While Councillor Georgio Mammoliti had not come to Summer Carnival organized by Delta Family Resource Centre in a high priority neighbourhood of Ward 7 of City Toronto, his opponent Mr. Nick Di Nizio, president of the Humber Sheppard Ratepayers’ Group was there with his daughter.

Mr. Di Nizio met Mr. Mammoliti’s staunch supporter at the Carnival, who admired Mr. Mammoliti’s commitment to the community, yet Mr. Di Nizio insists that there may have been some progress 15 years ago, “but not anymore.”

“The job is not just in the last year of the term, it’s throughout the term,” he says taking a shot at Councillor Mammoliti who has withdrawn from mayoral race.

“[There are] three parks being looked at in our area because of an election year, and there are streets that are being addressed now,” he continues.

His reasons for running for Toronto City Council are simple.

“I want change. We don’t have much representation in Ward 7. We’re not being heard. We’re paying taxes but we’re not being listened to,” he says heatedly.

“ I wanna bring in more control in what’s going on. I’m not gonna be an absentee councillor,” he promises.

Which mayoral candidate is better for Toronto?

In Mr. Di Nizio’s opinion, residents of Ward 7 prefer Mr. Rob Ford “who seems to have the ear of the population” and “some are for Smitherman.”

As far as Mayor Miller’s performance is concerned, he hasn’t done a good job as a Mayor of Toronto.

“He [Mayor Miller] had his inner circle [because] he needs certain votes from incumbent [Councillor Georgio Mammoliti]. If anything he [Mayor Miller] was hindrance to our area.”

He accused Mayor Miller of never responding to letters written by residents of Ward 7 on the need for parks and recreation centres in Ward 7.

Author:Asma Amanat

The Conservative Government’s decision to scrap the decades-old long form for the next census, in favour of a voluntary national survey, is both short-sighted and irresponsible according to Rob Oliphant, Member of Parliament for Don Valley West and Chair of the Liberal’s Multicultural Outreach Working Group.

Of particular concern to Oliphant are new Canadians and ethnic communities, many of whom may be left out. Immigrant settlement organizations and other community groups have unanimously expressed concern about the almost certain under-representation of minority groups if the Conservatives go ahead with their proposal.

Instead of mandatory short and long versions of the Census form being sent to Canadian households, the Conservatives have decided to make the long form, with its detailed questions about language, ethnic background and other data, voluntary. Almost everyone agrees that the voluntary Census will have a low participation rate and will lack statistical validity.

“It is important to consider the broader impact of this decision,” said Mr. Oliphant. “Without reliable census data it will become very difficult to plan for and formulate policies designed to provide these communities with much needed assistance,” Oliphant said.

The changes to the census have been met with widespread opposition from dozens of national organizations, academics, think tanks, and government officials. Their consistent opinion is that the new voluntary system will provide data that is virtually useless.

One of the first to confirm this sentiment was former Chief Statistician of Canada, Ivan Fellegi. “The most vulnerable groups are the least likely to respond. So if you’re interested in data about aboriginal people, if you’re interested in data about recently arrived immigrants, if you’re interested about the poor, the disadvantaged … those are the kind of data that will be threatened,” Fellegi said.

“Canadians are used to the census slogan, ‘Count Yourself In,’” Oliphant concluded.  “Mr. Harper seems to be telling some Canadians to ‘Count Yourself Out.’ Canadians deserve better.”

Do you believe that the government should be asking you what time you leave for work in the morning? Whether your house needs renovations? Or how many bedrooms you have?

What if you discovered that the federal government requires Canadians to divulge this private information under the threat of fines or jail time, only to turn around and sell it to marketing firms looking to sell you their products?

Until recently, this was the case in Canada.

Every five years the federal government conducts a national census. It is made up of two parts – the short-form and the long-form.

The short-form censes is a mandatory eight-question survey. It is sent to all Canadians and asks questions such as the date of birth, gender, marital status and mother tongue.

The long-form censes is a 47-question survey sent to 20 per cent of households. It asks a number of personal and intrusive questions such as the number of bedrooms in your house, and the size of your utility bill.

Until last month, completion of the long-form census was mandatory. Canadians who refused to fill it out risked prosecution.

During the last census the long-form proportion was sent to approximately 2.5 million households. More than 160,000 Canadians refused to fill it out, a five-fold increase over 1981. More than sixty of those who refused were referred by the government for prosecution.

There are some people including the leader of the Liberal party, Micheal Ignatieff, who believe that Canadians should be forced to divulge intimate, private details about their personal lives to the federal government. We disagree.

