[sacw] sacw dispatch (25 May 00)

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 25 May 2000 22:06:03 +0200


South Asia Citizens Web - Dispatch
25 May 2000

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

#1. Past, Present & Future of Left Movement in Pakistan (PART 1)
#2. Bangladesh / India: BBC News Storm over cross border love
#3. India: Funds of Hindu Far Right groups and tax evasion
#4. India: Osmania University Professor in trouble for his writings
__________________________

#1.

[The below article is being posted in the dispatch in two parts. Part 1 is
posted below and the Part 2 will appear in tomorrow's dispatch]

[Part 1.]

PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF LEFT MOVEMENT IN PAKISTAN

By Farooq Sulehria
Member National Executive Committee Labour Party Pakistan

Left movement in Pakistan traces its origin in Indian communist
movement. The Indian communist movement in turn draws its inspiration
from Russian revolutions of 1905 and particularly that of October
1917. Linen himself had developed a great interest in India. But long
before Lenin, Karl Marx had shown a great interest in what he called
'an interesting country' and a 'good future ally'. He wrote quite a
few articles on Indian subcontinent especially during the 1857's war
of independence, which ended in defeat.

The defeat strengthened and consolidated the imperialist basis for a
century to follow. An era of imperialist exploitation, plunder and
repression had begun. However, the exploitation and plunder requiring
an industrial base and an infrastructure also gave birth to a vast
proletariat. Intensified exploitation also generated resistance by the
peasantry.

As early as 20th century, trade unions and strikes had started
appearing while the biggest provinces of Punjab and Bengal were in
total revolt as peasantry had rose up against the imperialist
Britain's exploitation.

Indian revolutionaries who went in exile had also established
contacts with their European comrades. It was through these contacts
that Russian revolution of 1905 had shown a new way forward to Indian
revolutionaries. In 1911 these exiled revolutionaries formed Kairti
Kissan Party in the USA. Soon it had established itself in the USA,
Canada and Europe. The Russian revolution of October 1917 shook India
as well. In 1920, Communist party of India (CPI) was formed it's
leader M.N Roy participated in the meetings of Third International and
played a revolutionary role. In 1934, CPI was banned because of its
rapidly spreading influence. Its popularity had scared the
imperialism. The ban did not prove any hurdle in spreading the
communist ideas. Communists still worked tirelessly under different
umbrella organisations. Meantime, the Third International under the
leadership of Stalin had gone through a whole period of degeneration.
>From the 'Third Period' to 'Popular Fronts' and from non-aggression
accord with Hitler to alliance with the Allies, the Comintern had
taken many somersaults. A total degeneration of Soviet Russian
bureaucratic clique manifested itself in its bankrupt theory of
'socialism in one country' and 'Two-stage theory of revolution'. The
CPI. Blindly followed the Stalinist line betraying both the Indian
proletariat and the revolution. When the World War-II began, the CPI
opposed it until Stalin inked an accord with the Allies. The CPI
refused to lead the fight against British imperialism because (1)
Stalin had become an ally of the Allies (2) according to 'Two-stage
theory'; India had yet to undergo the Bourgeois Democratic Revolution
under the leadership of Indian bourgeoisie. On the other hand, teeming
millions, youth, revolutionaries and freedom fighters were offering
heroic sacrifice to rid their homeland of British imperialism. From
1940 to 1945, ten thousand freedom fighters were martyred; tens of
thousands were sent behind bars while tens of thousands flogged. But
for CPI these freedom fighters were 'fifth columnists'.

