USA - Stuck in the Afghan muc

ACCORDING to legend, Alexander the Great’s mother sent him a letter taunting him for being stuck in Afghanistan for three years after conquering Anatolia, Mesopotamia and Persia in a year. Alexander sent her back some Afghan earth to spread in her courtyard. Having tread on this, Macedonia’s nobles began to bicker and fight amongst themselves.

America’s generals have now been stuck in Afghanistan for 15 years. Unlike Alexander, they blame their failure not on the divisive realities of Afghanistan but on exogenous factors: alleged support to the Afghan Taliban from Pakistan and, more recently, from Russia and Iran. Alexander ultimately pacified Afghanistan by marrying the daughter of the insurgent leader and recruiting him to his cause. Today too — though a marriage between America and the Afghan Taliban is unlikely — ending the Afghan insurgency requires a bold political solution.

Instead, the US commander in Afghanistan has asked for more troops to fight the Taliban as well as the militant Islamic State (IS) group. It is unclear how 15,000 US-Nato troops can achieve what 180,000 failed to accomplish in over a decade. The US insistence in seeking a military solution in Afghanistan is either the consequence of injured pride and strategic confusion or part of a wider regional strategy. It may be a combination of both.

The Moscow consultations, or a UN process, should promote a viable peace plan for Afghanistan.
America’s military presence in Afghanistan serves to prop up the regime it has installed in Kabul and provide a base to coerce Afghanistan’s neighbours and conduct drone strikes and special operations à la Abbottabad if and when needed. It also curtails the influence of Russia and China in this strategically located country.

The US military has probably concluded, correctly, that the demoralised Afghan National Army will be unable to defeat the Afghan Taliban and the best hope of arresting the Taliban’s momentum is to cajole or coerce Pakistan to join the fight against them, especially against the Haqqani network, which is reputedly the most effective element of the Afghan insurgency.

Pakistan’s Zarb-i-Azb operation destroyed the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and the Haqqani infrastructure in North Waziristan and forced all the groups there to relocate to Afghanistan’s ungoverned areas. The Pakistan Army has gone to great lengths to show American generals and politicians that the Haqqanis do not have ‘safe havens’ in Pakistan. Pakistan’s new ambassador in Washington has declared that the Haqqanis are not Pakistan’s “friends” or “proxies”. But neither are the Haqqanis attacking Pakistan, unlike TTP which is now based in Afghanistan and reportedly enjoys the support of Afghan and Indian intelligence. Pakistan’s priority remains to eliminate TTP and IS.

Despite Pakistan’s desire to establish a constructive relationship with the Trump administration, it appears that the US establishment remains stuck in the Obama-era paradigm of viewing Pakistan through the Afghan (and Indian) prism. The new US national security adviser’s recent statement in Kabul regarding Pakistani ‘safe havens’ caused considerable consternation in Pakistan. H.R. McMaster’s meetings in Islamabad and Rawalpindi were ‘testy’ by all accounts. His ‘talking points’ were probably prepared in the White House by Lisa Curtis, who co-chaired (with Hussain Haqqani) a recent think tank report calling for the US to declare Pakistan a “state sponsor of terrorism” unless it ended alleged support to terrorist groups like the Haqqanis, the Laskhkar-i-Taiba and the Jaish-i-Mohammad.

However, today, Pakistan is less susceptible to US pressure than in the past. For one thing, the US ‘incentives’ to the Pakistani military — Coalition Support Funds and foreign military support funds — have been suspended and are unlikely to be revived even if Pakistan accepts the US demands. Second, pressure on Pakistan could prove counterproductive if its current cooperation with the US on Afghanistan and counterterrorism is terminated. Third, the Trump administration has revived tensions with Iran and will find it difficult to confront both Iran and Pakistan at the same time. It is also preoccupied with the North Korean crisis and multiple domestic scandals and squabbles.

Most importantly, Russia and China have come to accept Pakistan’s view that the Afghan Taliban’s objectives are limited to their country and the insurgency can be ended only through negotiations. There is also an emerging realisation that the Afghan Taliban are potential allies in fighting IS (which is linked to TTP and Jamaatul Ahrar).Moscow has initiated consultations to build a regional consensus on Afghanistan and counterterrorism on the basis of these assumptions.

