Welcome to the Most Visited News
Portal of Expatriate Pakistanis
 |
 |
|
Welcome to the Most Visited News
Portal of Expatriate Pakistanis |
|||
|
| June 04, 2009 The following is a text of President Obama's prepared remarks to the Muslim world, delivered on June 4, 2009, as released by the White House. I am honored to be in the timeless city of Cairo, and to be hosted by two remarkable institutions. For over a thousand years, Al-Azhar has stood as a beacon of Islamic learning, and for over a century, Cairo University has been a source of Egypt's advancement. Together, you represent the harmony between tradition and progress. I am grateful for your hospitality, and the hospitality of the people of Egypt. I am also proud to carry with me the goodwill of the American people, and a greeting of peace from Muslim communities in my country: assalaamu alaykum. We meet at a time of tension between the United States and Muslims around the world – tension rooted in historical forces that go beyond any current policy debate. The relationship between Islam and the West includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity and globalization led many Muslims to view the West as hostile to the traditions of Islam. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Muslims. The attacks of September 11th, 2001 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians has led some in my country to view Islam as inevitably hostile not only to America and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust. So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end. I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings. I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, "Be conscious of God and speak always the truth." That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart. Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith. As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality. I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America's story. The first nation to recognize my country was Morocco. In signing the Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, our second President John Adams wrote, "The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Muslims." And since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States. They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our Universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch. And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library. So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed. That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear. But that same principle must apply to Muslim perceptions of America. Just as Muslims do not fit a crude stereotype, America is not the crude stereotype of a self-interested empire. The United States has been one of the greatest sources of progress that the world has ever known. We were born out of revolution against an empire. We were founded upon the ideal that all are created equal, and we have shed blood and struggled for centuries to give meaning to those words – within our borders, and around the world. We are shaped by every culture, drawn from every end of the Earth, and dedicated to a simple concept: E pluribus unum: "Out of many, one." Much has been made of the fact that an African-American with the name Barack Hussein Obama could be elected President. But my personal story is not so unique. The dream of opportunity for all people has not come true for everyone in America, but its promise exists for all who come to our shores – that includes nearly seven million American Muslims in our country today who enjoy incomes and education that are higher than average. Moreover, freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion. That is why there is a mosque in every state of our union, and over 1,200 mosques within our borders. That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it. So let there be no doubt: Islam is a part of America. And I believe that America holds within her the truth that regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations – to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God. These things we share. This is the hope of all humanity. Of course, recognizing our common humanity is only the beginning of our task. Words alone cannot meet the needs of our people. These needs will be met only if we act boldly in the years ahead; and if we understand that the challenges we face are shared, and our failure to meet them will hurt us all. For we have learned from recent experience that when a financial system weakens in one country, prosperity is hurt everywhere. When a new flu infects one human being, all are at risk. When one nation pursues a nuclear weapon, the risk of nuclear attack rises for all nations. When violent extremists operate in one stretch of mountains, people are endangered across an ocean. And when innocents in Bosnia and Darfur are slaughtered, that is a stain on our collective conscience. That is what it means to share this world in the 21st century. That is the responsibility we have to one another as human beings. This is a difficult responsibility to embrace. For human history has often been a record of nations and tribes subjugating one another to serve their own interests. Yet in this new age, such attitudes are self-defeating. Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail. So whatever we think of the past, we must not be prisoners of it. Our problems must be dealt with through partnership; progress must be shared. That does not mean we should ignore sources of tension. Indeed, it suggests the opposite: we must face these tensions squarely. And so in that spirit, let me speak as clearly and plainly as I can about some specific issues that I believe we must finally confront together. The first issue that we have to confront is violent extremism in all of its forms. In Ankara, I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam. We will, however, relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security. Because we reject the same thing that people of all faiths reject: the killing of innocent men, women, and children. And it is my first duty as President to protect the American people. The situation in Afghanistan demonstrates America's goals, and our need to work together. Over seven years ago, the United States pursued al Qaeda and the Taliban with broad international support. We did not go by choice, we went because of necessity. I am aware that some question or justify the events of 9/11. But let us be clear: al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. The victims were innocent men, women and children from America and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. And yet Al Qaeda chose to ruthlessly murder these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. They have affiliates in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. These are not opinions to be debated; these are facts to be dealt with. Make no mistake: we do not want to keep our troops in Afghanistan. We seek no military bases there. It is agonizing for America to lose our young men and women. It is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. We would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in Afghanistan and Pakistan determined to kill as many Americans as they possibly can. But that is not yet the case. That's why we're partnering with a coalition of forty-six countries. And despite the costs involved, America's commitment will not weaken. Indeed, none of us should tolerate these extremists. They have killed in many countries. They have killed people of different faiths – more than any other, they have killed Muslims. Their actions are irreconcilable with the rights of human beings, the progress of nations, and with Islam. The Holy Koran teaches that whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind; and whoever saves a person, it is as if he has saved all mankind. The enduring faith of over a billion people is so much bigger than the narrow hatred of a few. Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace. We also know that military power alone is not going to solve the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is why we plan to invest $1.5 billion each year over the next five years to partner with Pakistanis to build schools and hospitals, roads and businesses, and hundreds of millions to help those who have been displaced. And that is why we are providing more than $2.8 billion to help Afghans develop their economy and deliver services that people depend upon. Let me also address the issue of Iraq. Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice that provoked strong differences in my country and around the world. Although I believe that the Iraqi people are ultimately better off without the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, I also believe that events in Iraq have reminded America of the need to use diplomacy and build international consensus to resolve our problems whenever possible. Indeed, we can recall the words of Thomas Jefferson, who said: "I hope that our wisdom will grow with our power, and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be." Today, America has a dual responsibility: to help Iraq forge a better future – and to leave Iraq to Iraqis. I have made it clear to the Iraqi people that we pursue no bases, and no claim on their territory or resources. Iraq's sovereignty is its own. That is why I ordered the removal of our combat brigades by next August. That is why we will honor our agreement with Iraq's democratically-elected government to remove combat troops from Iraqi cities by July, and to remove all our troops from Iraq by 2012. We will help Iraq train its Security Forces and develop its economy. But we will support a secure and united Iraq as a partner, and never as a patron. And finally, just as America can never tolerate violence by extremists, we must never alter our principles. 9/11 was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our ideals. We are taking concrete actions to change course. I have unequivocally prohibited the use of torture by the United States, and I have ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed by early next year. So America will defend itself respectful of the sovereignty of nations and the rule of law. And we will do so in partnership with Muslim communities which are also threatened. The sooner the extremists are isolated and unwelcome in Muslim communities, the sooner we will all be safer. The second major source of tension that we need to discuss is the situation between Israelis, Palestinians and the Arab world. America's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied. Around the world, the Jewish people were persecuted for centuries, and anti-Semitism in Europe culminated in an unprecedented Holocaust. Tomorrow, I will visit Buchenwald, which was part of a network of camps where Jews were enslaved, tortured, shot and gassed to death by the Third Reich. Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying that fact is baseless, ignorant, and hateful. Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong, and only serves to evoke in the minds of Israelis this most painful of memories while preventing the peace that the people of this region deserve. On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people – Muslims and Christians – have suffered in pursuit of a homeland. For more than sixty years they have endured the pain of dislocation. Many wait in refugee camps in the West Bank, Gaza, and neighboring lands for a life of peace and security that they have never been able to lead. They endure the daily humiliations – large and small – that come with occupation. So let there be no doubt: the situation for the Palestinian people is intolerable. America will not turn our backs on the legitimate Palestinian aspiration for dignity, opportunity, and a state of their own. For decades, there has been a stalemate: two peoples with legitimate aspirations, each with a painful history that makes compromise elusive. It is easy to point fingers – for Palestinians to point to the displacement brought by Israel's founding, and for Israelis to point to the constant hostility and attacks throughout its history from within its borders as well as beyond. But if we see this conflict only from one side or the other, then we will be blind to the truth: the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security. That is in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest, and the world's interest. That is why I intend to personally pursue this outcome with all the patience that the task requires. The obligations that the parties have agreed to under the Road Map are clear. For peace to come, it is time for them – and all of us – to live up to our responsibilities. Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed. For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation. But it was not violence that won full and equal rights. It was a peaceful and determined insistence upon the ideals at the center of America's founding. This same story can be told by people from South Africa to South Asia; from Eastern Europe to Indonesia. It's a story with a simple truth: that violence is a dead end. It is a sign of neither courage nor power to shoot rockets at sleeping children, or to blow up old women on a bus. That is not how moral authority is claimed; that is how it is surrendered. Now is the time for Palestinians to focus on what they can build. The Palestinian Authority must develop its capacity to govern, with institutions that serve the needs of its people. Hamas does have support among some Palestinians, but they also have responsibilities. To play a role in fulfilling Palestinian aspirations, and to unify the Palestinian people, Hamas must put an end to violence, recognize past agreements, and recognize Israel's right to exist. At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's. The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop. Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society. And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress. Finally, the Arab States must recognize that the Arab Peace Initiative was an important beginning, but not the end of their responsibilities. The Arab-Israeli conflict should no longer be used to distract the people of Arab nations from other problems. Instead, it must be a cause for action to help the Palestinian people develop the institutions that will sustain their state; to recognize Israel's legitimacy; and to choose progress over a self-defeating focus on the past. America will align our policies with those who pursue peace, and say in public what we say in private to Israelis and Palestinians and Arabs. We cannot impose peace. But privately, many Muslims recognize that Israel will not go away. Likewise, many Israelis recognize the need for a Palestinian state. It is time for us to act on what everyone knows to be true. Too many tears have flowed. Too much blood has been shed. All of us have a responsibility to work for the day when the mothers of Israelis and Palestinians can see their children grow up without fear; when the Holy Land of three great faiths is the place of peace that God intended it to be; when Jerusalem is a secure and lasting home for Jews and Christians and Muslims, and a place for all of the children of Abraham to mingle peacefully together as in the story of Isra, when Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed (peace be upon them) joined in prayer. The third source of tension is our shared interest in the rights and responsibilities of nations on nuclear weapons. This issue has been a source of tension between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. For