Of Pakistani natives, Nigerian ‘underwear bombers’ and Islam’s lost generation

Like Faisal Shahzad (FS), the American citizen accused of attempting to bomb Times Square, I too am a Pakistani 'native.'

Media reports suggest FS lived in the United States from the age of eighteen, for the last twelve years. Courtesy of the US taxpayer, he will probably stay in the US for many more decades.

Until a few days ago, FS was American. Then he parked the infamous Nissan SUV at Times Square and instantaneously became a 'Pakistani native.' Like me.

Surely, Islam has a problem. Why eleven Arabs believed flying airplanes into buildings was an act of war is beyond normal comprehension. Yet, the behaviour was justified by complicated, if distorted, theological arguments proposed by a small group of radical Islamic militants.

Arguably, the lure of extremist Islam has only grown in stature during the last nine years. In a menacing twist, the appeal of such deviant arguments has moved beyond the realms of the typical illiterate and impoverished foot soldier.

It's easy to understand why a fourteen year old Kandahari boy fights 'occupying infidels, 'especially if he has lost family members in 'tragic accidents' (of course, duly investigated by NATO / ISAF). It's quite another for the son of a member of Nigeria's wealthy elite to become the 'Christmas Underwear Bomber,' or the son of a (retired) senior officer of Pakistan's Air Force to want to kill civilians in Islam's name.

Balanced individuals generally do not have suicidal tendencies. Suicidal tendencies are considered the preserve of the mentally unstable. Typically, people are driven to contemplate suicide due to feelings of despondency and helplessness. The causes are scrutinized by psychologists and medical practitioners.

Is the impotence felt by some Muslims part of the problem? I suspect so. It also appears as if the US invasion of Iraq was a turning point for the world's Muslims.

Baghdad, former capital of the Islamic Caliphate and the Tigris – Euphrates civilization (remember learning about the cuneiform alphabet?), was easily overrun by a foreign army (with external Arab help of course). There was no contest. Saddam 'Mother of all Dictators' Hussein was captured like a sewer rat hiding in a basement near his hometown.

Undoubtedly, Saddam was a vicious dictator who had waged war against two of his neighbours. But Saddam was (and is) certainly not the only dictator worthy of regime change.

The Iraq war exposed the political, military and cultural weakness of the Islamic world. The Islamic psyche suffered a humiliating blow from which it is still recovering. For all its huffing and puffing, the Islamic world is a paper tiger.

Then it turned out that the war was justified on a falsehood, the elusive weapons of mass destruction.

The US Department of Defense Central Command's area of responsibility

To a large extent, the politics are irrelevant. Parliamentary inquiry commissions or Congressional hearings can investigate the legality of the war to their hearts content. Such legal niceties will not make an iota of difference to the Muslim street. They will remember Abu Ghraib or the air attacks on wedding parties in Afghanistan.

To some extent, even all that misses the point.

One century ago, Muslims were barely exposed to modern technology. Suddenly, Muslim societies are grappling with the effects of laptops, Play Stations, Metallica and Hollywood on their social milieu. There has been a social dislocation of gargantuan proportions, especially since the Muslim world bypassed any form of an industrial revolution.

Islamic theology has not had enough time to digest these changes. The bearded gentry still hark about modernizers like Ataturk being part of a Jewish conspiracy, or how modern technology only leads people down the path of the devil.

As a 'native,' I am not seeking to justify terrorism. I am suggesting that it is more than just a 'law and order' issue. FS, a seemingly normal young man who lived in the US for almost his entire adult life suddenly becomes entranced by militant Islam. Why?

Yes, the FBI should interrogate FS but equally important he must undergo serious psychiatric investigations to unearth what drives an individual to such acts. Was it linked to the fact that FS was a financial bankrupt with his house under foreclosure? Or, to what extent did events in Pakistan's tribal areas, FS is a Pashtun, act as a catalyst in his decision.

These and many other questions fall in the realm of medical professionals, not detectives. The natives can only be civilized once the answers are known.

Perhaps next time a National University of Singapore professor chides me by suggesting my commitment to Singapore is 'weak' it will remind me that I am not merely a Singaporean citizen. In reality I am simply a Pakistani 'native' residing in Singapore.

Foreign workers, English and the Singapore – Malaysia special relationship

Come July 1, all foreign work permit holders in the hotel, retail and food and beverage industries are required to pass a Ministry of Manpower (MOM) Service Literacy Test (SLT) in order to qualify as skilled workers. That is, unless the foreign worker is Malaysian.