It is essential that these consultations lead to the formulation of the parameters of a political settlement in Afghanistan. The farce of an ‘Afghan-led, Afghan-owned’ process must be discarded. The peace terms proposed by the US and Kabul: ‘reconciliation’ by the Afghan Taliban with Kabul and acceptance of the US-formulated Afghan constitution, without promising the total withdrawal of foreign forces, are obviously unacceptable to the Taliban. On the other hand, the Taliban too have displayed little flexibility, refusing direct talks with Kabul until all foreign forces have left Afghanistan.

The Moscow consultations, or a UN process, should step in to promote a viable peace plan for Afghanistan. This could include: mutual cessation of hostilities; a recognition of the ‘control’ of specific areas of Afghanistan by Kabul or the Taliban; a plan for cooperative action by Kabul and the Taliban and Afghanistan’s neighbours to combat IS and other terrorist groups; commitment to formulate a new or revised constitution which provides for power-sharing between Kabul, the Taliban and other Afghan ‘stakeholders’, and an agreement on a timetable for the staged withdrawal of foreign forces in tandem with the implementation of agreed political milestones.

Even if the US is initially unwilling to participate in formulating such a peace plan, other parties should commence the process through available forums and mechanisms. Eventually, once it becomes clear that a military solution is unavailable, the US will see the merit of joining a peace process.

A negotiated peace can open the way for the economic transformation of Afghanistan and the entire region through trade, investment and economic integration, including under China’s One Belt, One Road initiative and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
BY  MUNIR AKRAM,  a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1330067/stuck-in-the-afghan-muck

15 January 2017

World powers jostle in Afghanistan's new 'Great Game'

25 March 2015

Afghanistan: No end for Obama’s endgame

04 March 2014

Hamid Karzai's interview Washington Post: USA betrayed, Al-Qaida phony threat ... Not our war..

30 April 2017

USA - Stuck in the Afghan muc

31 October 2011

Can't Win in Afghanistan? Blame Pakistan

17 October 2011

Caught in the Af-Pak Quagmire

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

More: 
Frequently Asked Questions <<FAQ>> سلام فورم" پر سوالات کے جوابات"

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace

انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 

Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media

بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب

سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 

AftabKhan-net.page.tl 

Salaamforum.blogspot.com 

سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   

Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
   Twitter: @AftabKhanNet  
  

Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page

Who is hosting maximum Refugees ?

All these refugees, homeless, destroyed, killed people are Muslims whose lands are attacked by US/NATO/West..

Back to: Peace Forum Network

Related:

Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

More:

Frequently Asked Questions <<FAQ>>

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace 

Peace Forum Network
Visited by Millions

Frequently Asked Questions <<FAQ>>

Follow @AftabKhanNet	Facebook Page

 Geopolitical wranglings

Global politics is a complex web where one development can lead to many others, and one intervention to mitigate a conflict can expose the fissures of many other dormant conflicts. However, it always remains a hard task to find some direct relation between two distant and different conflicts and international interventions in those conflicts such as in Afghanistan and Iraq. Many authors have critically analysed and found some major flaws in the strategies adopted by the US and the West towards the Middle East and Afghanistan, which caused huge human sufferings and triggered multiple conflicts in both regions. The recently released Chilcot report, comprising the findings of the UK’s Iraq war inquiry, has discussed at length Tony Blair’s strategic ambitions about Iraq and how he manipulated Afghan invasion for another war in Iraq.

Hasan M. Sadiq in his book The End of the Great Game has tried to trace a direct link between these two wars. He thinks that these were part of a great game played out by the US whose real target was Pakistan.

A Pakistani-American and computer programmer by profession, Sadiq has tried to analyse a host of very complex issues including the Kashmir conflict, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the nuclear race between India and Pakistan, and pre- and post-9/11 relations between Pakistan and the US in his maiden publication comprising 16 chapters. He has attempted to connect the dots around his basic thesis that the US wanted to control the Middle East to ensure global hegemony, and Pakistan military and nuclear arsenal were major hurdles in achieving this objective; China entered the scene a bit later, distracting the US from its major goal.

