The Left Needs Honesty and Integrity and a True Heart for the People to Win

What’s most interesting about the results of the election is how unpersuaded people have become about the mainstream press and its views. That’s a good thing. I don’t know of a single news site that has any credibility that wasn’t preaching against Trump. Somehow, the voters didn’t buy it. The results will even further disqualify the usual pundits, as well as the pollsters, and demonstrate how much they are in the pockets of corporate America. Hooray for the independent press. Indeed, however corrupt the Hillary machine was, it simply didn’t have the power to change the will of the people. We can talk about how disreputable Trump is, and how rude and crude and unsophisticated a man he is, but it’s clear that the Establishment has been trounced, and that’s also a good thing.

It’s obvious that the Democrats are going to have to change, and hopefully die as a genuine party. The power of the left is going to swing toward what’s left of the Bernie supporters, but it won’t be Bernie Sanders this time. He showed what a sellout he is. We will need a true voice crying in the wilderness, a dark horse who will rise up and lead us with honesty and integrity. Hillary lost because she’s a fraud, a woman too entrenched in the status quo of corporate largesse. She was never for the people.

The American domestic scene doesn’t look very good from here on out, and just as American blacks were greatly energized by Obama’s election, we’re going to see a lot of people on the fringe right who believe that this is their time as well, and that’s not a good thing. Muslims and those immigrants from the south need to beware, not about Trump but about the average hater who believes that he can do anything he wants and not suffer the consequences.. But this will be a time to re-assess, a time to get closer to our true values,and to get behind not the lesser of two evils but someone who truly has our interests and will stand for the things we believe in.

Frankly I worried about civil war if Trump wasn’t elected. But the animals have been unleashed anyway. Take stock, my friends.  Watch your back.  Unite with those of us who believe in a better future, so that we can pull together our forces and achieve a position of strength.

And I suspect that the gridlock will continue in Congress, but for the opposite reasons. But maybe not. The Democrats have always caved in to the Republicans. But I don’t think we’ll be going to war with Russia anytime soon.


Rita Harrison: A Willow For You


The Willow System: What is It?

A drop of poison in the blood from the bite of a snake will soon spread throughout your body and kill you. Ideas about who we are also have that kind of power.  If you believe that you are a cripple, you are or soon will be.  If you believe that you are the greatest singer on earth, you will have to fight for that prize, but you’ll probably get pretty damn close.

Ideas about self set limits to growth.  They can turn us into street gangsters selling crack and ten-dollar whores and they can also turn us into astronauts.   They are like the forms a contractor uses to pour concrete into.  We create these ideas of self, pour ourselves into them, and then we harden like concrete.

Life, at least how we perceive it,  is largely the product of our imagination.  We believe that we are bright or stupid or better because we know how to brush our teeth in the morning and do something ritualistic, like wind-up automatons,  every day for money to pay the bills for a lot of garbage we don’t really need.  We fight everyday to belong to something, to anything, by either an artfully designed scam or by spending years in academia learning how to mate bees in space in order to prove our worth. I think most people do ask why, but never get beyond that.  Becoming who we are is as unique for a man who spends a career stamping metal in an automobile factory as it is for someone who believes in self improvement and is out climbing mountains and learning to play the sitar.

Imagination, as we all know, has its flaws.  Chicken Little imagined that the sky was falling.  Some of us can’t do much better than that.  The people in the village were not prepared for the truth because they believed that the boy who cried wolf was always lying.  And right now, wolf or not,  you believe that you are commonplace, attractive only to the rude and the crude, so you’re in the bars looking for love.  What would happen if you believed that you were beautiful?  Who would you reach out to then?  Would you stop going to IHOP and start going to Vino’s? Would you stop using Cover Girl and switch to Dior?

Opening Up the Pathways of Self

Understanding the relationship between mind and body has long been recognized as the key to solving many riddles that are presented in diagnosing various illnesses.  What we imagine infiltrates our entire system.  Cardiovascular problems are linked more closely to depression, a psychological disability, for example, than to physical attacks on the body through smoking, diabetes, high blood pressure, or high cholesterol.  Maintaining healthy relationships, particularly in your family, and having a positive attitude are just as important as eating the right foods and getting plenty of exercise.

