[sacw] SACW #2| 21 Dec. 00

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 21 Dec 2000 00:25:04 +0100


SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WIRE - Dispatch #2
21 December 2000
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex)

#1. Asma Jahangir interviewed in Bangladesh
#2. 1992 Razing of a Mosque Is Still Casting a Pall in India
#3. India: Open Secrets of Babri Mosque Demolition
#4. India: VHP to unveil model of Ram temple at Kumbh Mela
#5. Filmmaker strikes a blow against religious extremism in India

--------

#1.

The Daily Star
19 December 2000
Features

Voice of Conscience

Interview of Asma Jahangir

by Matiur Rahman

Asma Jahangir is former Chairperson of Pakistan's Human Rights Commission
and United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Extra-judicial Killing. Matiur
Rahman, Editor of the Prothom Alo, interviewed her on 5 November at Delhi.
She has spoken frankly on the heinous genocide committed by Pakistan Army
in 1971, what the government of her country should do in this regard,
current political situation in Pakistan and other matters in this exclusive
interview.

Matiur Rahman (MR): Thank you for your latest reactions on the statement
of the Pakistan diplomat in Dhaka on our Liberation War of 1971. Would you
say something about it?

Asma Jahangir (AJ): Well, I don't think that you should thank me. I think
this is a voice of conscience. I just feel that I have been fortunate
enough that I have been able to express it and I think that other people
not just living in South Asia, but in the world, must express their
abhorrence for any kind of killing which is widespread, systematic and done
with a kind of hatred.

MR: Again, a few months back, we remember, after the publication of the
Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report, you took a very strong position and
demanded the trial of those who were responsible for the genocide of the
people of Bangladesh in 1971.

AJ: Well, you know, there is something which I think I should say to you.
I have an institutional memory of history and I have seen the kind of
reaction that were there in West Pakistan during the army action and it has
sometimes amazed me how propaganda can actually make people believe in
their own lies. And this was one of those moments of history. I saw in our
part of Pakistan people actually believing that they could crush the
people's will and for them it was war and not the aspiration of the people
that was important. So I think the Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report was a
vindication of all those few people in West Pakistan who were, at that
point, telling the truth, who went to jail for telling the truth, who were
called traitors for telling the truth, who suffered for telling the truth.
And for them to know that it was not only the truth that they were telling.
They had a vision of what was going to happen. And they were truthfully the
leaders rather than the ones who believed in destruction.

MR: So you want to say that even before the publication of the report,
there were voices against the torture and genocide?

AJ: Of course. As you will recall, Mr Mazhar Ali Khan was in jail. Mr I A
Rahman here was sent to jail. Mr Naquib Hossain was sent to jail. My own
father was in Awami League and in jail at that point. So I think when I
talked about it, I thought that in my own way, I was saying to him, who is
not anymore there, that you were right and you did the right thing and that
is the legacy that you leave me that you have to speak up in difficult
times if you know that it is justice that you are talking about and the
truth.

MR: We have come to know that there are demands in the newspapers and
among personalities like you or human rights commissions, for apology for
those crimes committed in 1971, and this is very encouraging for us. There
is also a movement now in our country demanding apology from the Pakistani
government.

AJ: I want to actually make this a bit clearer that my stand is not that
the Pakistani government should apologise because of you. The apology is
for ourselves, to be able to live with ourselves. As far as the people of
then East Pakistan and the victims and their families are concerned, our
demand is that those who have committed those crimes must be brought to
justice. They owe it to us as the oppressors to apologise because we are
not able to live with ourselves.

MR: What is the mood of the people or the media in general on these issues=
?

AJ: Well, at this time Pakistan is going through a mini crisis so the
people are in great despair. So it is not an issue in Pakistan at all.
There are of course two extreme people there who live side by side and I am
glad that there has been this other group who, like ourselves, will
continue to follow human rights principles. And there is another group
which has also been there in Pakistan always who consider that an apology
is not necessary and anybody who talks about apology is being a traitor to
the country. So we have these two forces and the rest of the country is a
silent spectator.

MR: Coming back to politics, could you tell me a little about the
political situation of your country after taking it over by the military
chief General Musharraf?

AJ: The reversal of democracy has hurt Pakistan a lot because we don't
have a direction. And when you derail any system, no matter how rickety it
is, you are in fact ensuring that you will never get back to track. And
that is what has happened in Pakistan. We see no way out now. We are
looking and groping for a way out. We have always believed that you have to
start the process of democracy which is, in the beginning, only through
electoral process, but it's not the end. It's just a tiny step and we had
only taken that tiny step in the shadow of a powerful military. And even
that one step has now been uprooted. So where do we begin that process
again is a very big question. And as you know, no self-respecting society
can live without political parties and representation of the people
themselves.

We are also a bit worried because the military does not have the skills of
governance that you require so much now. It is not Cold War where military
governments are given bags of money. So the previous notion and military
was affiliated with law and order and prosperity, people have seen that
this has not happened this time. The law and order situation is bad and
economically we have suffered. People are beginning to link, for the first
time, military government with poverty and that, in a way, in the long term
perhaps, is better for Pakistan. But in the short term, we think that we
will have to go through maybe a very rickety, maybe a very despairing
process actually and then get back to some kind of a drawing board where we
will be able to come to some sort of a consensus as to where we are heading=
.

MR: Is it to blame the politicians, the successive governments elected by
the people for all these? Have they failed to deliver a minimum democratic
situation or to do some good for the people and other things?

AJ: You see, the point is I am not apportioning blame to anybody. I am
apportioning blame to ourselves because we let it happen. But please try
and understand some thing. Though we have not had remarkable politicians
which is absolutely there, everyone can see it. But in a country that has
been under military rule for more than half its life, you don't expect wise
people to be thrown up through that oppression. We have not been lucky like
South Africa. You don't get Nelson Mandelas every day. But if you compare
our politicians to other politicians of the region, you couldn't say they
were any worse or any better.
However, it is a very interesting thing that you must look into. In our
country there is widespread propaganda that all politicians are corrupt.
But if you look at Pakistan, there was Liaqat Ali Khan who had no charges
of corruption. We had Suhrawardy no charges of corruption. We had Mohammed
Ali Bogra no charges of corruption. Chowdhury Mohammed Ali no charges of
corruption. I A Chandrigarh no charges of corruption. Firoz Khan Noon no
charges of corruption. Mr Bhutto no charges of corruption, monetary
corruption. And when did corruption begin? It was institutionalised by the
army itself. Corrupt practices started with the army. And if Mr Newaz
Sharif was corrupt, he learnt it from his masters. So the most corrupt
people are the Generals of Pakistan Army. Yes, there are a few politicians
who are corrupt. But then even Habib Jali was a politician. He died in a
room four feet by six feet. Even my father was a politician who was left
with nothing except his house when he died and was born into much more
wealth. Mr I A Rahman has been in politics. He has the modest way of living
and one of the most honest people that I know. So which politicians are
they talking about? They are talking about a handful of politicians who are
corrupt. They are corrupt and it is indefensible. But to paint them with
one brush is not easy.
Secondly, in Pakistan, no civilian power has been able to stay. The
longest that anybody has stayed has been Mr Bhutto. And he had to pay the
price for it by being hanged. So we have not actually had a proper civilian
government. We have had civilians who have been ruling under the control
and influence of the army.

MR: The army still remains at the helm of power, and for some more time
they will continue to rule, as I understand. We had the similar experience,
going through being a part of Pakistan, then we had our own military
governments. The same thing happened here too. Of course, we are continuing
with the democratic process, but we are facing also political unrest,
economic poverty, pressure on women and other such things. So where is the
way out? What should we do?

AJ: I wish that I could say that we had good practices that we could
transport to you, but, however, experience can be of different nature. And
I have watched that any process of democracy which is not backed by an
effective independent judicial system, cannot be sustained. So if
Bangladesh really needs anything, it is more democracy rather than any less
of it. There will come a time when people will get fed up of confrontation,
of polarisation and a third force will be thrown up. But the people have to
be very patient because it is such a painful process. It is easy to found
democracy, but it is very difficult to sustain it.

MR: This process is taking a painfully long time. What we see in the top
is the most important. Unless there are a sensible and good people, it is
very difficult to sustain democracy.

AJ: Well, good people can make it smoother and bad people or inefficient
people or ineffective people or corrupt people can actually bring a lot of
frustration in society and that is where more trouble begins to start. I
see your problem. It is very fragile. It is something that is not taking
root as such and perhaps because of the personality clashes rather than the
will of the people to continue.
We have also learnt, and I think our leaders have learnt this time around,
that respect for your opponent in politics is a very important thing.

MR: Tolerance?

AJ: Tolerance. In fact I think that opposition is very relevant in new
democracies because they can play a very positive role as well. And if the
government is not willing to accommodate them, they are actually hurting
their own interests in the long term because people will not be able to
take it far too long.

MR: How is Musharraf going to organise or strengthen his power? Is he
going for a new party. If not, how is he going to create his political
base? Do you have any idea?

AJ: Well, I can only analyse it. I don't have any links to the government,
only through what they are doing. And it is the same manual being rerun
because they will have local body elections which will be on partyless
basis, which will be controlled because of a ban on political activity and
it will be done piecemeal. So they will find a few new faces, new
leaderships at the grassroots level to consolidate the GHQ and that will be
taken up to the provincial level and to the central level. This manual may
have worked well or for a period of time for other military government, but
I have my sincere doubts that it will work this time because they also plan
to change the Constitution and bring in a national defence committee,
inducting the army, bringing the army into politics. Well, if you have guns
and you have an army, they can make you do anything. But there is obviously
no cooperation by the civil society as such and by the people. They are
just watching and with great resentment at what is happening and it will
just not work.

MR: We were reading in the newspapers that all the political parties will
be grouped together. Can you see any prospect? Can they build up any
movement?

AJ: I think it is positive that at least they are with one voice saying
that we will not ask for the army ever to come to power, which has happened
in the past. Secondly, I think that is also for us, and we are planning to
build public pressure on this alliance that they must come with a code of
conduct this time and there must be some minimum agenda that they agree to
so that if ever they return to power, then we don't face the same hurdles
and road blocks as we did in the past. We are going to have a meeting of
some people who have political experience to put down some points and then
pressurise this group to adopt some of those points so that there is a
critical entry point into the politics of Pakistan where you begin to
change, unwind the system again.

MR: The last question. I have gone through an article by an American,
Stephen Cohen, a famous expert on South Asian region. He said that there
was a solution in Pakistan and that could be achieved by a sort of
coalition between the military and the civilians. Do you agree?

AJ: Well, I think that Mr Cohen should probably give that advice to his
own government. I mean, there cannot be freedom for Americans and no
freedom for Pakistanis simply because one was born in America and another
was born in another soil because every human being, and if they believe
that, is equal and every human being has the same aspirations, then freedom
is as dear to us as it is for an American.

MR: Now, say something for my Bangladesh readers.

AJ: I think that what I would like to say is that for me it is not so much
nationalities and nations that matter, but the people that live within
them. To me the greatest loss of East Pakistan going away was the fact that
we became more intolerant. There were secular winds blowing from the East
to us and those winds kept some of us breathing. They stopped. I think I
would like to say that.

MR: Thank you.

_____

#2.

The New York Times
December 20, 2000

1992 Razing of a Mosque Is Still Casting a Pall in India

By CELIA W. DUGGER

NEW DELHI, Dec. 19 =97 The upper house of Parliament censured the
Hindu-nationalist-led coalition government today for refusing to dismiss
three cabinet ministers who were charged in the demolition of a
16th-century mosque eight years ago. The mosque's destruction ignited
ghastly Hindu-Muslim riots.

The vote, 121 to 86, was an embarrassment to the 14-month-old government,
though not a threat to its survival. The more powerful lower house, where
the government is in the majority, decisively defeated a similar motion
last week.

But the harsh debate has a significance beyond partisan posturing: the
incendiary question of whether a Hindu temple should be built on the ruins
of the mosque in Ayodhya is no longer taboo.

That is because of the way Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee handled the
opposition's demand for the ministers' resignations. Not only did Mr.
Vajpayee reject the demand on Dec. 6, the eighth anniversary of the
mosque's destruction, but he also offered moral support to the temple
movement, calling it "an expression of national sentiment."

Mr. Vajpayee's remarks, a break with his past policy of avoiding comment
on the issue, have made many people in the capital rethink his carefully
cultivated image as the moderate, kindly face of Hindu nationalism.

Hindu hard-liners, who believe that the mosque sat atop the birthplace of
Ram, an incarnation of the god Vishnu, have taken his remarks as an
endorsement. They plan to meet next month to decide whether to set a date
for construction, in defiance of a Supreme Court order.

"We are excited now that the prime minister has given his support to the
movement," said Omkar Bhaway, joint general secretary of the World Hindu
Council, which is part of the same family of nationalist organizations as
Mr. Vajpayee's Bharatiya Janata Party and which organized the original
movement that led to the mosque's demolition.

In Parliament today Mr. Vajpayee was a little more cautious in what he said
=97 and for good reason. He has been lambasted by some of his most importan=
t
coalition partners for generating a furor on the issue, which his party has
promised it would not pursue, in exchange for the support of secular-minded
parties.

Mr. Vajpayee today assured his allies that he would adhere to the agreement
he made with them. And he stated that there were only two ways it could be
resolved: through the courts or in negotiations between Hindus and Muslims.

In his earlier comments, Mr. Vajpayee had suggested that Muslims might
agree to a temple on the site of the mosque. But today, while offering that
Ram had a place in the heart of every Indian, he also said he had never
meant to say a temple should be built on that disputed spot.

But that site is the only one the hard-liners will be satisfied with. For
years, dozens of stone workers in Ayodhya and in Rajasthan have been
carving pillars that are meant to hold up the Ram temple. Construction
could begin any time, Mr. Bhaway said.

Political analysts have said they believe that Mr. Vajpayee may have meant
to use the temple issue to mobilize upper-caste Hindus, whose support his
party needs if it is to avoid an expected rout in India's most populous
state, Uttar Pradesh, in elections next year.

The World Hindu Council is clearly eager to politicize the temple cause.
"This is the Hindu heartland, and no political party can go against the Ram
temple," Mr. Bhaway said.

But such a movement could backfire on Mr. Vajpayee, particularly if a
temple were built in violation of the court order. That would likely lead
several of his allies to quit the government, bringing its downfall.

And that is why Bipan Chandra, a historian and professor emeritus at
Jawaharlal Nehru University here, said he believes that Mr. Vajpayee may
allow the issue to be used to energize his core supporters, but will not
allow the temple itself to be built.

Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company

______

#3.

[recieved from the author on 19 Dec. 2000]

Open Secrets of Babri Demolition

Ram Puniyani

Of all the statements which Sangh Parivar (SP) leaders made to save their
skins from the law of the land for their crime in leading the Babri
Demolition, the one by SP patriarch, the RSS boss K. Sudarshan takes the
cake. While speaking in Tiruananthpuram on 6th Dec.(2000), eighth
anniversary of the fateful day, the RSS supremo was 'generous' enough to
share a well guarded secrete with the ordinary mortals of the Nation. He
said that even while the Kar Sevaks mobilized by his parivar just managed
to remove the plaster from the Mosque there was an explosion from within
the mosque due to which it came down. Most of the criminals do come out
with alibis to save themselves and put forward the imaginary sequence of
events to exonerate their own selves. What is surprising that it took
eighth years for the SP patriarch took to make up his mind that the nation
is 'worth ' sharing the 'secrets' with him. At the same time the mask of
SP, the swayamsevak P.M. also came up with the 'protection recipe' fresh
from the kitchen of Hedgewar bhavan (RSS head office) in Nagpur that his
ministerial colleagues, who presided over the demolition exercise in fact
had gone their to protect the fateful mosque. And soon to follow suit, as
probably it may be the best defense for their crime, the one time Sanyasin
(or is she so currently also?) Uma Bharati latched on to this alibi
without even thinking for a minute that generally Sadhvis and Sanaysins
are supposed to be speaking the truth etc. But probably this again is
totally a wrong supposition as, as per the modified adage, 'all (unfair)
is fair in love and politics'.

Here it is worth its while to recapitulate some of the events leading to
Babri demolition. As the section of community started responding to the
communal call of SP, it discovered that it could reap a rich electoral
harvest from the issue, which has nothing to do with the real problems of
the social needs, like the one of Ram Janm Bhumi at Ayodhya. In right
earnest they began the Rath Yatras culminating in the call for Kar Seva on
6th Dec.1992. It is no coincidence that they chose Dr. Ambedkar's death
anniversary for their dastardly agenda. The call to get the Kar Savaks
went from town to town and SP 'succeeded' in getting three lakhs of them
and of course twenty thousand Kar Sevikas also to do the cooking and
cleaning jobs for the warriors of Hindu Rashtra. Most of the leaders of
SP's aspirations were reflected in Advani's statement that Kar Seva will
be done with bricks and shovels and Vinay Katiyar(Bajarang Dal Chief, now
BJP M.P.) summed it up by saying that the, mosque will be demolished and
the debris will be thrown in river Sarayu.

On the day of demolition on the dais were sitting the worthies like
Advaniji, Joshiji, Sudarshanji, Singhalji and Sadhvis Ritambhara and Uma
Bharati. Throughout the demolition the Sadhvis from the dais kept exhorting
their Hindu brethren to wipe away the 'symbol of shame' to the Hindu
Nation, to drive away the 'Babar Ki Aulads' to Pakistan and also that this
is just the beginning of building a Hindu Nation, its day of bravery
(Shourya Divas), and this Nation Building exercise, which has begun with
Babri Demolition, will continue with further tasks like demolitions in
Kashi and Mathura (Ye to Kewal Jhnaki Hai Kashi Mathura Baki Hai).

There was not much information about the casualties and deaths in the
demolition exercise, one of the reasons being that most of the journalists
were beaten up following the demolition and their cameras etc were
destroyed by the followers of Sudarshan, Advani and Co. The debris of the
demolition was taken and thrown in river Sarayu.

Since then the BJP's electoral strength after an initial set back in
assembly elections started going up. Simultaneously a section of society
started realizing the dangers of SP politics and SP itself started cooking
falsehoods which could exonerate it from the guilt of Babri demolition,
(which ranks equal to the murder of Father of the Nation, Mahatma Gandhi,
again by a votary of Hindutva politics). The first attempt came in the
form of an article by Mr. K.R. Malkani, an RSS ideologue, who in an
article in a popular newspaper said that demolition was the handiwork of
ISI, the favorite culprit of ALL the crimes committed in India. The
attempt by Mr. Sudarshan to put the blame on Congress being responsible
for the blast which brought down mosque is a further 'advancement' in the
RSS school of falsification. It is not that Congress govt. did not falter
in protecting the demolition of the mosque. Its crime in the demolition
tragedy is one of the 'omissions', a dereliction of duty etc. But it was
the SP and its paraphernalia, which led the onslaught on the mosque. It
was BJP govt. in UP, Kalyan Singh, the then blue eyed boy of BJP, who gave
an undertaking in the court to protect it; it was him who committed to
National integration council to ensure that nothing untoward happens, it
was the BJP led UP administration which provided all the facilities
(water-electricity etc.) to Kar Sevaks.

It was Mr. Advani, the Architect-in-Chief of demolition who led the
mobilization of Kar Sevaks to Ayodhya, it was his own self who advised the
Kar Sevaks to block the roads leading to Ayodhya to stall the possibility
of the central forces coming in to prevent the demolition. It was his
ownself again who advised Kalyan Singh not to resign till the last dome
comes down. It was their saffron sister Uma Bharati who hugged and
embraced Joshiji in celebration of the demolition. It was the Swayamsevak
P.M., who the very next day tendered an apology to the Nation for the
demolition and later backed out from that a week later and went on to
assume threatening posture by saying that this is what happens when the
will of majority (in real sense-the Dominant Minority) is not respected.

Now with the dishing out of the secret by the RSS Supremo and the cooked
up defense by the Swayamsevak P.M., and parroted by the Sadhvi and
Sanyasin the task of fabricating the defense is complete. The surprise is
not that how the falsehood is being projected in the defense of SP, the
surprise is that it took them eight long years to fabricate it despite
being endowed with the wily ideology of Neo-Brahminism, the core spirit
which guides the Sangh Parivar.

(Dr. Ram Puniyani is Secretary of EKTA, Committee for Communal Amity
,Mumbai)

_____

#4.

The Week
Dec. 24, 2000

Kumbh calculations
Ayodhya: VHP to unveil model of Ram temple at Kumbh Mela in Prayag

A model of the Ram temple which is to be installed in Ayodhya is nearly
complete in a secret location in Jaipur. The plan is to cart the temple to
the Mahakumbh festival in Prayag and display it for darshan. Half a million
pilgrims are expected to congregate at the Kumbh Mela which occurs once in
12 years. At the end of the festival, the model will be taken in a
procession to Ayodhya, with most of the pilgrims expected to accompany it.
It will be installed at Karsewakpuram, where work is apace on the temple
that the VHP hopes to build.

The marble-coated thermocol model of the Ram temple which is 7m long, 3.6m
wide and 3.2m high. (Right) craftsman Chandresh Pandey

The thermocol model, coated with marble dust, using a solution from Japan,
is approximately 7m long, 3.6m wide and 3.2m high. It has the simhadwar,
nritya mandip, koli and garbhagriha parikrama which are held in place by
212 pillars 106 each on two floors. There is also a nine-inch high
sandalwood idol of Lord Ram in a sitting position. The other idols, in the
Ram darbar, are made of marble.

A computerised lighting system, with 45,000 bulbs, illuminates every part
of the structure. The bulbs and the wires are so placed that they are
hidden from public view.

The building of the model has been a hush-hush affair. The top three
leaders of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, international president Ashok
Singhal, international vice-president Giriraj Kishore, and international
secretary-general Pravin Toghadia made a secret visit to Jaipur in the
third week of November to oversee the final touches being made. They were
angry with some VHP workers who had apparently leaked the news to the local
media.

There are two reasons for the secrecy. First, it is a Congress government
in power in Rajasthan. The VHP is afraid that the state government will
thwart its plans by seizing the model or blocking its journey on some legal
pretext or other. Second, they were worried that some Muslim
fundamentalist groups might use explosives to destroy the model.

The trio set a date in the second week of December for completion but the
deadline could not be met because of problems with the electrical circuit.

The man of the moment is Chandresh Pandey. Owner of an obscure crafts shop
in Jaipur, he conceptualised the model two and a half years ago. "I want to
present this model to the Prime Minister," he said.

Pandey first built a small thermocol model, the size of an office table. It
is based on the proposed Ram temple to be made in Ayodhya, designed by the
Gujarat-based architect Chandrakant Sompura.

"The VHP leaders were happy with my model although they asked me to
visualise a bigger one that would reflect the grandeur of the proposed
temple," said Pandey. An artist, Vijay Doodi, gave shape to his concept
with the help of an engineer.

"I have put in a lot of hard work," said Doodi, "I spent nearly 10 days
carving out each pillar." (Incidentally, the stone for the proposed
temple is coming from Bansipaharpur in Dholpur district in Rajasthan. This
is the same stone that has been used for the Red Fort, Rashtrapati Bhawan
and Parliament.)

The model cost Rs 7 lakh and has been built in three separate pieces for
easy transportation. A well-cushioned truck has been designed to transport
the pieces to Allahabad.

The Congress government in Rajasthan has been caught unawares. It will be
accused of passivity, just as Narasimha Rao's government was, during the
demolition of the Babri Masjid.

Neelabh Mishra/Jaipur

_____

#5.

ASIAWEEK
DECEMBER 22, 2000 VOL. 26 NO. 50 |

To Bear Witness:
An independent filmmaker strikes a quiet blow against religious extremism
in India

By SUJOY DHAR Calcutta

When Indian director Buddhadeb Dasgupta was selecting locations for his
latest work, he really only had one place in mind: the West Bengal district
of Purulia. Fond memories of growing up in the rural area was one factor.
But the biggest draw was its isolation. Some settlements were so
inaccessible, his crew had to transport their camera and other equipment on
bicycle. Or strap the gear to their backs.

Why did Dasgupta want to hide? He was concerned that the film, which
focuses on the story of a Hindu zealot attack against a Catholic priest,
might invite reprisals from radical groups. Dasgupta needed the remoteness
to produce Uttara, a study of how intolerance devastates a tiny rural
community. But even the distant village wasn't far enough. Many of the
inhabitants, mostly poor Christians, were thrilled to have a film set in
their village =97 and even agreed to serve as extras in a crowd scene. But
when it came to their churches, the villagers, afraid that Hindu
extremists might identify the buildings and burn them down, refused to let
the cameras in.

Religious fundamentalism is a difficult movie subject at the best times. In
a sectarian climate, it can be downright dangerous. But the rise of Hindu
nationalism is precisely what compelled Dasgupta to take a stand. "I made
this film in response to present-day realities and to warn against them,"
he says, pointing to regular eruptions of religious, ethnic and political
extremism in India. "There's a growing cult of violence." The trend has
been spreading. In 1993, Hindu-Muslim riots broke out in Mumbai over a
disputed holy site. Since the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party came
to power two years ago, India's Christian minority has come under
increasing attack, often over accusations of proselytizing. Churches
across the country have been burned and several priests have been killed in
what Christian leaders called a campaign of hate.

The brutal murder of missionary Graham Staines last year spurred the
director to take action. A mob in Orissa state pounced on the Australian
minister and his two young sons while they slept and burned them to death.
"It is one of the cruelest attacks we have seen in recent times," the
director says. "It disturbed me very much." Indeed, even as the alleged
ringleader of the Staines murders, Dara Singh, went on trial this month,
hoodlums attacked a Bihar missionary home, raping the cook and assaulting
the nuns. Says Dasgupta: "The tendency in India is much like what it was in
Germany, Italy and Spain during the times of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco."

Yet the 55-year-old Dasgupta insists his film is not political. A dreamer
who lectured in economics at Calcutta University before giving in to his
passion for the cinema, he says that the universal notions of personal
fulfillment and loneliness are essential elements in his new work. All the
same, he points to another universal theme =97 the connection between bigot=
ry
and fragmentation. "Intolerance is the catalyst in the descent from peace
to destruction," he says.

Uttara, or The Wrestlers, is a poetic, visually stunning gem. Merging
contemporary reality with a Bengali short story, the movie is set in a
remote tribal hamlet. The rugged beauty of Purulia frames the tale's
brutality. Two friends, Nemai and Balaran, relieve the monotony of their
jobs at a railway signal station with enthusiastic bouts of wrestling. But
fractures soon appear in the tranquil village. The railway workers'
relationship deteriorates when Balaran brings home a lovely bride named
Uttara. Fueled by Nemai's envy of his friend's marriage, the friendly
wrestling matches become an obsessive rivalry over the woman. Meanwhile,
Hindu extremists turn on a parish minister who, like Staines, had been
serving leprosy patients in the area. Uttara, a symbol of human conscience,
tries to stop the brutality and is ultimately destroyed.

Thanks in part to his low-profile approach, Dasgupta has largely escaped
the wrath of Hindu extremists. Where publicity-conscious directors
embroiled themselves in controversy even before their first reels were
shot, he quietly sent his cast and crew to Purulia. Even so, a producer
pulled out of the sensitive project, fearing censorship troubles.
For good reason. Soon after he wrapped up production came a tip-off that
West Bengal officials allied to radical Hindu groups were moving to block
the film. Dasgupta thought laterally: He submitted his film instead to
censors in Tamil Nadu state, who he knew would not understand his
Bengali-language film. The Tamil-speaking board approved the movie,
clearing it for screening across the country.

But Dasgupta knows he has enemies. He received several warning phone calls
from Hindu intellectuals following a test screening in Delhi earlier this
year. "What they said can only be interpreted as polite threats," he says.
There haven't been any threats against his family so far. Perhaps that's
because until recently the film was showed only to festival-circuit
audiences in India. His use of Bengali, a regional language, also served as
a buffer.

Now Dasgupta is being rewarded for his pains. In September, he won the
highest honor at the Venice international film festival =97 the special
director's award. Festival director Alberto Babera calls Uttara "the best
Indian film in years." Since then, both Dasgupta and his new production
have been in constant demand at film festivals from London to Toronto.
What's more, he is even making some money. Not counting his own pay, the
film cost only $150,000 to make. That's a pittance by the standards of the
film studios in Mumbai (Bombay), known as Bollywood. But just breaking even
is a feat in India, where alternative directors have trouble getting
producers. Tara Bangla, a Calcutta-based television station bought
broadcast rights, and has screened the film on prime time. And after rave
reviews in the domestic press, Uttara is being shown commercially in
Calcutta, where communal tensions are muted and audiences are more
appreciative of creative expression.

For most of the theater-going public, who prefer standard Bollywood
entertainment, the film is unlikely to make much of an impression. Even so,
Christian groups like Bangiya Christiya Pariseba view Uttara as a form of
vindication. "It is a film of wider connotation but nevertheless highlights
the issue of attacks on religious minorities in India," says a Bangiya
spokesman. "Hindu groups are systematically targeting us. I think people
who see the film would be repulsed by the ruthlessness of people who resort
to communal violence." That's certainly true for Calcutta movie buff Bimal
Das. "I have never been so touched by a film. Uttara makes us ponder," he
says. The idealistic Dasgupta couldn't ask for a higher accolade than that.

=A9 2000 Asiaweek.

______________________________________________
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
at http://www.egroups.com/messages/act/
////////////////////////////////////
Disclaimer: opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily correspond to views of SACW compilers.