Where are today’s heroes? Detained at JFK airport by US immigration!

Role models are important. They help us aspire to be better than we are and give us concrete examples of success. Role models possess those qualities which help us achieve our goals.

Of course, the operative word here is success.

There are successful scientists, doctors, businessmen and politicians. But to some, negative role models such as Osama Bin Laden, Mullah Omar or their local variants may have greater appeal than members of mainstream society.

That the Islamic world has not been able to throw up vigorous contemporary role models may lie at the heart of the problem. Sure, aspiring politicians may look towards Ataturk, Jinnah or other nationalists for inspiration. However, their appeal is jaded and historical, not in tune with today's iPod generation. The jihadists and other radicals are far more likely to appeal to the young.

At a practical level, there are hardly any instances of world class scientists, doctors or the like produced by the Islamic world. When Dr. Abdus Salam, the Pakistani physicist received the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979, he was the exception that proves the rule.

And, being a member of a 'deviant' Islamic sect, Dr. Salam's status as a Muslim will be disputed by many traditional bearded 'scholars.' (That's another story for another day.)

Islamic scholars will hark back to the glory days of Islamic history when Muslims led the advancement of thought in most any field, including medicine, mathematics, physics and their derivatives. History provides context but is not sufficiently strong to shape the next generation. Especially today's digital generation which requires everything to be 'here and now.'

There are two major flaws with my argument. Firstly, I have restricted role models by religious persuasion. Secondly, not all role models must have achieved greatness on the international stage. Local, even parochial, role models are sufficient for most of us.

Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Bishop Desmond Tutu are not excluded from being role models simply because they are non-Muslims. Far from it, as role models for humanity these three are among the finest examples we can emulate.

However, the reality is that for most young in today's Muslim world the ability to 'connect and relate' with a role model increases exponentially if the individual is a Muslim. Perhaps this is an unfortunate by product of 9/11 or academic debates being anchored around Huntington's 'clash of civilizations' thesis – who knows.

Additionally, publicity within the Islamic world naturally gravitates towards 'indigenous' leaders. Just as the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has a natural bias towards reporting British news, the national media of Muslim nations has a domestic and subsequently 'Islamic' bias in its reporting.

Undoubtedly, 'local' role models play as significant (if not more) a role as national models. Who can argue that a parent, teacher or some other relative did not help shape their worldly outlook?

A doctor looks to the specialist in her ward for leadership by example, a scientist to the lead scientist at her institute and so on.

However, a purely 'local' approach is fraught with the danger that a truly gifted individual remains 'undiscovered' – a loss to all of humanity. The approach implies functioning filtering systems to ensure that the individual is 'pushed up' to the next level of achievement. Much is left to chance.

Hence, individuals must have larger greatness to emulate. Ideally, these people must have visible achievements, readily seen by all. Bangladeshi 2006 Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohammad Yunus, famed for his community banking concepts and Pakistani philanthropist Abdus Sattar Edhi and the Edhi Foundation come immediately to my mind.

Abdus Salam Road in Geneva, Switzerland

Let's hope that the next century holds more heroes for Muslims – and Osama doesn't count! And that these Muslim heroes are recognized beyond Islam's borders too. That US authorities confiscated 79 year old Maulana Edhi's passport and interrogated him for nine hours at New York's JFK airport in 2008, considering him a potential terrorist threat,' only underscores to Muslims the unfortunate (but real) notion that there is a clear distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim role models in the world today.

The Monster Raving Loony Party: coming soon to Singapore

Politics is serious business. And so it should be. Playing with people's lives and exercising power is no joke. Yet, there is a lighter side even to politics.

Take the Monster Raving Loony Party (MRLP), a fixture of British politics since 1983 when Screaming Lord Sutch established the political party. Lord Sutch, of course, was not officially a lord. That was a title popularized by the British media which almost never referred to him by his legal name, David Edward Sutch.

Rock musician David Sutch (1940-1999) founded the party as an alternative to mainstream politics. During his career Lord Sutch contested over 40 elections, often against heavy weight politicians such as Margaret Thatcher or Harold Wilson.

At the local town council level, the MRLP scored some electoral successes. In 1998, a MRLP candidate, Alan Hope, became the elected mayor of Ashburton Town Council, Devon. Hope had first been elected to the town council in 1987.

However, let no one suggest that the MRLP is not a serious party. It published a manifesto of its policy proposals in order to contest Britain's recent General Elections. The 'forward thinking and positive contributions to political life that the Loony party is famous for' were outlined in the manifesto.