First a little bit more about the test.

Essentially, the test appears to be a Singapore version of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) customized for workers in the hospitality industry. Most likely, the SLT will be slightly simpler and require less vocabulary as the TOEFL. Successful candidates "are expected to be able to listen and understand job-related communications in routine workplace tasks in English and to respond appropriately in English."

The SLT is a step forward, especially for those of us who can't speak Mandarin and are routinely shunned by non-English speaking shop assistants. (Although I must admit I often have problems communicating with Singlish speaking locals also!)

Yet, a close reading of the MOM press release indicates that the SLT is not mandatory for working in the defined industries. Passing the SLT is required only "in order to qualify [the worker] for skilled levy status."

The government has decided to use its legislative powers softly by creating a financial incentive to hire skilled workers versus unskilled workers. The monthly work permit fee for skilled workers is SGD 160, whereas for unskilled workers it is SGD 260. A saving of SGD 100 a month can add up for both small and large businesses.

Already, an industry surrounding training for the SLT test is developing to assist companies and workers prepare July. However, unskilled (i.e. non-English speaking) workers can continue to be employed in the food, retail and hotel industries, at the company's discretion.

Over time, Singapore should broaden the scope of the SLT.

In future, all foreign workers in designated industries, without any exceptions, must pass the SLT. The criteria for selecting SLT required industries should also be expanded.

Under current rules I presume that a receptionist at a hospital may not be required to speak English – as formally measured by the SLT criteria. Similarly, driving instructors also appear to be exempted. There are many other instances of occupations where English should be made compulsory, at least until Mandarin is made compulsory for all Singaporeans!

But why exempt Malaysian workers from the rules?

Many of my Chinese friends may see Malaysia's exclusion as a sign of 'pandering' to our larger neighbour, or perhaps another example of the (allegedly) privileged position of Malays within Singapore.

I see the move reflective of the special relationship shared by the two nations. Malaysians are a part of Singapore's extended family. Hence, unless the government intends to make the SLT compulsory for Singaporeans it is right to exempt Malaysians. Under one roof, the same rules apply to all.

In the coming years, I do hope that the Singapore-Malaysia 'Special Relationship' will manifest itself in more practical ways for ordinary citizens of both sovereign nations.

Does my MP live in Woodlands?

Constitutional democracies are fine representative forms of government, probably the least imperfect governmental system around. Ironically, one of the oldest and finest examples of parliamentary democracy operates without a written Constitution: the United Kingdom (UK).

'Westminster' style democracies are emulated in many countries around the world, including Singapore. Of course, there are no cookie-cutter approaches to representative government so all nations modify the democratic system to suit their own particular local environment.

The British Houses of Parliament and Big Ben located at Westminster, London.

Most young democracies, including Singapore, have used a 'top-down' approach. That is, a defined Constitution is hoisted upon the state at independence. Democracy is not based on parliamentary traditions defined over centuries of transformation, from kingdoms' to democracies.

In this manner, post-colonial national Constitutions' cherry pick provisions from existing international examples. The process leapfrogs the need for citizens to undergo traumatic, often revolutionary, movements to wrest certain rights now universally accepted as inalienable to all humans. Freedom of expression, religion and association are three of the fundamental rights which come to mind.

Singapore is not Britain. Singapore is a compact island republic where differences in constituency politics are not be as severe as in the UK. For example, the 'local' issues for an MP from Jurong or Woodlands may not be as different as for MPs representing London or Glasgow.

Yet, we all know that local politics is different from national politics. Local politics is the need for a cycling path in a particular estate, complaints about a noisy commercial establishment, or pollution from a nearby factory and so on. National issues such as the economy and immigration have a whole different dynamic.

I may be wrong, but I am quite certain that under Singapore's parliamentary rules an MP does not need to maintain a primary (or secondary) residence in the constituency she represents. I know the People's Action Party (PAP) has Grassroots Organisations (GROs), party activists and regular sessions in their constituency but is that enough for an MP to accurately understand the problems of the average resident?

Singapore is a 'kiasu' society. Everyone wants to live in a private condominium and drive a luxury car. However, the fact is that the great bulk (80% or more) of Singaporeans live in state subsidized Housing Development Board (HDB) apartments. Not all ordinary citizens will succeed in their aspirations to move out of HDB 'pigeon holes' or own cars.

MPs are a privileged lot of people. And, to some extent, they should be. Nevertheless, I suggest there is a direct correlation between understanding a constituency and living in the constituency. It is a self-evident truth and one hard to argue against.

It is unlikely that an MP who lives in a landed property and only sees the road from her residence gate to her workplace will experience selfish cyclists on footpaths breaking the law or the crowded state of the trains during peak periods. Parliamentary secretaries and state bureaucrats may dutifully report statistics on the average daily number of train commuters or serious accidents involving bicycles but the impact of such numbers is impersonal.

Followers of British politics will know that a Member of Parliament (MP) must maintain a residence in their constituency and reside a certain amount of time 'at home.' (Many readers will also be aware of the scandals surrounding certain dishonest MPs which arise from fraudulent expenses centred upon the 'two home' system.)

Singapore's Parliament building

I am not certain that the GROs and the party infrastructure is enough for an MP to immerse themselves in a specific constituency. Perhaps it is time Singapore parliamentary customs (or party rules) mandate that MPs continually reside for at least a minimum number of days, say 180, each year within the constituency they represent?

Of course, living in a neighbourhood implies more than just sleeping at a registered address each night. 'Living' means sharing the same experiences of a resident through taking public transport, shopping at neighbourhood stores, walking around the estate during the evenings, etc.

In my mind, there is no doubt that someone who does not live in Woodlands will not entirely understand the subjects (or complaints) that matter most to Woodlands residents. True representative democracy is an arduous journey. It is time for Singapore to take the next step forward.

France, Islam and the new cultural revolution

A French woman driving while wearing a niqab, a full face veil with only space for the eyes, was recently issued a ticket for unsafe driving. Apparently, the niqab hinders the full vision of a driver. (Surely, the peripheral vision of someone wearing a niqab is no less than that caused by wearing a motorcycle crash helmet?) Hence, the traffic summons.

Having lived in the Middle East for many years, I can say that female drivers (with or without the niqab) probably have a lower probability of causing traffic accidents than their male counterparts. I am sure international road accident statistics will back up my claim.

Let's not fool ourselves. The French police action is hardly linked to road safety. It is also not about human rights. The controversy is about the amplified prominence of Islam in Europe.

For a variety of reasons, Muslim consciousness has increased rapidly in the post 9/11 environment. The outward appearances of religiosity, including the hijab and the niqab, have found their way onto city streets all over the world.

Some may legitimately argue that segments of the Muslim population in the West use the hijab and other religious symbols as a form of silent protest against Western cultural domination.

And here lies the problem.

'Islamic' culture, if there is such a thing, cannot be clearly defined. Even if Muslim culture could be defined, undoubtedly it has been in the doldrums for many centuries with signs of life appearing only since the 1900s. It's hard for Koran recital contests to compete with Hollywood blockbuster movies.

That the Islamic world cannot speak with pride of even one international cultural capital is embarrassing.

Think of the world's vibrant cities. The cities that come to mind include London, New York, Paris and perhaps Shanghai, Tokyo and Hong Kong. Stretch the imagination slightly. Will cities like Cairo, Istanbul, Kuala Lumpur, Lahore, Damascus or Dubai enter the list? Unlikely.

The dynamic has improved with the beginnings of an Islamic cultural renaissance visible. However, the picture is not entirely clear as much of the renewed intellectual activity is based in Western nations around Muslim émigrés. The fact underscores the weak academic 'enabling' environment found in most Muslim countries.

Between the radical Mullahs who find most things un-Islamic and the weak research infrastructure, including a lack of world class higher educational institutions, an academic is better off working in New York, London or Paris versus Cairo, Istanbul or Islamabad. And, of course, most research material is not available in Urdu, Turkish or Arabic. That is, unless one conducts research on Islamic theology.

Although Islamic theology has a place in the world, it does not create doctors or teachers. Nor does theology help construct electric power plants, railways, hospitals or any of the other things in modern life which we take for granted.

So what's with the current European predilection with Islamic symbols? Whether we speak of minarets in Switzerland, the niqab in France or simply halal only restaurants there is obviously a deeper trend at play.

It concerns the awakening of a more assertive Islam. The world has a new generation of Muslims who are questioning their own identity. In the process, these Muslims are making the Europeans question the notion of 'Europeanness' and the European identity.

Ultimately, I suspect one will have to wait for the European Court of Justice to determine whether the niqab is an acceptable part of Europe or not. However, we already know that Turkey is not an acceptable part of Europe, with or without the headscarf.

Goldman Sachs and capitalism's ‘New Normal’

Goldman Sachs (GS) prepares to take on the US government, in the form of the US Senate and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in the coming months. The GS Chief Executive Officer Blankein versus Senator Levin exchange is a small battle in a larger war.

In the internet age we have a tendency to redefine traditions. Thirty is the new twenty, small is the new big and billions are the new millions.

High finance has been no exception. It has been redefined.

Traditional banking business is a relic of the past. Bankers do not lend money anymore. Bankers invest money aka play with OPM (other peoples' money). Yes, at some level the 'investments' are actually loans, but the degrees of separation between the lender and the borrower are umpteen.

Certainly, few bankers know the people to whom they lend money. Personal assessments of character and ability to repay are replaced by point systems. Few bankers visit business premises to check plant and machinery of borrowers.

When an AIG trader, if there are any left, buys a synthetic security he buys a piece of paper with a value associated with another piece of paper. The second piece of paper is linked to a loan securitized such that it becomes another piece of tradable paper. Perhaps the third piece of paper is the 'real' loan which some individual is servicing as a mortgage on their home.

It's easy to see why active market participants may not even care about the underlying exposure (loan) of the synthetic security. They leave the qualitative judgement on the final loan on which the entire structure is built to the rating agencies.

The rating agencies, like the hedge funds which proliferate through the financial ecosystem, rely upon quantitative, disciplined back testing to determine loan default rates. Of course, historical relationships, quantitative or otherwise, tend to break down over time.

China was a communist, centrally planned economy until the 1990s. India, with its pseudo-socialist economy, was a Soviet ally during the Cold War. Kabul, Afghanistan was the end point of the Hippie Trail which started in Volkswagen vans all across Europe. Brazil was a basket case economy suffering from chronic hyper-inflation and budget deficits.

Similarly in finance, relationships that remained stable for the last decade change dramatically at short notice. Whether the changes were triggered by Greenspan's easy credit era or home sellers running out of buyers to 'flip' their houses to, it really does not matter.

Ultimately, the system broke down. It will take years to fix and the world economy's new structure is still uncertain. The Chinese Renminbi may be the international reserve currency several decades hence, or perhaps the world will revert to the gold standard. No one can say for certain.

The 'New Normal' for capitalism is trading in paper certificates. The certificates may represent pork bellies, oil or paper which relies on paper which relies on paper which relies on paper which is valued based on the upward movement of US Dollar interest rates when it is sunny in London but when it is raining in London the value of one hundred bushels of wheat are to be used!

Ultimately, it's all paper and as long as one buys low and sells high (not necessarily in that order) then it's all worthwhile. Taking out money from the market is the new mantra for international bankers.

Play with the numbers enough and it's not a zero sum game. In other words, the money can be 'created' and original goods and services are no longer necessary.

So when watching the Goldman Sachs versus the World drama, let's remember that it's a world which the financial sector did not create without active participation from the broader society. When times were good everyone cheered.

Today, Iran's nuclear threat is no longer the greatest threat to Western civilization. The honour belongs to Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfein and his loyal (though greedy) troops scattered around the world's various financial capitals.  

Just in case someone wishes to profit from the entire mess, there are some gainers. During the last two weeks, as Goldman Sachs stock price dropped seventeen percent, Morgan Stanley's stock price gained three percent. In the old fashioned investment world, a relative outperformance of twenty percent is worthy of a handsome bonus.

Shrinks, theologians, the devil and the death clock

Most consider death to be a morbid thought. Yet, death is an inevitable fact of life. Everything must die. Humans, animals, plants, even inanimate objects like planes, trains and automobiles perish sometime.

Death may be a precursor to a new beginning. Dead plants fertilize the soil for more crops. Creatures that died thousands of years ago are today's fossil fuels. For humans, the monotheistic religions certainly propagate some form of afterlife.

At least the monotheistic religious traditions attempt to instil a fear of God, often through anxieties over death.

While it is impossible to verify any claims about a human soul's post death condition, one can certainly opine about the philosophy of death. One does not need to be noted Swiss psychiatrist Elisabeth Kubler-Ross to have opinions on death and dying!

Theologians and hedonists argue that humans must live to the fullest. However, their viewpoints are diametrically opposed in methods to achieve the same objective. 