The Holistic View of Self

It is not by accident that Rita Harrison, founder and creator of the Willow System, named her holistic health program after the Willow tree. “The weeping willow,” she says, “is a perfect metaphor for holistic healing.”  Holistic health focuses on the whole body and mind as a highly integrated and balanced system of health management rather than viewing particular physical symptoms as being isolated, localized problems.  If your knee is out of joint, maybe it’s because your nose is too.

In the Willow System, various elements of the Willow tree are used to symbolize different aspects of human life.  Family and relationships are represented by the roots, the trunk represents the physical body, and the branches reflect our energy and emotions,  The life of the tree, however, is very dependent upon making all these parts work together harmoniously, so the function of integration is significant in completing the picture.   Human life is like that also.

It is no coincidence that the willow bark has for centuries around the globe been a recognized cure for many ailments, particularly to ease pain and reduce fever, as far back as the time of Hippocrates, and was long used in Europe, China, ancient Egypt, Sumer and Assyria. In America, the Cherokee and other Native Americans were very familiar with its healing properties as well.

In 1763 Bayer, the pharmaceutical company founded in the same year, began synthesizing  acetylsalicylic acid, a modification of salicin, the vital health ingredient produced by the bark of the Willow tree.  Acetylsalicylic acid is more popularly known as aspirin,  Often called a “wonder drug” for its many medical applications, aspirin is a known cure for heart disease, strokes and blood clots, and has recently been found helpful in curing several forms of cancer, including both prostate and lung cancer. Just a little dab every day from the willow tree will do you.

It goes without saying that the willow tree itself is a system that, like holistic health, serves a larger purpose, not only in being a beautiful tree, but in producing a healing substance that is valuable to other living things.  It “lives kindly” by adding this substance to the soil out of which other plants grow.  A holistic view of life is that when all things are working together and are respected for what each contributes, we will have peace and harmony.  We too must live kindly not only in respect to our whole body and mind, but in respect to the world around us too.

When all the parts of the tree are healthy, it can fulfill that function.   When applying a holistic health system to your lifestyle, you can become a valuable and productive human being worthy of all that oxygen you suck up from the atmosphere. If your family life is a mess, you’d better find out why and fix it.  As on earth, so in heaven.  The simplest struggles we have are mirrored in everything we do, because they are a product of the root core of your beliefs, the original form in which you poured your concrete.

 It is no accident that people drive themselves off psychological cliffs.  If the doctor can’t find a drug to stop that pain in your lower right thigh,  then maybe you should be seeing Rita.  Psychosomatic disorders frequently cause psoriasis, eczema, stomach ulcers, high blood pressure and heart disease, but those are only the most obvious.  They cannot be treated with drugs.  They might better be treated with that smile you get from the nurse at the doctor’s office.  Or Rita’s.  They must be treated with change in how you manage life, in how you see yourself, and in what you project in values about yourself. 

Bringing the Consciousness of You Into Focus:  Learning Who You Are

Rita Harrison, through the Willow System, can help you find some of those concrete blocks and blow a few of them up with the dynamite perspectives she has.  Rita provides training, seminars and private sessions “to bring forth shifts and changes in your thoughts, feelings and actions.”  When the holistic approach is used, the relationship between who you think you are and the discomfort or pain you suffer in your life, whether physical or mental, becomes apparent. She uses an integrative method that unites health, relationships, spirituality and career into a single you, showing you how one aspect of your life can have an impact on another.  enabling people to be the best that they can be. She uses you as the source of your healing.

When the Student is Ready, the Teacher Appears

Rita engages her clients directly, in live class settings as well as in person-to-person, one-on-one counseling, but she also provides counseling via Skype and other virtual-based methods available through modern technology.  She recognizes the spiritual connection that people can make without the need for physical presence or being in the same geographical space.  But she also recognizes very clearly that the source of healing is not Rita but you yourself.  All healing comes from within.  The mind and the body together are like a Rubic’s Cube. To be whole, things must be in their proper place.  Whether it is pain caused by an idea that you cling to, or some person or thing you believe is responsible for your unhappiness, the true source of healing is within the self.  With your openness to that thought, Rita is there to guide you to it.

