Why they hate us

(CNN)The next time you hear of a terror attack -- no matter where it is, no matter what the circumstances -- you will likely think to yourself, "It's Muslims again." And you will probably be right.

In 2014, about 30,000 people were killed in terror attacks worldwide. The vast majority of those perpetrating the violence were Muslim but -- and this is important -- so were the victims. Of the some 30,000 dead, the vast, vast majority were Muslims.

That's crucial to understand because it sheds light on the question, "Why do they hate us?" Islamic terrorists don't just hate America or the West. They hate the modern world, and they particularly hate Muslims who are trying to live in the modern world. 

Let's be clear. While the jihadis are few, there is a larger cancer within the world of Islam -- a cancer of backwardness and extremism and intolerance. Most of the countries that have laws that restrict the free exercise of religion are Muslim majority, while those that have laws against leaving the faith are Muslim majority.

But are these things inherent in the religion?

When experts try to explain that in the 14th century, Islamic civilization was the world's most advanced, or that the Quran was once read as a liberal and progressive document, they're not trying to deny the realities of backwardness today. What they are saying is that it can change.

Islam, after all, has been around for 14 centuries. There have been periods of war and of peace. Before 1900, for hundreds of years, Jews fled European pogroms and persecution to live in relative peace and security under the Ottoman Caliphate. That's why there were a million Jews in the Muslim Middle East in 1900. Today, Jews and Christians are fleeing from Iraq and Syria and radical Islamists take control of those lands. It's the same religion then and now. So what is different?

It's not theology, it's politics. Radical Islam is the product of the broken politics and stagnant economics of Muslim countries. They have found in radical religion an ideology that lets them rail against the modern world, an ideology that is now being exported to alienated young Muslims everywhere -- in Europe, and even in some rare cases in the United States.

How can we bring an end to this?

There's really only one way: Help the majority of Muslims fight extremists, reform their faith, and modernize their societies. In doing so, we should listen to those on the front lines, many of whom are fighting and dying in the struggle against jihadis. The hundreds of Muslim reformers I've spoken to say their task is made much harder when Western politicians and pundits condemn Islam entirely, demean their faith, and speak of all Muslims as backward and suspect.

But here's another way to think about this. In America, African-Americans make up about 13% of the population, yet they comprise about 50% of homicide offenders, according to a Justice Department study. Now we understand -- I hope we understand -- that when we see a black man on the street, we cannot and must not treat him as a likely criminal. It would be dehumanizing, unfair and racist. In America, of all places, people should be treated as individuals and not as stereotypes from a racial, ethnic or religious group. And remember, the Bangladeshi cabdriver who drives you to the airport has nothing, nothing to do with ISIS, even though he is also a Muslim. 

Of course, it is hard not to make these quick associations -- especially in the wake of a terror attack. But if America is about anything, it is the idea that people should be judged as individuals with individual liberties and rights. It is what they hate about us. We might as well live up to our own ideals.

 

 

(CNN)-President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he will leave behind 3,000 more troops in Afghanistan than originally planned, effectively handing involvement in a raging civil war the United States joined after the 9/11 attacks to his successor.

Speaking from the White House, Obama said he would draw down troops to 8,400 by the end of his administration, a change from the initial target of 5,500. Currently there are 9,800 troops supporting the Afghanistan government in its fight against the Taliban, attempts by al Qaeda to regroup and a nascent threat from ISIS.

"The security situation in Afghanistan remains precarious," Obama said, with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford at his side, a day before leaving for the NATO summit in Poland where he will meet allies also engaged in the Afghan operation.

U.S. sanctions North Korean leader for first time over human rights abuses

"I strongly believe it is in our national security interest ... that we give our Afghan partners the best opportunities to succeed," Obama said.

The decision means that Obama, who came to power vowing to concentrate on winning the war in Afghanistan, after what he saw as a diversion by the Bush administration into Iraq, will hand responsibility for America's longest war to his successor. And by adjusting his target for troop numbers, Obama was implicitly admitting -- despite insisting that U.S. forces had forged great progress in Afghanistan -- that the situation at the end of his administration was not as positive as he might have hoped.

"We have to deal with the realities of the world as it is. We can't forget what's at stake in Afghanistan. This is where al Qaeda is trying to regroup, this is where ISIL continues to try to expand its presence," Obama said, using another name for ISIS.

