Revelations of Former FO Spokesperson Tasnim Aslam regarding the role of INGOs endorse James Peck's claims about convergence of US Foreign Policy & Human Rights.

[1]
How INGOs suspiciously operate in Pakistan | A discussion with ex-civil ... https://t.co/zxQWuCEZVy via @YouTube

James Peck in his book, “Ideal Illusions: How the U.S. Government Co-opted Human Rights” argues that US Foreign Policy and human rights industry is interconnected and is being used as an ideological weapon.

[2]
From the moment when Universal Declaration of Human Rights has been signed in 1948 in response to Nazi atrocities, human rights are being used to extend American global reach.

By condemning Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other human rights groups

[3]
with legal outfits for downplaying economic and social discriminations, Peck reveals that humanitarian interventions in US military adventures in Vietnam, Iraq and other places serve as pretexts for invasions to ‘legalize’ US prerogative of intervention while ignoring

[4]
the illegitimacy of intervention and the violence it causes.

In words of Peck, “The widely heralded rise of human rights is not free of such complications. For the history of human rights in the United States—as a movement, as an impassioned language of good intentions,

[5]
and as an invocation of American idealism—owes far more to the inner ideological needs of Washington’s national security establishment than to any deepening of conscience effected by the human rights movement.

[6]
Thousands of national security documents (from the CIA, the National Security Council, the Pentagon, think tanks, and U.S. government development agencies) reveal how Washington set out after the Vietnam War to craft human rights into a new language of power designed to

[7]
promote American foreign policy. They shed light on the way Washington has shaped this soaring idealism into a potent ideological weapon for ends having little to do with human rights—and everything to do with extending America’s global reach.”

[8]
While addressing ‘Terrorism and the Pathology of American Power’ in ‘Changing the Islamic World’, Peck highlights how, “The George W. Bush administration fused the aims of democratization, human rights, and regime change with a “War on Terror” to create the most formidable

[9]
fighting faith since anticommunism.” Since, “What Washington and human rights groups saw as a commitment to “universal values” Muslims saw as a war against their faith.” Therefore, “Washington’s task was to fashion the “war of ideas” so as to sustain policies

[10]
that it had little intention of changing—a conundrum that inevitably led to contradictory tactical maneuvering and the usual charges of “misperception”.

Peck is of the view that, “Washington was also far more blunt about what it means to handle the “processes of change.”

[11]
“Imagine a large map of the world,” said the chairman of the National Intelligence Council. “Let’s say we stick a pin in every country that had a low per capita income. And another for a high rate of infant mortality. Another for a sizable ‘youth bulge’…

[12]
And another pin to mark an absence of political freedoms and participatory government.” What have you got at the end of this exercise? “A large number of vulnerable states—many in the Muslim world.”

[13]
Peck here includes a comment by a task force, “the United States is not seeking to contain a threatening state/empire, but rather to convert a broad movement within Islamic civilization to accept the value structure of Western modernity—

[14]
an agenda hidden within the official rubric of a ‘War on Terrorism’. Democratization, in short, was a code word for support of “secular moderates linked to us—an admittedly scarce breed in the Arab world.”

[15]
For this purpose, in words of Peck, “Secular business people and middle-class professionals are the “strongholds of opposition to extremism … the first building blocks … that could be the basis of a democratic cadre and an indigenous force for nonviolent change.”

[16]
Policies thus should focus on reaching, sustaining, and building local Muslim “networks” (the precursor to “civil society”), and promoting local NGOs in order to “extend our reach into the core of the societies and help us to find allies who share our passion for wider

[17]
participation in society and the economy with special concern for the inclusion of youth and women.
Hence, “Washington, in short, sought “the development of a new class that could change the political and social balance in these countries” by fashioning an individualist

[18]
ethos into a culturally seductive package. The focus was not on the nation or the civilization or the faith but, rather, on “personal control, choice, and change, personal mobility, meritocracy, individual rights (and particular women’s rights).”
To know more about how foreign development aid is exploited by INGOs for policy interventions in Pakistan's education sector, see this👇
https://t.co/Y70nefGyRb
Has foreign development aid been weaponized?

Are policy interventions due to foreign development aid for education a matter of great concern?

