[sacw] sacw dispatch (23 Dec.99)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch
23 December 1999
__________________________
#1. India: Darning a Patchwork Dream
#2. Report of National Advisory Council on South Asian Affairs Meeting
#3. India Pak Arms Race & Militarisation Watch No.7
__________________________

#1.
Outlook
27 December 1999

http://www.outlookindia.com/19991227/opinionhasan.htm

Nationalism
India: Darning a Patchwork Dream

By Mushirul Hasan

Irish Portal, a British civil servant, observed in the early 1940s, "you
must never take land away from people. People=92s land has a mystique. You
can go and possibly order them about for a bit and introduce some new ideas
and possibly dragoon an alien race into attitudes that are not quite
familiar to them." But, he added, "you must go away and die in Cheltenham."
That is exactly what the British did on August 15, 1947.

The new nationalism comes into play only when India is at war with
Pakistan. Otherwise, it lies dormant.

On that auspicious day began India=92s tryst with destiny and the quest for =
a
new order. Doubtless, it was a tall order for a post-colonial country to
meet the challenges of governance and nation-building. Yet the silver
lining was that the legacy of nationalism was alive and kicking in a
country bruised and fragmented by colonialism and the horrors of Partition.
What is noteworthy is that nationalism in India and China generated not
only powerful anti-colonial sentiments but also provided a blueprint for
welding an otherwise divided and disparate country into a nation-state.

The chequered path of Indian nationalism, though marred by the estrangement
of many Muslims, had its moments of glory. The degree to which the elites
and the subalterns contributed to its making is debatable. But what is
perhaps less contentious is that the idea of nationalism-howsoever fuzzy,
shifting and ambiguous-fired popular imagination at several defining
moments in the 20th century. In 1920, for instance, when the Mahatma=92s
spectacular mass mobilisation strategies paid off while his predecessors in
the Congress were made to look silly. Again, when the same frail man
marched from his Sabarmati Ashram with 78 followers to the shores of Dandi.
This was nationalism, pure and simple, on the move.

In =9151, Nehru said there was absolutely no reason why India=92s infinite
variety should be regimented in line with a single pattern.

The point is not to valourise Gandhi but to make sense of his political
credo. Equally, the point is not to celebrate the Congress brand of
nationalism but to delineate its characteristics. I hasten to add that the
ambiguities of Indian nationalism were its greatest strength. Whether you
invoke Gandhi, Nehru, Patel or Azad, nationalism did lend itself to several
different meanings. This is not something to frown upon, because their
discourses were, after all, anti-colonial in their essence. The evolution
of institutional pluralism, democracy and political stability was not
contingent on a monolithic interpretation of nationalism.

In free India, the finest hour in the tortuous career of nationalism was
perhaps the drafting of a democratic and secular constitution with a
pronounced egalitarian thrust. True, the notion that loyalty to the people
came before loyalty to the party or government-in the 19th century European
sense where nationalism was associated with the idea of popular
sovereignty-did not find favour in India. Yet the urge to clear the debris
of the Raj and to rebuild a new and dynamic nation-state was central to the
post-colonial project. To me, these urges captured the spirit of
nationalism.

Nehru underlined in 1951 that India had infinite variety and there was
absolutely no reason why anybody should regiment it after a single pattern.
This, if you don=92t already know, is what secular nationalism is all about.
As its chief proponent after Independence, the country=92s first prime
minister pursued not a typically Nehruvian mission, but a goal set by the
Mahatma, by Congress=92 secular flank and by the left-wing formations. This
was a modern goal, rational and scientific, and in addition a specifically
Indian one. These values should have been apparent to all and it was
because of this that they were, for Nehru and his colleagues, both ultimate
and the final legitimisation of the secular state.

Three notable developments took place late =9150s onwards. First, secularism
was assailed in different quarters both as an idea and as a state policy;
second, the historical experience of resistance against colonialism was
forgotten; finally, the ideological edifice of nationalism was undermined
by the aspirations of =91new=92 groups trying to assert their linguistic and
ethnic identities, and by the persistent failure of the state to reduce
socio-economic inequities. As a consequence, nationalism and secularism
became contested terms and were transformed from being anti-colonial to
being ethnic and untutored religious consciousness. Hence the discovery of
new heroes, the invention of new histories and the resurgence of ethnic
movements in Kashmir, Assam and Punjab.

My real concern, therefore, is that ethnic collective consciousness in
India manifests itself in politically violent forms, as signified by the
assassinations of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. My other concern is that
ethnic nationalism, though objectified by perceptions of relative economic
deprivation, easily coalesced with religious fundamentalism. This is
exemplified by the murky career of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and the
ill-advised policies of several militant outfits in Kashmir, including the
expulsion of Kashmiri Pandits from their homeland. But much as one bemoans
the absence of a countrywide vision anchored in social justice, one is also
wary that the division of our society into ethnic communities will
constitute a complicating factor in =91nation-building=92.

If the politics of ethnicity gained salience in the =9180s, so did
majoritarianism in the garb of Hindu nationalism. For decades, its
protagonists had waited on the margins of political life to establish the
illegitimacy of the Congress-led anti-colonial movements. Their other
favourite pastime, for which they could draw from the writings of Savarkar
and Golwalkar, was to rewrite the nationalist idea in order to impose a
singular, monolithic Hindu identity and to establish an unbroken Hindu, as
opposed to a heterogeneous nationalist, tradition. The demolition of the
Babri Masjid- undoubtedly hastened by the hot-headedness of the Muslim
secular and religious leadership over the Shah Bano affair and by the
outcry against Mandalisation, was central to the fruition of the Hindutva
project.

More than the mosque=92s physical destruction, the ensuing religious
mobilisation by the Sangh parivar signalled a two-pronged attack on the
nationalist legacy. It was directed, in the first place, against Gandhi=92s
simple Ram-Rahim approach to the resolution of Hindu-Muslim disputes and
against Nehru=92s stubborn insistence on democratic socialism and secularism=
=2E
Second, Hindutva as the new mantra of civil society aimed at wrecking the
national consensus envisaged by the Constitution.

In India, the demise of inclusive nationalism has been hastened by, among
other factors, the Hindutva bandwagon. It has, in fact, been replaced by
state-sponsored nationalism that is exclusive and insular. It bears the
imprint of an ideology that seeks to homogenise only a small segment of
society around invented but divisive religious symbols and historical
memories. It is narrow in outlook because the impulse for homogenisation
itself, arising out of the tendency to stereotype or stigmatise the
minorities, rests on misplaced assumptions about the histories of
inter-community relations.

State-sponsored nationalism, orchestrated by the media, comes into play
only when a nuclear explosion takes place, or when the country is at war
with Pakistan. Otherwise, it=92s dormant. Actually, what is flaunted as
nationalism on such occasions is nothing but militarism. And once the
booming guns are silenced, it does not take long for the deep-seated
fissures in our polity and society to resurface. It does not take long for
us to forget our war widows and leave our injured soldiers at the mercy of
their relatives. And the eyes that shed tears in middle-class homes for the
dead and wounded soldiers dry up. The stories of demolition, war, floods,
cyclones and disease are over. The stories of life have begun, because the
stories of life never end.

The hollowness of the new brand of middle-class nationalism is illustrated
by our lackadaisical response to atrocities on women, dalits, tribals and
minorities. We care for the soldiers in Kargil, but not for those killed in
Sri Lanka. We build war memorials for our heroes, but take little notice of
those millions who have barely managed to survive in the cyclone-hit
coastal Orissa. We rose to the occasion when Pakistan invaded Kargil, but
we have not responded well to the cry for help from Ersama. Yet our pride
is not hurt. We accept loans from the imf and World Bank but refuse
humanitarian aid from international agencies for the sake of national pride.

How do we travel into the next millennium with this baggage? The ride is
bumpy; the journey hazardous. Yet this country of nearly one billion people
will need to move into the open spaces, equipped with an ideology that
draws upon the intellectual resources of the nationalist movement and, at
the same time, takes cognisance of the world-wide currents of change. "Let
us announce to the world," said Tagore long ago, "that the light of the
morning has come, not for entrenching ourselves behind barriers, but for
meeting in mutual understanding and trust on the common field of
co-operation, never for nourishing a spirit of rejection, but for that glad
acceptance which constantly carries in itself the giving out of the best
that we have."
______________
#2.
[The following report was published in Oct or Nov.99 by The Pakistan News
Service (www.paknews.org)]

Geoffrey Cook
P.O. Box 4233
Berkeley, California 94704

THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COUNCIL ON SOUTH ASIAN AFFAIRS MEETING

Madison(Wisc.)
The National Advisory Council on South Asian Affairs (NACSAA) had
its most recent bi-annual meeting entitled a Conference on South Asian
Politics and the Economy at the University of Wisconsin at Madison on
October 14th. Several topics were outlined by sections-Politics and the
Economy, Weapons and the Arms Races, Regional Conflict Issues and Prospects
for War and Peace.

Prospects for War and Peace

=46or those whose main interest is Pakistan this keynote session held some
disappointment. For, because of the recent putsch in Islamabad, the
Pakistani embassy cold not spare a staffer to represent its positions, and
the American expert Marvin Weinbaum of the University of Illinois was
called to Washington to act as a consultant to the U.S. State Department
during the crisis. Michael Krepon of the Henry L. Srtimson Center gave
the keynote on "After Kargil: The Kashmir Issue and Nuclear Weapons".
Although the subcontinent is more tense after Kargil, Krepon felt the
status quo can be maintained in the light of the danger of deterrence, but
there is no light at the end of the Kashmir tunnel. There is no argument
that confidence building measures are required. Regarding the Kargil
incident, the first step was executed extremely well by the irregulars and
the Pakistani themselves, but the second through sixth steps damaged
Islamabad's interests although the Indian army itself does not gloat
victorious over the battles waged this summer. Krepon emphasized in his
speech that South Asian nuclear capabilities do not equal a defensive
stability over the region. Then followed a series of commentaries led
by Clifford Singer, also, of the University of Illinois on "Nuclear Arms
Control Prospects" who stressed that India's nuclear policy is as much
political as security oriented, and most of concern to Pakistan, China and
the rest of the world is that New Delhi does see a scenario of possible
use. Also, the United States' export regime has had little effect on India
because of the slow pace of their nuclear development. "A State Department
Perspective" was expressed by Gary Usery, Director for South Asia in the
U.S. State Department. The status quo cannot be sustainable for long in
Kashmir. The United States views the Kargil conflict to have been the most
serious subcontinental crisis since the 1971 Indo-Pakistani War. It was
especially dangerous due to the fact that both contentious states are
nuclear capable. The struggle there on the heights of Kashmir definitely
had a role in Islamabad's October 12th coup. Kargil-like incidents between
the two bordering nations can re-occur. The Kashmir crisis has proven to be
a regional economic burden. This instability has discouraged foreign
investment. The lack of concern for the legitimate interests of the
Kashmiri people has created trans-regional difficulties. Washington is
ready to assist in resolving the Kashmir issue taking into account the
interests of the Kashmiri people themselves. Despite all that has happened,
President Clinton is still looking forward to his state visit to South
Asia. The Indian Government's position was delivered by their
Consul-General in Chicago, Ambassador Jagdish Sharma. After the nuclear
tests it is hard to take the political ramifications in both nations at
face value: "What was in the closet came out." Now there is good reason for
straight forward discussion between the nuclearized subcontinental
neighbors. The Indian army has been less than comfortable in the
counter-insurgency role in which it has been finding itself. As for India's
western neighbor, "Pakistan's public opinion will not permit an economic
crisis." Sharma reiterated his Government's position that, hopefully, a
consensus will be reached on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
between the two South Asian nuclear powers through a constructive dialogue
based on the principles of the Lahore process.

Weapons and the Arms Race

Earlier, an afternoon of distinguished arms control experts proved to be
very enlightening on the subject of their expertise, but the panel's
content was most gloomy for the prospects of the region to achieve and
maintain stability and security. Raju Thomas from Marquette
University and NACSAA began with a description of "The South Asian Security
Environment". Internal problems actually form more of a intimidation than
external threats in all of the nations of South Asia if the overriding
nuclear issue is backgrounded. India's failure to come to terms with the
Kashmir problem has agitated the conflict into an Islamic trans-national
issue which, in turn, could impact the entire subcontinent. Internal
de-centralization often helps improve volatile situations. Also-since
fighting at the nuclear level is out of the question-lower level insurgency
can be perceived as a successful way to wage "war" such as was seen in the
Kargil. Although there were high level Indian officers advocating an
invasion of Pakistan, such a strategy was no longer a viable option. Since
Nagasaki, the nuclear powers have not had the rational option of fighting a
direct conventional or nuclear war against each other. Pakistan's, like the
former Soviet before it, economy has partially been ruined through its
necessary move to maintain nuclear parity. Neil Joek of the Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory spoke on "U.S. Nuclear Non-Proliferation Policy". The
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty(CTBT) which was voted down in the American
Senate the day before(October 13th) stemmed from a confusion between arms
control and non-proliferation. The CTBT was originally negotiated as an
arms control vehicle to arrest the arms race. The Clinton Administration
re-packaged it as a non-proliferation treaty which Joeck felt was a fatal
political mistake. The Treaty, also, failed in the U.S. Congress because
the Executive branch leveraged it with domestic policy affecting economic
interests which Dr. Joeck, again, judged unfortunate. This essentially
ignored security prerogatives. Also, the Senate vote represented a personal
dislike of the more liberal President by a conservative Senate. Since the
CTBT is dead in the United States, this leaves little likelihood that
either India or Pakistan will accept it although this does not snuff the
life out of nuclear non-proliferation. Neither India or Pakistan have a
nuclear edge over the other. Therefore, arms control is required for their
mutual security interests. Yet the dialogue between India and Pakistan is
on hold even though survival of one depends on the restraint (not to
attack) of the other. Therefore, it is a pre-requisite that they dialogue!
"The Nuclear Arms Race in South Asia" was George Perkovich of the
W. Alton Jones Foundation's topic. A nuclear deterrence often encourages
low level military aggressive behavior such as the Kargil incident because
the other side has to show restraint. A full fledged war becomes
unthinkable because of the danger of a nuclear response. One problem in the
India/Pakistan predicament is that both lack the capability of surveillance
of the other that nuclear powers should possess. This is an opening for
accidents and miscalculations. Simply, the situation is not stable! The
window to make a decision on whether to attack or not is three to four
minutes whereas it is twenty minutes between the States and Russia. The
inability of Islamabad and New Delhi to work out their long standing
differences has created very real risks for nuclear conflict. in the
region. Further, India's recently announced nuclear policy is no more than
a sloppy draft opening up concrete threats to overall peace. The U.S.
rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has only made conditions
worse in the area. Ben Sheppard from London of Jane's Defence/Sentinel
discussed "The South Asian Missile Arms Race". There is a great danger that
the state of affairs will get out of control on the subcontinent.
Pakistan's missile progress has been miraculous. Although their projectiles
are based on external technologies, Islamabad has an indigenous production
capacity. India and Pakistan largely depend on their missiles for delivery
of their nuclear weapons. Regional security ambiguity is a negative to the
impasse. Nuclear weapons, in turn, have affected regional stability. China
could become more of a factor in the Southern Asia's arms race. Especially
with a the recent large BJP mandate, India is attempting to reach parity
with China. All of which only leads to even greater area-wide instability.
Unless there is another surprise from Pakistan, the Prithvi missile will
probably turn the missile race back to India's advantage. In short, we come
back to the necessity of India and Pakistan to heal the festering sore of
Kashmir. Amit Gupta of Stonehill College's subject was "Conventional
and Nuclear Arms Control". The two states under discussion must move away
from rhetoric and into reality. The reality is that there are three tiers
of nuclear states, and India and Pakistan are in the third tier: "The
reality is that Peking is not spending sleepless nights over the
developments on their southern borders." One nation does not need a large
number of nuclear weapons to destroy another state. Therefore, "Rhetoric is
serious. " To the international community, the two nations under discussion
do not have the status of a declared nuclear states. Arms control makes
regional sense, and improves Islamabad and New Delhi's international
status. Also, fighting a conventional war whether it is a small one like
the Kargil or a major conflict does not improve the situation; it only
hurts civilian political and social society which we have seen in Pakistan
most recently and the reaction expressed in the Indian elections. A public
debate is needed in these polities over nuclear policy!

Regional Conflict Issues

Talks presented in this session of interest to Pakistani readers include
Ved P. Vaidik's, President of the Indian Foreign Policy Council in New
Delhi whose views very much represent the new Hindi educated political
ascendancy in India. He spoke on "India and Afghanistan". Afghanistan has
had a direct influence on Indian security, and remains so, for there is an
historical relationship between the two. Although a Pakistan basher in
accusing Islamabad of being a terrorist state, Vaidik advocates that India
and Pakistan work together to find a political solution to the ongoing
Afghani political crisis. Mustapha Kamal Pasha of the American
University gave a talk on "Kashmir in Indo-Pakistan Relations". Kashmir is
both central and peripheral to the problems between the two countries. The
question of the state's future is more of personal ideology than territory.
Curiously, even with the Hindutva dominated government, Kashmir enforces
the idea of Indian Secularism. Without the Valley, Pakistan's Islamic
ideology is incomplete. The Kargil represented the conflict between a
state's territorial claim(Pakistan) versus an international acclaim(India).
Today India's goals for the state are untenable because of Islam has become
an issue. The internal politics of India and Pakistan determines what
happens within Kashmir. The issue of Partition is still a complex one
within India, and this part of their psyche plays out in their policy to
Srinagar: "Kashmir is such a terrible issue!" Unfortunately, this conflict
is reproducing the historic pathologies of European states in a
Post-Colonial context.

This gathering was a very fruitful one, but it did not present a very
hopeful picture for the future of South Asia. The Pakistani-Indian conflict
dominates the security issues for the whole region. The nuclear threat
presents a cloud over the entire area. The recent establishment of a junta
in the Pakistani capital and the huge mandate for the right wing in India
only exacerbates the situation especially in resolving the Kashmir crisis
which lies at the root of all contentions between these two nuclear powers.
The nationalistic chauvinism in India is tumbling that nation towards
conflict with its western neighbor. Conditions are indeed gloomy.!
______________
#3.

INDIA PAK ARMS RACE & MILITARISATION WATCH NO.7
(23 December 1999)

[1.]

Defense News
December 13, 1999
Vol. 14, No. 49; Pg. 22; ISSN: 0884-139X
RDS-Acc-No: 02237465

RUSSIA TO HELP INDIA DEVELOP NUCLEAR REACTOR FOR NEW SUB

Russia will help India with its $600-mil Advanced Technology Vessel
(ATV) project, which will result in a nuclear
submarine

Russia and India have agreed on a ten-year military-technical deal
covering India's Advanced Technology Vessel
(ATV) project, which will result in a nuclear submarine. The $600-mil
project could begin in 2001 with the laying of the
keel and the ship could be commissioned by 2008. The submarine, based on
Russia's Charlie I-class, will act as a
platform for nuclear-armed missiles. Its containment vessel will weigh
600 tons and the ship will have a displacement of
1,600 tons to 1,700 tons.

(Copyright 1999 Responsive Database Services, Inc.)

*******
[2.]

News Network International
Wednesday 22nd December, 1999
http://www.nni-news.com/nni/today/page19.htm

INDIA ENDS LARGEST NAVAL WAR GAMES IN ARABIAN SEA

NEW DELHI (NNI): The Indian navy and airforce have ended their largest
joint military exercise in the Arabian Sea, reports PTI.

The 10-day war game, condemned "Operation Galahad" and involving 30 naval
ships, four submarines and 30 airforce warplanes was the largest maritime
exercise conducted so far by Indian defence forces, officials said.

The exercise also involved the landing of marine commandos from submarines
and airborne aircraft on the Indian coast, Rear Admiral J.S. Bedi told
reporters in Bombay. "It also included deep-strikes over the sea with
latest aircraft in the inventory of the air force and the navy," Bedi said
of his maritime fleet of Sea Harrier jets and Russian MiGs and French
Mirage-2000s of the airforce.

"The tactical exercise in the north Arabian Sea was to validate and
revalidate certain operational concepts and procedures developed after
operational alert during the Kargil crisis," the Indian admiral added.
[...].

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////=
///
'India Pak Arms Race & Militarisation Watch' (IPARMW)
is a joint initiative of South Asia Citizens Web and
South Asians Against Nukes
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////=
//

__________________________________________
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.