The tone of that comment contrasted with the President's repeated vows to end the Afghan war, including a declaration in December 2014 at the end of U.S. combat operations that "the longest war in American history is coming to a responsible conclusion."

He noted Wednesday that although American forces were no longer engaged in a major land war in Afghanistan, Americans were still continuing to die -- 38 members of the military and U.S. civilians have perished in the country in the last year-and-a-half.

In his remarks on Wednesday, the President also sought to make a distinction between the training and support mission that U.S. troops are now engaged in and the mission that he escalated when he took over from President George W. Bush in 2009 in an apparent attempt to square the political circle of his promises to end costly U.S wars abroad but to leave thousands of American troops behind.

 

FBI director: Hillary Clinton 'extremely careless' but no charges recommended

"Compared to the 100,000 troops we once had there, today, fewer than 10,000 remain. And compared to their previous mission, helping to lead the fight, our forces are now focused on two narrow missions: training and advising Afghan forces and supporting counterterrorist operations against the remnants of al Qaeda as well as other terrorist groups, including ISIL," Obama said.

"In short, even as we've maintained a relentless, you know, case against those who are threatening us, we are no longer engaged in a major ground war in Afghanistan."

But Republicans criticized Obama's comments.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said it was a more of a political decision than a military one.

"I've never heard anyone suggest that our current level of 9,800 troops in Afghanistan is too high or that President Obama's new 8,400 troop level will be just right," Graham said in a statement.

"But let's be clear -- this troop reduction, while it will seem small to many, will have a negative impact on the security situation in Afghanistan."

Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he thought the troop levels should remain the same, but praised the timing of Obama's announcement.

"Announcing this decision prior to the NATO summit helps set expectations about our commitment to a stable and democratic Afghanistan and continued support of our allies in this effort," said Corker.

RELATED: Taliban bombings in Afghanistan kill 30 officers, 4 civilians

Obama did not mention Iraq during his remarks, but many observers will see his decision as heavily influenced by events that unfolded in the Middle Eastern nation since his decision to bring all U.S. troops home. The rise of ISIS and a sectarian meltdown in Iraq ever since has forced Obama to send hundreds of U.S. troops back to the country to support Iraqi forces.

One difference between the two countries, however, is that Washington considers it has a more effective partner in the Afghan government of President Ashraf Ghani, than it ever had in the chaotic administration of former Iraq premier Nuri al-Maliki.

Obama's announcement on Wednesday was also notable because it almost certainly represented the last of a string of troop review exercises and announcements on troop numbers that have punctuated his administration, focusing on Iraq and Afghanistan, that have prompted Republicans to accuse him of imposing artificial, politically motivated timelines on military operations.

And far from predicting a swift de-escalation of U.S. troop deployments abroad, Obama, who once told Americans that "the tide of war is receding," appeared to lay the ground for prolonged U.S. involvement.

"In January, the next U.S. president will assume the most solemn responsibility of the commander in chief, security of the United States and the safety of the American people. The decision I'm making today ensures that my successor has a solid foundation for continued progress in Afghanistan as well as the flexibility to address the threat of terrorism as it evolves," Obama said.

"Afghanistan is not a perfect place. It remains one of the poorest countries in the world. It is going to continue to take time for them to build up military capacity that we sometimes take for granted," Obama said.

"And given the enormous challenges they face, the Afghan people will need the partnership of the world, led by the United States, for many years to come."

 

Four women herald Soyinka’s 82nd birthday cultural exchange programme

Four women working in cultural and advocacy projects, Prof. Omofolabo Ajayi-Soyinka, Hafsat Abiola Costello, Kadaria Ahmed and Sola Salako will discuss an important topic that underlines issue plaguing vulnerable groups in society at this year’s Wole Soyinka International Cultural Exchange Project as he turns 82. The events are scheduled for Abeokuta from July 13. The four women will speak on the topic, ‘Corruption as it Affects Children, Women and Our Humanity.’
Already, preparations for the programme as confirmation has started coming in from invited guests while the secondary school students, having submitted their pre-screening essays, are set for the non-competitive essay billed for July 13, 2016.
Dr. (Mrs.) Olufunso Amosun will be holding a special mentorship session with the students of Ogun State and other youths at the main Hall of Ogun State Cultural Centre, Kuto, Abeokuta, on the topic ‘Challenges or Not; I Love My Country.’