Are INGO's working to achieve strategic objectives?

See this 👇
https://t.co/Zg3X0yXyMf

More from World

"MLs" do support the proletariat of Xinjiang & have the whole time. People like @Tursunali_7 & @GulnarNorthwest (and many others) who show the world the real Xinjiang via their everyday videos.

Shopkeepers like in this video below say

"Pompeo, we Xinjiang people hate you."


Or everyday working people like Zaynura Namatqari, who speak out against vicious & disgusting US lies and accusations about


.@qiaocollective have a brilliant thread of everyday proletarian Uyghurs speaking out against the harassment they face from the US and their paid


'Uyghur proletariat' looks like this:


Not like this: (photo from a pro Islamist separatist protest in Turkey in 2017)

You May Also Like

#தினம்_ஒரு_திருவாசகம்
தொல்லை இரும்பிறவிச் சூழும் தளை நீக்கி
அல்லல் அறுத்து ஆனந்தம் ஆக்கியதே – எல்லை
மருவா நெறியளிக்கும் வாதவூர் எங்கோன்
திருவாசகம் என்னும் தேன்

பொருள்:
1.எப்போது ஆரம்பித்தது என அறியப்படமுடியாத தொலை காலமாக (தொல்லை)

2. இருந்து வரும் (இரும்)


3.பிறவிப் பயணத்திலே ஆழ்த்துகின்ற (பிறவி சூழும்)

4.அறியாமையாகிய இடரை (தளை)

5.அகற்றி (நீக்கி),

6.அதன் விளைவால் சுகதுக்கமெனும் துயரங்கள் விலக (அல்லல் அறுத்து),

7.முழுநிறைவாய்த் தன்னுளே இறைவனை உணர்த்துவதே (ஆனந்த மாக்கியதே),

8.பிறந்து இறக்கும் காலவெளிகளில் (எல்லை)

9.பிணைக்காமல் (மருவா)

10.காக்கும் மெய்யறிவினைத் தருகின்ற (நெறியளிக்கும்),

11.என் தலைவனான மாணிக்க வாசகரின் (வாதவூரெங்கோன்)

12.திருவாசகம் எனும் தேன் (திருவா சகமென்னுந் தேன்)

முதல்வரி: பிறவி என்பது முன்வினை விதையால் முளைப்பதோர் பெருமரம். அந்த ‘முன்வினை’ எங்கு ஆரம்பித்தது எனச் சொல்ல இயலாது. ஆனால் ‘அறியாமை’ ஒன்றே ஆசைக்கும்,, அச்சத்துக்கும் காரணம் என்பதால், அவையே வினைகளை விளைவிப்பன என்பதால், தொடர்ந்து வரும் பிறவிகளுக்கு, ‘அறியாமையே’ காரணம்

அறியாமைக்கு ஆரம்பம் கிடையாது. நமக்கு ஒரு பொருளைப் பற்றிய அறிவு எப்போதிருந்து இல்லை? அதைச் சொல்ல முடியாது. அதனாலேதான் முதலடியில், ஆரம்பமில்லாத அஞ்ஞானத்தை பிறவிகளுக்குக் காரணமாகச் சொல்லியது. ஆனால் அறியாமை, அறிவின் எழுச்சியால், அப்போதே முடிந்து விடும்.
1. Project 1742 (EcoHealth/DTRA)
Risks of bat-borne zoonotic diseases in Western Asia

Duration: 24/10/2018-23 /10/2019

Funding: $71,500
@dgaytandzhieva
https://t.co/680CdD8uug


2. Bat Virus Database
Access to the database is limited only to those scientists participating in our ‘Bats and Coronaviruses’ project
Our intention is to eventually open up this database to the larger scientific community
https://t.co/mPn7b9HM48


3. EcoHealth Alliance & DTRA Asking for Trouble
One Health research project focused on characterizing bat diversity, bat coronavirus diversity and the risk of bat-borne zoonotic disease emergence in the region.
https://t.co/u6aUeWBGEN


4. Phelps, Olival, Epstein, Karesh - EcoHealth/DTRA


5, Methods and Expected Outcomes
(Unexpected Outcome = New Coronavirus Pandemic)