Some of the MRLP's more innovative proposals are as follows:

1.    Needles: Due to the increasing number of children afraid of needles, I propose the destruction of the tedious, scary and often painful process of school vaccinations. Instead, I propose that highly trained nurses should be given free reign on the playground with specially modified tranquillizer rifles which apply vaccinations as well as a tranquillizer. This would have two main benefits: It would be less scary for the children as they will not know what hit them, also it will be more fun for the nurses

2.    One Sided Policy: It is proposed that The European Union end its discrimination by creating a "Court of Human Lefts" because their present policy is one sided.

3.    Political Colours: All politicians should paint them self's permanently head to toe in the colour of the party they represent - e.g. all Labour candidates in Red , all Conservatives in Blue ,etc., etc

4.    Animal fashions. It is proposed that: Pets, especially cats and dogs, may not be dressed in miniature human clothing for the purpose of human amusement, unless the animal in question can equip the clothing himself/herself. Punishable by dressing the owner of the animal in miniature human clothing.

5.    Isle of ? It is proposed that the Isle of Man be renamed to "The Isle of Men, Women, Children and some Animals" as not just men live there.

6.    Education: As well as using computers in schools, children should be taught to reed, rite, and appreciate rock.

In the Singapore context, perhaps it is only a raving loony party that can compete with the ultra-logical and efficient People's Action Party's - who else but a loony believes that they can break the PAP's electoral monopoly?

Yet, I fear that most Singaporean bureaucrats may not know how to deal with an application to register a 'loony' party in Singapore. A final decision on the fate of Singaporean 'loonies' will have to be made at a most senior level.

Lord Sutch, founder of Britain's Monster Raving Loony Party

Sometimes it's necessary for us to laugh at ourselves, if only to help us understand what we have become and in which direction we are heading.

NB – Tragically, Lord Sutch suffered from clinical depression and committed suicide in June 1999, following the death of his mother the previous year.

McChrystal and the US Afghan war gone awry

General McChrystal's departure from the US Afghan war effort has thrown the spotlight on Afghanistan once more. Although never far from the news, the resignation of the top US commander raises question about long term US strategy in the region.

Something is definitely brewing. Afghan President Karzai recently fired his Interior Minister and the Head of Afghan Intelligence. Both individuals were considered anti-Pakistan and anti-Taliban hard liners, unwilling to agree to even a hint of negotiations with Taliban leaders.

Simultaneously, Pakistan's military chief, General Kayani, and his head of intelligence have apparently travelled to Kabul for 'exclusive' discussions with Karzai several times in the last few weeks. In fact, Arabic news channel Al-Jazeera has even published a news report suggesting Karzai met with Sirajuddin Haqqani, leader of a large anti-government insurgent group.  

While Kabul's rumour mill must be running on overdrive, some basic facts can be gleaned from these events.

Notwithstanding the much heralded US troop surge in Afghanistan, after almost nine years of propping up a Karzai regime, Karzai's confidence in the US appears to be receding quickly. He seems not just to be sending feelers but fighting for his political, and possibly physical, survival.

Pakistan, as the home of more Pashtuns than Afghanistan, has an integral stake in any Afghan peace process. The instability in Afghanistan is writ large on recent political events in Pakistan.

Additionally, after nine years of watching India make inroads into the Pakistani 'backyard,' the Pakistan military must be excited at the prospect of extracting itself from a two front 'assault' engineered by the Indian-Afghan politico-military axis.

The Americans can only be incensed at not being a part of the 'peace' process. Surely, the US must have expected to be in the driving seat for any Afghan peace formula? After all, it was the Americans who legitimized (cynics would say 'arranged') Karzai's re-election as President after controversial elections held less than a year ago.

Pakistan's decision to 'play its hand' in Afghanistan demonstrates that the Pakistani establishment also believes America's influence in its western neighbour is time barred. Not an outlandish notion given America's self-imposed time frame of August 2011 to begin a drawdown of its Afghan troop presence.

The Pakistanis are rightly worried that once Afghanistan is no longer a security obsession for the West, it will have to deal with the ensuing 'blowback.' The 1990s are a recent and fresh memory for all Pakistanis, especially within the security establishment.

Meanwhile, Karzai is probably more concerned about having his carcass hung on a Kabul telephone pole once his foreign patrons disappear. A similar fate befell Najibullah, Afghanistan's Soviet installed leader in 1996.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai speaking at a security conference in 2008

McChrystal's interview with the Rolling Stone seems a master stroke from a highly skilled tactician and strategist. Surely, the interview cannot be an isolated case of 'poor judgement' by a general who understands the power of the media? On the contrary, the article has revived debate about the future of Afghanistan: a debate which, like the previous 30 years of the Afghan war, may ensue for another 30 years.