many years, Iran has defined itself in part by its opposition to my country, and there is indeed a tumultuous history between us. In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically-elected Iranian government. Since the Islamic Revolution, Iran has played a role in acts of hostage-taking and violence against U.S. troops and civilians. This history is well known. Rather than remain trapped in the past, I have made it clear to Iran's leaders and people that my country is prepared to move forward. The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build. It will be hard to overcome decades of mistrust, but we will proceed with courage, rectitude and resolve. There will be many issues to discuss between our two countries, and we are willing to move forward without preconditions on the basis of mutual respect. But it is clear to all concerned that when it comes to nuclear weapons, we have reached a decisive point. This is not simply about America's interests. It is about preventing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that could lead this region and the world down a hugely dangerous path. I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal. The fourth issue that I will address is democracy. I know there has been controversy about the promotion of democracy in recent years, and much of this controversy is connected to the war in Iraq. So let me be clear: no system of government can or should be imposed upon one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election. But I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere. There is no straight line to realize this promise. But this much is clear: governments that protect these rights are ultimately more stable, successful and secure. Suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. America respects the right of all peaceful and law-abiding voices to be heard around the world, even if we disagree with them. And we will welcome all elected, peaceful governments – provided they govern with respect for all their people. This last point is important because there are some who advocate for democracy only when they are out of power; once in power, they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others. No matter where it takes hold, government of the people and by the people sets a single standard for all who hold power: you must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party. Without these ingredients, elections alone do not make true democracy. The fifth issue that we must address together is religious freedom. Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition. I saw it firsthand as a child in Indonesia, where devout Christians worshiped freely in an overwhelmingly Muslim country. That is the spirit we need today. People in every country should be free to choose and live their faith based upon the persuasion of the mind, heart, and soul. This tolerance is essential for religion to thrive, but it is being challenged in many different ways. Among some Muslims, there is a disturbing tendency to measure one's own faith by the rejection of another's. The richness of religious diversity must be upheld – whether it is for Maronites in Lebanon or the Copts in Egypt. And fault lines must be closed among Muslims as well, as the divisions between Sunni and Shia have led to tragic violence, particularly in Iraq. Freedom of religion is central to the ability of peoples to live together. We must always examine the ways in which we protect it. For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation. That is why I am committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat. Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit – for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear. We cannot disguise hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism. Indeed, faith should bring us together. That is why we are forging service projects in America that bring together Christians, Muslims, and Jews. That is why we welcome efforts like Saudi Arabian King Abdullah's Interfaith dialogue and Turkey's leadership in the Alliance of Civilizations. Around the world, we can turn dialogue into Interfaith service, so bridges between peoples lead to action – whether it is combating malaria in Africa, or providing relief after a natural disaster. The sixth issue that I want to address is women's rights. I know there is debate about this issue. I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal, but I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality. And it is no coincidence that countries where women are well-educated are far more likely to be prosperous. Now let me be clear: issues of women's equality are by no means simply an issue for Islam. In Turkey, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia, we have seen Muslim-majority countries elect a woman to lead. Meanwhile, the struggle for women's equality continues in many aspects of American life, and in countries around the world. Our daughters can contribute just as much to society as our sons, and our common prosperity will be advanced by allowing all humanity – men and women – to reach their full potential. I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice. That is why the United States will partner with any Muslim-majority country to support expanded literacy for girls, and to help young women pursue employment through micro-financing that helps people live their dreams. Finally, I want to discuss economic development and opportunity. I know that for many, the face of globalization is contradictory. The Internet and television can bring knowledge and information, but also offensive sexuality and mindless violence. Trade can bring new wealth and opportunities, but also huge disruptions and changing communities. In all nations – including my own – this change can bring fear. Fear that because of modernity we will lose of control over our economic choices, our politics, and most importantly our identities – those things we most cherish about our communities, our families, our traditions, and our faith. But I also know that human progress cannot be denied. There need not be contradiction between development and tradition. Countries like Japan and South Korea grew their economies while maintaining distinct cultures. The same is true for the astonishing progress within Muslim-majority countries from Kuala Lumpur to Dubai. In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education. This is important because no development strategy can be based only upon what comes out of the ground, nor can it be sustained while young people are out of work. Many Gulf States have enjoyed great wealth as a consequence of oil, and some are beginning to focus it on broader development. But all of us must recognize that education and innovation will be the currency of the 21st century, and in too many Muslim communities there remains underinvestment in these areas. I am emphasizing such investments within my country. And while America in the past has focused on oil and gas in this part of the world, we now seek a broader engagement. On education, we will expand exchange programs, and increase scholarships, like the one that brought my father to America, while encouraging more Americans to study in Muslim communities. And we will match promising Muslim students with internships in America; invest in on-line learning for teachers and children around the world; and create a new online network, so a teenager in Kansas can communicate instantly with a teenager in Cairo. On economic development, we will create a new corps of business volunteers to partner with counterparts in Muslim-majority countries. And I will host a Summit on Entrepreneurship this year to identify how we can deepen ties between business leaders, foundations and social entrepreneurs in the United States and Muslim communities