We believe Canadians should be free to choose whether they share the private details of their lives with federal government. Acting on this belief, the government recently announced that the long-form version of the 2011 Census will be voluntary.

Canadians will still be required to complete the standard short-form census that provides basic, necessary information that every government needs. The only substantive change is that the long-form will now be voluntary.

Statistics Canada will continue to conduct and oversee the census process. And its employees will maintain the same rigorous methods and standards used for all of its surveys.

We believe this new approach strikes a fair and reasonable balance between ensuring the federal government has the basic information every government requires, and protecting the privacy of Canadian citizens.
Author:Tony Clement,Minister of Industry.

Before the Soviet forces entered Afghanistan in 1979, I used to visit Kabul regularly. I found President Mohammad Daud a fatherly figure who had no idea of what was happening in his country.

Even otherwise, he was dependent on warlords, a pattern which has not changed since. But he was not aware of the strong base that the communists had developed in the country.

How can one fight without reservation when you declare beforehand your decision to quit? –Photo by AP

This was a period of innocence. That Daud was pro-India was significant because New Delhi wanted to keep out Islamabad which stressed Afghanistan as part of its ‘strategic depth’ vision. For that reason, Pakistan denied India the use of road for transit goods to Kabul.

Later, President Hafizullah Amin, a communist, was in power for a short while. But Amin did not want Afghanistan to be a Soviet satellite. He was anti-Pakistan. Atal Behari Vajpayee told me that when he met President Amin, the latter suggested to him that the Indian forces should march into Pakistan from the east and the Afghanistan forces from the west.

Babrak Karmal came to Afghanistan riding the Soviet tank. President Amin was killed. New Delhi should have condemned the aggression, but stayed neutral because of its close relations with the Soviet Union. It was the biggest disgrace of India’s foreign policy.

Moscow’s fears that it would be sucked into a war defending Babrak Karmal’s government came true. Little did it realise that America was looking for an opportunity to bleed the Soviet Union to death. In fact, the happenings in Afghanistan at that time gave a fatal blow to Moscow and gave victory to America in the Cold War.

Washington constituted a force of fundamentalists — the Mujahideen — with Pakistan in the front. They wanted Kalashnikovs and unlimited dollars to fight the ‘infidels’ of the Soviet Union. This was the opportunity which Gen Ziaul Haq exploited not only to get maximum money and weapons for Pakistan but also to spread fundamentalism in his own country.

The US and the Mujahideen inflicted so many casualties on the Soviet Union that Moscow had no option but to pull out. But, after defeating the Soviet Union, the worst that Washington did was to quit immediately and drop everything, leaving behind weapons and the fighters it had trained. The world is today paying for the sins that America committed at that time.

Now it is committing a similar blunder of projecting its withdrawal without bothering about what would happen to Afghanistan and the region. Raised from the ranks of the Mujahideen, the Taliban became a menace and went on to foist their rule on Afghanistan. They had all the weapons that America left behind.

When America found Afghanistan as the epicentre of terrorism after the 9/11 attack on New York and went after the Taliban, it looked like it was rectifying the mistake it made earlier. Pakistan was a reluctant partner. But after having suffered the Taliban’s terrorism inside its own territory, for example in Swat, Islamabad has come on board to a large extent. But it still alleged to have contacts with the ‘good Taliban’.

Terrorism today has spilled over Pakistan’s borders. Lashkar-i-Taiba has carried out attacks even on Indian soil. The attack on Mumbai on 26/11 was the Lashkar’s doing.

For obvious reasons, America has become crucial to the area, not only because of the troops it has deployed but also because of the coalition of resistance it has put together. Washington’s focus is on the region itself.

Yet President Obama’s declaration that the US forces would begin withdrawing from next summer is tantamount to weakening “the wholehearted fight” against the Taliban. How can one fight without reservation when you declare beforehand your decision to quit? The last time when America did so, it gave birth to the Taliban government, the flagship of religious fundamentalism. This time the scenario could be worse because then the Taliban had not tasted power which they did after America’s withdrawal. At present, they are lying low and awaiting the departure of the American forces. The Afghanistan government is not viable. Nor has its military developed enough teeth to thwart the Taliban. What was needed was not the change in command — from Gen McChrystal to Gen Petraeus — but a change in American policy that is looking to withdraw its forces.

True, Islamabad has been able to keep New Delhi out. The latter has not taken up any new economic project. Pakistan has been able to convince America which needs Islamabad’s support the most that Pakistan cannot fight with all its troops because it has to keep a large number of them on the eastern border with India. Indeed, America has changed the scenario in favour of Pakistan. President Hamid Karzai who was literally abusing Pakistan till a few months ago reportedly met the Pakistani army chief to show intimacy between Islamabad and Kabul.