Historians will determine whether Afghanistan will be a beacon for freedom and democracy by 2011, the year the Americans start to leave. Seth Jones choice of title for his of America's Afghan war, In the Graveyard of Empires: America's War in Afghanistan is just as likely to be random as McChrystal's revelations to Rolling Stone magazine.

Sarkozy and the French Napoleonic tradition

I don't know if the Singapore government releases statistics on average heights for Singaporeans. The government probably collects the details and if I troll through the Department of Statistics website carefully enough, I may even find the numbers somewhere. Still, anecdotally speaking, it is safe for me to suggest that at six feet (1.83 meters) tall I am at the taller end of the local height spectrum.

Yes, it's nice to be able to stand tall in a crowd but is standing tall all about height? I don't think so. Maybe if I were 5'5" (1.53 meters) my answer might have been different.

Sarkozy sans the Sarkozy Step

For a President, Sarkozy is a tad touchy about his 5'5"stature. One would have thought being a ruler of so many different cheese and winemakers Sarkozy's self-confidence will be strong enough to absorb height related taunts. And, of course, with Sarkozy's alleged use of 'special' footwear to make himself appear taller is an unimportant detail.

However, I must admit some of the teases are pretty good. Take a French car rental company's advertisement slogan, "Be like Madame Bruni [Sarkozy's 5'10" wife], take a small French model." The ad urges customers to rent a small hatchback car as opposed to larger vehicles.

Then there's the 'Sarkozy Step.'

The step is not a new French ballroom dance but a small footstool used by Sarkozy when making public speeches from behind podiums. I guess it's easier to use a 'Sarkozy Step' than have smaller podiums. More recently, Sarkozy has taken to 'cull' tall people from his public appearances. That is, only short people can stand alongside or near Sarkozy! Who says autocratic traditions died in France with the 1787 French Revolution ousting the absolutist monarchy?

According to Dutch psychologist Professor Abraham Buunk of the University of Groningen, the 'short-man syndrome' is no laughing matter. His research suggests tall men have greater success with the opposite sex. (Despite being a Dutch researcher the good professor seems to have restricted his research to heterosexual couples!)

Most importantly for some, tall men have more eye contact with bar staff and thus are served drinks sooner than shorter men. Although I do notice that height is irrelevant to male bartenders as long as there are women to be served. There is a natural bias towards serving women – a bias which doctoral level university research is not required to authenticate.

French Emperor Napoleon (1769-1821) before the Sphinx as painted by Jean-Leon Gerome

Groningen is not the only academic with theories linking height with behaviour. The psychoanalyst Alfred Adler (1870-1937) talked about the 'Napoleon Complex,' named after the 5'2" French Emperor Napoleon. (Sarkozy follows in a long line of distinguished short French leaders.) The theory postulates that shorter men tend to be angrier and more aggressive than their taller counterparts.

Perhaps that's why the one exceptionally short banking professional I worked with was known to send highly aggressive emails, even for the most innocent of matters. Of course, anecdotal evidence does not help to fill textbooks, only stereotypes.

Then again, if Stalin (5'4") and Napoleon weren't short men maybe the world would have been a better place. To be fair, I must point out that Osama Bin Laden measures 6'4" or 1.93 meters. Or someone wishing to dominate the world, Osama's pretty tall.

Clearly, height doesn't seem to be a meaningful criterion for measuring an individual's impact on history.  

The Gulf Arab countries join the ‘real’ world of investing

It's not news until the global media reports it. An accident at a nuclear plant in a former Soviet Republic, killing of civilians by NATO soldiers in Afghanistan or oil leaks in the Nigeria delta are all absent from the agenda until the mainstream media decides they are newsworthy.

Of course, as news consumers all of us are guilty of wearing blinders when it comes to the content that interests us. Silly cat videos on the internet get more hits than articles on American citizens being kept out of America by the Department of Homeland Security.

As with most things, even the news is determined by the profit motive. So it is significant that the global media, in its infinite wisdom, has concluded that the Arab Gulf stock markets are ready to graduate into the 'real' world.

The flag of the Gulf Cooperation Council, a regional grouping combining Oman, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates

CNBC, the arbiter of important global financial news, has established a regional news bureau in Bahrain (no, not Dubai!). Performance of the Saudi, Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Cairo stock exchanges is reported almost as regularly as news about the Seoul, Singapore and New Zealand exchanges.