Hasan M. Sadiq offers his perspective on the US’s global politics and policies towards Pakistan

He argues that since the first Gulf War, the US has been trying to ‘manage’ Pakistan with a view to ensure that it would not be able to provide military assistance to the Gulf states, in case of any conflict there. A new alliance of China, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan emerged in the region, which has become a hurdle in the way of the US great design. According to Sadiq, this alliance is gradually neutralising American influence not only in the Middle Eastern and South Asian regions but also in the rest of the world. To regain its influence, the US wanted to denuclearise Pakistan and to contain Pakistani defence spending. He also sees the conflict in Afghanistan, which he calls ‘war’ as part of the US strategy. He believes that “the main goal of the US war in Afghanistan, which has now lasted over 14 years, was to degrade Pakistan’s expanding nuclear program, which otherwise has the potential to threaten US hegemony over this vital energy-rich region of the world.”

Sadiq considers the US and Pakistan as vital actors in the regional chessboard and China as an emerging actor, which is also challenging the US hegemony in the region. The last chapter, which depicts the title of the book, provides an interesting viewpoint on what the author calls ‘the great game’. He points out that the US dependence on Middle Eastern oil and energy resources is decreasing but it still wants to control the Middle Eastern oil for geostrategic reasons, which include to prevent the Russians from gaining control of these reserves; control its own installed dictators in the Middle East; fuel the economies of the West by receiving cheap oil; deplete the energy resources of the Arabs to preserve its own energy resources; and bring to market its own energy resources and continue to control the geopolitics of the world from its own shores. Sadiq thinks the larger threat to these US policies in the Middle East is the increasing arsenal of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. He sees all international attempts for reduction of nuclear arms, as part of the US efforts to contain Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities, including the 2010 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty knows as New START signed by the US President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

“In May 2001, China and Pakistan publicly announced the joint development of Gwadar port in southwest Pakistan. Gwadar, adjoining the Iranian sea border lies strategically on the waters of the Persian Gulf, also known as the Straits of Hormuz. It is across this strategic access from where most of the Middle East oil is supplied to the West, Japan, and China. If left unchecked by the U.S. this development can undermine its power not only in south Asia, but also in the Middle East. In addition, if U.S. intentions remain on track to control all the Middle East oil, as per my theory, then China with the help of Pakistan could position itself to fight against a U.S. imposed oil blockade from Gwadar port. China already knows how the US reacted when the Soviets marched into Afghanistan in 1979. Being the second largest consumer of oil, is China worried that the US plans to occupy all the Middle East oilfields? If indeed this is the reason why China has entered Gwadar, then there could be some truth to this worry.” — Excerpt from the book

One finds a frequent argument made in the book that Saudi Arabia and China are partners of Pakistan in order to subjugate the US efforts. This is the reason, the author argues, that Saudi Arabia always comes forth to support Pakistan when financial restrictions are imposed on it. Although the Saudis’ Afghanistan policy always remained mysterious and even difficult to predict, the author alludes to a speech made by Prince Turki al-Faisal in 2010 in which he said that Saudis do not want to give up on the Taliban. They will continue to support the interests of the Pakistanis against the Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, who form the Northern Alliance group and are supported by the US and India. Hence, he concludes that “it is highly unlikely that Pakistan would support any peace deal between the Taliban and the US, which denies the Taliban its full representation in any future Afghan government.”

As far as China is concerned in this equation, the author has put in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s words that China appears to be driven by its own interest of consolidating Pakistan “as a counterweight to India and to gain through it a more proximate and safer access to the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf.” Of course, this is not in the interest of the US which sees China’s growing economic, military power and partnership with Pakistan as a threat to its hegemony in the region. The writer sees proxy wars in Afghanistan and pressure on Pakistan’s western borders as a tactic to build pressure on Pakistan.