The basic question remains unanswered: how to eliminate the Taliban who have made Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan their playground. They have killed hundreds of Pakistanis. There is no alternative to the Taliban’s elimination. And here India can be of great help. Both countries have to evolve a joint strategy to fight the Taliban who are threatening the entire South Asian region. It may appear as wishful thinking.

If the intelligence chiefs of India and Pakistan meet to discuss how the agencies can fight against terrorism effectively, some type of joint mechanism against the Taliban may become feasible. If nothing else, the two countries have to think of ways to fill the vacuum which the withdrawal of the American troops would create. If the Taliban are allowed to step in, it would affect the peace and stability of the entire South Asian region.

Author: Kuldip Nayar

The terrorist attack on Data Darbar shrine in Lahore on July 1 is a stark reminder, if any new reminder was needed, of the growing power of militancy in Punjab.  In the past the suicide bombers used to come from the tribal areas. They parked with local militant groups that worked as the facilitator for the terrorist attack from the tribal areas. Now, local groups have acquired enough skills to engage in violence of higher scale, involving suicide attacks and bombings against the ordinary people.

The incident also showed that the political leaders and the government are divided on the threat of terrorism and some of them express sympathy for the Taliban and other militants.  This pro-militancy sentiment runs deep in the official circles and up to the middle level in the military.

The absence of unity of mind in the political and societal circles on terrorism is caused mainly by the inability and unwillingness of civilian leaders to take a categorical stand against those engaging in suicide attacks, bombings and hostage taking. Leaving aside Islamic political parties that support the Taliban and Islamic militancy, several political parties and groups maintain ambiguous stance towards Islamic militancy and terrorist attacks.

The major problem is in the province of the Punjab because the ruling PMLN maintains an ambiguous position on Islamic militancy and the Taliban.  Its leadership condemns terrorist attacks but avoids criticizing any specific militant group, including the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.  The PMLN has several leaders in its senior cadre that share the Jamaat-i-Islami perspective on terrorism.  However, it also has leaders that publicly criticize Islamic hard line groups.

Nawaz Sharif has avoided giving a straight line on terrorism in order to accommodate differences of opinion in the party and to sustain its electoral support among the Islamists and the political right, making the PMLN announce some compensation for the victims of the incident.

The Punjab government does not appear to be convinced that many Islamic hard line groups and their break-away factions based in the Punjab have developed strong linkages with the Taliban based in the tribal areas. These groups are involved in four types of activities: work with some Taliban-type groups in the tribal areas against Pakistan’s security authorities deployed there; get training and return to mainland Pakistan; undertake their own violent attacks to pursue their ideological-political agendas; and serve as local handler or host for suicide bombers or other militants visiting their city on an attack-mission or for any other purpose.

There were two incidents of terrorism in Lahore. First, two religious centres of the Ahmadya Community in Lahore were attacked by terrorists in the last week of May. Two days later a small group of militants attacked the Jinnah Hospital to free one of their partners who was being given treatment after being arrested by the police. This attempt failed but it showed that these groups had become very confident of their capacity to pursue their agendas.   About 100 people were killed in these attacks.

The Punjab government was cautious in expressing sympathy for the victims of these attacks, fearing the wrath of hard line Islamic clergy.  However, there were people who rose above extreme religious views to discuss the attacks on the Ahmadya centres in the context of a nation-state and its citizens. Unlike the orthodox religious hierarchy they argued that it is the state’s basic responsibility to protect all citizens, irrespective of their religion, sect, caste and region.

The orthodox Islamic clergy was perturbed by the media’s sympathy for the Ahmadi victims of the terrorist attack. They quickly returned to their anti-Ahmadya community tirade to remind the people of their “anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam” disposition.  Some attributed the attack to what they described as an intra-Ahmadya conflict and that the Taliban could not be involved because no Muslim could ever launch such an action against a religious minority because Islam does not allow that.

The divided mindset of the leadership on terrorism and sympathy for Islamic hard line groups at the societal level gives the militants enough space to sustain and flourish. The ordinary people do not join them in their violent activities but they maintain a soft corner towards them and avoid reporting their activities to the security authorities.  This is partly because of fear of retribution by militant groups and partly because they are not convinced that violent attacks are done by these groups, including the Taliban.

The Data Darbar incident has shocked all sections of the populace because he is one of the most revered saints of Pakistan.   This terrorism incident and other incidents in Lahore and elsewhere in Pakistan during the last six month underline the need to develop a shared political stand on terrorism and the groups involved in it.   The political leaders and societal activists should take the lead in evolving a shared approach.

