By Our Correspondent

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---

WASHINGTON, Oct 13: Pakistani professor Adil Najam, now teaching at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, US, is amongst the team of scientists and experts in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that shares the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with former US Vice President Al Gore.

The 2007 Peace Prize, announced in Stockholm, Sweden, on Friday includes a gold medal and $1.5 million, is to be shared between Al Gore and the IPCC for
enhancing the understanding of the science of climate change. The IPCC is a panel of the world's most eminent and leading scientists working on global
warming and it produces its scientific assessment every 4-5 years.

These assessments, especially the most recent one, have been influential in moving global climate policy, including changes in US and other country positions on the subject.

Prof Adil Najam has served as an expert on this prestigious panel for eight years, and as a Convening Lead Author for its most recent report. Along with
other scientists on the panel he helped shape the findings of the IPCC, especially on issues related sustainable development and other developing country interests.

Dr Adil Najam holds a doctorate and two Masters degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a specialisation in negotiation from Harvard Law School, and an engineering degree from UET, Lahore.

He has taught at MIT, Boston University, University of Massachusetts and currently at Tufts University. He is author of more than a dozen books

Dr. Najam has also started a blog

Wow , atlast a good news for pakistan and pakistanis

thanx for sharing IM.

yeah ... that's really good news ..

great news allah ka sukkar hai bohat bohat esee baat pay zaberdast taleeyaan

Great news.............

Dr. Najam yaqeenan aik qaabil faazil scientist haiN. science o tahqeeq ki field maiN onki khidmaat yaqeenan tahseen k qabil haiN......... magar ... a big magar maiN being a pakistani n muslim maiN kiyouN 'proud' feel karouN.

kia woh amreeki shaharyat k haamil naheeN ... kia onhouN nay apni qaabliat say amerika aur sirf amerika ko (jo pakistan / alamay islam ka khola dushman hai) faida nahi pahonchayaa ??? ... onki qaabliat say pakistan / aalamay islam ko koi faida howaa??? agar nahi to phir sanu ki.... dunya maiN bahoot say log / scientist haiN jinki khidmaat / qaabliat k baaes onsay faidah othanay walay mulkouN nay onhaiN awards say nawaza... Dr. Najam bhi onhi maiN say aik haiN ... per sanu ki.

Abu Adnan bhai, DUniya k kisi konay mein koi b Pakistani agar koi achha kaam karay ga to wo hamaray liye khushi aur mulk k liye izzat ka bais ho ga, chahay wo shakhs pakistan se bahir reh kar hi apni job ya research karta ho, Poori duniya mein mulk ka image behtar hota hy aur jab bhi kaha jaye ga k ye shakhs pakistani hy to chahay wo usa mein ho ya england mein yakeenan ek pakistani ka sir fakhar se zruru buland ho ga

be positive

agar koi (saabiq /so called) pakistani, pakistani hotay howay bhi pakistan ki bajaye pak-dushman mulk ki falaah o bahbood k liyeh kaam karay to sanu ki.

Jo loag pakistan se bahir jatay hyn wo Pakistani hi rehtay hyn

AA bhai

yeah kahan likha hey ke wo amreeki shahriat ke hamil hain??? please give me some refernce

kya ham sab amriki technology istamal nahin kertey????,,,, agar aap ko yeah aitraz hey tu sab se pahley tamam amriki technology istamal ker daina cho daini chahiye

Dr. Kalam tu Pakistan aye they,,, magar ham ne unki qadar na ki,,,,

aap unkey blog pe ja ke daikh lain,,,, shaid unkey andar ham logon se ziada Pakistan ke liya dard mahsoos karain aap

!!۔ ڈاکٹر عدیل نجم کا ایک انٹرویو پیش خدمت ھے اس سے میں بہت متاثر ھوا ھوں



For the record Adil Najam, associate professor of international negotiation and diplomacy at Tufts
Pakistan’s pivotal momentMusharraf clampdown raises opposition voices
INTERVIEW. Would your lawyer fight for your civil rights if it meant being beaten in the streets?

Hundreds of Pakistani lawyers have been doing just that, defying the emergency powers declared by Pakistan’s President, Gen. Perves Musharraf, to protest the dismissal of Supreme Court judges and the suspension of Pakistan’s constitution.


Musharraf’s move came just as the high court was slated to rule on the constitutional merit of the military leader’s presidency, with the decision widely suspected to go against Musharraf and result in new elections. Though such a scenario was believed to be a factor in a deal Musharraf made with former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto that allowed for her return from self-imposed exile, professor Adil Najam of Tufts University’s Fletcher School says increased frustration by the lawyers and other pro-democracy forces have only increased Musharraf’s desire for control.

Why was it necessary for Musharraf to suspend Pakistan’s constitution in response to what he calls “judicial activism”?

Some time back, Musharraf had removed Pakistan’s chief justice. This led to a major people’s movement and the chief justice was reinstated. There is now a case in the Supreme Court which challenges whether Gen. Musharraf can continue to be president because he is also a military general. That is unconstitutional. The court was supposed to give its verdict on Monday and the likelihood was that it would have ruled against Musharraf. That is why he made the declaration on Saturday.

What is the mood like on the streets of Pakistan’s cities now?