around the world. On science and technology, we will launch a new fund to support technological development in Muslim-majority countries, and to help transfer ideas to the marketplace so they can create jobs. We will open centers of scientific excellence in Africa, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, and appoint new Science Envoys to collaborate on programs that develop new sources of energy, create green jobs, digitize records, clean water, and grow new crops. And today I am announcing a new global effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference to eradicate polio. And we will also expand partnerships with Muslim communities to promote child and maternal health. All these things must be done in partnership. Americans are ready to join with citizens and governments; community organizations, religious leaders, and businesses in Muslim communities around the world to help our people pursue a better life. The issues that I have described will not be easy to address. But we have a responsibility to join together on behalf of the world we seek – a world where extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own, and nuclear energy is used for peaceful purposes; a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all God's children are respected. Those are mutual interests. That is the world we seek. But we can only achieve it together. I know there are many – Muslim and non-Muslim – who question whether we can forge this new beginning. Some are eager to stoke the flames of division, and to stand in the way of progress. Some suggest that it isn't worth the effort – that we are fated to disagree, and civilizations are doomed to clash. Many more are simply skeptical that real change can occur. There is so much fear, so much mistrust. But if we choose to be bound by the past, we will never move forward. And I want to particularly say this to young people of every faith, in every country – you, more than anyone, have the ability to remake this world. All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort – a sustained effort – to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings. It is easier to start wars than to end them. It is easier to blame others than to look inward; to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There is also one rule that lies at the heart of every religion – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. This truth transcends nations and peoples – a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian, or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the heart of billions. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today. We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written. The Holy Koran tells us, "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another." The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace." The Holy Bible tells us, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now, that must be our work here on Earth. Thank you. And may God's peace be upon you. | ||||
 |
||||
|
The need of the hour: Our own Pakistani-American school
By Mohsin Zaheer There has been a long-standing conversation among Pakistani-Americans in New York City about the need to establish at least one private school for their kids. So far, the need remains a dream. Although past efforts to found a school have failed, the reasons for wanting such as school remain pressing and urgent. Community leaders and parents want their children to grow up in an environment where they can get familiar with their cultural heritage and adopt the values of their immigrant parents. They are concerned that their children, who are attending public school and spending a great deal of time in that environment, could lose their culture and identity to the “malting pot” culture of the city. “That’s the reason we want to have one or more schools of our own,” said Asghar Chaudhary, a community leader as well as president of the Pakistani American Merchants Association of Coney Island Avenue, Brooklyn. Since America is the land of opportunity, he said, a community that aspires to have its own school should have one. Rana Saeed is one among many Pakistani American parents who opted to send their kids to private school rather than to a New York City public school. He told Sada-e-Pakistan, “I sent my daughters to Al-Noor Elementary and Intermediate School, Brooklyn because they displayed the unique vision of creating a safe environment conductive to the preservation of the cultural identity and academic progress of the children.” Al-Noor, a K-12 school, located in Queens, is New York City’s largest Islamic school, with a student population of 703 – 472 elementary school students and 231 high school students. Al-Noor Website states: “[This] is the kind of school that is very much concerned with the general academic development of its students, their morals, values, and identity as Muslims.” Al-Iman School, a second Islamic school also located in Queens, was established in 1990. The school’s mission is “to train our children not only academically but morally and spiritually, so they may attain the ‘whole’ (secular) and ‘holy’ (religious) values.” Abid Raja, a Pakistani-American businessman, enrolled his son and a daughter at Al-Iman five years ago. Although the family lives in Brooklyn, the children travel all the way to Queens to attend their school. He also agrees with Rana Saeed that culture and values also matter for the children while being taught at schools. “My children also learn read, write and speak Arabic at Al-Iman School,” Mr. Raja said and added, “I believe that Arabic and, if possible, Urdu are languages our children should learn. “ He added, “I sent my youngest daughter to a Kindergarten school. During her first few days, she cried in class, so her teacher asked if I could stay with her until she got use to the class. The first day I noticed that the kids were taught with music and dance. I want a different kind of culture for my children,” Mr. Raja said, “that’s why I sent my kids to the Al-Iman School.” A Pakistani American who teaches at a city public school sends her own daughter to Al-Noor. On condition that her name not be mentioned since she does not have permission to talk, she said, “I am a working mom and I can give limited time to my daughter, but I believe she should not only get regular academic education but also religious education. That’s why I send her to a school which caters to our needs.” Prominent Pakistani-American activists and community leaders, like Asghar Chaudhary, Imam Hafiz Muhammad Sabir, Allama Sakhawat, Hussain Sandralvi, Rana Saeed, Irshad Sahi, Tahir Bhutta and many others, who tried to build a school for Pakistani-American students, pointed out to this correspondent that although Al-Iman and Al-Noor are private schools, they are not being run by Pakistani Americans. “We want a Pakistani-American school where we can teach Urdu and Arabic to our kids along with the subjects that are mandated by the Department of Education,” they said, a goal that is difficult but not impossible. Muhammad Razvi, executive director of Council of Peoples Organization (COPO), a nonprofit organization, agreed it is absolutely necessary that at least in Brooklyn, which is also known as “little Pakistan,” there should be a school for the community. Razvi mentioned that past fund raising efforts had failed to secure enough money to purchase a space where a private school could be built. There were other reasons as well why the community has been unable to get its private school, he said. “There are some people who just talk for talk’s sake, and there are some who do not know how the system works in New York. |
||||
|
|
||||
|
Redefining "Practicing Muslim"
