Huber, the top Protestant Bishop in Germany, warned in his Christmas message that the financial markets have not been balanced by real values. According to a German news report, the bishop said the whole economic crisis is because of "a dance round the golden calf." In fact, most Christian religious leaders talked yesterday about the hope of Christmas, which can be an inspiration for those facing economic "gloom." Over the past few weeks, the news stories have really turned the financial crisis into questions of bank managers and executives, who worship money and cannot control their greed. Whether the whole financial crisis facing the world today can really be blamed on greed is irrelevant, the point is that the average person now hears from every corner that the blame goes to "profit-hungry managers." This subsequently leads to a complete lack of trust and an even greater senses of hopelessness. For example, according to the Telegraph, the leader of the Catholic church in England "used his Christmas message to speak about the "breakdown' in trust prompted by the credit crunch." The Pope, besides the interminable plea for peace in the Middle East, also spoke about selfishness and tried to instill hope through his message that the political and economic mess in the world could be improved.

It was surprising to see the pictures coming out of Malmo, Sweden this week. At first I thought the images were from Greece, but in fact similar rioting (though not nearly as serious) has also hit the Swedish city of Malmo after youths, who were squatting in a former Islamic center, clashed with police. The fighting took place on Wednesday and Thursday, and by Friday evening, calm was mostly restored. The local reports say that the unrest started "as a quiet protest linked to the recent closure of an Islamic cultural centre," which was also serving as a mosque. Five people have been arrested.

The closure of the center was simply the will of the owner of the building, who chose not to renew the center's lease and to use the premises for other purposes. Other reports have quoted police officers as saying that the riots were continued by "troublemakers" rather than community members upset by the closure of the mosque. It is amazing though just how many troublemakers there are these days waiting to take advantage of peaceful protests. Either way, the world cannot afford right now for disaffected youths to take advantage of sensitive political issues connected to religion , such as mosque closures.

 On December 15, the Third World Congress of Imams and Rabbis for Peace began its three-day meeting at UNESCO in Paris. Christian leaders also took part in the conference. Previously, the religious leaders had named 2008 as the "year of reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians." The calls for peace in the Middle East were widespread in 2008, although the results have been minimal. President Bush will leave office without having substantially achieved his goals for Israel and Palestine. Overall, the theme of the Congress was "the sacredness of peace" and much of the conference was devoted to the need for commitment from religious leaders to peacebuilding. Now, the Congress hopes to set up a monitoring group to support its initiatives and projects for Judeo-Muslim dialogue. It should hold its first working session in February 2009.

Over the past few days, there have been update reports about the case of the potential forced marriage of a British resident, who returned to her home in Bangladesh.

Dr. Humayra Abedin, a trainee general practitioner, had apparently been imprisoned in her family's home in Dhaka since August. Now, the new Forced Marriage Act in Britain, which came into effect this past month has led to an injunction against any planned marriage for Dr. Abedin. Naturally, with any stories about family life, the details are always confusing and the true story will probably never be known.

The reason I decided to import this news story here is that marriage is generally considered a sacred act in religion. In very religious societies, refusal to engage in the wedding and marriage customs is considered horrifically sinful. By applying the Forced Marriage Act to a mere British resident in Dhaka, the British government is essentially imposing its own cultural views of marriage. On the other hand, there are basic standards, and human rights surely must include the freedom of choice in marriage rather than family and religious obligation.

Although the stories have not delved into the religious practices of Dr. Abedin's family, assuming that she is Muslim, it is hard to imagine that from the time she was forced into the engagement in February until December (ten months) the wedding did not in fact take place. The reports say that she "managed to return to England" but was then tricked into returning to Dhaka in August when told that her mother had fallen ill. From August until December, the family apparently did not succeed in performing the nikah (Muslim marriage rite, which can only last a few minutes if necessary), she was sent to a mental institution, and on receiving the British court order, "Dr. Abedin's father collapsed from shock." In the last four months, it must have become totally clear to the family that Dr. Abedin was not going to marry at all in Bangladesh, but the family were unwilling to let her leave and locked her away.

Whatever actually took place, the UK Forced Marriage Act is apparently "about basic rights" (or so says the lawyer for Dr. Abedin). In essence, the UK law has rescued someone from the traditional concept of a religious marriage in a conservative cultural setting.

picture source of Dr. Abedin

December 10 was the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As usual, the leaders at the UN took the opportunity to remind the world's governments of their obligations and responsibilities to protect the most vulnerable. The Declaration's aim has been to ensure human rights for everyone - regardless of their race, gender, colour, sex, language, religion, or political opinion. Writing this blog has brought home just how many conflicts are based on religious grievances and how often human rights are violated on account of repression of religious minorities. As the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, has said, “For many people, the Universal Declaration remains an unfulfilled promise, as States’ political will to fulfill their obligations lags lamentably behind their pledges.” This has been particularly true with respect to religious minorities and freedom of conscience - as states can base their national identities on religious principles, sometimes leading to excessive intolerance.