The book is a very frank commentary based on the feelings of a Pakistani expat in America. The author is not an academic by practice but he has tried to offer his analysis of the US’s global politics and policies towards Pakistan.



Geopolitical wranglings

Review by Muhammad Amir Rana, dawn.com

The reviewer is a security analyst. He is the Director of Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS), Islamabad. 

The End of the Great Game ,(POLITICS), By Hasan M. Sadiq , ISBN: 978-9692308809 ,HMS Books, Pakistan, 374pp.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Islamic Revival رساله تجديد الاسلام ‏

An in-depth study of the Qur’an and Islamic religious history reveals startling facts. “Risala-e-Tajdeed-ul-Islam” is a message to develop positive change in the thought and practices of Muslims.

قرآن اور اسلام کے گہرے مطالعه سےحیران کن حقائق کا انکشاف ہوا، "رساله تجديد الاسلام" مسلمانوں کے انداز فکروعمل میں مثبت تبدیلی کا پیغام ہے:

https://bit.ly/Islamic-Revival-Mag

Eng: https://Quran1book.wordpress.com

Urdu: https://Quran1book.blogspot.com 

FB    https://facebook.com/IslamiRevival

Twitter:        https://twitter.com/QSubjects

Islamic Extremism is a Product of Western Imperialism

As we struggle to come to terms with the latest terrorist attacks in Brussels, it is important that we understand the causes of such extremism. After all, Islamic extremism was virtually unknown fifty years ago and suicide bombings were inconceivable. And yet today it seems that we are confronted with both on a daily basis. Keep reading >>>>>

Related:

Genesis of Terror & Road to Peace

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace

 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Peace Forum Network Mags
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits

Follow @Peace_Forum

Prophet Muhammad's Everlasting Promise of peace and security to Christians - St. Catherine's Monastery, Sinai

حضرت محمدﷺ کا عیسائیوں کے ساتھ عہد [اردو]

النبي محمد وعد الآخرة للمسيحيين

وَأَوْفُوا بِالْعَهْدِ إِنَّ الْعَهْدَ كَانَ مَسْئُولً

Keep your promises; you will be called to account for every promise which you have made! (Quran; 17:34)

