Discussions on several aspects of Barack Obama’s election continue — his racial background as well as his statements. According to the Delhi-based Hindustan Express, a well-known Iranian columnist, Aamer Taheri, has unearthed a “prophecy” by one of the earliest Islamic leaders that apparently says: as the world nears its end the commander of the most powerful army of the world would be a tall black person whose name would have “a clear sign of Hussein”. Dwelling on this and some other observations on Obama’s personality and his views, the editor of the paper, Ahmad Jawed writes: “When the philosophy of clash of civilizations was being propagated all over the world, a fitting reply to this misleading viewpoint and the poisonous thinking was being prepared by higher powers (qudrat ke karkhane mein). And that reply is the personality of Barack Hussein Obama himself in which several different civilisations are breathing simultaneously.”

Rashtriya Sahara, in an editorial (Nov. 7), described Obama’s victory as “bad news for Pakistan,” mainly because of his plan of attack on Al-Qaeda and Taliban camps in Pakistan. Delhi-based daily Milap (Nov. 9) worries: “As it appears, India will not get the importance that it got from the presidentship of George W. Bush by signing the nuclear deal.” Hyderabad-based Rahnuma-e-Deccan on November 7 has no illusions on life after Bush. The paper writes; “ There are many issues on which a majority of countries have a differences with the US. Obama’s viewpoint on these, is harder and more extremist than that of Bush and he is no friend of the Palestinian cause.” The paper says it is foolhardy to expect “Jewish domination of US state policy” to change with Obama.

Consider this headline from the front page anchor in Sahafat (Nov. 13): ‘Hamara “Obama” bhi kisi se kam nahin’ (Our Obama is no less). ‘Our Obama’ here is Rahul Gandhi. “Rahul too, like Obama, is young, both have studied at Harvard. Rahul too, like Obama, has the commitment and courage to fight against adversity, something he has been demonstrating over the last four years,” it points out.

Preach and practice

The strong fatwa against Mumbai-based well-known preacher and Islamic tele-evangelist, Dr. Zakir Naik, by a Mufti of Lucknow, has stirred the pot. He has been charged with supporting Bin Laden, among other things. Urdu newspapers have refrained from making editorial comments, but several opinion pieces have supported the television-savvy preacher. Maqshoodul Hasan Qasmi, in a piece in Hindustan Express (Nov. 12), writes: “He (Dr. Naik) considers the attack on New York’s World Trade Centre a terrorist act. But he cannot say with certainty who was behind it. Do not Muslims and other justice-loving people of the world share the view that no solid proof has come out about Osama Bin Laden’s involvement in that attack?” Maulana Nadeem-ul-Wajedi, in a comprehensive article in Hamara Samaj (Nov. 5), takes on an earlier fatwa from Deoband’s Darul Uloom against Dr. Naik that reportedly said that the preacher is “a ghair muqallid (not believing in the basic tenets of Islam) as he is not even attired in Islamic clothes, so his views are not reliable.” Maulana Al-Wajedi asks if it is proper to take a sensitive religious issue “casually”, without referring to details of the preacher’s speeches and writings.

Jamiat’s conclave

Hailing the initiative of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind for again condemning terrorism, Kolkata and Delhi-based Akhbar-e-Mashriq, in an editorial on Nov. 10, writes: “Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind deserves congratulation for its total endorsement to the fatwa issued, earlier, by Darul Uloom, Deoband, saying that Islam is in no way connected with terrorism and all those who are responsible for terrorist acts leading to loss of life and property of innocent people are not Muslims.” Milap, in an editorial (Nov. 12) writes: “The Hyderabad conclave would indeed get a place in history. But, now there is need to build the edifice of peace and brotherhood on this solid foundation.”

—Compiled by Seema Chishti