Theologians suggest a full life must be devoted to God by indulging in a faith based regime which purports to keep us away from evil behaviour. Hedonists tend to see life as an equation in which 'pleasure minus pain equal happiness.'

Both philosophies have one idea in common: we live each day as if it is our final day on this earth. And, that is why an individual's philosophy of death provides qualitative insights into character.

Will someone go out partying during their last night on earth or will they seek penance and repentance in prayer out of fear? Perhaps just eat the proverbial last meal and then a restful night of sleep to enter the afterlife?

The permutations are as endless as personalities on the planet.

I only hope that when it's my turn I am not filled with fear. I can't hide my history from my own self. For my acts of omission and commission, I am accountable to at least myself. The rest may not be irrelevant but should take care of itself.

If my conscience is clean I can have that last night of restful sleep, uninterrupted by demons and wizards. No valium capsules necessary.

Elisabeth Kubler-Ross sounds eerily close to Muslim theologian Al-Ghazzali when she said, "It's only when we truly know and understand that we have a limited time on earth - and that we have no way of knowing when our time is up, we will then begin to live each day to the fullest, as if it was the only one we had."

The sceptics may wish to visit the Death Clock to check their estimated time of departure. Additionally, as the Irish toast goes:

May you have love and raiment
And a soft pillow for your head
And may you spend forty years in heaven
Before the devil knows you're dead.

The global media: on picking and choosing wars and the Am-mex region

The power of the global media to set the international agenda is incredible. The news the world watches on international television channels and reads in umpteen newspapers is eerily alike.

Television channels like CNN and BBC, despite their respective US and British centric biases, carry almost identical news. Similarly, given the propensity of newswires like AP, AFP and Reuters to dominate the print media, newsreaders in Hong Kong, London and Sydney often read the same articles on major international events.

Surely, there are economic reasons for the monopoly on news by major international players. Undoubtedly, the world benefits by increased and convenient information flow.

Some items make the news and others do not. The war on terror makes the grade but the war on drugs does not.

Consider the global war on terror. Each and every day for almost the last decade global citizens are bombarded with considerable details on any event, large or small, related to the war on terror. Even a firecracker exploding in Pakistan's tribal areas will flash across CNN screens ('through reliable sources CNN has learnt of an explosion in Pakistan's lawless tribal areas') within a few minutes.

Americans, not generally known for their grasp of international geography, are suddenly aware of the finer distinctions between North Waziristan, South Waziristan and the towns of Mir Ali and Wana. Not surprisingly, most Pakistanis are themselves not fully aware about the existence (and legal framework) of the various agencies within the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

The war on terror is real for the world, whether it is fought in Yemen, Iraq or Afghanistan.

On the contrary, few know of the war on drugs being waged just south of the Rio Grande River. Perhaps only the scores of civilians dying daily in Northern Mexican towns such as Juarez, or those killed in shootouts in the hotel district of Mexico's prime beach resort, Acapulco know of this forgotten war.

Almost 23,000 people have died in the Mexican war against organized crime since 2006.

Ok, so Juarez might be the murder capital of the world but it is still the Mexican equivalent of Mir Ali. Monterrey, however, is not.

Monterrey is Mexico's third largest city and home to much of Mexican industry. Monterrey is Mexico's Kandahar or Pakistan's Peshawar. Incidents in Monterrey are of international interest.

Thus, when a dozen SUVs cordon of an entire district of the city and storm two hotels, including the Holiday Inn to abduct six people one would think it will make global news headlines. But no, the episode is either a footnote in a print newspaper or not mentioned at all.

If a similar event occurred in Yemen, Mali, Indonesia, Pakistan, Jordan or Afghanistan, then speculation about lack of central authority, collusion with Al-Qaeeda and a host of other matters will fill the international news ecosystem incessantly.  

Undoubtedly, the world is an unfair place. Like nations, individuals pick and choose their wars carefully. To fight the international media may be easier due to the advent of social media. However, let's not fool ourselves, until a war is adopted by the mainstream media it does not exist.

Everyone is familiar with the war taking place in the Pak-Afghan border but few hear about the war which takes place on the US-Mexican border.

There are public wars and there are private wars.

Maybe if the Am-Mex war seeps over onto the US mainland it will be more widely reported. Mexican drug barons are as feisty as Obama's warriors in defending their interests and there are no guarantees the Mexican war stays limited to Mexico.

Osama's original war was against the US troop presence in Saudi Arabia. Clearly, the war is no longer confined to Saudi Arabia. Read any newspaper.