Terrorism has become such a threat that different political parties and societal group cannot have the luxury of playing their partisan politics. They need to recognize that unless terrorism is controlled, Pakistan’s economy cannot improve and  Pakistan’s capacity to function autonomously at the international level will be greatly compromised.

Author: Hassan Askari

“One day, I would like to take out my Canadian flag and wear a Canadian jersey to support a Canadian team in the World Cup,” said New Democrat critic for Sport Glenn Thibeault. “It’s time to invest in the most popular sport in the world here at home.”

During each World Cup, Canadians proudly display flags and colours from various countries to show support for teams that make it to the finals; many are rooting for their country of origin. But many Canadians long for a competitive team of our own.

Currently there are too many structural, financial, organizational and infrastructure problems preventing a Canadian team from participating in the most important sporting event worldwide. Thibeault suggests give coaches more training, provide better infrastructure, improve coordination of competitions and invest more in soccer.

In 2009, the Canadian Soccer Association received $1.76 million from Sport Canada, which was less than the $1.88 million it received in 2008. By contrast, Australia, with a smaller population, invested more than $4 million in Australia’s soccer federation, including more than $1.3 million for college and university programs.

___________________________

Governor General Designate David Johnston: the President of University of Waterloo

While he is excited about the new opportunity in his life, Governor General designate David Johnston, the former President of University of Waterloo said there is still “much to do at uWaterloo between now and Oct 1. I want to devote an enormous effort to bring Campaign Waterloo home in splendid fashion.”

David Johnston, Canada's governor general-designate, is shown meeting the Queen alongside Prime Minister Stephen Harper during a dinner held in her honour in Toronto on Monday. (Prime Minister's Office

During his 11-year tenure at the University of Waterloo, David Johnston oversaw unprecedented growth in the university’s reputation, research capacity and leadership capabilities.

Of his many accomplishments, he will be especially remembered for putting the University of Waterloo, and the surrounding region, on the national map as a centre for talent, ideas, and innovation; leading Campaign Waterloo, which raised in excess of $500 million to support the university’s scholarship, students, and key building projects.

In 2007, the City of Waterloo was recognized as the world’s Top Intelligent Community by the Intelligent Communities Forum.

President Johnston’s vision includes a community where universities are innovative leaders, healthy living standards rise, investments in research and development transform, smart infrastructure is       developed, and social innovation is championed.

Mr. Johnston resides outside of Waterloo, Ontario.  He is married to Dr. Sharon Johnston.  They have five children and seven grandchildren.

________________________________________

Salma Ataullahjan appointed Conservative Senator

Prime Minister Stephen Harper filled a vacancy in the Senate, announcing the appointment of Salma Ataullahjan.

“A professional, artist, parent and strong activist for the South Asian community in the Greater Toronto Area, Ms. Ataullahjan brings a remarkable dedication and energy to her new role as a Senator for the Province of Ontario,” said Prime Minister Harper

Ms. Ataullahjan fills a single vacancy in Ontario.  She has also pledged to support the Government in its efforts to make the Senate more democratic and accountable, including legislation to limit Senate tenure and to allow provinces to elect their Senators.

“In addition to coming from a family of political activists on the Indian Subcontinent, Ms. Ataullahjan’s political and social activism here in Canada has earned her a reputation of one who both stands against violence and stands for peaceful dialogue and consensus building,” said the Prime Minister.  “As our Government continues working to promote safety and security both at home and abroad, I welcome the addition of Ms. Ataullahjan’s skills and experience to the Senate of Canada and look forward to working with her in the months and years ahead.”

Salma Ataullahjan immigrated to Canada from Pakistan 31 years ago, becoming a Canadian citizen in 1989.  After settling in Toronto, she pursued a career in real estate, a profession in which she has worked for the last 21 years.  Born into a family with a long-standing history of political activism, Ms. Ataullahjan has spent many years actively involved in the social and political affairs of her community.

A natural consensus builder, Ms. Ataullahjan has served many organizations including: on the executive of the Pakistani Canadian Professionals and Academics; as Founder and Chairperson of the Parent Council of David Lewis Public School; as a member of the South Asian Regional Council; as a former President and current Vice-President of the Canadian Pashtun Cultural Association; and on the executive of the Toronto chapter of the Citizens Foundation, a charity organization that builds not-for-profit schools in the poorest districts of Pakistan.

Ms. Ataullahjan is an accomplished artist and paints watercolours in her spare time.  She and her husband Saleem have been married for 31 years and have two daughters, Anushka and Shaanzeh.

