[sacw] SACW Dispatch | 30 Sept. 00

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch
30 September 2000
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

[ An important note from SACW: A certain number of people on the SACW list
have recently written in saying they have been recieving multiple copies of
messages. We are looking into the problem, everyone facing this problem
should signal this to -> aiindex@m... ]

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

#1. On events of 1971 & the ruling elite in Pakistan (Asad Rahman)
#2. Towards a Secular & Democratic Culture: note for discussion (by Prof.
KN Pannikar)
#3. India: on the Hindu Right's education policy to make =93good citizens=
=94
#4. India: Of guns and a Hindu `rashtra'
#5. India: Book Review - Hindu Muslim Communalism- A Panchanama (Ram Puniya=
ni)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

#1.

The News International
30 September 2000
Op-Ed.

FACING UP TO REALITY

by Asad Rahman

History as such is a great teacher only if one is willing to learn and not
repeat past mistakes while making a determined effort to judiciously
rectify and contain the aftermath of political debacles. A humane approach
to political, economic and social national issues is the best recourse for
governments to follow.

South Africa, through the setting up of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission, has been able to successfully dissipate the potential ethnic
African revenge violence against European settlers, after the demise of
apartheid. Because of this nation-building determined effort on the part of
the African National Congress of Nelson Mandela, a looming civil war
between the black Africans and white settlers was averted. Apologies were
made and most perpetrators of ethnic violence were forgiven and continue to
live in South Africa as citizens with all the rights given to them under
the constitution.

The escalating row between Pakistan and Bangladesh over the alleged war
crimes committed by the Pakistan Army in 1971, in the then East Pakistan,
is the result of our ruling elite's ostrich syndrome when faced with
embarrassing situations of their own making. General Pervez Musharraf
avoided meeting the Bangladesh Prime Minister because of her anti-military
coup speech at the UN. Then in a press conference in the US, dismissed the
demand for a complete publication of the voluminous Hamoodur Rehman
Commission report, as it's terms of reference did not cover the political
hands behind the debacle (according to him), while advising the press to
forget the past.

The general public has not set its eyes on the complete report, only the
supplementary portion, first published in India and then in the Pakistani
press. One can thus assume that the General has read the complete report
for him to make such a categorical statement about its mandate.

The Bangladesh Foreign Minister has now called for a war crimes tribunal to
be set up in Dhaka. Our Information Minister has, in response, put the
blame for war crimes on India. One is continually amazed and bewildered by
the approach of our ruling elite to the multitude of political, economic
and social debacles that are integral to the political history of
Pakistan=EDs 53 years of existence. Either they are politically naive and
immature or are blindly following an irrational foreign dictated agenda
that has no relation to national integration, political, economic and
social development for the people of Pakistan.

The fact is that like the other smaller provinces of Sindh, Balochistan and
NWFP, East Pakistan (the population majority province) was oppressed,
repressed and exploited both politically and economically for the sole
interests of the ruling elite. In 1971, the military institution (read
army) was in power under the martial law regime of General Yahya Khan, and
thus whatever happened in East Pakistan, even if at the goading of some
political entities, was the sole responsibility of the government of the da=
y.

Exponentially, the alleged war crimes, or military action, against the
people of Pakistan did not take place in East Pakistan alone. The people of
Balochistan have suffered four military operations against them for
demanding provincial autonomy after the forced merger and botched accession
negotiations under both military and civilian governments. In Sindh, the
people faced terrorist violence from an organisation sponsored and created
by the martial law regime of Ziaul Haq in an effort to counter the hold of
the People's Party.

Subsequently this very organisation had to be confronted by the Army in a
showdown that cost thousands of lives because it had broken free of the
control of the ISI and the Army High Command. NWFP, too, has suffered
military operations although on a much smaller scale from time to time. In
the Punjab, the military government of Ayub Khan used the mighty armed
forces, unsuccessfully, against the student movement of the late 1960s that
sought to oust his regime.

The drugs and Kalashnikov culture was introduced into Pakistani society by
Afghan refugees during the Afghan war, which again took place in the
General Ziaul Haq military rule era. The resulting sectarian, drug mafia
violence, law and order situation rent asunder the very fabric of civil
society. Security of life and property vanished, while gangs in connivance
with police and political forces reigned supreme in the sphere of illegal
occupation of property, looting and killing innocent citizens, the most
tragic being Hakim Saeed and others like him.

Political and financial corruption's head rose like that of an angry cobra
about to strike its very master. Where there is smoke, there must be a fire
burning. Not that politicians and administrators were not corrupt before,
but their corruption was miniscule compared to the so-called era of
democracy 1988 onwards, they were just emboldened by the corruption seen in
the Ziaul Haq period.

Many crucial and important incidents have taken place in our short history
which have had far reaching consequences on the sovereignty, security,
integrity, social, political and economic conditions of Pakistan. Many
commissions have been set up to investigate and report on these incidents
but most reports have never seen the light of day for the general public.
The assassination of Liaqat Ali Khan report, Hamoodur Rehman Commission
report, Ojheri Camp explosion report, Ziaul Haq's plane crash report, are
just the tip of the iceberg. All these incidents and happenings have
lessons we must be willing to learn if Pakistan is to survive as it stands
today on the brink of disintegration and extinction.

It is an established fact in Pakistan that after the Ayub Khan era, most
political governments have only been able to gain power after receiving a
nod from the military institution (read Army). General Yahya Khan handed
over power to ZA Bhutto, General Mirza Aslam Baig handed power over to
Ghulam Ishaq and Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif was a protege of General
Jillani and Ziaul Haq. The foreign policy of Pakistan has always revolved
around the Kashmir issue, which the military institution uses as its reason
for existence and thus dictates to all civilian governments. It is obvious
to any observer that the economic and political policies are, therefore,
geared to maintaining the military institution at its present level if not
capable today of a technologically more advanced level.

These and many other issues are ground realities in the history of Pakistan
that need to be studied and lessons learnt from. It is unproductive to
continually apportion blame on external forces for all the ills Pakistan is
faced with today. An apology for not handing over power to the political
party that had fairly and clearly won the elections of 1970 would be in
order. An apology for the subsequent military operation and the atrocities
committed in East Pakistan is most definitely in order.

The atrocities committed by Bengalis against West Pakistanis in East
Pakistan should not have triggered a response as atrocious and genocidal as
was witnessed in an integral part of Pakistan whose people were demanding
their legitimate right. This atrocious response of the Pakistan Army was
the opportunity India was waiting for to disintegrate Pakistan. We provided
and they took it with international laurels.

A nation's character is judged by the way it treats its own citizens and
the magnanimity that it shows in accepting its shortcomings, weaknesses,
mistakes and demonstrating remorse. To apologise for the mistakes and human
rights violations committed at any time in its history is a demonstration
of humane character. The ruling elite of Pakistan has never accepted its
political shortcomings, weaknesses, and exploitative self interest and,
thus, has taken Pakistan down the road to self-destruction.

______

#2.

>From Professor KN Pannikar, New Delhi.

DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION

MOVEMENT FOR SECULAR AND DEMOCRATIC CULTURE

The cultural manifestations of globalisation and communalisation, though
threaten to undermine the secular and democratic culture historically
inherited and nurtured during the post- independence era, have not elicited
adequately strong and creative response so far. The forces of
globalisation representing the operation of trans-national capital, with
considerable interest in culture industry, have entered the cultural domain
in a very striking and dramatic manner through entertainment media and
consumer network. The strategy of communal organisations, on the other
hand, has been a molecular transformation of cultural consciousness, sought
to be achieved through the active intervention of a large number of
institutions brought into being in almost every field of cultural activity.
Both these forces share a common purpose: transformation of the existing
cultural common sense of the society, although in entirely different
directions. While the former is engaged in constructing a mirror image of
the advanced capitalist culture through a process of hegemonisation, the
aim of the latter is to impart a religious character through selective
appropriation and expropriation.

The cultural differentiation is integral to every society; the
differentiation in itself is not unhealthy or undesirable, so long as
differentiation does not entail hierarchy. Nor is differentiation
necessarily undemocratic. For democratic culture does not mean homogenised
culture or an identical way of life. What is central to democratic culture
is access to differentiated culture and ways of life, both through
opportunity and ability. Any system that denies ability and opportunity to
have such an access does not contribute to the development of a democratic
culture. In India both caste and class have been factors creating
insularity in cultural consciousness and practices. As a consequence
cultural knowledge and cultural products have remained the monopoly of a
particular caste or a class. This is true of both classical and popular
forms as well as different ways of life leading to the absence of universal
participation or appreciation of different cultural practices prevalent in
society. In a caste- class society the cultural practices are so ordered to
prevent universal participation, for culture is one of the many channels
for the articulation and maintenance of power. A struggle for democratic
culture therefore involves a struggle against such structures of society
and their ideological articulations, which prevent universal participation.

The critique of cultural practices and resistance against cultural
domination are necessary precursors of democratisation. Several movements
in the past have contributed to this process. The Bhakti and Sufi movements
in the medieval period, the cultural revitalisation and regeneration during
the nineteenth century and the progressive cultural movement more recently
are some of them. All of them had initiated a critique of existing cultural
practices and posited an alternative vision, even if with limitations, of a
cultural future within a democratic and secular mould. Yet, independent
India has not succeeded in building upon this legacy and carry forward the
cultural struggle they represented. Instead contemporary society appears to
be fast sliding towards a state of cultural backwardness.

The process of globalisation, projected as a homogenising force, does not
promote democratisation in the cultural domain. In fact, like in all other
fields, it only heightens differentiation, as the culture industry promoted
by the transnational capital produces its wares primarily for the
consumption of the affluent. Subjected to the hegemonising influence of the
=91global=92 culture the Indian middle class is acquiring a new cultural ta=
ste,
which is distancing them further from the masses. The implication of
cultural globalisation is far greater than the hegemonisation of the middle
class. It adversely affects the culture of the masses, as popular culture
is commercially appropriated which in turn leads to its eventual
fossilisation. The potential for resistance inherent in popular culture is
thus seriously undermined.

A simultaneous development is the communal construction of culture and the
subversion of the long-standing secular tradition of the society. In the
multi-cultural situation prevailing in India people have lived and
interacted with each other informed by a secular cultural common sense
which recognised religion as a matter of personal faith. Historically the
religious and the secular have co-existed along with the tendency of
secularisation, seeking to divorce religion fron the public and
institutional practices.The effort of the communal forces is to transform
this common sense into a communal one in which culture is defined and
constructed on religious lines. As a part of this agenda the national
culture is identified with Hindu culture and Indian nationalism is
interpreted as Hindu religious nationalism. A fairly large number of
cultural organisations sponsored by the Sangh Parivar are actively engaged
in the dissemination of these ideas.

Two recent developments are particularly significant in the rapidly
progressing communalisation of culture. With the rise of BJP to power at
the Centre, although with the help of several regional powers, Hindu
communalism has entered a new phase. The earlier strategy of the communal
forces has been the slow infiltration of various cultural organisations and
thus to influence the cultural field in a relatively unobtrusive manner.
The situation has substantially changed since the BJP=92s success to form t=
he
government. The access to power has created the opportunity to control
these organisations and to use the power of patronage thus gained to shift
the cultural discourse in favour of communal ideology. During the last two
years of BJP rule the liberal character of most government sponsored
cultural organisations has been replaced by the communal. Naturally their
programmes have consciously foregrouded a communal cultural agenda.

The success of this initiative would largely depend upon the creation of a
public space for communal cultural practice. Given the hegemony of secular
cultural intelligentsia the communal forces were not able to make much
headway in the past. It was therefore realised that without the
denigration and the eventual displacement of the secular intelligentsia the
communal cultural discourse can not make its presence felt. Such a
realisation has led to a series of attempts during the last two years to
discredit the secular intelligentsia, by questioning their ideology,
morality and even their commitment to the nation. Engaged in this
denigration is a section of the liberal intelligentsia, lured by the
benefits of official patronage, and hence turned collaborationist which
tends to impart some legitimacy to the communal propaganda. The silence of
some other sections of the intelligentsia also helps to promote the
communal cause. A fairly good number of liberals have been rather reticent,
either fearing reprisals or reluctant to join issue with those who do not
respect the norms of public debate. The ambivalence of some members of the
radical intelligentsia who seem to maintain equidistance from both the
communal and the secular, possibly due to the lack of ideological clarity,
equally serves the communal cause, at least indirectly.

The cultural tendencies gaining ground as a result of globalisation and
communalisation threaten to unsettle the prevalent cultural ethos of Indian
society. The change it is likely to usher in are not internal to the social
dynamics or a process in which the society exercises a decisive influence.
Rather they are constructions imposed upon it through political
intervention or economic domination. Given the collaboration of the state
with the trans national capital and the communal character of the present
government the resistance against the ongoing cultural engineering has to
emerge from the people. Such a resistance can be waged only as a part of a
movement engaged in the construction of a democratic and secular cultural
consciousness.=20

Towards that end several cultural organisations are already at work. The
cultural assertion of the traditionally marginalised and oppressed groups
like women and dalits has become quite powerful in recent times. There is
also considerable concern about the degradation of environment and the
exploitation of natural resources and a host of other issues which are
being pursued by several groups. In most cases, however, these movements
remain single issue oriented and generally do not form part of the larger
secular and democratic struggles, despite their secular outlook and
democratic convictions. Their linkage with larger democratic struggles is
necessary for the enrichment of both.

The proposed movement for secular and democratic culture is envisaged as a
platform on which all organisations, groups and individuals concerned with
the current cultural situation in the country can come together. This
initiative, without replacing the already existing cultural activities,
would attempt to mobilise cultural activists and concerned citizens to
create active democratic and secular communities at local levels. Their
undertakings will be constructively secular rather than reactively
anti-communal. These communities can be formed on the basis of locally
important secular and democratic issues. They can then act as the nodal
points for the creation of secular-democratic cultural consciousness. For
the organisation of such communities following steps are suggested:

1. A national convention with ten representatives from each state within
three months.
2. State level conventions with at least five representatives from each
district within the next three months of the national convention.
3. District level workshops with one representative from each village or
panchayat for orienting them to organise local level secular communities
and to equip them with audio and video material.
4. After one year the district, state and national level review meetings
are held to assess the progress of the movement.

The organisation and direction of the movement will be the responsibility
of the following committees:

1. National Committee
President
Vice-presidents from each state.
General Secretary
Secretaries from each state
2. State Committees
Vice- President as President
Secretary
A representative from each district
3. District committees
President
Secretary
A representative from each village or panchayat.

The scale at which the movement is conceived will require considerable
financial resources. The methods for the generation of finances will have
to be thought of. Some money can be raised during the course of the
movement through cultural performances. Initiating the movement at a
national plane and its future sustenance will, however, entail substantial
expenditure. The movement should have at its disposal some money to conduct
its activities.
=20
_____

#3.

The Telegraph
30 Septmber 2000

EDITORIAL / CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM=20=20=20=20

=20=20=20=20
Backbones need careful tending. Mr Murli Manohar Joshi has been disturbed,
for a while now, by his nation=92s bad back. India=92s =93moral and spiritu=
al
backbone=94, he feels, is =93in decline=94. The Union minister for human
resources development would like to project himself as some sort of a
national bone-setter, determined to straighten this tangle of nerve and
bone and restore his country to the correct posture. Upright Indians
mustn=92t stoop or slouch, as every right-thinking
chiropractor-cum-scoutmaster will agree. The crucial arena for such
essential rectifications is, of course, that all-encompassing, hence
conveniently vague, concept, which Mr Joshi=92s ministry likes to call =93v=
alue
education=94. After a period of long and frequently vocal mulling over, the
ministry has taken its first decisive steps towards making value education
a part of the new school curriculum. The National Council for Educational
Research and Training has set up a resource centre in New Delhi which is
about to implement an =93action plan=94 for the propagation of the =93right=
=94
values.=20

This move has a history. Earlier this month, the NCERT had announced that
it has abandoned the idea of =93religious instruction=94 for its new school
curriculum, to replace it with =93education about different religions=94. T=
his
is to assure paranoid secularists that the dread hue has now burst into a
riot of pluralist colours. And most important, secularism =97 still =93one =
of
the core curricular components=94 =97 is being unshackled from the traditio=
nal
and limited idea of a =93complete dissociation between religion and
education=94. Hence this latest shift from religious to value education.
Nevertheless, several fundamental elements of this new plan remain
regressive and far from reassuring.=20

First, the entire programme is founded upon an attitude of pious Gibbonism.
Mr Joshi=92s =93nation in decline=94 theory can only result in the most dan=
gerous
archaisms in educational policymaking. Besides, if the nation is in
decline, what entitles Mr Joshi to set himself and his ministry apart from
this process so as to be arbiters of human values? Second, the elaborate
ethical system that the NCERT has devised as the basis for this new form of
education can be of use only to the most Dickensian of caricaturists.
Diligent research in Mr Joshi=92s resource centre has yielded a precise
number of human values =97 83 to be exact=97 which will be =93classified in=
to
different categories=94 before nationwide dissemination. Bone-setting meets
here the ancient arts of memory. Third, the inspiration for this year-long
research into the new meanings of secularism comes, incredibly, from
dubiously powerful godmen and quasi-spiritualist multinational
organizations. The chief inspirer of the resource centre=92s reformist idea=
s
has been Sai Baba of Bangalore. Finally, Mr Joshi=92s reforms remain
motivated primarily by a dour =97 and distressingly familiar =97 nationalis=
m.
The value education factory line intends to produce =93good citizens and
nationalists=94.=20

This vision and practice of educational reform =97 involving an 83-point
value-system and the usual bureaucratic paraphernalia for its
implementation =97 raises another fundamental question. To what extent shou=
ld
the state, already groaning under its own unwieldiness, take it upon itself
to intervene in the moral education of its citizens? This is a matter of
both principle and pragmatics. The state could certainly discharge its
constitutional commitment to elementary education without mixing up basic
literacy and numeracy with what is good or bad for the soul. The
inculcation of human values should be left to the individual and to the
self-regulating institutions of civil society. Outside the sphere of
elementary education, this interventionist attitude to morality can spill
over into such important national concerns as sexual health or the
regulation of the private entertainment market. A greater degree of
unobtrusiveness in matters spiritual would certainly afford opportunities
for bureaucratic streamlining. Mr Joshi=92s =93good citizens=94, in spite o=
f
their spinal mettle, would perhaps prefer a minimalist to a moralist state.
=20=20=20=20=20=20

______

#4.

The Times of India
29 September 2000

OF GUNS AND A HINDU `RASHTRA'

SITAPUR: Rat-a-tat-tat. The deafening sound of gun shots disturbs the
serene surroundings with uncanny regularity. Tracing the source through
overgrown shrubs and grass, one comes across 15 men in the 22-30 age-group
lying on their stomach with firearms in their hands. They are practising on
different targets comprising chiefly glass bottles.

Giving them training is an older man, who appears conversant with guns. The
men listen to him intently and then begin their practice session like
people possessed. Their dictum is simple: tooth for a tooth and eye for an
eye. `Hindu' power flows from the barrel of the gun for them.

They are members of the newly-floated Hindu Rashtriya Mukti Army, an
offshoot of the Shiv Sena, and are attending an arms training camp over the
past 15 days at a destination about 90 km from the state capital.

Their burning ambition is to fight terrorism in Kashmir and put an end to
the SIMI and ISI activities in Uttar Pradesh. For this, they have roped in
unemployed youths and have tutored them on `desh bhakti' and the need for
inculcating militancy among Hindus to combat Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

Says Jai Dev Verma, a Shiv Sainik and a participant at the camp: "The
outfit is month-old and we are acting on directions of Bal Thackeray. Hindu
pride has to be restored and arms training is a step in this direction."

But from where do they get the firearms and the money for running such a
camp? And why has the police not caught up with them? Counters Swatantra
Kumar Tripathi, state president of the Bharatiya Vidyarthi Sena: "Do you
expect the police to come to this forsaken place. These are our personal
firearms and we have enough resources to run such camps. Are you aware that
another such camp has been organised at another destination?"

The Mukti Army members will be taking out a padyatra from Lucknow to Delhi
on October 1 to highlight the Kashmir issue. They will then embark upon
their `Free Kashmir of militants' mission. The members are equally
vociferous in their criticism of the BJP and Atal Behari Vajpayee. "The BJP
is no better than the rest when it comes to Kashmir and Vajpayee wants to
become another Mahatma Gandhi. He talked about Hindu `rashtra' and Ayodhya
to capture power but has resorted to the policy of appeasement once he has
occupied the chair," averred Tripathi. For them it is Bal Thackeray, the
barrel of the gun and nothing else.

______

#5.

Economic and Political Weekly- May 13th 2000

Book Review:

Taking Evidence on Communalism

Ram Puniyani

Book Reviewed: Hindu Muslim Communalism- A Panchanama
By Jayant Gadakari. Published by D. D. Kosambi Memorial Trust, Mumbai,
C/o-J.G.Gadakari L-2/9,Tilak Nagar No.2, Vrindavan, Chembur Mumbai 400089,
(Distributed by Sabrang Communications & Publishing Pvt. Ltd. P.O.Box
28253, Mumbai-400049) -Price Rs.200

The issue of communal politics has been analysed from different angles.
Many a scholars-social scientists have looked at the social roots of this
menace and tried to unravel the causative factor of this politics. Others
have focussed on historical genesis of the problem. This work falls in the
later category. Though the post 80 communalism as a phenomenon has some
differences with the pre- partition one, most of the underlying tenets are
the same. There is a superficial break in the underlying project of this
politics and that causes much confusion as far as its analysis is
concerned. The linkage between the post 80 and the pre-partition communal
politics need to be drawn out more meticulously to understand the 'core'
project of this phenomenon. In addition one notes that between these two
periods there has been the massive worldwide upswing of fundamentalism,
which adds some more dimensions to the understanding of current state of
affairs. What strikes one is that when the foundations of communal
politics were being laid down in India, Fascism was on rampage in Europe.
Today when communalism is rampaging the human rights of the oppressed and
weaker sections of society it is the 'Fascism-twin' (Fundamentalism) which
is doing the same to the rights of minorities and other weaker sections of
society, in different parts of the world.

Gadkari's contribution goes to the meticulous details of the historical
genesis of communalism manifesting itself as the movement for Partition of
the country. In aptly referenced work the author goes to the details of
the rise of this demon. The rise of newer social structure, modern
education and administrative need of growing civic structure are the
backdrop in which the embryos of this phenomenon emerged. The first
perception of this comes in the form of the recruitment for jobs. "Muslims
as a rule had been attached to military careers. After the 1857 uprising,
many of the Nawabs and Rajas and their retinues participating in the
uprising were deposed. The British as a rule denied jobs to the Muslims in
the army. Sir Hunter observes: "the army is now completely closed to them.
No Mohammedan gentleman can enter the army now." (Pg.46) Sir Syed
recognizing this fact propagated for the spread of modern education for
the Muslim elite and also went in for non-confrontation policy vis-a-vis
the British, with the belief that Anglo-Muslim alliance will ameliorate
the conditions of the Muslims. With this understanding he saw the Indian
National Congress (INC) as antithetical to the interests of Muslims,
adding a rider that INC is a body to promote the Hindu interests. The
Hindu communalists at this point went on to condemn the INC for ignoring
the Hindu interests and for laying the foundation of the much maligned and
'non-existent' appeasement of minorities. Gadkari is on the dot when he
says that Sir Syed was articulating the interests of Muslim Jagirdars and
Nawabs. Today when the blame of partition is put solely on the Muslim
separatism, the author goes on to remind us that the partition process had
more to do with the political interests of the Muslim elite. Those
supplementing the fanning of fire of partition movement were the British
and the Hindu communalists. He ably makes the point by quoting from the
communication of Lord Elphistone (The then Governor of Bombay) to the East
India Company executive recommending: "divide et empera was the old Roman
motto and it should be ours". Also Lord Minto's reception to a group of
Muslim Nawabs and Jagirdars, who called upon him as Shimla delegation in
1906, as the representatives of Indian Muslims was another landmark, which
laid the foundations of the partition process in times to come.=20
The political process unleashed by the United India Patriotic Association,
(1860s) in which both Hindu and Muslim Nawabs and Jamindars were there and
whose aim was to spread patriotism to the British crown, found its
continuation in the politics of Muslim League and Hindu Mahasabha. This is
well exemplified in the resolution moved in the convention of Muslim
League (1906) calling for promotion of loyalty amongst Musalmans of India
to the British administration. Similar observations were relevant in the
context of Hindu Communal organizations, which were not a part of any of
the anti-British agitation's and campaigns started by INC, Subhash Chandra
Bose, and revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh. Not only that they condemned
the anti British struggle as being reactionary. It is important to note
here that in the Princely states Praja Parishads were active and demanding
representation to the legislative assemblies, while most of the princes
were opposing these moves in the name of politics of Muslim League or
Hindu Mahasabha.=20

Gadkri does well to demolish the myth that all Muslims were for Pakistan.
Not only the Deobandi School of Ulama but also the stalwarts like Maulana
Abul Kalam Azad, and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan were absolutely opposed to the
partition politics, " N.W.F.P. dominantly populated by Muslims, had
rejected the Muslim League". The concern of princes was to continue their
rule under the patronage of British, they were opposed to merger with
India, and also they were the main patrons of Hindu Maha Sabha, R.S.S. and
Muslim League. These formations in turn paid glorious tributes to the
princes. Gadkari quotes Bhai Paramand of Hindu Maha Sabha "These princes
are the flesh of our flesh and most essential part of our body politic"
(Pg121). Reading the book makes one realise that truth is stranger than
fiction. Currently the communal forces and the progenies of fountainhead
of Hindu Rashtra (RSS) are projecting as if they are the main custodians
of patriotism and nationalism. This book makes it abundantly clear that
these forces had no role whatsoever to play in the freedom struggle and if
at all most of the times they were promoting loyalty to British in more
ways than one. That much for their custodianship of patriotism. This was
passed off as the move towards Hindu Rashtra or Muslim Nation. Post
Andaman Savarkar's role in toeing the British line in the name of
Religion: Hindu Nation, comes out very well in the exposition in the book
under review. Exhorting the Hindu Kings to lead the Hindu movement Mr.
Savarkar the hero of many of those who are unaware of his role in the post
-Andaman phase, writes ". The Congress Hindus had not only failed to
extend them support but looked down on the Hindu states as an impediment
in the path of India's progress. The Hindu states arethe only centers of
organised military administrative and political Hindu strength and are
bound to play a more active and more decisive part in the near future, in
molding the destiny of Hindu Nation, than any other factor within our
reach" (Pg122). Also Savarkar expected the Hindu ruler of Nepal who
according to him was destined to fulfill "the great and glorious destiny
of being the leader and savior of the hopes of Hindus and the leader of
the Hindu faith and the commander of Hindu forces."(Pg.122)

Gadkari concludes that Pakistan was not formed due to the support of all
Muslims. It was the machination of elite Muslims as the average Muslims
had no voice in politics "Even the broadened franchise under the 1935 act,
was limited to 10% of the total adult population, restricted to propertied
elite and highly educated middle class". The other factors as mentioned
above related to the British policy of divide and rule and the
contribution of Hindu communal forces. Gadkari feels that the weight of
Hindu communal forces was weaker, "the reason is that the leadership of
Hindu communalist movement remained in the hands of Brahmins and even non
Brahmin social reformers thwarted the growth of religious sectarianism
among large majority of Hindus belonging to Sudra castes. These castes
became averse to the open protrusion of Hindu Maha Sabha's Brahminical
politics. The other reason for the weakness of the Hindu Mahasabha was the
relatively lesser weight of Jagirdari elements and the existence of middle
class among the Hindus. The inadequacy of middle class among the Muslims
contributed to the growth of Muslim communalism." This formulation can be
disputed as the Hindu communalism was not only restricted to Hindu Maha
Sabha alone. R.S.S. contributed to this politics in no mean way. This
Brahmin and Bania formation had good deal of following amongst section of
middle class and this was one of the most 'unique' organisation. It
developed in a most 'ingenious' way to go on to survive not only partition
but also to become the vehicle of communal politics in the 80s though with
a major shift in its class base. But it did retain the same principles of
communal politics, which aim to do away with the liberal democratic norms
and to work for the restoration of values based on pre-modern structural
hierarchy. Also Gadkari turns a blind eye to existence of communal
elements within Congress it self. How did the soft Hindutva elements
within Congress differ from the hard core Hindutva of HMS and RSS? Why
some of them who in a way were close to Religion based Nationalism
preferred to be in Congress. This needs to be unraveled. Gadkari is
totally silent on this.=20

Communal politics rides on the horse of 'manufactured common sense', and
bases itself on the distorted version of history built upon the selective
events of the past. On both sides of the divide it is communal
interpretation of history, which formed the 'grounding' on which the demon
of communalism stands. In Pakistan today it is part of the official
education policy while in India so far it has been percolating through RSS
shakhas in an 'effective' way. Both these versions are polar opposite of
each other and at one level are two sides of the same coin. Aurangazeb is
the most revered king for Muslim communal historians, he is also the most
hated one by their Hindu counterparts. Both these versions are equally
critical of the Indian Nationalism propounded by Congress under the
leadership of Gandhi and Nehru. Both accept the periodisation of Indian
History in to Hindu, Muslim and British periods though the interpretation
of these is different in both the versions. Gadkari disputes this
perodisation "This division of historical periods, to say the least was
totally misconceived. The periodisatoin is fallacious, since the rulers;
big and small throughout the history had always respected local and
customary law. Muslim rulers never imposed Islamic laws on Hindus. In
fact, all Muslim rulers ruled through a chain of feudal intermediaries
called sardars, talukdars etc among whom a large number were Hindus"
(pg.130). This Panchanama goes in the details of ancient, medieval and
modern Indian history to conclude "The objective analysis of social,
economic and political factors governing societies has to be bereft of
racial, religious and sectarian biases or prejudice. The object of reading
history is not to bog down the present generations in the quagmire of
false prides and prejudices created by the ruling classes and their
intellectual henchmen, in order to perpetuate inimical atmosphere among
masses; but to extricate them from those false perverse notions." (Pg152)
Panchanama takes up the issue of two-nation theory at length and also
shows the fallacy of those who supported this theory like Dr. Ambedkar and
the communists. One wishes he had given these arguments at some length as
Ambedkar changed his views in times to come. Though Gadkari registers
this, he does not mention Ambedkars fears due to formation of Pakistan
i.e. such an event may result in formation of Hindu Rashtra, which will be
such a calamity to the Dalits. What a prophetic vision. Today one seees
the worth Babasaheb's vision when on one hand he is being denigrated as a
'false god' by the ideologues of Hindu Communal politics and on the other
the threat of Hindu Rashtra is hovering over the horizons in a menacing
way. Also these dark forces presiding over the education and culture
ministries dominate the present scenario. They are fully determined to
wipe out the objective and rational view of history and social
understanding. Even without being in the seat of power they have
'succeeded' in communalising the 'social common sense', with newfound
power what havoc they can inflict on these is already becoming painfully
visible.
The basic tenor of the book is built around the historical progression
of the march of communal politics and its resurgence in the post 80s. It
does take up the debate of cultural nationalism and goes on to demolish
the myths around which the common notions which have been built by the
Hindutva politics. The author with his deep knowledge of the Indian
History, especially the ancient Indian history brings to our notice
various gross distortions in the edifice built by RSS and its progenies.
What is jarring is the too detailed an elaboration of JP movement and the
events of 70s and 80s which have not much relevance to the theme under
discussion. The other aspects of the communal problem have been handled in
a very lucid manner bereft of the jargons and with simplification of the
concepts without diluting the depth of the concepts and ideas. The book is
marred by many a confusing dates and years, BC replacing AD and 1957 being
put in place of 1857 and the like. Overall this is a valuable contribution
to combat communal propaganda amongst average readers.

_____________________________________________
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 blank message to <act-subscribe@egroups.com>
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[Disclaimer : Opinions carried in the dispatches
are not necessarily representative of views of SACW compilers]