Log has written
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2009

New Delhi: Vali Nasr is the professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University in the US. An American citizen of Iranian origin, Nasr has also extensively written on the politics of Islam. He lived in Pakistan for many years studying the Jamiat-i-Islami, looking at how one of the most important organizations in the Islamic world negotiated several identities, both religious and nationalist. In Delhi to speak at the Hindustan Times Leadership Summit last week, Nasr spoke to Mint. Edited excerpts:

What does Obama’s win mean for the Islamic world?

SIt has so far meant a great deal of hope. Muslim countries feel America has a president with a Muslim middle name, whose father was a Muslim, who grew up as a poor kid in Jakarta, who has travelled in the Third World. Therefore, they feel he may have an affinity for the problems and viewpoints of the Muslim world that other American presidents may not.

Secondly, they saw a different tune in what he was saying, not only about crises such as Iran, Iraq and the Palestinian-Israeli crises, but about the US relationship with other cultures and other people. And that was so different from the Bush administration’s rhetoric, which had antagonized and offended them.

But as President do you think we could all be a little disappointed because the change is not as far-reaching as he promised it to be?

Politics always has that element of disappointment. What is important is that any American president who has the goodwill of the Muslim world can probably do some things a bit easier. And that is welcome for the US because in the past few years they have literally hit a brick wall, people have been so frustrated they have not given an inch. Obama can persuade people to be a little more patient, a little more understanding.

You think he should get out of Iraq as soon as possible?

I think the objective is there. We have learnt the lesson from Afghanistan that if we leave a territory without someone in charge, it will break down and collapse and then you will have trouble. Under Obama the principle that we will leave Iraq exists and that is a big change from the Bush administration.

How would you compare the Al Qaeda in Iraq and in Afghanistan-Pakistan?

Tags - Find More Articles On:
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Prakash Said:


Why do Hindus fear giving space to Muslims? Basically there are five types of countries involving Muslims. Muslims move from one stage to the other 1. Muslims in real small minority like US, where they shut up follow laws of the land 2. Muslimes in Europe like England, France etc where they are fighting for special social laws as per sharia. Constitute around 5-10% of population 3. Muslims in India who have the laws and engage in large scale terror. Example Kashmir were minority hindus were driven out. No it is happening in Assam. So essentially they multiply and instil terror in weak majority cominuting once they reach 30% of population which would allow them grow and ask for separation 4. Muslims countries like Malayasia where minorities are kept out of economic and socail development and trivialised and essentially suffocate them out of the country 5. Finally countries with Islamic rule where there is no question of other religions e.g Saudi, Pakistan. So the world should beware of these Muslims who seem to be secular but once they reach a population where they can decide elections they always vote on communal lines. That is the reason democracy does not work in Muslim world. Before they seek space in western world we should ask them to first build churches, temples, synanguoes in Saudi and provide right of worship for other relegions in Saudi, their so-called holy land.

Posted On 11/25/2008 5:21:14 AM
Re: Abul Said:


How many churches, mosques and synanguoes are there in Haridwar?

Posted On 11/25/2008 5:25:48 PM
Re: Deep Said:


Looking at Abul's reply, I understand why Muslims are at the bottom of the heap in India. He mentions Haridwar, but conveniently forgets the mosques, dargahs etc. in India.

Posted On 11/25/2008 5:50:47 PM
Re: Abul Said:


Deep if you introspect yourself, you will understand the root cause of Saffron Terrorism. You are trying to equate whole of India as Hindu holy land but that's incorrect. Haridwar is "the" Hindu holy land. So no matter how secular you claim to be no other places of worship are allowed in your holy land, then why expect same from Muslims? We can argue about who is at the bottom of the heap but lets leave holy places out of this.

Posted On 11/25/2008 7:34:45 PM
Re: Adi Said:


Prakash has made a juxtrapositioned solutions that each society in US, EU and India had for religious minorities. The missing piece here is that US did not instill religious elements in the law and constitution like India. That is not to say that US laws are perfect or the solutions are perfect. In India we created Muslim Personal Law/Hindu Undivided Family/Christian Personal Law and instilled elements of religion in law. It is a solution our society chose over a western solution. If religious minorities (Buddhist/Muslims/Sikh) feel squeezed and suffocated in India, I would challenge them to see how isolating and suffocating experience it can be living in Christian dominated culture where there is no Gurudwara/Mosque/Agyari in 200 miles radius. Nobody knows what Ramzan/Diwali/Roshashana is but they think the world syncs up with 1st of Jan. Point being, we have sawed seeds of religion in Law but being a country of 120 crores with so many religions living over-each-other, can we afford not to?

Posted On 11/26/2008 12:28:53 AM
Re: Deepik Said:


Very succintly summed up. you seem to have hit the root - proselytising through terror.

Posted On 11/26/2008 11:38:08 AM
alen Said:


Prakash, There is no point arguing with people who dont know the difference between Saudi- country and Haridwar-a town.

Posted On 11/25/2008 10:58:09 PM
Randhir Said:


Am I missing a point a point here? Of course, there are dargah and mosques in Haridwar as is the case in Benares, Vrindawan, Puri, Rameshwaram... to my knowledge, and I will be gravely off mark if it's not the case, there is no sanction against setting any such leagal (sometimes illegal) places of worship anywhere in the country. One possibly needs to refer back to history to study the move of cultures and religions across regions to find what kinds of places of worship came up there. Can I blame the Pope if I find no temples in Vatican? Or hindu fundamentalists for new temples that have come up in Europe or US? I would rather see how Muslims, Christians or people with any other religious beliefs have co-existed across India. Moreso, I feel the approach to justify any point using a negative premise is losing a debate before you began it.

Posted On 11/26/2008 11:00:44 AM