Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by Hassaan Charolia in Pakistan in World Press on June 10th, 2017
The PTI now wants to see locals flocking to use public services. It has certainly made schools more appealing: the party has appointed 40,000 more teachers, rebuilt institutions blown up by the Taliban and furnished others with toilets and electricity. Teacher absenteeism has fallen. But the PTI’s claim that about 100,000 students have chosen to switch from private to public schools is based on dodgy data. There are other bones to pick. In 2013 the PTI allowed its coalition partner, the Jamaat-e-Islami, an Islamist group, to remove pictures in textbooks of women without a veil, among other measures.
The diagnosis is less mixed when it comes to health care. The PTI has employed many more medical staff, raising the ratio of doctors per 1,000 people from 0.16 to 0.24. It has also begun, albeit far from smoothly, to roll out a comprehensive health-insurance card for poor families. All this has had an effect. The number of operations in public hospitals has doubled since 2013; inpatient cases have risen by half as much again. Such change comes despite objections from special interests that lose out from reforms. Pharmacists broke the shelves of a new drug dispensary at one Peshawar hospital, so incensed were they by its offering medicine at the wholesale price.
Yet the PTI may struggle to win a second term in 2018. One problem is excessive promises. Mr Khan, who broke into politics after a stellar career as a cricketer, pledged a “tsunami” of change. But it took his inexperienced party two years to get a handle on government, and many of its reforms so far, according to Faisal Bari of LUMS university, need much longer to get entrenched. Some of its more notable improvements are hardly photogenic. It is one thing for people gleefully to take selfies in front of a new flyover in Peshawar, another to do the same in front of new toilets in a rural girls’ school.
That Mr Khan himself appears to have lost interest in the province does not help. He aspires to national office and spends much of his time heckling the prime minister, who is under investigation for corruption. The PTI is starting to look more like the established parties. Having long mocked rapid-transit bus lanes, a favourite pork-barrel project of such parties, as a costly distraction from public-sector reform, the PTI is now building one of its own in Peshawar. It is said to be the country’s most expensive, per kilometre, yet.
The Economist
Posted by malika in Afghan -Taliban-India Axis, India, India Hall of Shame, India's Missile Technology Proliferation, India's Nuclear Proliferation, Makaar Dushman, Suppression of Women in Hindu India on April 15th, 2013
Think for a moment about which countries cause the most global consternation. Afghanistan. Iran. Venezuela. North Korea. Pakistan. Perhaps rising China. But India? Surely not. In the popular imagination, the world’s largest “democracy” evokes Gandhi, Bollywood, and chicken tikka. In reality, however, it’s India that often gives global governance the biggest headache.
Of course, India gets marvelous press. Feature stories from there typically bring to life Internet entrepreneurs, hospitality industry pioneers, and gurus keeping spiritual traditions alive while lovingly bridging Eastern and Western cultures.
But something is left out of the cheery picture. For all its business acumen and the extraordinary creativity unleashed in the service of growth, today’s India is an international adolescent, a country of outsize ambition but anemic influence. India’s colorful, stubborn loquaciousness, so enchanting on a personal level, turns out to be anything but when it comes to the country’s international relations. On crucial matters of global concern, from climate change to multilateral trade, India all too often just says no.
India, first and foremost, believes that the world’s rules don’t apply to it. Bucking an international trend since the Cold War, successive Indian governments have refused to sign nuclear testing and nonproliferation agreements — accelerating a nuclear arms race in South Asia. (India’s second nuclear tests in 1998 led to Pakistan’s decision to detonate its own nuclear weapons.)
Once the pious proponent of a nuclear-free world, New Delhi today maintains an attitude of “not now, not ever” when it comes to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. As defense analyst Matthew Hoey recently wrote in theBulletin of the Atomic Scientists, “India’s behavior has been comparable to other defiant nuclear states [and] will undoubtedly contribute to a deteriorating security environment in Asia.”
Not only does India reject existing treaties, but it also deep-sixes international efforts to develop new ones. In 2008, India single-handedly foiled the last Doha round of global trade talks, an effort to nail together a global deal that almost nobody loved, but one that would have benefited developing countries most. “I reject everything,” declared Kamal Nath, then the Indian commerce and industry minister, after grueling days and sleepless nights of negotiations in Geneva in the summer of 2008.
On climate change, India has been no less intransigent. In July, India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, pre-emptively told U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton five months before the U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen that India, a fast-growing producer of greenhouse gases, would flat-out not accept binding carbon emissions targets.
India happily attacks individuals, as well as institutions and treaty talks. As ex-World Bank staffers have revealed in interviews with Indian media, India worked behind the scenes to help push Paul Wolfowitz out of the World Bank presidency, not because his relationship with a female official caused a public furor, but because he had turned his attention to Indian corruption and fraud in the diversion of bank funds.
By the time a broad investigation had ended — and Robert Zoellick had become the new World Bank president — a whopping $600 million had been diverted, as the Wall Street Journal reported, from projects that would have served the Indian poor through malaria, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and drug-quality improvement programs. Calling the level of fraud “unacceptable,” Zoellick later sent a flock of officials to New Delhi to work with the Indian government in investigating the accounts. In a 2009 interview with the weekly India Abroad, former bank employee Steve Berkman said the level of corruption among Indian officials was “no different than what I’ve seen in Africa and other places.”
India certainly affords its citizens more freedoms than China, but it is hardly a liberal democratic paradise. India limits outside assistance to nongovernmental organizations and most educational institutions. It restricts the work of foreign scholars (and sometimes journalists) and bans books. Last fall, India refused to allow Bangladeshi and Sri Lankan journalists to attend a workshop on environmental journalism.
India also regularly refuses visas for international rights advocates. In 2003, India denied a visa to the head of Amnesty International, Irene Khan. Although no official reason was given, it was likely a punishment for Amnesty’s critical stance on the government’s handling of Hindu attacks that killed as many as 2,000 Muslims in Gujarat the previous year. Most recently, a delegation from the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a congressionally mandated body, was denied Indian visas. In the past, the commission had called attention to attacks on both Muslims and Christians in India.
Nor does New Delhi stand up for freedom abroad. In the U.N. General Assembly and the U.N. Human Rights Council, India votes regularly with human rights offenders, international scofflaws, and enemies of democracy. Just last year, after Sri Lanka had pounded civilians held hostage by the Tamil Tigers and then rounded up survivors of the carnage and put them in holding camps that have drawn universal opprobrium, India joined China and Russia in subverting a human rights resolution suggesting a war crimes investigation and instead backed a move that seemed to congratulate the Sri Lankans.
David Malone, Canada’s high commissioner in New Delhi from 2006 to 2008 and author of a forthcoming book, Does the Elephant Dance? Contemporary Indian Foreign Policy, says that, when it comes to global negotiations, “There’s a certain style of Indian diplomacy that alienates debating partners, allies, and opponents.” And looking forward? India craves a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, seeking greater authority in shaping the global agenda. But not a small number of other countries wonder what India would do with that power. Its petulant track record is the elephant in the room.
Posted by admin in Pakistan's Free Media & Press on December 23rd, 2012
Nobel Committee is heavily skewed and prejudiced against Muslims and Islam. Therefore, it stands to reason that they bypassed in 2012, Pakistan’s heroic daughter Malala Yousafzai. But, you never know that their conscience may be awakened, and Malala is recognized by them in 2013. She went against her tribal culture and spoke as a brave Muslim woman for the education of women in Pakistan’s tribal areas of FATA. For her vision and bravery, she received bullets in the head in return. The West did a lot of song and dance and lionized her or rather used her for their propaganda, mainly Zionist driven,against Pakistan and Muslim societies at large. They made 180 million Pakistanis and 1.2 billion Muslims appear like Neanderthals or living in dark ages. Little realizing that Islamic societies have produced more women political leaders, Prime Ministers, Chief Executives, Managers, Business leaders, Doctors, Engineers, Soldiers, Journalists, and many professions, where women still face prejudice in Western societies. The West is still trying to play catch-up.
Status of Women in Islam:
The First Lady of Islam, Hazrat Khadija (RA) was literate business woman. She was also the Boss (in modern terminology) of our Holy Prophet (PBUH). She exported and imported goods from as far away places as Syria. Our Prophet(PBUH) handled her Import-Export business or cross national Trade!
Hazrat Khadijah R.A was the first wife of Prophet Muhammad P.B.you.H. She was the daughter of Khuwaylid ibn Asad and belonged to Banu Hashim Clan.
Her contributions to Islam are numerous. She was the first person to convert to Islam. She trusted her husband and she consoled him whenever he was distressed about the reactions of the non-Muslims. She sacrificed her wealth to promote Islam. She also patiently bore the persecutions of the non-Muslims and aristocrats of Quraish.
She remain at the side of the Propher Muhammad P.B.U.H all her life and supported him in his mission. She died in the year 619. This year is known as the year of sorrow. This is because Prophet Muhammad P.B.you.H was deeply moved on her death. She was the favorite wife of the Prophet Muhammad P.B.U.H and he did not remarry until her death.
The Hollywood celebrity has joined the growing number of voices speaking in support of Malala. PHOTO: AFP
American actor and former UN goodwill ambassador for refugees Angelina Jolie has urged the Nobel Peace Prize awarding committee to give “serious consideration” to “brave” Malala Yousafzai.
The Hollywood celebrity has joined the growing number of voices speaking in support of Malala, the 14-year-old girl who was shot by the Taliban for promoting girls education in Swat.
In an article published by the Daily Beast, Jolie wrote: “I felt compelled to share Malala’s story with my children. It was difficult for them to comprehend a world where men would try to kill a child whose only “crime” was the desire that she and others like her be allowed to go to school.”
Jolie wrote: “Still trying to understand, my children asked, “Why did those men think they needed to kill Malala?” I answered, “because an education is a powerful thing.
“The shots fired on Malala struck the heart of the nation, and as the Taliban refuse to back down, so too do the people of Pakistan.”
She was of the view that Malala was proof that it takes only the voice of one brave person to inspire numerous men, women and children.
“As girls across Pakistan stand up to say “I am Malala,” they do not stand alone,” Jolie asserted in her article.
Lauding Malala for her feats achieved at such a small age, Jolie said: “As the Nobel Committee meets to determine the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, I imagine brave Malala will be given serious consideration.”
Published in The Express Tribune, October 18th, 2012.