For a region that spans many countries all the way from the Maghreb in North Africa to the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states in the East it is surprising it took so long to join the 'elite CNBC Club.' Especially if one remembers that many of these countries have been amassing oil wealth since the 1980s. Some, like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Abu Dhabi, have long been active participants in the global capital markets through their respective sovereign wealth funds – even helping to capitalize some Western banks at the height of the global financial crisis.

After years of knocking on the doors of international investors, a few Arab stock exchanges are making some headway. Egypt, devoid of serious oil wealth but the recipient of years of American largesse due to Sadat's peace agreement with Israel, has always fluttered around the fringes of the Emerging Markets universe, never quite absent but never quite completely there either.

Saudi Arabia's exchange, the largest and most liquid in the Arab world, is arguably the most important for international investors evaluating the Arab world. It's a pity the news is mainly for informational purposes – despite joining the World Trade Organization several years ago direct purchases of Saudi stocks by non-GCC nationals is not permitted yet.

Most revealing is the inclusion of the Abu Dhabi and Dubai stock exchanges. Yes, there are two main exchanges in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – something which the authorities will be wise to 'arm twist' away via a merger. The two exchanges have different investing rules and an entirely different set of listed companies.

The Sheikh Zayed Mosque located in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

While the inclusion of the two UAE exchanges demonstrates the importance of the UAE as a regional financial hub – Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain stock news is incidentals to the CNBC coverage – it also points to the obvious drawback of having two distinct exchanges competing in a small country. One larger, more cohesive exchange will not only raise the profile of the UAE but also make investing operationally much easier for all classes of investors.

Nevertheless, CNBC has started what hopefully will be the beginning of a trend within the financial news media: increased coverage of the Arab world's stock exchanges. If nothing else, the coverage will help to raise the disclosure and investor relations standards of Arab public listed companies.

How the global media will handle delicate news like financial scandals, especially those involving prominent personalities, still remains to be seen.

The Germanic peoples, World War Two, one million dollars and one million years

A trader and God are speaking. The trader asks God, "What is a million years like to you?" "Like one second," answers God. The trader then asks, "What is a million dollars like to you?" God answers, "Like one penny." The trader then asks, "Can you spare a penny?" "Sure," says God, "give me a second."

Quoted from the book 'Trading without Gambling,' by Marcel Link.

Perspective is everything.

One nation's freedom fighters is another's terrorist. America's Afghan freedom fighters of the 1980s, the Mujahideen, (remember Sylvester Stallone's film Rambo III?) were the Soviet Union's terrorists. Today's 'second generation Mujahideen' remain freedom fighters to many Afghans but are Taliban terrorists to the Americans.

Modest Islamic dress to some women is the all encompassing niqab. To others, it's simply covering the head during the Azan, or call to prayer.

A hedge fund manager managing ten billion dollars of other people's money thinks nothing of betting 100 million dollars on an individual trade. A normal retail investor may shudder at investing more than ten thousand dollars in one stock. Both the 100 million and the ten thousand dollars may represent an equal amount of one percent of their total assets.

It's all about the prism through which we see the same event. However, humans have the uncanny ability to think beyond our own limited experiences.

So, when an Indian whom I met for the first time nonchalantly informs me, "I hate the Pakistan government but I don't mind the Pakistani people" I know not to overreact. Or when a Singaporean states, without thinking, "Pakistan, isn't that a terrorist state? Are women allowed out in public?" I can shrug it off to ignorance. (Both experiences are real and, unfortunately, not extremely unusual either in Singapore or anywhere in the world.)

I find new and 'uncomfortable' experiences helps to minimize existing prejudices. Such experiences open up the mind to ways of seeing which we may not otherwise consider.

A 1945 photograph of a bombed out street in Berlin, Germany

For example, in the past I somehow got it into my head that the Germans are primarily to blame for starting two horrific world wars (1914–18 and 1939-45) due to inherent 'Germanic' traits. Therefore, I reasoned the Germans are responsible for terrible devastation wrought on two successive generations of humankind.

Who knows, maybe my opinion was a result of a staple diet of World War Two Hollywood films depicting the evil German military machine manned by cruel Nazi soldiers.

Nevertheless, my view of the Germans was nothing short of racial discrimination. I blamed an entire people, the Germans, for historical events which were caused due to a confluence of historical factors.

The Germans alone cannot take the entire blame for the world wars. Even if it were true, time has not stood still and contemporary Germans are not members of Hitler's youth, nor are they soaked in Nazi propaganda.