The Practice of Becoming You

Self-empowerment is fundamental to the process.  It is you who have set yourself in stone, and sometimes you’ve built the bathroom where the kitchen should be.  It is only you who can free yourself from it through the dynamic of first loving who you are, where you are, and realizing that you are much more.   This brings about a change in your behavior, a shift in your habits, thereby bringing about healing.

The healing is about freeing yourself to love, to be able to love and to accept it when it is given, to enjoy and to make the most of what is instead of waiting for what might be.  Anger, hatred, a refusal to forgive, blame and resentment are greatly disabling.  These are very much like snake poison.  They bind you as though committed in marriage to those things that hurt you, and prevent you from moving on toward habits that are healthy, creative and satisfying.

An integrative, holistic treatment & education system that creates self-empowering shifts will produce revolutionary changes in your body, mind and soul.  Get ready for it.

To contact Rita, send her an email at see her contact page at

She also has a toll-free number,  1-800.790.6140

In Honor of Those Who Resist

I posted a photo of a bloody hand holding a large rock the other day as a cover photo for my Facebook page, and my comment about it said, “In honor of those who resist.” It signified the tragic insignia of Kashmir’s stone pelters—those who pick up stones and throw them at their oppressors, the Indians who wear all the trappings of military force who would take aim at such men and women who dare to defy the authority and dignity of the Indian state and blow their heads off or at least blind them with shotgun pellets..

I’m sure that there was some reaction among some of my peace-loving friends, who may have said, “What? Paul Barrow alleges to be an ambassador for  the Global Village Forum. Where is the dove? Where is the olive branch?  How can you be an ambassador for peace and celebrate violence?”

Certainly, it is a valid question.  It is undeniably appropriate to advocate peace at all times wherever there is conflict. But let’s face it: in Kashmir’s normal state of affairs, there really is no conflict. Not most of the time.  Normalcy is merely the pain and suffering of those who must endure, and endure, and endure, and have endured 69 years of a hostile and very unfriendly occupation by men who do not, and will not, acknowledge the rights of free men.  They endorse, sanction and give lip service only the power of the state; they dedicate their lives and support their families in service to the power of dictatorial rule, the power of sit down and shut up or you will be jailed, or executed,and your wives and daughters raped. Your sons will disappear into the darkness never to be seen again, except at those rare moments when a lonely unmarked grave is discovered in a field, a child lost to the emptiness of an uncelebrated and undignified martyrdom.

Is that our peace? Do I commit my ambassadorship to such a fate? Should I be telling these young men who throw stones, “go home.  Please don’t do that.  It doesn’t help.  Leave such affairs to us grownups, the men in suits who parade on red carpets, sip tea together in ornate halls, acquire fancy titles, and talk, talk, talk, while the oppression continues and gets worse and worse and worse.

Kashmir, they say, is not a disputed territory.  It is an integral part of India.  What are  you going to do about it?  Sit down and shut up, or you will be jailed, or executed, and your wives and daughters raped. You will be charged for sedition for even mentioning the notion that Kashmir is an independent state with its own right to sovereignty, its own right to self-determination.

Believe me when I say, I am not an ambassador for that kind of peace.  .

The very loud and outspoken fact is that, were it not for the stone pelters, were it not for the massive civil disobedience and all the deaths and blindness that Kashmiris subject themselves to, these men in suits would themselves have to go home and shut up, and entertain their wives with talk of sweet nothings, and pretend to an importance that has no backbone, whose words drift through the air like so much putrid smell of an outhouse.

Don’’t get me wrong.  I am not discounting the noble efforts of true diplomats who seek an honest and fair resoluition to the dispute.And I know such men.  But their role is not a primary one.  It is secondary to the role of the real champions, the men who have dared defy a power that acknowledges only itself for its own sake. If it were not for these champions, there would be no place for them.  they could raise no funds for their glamorous institutions.  They would have no titles that would mean a goddam thing. Because the real truth is that there must be war before there is a justifiable peace.  Millions of men,women and children have invariably died and will continue to die so that you and I can live in dignity and choose how and where we want to live in pursuit of a life that truly has meaning.

India still doesn’t get it.  That toothless tiger, the UN, still doesn’t get it.  Not enough blood has been shed.  Not enough people have starved.  Not enough women have been raped. The demand for self-determination still echoes in our head like stones cascading off a brick wall. Kashmir’s voice is only dimly heard as a faint whimper in a world where massive violence and genocide is the order of the day.  If Srinagar were Alleppo, do you think the world would pay attention then?  Sad to say, but just maybe.  Just maybe.

It should not have to come to that. But until there is global acknowledgement, Kashmir’s pain will not go away.  The suffering will continue because its cry is a small cry in such a terrible world that only pays attention to the Aleppos, the Mosuls, and other great tragedies our men in suits commit.

I say it is not time for Kashmir to cry.  It is time for kashmir to get angry, to get angrier, and  to reach a point where the world cannot look upon it without feeling shame that it participates in such horror,and has the guts to really do something about it.  All of us must be brave and make those sacrifices if we really want peace.  And to that peace I am truly dedicated.

The Power of the Courts in a Time of Diversity

For the second time in my Constitutional law course at Yale, I was asked to provide an essay answer to questions provided by the law professor. I thought that I would share this.

Question: Of the three branches of our government codified in the Constitution, the Judiciary comes last. Why did the Framers do this? Why did they perhaps consider the Judiciary to be the weakest of the three branches?

Question: Similarly, how and why has the Judiciary gained power over time? Do you think that it is prudent (wise) to give judges this increased power?

My Answer: (this is subject to peer review, which is currently under way, so I do not know whether I will get a passing grade for this. As my peers, perhaps you can offer an opinion.) 🙂

The Power of the Courts in a Time of Diversity

The judiciary’s role is by its very nature the weakest of the three branches. It’s role is not to make law, as is that of the legislature and the executive. The power to make law is left to the other two branches, so long as that law conforms with the Constitution. The judiciary merely interprets what has been enacted into law. The judiciary essentially follows the will of the other two branches by determining the spirit and letter of the law. The judiciary has in its power the discretion to declare as invalid any law that does not conform to the Constitution.

It is quite appropriate that some other authority besides the judges themselves appoint lower court judges, in order to avoid the corruption that follows closed ranks within specific orders. Favoritism and the appeal of money take root in such institutions. Judges might be picked because they were able to purchase the job, or because they married into the right family. The conflicts of interest immediately become pronounced/ This would give them complete control over the judiciary, creating a monolithic power structure that would ultimately be quite dangerous.

We are caught in a legal quagmire now because the framers of the constitution saw fit to create a secular state without the right of any one religion to impose its customs upon others. But this did not account for what is happening today. Today, we have very diverse cultures trying to establish common ground whose customs surrounding sex and the roles of men and women in society differ sharply. America was primarily populated by Catholics and Protestant Christians whose way of life and values were fairly harmonious and came out of common European origins. Now our nation is confronted with laws that are inconsiderate of the practices of Islam, the principle case in point, and are not compatible with fundamental religious and cultural views of that way of life. Their way of life is oppressive to us, while our way of life is oppressive to them. The result is that we are seeing more and more violence and distrust toward one another because of that basic incompatibility. Justices’ hands are tied, because they can only rule on the basis of Western law where issues involving abortion or having multiple wives might be involved.

What’s happening then today is that justices are asked to make rulings on issues that impact the religious views of some, if not all, of the people. Is abortion legal or isn’t it? Should same sex marriage be permitted? Is it ok to teach gender neutrality to school-aged children? Is it ok for the state to take children from parents who smoke pot? May a woman wear a hijab to work?

The power of the courts today are felt because they are in conflict with diverse cultural/religious positions in society..I don’t think the courts have grown stronger as much as they are simply exercising the power that was never fully expressed in a more monolithic culture. Diversity in America has grown, which has imposed upon the courts decisions about these matters that were not fundamentally overwhelming social issues in the past.


In addition, the failure to recognize the intersection between culture and religion has over-politicized the office of the judiciary because, however, it rules, it impinges upon religious or quasi-religious points of view either positively or negatively in a manner that conflicts at least in spirit with the Second Amendment in which “Congress shall make no law affecting the establishment of religion.” Secularism has also become a religion. And let’s face it. Ruling against certain kinds of religious doctrine comes out of secular ideology, typically, that has attempted to assert its own supremacy in the political world at the expense of a cultural sovereignty that goes unrecognized, The attempt to avoid religious doctrine in civil law has failed. Courts that rule on the constitutionality of a provision will interpret that law to the detriment of someone’s cultural or religious point of view. .

