[sacw] sacw dispatch #1 (23-24 Nov.99)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #1
23-24 November 1999
------------------------------------
#1. The Nuclear Enigma
#2. Merchants of Death celebrate as India goes Arms Shopping
#2. Rebirth of Indo Bangladesh border train line
#3. Broadcasting prejudice in India
#4. Filming India's sex secrets
#5. Festival of South Asian Documentary Films in New York
-------------------------------------
#1.
South China Morning Post Internet Edition
Tuesday, November 23, 1999

THE NUCLEAR ENIGMA
by Jonathan Power

The West has gone uncannily calm about last month's military take-over in
nuclear-armed Pakistan. Could it be through embarrassment that it hasn't
delivered on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, an essential ingredient in the
grand bargain of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty that states that the
old established nuclear powers will make significant progress in
disarmament in return for the rest of the world-95 per cent of it in fact
-abjuring manufacture of their own nuclear weapons?

Or is it just carelessness that takes its cue from US President Bill
Clinton's lack of conviction on the urgent necessity for nuclear
disarmament?

It is a quite extraordinary silence. Nowhere else in the world does the
military-so blatantly at least-have its finger directly on the nuclear
trigger.

There has always been, right through the darkest days of the Cold War, the
buffer of civilian authority. Even when the Soviet Union was overthrown and
the newborn Russian federation fell heir to its nuclear arsenal, and for
the first time in history the nuclear baton was passed, it was done in a
careful and responsible manner from civilian to civilian.

Or could it be perhaps that the West knows that in practice civilian
control has never been quite what it was made out to be?

The so-called sophisticated civilian-headed command and control system,
wrapped up in the mystique of "deterrence", that was supposed to work by
making sure by mutual fright that an order to press the button would never
be given, has been all along only a half-baked story meant more to reassure
an anxious public than to reflect reality.

In the early 1970s Bruce Blair, now a senior fellow at the Brookings
Institution in America, was a US Air Force launch control officer for
Minutemen nuclear missiles. He observed that there was a profound
discrepancy between the drills he was rehearsing and the publicly declared
policies of the government. Deterrence was the public policy and this was
supposed to mean the US armoury was capable of surviving a Soviet attack
and then retaliating.

Mr Blair realised how rarely he was asked to drill for such an
eventuality. The drill was to fire even though no Soviet attack had yet
occurred, either launching the missiles for a pre-emptive strike or else on
receiving a warning that Soviet missiles had been launched.

Once demobbed Mr Blair went on to become what The Washington Post has
described as America's "leading expert on nuclear command and control".

His later research deepened his earlier conviction that the deterrence
theory was severely holed, below the water line. The command and control
apparatus was so vulnerable to being decapitated by a nuclear strike that
it was very doubtful in practice if the United States could deliver a
single, prompt, retaliatory attack.

Indeed, this is why his military superiors had insisted on the training
and drilling they gave. The emphasis on being prepared to launch on
warning, a dangerous, hair-trigger posture, was at least a practical and
doable one.

Of course, this pressed decision-making down to minutes-for the president
about three. Mr Blair's later work showed that the Soviet president was in
a similar predicament. Moreover, since the end of the Cold War the
situation has worsened, owing to the increasing accuracy of the missiles,
not to say the simultaneous deterioration of the Russian radar and other
detection and warning devices.

General George Lee Butler, who until 1994 was the military officer in
charge of all US nuclear weapons, has taken the public argument a stage
further. Deterrence, he now says, "worked best when we needed it least".

In moments of calm it seemed to produce equilibrium and equanimity. But
"in moments of deep crisis it became irrelevant". He observes that during
the Cuban missile crisis in 1962 there was no talk of deterrence during
those critical 13 days. Both sides realised deterrence had failed. They
were on a collision course, a countdown to nuclear war.

"What you had was two small groups of men in two small rooms groping
frantically in the intellectual fog in the dark, to deal with a crisis that
had spun out of control". If deterrence really worked, rational men would
not have allowed the situation to get so close to the danger point. One
truth always overlooked by Western proponents of deterrence was that the
Soviets never believed in it; they thought a nuclear war was winnable.

Robert McNamara, who as US Secretary of Defence was at the epicentre of
the Cuban missile crisis, has long said, "We came within a hair's breadth
of war". Nuclear deterrence, Mr McNamara argues, is simply too dangerous.
"It is very, very risky. Even a low probability of catastrophe is a high
risk." And we now know not just the inner details of the Cuban missile
crisis but how, at least a half dozen times, American nuclear missiles were
nearly fired because of misinformation, insubordination or accident.

The fact is, as these men, intimate with the chain of command, know, the
whole system was-and still is-on a dangerous hair-trigger, with a president
or prime minister's ability to override it extremely circumscribed. This is
why Mr McNamara was moved to tell both presidents Kennedy and Johnson,
"Don't follow Nato policy. I don't care what happens, if the Soviet Warsaw
Pact is, in fact, overrunning West Germany, don't launch nuclear weapons."

