Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Friday, February 20, 2009

Haidar: Bin Laden is not, either, Hiding Out in Shiite Parachinar

Murtaza Haidar shares with IC his letter to the editor of the MIT International Review

[pdf] Gillespie et al. Finding Osama Bin Laden : An application of biogeographic theories and satellite imagery. MIT International Review. Feb 17, 2009.

Dear Editors and founders of the MIT International Review:

Professors Gillespie et al. while writing in MIT International Review have not only identified Parachinar, the town where Osama Bin Laden may have been hiding, but they have also pinpointed the three buildings that they think are likely to be Bin Laden's hideout. Since I am from the Northwest Frontier Province, I find it a little odd that Osama may be hiding in the only Shiite majority town in the entire tribal region of Pakistan.

The geography professors at UCLA may have used spatial analysis to determine the probable hideout of Osama; they certainly overlooked history and anthropology, which would have explained the gory sectarian rivalries between the Shiites of Parachinar and the Sunni supporters of Osama bin Laden. This is yet another example of technical analysis devoid of any understanding of the local socio-cultural and political contexts.

Parachinar is a small town of approximately 20,000 individuals, who are almost exclusively Shiites and belong to Turi and Bangash tribes. The Sunni tribesmen from North Waziristan agency along with other militants from Arab countries and the Caucasus have been attacking the Shiites over the past two years, which has resulted in the death of hundreds of Shiites. In addition, since the Sunni tribesmen control the ground access to Parachinar from Peshawar, the supply of food, medicines, and other necessities to Parachinar have been interrupted for months, forcing the doctors to operate without anesthesia. The power and water supply, which have been restored only recently, also remained suspended.

I find it hard to believe that after having hundreds, if not thousands, of Shiites murdered by the followers of Osama bin Laden, the Shiites of Parachinar would like to aid and abet Osama bin Laden.

It is sad to see that the press in North America has largely ignored this tragedy that has been unfolding in Parachinar over the past two years. It took faculty and students from UCLA to put Parachinar on the map, but only for the wrong reasons.

Professors Gillespie et al. assert that "One of the most important political questions of our time is: Where is Osama Bin Laden?" Even when the crisis in Darfur has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians; the relentless bombing by American drones and the fighting in the Pakistan’s tribal areas has forced half a million civilians to live in deplorable conditions in refugee camps; and the hunger and disease faced daily by the global poor, the authors still believe that locating Osama is “one of the most important political questions of our time.” Even if Osama Bin Laden is found, what answers could he provide that would make the world become a better place?

Lastly, I am concerned that if the UCLA professors are taken seriously by the trigger-happy NATO forces, who certainly lack ground intelligence in the tribal areas and cannot tell friend from foe, the Shiites of Parachinar may have to fend off bombs dropped from American drones, while they are fighting for their survival against the Taleban on the ground.


Sincerely,

Murtaza Haider
Ryerson University

End/ (Not Continued)

6 Comments:

At 8:05 AM, Blogger Don Thieme said...

Professor Gillespie exemplifies a sterile and counterproductive "positivist" trend in geography and other historical sciences. Quantification and deductive modeling only succeed where the parameters for a phenomenon are well understood. Human social, political, and spatial arrangements have many dimensions which will always have to be understood through qualitative methods.

 
At 8:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks Murtaza,nice to find someone from Pakistan in the study circles and that too with a considerate heart and rational brain.

agree 100%, bin laden can't atleast be in parachinar, and then as you said, what difference does it make if he is?

 
At 11:13 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Professor Cole: Thank you for this post. Just because an armed US drone-craft targets its payload (like the suicide bombers you frequently describe)and kills some people does not mean it hit the people its controller wished, or that the act is in any way justified. Public skepticism about the accuracy of the military's intelligence is far too weak. And of course there is no vestige of "innocent until proven guilty" or any kind of trial, the fundamentals of what supposedly set American governance apart. The red flag of terrorism waved before an unskeptical people has evaporated international borders, repeatedly reinforcing the message from America to the world that we will kill whom we wish, with no meaningful review or question. That this happened under Bush is no surprise, but its continuance under Obama is disgusting, and is rapidly wasting the "capital" for real change that he brought with him into office.

 
At 3:53 PM, Blogger George said...

Good job Juan Cole, you may have saved some of these peoples lives as individual structures were identified based on ceiling height. I am glad they published first before dropping bombs.

 
At 3:38 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

Dr. Thieme’s opinion regarding the MIT International Review paper by the UCLA professors human spatial distribution being better understood on qualitative terms was spot on. That was my initial reaction to the paper although my read of it was from a biogeography perspective. I see the problem with using island biogeography theory to explain the complexities of human behavior as being identical to using island biogeography in order to explain the distribution of plants on islands. No generalized theory works well to explain the myriad of conditions that account for the presence or absence of plants in a given location. For this very reason, many plant geographers working on islands prefer an idiographic approach to a nomothetic one.

Besides, you don’t need electricity to perform dialysis.

 
At 2:01 PM, Blogger Joseph said...

It is worth noting that this exercise in spatial analysis was not published in a geography journal. By and large, geographers have avoided such spatially-deterministic methods.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home