One of the highlights of this year’s event is the presentation of cheques to the remaining winners of the Project WS Essay competition from 2014 and 2015 who are yet to receive their scholarship money. The management of the project has faced some financial challenges in the past two years years due to lack of sponsorship. This year’s event is not any different as sponsorship has been scarce but organizes insisted they does not want to drop the ball on the event as they are aware of the immense impact it has had on past participants, both teenagers and adults alike. Alhaji Teju Kareem said, in line with the theme for this year’s event, the organizers want to walk the talk by ensuring that all promises made are fulfilled as promises made, with intention of not fulfilling, can also be termed corruption.
The panel will be speaking on the topic ‘Corruption as it Affects Children, Women and Our Humanity.’Chairperson of the event, Prof. Omofolabo Ajayi-Soyinka is an interdisciplinary scholar; her teaching, research, and creative works encompass theatre, literary and gender studies, including the theories that inform them. Her works examine discourses on power, gender, race, and nationality especially in Africa and the Diaspora.
Expected at the advocacy lecture this year is an all-female panel.Hafsat Abiola Costello is a Nigerian human, civil rights and democracy activist, and founder of Kudirat Initiative for Democracy (KIND), which seeks to strengthen civil society and promote democracy in Nigeria.
Kadaria Ahmed is an international journalist, editor, social commentator and TV personality. She moderated Nigeria’s 2011 vice-presidential and presidential debates.
Sola Salako (The Anchor) is a freelance writer and industry critic, she produced and presented the First Consumer TV show PROMOWORLD on Lagos Television for three years and contributed to various journals, newspapers and magazines on marketing/advertising issues.
They have all confirmed they would be present. Special guest of honor, Prof. Femi Osofisan, as well as the keynote speakers, Comrade Tunde Fagbenle and Professor Segun Ojewuyi have also confirmed they would attend.
The first keynote speaker, Mr. Tunde Fagbenle, is a media entrepreneur. He began his media career as Managing Editor of international Travels magazine in 1978.
The second keynote speaker, Prof. Segun Ojewuyi is a scholar and theatre director. A fellow of the Salzburg seminar, Ojewuyi has taught at the University of Lagos, Nigeria, Yale University undergraduate studies, Yale special summer Acting programme and Rowan University, New Jersey. He currently teaches in the Department of Africana Studies at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Illinois, U.S.

Syria truce extended as Aleppo faces food shortages

The Syrian army has unilaterally extended a nationwide ceasefire for three days, while residents of besieged Aleppo face food and fuel shortages after government forces cut off a primary supply route.
The Syrian army announced a 72-hour ceasefire extension on Saturday, the government-run SANA news agency reported. The ceasefire, which started on Wednesday, was marred by violations from all sides.

The Free Syrian Army (FSA), an opposition group, said it would honour the ceasefire.
In northern Syria's Aleppo, at least 43 civilians have been killed in fighting in recent days. The United Kingdom-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said rebel shelling on government-controlled parts of the city killed 34 civilians, while government air strikes on the rebel-held eastern Aleppo left nine dead.
"Over the past few days, there has been no ceasefire on the ground," Al Jazeera's Zeina Khodr reported from Kilis, Turkey. "On the ground, there is no truce and the violence continues."
The Russian Ministry of Defence said on Saturday that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) armed group shot down a military helicopter near Palmyra, killing two Russian pilots.

Fear of shortages

Around 200,000 people remain in the opposition-held eastern sectors of Aleppo, which has been divided between government and rebel control since shortly after fighting in the city erupted in mid-2012.
Residents there described shortages of basic goods after government troops advanced within firing range of the key Castello Road supply route.
"For two days the situation was calm, I went to the market and I filled up my motorbike with gasoline. Today, I couldn't even find a single tomato," said Bilal Qaterji, a local textile factory employee.
"There's not a drop of fuel left because the Castello Road has been cut," he told AFP.
Government troops effectively severed the Castello Road on Thursday with the capture of a hilltop within firing range of the key route.
On Friday, at least 22 people were killed by air strikes on a market in the western part of the Idlib province
More than 270,000 Syrians have been killed since the conflict began in March 2011. Although it initially started as a largely unarmed uprising against President Bashar al-Assad, it quickly turned into a full-scale civil war.