Olympic Values

London 2012 is upon us. Already the there have been some soccer tournaments and the official opening ceremony will be held later today. I love the city of London and when I was there over a month ago, the preparations for the Olympics (and the Jubilee) were evident everywhere. Good luck London!

Let us remind ourselves of the Olympic (and Paralympic) values which could be applied to us all in everyday life:

The Olympic Values:

• Respect – fair play; knowing one’s own limits; and taking care of one’s health and the environment
• Excellence – how to give the best of oneself, on the field of play or in life; taking part; and progressing according to one’s own objectives
• Friendship – how, through sport, to understand each other despite any differences

The Paralympic Values:

• Determination – the drive and motivation to overcome both physical and mental barriers in order to achieve your goals
• Courage – having the self-belief and confidence to overcome adversity and face difficulty
• Equality – showing respect and humility towards all those around you in the spirit of fair play
• Inspiration – to be motivated by the achievements and actions of others and to be a positive example to others

Riot and Reason

No doubt over the ensuing weeks there will considerable debate over the reasons that seemingly opportunist riots broke out on the streets of the UK and why failures in policing allowed anarchy and fear to follow.

Some will look to blame the encrypted messaging such as that offered by Blackberry and the organisational power of Twitter. These mediums were, of course, pointed to the reason that the Arab Spring became such a formidable force of people power. Applauded by the UK then, but rather ironic when the tables are turned.

There has, alas, been loss of life as a result the riots, and in no way do I think that any of this should be trivialised. There has been damage to property and livelihoods, to individuals and communities. As always they are foremost and our thoughts are with them.

This article by Max Hastings speaks candidly. Much of it says what many people already think but find difficult to express to regular media channels. It is worth a read for a key opinion at least.

More interestingly, I am interested in public standards generally. Surely that is what separates civil society from outright despair and anarchy. Consider two opinions on standards. The first comes from the article and is also quoted on the BBC:

"Liberal opinion holds they are victims, because society has failed to provide them with opportunities to develop their potential. Most of us would say this is nonsense. Rather, they are victims of a perverted social ethos, which elevates personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the underclass the discipline — tough love — which alone might enable some of its members to escape from the swamp of dependency in which they live."

A second opinion by David Wilson, Professor of Criminology at Birmingham City University and a former prison governor considers the culture of entitlement in the UK. See here.

"It's not just about the underclass - it's about politicians, it's about bankers, it's about footballers. It's not just about a particular class, it permeates all levels of society. When we see politicians claiming for flat-screen TVs and getting jailed for fiddling their expenses, it's clear that young people of all classes aren't being given appropriate leadership."

Quite.

London's Burning

A man is shot dead by the police under mysterious circumstances. The full story remains unclear and in the general summer mood of discontent, a community is outraged.

It starts with a peaceful  vigil - family seeking answers, but in the days following, rioters and looters, black, white, male and female described as "sheer criminals" by Theresa May MP seem to have taken a hold of London. Voices that protested the original shooting and the fatality are muted by the chilling images of anarchy.

Dear Politicians, Police, and Leaders of London, this is social breakdown with intrinsic political, economic and moral foundations. This is the society that you nurture and preside over - the society that we are all part of. The rioters are your children; the anarchists of your own flesh. Who is to blame, but society itself?

The Art Of Manipulation

Propaganda. It's an art.

But it doesn't mean that it's any less conniving.

When I hear about some Mullahs on a UK Foreign Office tour of London it rouses my curiosity. The Mullahs are taken on-board the London Eye, where they recline, feet up, Afghan style and are treated especially well. I'm very happy for them and glad for once that Pashtoons are treated hospitably.

This does shape the visitors' opinions and when they hear of British Muslims for the first time, they learn that Muslims make up a part of the working social fabric of British society. The Mullahs are impressed. In southern Afghanistan, where there is poverty, it is perhaps not known so well that there are well-fed Muslims living in Europe. The Mullahs learn just enough to come away with the impression that British Muslims are well accommodated within British Society - free to worship and pursue their lives, and return with a message to Afghanistan that European and American forces in their country are good and are there to help.

The Foreign Office likes these types of Muslims when it serves their purposes.

But then, why do I, also Pashtoon and desiring to build bridges, not swallow this so easily?

A Very Different Reality

Perhaps, this is because it feels manipulative. I suspect that there is a deeper reason for allowing visiting Mullahs to come to Britain, especially at a time when many Brits probably feel saturated by the global Islamic presence. London is great; it's a city with lots to offer and remains one of my favourite places. Unlike the Mullahs, however, when I am in London, I have to push my way through the crowds and there is no special treatment. So a whistle-stop tour in a dynamic city as part of an official visit can create a rather superficial impression - this isn't the UK society that most Muslims that I know, are exposed to.

Consider the history - during my formative years, I came across a deep institutionalised prejudice that still shapes my thinking. This prejudice, which is built into the bricks and mortar of the social institutions we deal with daily, has still not gone away. The reality is that non-European migrants and their indigenous-born children have been at the centre of many discussions in the UK and not all favourable.

A 'Modern' Hysteria

I know what racism looks like; subtle racism, as well as overt and I know how unpleasant and damaging this can be. I am also aware that racism is primarily about ethnicity and that religious hatred is in truth, is a different thing. But look how they have come together.


The modern wave of post 9-11 anti-Muslim hysteria is traced back to an earlier time and I am deeply concious of how Muslims are continuously scapegoated for many of today's social ills. The UK is typical of its sisters in Western Europe in that Muslims have been ghettoised in the large parts to particular urban areas, often run down; where "white flight" is made up of that combination of racial prejudice and religious intolerance.

Divisions and Spoils

And then there is Afghanistan, where the military campaign is the physical front of the ideological racial and religious divide that I speak of.

President Hamid Karzai, speaks of it too, in an ever increasingly louder voice. If the Mullahs who visited London speak favourably of the military campaign in Afghanistan, then perhaps, this once, I can be forgiven for being a sceptic. There are, after all, many genuine concerns over the effectiveness of the foreign military presence, their behaviours and their governments' intentions.

Afghanistan is in need and no society is perfect. But I think it is particularly unfair to take people from a fatigued, war-torn society where a foreign military campaign is eyed with distrust and where development of social infrastructure is - lets face it - hardly without condition - to become the voice of that failing campaign. Favouring some hand picked Mullahs like this is highly manipulative and the British tactic of patronage and favouritism is how a small island nation managed to colonise half the planet.

Create the divisions and exploit the spoils.

It is an art. Though no less dishonourable.

London Calling

The Taliban leadership do not have as their principal aim al-Qaeda's violent global jihadist agenda

UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband

Mmm ... tunes change ...

In 2001, the Americans blurred the lines between the Taliban/Al Qaeda and in the process also confused Pashtoon interests with terrorism. It was always complex, but the net result is, nine years later, Pashtoons feel unrepresented, out of favour and vilified. The London Conference on Afghanistan is primarily about handover/withdrawal - call it what you like. At least that is the mood today.

From the BBC:

Talking with the Taliban is emerging as the big issue at the London conference. At first glance, it appears a simple idea - weaken the insurgency by luring away low and mid-level Taliban fighters. This - it is argued - could be done by offering jobs and a general amnesty for the insurgents. But it will be difficult - if not impossible - to pull off.

Part of the problem is that international forces (and the Afghan government) are struggling to understand who they are fighting and what is actually fuelling the insurgency here. And that raises the question: if you do not fully understand who you are fighting, can you hope to win them over?

Photograph from the Boston Globe