One-state solution

In her article “Two-state solution needs a rethink” (Aug. 26), Linda Heard provided a good analysis of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. However, there was a point that she failed to mention: Even if a two-state solution was achieved and implemented on the ground, it would not survive as a solution for long. It will only be a temporary one, because the Palestinians of 1948 will never accept to relinquish their right of return, and wars will sooner or later erupt again. So, the only permanent solution would be a one-state future where all Palestinians and Jews live under one umbrella with equal rights in the whole of Palestine, governed by an elected democratic authority.

Khader Abu-Hayyeh, Kent, England, published 2 September 2008

Burning of schools

I am surprised that reports about the burning of girl’s schools in Afghanistan by the Taleban have not drawn condemnation from the Muslim Ulema. When such atrocities are committed in the name of Islam, is it not their responsibility to make it clear to the misguided zealots as well to the rest of the world that such actions have nothing to do with our religion? Would it not be very helpful if the Ulema everywhere, Saudi Arabia in particular, gave their verdict against this practice of violence against the right of women to learn? Is it not very clear that burning institutions of learning is utterly opposed to the advice of our Prophet (peace be upon him) to acquire education, no matter what the hurdles, even if that meant traveling to China?

This action by the Taleban raises some very important questions for Muslims: Has Allah made it incumbent on us, men, to tell women what they should or should not do? Are they not capable of understanding Allah’s commands as much as men are and of exercising as much judgment and as much self-restraint as men are? Don’t we all know that women can, and do, exercise more self-restraint than men in life? The words of Allah granting rights and imposing responsibilities apply to males and females equally and, hence, women are as accountable for their actions to Allah as men are for their actions. So what business do I have to go around telling women what they should or should not do, without first searching my own soul for its weaknesses and failures?

S. Wasty, Jeddah, published 2 September 2008

Child marriages

It is a welcome initiative that, as reported in Muhammad Rasoldeen’s story “HRC seeks end to child marriages” (Aug. 26), the Saudi Human Rights Commission has called on government agencies to take steps to end the practice of child marriage. It is a violation of human rights when children are given in marriage to elderly men, mainly for monetary reasons such as settlement of debts or to receive generous dowries.

Nevertheless, the system is not all evil. It can be argued that the marriage of very young girls was, in reality, a promise that when they are old enough they will become wives, and that while they were still children they merely lived in the homes of the prospective spouses. The custom probably originated in times when there was no social welfare. It must have ensured, when poverty and a surplus of females dictated customs and traditions that no female ended up without the protection of a family or a husband.

Islam requires that marriages have the consent of both partners to make them valid. So, forced marriages or those contracted with the consent of the parties have no validity, according to Islam.

With regard to the marriage age, it varies in different cultures. Judaism has traditionally, according to its ancient writings, discouraged marriages of young women to much older men, whereas in England, for example, there were such arranged marriages.

Finally, marrying partners with big age difference is not unknown in our time. In contemporary society, there are young women who marry much older men, and young men marrying much older women.

O.R., Riyadh, published 2 September 2008

Attack on board

The report “Saudi woman attacked on board a plane” (Aug. 27) reminded me of an incident on a plane involving two Saudi men back in 1984. I had just boarded a Pan American flight which was scheduled to fly nonstop from New York to Dhahran when I noticed a Saudi family (husband, wife and children) trying to get into their assigned seats. However, another Saudi man was occupying one of their seats and he got very angry when the Saudi family asked him to move. He finally got up and started beating the poor husband until blood was streaming from his face. The plane’s crew immediately called the New York police. Two huge policemen rushed on board and carried the offensive Saudi off the plane. Everyone cheered. The Saudi family then took its assigned seats and was very nice to everyone during the long flight back to Dhahran. This is what the police in Istanbul should have done.

Bill Bruinsma, Dammam, published 2 September 2008

Kashmir unrest

This refers to the editorial “Kashmir unrest poses dangers” (Aug. 26). Kashmir wants nothing less than independence from the illegal occupation of India. Ours is not a struggle for economic or material gains, but for freedom. We will fight as long as the last drop of blood runs in our veins. It is sad that the OIC or the UN doesn’t pay even lip serve to our cause. Why don’t the Indian atrocities on Kashmiri Muslims bother them?

MubasMubashir Wani, Riyadh, published 2 September 2008

Kashmir unrest - 2

The Kashmir issue is not a Hindu vs. Muslim struggle as the editorial tried to project. Jammu itself has a Hindu majority in only two districts and about six districts have Muslim majorities. So, kindly stop making it a religious issue.

The fact is that this is a fight for the right of self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir, which has been denied to them for the last 60 years. And please don’t refer to pro-freedom politicians as extremists and to pro-India ones as moderate. That is contrary to the situation on the ground and to what millions of Kashmiris have proved by their support for the pro-freedom leaders. All right-thinking people around the world should come forward to support the call for justice by the oppressed people of Jammu & Kashmir.

Rafi Ahmad, Dhahran, published 2 September 2008

Zardari as president

It is really unfortunate for the people of Pakistan that they will have to see a day when a person who was in jail for more than eight years on criminal charges — murder, corruption and receiving kickbacks — will hold the office of the president of Pakistan. Gen. Pervez Musharraf is answerable for this. He must explain to the nation how and why he pardoned Asif Ali Zardari of all his crimes under the National Reconciliation Ordinance.

Those who say that, with US backup, Zardari is going to be inducted as president of Pakistan to support its war on terror under a backhand deal are correct. All powers are in the hands of Zardari. It is quite obvious that Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani is a dummy and Zardari takes all decisions. This is an identical pair just as Musharraf and Zafrullah Jamali were. That is why some people have named Gilani as Yusuf Raza Jamali.

Shafiq Khan, Jeddah, published 2 September 2008