I believe that there is clearly a need for an Amendment to adjust the power of rulings, or the reach of the law, in its conflict with cultural and religious values. I don’t have the answer for this, because it is unquestionably a thorny and complex issue, but it needs to be addressed in order to avoid another civil war.

Why President Obama Ignores Human Rights in Kashmir

ghulamnabifai_thumb.jpgDr. Ghulam Nabi Fai

September 5, 2016

Since the current uprising in Kashmir began with the killing of Burhan Wani on July 8, the unjustifiable and violent attack with bullets, birdshot from pump-action shotguns and extreme cane beatings by Indian military forces upon many of some 200,000 mourners who attended his funeral, who were in technical violation of a rigid curfew that was established by the police and armed forces, has provoked numerous demonstrations and violent clashes between residents. Demonstrations have occurred across the globe by non-resident Kashmiris and other human rights activists. The curfews and clashes have now been sustained for over five weeks, with limited or no access to the basic necessities of life, including food, power and fuel, and the protests have continued almost unabated, with injuries reaching close to 10,000, deaths over 85, and some 570 at last count left blinded, and many more maimed from what have been euphemistically called “pellet” wounds. While Kashmir has been under siege for many decades by the largest military occupation in the world, the recent uptick in what is nothing less than an effort to terrorize the population into submission and silence has been particularly brutal.

On August 30, a letter was submitted to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry by NRK, or non resident Kashmiris, saying, “This latest situation has been met with inexplicable silence by the United States. This has given a sense of total impunity to India to exercise the use of unprecedented force on unarmed Kashmiri civilians. It has also created the impression that the United States is selective about the application of the principles of human rights and democratic values. What is the significance of an alliance between the great democracy (USA) and the so-called largest democracy in the world (India), when universal principles, democratic values, and human rights are knowingly ignored?”

Coincidently, on August 30, the U.S. and India signed a mutual defense compact, agreeing to share bases, resources and logistics in the Far East. At the same time, human rights and what was at least a semblance of being the symbol of democratic freedoms has seemingly all but disappeared from the U.S. agenda. Not a word, at least publicly, has been mentioned by President Obama or other U.S. officials that would indicate that some pressure is being applied toward India to exercise restraint in Kashmir and permit an airing of grievances by the angry population. The familiar cries of Azadi (freedom) and “Go India Go Back” continue to fall on deaf ears, not only in India but upon those in the U.S. administration who undoubtedly know the truth on the ground, but instead have chosen to play politics with the facts. India’s rhetoric continues to blame Pakistan for incitement and cross-border terrorism, and the U.S. has conveniently accepted that propaganda line in the interest of selling India more weapons and paving the way for other U.S. investors. In September of last year, according to Bloomberg, “ India’s cabinet approved a $3 billion deal for Boeing Co. military helicopters. The 22 Apache attack choppers and 15 Chinook cargo choppers comprised the biggest defense contract since Prime Minister Modi came to power.” India surged to become the U.S.’s second largest weapons buyer..

Meanwhile, US State Department Spokesperson Elizabeth Trudeau said on August 16, 2016 that our position on Kashmir has not changed. “The pace, the scope, the character of any discussions in Kashmir is for the two sides to determine”. Trudeau said we support any and all positive steps that India and Pakistan can take to forge closer relations. “We’re aware of the clashes”, Trudeau added.

This obviously does not bode well for anyone looking for U.S. support for human rights causes. Particularly in Kashmir. The bipartisan support that Kashmir issue was given by the United States Administration at the United Nations seem to be disappearing. Is it because the United States was wrong then or is it because United States policy towards international legality and morality has changed?

History has demonstrated a significantly different approach to foreign policy toward Kashmir. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles (Republican) stated at the UN on February 5, 1957 that: “We continue to believe that unless the parties are able to agree upon some other solution, the solution which was recommended by the Security Council should prevail, which is that there should be a plebiscite.”

American representative to the United Nations, Adlai Stevenson (Democrat), stated on June 15, 1962 that: “The best approach is to take for a point of departure the area of common ground which exists between the parties. I refer of course to the resolutions which were accepted by both parties and which in essence provide for demilitarization of the territory and a plebiscite whereby the population may freely decide the future status of Jammu and Kashmir. This is in full conformity with the principle of the self‑determination of people which is enshrined in Article I of the Charter as one of the key purpose for which the United Nations exists;”

President Obama himself said during his 2008 Presidential campaign that the U.S. ought to help resolve the conflict over Kashmir. But as an editorial in the Nation the following year indicates, “President Obama’s comment that the U.S. should help resolve the Kashmir dispute rattled India, and now it seems that the U.S. Administration is dragging its feet. The issue of Kashmir remains the core issue in relations between Pakistan and India. Bruce Riedel [former CIA analyst at the Brookings Institution], who chaired the White House review that formulated Obama’s Af-Pak strategy, is quoted by a news agency on Sunday as saying that the Obama Administration, ‘does not intend to meddle in Kashmir.’”

What is conspicuous is that since the Iraq war, and Libya, and now Syria, a cynicism has grown toward any acknowledgement of issues of sovereignty and human rights. These issues have pretty much fallen off the map. U.S. leadership has become almost completely absent on any voice for such rights, unless we are talking about Assad or Putin or some other figure whose cooperation in the international matters are questionable. Corporate priorities, international banking interests, and the needs of Wall Street have taken control of governments everywhere, particularly in both India and the United States. It is extremely difficult to see any value in even discussing human rights, because these have taken a backseat, if they even have been permitted a seat, at any discussions concerning national interest.

In addition, there has been a shift from political priorities to religious priorities and an ultra-nationalism that trumpets “Neighborhood first’ in India, much in the style and mode of Donald Trump’s “America First,” where the sectarian divide now holds stronger ground than any consideration for democratic principles. In the U.S. we have a similar shift, a growing nationalism combined with a distorted sense of American exceptionalism by some Conservatives, led by Donald Trump, that erodes further any consideration for democratic rights elsewhere in the world, or on the left, a New World Order imperialism which seems to be the primary agenda of neoliberals who have co-opted the priorities of the left.

One wonders why President Obama isn’t listening to the voice of Dr. Martin Luther King. President Obama was envisioned as the man who would bring “change,” a man whose roots and affinity in black culture gave him some significant cachet with the oppressed. While he is popularly known for his Harvard Law School days, and a brief stint as a Constitutional law professor, what has been largely forgotten is that he has a much deeper background in foreign relations and international politics and a substantial focus on economic pursuits. At Columbia he did not major in law but in political science and international relations. He then went to work for Business International (BI).

As a research associate in BI’s financial services division, “he edited Financing Foreign Operations, a global reference service, and wrote for Business International Money Report, a weekly financial newsletter.[4] His responsibilities included “interviewing business experts, researching trends in foreign exchange, following market developments.” Since taking office, he has fallen back on that experience and is better known for his ties to Wall Street than to his interest in the Constitution and justice and as an advocate for the less privileged..

The advocacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, that injustice is immoral, seem to have no effect on the mindset of experts in the corridors of power in Washington. As King said, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.” We have perhaps no outstanding examples of that kind of courage that is needed by principled men in times of challenge and controversy.. Dr. King would not believe that a person of high intellect like President Obama would ignore this golden rule and not speak for the oppressed people of Kashmir. Yet he is briefed almost everyday about the suffering and pain inflicted upon the people of Kashmir by the Indian army.

How is it possible to talk about human rights all day when not at the negotiating table it’s not even on the agenda?

Trade and commercial deals are important but not at the expense of the high moral ground American exceptionalism has always claimed. Moral values and human rights are the very essence of even being called civilized.

The massive pain and indignities that Kashmiris suffer are only significant when they reach a pitch that the mainstream press starts noticing, as the New York Times did recently, and realizes it can capitalize on viewing audience because of the violence and mayhem. The usual platitudes are rushed out to put a public face on it, but there is no incentive for change. Only the realization that eventually things will die down, that the curfews will end, with India regaining full control, and then everyone can return to the money pit, trading in dollars, jets and other military hardware.