PROPHET MUHAMMAD'S PROMISE TO CHRISTIANS   Muslims and Christians together constitute over fifty percent of the world and if they lived in peace, we will be half way to world peace. One small step that we can take towards fostering Muslim-Christian harmony is to tell and retell positive stories and abstain from mutual demonization. In this article I propose to remind both Muslims and Christians about a promise that Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) made to Christians. The knowledge of this promise can have enormous impact on Muslim conduct towards Christians. Muslims generally respect the precedent of their Prophet and try to practice it in their lives. In 628 AD, a delegation from St. Catherine’s Monastery came to Prophet Muhammed and requested his protection. He responded by granting them a charter of rights, which I reproduce below in its entirety. St. Catherine’s Monastery is located at the foot of Mt. Sinai and is the world’s oldest monastery. It possess a huge collection of Christian manuscripts, second only to the Vatican, and is a world heritage site. It also boasts the oldest collection of Christian icons. It is a treasure house of Christian history that has remained safe for 1400 years under Muslim protection. The Promise to St. Catherine:"This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them. Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them. No compulsion is to be on them. Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries. No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims' houses. Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God's covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate. No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight. The Muslims are to fight for them. If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray. Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants. No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world)."   The first and the final sentence of the charter are critical. They make the promise eternal and universal. Muhammed asserts that Muslims are with Christians near and far straight away rejecting any future attempts to limit the promise to St. Catherine alone. By ordering Muslims to obey it until the Day of Judgment the charter again undermines any future attempts to revoke the privileges. These rights are inalienable. Muhammed declared Christians, all of them, as his allies and he equated ill treatment of Christians with violating God’s covenant. A remarkable aspect of the charter is that it imposes no conditions on Christians for enjoying its privileges. It is enough that they are Christians. They are not required to alter their beliefs, they do not have to make any payments and they do not have any obligations. This is a charter of rights without any duties! The document is not a modern human rights treaty but even thought it was penned in 628 A.D. it clearly protects the right to property, freedom of religion, freedom of work, and security of the person. I know most readers, must be thinking so what? Well the answer is simple. Those who seek to foster discord among Muslims and Christians focus on issues that divide and emphasize areas of conflict. But when resources such as Muhammad’s promise to Christians is invoked and highlighted it builds bridges. It inspires Muslims to rise above communal intolerance and engenders good will in Christians who might be nursing fear of Islam or Muslims. When I look at Islamic sources, I find in them unprecedented examples of religious tolerance and inclusiveness. They make me want to become a better person. I think the capacity to seek good and do good inheres in all of us. When we subdue this predisposition towards the good, we deny our fundamental humanity. In this holiday season, I hope all of us can find time to look for something positive and worthy of appreciation in the values, cultures and histories of other peoples. References See for example Life and Teachings of Muhammed by Amir Ali, p. 176. click to read it. Links: The original charter does not survive, but several copies are now extant in the library of St Catherine, some of which are witnessed by the judges of Islam in order to lend some force to its semblance of authenticity. The traditional explanation which accounts for the loss of the original claims that during the Conquest of Egypt by the Ottoman sultan Selim I in 1517, the original document was seized from the monastery by Ottoman soldiers and taken to Selim's palace at Constantinople.[2][1] A copy was then made to compensate for its loss at the monastery.[1] On the other hand, it is also possible that the charter was simply renewed under the new rulers, as other documents in the archive suggest.[3] Traditions about the tolerance shown towards the monastery were reported in governmental documents issued in Cairo and during the period of Ottoman rule (1517-1798), the Pasha of Egypt annually reaffirmed its protections.