I was in Pakistan last week, and two things have happened. If you look at the political chessboard, there are two pro-democracy forces. One is the lawyers’ movement, which is calling for the restoration of justice and democracy, and they’re being beaten up in the streets. The other is the independent media. The emergency clamped down on the independent channels: They’re off the air and people are watching them on the internet and so forth. The regime then removed a bunch of judges, who were going to make this decision against Musharraf, and replaced them with Musharraf’s own people.

If Musharraf was just going to declare a state of emergency anyway, why bring Benazir Bhutto back, make the deal with her to step down as general and tell Pakistanis he’s going to run for president again? If he’s going to act like a strongman, why didn’t he just be the strongman?
I think a lot of Pakistanis are confused about the same thing. It crept up. When he first took power, he wasn’t really the strongman. In the last year, there’s been a ratcheting up of the strongman tactics. Each move he makes is a more stringent and more difficult move. I think what has happened is that it is not Gen. Mush-arraf who has changed, but the appetite and patience of the people of the country that has changed. At first, people were willing to give him a chance be-cause they were afraid of other politicians and thought, “Well, he seems sincere, so let’s give him a chance.” Over the last seven years, that patience has run out, and people have been demanding more freedom. In order to suppress that, he has had to take more draconian steps.

Is the U.S. government feeling pressure to abandon its investment in Musharraf?

I don’t know if the U.S. government is feeling the pressure or not, but the people on the streets of Pakistan are tired of the U.S. government interfering. I think, largely, you used the right term: The U.S. government has made an investment in Musharraf, and I think that’s where the U.S. government went wrong. Instead of making an investment in Pakistan or in democracy in Pakistan, they made an investment in this one person. He’s going to be our client, he’s going to be our manager for this “pesky country.” As long as the U.S. goes on that assumption, no matter who they invest in, it is going to fail. If the U.S. government tomorrow makes an investment in Benazir Bhutto, it will fail for the exact same reasons. They can make an investment in me; it will fail for the same reasons because you have to make an investment in the country and the idea of democracy. I think that explains a lot of the unpopularity of the U.S. government, not only in Pakistan but in many other countries. The charge against the U.S. is one of hypocrisy, that we talk big on democracy but deliver unflinching support from one dictator to another.

What are the lessons the U.S. should take from these recent events in Pakistan?

Maybe it should look more carefully at Pakistan, and, if it did, it wouldn’t just see militants. It would actually see 160 million people, most of whom are moderate and most of whom don’t want the extremists. I think the lesson to be learned is that we in the U.S. should be more confident in our own core values. In Pakistan, at this moment, the general sense is that the real roadblocks to democracy are two: Gen. Musharraf and the United States, which is a really tragic statement.
The real lesson is that world politics is not a board game, that you shouldn’t go around looking for people to best manage countries but to promote democracy for its own sake.


Do extremists factor into this discussion at all?

One of the biggest mistakes we’ve made, and Gen. Musharraf has encouraged us to do this, is to confuse the issue of terrorism with the issue of democracy. The question he wants you to ask is, “What happens if he’s not there and some mad mullah gets a hold of the nukes?” He’s been very successful in making that the question we are interested in, because, as soon as he asks that question, we think “He’s bad, but at least we know him.” In some ways, this question has confused the real issue of our commitment to democracy.

We’ve seen this type of scenario unfold two ways in the last 20 years: Tiananmen Square and Eastern Europe. Which way will this go?

I hope it goes Eastern Europe, but even in Tiananmen Square, you can delay the public will and suppress the public will, but you cannot kill the public will. Gen. Musharraf can win time, but he cannot win victory. The question is whether the will of the people of Pakistan will break first, or whether the patience of the international community will break first.


Has the reappearance of former Prime Minister Bhutto only exacerbated the
situation in Pakistan?

She was considered to be very corrupt, and lots of people have concerns. The tragedy with Benazir Bhutto is that, because her return has been engineered through this deal with Gen. Musharraf and the U.S., she has lost a lot more credibility in the country. The good news is that no one can doubt at this point that the people of Pakistan want democracy. They’re protesting in the streets and getting beaten up — regular people, lawyers and students. In many ways it is akin to the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. There is an honest, democratic, moderate, liberal core to the country at wants democracy. The question is whether we side with them or with those who want short-sighted, dictatorial rule.

Is there any resolution in sight?

I don’t think there is a magic solution to this. There is a reason countries like to have elections every four years and have a restriction of two terms.

People get tired, people want to have a say. He’s been in power for seven years and, in some ways hasn’t been able to deliver what people have wanted and they want change. In an autocratic system, when there is no mechanism for change, the streets become the only mechanism. The great thing about democracy is that it allows an unpopular ruler to leave office with some dignity. It allows people to give someone else a chance, not on the certainty that the other person will do a better job, but on the hope that they just might.



Jason Notte

jahan b jis b country myn pakistanis koi achha kaam kr rhe hyn we should encourage it

wOw... thts a gr8 newz!

very glad tO hear tht... thnX 4 sharing

nice to hear that

A big pride for Pakistan, koi pakistani dunya k kisi b kone mein rahey wo pakistani hi kehlae ga.

Gud for Pakistan reputation

Ji, aap ki baat drust hai ke ager Dr. Najam ki wajha se 'insaniyat' ko koi faida hoa hai to bhi woh humarey liye qabil-e-qadar haiN aur un ki tahseen ki jani chaiye...

Aallah karey ke unki citzenship abhi tek Pakistan ki ho aur kisi waqt wo wapis apney watan aa ker , mulk ko faida poohnchaiN !