1946 proved the year of revolution. Indian subcontinent
was in total revolt. Mass uprisings, striker and mood of revolt
across Indian subcontinent marked the beginning of 1946. The
proletariat was leading the revolt. On February 10, navy sailors went
on strike. To show their solidarity with navy sailors, the workers of
Royal Air Force went on strike. On March 1, Sepoys revolted in Jaipur.
On March 18, in Dera Doon, Gorka Sepoys revolted. Karachi, Bombay,
Madras and many other cities were in the grip of general strike. On
April 3, following the Delhi Police, the police in the entire province
of Bihar, also revolted. May witnessed the strike observed by 100
thousand employees of Railways and Post. On May 23, 0.4 million
industrial workers joined this strike as well. During this wave of
strikes, the CPI was playing the role of strikebreaker. Not drawing
any lesson from the defeated revolutions of China (1925-27) and Spain
(1934 - 37), the CPI remained blindly committed to Stalinist line of
'Two-stage theory' in the hope of a Bourgeois Democratic Revolution
which never came. The ideological blunder coupled with shameful
alliance with British imperialism alienated the CPI form the working
class. Both were going in opposite directions. This state of affairs
benefited Congress and Muslim League. They led the revolt and a
movement that could end the imperialism as well as the capitalism and
feudalism, proved only a movement of national liberation. The teeming
millions paid a heavy price for CPI's blunders. Not merely a chance of
class liberation had been missed but Indian subcontinent was plunged
into bloodshed. History witnessed the biggest riots and even biggest
migrations leaving behind indelible stains of blood. In 1947, the
British left India. The CPI supported the partition and ordered its
Muslim cadres to migrate to Pakistan.

Left Movement in Pakistan:

The Communist Party of Pakistan (CPP) not only inherited cadre from
CPI but the ideological legacy as well i.e. 'Two-stage theory' of
revolution. Following their theory, they joined Muslim League. In
Muslim League, they supported the bourgeoisie against the feudal
lords. But Muslim League was and had always been a party of the Muslim
feudalists. These feudal soon managed to rid their party of these
'infiltrators'. These purges drove the CPP to another extreme. Instead
of organizing the working class for a revolution, it sought a
shortcut--- a coup. Here too the CPP depended on a liberal section of
the bourgeoisie in the persons of Gen. Akbar and his mother-in-law,
Begum Shahnawaz. They discussed a coup plan with the General. This
coup attempt, known as Rawalpindi conspiracy case, was only a
discussion and it was unearthed in 1951before it was executed. The
government banned the CPP along with its student and trade union
wings. At the time of ban, it had a membership of 200. Following this
ban; the CPP members formed Azad Pakistan Party. A radical
nationalist, Mian Iftikhar-ud-Din, led this party. In 1957, Azad
Pakistan Party merged with some other so-called liberal progressive
groups to form National Awami Party (NAP). The NAP had a reformist
program instead of a revolutionary one. Anti-imperialism, secularism,
regional autonomy and industrialization were the key features of its
program. After merger, the communists dissolved their independent
identity and did not organize any class movement independently. In
1958, as the capitalist crisis worsened, the workers took to the
streets. A working class movement had begun across Pakistan. It also
affected the peasantry. Same year NAP leader Maulana Bhashani (who
belonged to the then East Pakistan now Bangla Desh) formed an All
Pakistan Peasants Association (Kull Pakistan Kissan Association). A
working class movement began in Lahore that gripped the whole country.
To crush this movement Gen. Ayub imposed a martial law on October 26,
1958.

Sino-Russian Conflict and its impact on Pakistan left:

Avoidance from class struggle and Marxism was the reason behind
Sino-Russian bureaucratic conflict. From 1956 onwards, the
Sino-Russian conflict became grave. This conflict was a set back to
international working-class movement disillusioning a mass of
conscious working-class fighters but it also divided the working
class.

Despite its bureaucratic deformations, the Chinese revolution of
1949, because of its success to end feudalism and capitalism, had a
great attraction for the colonial world. Chinese revolution proved
contagious for Pakistan. How could it be otherwise for Pakistan had
common frontiers? Maoism attracted a big chunk of workers, youth,
intelligentsia especially students.

One big reason for tilt forwards Maoism was an aversion for
Stalinism's impotent 'Two-stage theory' that was stopping Pakistani
left from striking for revolution at a time when revolution was a
battle cry. But Chinese bureaucracy was not a different phenomenon
than the Russian. It also had its own priorities and ideological
deformations. The preceding years exposed the real character of the
Chinese bureaucracy. It gave a big support to military dictator
General (later on a self-appointed Field Marshal) Ayub Khan. In 1965,
Chau En-lai congratulated Ayub Khan on his success in the sham polls.
The so-called election was not even based on adult franchise but on
`Basic Democracy'. A few thousand so-called elected representations of
local bodies had to elect the president. Ne Chu, head of a visiting
trade delegation, also termed military dictator Ayub Khan as people's
representative.