It is quite unfortunate that the Obama administration and the United Nations both have chosen to adopt India’s view that this is simply a bilateral issue. This is a political mask similar to that worn by the Joker in the Batman series intended to deceive. Unfortunately, it is the Big Lie, and an extremely dangerous one. As long as India continues to blame Pakistan for problems in Kashmir, India and Pakistan remain on the verge of war with each other, and this is a threat to international peace. When two nuclear countries are facing each other down, as they have for going on 70 years, with already three wars under their belts, that’s not a bilateral issue whatsoever. That has the makings of a world war. Nothing else demands international attention like such a threat, and it greatly behooves the United States, the United Nations and other allies to sit up and take heed.

Dr. Fai is the Secretary General, World Kashmir Awareness.

He can be reached at: 1-202-607-6435 or

Kashmir: Not a Bilateral Issue

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” – Margaret Mead

The U.S. has recently shown its official stance on Kashmir again, by avoiding any appearance of taking sides on the conflict and restating that it is up to India and Pakistan to resolve the issue.  It’s been stated by other countries as well.  But that’s hogwash.

The interest of other countries in the Kashmir dispute is warranted and highly recommended. The Kashmir dispute is not simply to be left to India and Pakistan, and the interest of other countries does not represent unnecessary interference in the internal affairs of India, however much they would like to claim. This is a global problem that affects global peace and security.

When two nuclear countries stand face to face and cannot settle a vicious sore between them after 70 years, they have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are incapable of doing so.

Because international interests are so deeply embedded in both countries, such interests are clearly at stake. What countries will support India if there is war? What countries will support Pakistan?  Will this really be Russia against the U.S.?

There is a dividing line here in the context of global politics where two very opposing forces are very much at odds. This could prove to be all-out global war. Kashmir would just be the final domino that falls in this madness that causes two international banking cartels to be opposed to one another. It’s about world domination, about which hemisphere of influence has control, and it might be labeled East vs. West. That’s Armageddon in the making.

The bottom line is that Kashmir is an international issue. Instability in Kashmir threatens global peace, particularly when India insists that the whole problem is caused by Pakistani influence and terrorism. That’s a lie.  India knows it, and the whole world knows it.  So why continue the charade?  Because global interests are involved.  It serves the Western agenda to attack Pakistan and limit its influence elsewhere.

Other governments must realize that they must intervene and support self-determination for Kashmir in order to bring some resolution to the problem.

The whole matter of demonstrating whether or not India is committing war crimes and human rights violations is less important than to demonstrate that peace can only come through self-determination. It’s time to secure self-determination first, and then settle other matters later.

Kashmiris can achieve this on their own. As Margaret Mead once said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” But at what price?

There will be fewer lives lost if the international community gets behind it.  The greater the threat to peace in Kashmir, the more urgent it is for the world to sit up, take notice, and start knocking on India’s door.

Kashmir, the Nobel Peace Prize, and Becoming an Ambassador

As some of you may know already, the Global Village Forum and His Excellency Amb Mohammed Khan have chosen to honor me with a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize for my advocacy of Kashmir’s right to self-determination and in opposition to India’s brutal repression of that territory.

I can hardly ignore such an honor, and while I have always eschewed the grandeur of such titles which tend to distinguish and self-glorify one from the hard work that others do, I feel duty bound to honor the Global Village Forum reciprocally. 

I have chosen to add the title Amb (short for ambassador) in honor of the organization I represent to and for the United States.

I have served the Global Village Forum in this capacity for several years in somewhat subdued fashion, without title or fanfare, perhaps because I believe titles must be earned and should not be flung about as though they signify special powers or privileges.  It is the honor that I bring to the organization which should distinguish the title, not the other way around. 

Based in Pakistan but with members from all over the globe, we strive for peace under all circumstances and among all countries by bringing a truthful balance to all international equations. I can only hope that the title will lend itself to my effectiveness in this work in the future.

There are more than 200 nominations every year, and I’m quite sure that there are many more people far more qualified than I to receive the ultimate prize, but I do hope that the nomination will heighten awareness of Kashmir’s cause. That is what is needed most, and i will continue to contribute what I can to that effort. Thank you, Ambassador Khan and the Global Village Forum.