By Farzana Hassan Farzana Hassan is a Director of the Muslim Canadian Congress. The accusations and denunciations reverberated across the length and breadth of Queens Park, Toronto on Sunday Oct 2nd, when a crowd of angry pro-Shariah Muslims gathered to challenge Dalton Mcguinty's decision banning all faith based tribunals in Ontario. Of the countless verbal assaults hurled at those opposing Shariah, was one that captured my attention most, since it came from a very young woman. Shouting at the top of her lungs, she announced that opponents of Shariah were either Non- Muslim Islamophobes or non practicing Muslims. Although a lesser accusation than the usual apostasy charge, the "non practicing:" label assigned to Shariah opponents nonetheless invoked feelings of frustration and resentment in me for a number of reasons. It was apparent for example, that Muslim practice as understood by the young sister would be confined to the five daily prayers, fasting during Ramadan, the performance of Hajj, or observance of the hijab. It seemed that integrity, compassion, the abstinence from vices such as fraud, debauchery or dishonesty would all get sidelined under her definition of Muslim practice, as these were not tangible in terms of outward display of religiosity. The young Muslima who hurled such allegations at other Muslims seemed quite sure, that anti Shariah Muslims exercised negligence in upholding the above Islamic ideals. Religious practice, let it be known, is far greater than the outward expression of piety or religiosity associated with the performance of daily rituals or the attire one chooses to adopt. A Muslim who is careful not to lie, cheat, steal and deliberately cause hurt, is just as practicing, if not more, than one who performs certain rituals mechanically, but abandons Islam's eternal principles of justice, peace, tolerance, harmony and egalitarianism. Islamic practice is far more comprehensive than the mere ritualistic exercise some have reduced it to be. Due to their exclusionary mind-set, many Muslims accuse fellow Muslims of anti-Islamism, pandering to the West, or conspiracy. They do themselves great disservice by exposing their narrow-mindedness based on an outdated understanding of religious precepts. Perhaps our young sister can be excused her indiscretion due to her tender years, but those injecting such ideas into her yet impressionable mind, certainly need to reevaluate their understanding of their faith. They are advised to refrain from any future insults aimed at their coreligionists, who may be well-intentioned and sincere in terms of religious observance, which undoubtedly encompasses more than mere rituals. Let them also be reminded that only Allah can be judge between people. |
||||
|
|
||||
|
WASHINGTON, June 5: The current dispute over the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran at the US prison camp in Guantanamo has apparently increased Americans’ interest in the Holy book, says a report. The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said some 5,000 people have requested free copies of the Holy Quran since the launch of the group’s “Explore the Quran” campaign on May 17. CAIR’s campaign is designed as a positive response to the recent controversy over desecration of the Holy Quran. Those who have requested free Qurans include a police officer who works with the Muslim community, Christian religious leaders who wish to explain Islam to their congregations and Americans of all faiths who just wish to learn more about Islam’s revealed text. Calls are coming into CAIR’s Washington, headquarters at the rate of one-per-minute, the group said. “The overwhelmingly positive response to our ‘Explore the Quran’ campaign reflects a desire by ordinary Americans to better understand Islam and Muslims,” said CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. He encouraged Muslims to support the campaign by sponsoring a copy of the Holy Quran. Mr Awad added that a letter explaining how Muslims are taught to handle the Holy Quran with due respect will be included with each shipment. |
||||
|
|
||||
|
The Diversity of Muslims in the
United States: Views as Americansa Summary There are approximately 6 to
7.5 million Muslims in the United States who identify themselves as Americans.
The community consists of a combination of immigrants and second- and
third-generation Arab, Latino, Asian, European, African, and African-American
Muslims. The growth of the American Muslim community has fostered the
development of a variety of religious, civic, political, cultural, economic,
social, ethnic, feminist, artistic, and professional organizations. The diversity of American Muslim organizations provides a vast number of voices addressing such issues as terrorism, democracy, peacemaking, and human rights. American Muslims do not see contradictions between Islam and such ideals as democracy, pluralism, or political activism; rather, in recent years several national groups have made it their primary mission to reconcile all three with Islamic values. Some leaders see the blending of Islamic values with the American experience as a solid bridge to mutual understanding between the United States and the Muslim world. American Muslim advocacy organizations often collaborate with the White House and law enforcement authorities to devise strategies on public policy, civil rights, the war against terrorism, and other related issues. Many organizations emphasize the importance of self-scrutiny and education in relation to the larger Islamic heritage. Interfaith dialogue has taken the forefront on the agendas of many American Muslim organizations, demonstrating a belief that building trust, peace, and reconciliation will ultimately lead to harmonious interfaith relations in the United States. American Muslim scholars advocate greater involvement by Muslims in the political, social, economic, and cultural spheres of American society. American Muslim scholars believe Muslims have an enormous responsibility and talent for resolving conflict and being agents for peace. Conclusion: Multipronged Conflict Prevention The American Muslim community is diverse in every conceivable way. There are numerous national and regional organizations dedicated to important civic, religious, cultural, educational, political, and social issues. On the subject of terrorism and conflict resolution, clearly all American Muslim groups have denounced it emphatically, while some have gone beyond words by becoming involved with foreign policy, lobbying efforts, and mobilizing grassroots campaigns in the community. The Fiqh Council of North American fatwa is an example of American Muslims taking proactive positions on global terrorism, while practicing zero tolerance of violence and religious extremism. Their positions have examined conflict and peacemaking in Islam and have advocated the explicit need for American Muslims to cooperate with law enforce- ment. National American Muslim organizations like MPAC, CAIR, ISNA, and AMA have focused on violence and religious extremism as critical issues with local and international strategies. MPAC's "National Grassroots Campaign to Fight Terrorism" and CAIR's "Not in the Name of Islam" efforts are examples of American Muslims' innovative programs to raise awareness on issues of radical ideologies. The coordination of their efforts with those of law enforcement agencies demonstrates mutual recognition of the roles each group plays in conflict prevention. Organizations like CSID, FMC, MAT, and AIFD exhibit new types of thinking in the American Muslim community by fostering, cultivating, and institutionalizing democratic reform in the Muslim world as the primary answer to extremism. Their own experiences in the United States confirm that Islamic values and democracy are compatible, and it is vitally important to institutionalize democracy in order to reform despotic totalitarian societies. Their activities display a conscious effort to make for themselves in American society, while