[1] In 1630, Gabriel Sionita published the first edition of the Arabic text, with Latin translation, under the title Testamentum et pactiones inter Mohammedem et Christianae fidei cultores. The origins of the document has been the subject of a number of different traditions, best known through the accounts of European travellers who visited the monastery.[1] These authors include the French knight Greffin Affagart (d. c. 1557), the French traveller Jean de Thévenot (d. 1667) and the English prelate Richard Peacocke,[1] who included an English translation of the text. Since the 19th century, several aspects of the Achtiname, notably the list of witnesses, have been questioned by scholars.[4] There are similarities to other documents granted to other religious communities in the Near East. One example is Muhammad's letter to the Christians of Najrān, which first came to light in 878 in a monastery in Iraq and whose text is preserved in the Chronicle of Séert.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achtiname_of_Muhammad The contents of letter are however generally in line with the special privileges granted by Islam to Christians as  People of the Book.  نص العهد: "هذا كتاب كتبه محمد بن عبدالله إلى كافة الناس أجمعين بشيراً ونذيراً ومؤتمناً على وديعة الله في خلقه لئلا يكون للناس على الله حجة بعد الرسل وكان الله عزيزاً حكيماً كتبه لأهل ملته ولجميع من ينتحل دين النصرانية من مشارق الأرض ومغاربها قريبها وبعيدها فصيحها وعجميها معروفها ومجهولها كتاباً جعله لهم عهداً. لا يغير أسقف من أسقفيته ولا راهب من رهبانيته ولا حبيس من صومعته ولا سايح من سياحته ولا يهدم بيت من بيوت كنائسهم وبيعهم ولا يدخل شيء من بناء كنائسهم في بناء مسجد ولا في منازل المسلمين فمن فعل شيء من ذلك فقد نكث عهد الله وخالف رسوله ولا يحمل على الرهبان والأساقفة ولا من يتعبد جزيةً ولا غرامة وأنا أحفظ ذمتهم أين ما كانوا من بر أو بحر في المشرق والمغرب والشمال والجنوب وهم في ذمتي وميثاقي وأماني من كل مكروه فمن نكث العهد الذي فيه وخالفه إلى غيره وتعدى ما أمره كان لعهد الله ناكثاً ولميثاقه ناقضاً وبدينه مستهزئاً وللّعنة مستوجباً سلطاناً كان أو غيره من المسلمين المؤمنين." تعتبر الجملتان الأولى والأخيرة في هذا العهد حاسمتان، فهما تجعلان الوعد أبدياً وعالمياً. يؤكد النبي محمد (ص) أن المسلمين يقفون مع المسيحيين من قريب وبعيد، ويرفضون فوراً أية محاولات مستقبلية للحد من وعد دير القديسة كاثرين وحده. من خلال أمر المسلمين باحترام الوعد حتى يوم القيامة، يُفشل الصك مرة أخرى أية محاولات مستقبلية لإلغاء الامتيازات. هناك ثلاثة حقوق لا يمكن التنازل عنها. أعلن النبي محمد (ص) أن المسيحيين جميعهم حلفاء له حيث ساوى بين معاملة المسيحيين السيئة مع انتهاك عهد الله تعالى. ومن النواحي المثيرة للاهتمام والإعجاب في الصك أنه لا يفرض أية شروط على المسيحيين للتمتع بميزاته. يكفي إنهم مسيحيون، ولا يُطلب منهم تغيير إيمانهم ومعتقداتهم ولا أن يدفعوا جزية ولا تكون عليهم أية التزامات. هذا صك حقوق دون أية التزامات. ليست الوثيقة معاهدة عصرية في حقوق الإنسان، ولكنها، ورغم أنها صيغت عام 628 بعد الميلاد فإنها تحمي بوضوح حقوق الملكية والحرية الدينية وحرية العمل والأمن الشخصي. أعرف أن معظم القراء سوف يقولون "وماذا بعد؟". حسناً، الجواب بسيط: يركز هؤلاء الذين يبغون رعاية الفتنة بين المسلمين والمسيحيين على قضايا تتسبب بالفرقة والنزاع. ولكن عندما تطرح موارد مثل وعد النبي محمد (ص) إلى المسيحيين ويتم إبرازها فإنها تبني الجسور. وهي تلهم المسلمين أن يرتفعوا فوق عدم التسامح الطائفي وتولد حسن النية لدى المسيحيين الذين قد يكونوا يتعاملون مع الخوف من الإسلام والمسلمين. عندما أنظر إلى المصادر الإسلامية أجد بها أمثلة لا سابق لها من التسامح الديني والشمولية. تجعلني أرغب بأن أصبح إنساناً أفضل. أعتقد أن القدرة على السعي لما هو صالح وصنعه متأصلان فينا جميعاً. عندما نكبت هذا التوجه نحو الصلاح فإننا ننكر إنسانيتنا الأساسية. آمل في أعقاب فترة الأعياد أن نجد جميعاً الوقت للبحث عن أمر إيجابي يستحق التقدير في قيم وتاريخ وثقافة الشعوب الأخرى. St. Catherine's Monastery, Sinai, Egypt                                          A Picture of Prophet Muhammad's Letter to St. Catherine's Monastery Dr. Muqtedar Khan | 08.22.2010 This article was published in the Pittsburg Post-Gazette [03.25.2007], Daily News Egypt [03.09.2007], AltMuslim [03.03.2007],  Pakistan Link,  Middle East Window, Turkish Daily News [04.10.2007 ], OpEd news [03.19.2007],Ikhwanweb [02.11.07],  and many other places.. Article also available in:   English   |  Indonesia   |  عربي   |  اردو   |  Français Courtesy Common Ground News Service http://www.ijtihad.org/Prophet%20Muhammed's%20Promise.htm Return to Ijtihad http://www.ijtihad.org/Prophet%20Muhammed's%20Promise.htm Minorities in Islamic State: The hand book highlights the rights of minorites... Read more: Protection of Minorities, a Religious Obligation of Muslims: http://islam4humanite.blogspot.com/2015/03/non-muslims-in-islamic-society.html حضرت محمدﷺ کا عیسائیوں کے ساتھ عہد [اردو] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~ Humanity, Religion, Culture, Science, Peace  A Project of  Peace Forum Network Peace Forum Network Mags Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media Overall 2 Million visits/hits Follow @Peace_Forum