When a war broke out between India and Pakistan, the same year i.e.
1965 it was termed a people's war by Chinese bureaucracy, which gave
full, support to Ayub Khan's dictatorship and Pakistani chauvinism.
When Marshal of the Peoples Army, Chun Lee, visited Pakistan after
the war, he made a mockery of communist democracy, terming Ayub Khan's
system of Basic Democracy akin to commune system. Pakistani Maoists
started supporting military dictator Ayub Khan. They also declared
Ayub Khan's foreign policy as progressive utterly forgetting the
Marxist point of view on foreign policy that foreign policy is mere a
continuation of a government's internal policy. The ruling classes
adopt certain foreign policies, and for that matter internal policies,
in order to safeguard and prolong their rule. Later on, Marshall Lee
also termed India andaggressor', not bothering to elaborate if he was
referring to the Indian ruling class or the Indian working class. In
1967, a trade delegation of China visited Pakistan. The statement
given by the head of the delegation will be an interesting reading. He
said:" Led by General Ayub Khan, Pakistan has made a great development
in the fields of agriculture as well as industry. The day is not far
when Pakistan will achieve total economic independence". ( Pakistan
Times 29-10-1996). The policies of class collaboration that Chinese
bureaucracy had adopted were nakedly manifested in Pakistan during
this period. The Russian bureaucracy meantime was not playing any
radical role either. It was supporting Indian bourgeois. The Russian
line for Pro-Moscow left during this period could be gauged from an
extract from a party-organ monthly Outlook. Monthly Outlook in its
issue of April 1964 writes: "Our newly emerging bourgeois will come
in conflict with the international bourgeois. Driven by economic
compulsions, Habib Ullahs, Sehgals and Walikas will have to turn to
socialist block for trade. This process will end western monopoly on
our economics. This is where we are heading for. And I will be the
biggest mad if I oppose General Ayub for this door opening towards
left". (Outlook 25-4-1964).

To another question, the same issue suggests that had masses been
conscious, the basic democracies could become training institutions
for soviets.

The pro-Moscow left dissolved itself in so-called liberal,
progressive bourgeois parties. The left itself remained divided into
Pro-Moscow and Pro-Beijing. The former would support one section of
the bourgeoisie, terming it progressive while latter would support the
other section of the bourgeois terming that as progressive. The left
during this period failed to see the unprecedented economic growth
internationally. The post -World War II boom also affected Pakistan. A
process of significant industrialization had begun in a big way for
the first time, giving birth to its gravedigger-- the proletariat. The
left during this period, instead of organizing and associating itself
with the new layer of proletariat was hunting progressives among
bourgeoisie to lend support. Its flirttation with the working class
was confided only to sloganeering. That was why when a revolutionary
movement, first of its kind, began in 1968-69 in Pakistan and many
explosive revolutionary events swept away the military dictatorship
which had made dictator Ayub the richest president of the poorest
country, the left was taken aback. evolutionary movement of 1986-69
and Left:

[The remaining part of the above article is continued.... on Sacw Dispatch
of 26 May 2000]
________

#2.

BBC News | SOUTH ASIA | Storm over cross border love
Tuesday, 23 May, 2000, 17:41 GMT 18:41 UK

STORM OVER CROSS BORDER LOVE

By South
Asia analyst Kamal Ahmed
The border between Bangladesh and India is at the centre of an unusual
love story.
A Bangladeshi Muslim youth has taken refuge in one of the many Bangladeshi
enclaves that juts into India, with a Hindu woman believed to be his
fianc=E9e.
But the woman's family and friends in India disapprove of the relationship
and have demanded that she return home.
Thousands of people have surrounded the enclave, Mashaldanga, which is
only accessible to Bangladeshis who have permission from the Indian
authorities.
Seige
Love affairs between Hindus and Muslims in this area of South Asia are
often highly controversial, and can provoke largescale protests.
That is why thousands of people have besieged Mashaldanga - which adjoins
the Indian state of West Bengal - to demand that she return home.
Like other enclaves formed at the time of India's partition, the people of
Mashaldanga cannot leave or depart without the permission of the Indian
authorities.
The enclave is surrounded on four sides by India and is only populated by
a few thousand people.
Bangladeshi officials say they are in the dark about the situation inside
the enclave, because Indian border guards and police have refused to allow
them to communicate with its inhabitants.
The few residents who have managed to reach the Bangladeshi mainland have
reported shortages of food and other essential commodities.
Porous border
It has been reported that the runaway couple, Mozammel Huq Mandol and
Sheema Rani Sarker, are now in hiding.
Skirmishes between India and Bangladesh along their joint border are not
uncommon.
In some cases the border is not clearly defined, and smuggling, illegal
immigration and cattle theft all take place on a regular basis.
Officials in Dhaka say that they are negotiating with the Indian
authorities to resolve the stand-off.
But they say their requests for a meeting with Indian border guards on the
issue has not been accepted.
________

#3.