contributing as bridge builders to the Muslim world. Their activities have already established a definite American Muslim model of inclusion and participation that differs from Muslim communities in Europe where Muslim communities are less involved in law enforcement and civic participation. The participation of American Muslims in mainstream politics is to empower the community in many different levels of public life. American Muslim advocacy groups have tackled stereotyping of Muslims as a matter of public debate, and they have aggressively worked toward resolving incidents of discrimination and civil rights abuses. These achievements have shifted political attitudes that have enabled American Muslims to integrate in American political institutions. Another strategy in the American Muslim community is to focus on human rights, gender inequality, and interfaith dialogue, and to increase the Muslim presence in the American legal system. KARAMAH, NAML, and ASMA represent specialized groups whose members believe that injustices can be overcome by addressing the various legal, socio-economic, political, and religious systems involved. ASMA's interfaith dialogue programs in the United States and around the world reflect the desire for reconciliation and humanizing of all people. Each of these groups recognizes that mutual respect is tied to taking real steps toward tolerance and is part of alleviating suffering. Some organizations are concerned with improving the condition of all human beings through education and spiritual awareness, not terrorism. Other groups believe their particular expertise is not conflict resolution, but rather a focus on cultural, social, professional, artistic, democratic, and human rights issues. With such immense diversity in the American Muslim community, it is difficult to reduce it to a single voice. Instead, there needs to be greater appreciation for the efforts and contributions of Muslims in areas of conflict resolution, interfaith dialogue, peace building, education, political activities, civic work, human rights and women's rights advocacy, legal expertise, and humanitarian efforts. The immense contributions and growing involvement of American Muslims in the public square clearly reflects that Muslims in the United States are situating themselves within civic, governmental, and political structures of the nation. Each organization has its own vision for its members as Americans and for their contributions to contemporary issues of conflict and peacemaking. About the Report With the war against terrorism and an increased attention on the Muslim world, this report analyzes ways Muslims in the United States understand their roles as Americans in combating terrorism and their unique contributions toward conflict prevention and peacemaking. The assimilation and integration of American Muslims has effectively enabled the flourishing of dozens of national and regional organizations to work in areas of civil rights, human rights, interfaith dialogue, education, charity, public diplomacy, political activism, and other religious and secular activities. Despite the post 9/11 scrutiny of the Muslim community, American Muslim groups have devised sophisticated grassroots campaigns on counter-terrorism and anti-extremist ideology. Qamar-ul Huda is the Senior Program Officer in the Religion and Peacemaking program at the United States Institute of Peace. Formerly a professor of Islamic Studies and Comparative Theology at Boston College, he examines ethics, violence, conflict resolution and nonviolence in juristic and nonjuristic Muslim authorities in contemporary Islam. This report is part of a larger book project on American Muslim identity formation and Islamic approaches toward mediation and peacebuilding. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect views of the United States Institute of Peace, which does not advocate specific policy positions. Of Related Interest Muslim World Initiative Religion and Peacemaking: Publications Applying Islamic Principles in the Twenty-first Century: Nigeria, Iran, and Indonesia Religion and Peacemaking Research Resources United States Institute of Peace 1200 17th Street NW - Washington, DC 20036 Phone - (202) 457-1700 Fax (202) 429-6063 |
||||
|
|
||||
| Chairman Kerry And Chairman Berman Release Joint Explanatory Statement To Accompany Enhanced Partnership With Pakistan Act Of 2009 WASHINGTON, D.C.– Today at a joint press availability, Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry, House Foreign Relations Chairman Howard L. Berman and Pakistani Foreign Minister Qureshi announced the release of a joint explanatory statement to accompany Senate Bill 1707, the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009. Chairman Kerry made the following remarks at today’s press availability: “In order to set the record straight, Chairman Berman and I are today submitting a Joint Explanatory Statement to accompany the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act (S.1707). It affirms that the primary intention of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act is to demonstrate the American people’s long-term commitment to the people of Pakistan. It will be placed in the Congressional Record today along with the final version of the legislation that the President will be signing. “The purpose of this Joint Explanatory Statement is to facilitate accurate interpretation of the text and to ensure faithful implementation of its provisions in accordance with the intentions of the legislation. “It affirms that the United States values its friendship with the Pakistani people and honors the great sacrifices made by Pakistani security forces in the fight against extremism. “And it also makes absolutely clear – and I want to emphasize this point – that the legislation does not seek in any way to compromise Pakistan’s sovereignty, impinge on Pakistan’s national security interests, or micromanage any aspect of Pakistani military or civilian operations. “The fact that this legislation was passed unanimously in both the Senate and the House of Representatives sends a very strong message of the desire of the United States Congress to strengthen our relationship through a long term commitment of economic assistance to the people of Pakistan. “This bill should be seen as a true sign of U.S. friendship to the people of Pakistan. Even at a time when Americans are going through challenging economic times, the United States is pledging $7.5 billion to the Pakistani people, to spur their own economic progress through schools, health infrastructure, and development. “Our hope is that it will transform the relationship between the U.S. and Pakistan into a deeper, broader, long-term strategic engagement with the people of Pakistan.” Chairman Berman made the following statement at today’s press availability: “This is a reflection of our desire to be long-term partners with the Pakistani people, to work with them for stability and the strategic interests that we share.” _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The text of the joint explanatory statement to accompany S.1707, the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 is below: The following is an explanation of S. 1707, the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009. The final text of the legislation reflects an agreement reached by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The purpose of this Explanatory Statement is to facilitate accurate interpretation of the text and to ensure faithful implementation of its provisions in accordance with the intentions of the legislation. The core intent of the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act is to demonstrate the American people’s long-term commitment to the people of Pakistan. The United States values its friendship with the Pakistani people and honors the great sacrifices