This brings us back to Pakistan. Are Mr Clinton, British Prime Minister
Tony Blair and French President Jacques Chirac quiet because although they
know the tinder that lies between India and Pakistan is easily combustible,
it is, in reality, a no more dangerous situation than when there was a
civilian government in power?

Yes, India and Pakistan are on a hair-trigger and there is a real danger
of a nuclear war, but the civilian buffer zone was so thin anyway it would
only be a useless pretence if more fuss were made now than a couple of
months ago.

If India and Pakistan are playing a dangerous game with nuclear matches
then so indeed are the US, Russia, Britain, China and France. With two more
actors on the nuclear stage the probability of accident or miscalculation
is now raised a few more degrees.

In all likelihood, someone, somewhere will one day give the order to fire.
We live with that. Why?

( Jonathan Power is an international commentator based in London.)
-----------------------
#2.
BBC News
Wednesday, November 17, 1999 Published at 17:30 GMT
World: South Asia

INDIA GOES ARMS SHOPPING
By Defence Analyst Rahul Bedi

India has embarked on a big arms buying spree after the conflict during the
summer with Pakistani-backed forces in the disputed state of Kashmir.

It has bought a variety of military hardware and ordnance and is
negotiating with overseas suppliers for additional equipment to modernise
and upgrade its fighting capabilities at tremendous cost.

The army wants to modernise its equipmentThe Indian army has demanded an
extra budgetary allocation of around 60bn Rupees ($1.42bn) from the
government to acquire tanks, howitzers and underground sensors for enhanced
operational preparedness.

It is also negotiating to acquire hugely expensive unmanned aerial
vehicles, sophisticated ordnance, winter clothing and radio sets to
modernise itself.

Air and naval upgrade

The air force has invited quotations from British Aerospace for around 48
Hawk advanced jet trainers (AJTs) to bring down its accident rate-one of
the world's highest.

The chief of air staff, Air Chief Marshal A Y Tipnis, declared recently
that the Hawks, whose induction had been delayed by over a decade, would be
decided upon by the end of 1999 to improve the air force's safety record.

185 aircraft have been lost in accidentsOfficial sources said around 60bn
Rupees ($1.42bn) had been sanctioned for the trainers.

The IAF has lost around nearly 85 pilots and around 185 aircraft in
accidents since 1991 including MiG-21 variants, MiG-23 BNs, MiG-27s and at
least one French Mirage 2000 and two MiG-29s.

The Indian Navy, meanwhile, has also finalised technical details on
refitting Admiral Gorshkov, the 44,500 tonne aircraft carrier, before the
price negotiations for its overhaul and modifications begin later this
year.

Admiral Gorshkov, which Russia has offered to India for the cost of its
refit, will replace INS Vikrant, the carrier that retired over two years
ago.

The cost of around 20 MiG-29 fighters for the carriers' air group would
cost an additional $1 to $2 bn.

More tanks

The army, meanwhile, is buying around 200 T-90 tanks from Russia for around
$2.4m each for deployment in offensive formations against Pakistan in the
western desert region of Rajasthan and neighbouring Punjab state.

T-90 tanks will be deployed along the border with PakistanMilitary sources
said the decision for the outright purchase of T-90 tanks to equip four to
five armoured regiments by next year was to counter the large number of
T-80s Pakistan had acquired recently from Ukraine.

The possibility of locally making T-90s under licence at the Heavy Vehicles
=46actory at Avadi in the south was also under "consideration".

Also under evaluation are seven overseas companies to uniformly equip the
army's 200-odd artillery regiments with around 3,000-4,000 155 mm/52
howitzers over the next two decades through outright purchase and local,
licensed manufacture.

The entire project is estimated to cost over 100bn Rupees ($2.3bn).

More than $2bn will be spent on howitzersThe Ministry of Defence recently
signed a contract worth 1.5bn Rupees to buy 1000 Russian laser-guided 155mm
Krasnopol-M rounds and 10 laser finders-or around 1.4m Rupees per shell-to
give the artillery an edge in precision targeting and to reduce operational
costs.

India has also signed a contract with Bulgaria worth $4.5m for 3,600 under
barrel grenade launchers and the same number of AK-47 assault rifles on
which they will be mounted.
-----------------------
#3.
South China Morning Post Internet Edition
Tuesday, November 23, 1999
South Asia Today

REBIRTH OF BORDER TRAIN LINE MAY HERALD NEW ERA OF RAIL LINKS
by Arshad Mahmud (in Dhaka)

Thousands of Bangladesh's have hailed the relaunch of a century-old train
service.

The 110km-long service between the southern city of Khulna and the border
town of Benapole is reopening today, nearly 35 years after it was shut due
to the 1965 war between India and Pakistan. Reopening the line is the most
significant step towards restoring direct rail links with Calcutta.

Disruption of the popular, cheap service led to the rupture of an historic
bond between the people of both Bengals who could still travel back and
forth without hindrance, despite being separated by the partition of
British India in 1947.

The service was partly resumed in 1973 after former East Pakistan seceded
to become independent Bangladesh in 1971 when a goods train ran briefly
between Jessore and Benapole.

Citing economic reasons, Bangladesh railway authorities suspended the
service a few months later.

"It won't be too long before peoples of both countries will again be able
to enjoy uninterrupted rail travel," said a senior railway official.

A goods train service is expected to begin next month, he said, with a
full service in the new year. "But final restoration of the passenger
service to Calcutta depends on the political masters," the official said.

At official level there appears to be no problem. Indian Railway Minister
Mamata Banerjee, who is a Bengali, has publicly expressed interest in
reviving the service.

But, not surprisingly, the public pronouncement of an Indian minister on
the matter has evoked criticism from the anti-India lobby in Dhaka.

A group of Islamic fundamentalists has already expressed concern at what
they described as a "fresh Indian design" to subjugate Bangladesh.

A Communication Ministry official said he believed the fundamentalists'
opposition to the rail-link would be overshadowed by popular demand.

The reconstruction of the abandoned route and station buildings from
Jessore to Benapole cost 240 million taka (HK$37.8 million).

Published in the South China Morning Post. Copyright =A9 1999. All rights
reserved. ---------------------------
#3.
The Asian Age
Tuesday 23rd November 1999=20

BROADCASTING PREJUDICE

The political class in general and the government of the day in
particular, whatever the latter's complexion may be, usually finds it
irresistible to fashion the media in its own mirror image. While the so
called independent media has in recent times veered increasingly towards
the saffron view of things, the benighted official media has no chance of
being really autonomous of motivated influences. Its history provides
striking testimony to much abuse at the hands of the reigning political
masters. In the context, it is hardly a surprise that the Vajpayee-led
government is all set to reconstitute the Prasar Bharati Board in
consonance with the Bharatiya Janata Party's known aversion to anyone to
the Left of the ideological spectrum. When the board was originally
constituted under the stewardship of Mr S.S. Gill, the then information
and broadcasting minister S. Jaipal Reddy was accused by the BJP of
forming an exclusive club inimical to the forces of Hindutva. Mr Gill
decided to strike a defiant attitude, but not to much avail-one of the
most notable things the BJP-led coalition did in its initial avatar was to
remove him from his high profile post. Veteran journalist and confirmed
Left-leaning commentator Nikhil Chakravartty, another Jaipal Reddy
appointee to the board, passed away even as the whole concept which led to
the creation of the board was coming under severe stress. The board seemed
jinxed because most of its original members were unwilling to play the
role which the BJP wanted of them. Mr Pramod Mahajan had his own ideas
about what the official media, its electronic component in particular,
should do. His successor, the equally voluble and articulate Arun Jaitley,
is no different. He also wants the media to conform. While the mantra of
corporatisation continues to provide the element of continuity to Mr
Jaitley's projections vis-=E0-vis Prasar Bharati, the revamping of the boar=
d
is obviously dictated by the need to replace such "uncomfortable"
eminences like historian Romila Thapar and litterateur Rajendra Yadav with
arguably more "politically correct" choices. As it happens, neither Dr
Thapar nor Mr Yadav are hard ideologues, nor are they in any way political
partisans. They are informed by a liberal-Left ideological orientation
which eschews party-specific dogma. Their contribution to their chosen
calling has been both central and exceptional. While Dr Thapar's
internationally acclaimed forays into ancient and early medieval Indian
history make her an ideal choice for an advisory role on the board, Mr
Yadav's contribution to the "new" approach to the Hindi short story and
several other notable achievements make him something of a legendary
figure in his own lifetime. But all this seems not very consequential to
the saffron brigade, which, through the ministries of human resource
development and I&B, wants to keep a tight rein on how India should think
and believe. This thought police has been in action for a long time,
especially its Mumbai variant. But it is perhaps for the first time that
they have got the power to reorient dominant thought. They may not
succeed, but that they will try their best to do so goes without saying.
In the name of autonomy, the media may get the tyranny of hegemony
instead; of those few who are in a great hurry to unleash their "cultural"
agendas. It is a moot point whether the BJP's coalition partners will
quietly concur with the ethos of the "new" media order being promised by
Mr Arun Jaitley, since many of them claim to be supporters of as much
cultural pluralism that federal India can offer them.
----------------------------
#4.
BBC News
=46riday, November 19, 1999 Published at 16:01 GMT
World: South Asia

=46ILMING INDIA'S SEX SECRETS
Split Wide Open features the collision between East and West

By BBC News Online's Jatinder Sidhu

A new film which aims to lift the lid on the secret sexual activity of
Indians could re-ignite the controversy over portrayals of Indian family
life following films like Fire and Kama Sutra.

Director of Split Wide Open, Dev Benegal: "The film is dark but about
hope"Split Wide Open-by Delhi-born director Dev Benegal-centres on a TV
programme which encourages people to talk openly about their "subversive
sexuality".

Benegal explains that people appear on the show in complete anonymity and
recount shocking tales of infidelity, incest, love triangles and systematic
rape.

All the stories in the film are based on real letters which appeared in
newspaper agony columns.

Benegal recalls coming across the letters: "The explicit detail in the huge
volume of letters and the problems people were facing was overwhelming".

One of the few steamy scenes in the filmAmongst these stories, we see the
abduction of a Bombay street-girl and her sexual abuse by a rich widower.
Benegal describes first hearing the story of the paedophile:

"A man picks up a beggar child, has sex with her and then asks her to
leave. But she refuses to leave asking instead that he allow her to be his
wife or cook, or cleaner. His letter asks: What do I do now? I'm stuck.'"

The film is about the loss of innocence of a child as well as the loss of
innocence of a country as it hurtles towards a new millennium", says the
director.

"It's about what happens when one billion Indians start talking about sex."

The film, which took four years to make, was praised by no less a body
than the Indian board of film censors. "We were worried that it would be
banned by the censors", explains Benegal.

The film explores the sexual underbelly of Bombay"We were quite taken aback
when they said were quite moved and how important it was for people across
the country to see this movie". They even gave the producers advice on how
best to distribute it.

The film has shown at several film festivals around the world including
Tokyo, Toronto, Venice and most recently London.

Some of these stories are funny-the writers had originally concentrated on
the more unlikely and bizarre letters-but others are horrifying.

All of them challenge the Bollywood cinema image and its diet of youthful
romance, family values, and sex within marriage.

Children's rights?

As children's welfare organisations worldwide mark the 10th anniversary of
the UN convention on the rights of the child, Benegal takes aim: "The real
India is not a nostalgic image fabricated by Bollywood".

"40% of child sexual abuse is happening within the family. It's entered
into everyday life. It could be happening next door."

Like the child in the letter from the paedophile, the raped child in the
film is not desperate to flee the clutches of her abuser. Benegal comments
on the extraordinary decision made by the girl.

"She has lived on the streets all her life and when she finds herself in
an apartment with a TV and a video she doesn't want to leave-that's
shocking."

</olmedia/525000/audio/_527055_swo_daughter.ramClick here to listen to a
clip: 'The daughter's confession' played by Ayesha Dharker"How does she
distinguish between abuse, shelter, and comfort?" asks Benegal. It brings
the responsibility for protecting and being concerned about children back
to society as a whole.

The Indian children's welfare group Cry provides the shocking statistics.
A third of all girls born in India do not survive to see their 15th
birthday. A sixth of all girl children die as a result of gender
discrimination.

Of the estimated three million street children, girls are much more
vulnerable than boys. Many are forced into prostitution from an early age.
Most of these children will not come to terms with the abuse until later in
life.
-------------------------
#5.

The Asian/P/A Studies Program and Institute, The Department of Cinema
Studies, The Draper Program in Humanities and Social Thought, The Hagop
Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies, and The Center for Media,
Culture & History at New York Univesity

are proud to sponsor

SCREENING IDENTITIES A FESTIVAL OF RECENT SOUTH ASIAN DOCUMENTARY FILMS

December 9 & 10 Kriser Screening Room Department of Anthropology 25 Waverly
Place

December 9, 6-9 pm: Reproducing Religious Nationalism The Boy in the Branch
by Lalit Vachani Fishers of Men by Ranjan Kamath & Padmavathi Rao
Discussants: Arvind Rajagopal (NYU) & Meg McLagan (NYU)

December 10, 12-3 pm: Gendered Modernities When Mother Comes Home for
Christmas by Nilita Vachani Grohonkal (Eclipse) by Ain-O-Shalish Kendra
Discussants: Lila Abu-Lughod (NYU) & Dina Siddiqi (Bryn Mawr)

December 10, 4-7 pm: Youth and the Politics of Identity Gimme Somethin' to
Dance to! by Tejaswini Ganti Desi Dub by Swati Khurana & Leith Gill Murgai
Mutiny: Asians Storm British Music(selections from the work-in-progress) by
Vivek Renjen Bald In the Eye of the Fish by Raqs Media Collective
Discussants: May Joseph (NYU) & Levant Soysal (NYU)

Seating is limited. Please RSVP to 998-3759

__________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH is an informal, independent &
non-profit citizens wire service run by South Asia Citizens Web
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since1996.