Asian Age
25 May 2000

HOLY BUSYBODIES
The Vajpayee government has managed to duck persistent Opposition demands
that the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other members of the Sangh Parivar
should come clear on their financial deals.
The government did not categorically answer under what circumstances and
by what logic the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and its offshoots have been granted
exemption from paying income tax. The charge is indeed grave, given the VHP
and its derivatives=92 reputation, which is thoroughly well-deserved too, of
being intolerant and irresponsible.
The Union home ministry has no dearth of information on how foreign funds
are funnelled into the country thanks to the loopholes that exist in even
the amended Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.
And the country=92s economic intelligence and income tax departments are
also more than aware of how surreptitiously and under which guise
controversial fundamentalist or secessionist (or both) organisations manage
to generate funds for their destabilisation of the Indian state from within.
As for the VHP, that its accounts should be perfectly maintained and
impartially audited is all the more necessary because it is a member of the
Hindu Divided Family that has come to occupy prime political space over the
last few years.
The VHP had collected huge funds for the construction of the proposed Ram
temple in Ayodhya; there were strident demands about what happened to those
funds and they were utilised, with even a section within the Parivar
publicly curious about the issue.
The murmurs died down because for whatever reason, the VHP over the last
few months has kept a low profile and let the Bajrang Dal and certain newly
floated fronts to dominate the Hindutva agenda.
While it may be quite true that it is not the VHP alone which has been
able to cock a snook at authority of various descriptions and defied the
law of the land with impunity, there is sound logic in the argument that
the factor which lends more power to the Parishad than some of its
counterparts is the factor of political patronage.
Historical experience shows that the probity of the holy busybodies who
dot the national landscape is not always above board, and they should be
governed by the laws of the land just as other individuals and
organisations are.
In the case of the VHP and allied tendencies, if the Parishad=92s top brass
actually has nothing to hide, as one of its spokesman said in the wake of
the latest controversy, there is no reason why it should not come clean on
this. Emotionalising the issue, or attributing motives to such demands, is
certainly far less effective than straight rendering of accounts.
The onus is not just on the VHP or its parent, that is the Rashtriya
Swayamsewak Sangh; the chief responsibility is that of the BJP which is the
political face of the Sangh Parivar and hopes to win the oncoming Lok Sabha
elections more comfortably than it could have maybe even three months ago.
The NDA manifesto which was released recently is full of pious intentions
of ensuring a new regime of transparency and probity in government; the way
the VHP=92s tax and allied issues are handled will indicate how serious the
authors of the agenda are about the promises they themselves have made to
the people.
________