Yesterday was the funeral service for the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, Alexy II, who died of a heart attack at age 79. According to RIA, the patriarch is “credited with leading a revival of the Church after the fall of communism.” He officially became patriarch in 1990. As he came to lead the Church before the fall of the Soviet Union, Alexy II was responsible for the religious revival in Russia that came after the fall of Communism and state imposed atheism. For this reason, much of his legacy is actually quite political. RIA, for example, has also pointed out “his open support for fellow orthodox Serbs during the Kosovo conflict” and the AP has discussed his lobby for the “1997 passage of a religion law that places restrictions on the activities of religions other than Orthodoxy, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism.” The aim actually appeared to be that all Russian Christians would be under the control of Moscow and the Orthodox Church. This caused some tensions with the Pope, particularly as the Orthodox Church was concerned about the numbers of conversions to Catholicism. Looking at the current political situation in Russia, the most relevant questions after the passing of Alexy II concern the degree to which the Orthodox Church helped influence extreme Russian nationalism.

Asif Ali Zardari, the President of Pakistan, has replied to the current pressure on his government by reflecting on "the challenge of confronting terrorists." In an editorial printed in the New York Times, Zardari discusses both the global scale of the current war against extremists and the particular price that Pakistan that has had to pay for the world's past exploit of religion. Zardari is referring to the past strategy of "empowering the most fanatic extremists" (Mujahidin in Afghanistan) to combat the Soviets. This exploitation of religion in the past has led to the creation of a new extremist militia (Taliban and al Qaeda) that has their "own dynamic." Zardari makes a simple but excellent point that terrorists are all "connected by ideology," and therefore, they should be "battled collectively." The underlying point of the editorial is that India and Pakistan (as well as the United States) should coordinate their responses and stop all unnecessary accusations. The world should also recognize and respect the massive war, which Pakistan has been undertaking against terrorists. "Nearly 2,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives to terrorism in this year alone, including 1,400 civilians and 600 security personnel."

Today is a very holy day for Muslims around the world. Nearly three million Muslims have gone yesterday to Mount Ararat during the annual hajj pilgrimage, and today is Eid al-Adha. In English, it is called "Feast of the Sacrifice." The majority of pilgrims have been praying for the forgiveness of their sins, but of course, historically , there have also been elements of politics involved for some of the pilgrims. As always, the AP pointed out the "Iranian" element, and how some Iranians have been holding anti-U.S. and Israel "demonstrations" inside their tents. Saudi Arabia has traditionally refused to permit any political demonstrations, but of course, who can prevent people from chanting inside their tents? In the past, political demonstrations have led to hundreds of deaths (1987 for example, when 402 pilgrims died), and so naturally, the Saudis are attempting to make sure that the political side of this mass pilgrimage stays quiet. No matter what a person's religious beliefs, it is inspiring to see so many people gathering together to pray - many of them hoping for world peace.

Religious views, if extremist, can lead to conflict. On the other hand, conflicts can make religions appear extreme , actually tarnishing the faiths themselves. This past week, the horrific images of death and devastation in Mumbai have significantly changed the world's perception of the war on terror. Instead of recognizing the events as truly international in scope, the media has turned the tragedy into a regional conflict that cannot subside , lest "Pakistan" get away with some form of state sponsorship of terror. Regional experts have been saying that Mumbai was India's 9/11. In sum, the ongoing progression of dialogue between India and Pakistan has been damaged because of the faulty need to link the conflict-dynamics behind the attacks on Mumbai and the religion of Islam, which the gunmen supposedly espoused.

I didn't think the political situation could get worse for Pakistan's Muslim population , the generally moderate citizens, who are actively trying to combat their country's own plague of terrorism, but the news reports are actually worsening the situation. The cable news networks are continuously reporting clips of Indian citizens calling for war with Pakistan

War on account of a non-state sponsored terrorist act makes so little sense that news media should be held accountable for repeating the ignorant words of belligerent people. Once again, Muslims (and their leaders) are supposed to come one by one to the world stage and condemn the attacks. As Karin Laub wrote for the Associated Press, "Throughout the Muslim world, the attacks set off soul-searching."

Why is that such a doubtful statement? It may be on account of the fact that attacks have been increasing around the world over the past years, and each devastating and violent act of terrorism cannot possibly lead to new soul-searching. Furthermore, "soul-searching" implies reflection on personal religious choices, which raises questions about whether these terrorist acts should force the majority of peaceful Muslims to redefine their faith. Forcing Muslims to defend their religious views cannot lead to the political results desired by "Western" countries. If the media appears to be forcing moderate Muslims into "soul-searching," the result will be what Maha Azzam has written in International Affairs: The Muslim public will increasingly be divided between "those who condemn such actions and those who view attacks on the United States and Israel as justified and are therefore ambivalent about violence against them."

Actually, what we have seen in the last week is a mass interpretation of the Mumbai attacks as "religious extremism." In fact, if the gunmen were really members of Lashkar-e Taiba, the terrorists acts were far more politically motivated and based on the Kashmir dispute. Instead, if we want to look at a more "religious conflict,' the horrific news was coming from Nigeria this week. After two days of terrible violence, at least 400 people have been killed , Christian and Muslim gangs trying to take complete control of the city of Jos. The New York Times, however, has reported that even this conflict has its basis in other grievances , such as land, political power, and control over government funds. Nevertheless, Jos , a city and regional capital , is "balkanized," and therefore, the underlying causes of the religious intolerance and violence are no longer known to the average person. Instead, they will fight solely on account of the "impression' that there should be retaliation for past wrongs committed by the other community's members. The conclusion: religious extremism may actually be a guise for human nature's psychological need for retribution.