A proxy object, holding the most expensive weaponry imaginable, flies from one point on the earth, crosses Pakistan’s border, and unleashes its full force over the people.

One would think I am describing the attacks Pakistan faces in the form of drone operations conducted by the U.S. to eliminate high-profile terrorist threats. In fact, I am talking about the ideological “bombs” being dropped on Pakistan’s society by the Saudis and Iranians through their militant forms of Islam.

Incidents like the savage attacks on the Ahmedies and recently the Data Darbar Sufi shrine, are ideological drone attacks waged by both Iran and Saudi Arabia. These attacks violate Pakistan’s cultural sovereignty transforming the national identity to a radical religious one.

One should ask what the incentive for Iran and Saudi Arabia is in spreading militant ideologies and supporting elements who gravely threaten the security of Pakistan? The answer is in the Cold War chapter of history where the value of proxy wars was that you compete against your arch nemesis in someone else’s backyard to avoid risks at home. As such, playing out the primordial Sunni-Shiite conflict has been facilitated for both nations in Pakistan by its own leadership.

The door was first opened by Z.A. Bhutto who jockeyed for the support of religious groups. Forgoing the fact that he was a leftist candidate, Bhutto imposed several Islamic concepts to an otherwise secular urban population (i.e. banning the gambling halls and bars of the big cities). Perhaps Bhutto realized that many of the religious political parties were funded by entities in Saudi Arabia, and thus had more cash and influence than Bhutto could fight against.

More importantly, one should simply look to the rise of the religious militancy fed by Saudi Arabia during the Zia Ul-Haq period.  During the 1980s, Pakistan was engaged in its first proxy war that brought the flood of Islamists and set the seed for extremism. Zia Ul-Haq found himself in a situation where he could not only prop himself in power, but get U.S. aid by espousing an Ummah ideal of Pakistani identity. The U.S. was comfortable with this rhetoric because it served their short-term goal of battling the Soviets in Afghanistan.

More significantly, it was during this period that Zia Ul-Haq ramped up the ideological engagement with Saudi Arabia to give weight to Zia’s call for mujahiddin to fight in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, the leader of Laskar-e-Taiba, states that he was given a scholarship by the general to study Islam in Saudi Arabia, where he first learned concepts of global jihad. This seemingly insignificant administrative action, with the intent of spreading Saudi ideologies, has led to the growth of one of the most lethal insurgent groups who regularly threaten the stability of the state.

Some make the argument that today’s government is secular and does not espouse the same ideals as the puritanical Zia. Yet, the military remains greatly affected by the importation of militant Saudi/ Iranian ideologies during the Zia period. The connection between the ISI and the militants is fueled by a shared religious sentiment which they simultaneously were exposed to in the 1980’s. Further, the school systems have been left to languish which has opened the door not only to an uneducated populace, but a MIS-educated populace who no longer contemplates the idea of a Pakistani identity.

Instead of focusing on issues concerning the venomous militancy spreading throughout the nation and its root causes, the leadership seems keener on lambasting the U.S. drone attacks. While these drone attacks do violate principles of national sovereignty and have caused the death of hundreds of civilians, the ideological proxy wars being fought have a far more expansive reach in spreading chaos. Currently, we are seeing a rise in sectarian murders being carried out in cities like Karachi. The tension amongst religious sects seems to be reaching a feverish pitch both in the media and through the attacks by the myriad of militant groups.

The Dara Darbar attack best illustrates how forces within Pakistan are being encouraged to attack the oldest pillars of Pakistani society, by forces outside of Pakistan. Perhaps more news-worthy than the Data Darbar attacks were the protests that followed calling on Shahbaz Sharif to crack down on militancy, especially in Punjab.

This might signal that the populace’s honeymoon with Wahabiism and militant Shiite ideals may have come to an end. Pakistan’s leadership needs to shake itself out of playing up anti-Americanism as an easy ploy to garner popular support. The civilian government must deal with the homegrown problem of religious extremism fueled and funded by Saudi and Iranian powers. Without recognizing that hundreds of “drones” are being piloted to drop ideological bombs from Riyadh and Tehran, there can be no success in battling religious extremism and its militant wing.

Author: Waris Husain

Pakistan’s elected assemblies and the federal and provincial governments have been functioning for the last over two years but most political analysts express doubt if these will complete their five-year term.

The issues that cause uncertainty about political stability and internal harmony include poor governance, the troubled economy, persistence of religious extremism and militancy, the over-active superior judiciary  that endeavors to expand its domain and the off-again, on-gain confrontation between the federal government and an array of political adversaries.

The federal and provincial governments are performing poorly so far as governance and delivery of services to the people are concerned. This has caused alienation among people from the civilian governments who periodically engage in street protest and violence, disrupting life in major cities and towns.

The most serious challenge is in the economic domain. Pakistan is not expected to create an economy based primarily on domestic sources rather than relying heavily on external economic assistance and remittances from Pakistanis settled abroad. These constraints make it extremely difficult for the government to provide economic relief to the common people. Further, the government policies have utterly failed to reduce economic disparities between the richest and the poorest, making the latter more vulnerable to radical Islamist appeals.

Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership has shown determination to fight terrorism in Swat and the tribal areas. These efforts have been reasonably successful but this challenge is expected to haunt Pakistan for at least four-five years. This has led the government to divert some resources from socio-economic development to counter insurgency. Further, military action has displaced over one million people. The government faces an uphill economic challenge for assistance and relief to these people and their rehabilitation back home after the extremists are expelled from their home-areas.

These two challenges –the economy and extremism and terrorism – could be addressed more effectively if the opposition political parties extend full support. They appear to be more active in pointing out deficiencies in the government’s economic policies. They actively highlight the inability of the government to provide economic relief to the common people. However, no opposition party, including the PMLN –the major opposition party – has provided an alternate economic plan of action for coping with the current economic predicament.

The same can be said about the disposition of the PMLN on terrorism. Nawaz Sharif maintains ambiguity on his party’s policies towards the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Several senior members express sympathy for Islamic militancy and often criticize the government’s counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency policies. Though the party’s top leadership avoids direct criticism of the Pakistan Military, they often accuse the government of bowing to American pressures and serving American agenda in the region.  Again, no opposition provides an alternate plan to deal with religious extremism and militancy. The Punjab government refuses to acknowledge the existence of Islamic militant elements in the Punjab.

These developments have put the PPP-led federal government on the defensive, especially because their governance and economic management is far from satisfactory. The major thrust of criticism has to be faced by the PPP because its coalition partners, especially the MQM, do not own any unpopular policy. In fact, the MQM does not hesitate to criticize the federal government if it perceives a policy to go against its political interests and assets in urban Sindh. .

Another source of pressure for the federal government is the superior judiciary that invokes judicial activism to repeatedly censure the executive.  This has created a perception in the political circles that the Supreme Court might pass an adverse order against the federal government of President Asif Ali Zardari.  In addition the court-case pertaining to implementation of the NRO judgment, the adversaries of the PPP have filed several cases in the Supreme Court on the provisions of the 18th constitutional amendment, especially on the procedure for appointment of the judges of the superior courts.  Some cases target President Asif Ali Zardari.

During 1988-1999 the opposition used to woo the army top brass to apply pressure on the civilian government. Now, in 2009-2010, as the army avoids direct role in politics because it is engaged in counter-terrorism, the PPP’s adversaries are approaching the Supreme Court with the hope that it would knock out the PPP government or President Zardari.

Nawaz Sharif made extremely hard hitting statements on May 25 and June 26 on the performance of the government and advised them to implement the orders of the Supreme Court.  These statements were meant to increase pressure on the federal government as well as to communicate a subtle message to the Supreme Court that the major opposition party would support the Court if it passed an adverse order against the federal government.

Democracy cannot endure if the major political players do not work in harmony within a democratic and constitutional framework. Pakistan faces so complex challenges that a single political party cannot cope with them. If PMLN comes to power today, its government will face all the problems that have adversely affected the present federal government.  The opposition should not seek extra-parliamentary options to knock out the government. This will shift the initiative to non-elected state institutions.

Author: Dr.Hassan Askari

With such positive talks between India and Pakistan recently, the tragic happenings in Kashmir seem more than a coincidence.

That the youth in the valley are angry for not getting their due is known to all. But why should Kashmir be on the boil when relations between India and Pakistan are on the mend?

Kashmiri protestors clash with Indian police in Srinagar. Thousands of Indian troops enforced a strict curfew in parts of Kashmir on June 30, stemming three weeks of deadly protests that have claimed 11 lives and led to soaring tensions. – AFP Photo

Kashmiri leader Syed Gilani took advantage of the killing of one young man at the hands of the security forces to incite the people to come on to the streets. The Hurriyat Conference gave a call to start something new. Political parties jumped into the arena. All this developed into huge protests in four cities – Srinagar, Sopore, Anantnag and Baramulla.

An inept Kashmir police and the Central Reserve Police Force which has only guns at their command to tackle the protests aggravated the situation. The use of force against the protesters agitating against successive killings in the firing was excessive and what the security forces did was without restraint. This is a matter to be looked into by an inquiry committee.

Yet the fact remains that extremists in Kashmir strike whenever an atmosphere of goodwill begins to prevail after some kind of engagement between India and Pakistan. Pro-India elements have become irrelevant. They, in any case, are too elitist, seldom mixing with the common Kashmiris. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah leads the exclusive club. But their distance from the people is a contributory factor — not the factor itself.

Underlying the situation is the belief of the Hurriyat leaders that violence alone can lead to a solution in Kashmir. That the problem must be solved quickly goes without saying. But the extremists only stall the issue by instigating violence. They should have themselves come on to the streets to lead the protests in a peaceful manner to focus attention on the unresolved issue of Kashmir. They should understand that no discussion is possible at gunpoint.

One welcome development of the Islamabad talks was that nobody, except for a few hawks, implicated Pakistan in the Kashmir happenings. This means that the talks between the two foreign secretaries and the home ministers, in that order, have reduced to some extent the deficit in confidence which New Delhi has been seeking.

I do not know whether Home Minister P. Chidambaram and Interior Minister Rehman Malik discussed Kashmir. But at least the foreign ministers of the two countries should do so when they meet in Islamabad. India’s army chief has also emphasised political initiatives in Kashmir.

The talks at Islamabad have made two points clear: one, New Delhi has again enunciated Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s assurance in Egypt that the terrorists’ attack would be kept separate from the talks. Many experts in India tried to quibble over the meaning of this but there is no ambiguity now. Two, the core issue between India and Pakistan or, for that matter, before the Saarc countries is terrorism.

The separation of the two points was clear when the two foreign secretaries who prepared the agenda for the forthcoming talks between their foreign ministers refrained from discussing terrorism. But they did discuss Kashmir. My information is that Indian foreign secretary Nirupama Rao asked her counterpart whether the ground covered on Kashmir through the back channel held good.

Pakistan’s foreign secretary had told me in Delhi that the two countries would go forward from the undertaking reached through the back channel. This should set at rest the doubts some Pakistani quarters raised that a democratic government was not bound to follow what was achieved during Gen Pervez Musharraf’s regime.

Chidambaram, who played to the gallery when he spoke to journalists at Delhi, was more responsible and vividly sober in his remarks in Islamabad. For him to say that he did not doubt the intention of Pakistan should be an eye-opener for retired Indian foreign secretaries who continue to follow the hard line they had taken during their careers to bring the two countries practically to the point of no return. They are openly critical of Manmohan Singh who has taken the bold initiative to talk to Pakistan despite criticism from the Bharatiya Janata Party.

New Delhi expects more arrests in Pakistan after the disclosures by David Headley whom the Indian intelligence agencies met in Chicago. Manmohan Singh has reportedly drawn President Barack Obama’s attention to Headley’s confession.

Chidambaram has rightly reminded Pakistan of the status of Most Favoured Nation India extended to it many years ago. If Pakistan were to respond to it, Chidambaram’s ideas on trade and investment between the two countries could be implemented. India, with a bigger market and investment potential, can help Pakistan overcome the lack of openings and technology which puts its industry at a disadvantage.

Action against Jamaatud Dawa chief Hafiz Saeed remains India’s litmus test to assess Pakistan’s steps towards normalisation. His cries of war or jihad against India are not what bothers the government and the people so much as his vast network which made 26/11 possible.

In fact, Islamabad’s declaration to have a regional plan to combat the Taliban will mean a strong effort against the militants. Some elements in Pakistan consider it their duty to support fundamentalism. But religious values are the antithesis of what the Lashkar represents. Today’s world, including Muslim nations, wants religion to inculcate values, not to be used to incite violence.

New Delhi and Islamabad should ensure that their rulers meet the opposition leader when their officials visit each other’s country. India has been able to establish it for visiting presidents or prime ministers. The Pakistan government should include Nawaz Sharif on the list of dignitaries during the visit of top Indian leaders.

Author:Kuldip Nayar

The Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of National Defence and Member of Parliament (Central Nova), attended an event at Pier 21 in Halifax to celebrate a major milestone reached in creating Canada’s newest national museum, the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21.

“Our Government is moving forward in establishing the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21, delivering on the commitment made by Prime Minister Harper to create a new national museum,” said Minister MacKay. “With its broadened mandate, expanded space, and more comprehensive exhibitions, the new Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 will share the experiences of all immigrants, regardless of where or when they arrived in Canada.”

“One million immigrants arrived in Canada through Pier 21, and one in five Canadians can trace some relationship to it,” said Minister Moore. “Immigration has been a pivotal force in building Canada as a nation. Given its significant role in our country’s immigration history, Pier 21 is a fitting location for this new national museum that will tell the story of the past, present, and future of immigration in Canada.”

Bill C-34, Act to Establish Canadian Museum of Immigration, received Royal Assent on June 29^th.  It amends the Museums Act to establish the new national museum as a federal Crown corporation with the same status as other national museums. The Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 will be Canada’s sixth national museum and the second outside the National Capital Region.

The Museum will explore the theme of immigration in Canada and showcase the experiences of immigrants as they arrived in Canada, the vital role that immigration has played in the building of Canada, and the contributions of immigrants to Canada’s culture, economy, and way of life.

The contributions of the Pier 21 Society and the Pier 21 Foundation have been instrumental in the creation of this new national museum. The Pier 21 Society will contribute its assets to the new museum, and the Pier 21 Foundation will contribute a $7-million endowment fund to enhance its educational and public programming capacity. The Halifax Port Authority, which manages the historic Halifax Seaport, will be the new museum’s landlord.

In keeping with its national mandate, the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 will be bigger than the existing Pier 21 museum. The Government of Canada will invest up to $24.9 million in upgrading the Museum’s leased premises and in developing exhibitions and other programming. The Museum’s ongoing operating budget is projected to be up to $7.7million, subject to approval of its corporate plans.

___________________________________________________

Extreme Heat Expected To Last Most Of The Week


Dr. Arlene King, Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health, is reminding Ontarians to take special care to prevent heat-related illness during the current heat wave in the province.

With extreme heat expected to last most of this week, Dr. King is warning that anyone can suffer heat-related illness when their bodies are unable to compensate for the extreme temperatures and properly cool. Those who are especially at risk include infants under one year of age, seniors 65 years and older, and people with chronic medical conditions.

There are a number of things that people can do to prevent heat-related illness, including:

• Drinking plenty of water or natural fruit juices
• Wearing light, loose fitting clothes
• Eating light, cool foods, and not using the oven or other hot appliances
• Staying in air conditioned rooms – either at home, a friend’s place or public spaces such as malls, libraries, community or specially designated facilities
• Regularly check up on friends, family and/or neighbours who may be at high risk during a heat wave.

_________________________________________________________________________

Showcasing Ontario to Royalty

The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh visited Research In Motion, in Waterloo, and Pinewood Toronto Studios to experience Ontario’s cutting-edge technical innovation and culture.

Ontario’s Research In Motion (RIM) created the BlackBerry and revolutionized the way people communicate around the world. Her Majesty and His Royal Highness took a behind-the-scenes look at this pioneering company. The Queen was given the most recent BlackBerry model that included a special gift — a photo of school children from Queen Elizabeth Public School in Kitchener.

The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh also saw first-hand a new jewel in Ontario’s arts and entertainment industry crown. Pinewood Toronto Studios is a film and television production complex, with 23,000 square metres of production space and North America’s largest soundstage.

The Royal Visit provides an opportunity to highlight Ontario’s innovative and cultural achievements. Creating an environment where artistry and invention thrives is part of our five-year Open Ontario Plan.

________________________________________________________________________


York Woods Library Arts Hub



Mayor David Miller, City Librarian Jane Pyper and Councillor Anthony Perruzza (Ward 8 York West), a member of the Toronto Public Library board, joined members of the Jane and Finch arts community and local residents last night to celebrate the grand opening of the Arts Hub, located at the York Woods Branch of Toronto Public Library. The vibrant opening ceremony featured performances of several well known artists from the Jane-Finch neighbourhood.

 The new Arts Hub features shared office and storage spaces, a community information board, a lounge area, and rehearsal and production space equipped with sprung wood flooring, specialty lighting, and mirrors that can accommodate theatre and dance. The new space perfectly complements the York Woods branch’s existing theatre space.

 “The Arts Hub is an investment in both the neighbourhood and in the lives of artists in the Jane and Finch community and will nurture talent, encourage creativity and grow skills,” said Mayor David Miller. “Today the Jane-Finch arts community moves into a facility that is befitting the wealth of artistic talent in the neighbourhood. No more practising in hallways, parking lots and facilities far outside the area.”

______________________________________________

Prime Minister Stephen Harper bids farewell to Her Majesty The Queen as she ends her nine-day Royal Tour of Canada. (Photo)

_________________________________________________

MP Rob Oliphant from Don Valley West speaks at Journey of Faith held over the weekend at Metro Toronto Convention Centre.