#4.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/may/24ap.htm

rediff.com
INTERVIEW May 24, 2000 THE REDIFF INTERVIEW / DR KANCHA ILAIAH

'The attempt to censor my writing is part of a larger game plan'
Dr Kancha Ilaiah (48), associate professor of political science at Osmania
University, has received a missive from the registrar, Professor Pannalal,
on his writings in a local newspaper. The registrar advised him not to
write articles that tended to accentuate prejudices or inflame hatred among
various sections of people.
A Nehru Fellow at Delhi from 1994-97 and recipient of the Mahatma Jyotirao
Phule Award, Ilaiah was taken aback by the tone and tenor of the
registrar's letter. He sees in them attempts to censor his writings as part
of a larger process of controlling institutions of social sciences.
Though he has authored several books in English and Telugu, Ilaiah stirred
up a controversy with his magnum opus Why I Am Not a Hindu. His other books
are State and Repressive Culture, Struggle between Buddhism and Brahminism
and Democracy in a Hollow Shell. He has also authored Mana Tatva in Telugu.
Born in Papaiahpet, Warangal district, in the backward Telangana region,
Ilaiah studied up to BA in the Telugu medium. He did his MA in political
science and his MPhil on land reforms in Andhra Pradesh. Incidentally,
Gautama Buddha's political philosophy was the subject of his doctoral
thesis.
In this interview with Syed Amin Jafri in Hyderabad, Dr Ilaiah discusses
the latest controversy over his writings. Excerpts:
Why is there another controversy over your writings? What does the Osmania
University registrar seek to convey through his 'personal letter'?
I have been writing in several newspapers and journals for 20 years. Some
articles were controversial and highly debated. Why I Am Not a Hindu was
also controversial. It was debated the world over. The university had never
asked me about what I wrote and what I should write. It never interfered.
Suddenly, on May 6, it sent a letter, which I received on May 11. I was
surprised by the letter, addressed to me by Dr Pannalal.
The registrar sought to convey that some articles in popular newspapers
were creating social tensions. Therefore, he said I should write within the
canons of conduct of our profession and my articles should not accentuate
prejudices and inflame hatred among various sections of society. My
writings have not led to riots.
But what about social tensions which the registrar alludes to?
My writings only try to reduce prejudices, as the caste system has created
a huge gulf between various sections of society. The article the registrar
mentioned, 'Spiritual fascism and civil society', appeared in Deccan
Chronicle on February 15, 2000.
What was so provocative about it?
In fact, I have proposed a scheme whereby the caste system can be
eliminated. I said that Brahmin priests had gone to tribal societies and
divided them into castes. Now, Hindutva proponents want India to become a
unified Hindu nation. In that case, they should send Brahmin priestly teams
to tribal areas, Dalitwadas and OBCwadas and these priests should live with
the people, eat their food and integrate them into religion. I am not
suggesting a division in society. In fact, I am proposing unity on an equal
basis.
I have been arguing that Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward
Classes and other sudras do not have the right to be Hindus within that
religion today as they do not have any initiation into it, nor do they have
the right to become priests. Unless an individual, a community or a caste
has the right to become priests, they do not automatically belong to that
religion. So, am I dividing society or am I proposing a spiritual method
where SCs/STs/OBCs and women, on their own, can become equal spiritual
people in Indian society.
But why has Osmania University picked on you?
The registrar took exception to my writings. But can he explain which
portion of my writing created social dissension? All over the world,
professors in universities have an inalienable right to express theoretical
opinions and no university has tried to censor theoretical formulations of
a research scholar or teacher. This is for the first time in the history of
Osmania University that an censorship attempt is being made.
In the larger interest of society, the university should not interfere with
the freedom of expression and academic freedom of a teacher to formulate
his thoughts.
What is the motive behind the registrar's missive?
There could be various reasons. There is a debate initiated by the Human
Resources Development Ministry of the Union government on the one hand and
also Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu on the other that
there is no relevance of social sciences today. As a teacher of social
sciences, I am bound to take up critical writing because, unless there is
critical writing, social science does not mean anything. The attempt to
censor is part of a larger process of controlling institutions of social
sciences. This trend is also part of a larger privatisation campaign of
educational institutions in the country.
What is the remedy you are seeking against this attempt to interfere with
your right to expression?
I wrote to the Osmania University Teachers Association (OUTA) that the
tone and tenor of the registrar's letter impinges on my basic right to
academic freedom and my freedom of expression as a citizen. Therefore, I
requested the OUTA to take up the matter with the registrar. It has given a
representation for withdrawal of the missive. Now, a debate is on in the
media and academic circles. The registrar has not yet withdrawn the letter.
'What controversy?' asks Prof Pannalal,registrar of Osmania University
Prof Pannalal, professor in business management and Registrar of Osmania
University, sent a missive to Prof Kancha Ilaiah, which kicked off a row on
the campus and in intellectual circles in Hyderabad. The registrar brushed
aside the issue. Here is the short telephonic conversation he had from
Hyderabad, with rediff.com's Syed Amin Jafri:
What is your reaction to the latest controversy?
What controversy?
Your letter to Prof Kancha Ilaiah on his writings in newspapers.
What is your jurisdiction in this matter? It is an internal matter of the
university.
What about your letter?
I have written it in my official and personal capacities to a colleague in
the university. It is an internal matter between us.
But the matter concerns freedom of expression of an academician?
=46irst of all, it does not concern you. That's all [disconnects telephone].
______________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH (SACW) is an
informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service
run by South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex)
since 1996. Dispatch archive from 1998 can be accessed
by joining the ACT list run by SACW. To subscribe send
a message to <act-subscribe@egroups.com>
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL