[sacw] [ACT] sacw dispatch #1 (21 Jan 00)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #1
21 January 2000
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex)
___________________
#1. From Pakistan India Peoples Forum Meet in Calcutta
#2. In a crisis, only the hawks will talk!
#3. Globalization and Hindutva: A comment from an activist
[Beware of the Hindu Right in the midst of all the Anti WTO coalitions]
___________________

#1.
=46rom the Pakistan India Peoples Forum Meeting
Calcutta: 21 January 2000 =20

"If a neighbour is in trouble, the other neighbours will also feel the
strains." Qouting these words of an ancient sage, Tahir Mohammad Khan,
chairman of the Balochistan Human Rights Commission, made a passionate
plea for subcontinental solidarity. He was speaking at a seminar organised
by the Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy, West Bengal
Chapter, in Calcutta. Karamat Ali, trade unionist and peace activist from
Pakistan, said that one should not bother about borders while fighting for
peace, democracy and secularism. "The lack of peace in the subcontinent,"
he said, "not only has the potential to but also has actually subverted
the process of democracy... so we really have to take the issue of peace
seriously." He appealed to uphold peace as a fundamental human right. The
concern was shared by other speakers and the audience. Professor Arun
Banerjee, and international relations expert, elaborated on the inequality
and underdevelopment that the region's rulers have fostered while spending
scarce resources on war preparations. He pointed out that neither India
nor Pakistan has come up with a positive proposal on the contentious issue
of Kashmir, or ever tried to ascertain what the Kashmiris actually wanted.
In this context, the following resolution was adopted at the meeting: "It
has been brought to the notice of Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for Peace
and Democracy, West Bengal Chapter, that in Jammu and Kashmir a good
number of people were arrested and are still in the prisons without trial
for merely exercising their fundamental right to freedom of expression.
The extent of their alleged offence was that they advocated
non-participation in the last Lok Sabha election in Jammu & Kashmir.
=46reedom of expression guaranteed in Indian Constitution, as was made clea=
r
by the Chief Election Commissioner of our country, includes right to
advocacy of participation and non-participation in the elections. There
are instances in this country in certain areas and constituencies where
the voters concertedly boycotted the election en masse without attracting
any penal measure. This august meeting of democratic and peace loving
people expresses concern for trampling human rights under foot in Jammu and
demands on the powers that be the immediate release of those incarcerated
persons. =20

____________

#2.
The Friday Times
21 January 2000

In a crisis, only the hawks will talk!

by Khaled Ahmed

In the latest Indo-Pak crisis, bilateral tension was notched up till the
situation became dangerous. Words were used to raise the temperature till
it expunged all other thought from the minds of Indians and Pakistanis. The
media were used to throw words at each other. The hijacking incident formed
two diametrical opposite views: the Indian point of view and the Pakistani
point of view. No space was left in the middle for a third voice. Any
outsider sitting in India or Pakistan found the media hype hysterical and
incredible. The international press stayed in the middle, discounting the
extreme rhetoric of either side.

It is logically not tenable that both India and Pakistan could be right,
but the proposition was presented in such a way that only one side could be
right. Had it been the Cold War era, the world would have bifurcated,
siding with its clients. The world instead refused to take seriously
India's demand that Pakistan be declared terrorist, which angered India.
The world also didn't rise to the defence of Pakistan, which angered
Pakistan. Each therefore decided to talk to itself. This discourse was
possible only in the vocabulary of the political orthodoxies on both sides.
No one else was considered qualified to take part in this discourse. The
hawks dominated where doves too had been known to exist.

Orthodoxies are always aggressive because they guard a consensus. Hawks are
their natural spokesmen. After the hijacking, people who normally feel
secure enough to listen to the 'variant' point of view told the doves that
time had come to let loose the hawks. Wasn't India pulling out all stops to
demonise Pakistan? Would this be the right time to let the dove sing his
ineffectual song of moderation? The worst thing to do would be to get
someone to criticise India and Pakistan both on the Pakistani television or
in the Pakistani press. This would yield the unequal theorem of Indian
criticism plus the dove's self-criticism juxtaposed with the dove's
criticism of India. The message to the dove was: stand aside, this is not
the time for you to sing your pusillanimous ditty.

As a result, neither India nor Pakistan came out looking reasonable. Both
expected the world to accept their case but ignored the fact they had to
sound reasonable for the world to accept. In fact even a hardliner who
wished to adopt a reasonable stance was marginalised in Pakistan. Take the
case of foreign minister Abdul Sattar. When the Indian media were going
nuts, he resisted the temptation of adopting extremist hypotheses. By the
time the denouement came in Kandahar, he was unfortunately seen as
advocating the signing of the CTBT to end Pakistan's international
isolation. It was just the wrong time to talk of ending isolation. Both
India and Pakistan were in the process of isolating themselves. That's how
wars begin.

Of course, the endgame was quickly achieved. General Musharraf said
Pakistan would not hesitate to use 'the bomb' if attacked. India's General
Malik said a limited set-piece war could be the order of the day. The two
chiefs posited what was integral to their strategy: Pakistan wants to avoid
conventional confrontation and will use nuclear deterrence; India sees
nuclear deterrence as an opportunity to wage a 'winable' conventional war.
Each said it would 'give a befitting reply' to the other, meaning that the
other party would be routed. The stage was set by the hawks for this
escalation. The climax was quickly reached, foreclosing on any truth that
would emerge later as the process of case-building from both sides is
subjected to scrutiny and investigation.

The truth will out, and both India and Pakistan will lose. By mid-January,
many Indian opinion-writers were inclined to see contradictions in the
Indian case-building against Pakistan. The BJP government had the Indian
public in its propaganda control and was inclined to reinforce it with more
'evidence' against Pakistan. On the Pakistani side, the opinion-makers were
still busy denouncing the Indian stance and building on the theory that
India had stage-managing the hijacking as it did once in the past. The
Pakistani public was in thrall and willing to accept the counter-conspiracy
theory. The loose strands were not yet visible in Pakistan, but the foreign
media were asking questions that the hawks could only counter with
denunciation.

The BJP government's handling of the crisis was marred by the urgency to
produce quick evidence to convict Pakistan. This hurry led it into errors
that it had to admit, thus laying it open to attack by counter-propaganda
from Pakistan and from analysts in India. First the Indian media fell into
the trap of mixing the categories of persons involved in the hijack: the
hijackers who were proven terrorists, and the prisoners released by India
after the deal made with the hijackers. The latter category had not been
convicted, their only 'guilt' being the terrorists' demand that they be
released. When the Indian Intelligence produced an intelligence coup in
Bombay, catching hold of 'Pakistani' collaborators, it was marred by the
hurry in which the BJP government released the hijackers' names and
photographs. The action was too contrived too seem credible, but it was a
typical Intelligence ploy to convince their own masters rather than the
world at large.

The Pakistan government ignored the entire international understanding of
the Kashmir jehad to claim that no Pakistanis were involved in the
hijacking incident. It ignored also the information brought to light by
Pakistan's own press about the nature of this 'unofficial' jehad to declare
that hijackers would not be allowed to enter Pakistan. A TV discussion put
forth the view that the hijackers, who were actually Indian agents, had
escaped to Northern Afghanistan, where India's other agent, Ahmad Shah
Massoud, had given them protection. A government spokesman welcomed the
entry into Pakistan of the released Harkat al-Ansar leader Maulana Masood
Azhar, only to be embarrassed later when he started issuing statements from
Karachi. This time the reaction came from the United States where there is
a law providing for declaring countries and organisations terrorist.

The truth of the matter is that the jehad in Kashmir has given rise to
religious militias whose politics is not always in consonance with the
political system in Pakistan. They are tolerated by the state because they
are waging a war that Pakistan cannot join. But since these warrior
organisations wield power over society, they are not always in the control
of the government in Islamabad. Indeed, governments can come under pressure
from them and may have to trim their policies to accommodate their
aggressive views. Many of these warriors are known to the state and the
elites that run Pakistan. Intelligence reports, leaked to the press, have
actually warned that these armed organisations could be a threat to
Pakistan's own security. There is no doubt that they have changed
Pakistan's international image, inspiring fear and loathing.

Maulana Masood Azhar is no small activist, although few in Pakistan have
known him or his standing within the great Deobandi-Taliban consensus in
Pakistan. An earlier attempt at getting him released through hostage-taking
of foreign tourists in Held Kashmir by Harkat al-Ansar guerrillas will
always incline the international community to link the latest group of
hijackers to Pakistan's jungle of jehadi organisations. No amount of
propaganda by Pakistan will make it believe otherwise. But had Pakistan
taken a different tack, it could have refrained from categorically denying
something that it probably did not know. The world might still attribute
the crime to 'rogue' elements not in Pakistan's control, which indeed may
be the case.

The fanfare with which freed Masood Azhar was received at the Banuri Masjid
in Banuri Town in Karachi has put the spotlight on Asia's biggest centre of
'revolutionary' Deobandi activity. Various seminaries in the NWFP have
often wrongly been designated as the headquarters of the Taliban movement
in Pakistan. In fact, the dominance of the Taliban is not in the NWFP and
Balochistan, but in Karachi, often considered a relatively 'secular' city.
Set up in 1947 by Allama Yusuf Banuri, the mosque was the place where
Afghanistan's Mulla Unmar first met Osama bin Laden in 1989. The man who is
behind the great Deobandi jehad today is Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai in whose
name funds are being collected in all parts of Pakistan for Harkat
al-(Ansar) Mujahideen. For instance, in Lahore, the government-controlled
Masjid-e-Shuhada collects under the banner of authorisation of Mufti
Shamzai. What may be embarrassing for the government is the fact that Mufti
Shamzai is the author of a fatwa of war against the United States.

Internally 'soft' states have a hard time when their beleaguered
governments have to confront the external 'enemy state'. Both India and
Pakistan have to pretend that they are not 'soft' and have everything fully
under control. India has to pretend that the uprising in Kashmir is nothing
but military intervention by Pakistan and that the Kashmiris would be good
citizens if Pakistan gave up the intervention. Pakistan has to pretend that
it is not involved in the Kashmir jehad while powerful militias daily
publicise the achievements of their locally inducted Pakistani guerrillas
against the Indian army. Both states are trapped in a savage confrontation
which they cannot give up even after realising that they will finally come
to grief. Both have proudly proclaimed their status of nuclear states
equalling the Big Five in the UN Security Council, which the world refuses
to accept. Never have India and Pakistan landed themselves in a situation
of no-exit as they have now. Since becoming 'nuclear states', their
security has been repeatedly shattered by a quick succession of events
their governments can no longer control. Their highly imaginative theories
of nuclear deterrence have actually made them more 'soft' than they were in
the past.
____________

#3.
[Beware of the Hindu Right in the midst of Anti WTO coalitions !;
And beware of Anuradha Mittal <amittal@f...> who circulates
propaganda of the Hindu right!]
----
GLOBALIZATION AND HINDUTVA: A comment from an activist

Benaras, India
January 20, 2000

Recently, an e-mail message from New Delhi ? subject: WTO DG Mike Moore
faces protestors in India ? was widely distributed on various
anti-globalization listservs as well as some progressive and radical news
services.

The message (attached below) provides a brief description about a recent

anti-WTO protest in India and an "open letter" to WTO Director-General Mike
Moore signed by six organizations. Superficially, the post is simple
enough: a short account of a protest against the schemes of Mike Moore and
the WTO, as well as an accompanying Open Letter whose rhetoric is common to
activists involved in anti-globalization movements ("biopiracy," "Wicked
Trade Organization," "pawn in the hands of the United States," etc.).

However, I write this message to draw attention to some of the groups who
have signed on to the Open Letter. Three of the six groups that I have been
able to identify are widely-recognized front groups affiliated with the
Hindu Right in India, while a fourth has supported the current ruling party
which represents the interests of those right-wingers. I have not yet been
able to identify the other two groups, but they obviously have no qualms

associating with the Hindu right-wing, at least on the evidence of the lette=
r.

The Hindu Right ? comprised of a network of affiliated organizations
collectively known as the "sangh parivar"-is led by the fascistic RSS

(Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh), the VHP (Vishwa Hindu Parishad) and the BJP
(Bharatiya Janata Party). The RSS-VHP-BJP combine and their affiliates
promote the idea of a "Hindu Rashtra" (Hindu homeland) which manifests
itself in a militant anti-secular, anti-Muslim and, more recently,
anti-Christian posture. The attack on the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in 1992
is one infamous recent chapter of the movement, while the assassination of
Mahatma Gandhi, for his alleged appeasement of Muslims, is another
well-known post-independence bookmark (although Gandhi, like other
historical figures, has been appropriated by the parivar for their
purposes).

The sangh parivar has recently stepped up its rhetoric and attacks against
Christians while continuing to stir up anti-Muslim and anti-secular
sentiments (it goes without saying that the Hindu Right is also militantly
anti-communist and anti-feminist). The sangh parivar is the heart of a
well-organized Hindu Right mass movement in India which is implicated in
all aspects of Indian society, and whose political arm governs the country
as well as many key states. To speak cautiously, the movement has fascist
overtones, although many progressive activists in India would not hesitate
to label the Hindu Right as out-and-out fascist.

The Swadeshi Jagran Manch (SJM), Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) and Akhil
Bhartiya Vidayarthi Prishad (ABVP) ? signees to the open letter to Mike
Moore-are all openly part of the sangh parivar movement.

The SJM encourages the production and consumption of domestically produced
goods, appropriating the swadeshi legacy of the Indian freedom movement.
The BMS is a labour front, founded to counter so-called "communist"
inspired ideas of class-struggle. It stresses harmonious, paternal
relations with management in the "national interest" (much like other
right-wing and fascist trade unions in modern history). The ABVP is the
student wing of the parivar, which likewise wishes to re-structure the
relationship between students, teachers and college administrators on the
family model while purposely downplaying radical student politics and
agitations.

Meanwhile, the Bharatiya Kisan Sangh (BKS) is a farmers=92 organization whic=
h
is seemingly independent of the parivar. However, it is sympathetic to the
BJP, especially in the state of Uttar Pradesh where it has provided
electoral support on more than one occasion. The BKS, like the other two

groups signing on to the open letter (Laghu Udyog Bharati and Swamajvadi

Abhiyan) apparently have no problems identifying with clearly identified

Hindu Right organizations like the SJM, BMS and ABVP.

To be sure, elements of the Hindu Right do genuinely oppose globalization,
and more-often-than-not employ anti-colonial, anti-imperialist rhetoric in
doing so. However, the anti-globalization posture is tied to a wider agenda
which seeks to scapegoat so-called "pseudo-secularists" and "anti-national"
Muslims and Christians for the nation=92s problems.

Interestingly, the BJP, the largest party of the current ruling coalition
government, has embraced free-market "reforms" and has recently passed a

whole series of privatization and de-regulation bills, which makes the
pleadings of the open letter below all that much more suspect.

The anti-WTO posture of elements of the Hindu Right is similar to existence
of chauvinistic right-wingers like Pat Buchanan in the USA, or the array of
anti-immigrant, far-right politicians in Europe who are also outspoken
opponents of globalization. (Admittedly, these are imperfect analogies, and
I use them simply to provide a basic frame of reference for readers who
might not be familiar with India=92s political culture.)

The existence of far-right opponents of globalization is something that
various progressive opponents of globalization have been reckoning with in
the past few years. I defer here to a recent statement of the People=92s
Global Action against "Free" Trade movement (PGA) who squarely addressed
the issue at their conference in Bangalore last summer:

"We reject all forms and systems of domination and discrimination
including, but not limited to, patriarchy, racism and religious
fundamentalism of all creeds. We embrace the full dignity of all human
beings. =8A [T]he denunciation of "free" trade without an analysis of
patriarchy, racism and processes of homogenization is a basic element of
the discourse of the (extreme) right, and perfectly compatible with
simplistic explanations of complex realities and with the personification
of the effects of capitalism (such as conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism,
etc.) that inevitably lead to fascism, witch-hunting and oppressive
chauvinist traditionalism =8A [The] PGA rejects all reactionary forms of
resistance to capitalism." [PGA Bulletin, Issue #4, October 1999]

Undoubtedly, there is a militant, progressive, grassroots and radical
resistance to capitalist globalization in India, and I will forward a quick
article I recently wrote on the topic after this post. The PGA has also
posted accounts of recent protests on which my own article heavily relies.

I encourage people receiving this note to re-post it to lists and
individuals who may have received the original post below without knowing
about the right-wing connections of the protesting organizations signed on
to the Open Letter to Mike Moore. It is important to stay informed about
all movements against the WTO and globalization ? including the reactionary
ones. But this note is being posted in the interests of providing some
necessary context which the original message was missing.

Jaggi Singh <jaggi@t...>
January 20, 2000
Benaras, India
(based in Montreal)

----------original post----------

Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 10:31:51 -0800
=46rom: Anuradha Mittal <amittal@f...>
To: fianusa-news@i...
Subject: [asia-apec 1378] WTO DG faces protestors in India

New Delhi, Jan 11

While more than 200 activists were staging a demonstration outside,
three protestors sneaked into a heavily guarded venue session of the
Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Partnership Meet 2000, here
today. WTO Director General Mike Moore had just finished speaking when
an activist walked to the dias and spoke against the dangers of
allowing WTO to police the world economy and also criticised the Indian
industrialists for joining hands with "an evil force".

Mr Mike Moore is in New Delhi on an invitation of the CII.

Taking the delegates attending the conference by surprise, the three
activists distributed to the delegates a copy of an open letter to the
WTO Director General. Terming the WTO as a "Wicked Trade Organisation",
the activists said that the recent protests on the streets at Seattle
had clearly demonstrated that trade was not the answer for human
development. "The protests that began in Seattle will now be seen in
India," they said.

A copy of the open letter to Mr Mike Moore is appended below:

AN OPEN LETTER TO MR MIKE MOORE

Jan 11, 2000

Mr Mike Moore
Director General
World Trade Organization.

Dear Mr Moore,

We have tolerated enough.

=46or several years now, the people of India have been a mute witness to
the systematic effort of the rich countries to recolonise the
developing world under the garb of free trade.

Over the years, the WTO has legitimised under TRIPs the steal, grab and
plunder of biological wealth and traditional knowledge from India. Your
patent laws have been designed to facilitate biopiracy from the
biodiversity rich countries. We are aware that almost 90 per cent of
India's estimated 45,000 plant species and 81,000 animal species are
already stored illegally in the United States.

To protect the economic interests of a few million farmers on either
side of the Atlantic, the WTO has reached an Agreement on Agriculture,
which is aimed at marginalising the 550 million Indian farmers and
putting the country's food security at an unmanageable risk. For us,
the survival of our small and marginal farmers, forming the backbone of
the economy, is as essential as protecting the democratic traditions of
this great nation.

A majority of the small-scale industries in India have already closed
down. The pharmaceutical sector, which made available medicines within
easy reach of the people, is at the verge of closure. Multi-national
companies, which your organisation essentially represents, have already
embarked on the process of loot and repatriation of resources. And if
the past tradition is any indication, we know that after you quit the
WTO, you too will join one of these companies. Your interest in
furthering the cause of these companies is, therefore, obvious.

As if this is not enough, you are bringing in labour, environment and
multilateral investment within the gambit of the WTO. In any case,
Seattle has clearly demonstrated that you are merely a pawn in the
hands of the United States. Unabashedly, you addressed joint press
conferences with the US Trade Representative. You behaved as if she was

your boss.
You threw all the democratic norms to wind by permitting the US to
hijack the global forum. The WTO is, as a placard being carried by a
protestor on the streets of Seattle read: "Wicked Trade Organisation."

Your agents in India, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), and
the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI),
perpetuate the unequal doctrine on unsuspecting and gullible masses.
=46or your kind information, many of the people you support have already
sucked the national exchequer dry. For instance, the non-performing
assets of the nationalised banks in India, milked dry by a few
industrialists, stand at a staggering Rs 5,00,000 million !!

The WTO protects the criminals. We cannot allow this to go on forever.
Let this be a warning from the people of India. We will not allow a
global system, which actually protects and supports the rich and the
powerful at the cost of the lives of millions of poor and hungry.
Mahatma Gandhi has taught us that tolerance of injustice is a crime. We
will, therefore, no longer accept any sort of coercion, threat and
injustice.

You are perhaps aware that we have had a long history of driving out
the pirates and the colonial masters. And we will do it once again, if
need be.

=46rom:

Swadeshi Jagran Manch
Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh
Akhil Bhartiya Vidayarthi Prishad
Bhartiya Kisan Sangh
Laghu Udyog Bharati
Swamajvadi Abhiyan

-----end of message-----

__________________________________________
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.