made by Pakistani security forces in the fight against extremism, and the legislation reflects the goals shared by our two governments. The legislation does not seek in any way to compromise Pakistan’s sovereignty, impinge on Pakistan’s national security interests, or micromanage any aspect of Pakistani military or civilian operations. There are no conditions on Pakistan attached to the authorization of $7.5 billion in non-military aid. The only requirements on this funding are financial accountability measures that Congress is imposing on the U.S. executive branch, to ensure that this assistance supports programs that most benefit the Pakistani people. Summary of Congressional Intent The Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act of 2009 (the “Act”) establishes a legislative foundation for a strengthened partnership between the United States and Pakistan, based on a shared commitment to improving the living conditions of the people of Pakistan through strengthening democracy and the rule of law, sustainable economic development, and combating terrorism and extremism. It is the intent of Congress to strengthen the long-term people-to-people relationship between the United States and Pakistan by investing directly in the needs of the Pakistani people. This legislation is intended to fortify a lasting partnership with Pakistan based on mutual trust. The overall level of economic assistance authorized annually by this legislation is tripled over FY 2008 U.S. funding levels, with the bulk of aid intended for projects such as schools, roads, medical clinics, and infrastructure development. The funds directly authorized by this Act – $1.5 billion in economic and development assistance annually for five years, with a similar amount envisioned for a subsequent five years – place no conditions on the Government of Pakistan. The only requirements are accountability measures placed on the United States executive branch to ensure that the aid directly benefits the Pakistani people. This Act fully recognizes and respects the independence of Pakistan as a sovereign nation. The purpose of this Act is to forge a closer collaborative relationship between Pakistan and the United States, not to dictate the national policy or impinge on the sovereignty of Pakistan in any way. Any interpretation of this Act which suggests that the United States does not fully recognize and respect the sovereignty of Pakistan would be directly contrary to Congressional intent. The certifications in the Act regarding certain limited forms of security assistance are consistent with previous Congressional legislation regarding security assistance to Pakistan and other nations. In all cases, they align with the aims of, and serve to reinforce the publicly-articulated positions of, the democratically-elected Government of Pakistan, and Pakistani military leaders, to combat extremists and militants. Sections 1-4: Strengthening a Relationship Founded on Mutual Respect Sections 1-4 establish the framework and context for the legislative provisions that follow. The Findings and the Statement of Principles demonstrate an unequivocal appreciation for the friendship of the Pakistani people, and for the sacrifices made by the Pakistani security forces and people in fighting extremism. The Findings in Section 3 include: Section 3(1): “Congress finds the following: The people of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the United States share a long history of friendship and comity, and the interests of both nations are well-served by strengthening and deepening this friendship.” Section 3(4): “Pakistan is a major non-NATO ally of the United States and has been a valuable partner in the battle against al Qaeda and the Taliban, but much more remains to be accomplished by both nations. The struggle against al Qaeda, the Taliban, and affiliated terrorist groups has led to the deaths of several thousand Pakistani civilians and members of the security forces of Pakistan over the past seven years.” The Statement of Principles in Section 4 include: Section 4(1): “Pakistan is a critical friend and ally to the United States, both in times of strife and in times of peace, and the two countries share many common goals, including combating terrorism and violent radicalism, solidifying democracy and rule of law in Pakistan, and promoting the social and economic development of Pakistan.” Section 4(4): “The United States supports Pakistan’s struggle against extremist elements and recognizes the profound sacrifice made by Pakistan in the fight against terrorism, including the loss of more than 1,900 soldiers and police since 2001 in combat with al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other extremist and terrorist groups.” Title I: Democratic, Economic and Development Assistance for Pakistan This Title contains the core intention of this legislation: To make a long-term commitment to the people of Pakistan by tripling non-military assistance, free of any conditions on the Pakistani government. The purposes set forth for the $7.5 billion that is authorized here are all intended to reflect the expressed priorities of the Pakistani people. Specifically, Section 101(a) provides that: “The President is authorized to provide assistance to Pakistan to support the consolidation of democratic institutions; to support the expansion of rule of law, build the capacity of government institutions, and promote respect for internationally-recognized human rights; to promote economic freedoms and sustainable economic development; to support investment in people, including those displaced in on-going counterinsurgency operations; and to strengthen public diplomacy.” The funds authorized under Title I are intended to be used to work with and benefit Pakistani organizations. Specifically, Section 101(c)(3) provides that: “The President is encouraged, as appropriate, to utilize Pakistani firms and community and local nongovernmental organizations in Pakistan, including through host country contracts, and to work with local leaders to provide assistance under this section.” Section 102 (a) makes clear that there are no conditions placed on the Pakistani government for delivery of the $7.5 billion in assistance. The only accounting requirements are of the U.S. executive branch. Section 102(d) makes clear that a long term commitment to increased civilian assistance for the people of Pakistan is envisioned by stating that it is the desire of Congress that the amounts authorized for fiscal years 2010-2014 shall continue from fiscal years 2015-2019. Section 103(b)authorizes establishment of field offices for Inspectors General to audit and oversee expenditure of this assistance. It is the intent of Congress that such offices would be established in consultation with appropriate Pakistani authorities for the purpose of ensuring optimal management of resources. Title II: Security Assistance for Pakistan The intention of this section is to strengthen cooperative efforts to confront extremism. The purposes of security assistance are intended to be completely cooperative, and reflect the intention that such assistance be used to support Pakistan in achieving its stated objectives in winning the ongoing counterinsurgency, defeating terrorist organizations that threaten Pakistan, and strengthening democratic institutions. Specifically, Section 201(1) “Purposes of Assistance” states that: “The purposes of assistance under this title are -- (1) to support Pakistan’s paramount national security need to fight and win the ongoing counterinsurgency within its borders in accordance with its national security interests; (2) to work with the Government of Pakistan to improve Pakistan’s border security and control and help prevent any Pakistani territory from being used as a base or conduit for terrorist attacks in Pakistan, or elsewhere; (3) to work in close cooperation with the Government of Pakistan to coordinate action against extremist and terrorist targets; and (4) to help strengthen the institutions of democratic governance.... ” The provisions applied to certain limited portions of U.S. security assistance in Section 203 are intended to be fully in line with the existing policy of the Government of Pakistan. Specifically, Section 203(c)(1) reflects our understanding that cooperative efforts currently being undertaken by the Governments of Pakistan and the United States to combat proliferation will continue. Section 203(c)(2) reflects the intent that U.S. security assistance is used in furtherance of the purposes set forth in Section 201 above, e.g., ensuring Pakistan’s security, winning the counterinsurgency within Pakistan, preventing territory from being used for terrorist attacks in Pakistan and elsewhere, and coordinating action against extremist and terrorist targets. This section requires a certification by the U.S. executive branch to Congress regarding the efforts and progress made in achieving these purposes, and includes a series of factors to be considered collectively by the Secretary of State in making this assessment. Section 203(c)(3) includes a provision intended to express support for democratic institutions in Pakistan. Section 203(e) contains a waiver making clear that this certification could be waived if the determination is made by the Secretary of State in the interests of national security that this was necessary to continue such assistance. Title III. Strategy, Accountability, Monitoring, and Other Provisions. The intention of this section is to ensure that there is transparency and accountability in the way authorized assistance is spent. This Title requires the U.S. executive branch to provide various reports to Congress designed to demonstrate that funds are being used for the purposes set forth in Title I and Title II; there are no requirements on the Government of Pakistan. Section 301 “Strategy Reports” requires three reports from the U.S. executive branch that detail a plan for how U.S. assistance to Pakistan will be spent and evaluated and a regional security plan for how the United States can best work with its partners for “effective counterinsurgency and counterterrorism efforts.” Section 302 “Monitoring Reports” reflects the need for ongoing consultation between the U.S executive branch and Congress on monitoring U.S. assistance to Pakistan, including a “Semi-Annual Monitoring Report” where: “The Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to the appropriate congressionalcommittees a report that describes the assistance provided under this Act during the preceding 180-day period.” The many requirements of this report are intended as a way for Congress to assess how effectively U.S. funds are being spent, shortfalls in U.S. resources that hinder the use of such funds, and steps the Government of Pakistan has taken to advance our mutual interests in countering extremism and nuclear proliferation and strengthening democratic institutions. There is no intent to, and nothing in this Act in any way suggests that there should be, any U.S. role in micromanaging internal Pakistani affairs, including the promotion of Pakistani military officers or the internal operations of the Pakistani military. The reports envisioned in this Section are not binding on Pakistan, and require only the provision of information by the executive branch to the U.S. Congress, in furtherance of the Act’s stated purpose of strengthening civilian institutions and the democratically-elected Government of Pakistan. | ||||
|
|
||||
| David Kallick of Fiscal Policy Institute releasing findings of a study on the contribution of immigrants in metro New York economy at a press briefing organized by New York Community Media Alliance NEW YORK: Fiscal Policy Institute, a nonpartisan research and education organization, released detailed findings for well over two dozen immigrant communities in New York in its latest study on the economic contribution of immigrants in metro New York, at press briefing organized by New York Community Media Alliance, in collaboration with SEIU 32BJ, held on January 21, 2010. David Kallick, the director of the Immigration Research Initiative at the Fiscal Policy Institute, released the data before numerous representatives from the ethnic and community media. The report – titled “Immigrants in the New York Metro Area Economy: Detail by Country of Origin” – found that the ratio of economic contribution to population in the New York Metro Area was exactly 1.00, meaning that the contribution of immigrants, which was measured in terms of wages and proprietors earnings, is equivalent to the portion of the New York population that is foreign born. Kallick suggested that this was in large part due to the fact that more immigrants are of working age and tend to work in a wider range of jobs than is expected. He also presented the report's findings on occupational share of foreign-born workers, discussing the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Colombia, India, Jamaica, Haiti and China in great detail. The occupational share data gives an interesting picture of the job preferences and economic performance of immigrants from 21 countries. These included Dominican Republic, Mexico, India, China, Jamaica, Ecuador, Colombia, Guyana/British Guiana, Philippines, Haiti, El Salvador, Korea, Trinidad and Tobago, Poland, Peru, Italy, Russia/Other USSR, Ukraine, Pakistan, Cuba and Puerto Rico. Journalists representing New York's different community media outlets attended the briefing. – Photo by Mohsin Zaheer According to the newly released data, immigrants make up 35 percent of employed residents in the New York metropolitan area even though they are 28 percent of the total population. Peter Kwong, Professor of Urban Affairs at Hunter College, spoke about “the tremendous contribution of immigrants” to the New York economy and the split among Chinese immigrants between high-paying jobs in administrative and professional fields and low-paying jobs in fields such as food service. Jaime Contreras, Area Leader, SEIU, 32BJ, also addressed the press over telephone. He praised the FPI for producing a report that confirmed the benefits of immigration. He said SEIU would continue to strive for fair immigration reform. In response to questions from the press, Kallick discussed his findings as they pertained to the issues of illegal immigration, immigration reform and the significant correlation between immigration and economic growth. When asked how he would respond to those who said it's not a good time for immigration reform while the economy is in recession and employment is in the double digits, he said: “Some people are of the view that's its not a good time. The history of immigration tells us that it is responsive to economic conditions. However, at this time reform does not mean to add more people but it means to bring the already existing immigrants in the United States into the system and control.” Commenting on the unemployment figures, Peter Kwong said the unemployment rate in immigrant communities was lower than others. He also brushed aside fears that immigrants legalized under any reform will take away locals' jobs. | ||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
|
|
||||
| Go Back To Previous Page |
|
|
Senate Flood Relief Committee for Sindh has called upon all social and non-governmental organizations as well as philanthropists and well to do persons to come forward and extend their full support to the government on its rescue, relief and rehabilitation work for the flood affected people of the country.
The International Monetary Fund will give Pakistan $450 million in emergency flood aid and disburse funds in ‘coming weeks,’ IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said on Thursday.