During 2008, I had the privilege of spending some time in several cities in Germany.

Through my interaction with the Germans I realized that my earlier thoughts were misplaced. The Germans are no different from any other group of people – they have biases and carry historical baggage like any other nation.

Childish as it may sound, it took my contact with Germany and its people to come to such an obvious conclusion.

The moral of the story – try everything you possibly can, at least once. Even if the experience is 'uncomfortable' for you, it will still add to your memory bank and affect you in ways which we will only understand later.

Of course, don't throw morality and ethics out of the window and consider this idea a license for all types of immoral behaviour! Although occasionally transgressing the rigid social mores associated with the Taliban's harsh world view may not be such a bad idea.

In other words, (if you're a Muslim) pick up the Bhagavad Gita and read it. Or step inside a Church and admire the stained glass windows. Simply put, do anything not on your usual routine, like, dare I say it, enter a vice-den (aka bar or club) and dance the night away – drinking optional.  

We may have to wait one million years for God to present us with one million dollars, but I find it inconceivable that God is so petty as to stay upset with us for constantly searching for positive life changing experiences – even in bars!

What’s your passport worth – get a second opinion from Yahya Wehelie before deciding?

'True blue' Singaporeans recently made a lot of noise about the relatively liberal naturalization policy pursued by the government. Yet, Singaporeans forget that those who take oath as Singaporeans must sacrifice their existing citizenship. Dual citizenships are not permissibly under Singapore law.

Ok, a Pakistani passport does not facilitate travel – one is immediately branded a terrorist suspect and selected for 'random' screening in most Western nations. (An experience which changes little even with a Singapore passport – it's the religion and place of birth which elicits the extra 'attention.')

The Pakistan government is poor so one gives up little in the form of government benefits. That is, unless you happen to be one of the many Pakistanis stranded in violence struck Osh, Kyrgyzstan. Then you benefit from a speedy repatriation arranged by the Pakistan government.

Yet, emotionally it is not easy giving up one's nationality. But my discord is mild compared to Yahya Wehelie's issues.

Wehelie was born and raised in the US. He is a 26 year old US citizen. Like most people, Wehelie does not have another passport. Nor can he call another nation home.

Wehelie's problem – the US government is not letting Wehelie set foot in the US. Following eighteen months outside the US, Wehelie was 'waylaid' in Egypt on May 5. 'Waylaid' includes being detained by Egyptian authorities.

No, he has not been charged with any crime. There is no outstanding arrest warrant in his name. So, what's the problem?

Well, Wehelie's Muslim. His parents were Somali – and we know all Somalis, or at least most, are terrorists. Most importantly, he spent the last eighteen months studying in Yemen. After all, there is nothing to study in Yemen except terrorism.

So, Wehelie's name was placed on the US 'no-fly' list. Hence, he is unable to return to the US – his place of birth and home country.

Surely, there are legitimate security constraints faced by US authorities. Islamic terrorism is a serious problem. Basic racial profiling techniques make Wehelie stand out like a sore thumb due to his background and studies in Yemen.

But can a nation keep a citizen out of her own country? Something is terribly wrong here. Where does Egypt deport Wehelie once his Egyptian visa expires?

If Wehelie is a known security threat the US authorities should arrest him and charge him in court - in the US. As a citizen he has rights. Those rights are being flouted ostensibly only on the basis of his religion and Somali background. Is there a better explanation?

If there is one overarching principle associated with Constitutional republics, it is the supremacy of law. Based on the Wehelie experience, US law is hopelessly failing any sort of 'due process' test. His fundamental rights as a US citizen have been conveniently discarded.

Citizens are citizens – theoretically at least. Clearly, it helps if you are part of the majority race and religion.

The trouble with human nature is no matter how hard we try to raise awareness some biases tend to stay with us. Such biases are often institutionalized into legal frameworks and societal norms.

Passports have real value in today's globalized world.

Many Somalis will go to great lengths to become American citizens. These Somalis assume becoming an American citizen confers upon you the fundamental freedoms and rights granted by the US constitution.

The same rights which Wehelie acquired at his birth in Fairfax, Virgina 26 years ago. Cynics might suggest, "In today's world, being Muslim means you have no rights. Only privileges which can be taken away at will, even in the land of motherhood and apple pie."

I didn't believe it a few years ago, but it's becoming harder to argue with the pessimistic notion that Muslims are the new 'blacks' in American society, i.e. subject to institutional and other subtle forms racism of the sort often faced by African-Americans until recently.