[sacw] SACW Dispatch | 28 Nov. 00

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch 
28 November 2000 
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex)

____________________________

#1. Pakistan Intellectuals call for peaceful resolution of Kashmir issue
#2. 'About Daddy' a new novel about India's partition of 1947
#3. India / Nagaland: From ceasefire to the cessation of hostilities 
#4. India: Covert Censorship by National ISP
#5. India: Kushwant Singh on increasing religious intolerance 
#6. India: Hindu Far Right to Mobilize Volunteers for Ayodhya Temple Construction
#7. India: 'Door To Door Propaganda work by the Hindu Right'

____________________________

#1.

Dawn
26 November 2000

INTELLECTUALS CALL FOR PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF KASHMIR ISSUE

By Our Staff Reporter

KARACHI, Nov 26: Peace is essential within the country and on the borders for improving the health of the ailing economy as well as for the welfare of the people.

Search for security results in a search for weapons which leads to arms race and frittering away the scant resources of the country, as is shown by a weakening economy and the ever harsher conditionalities of the IMF and other international lending organizations.

These were the views expressed by speakers at the fourth session on "Sectorial perspective" of the "Pen for Peace" conference here on Sunday. The session was jointly presided over by Dr Inayatullah and Prof S. M. Naseer. Nazir Mahmood was the moderator.

In the concluding remarks, Dr Inayatullah called upon enlightened sections of people, committed to peace, not to address their opponents with terms of contempt like Jehadi organizations but with a degree of respect and hold talks with them.

"Those who are working for an Islamic revival, as they understand it, should not be called fundamentalists."

He said only those can contribute to any movement who are guided by the spirit of fighting against human sufferings.

Joint Chairman of the fourth session, Prof S. M. Naseer, said people have been groping in the dark and there is confusion everywhere. India does not need not to drop nuclear bomb as we are capable of destroying ourselves.

"Both India and Pakistan want to make Kashmir their colony, but the solution is to give them independence," he said.

Speaking on "Foreign relations," diplomat and former foreign secretary Iqbal Akhund pointed out that our foreign policy has been obsessed with India and the Kashmir issue.

He said the objective of partition of the subcontinent, which was mainly to provide an opportunity to Hindus and Muslims to live peaceably in their countries and have friendly relations, could not be achieved.

Referring to the Kashmir issue, he said it was the direct outcome of the decision of the Muslim League leadership, who at the time of partition, had conceded the right to the rulers of princely states to decide on accession of their states with Pakistan or India, not to the people of the states.

However, he said, Kashmir had remained more of a problem for India than for Pakistan where the former has deployed nearly a million of its troops and had been spending billions of rupees.

He said it was important that there was a realization among the rulers that there was no military solution to the Kashmir issue.

"We don't have the military power to overrun India as was the case with India which used its military might to create Bangladesh," he said.

Mr Akhund said Pakistan favours third party mediation, and this too was tried but failed, as India could not implement the UN resolution calling for plebiscite.

Now, he said, for Pakistan third party mediation means that the US should use its power to force India to hold plebiscite. But we forget that Kashmir is not Kosovo and there has been a major shift in US policy since the adoption of the UN resolutions in 1949-50 and gradually the US has come more closer to India. Now the US favours, to an extent, some kind of autonomy for Kashmir.

He favoured giving moral support to Kashmiris but did not agree with those who favour sending Jehadi groups to Kashmir as it could lead to communal riots within the country itself.

He said Pakistan's strategy should be based on the assumption that there was no real danger of a full-fledged war with India.

He said if Pakistan by signing the CTBT could get a good deal from Japan as reported, we must sign it.

Referring to Afghanistan, he stressed the need to use the good offices of Saudi Arabia to pressure the Taliban to respect human rights and to stop its endeavours to "export Jehad." Iran too could play a role in bringing about peace in Afghanistan, he added.

He said the present mess in the country was not due to foreign policy but resulted from non-payment of taxes by people.

Historian Dr Mubarak Ali traced Hindu-Muslim relations in the subcontinent from the beginning up to the separate homeland movement for Muslims led by the Muslim League and the creation of Pakistan.

He said feelings of separation had been growing by the day. M. B. Naqvi, senior journalist, highlighting the prevailing political situation and its causes, said the present rulers had no solution of the problems which Pakistan faced.

"On the one hand, the country stands internationally isolated and the economy has been sinking on the other. There is a threat of nuclear war from India and there is political apathy among the people. These are some of the issues fraught with serious consequences," he said.

Then there was threat of Talibanization of the country from Jehadi organizations, which could not succeed due to inherent differences among themselves. They, however, could cause some ugly situation, he feared.

"Besides, the Western countries are demanding to help check Afghanistan from exporting its system, to stop Jehad in occupied Kashmir and to rein in Jehadi organizations in the country. They are putting forth these conditions to save the country from debt payment default," he said.

He said as feudal lords of West Pakistan did not want to concede the rights to the people of East Pakistan, where democratic spirit was strong, so the machinations of the feudals led to the dismemberment of the country, he added.

Dr Mehnaz Fatima, an economist, said the problems of the country could not be solved nor the economy could be improved without a change of mind-set. Even if defence expenditures were curtailed the funds would be pocketed by those who had made a mess of aid and foreign loans.

She gave figures how Pakistan, over the years, had been spending its GDP on defence. Before the 1965 war, the percentage was 2 which rose to 5.6 after the war. In 1971 it was 4.3 per cent which after 1975 went up to 7.5. She said now it was 5.7pc as against the world standard of 2.5pc. India spent 2.8pc of its GDP on defence. Dr Asad Saeed said without cutting defence expenditure the economy could not be strengthened and social services could not be improved.

"Since defence contracts are non-transparent, kickbacks from contracts are high. The real amount of kickbacks could not be known because of the non- transparent nature of such contracts," he said.

He pointed out that in one year the amount of pension of military personnel was Rs26 billion, but the pension amount of the employees of the civil administration was slightly above Rs one billion though they numbered 2.2 million as against the army's 650,000. Wahid Bashir, trade unionist and journalist, said the people could take interest in peace only if it ensures justice and equity.

Businessmen A. Majid said peace is essential for promoting industry and business. He said globalization of trade was tantamount to colonizing the economies of developing countries.

_____

#2.

Tehelka.com

Locating Memory 

ABOUT DADDY

BY MEENA ARORA NAYAK

(Penguin India | Price:Rs 250)

[Reviewed] By Urvashi Butalia

Some months ago I was traveling, along with a few others-legally and with a visa-in the Rawalpindi area in Pakistan. Turning off a main road onto a smaller one that we thought led to the village we wanted to go to, we were surprised to come across a security barrier. Three or four large, angry looking men in fatigues manned the barrier. One of my companions was a sardar, clearly a 'foreigner' and not surprisingly, we were stopped and questioned. Despite the fact that we had visas and permission, the security men, like their brethren everywhere, refused to believe us. They insisted that our passports and whatever was written inside them, was done so by the Indian government, and could not be counted as Pakistani permission. We tried to explain that it was their High Commission that had issued the visas, but even as we did so, I realized the futility of it. The whole concept of High Commissions and visas was alien to them. All they knew was that a group of 'foreigners' (gair mul!
k ke log), among whom were the worst kind of foreigners, Indians, were trying to get into an area which was closed to them. They wrote a detailed report, which carried information from our passports in their report book, and we were then asked to sign this. Not being an Urdu reader, I had no idea what I signed, but at the time, I had little choice. They insisted on taking our pictures, and when I tried to refuse on the plea that I did not want strange men photographing me, their senior officer told me very politely that if I refused he would have no alternative but to confiscate my passport and hand me over to the police. I felt a deep frustration and anger, and also a sense of helplessness not only at myself, but also at what our two countries have done to each other.

This was why, while reading About Daddy, I had a sense of recognition at the Kafkaesque irrationality and fear that comes through the author's descriptions of the protagonist's seemingly simple mission of scattering her father's ashes at the border. Such is the rhetoric of enmity between the two countries at the official level, that something as innocent as this can easily be seen as a threat to national security. And once the system latches on to such a threat, there's no getting out of its trap, something that Meena Arora Nayak amply demonstrates.

Nor is the protagonist's mission itself so difficult to understand. Indeed, here the author touches on something that has not been given much attention in partition narratives and even, to a large extent, in fiction: the question of our own complicity. Even in the stories survivors tell, they will seldom speak of their own participation in, or their complicity in consenting to or 

Meena Nayak's book is important in that it looks at the question of Partition memory, and the need to lay that memory at rest, from the point of view of the next generation helping to hide, the violence. And yet, the question is real: how did families deal with the violence in their own midst? What happened to those people, like Simran's father in this book, who became perpetrators of violence and who then lived all their lives with the regret, the grief, the silence and the guilt? And more, what kinds of moves did the system, the State, make to help these people?

In this sense, Meena Arora Nayak's book is an important one, for it raises questions that we need to face up to. I wish though that she had found a way of exploring these questions without having to bring in everything from Kashmir to terrorism to 1984 and Naxalbari. There is no doubt that in the cycle of violence, which is so much a part of our lives today, many of these histories are linked. But I am not sure what it is about their linkages in the book that makes me feel a bit disappointed that the author did not stay with the very important questions about Partition that she raises.

Nonetheless, it is important that such books be written and read. Thus far, much Partition fiction has dealt with the experiences of survivors; indeed many of the writers are people who have had direct experience of that history. The passing of a half century, the fact of the many kinds of violence that have so polarized our society in this half century, the passing into adulthood of a second generation of Partition 'children'-all this had contributed to the new kinds of explorations we are seeing. Meena Nayak's book is one among these and important in that it looks at the question of Partition memory, and the need to lay that memory at rest, from the point of view of the next generation. I remember speaking, more than a year ago, to students and teachers in Amritsar, about Partition histories. One of the questions raised most vehemently by several younger people in the discussion was: why was it that so much Partition writing, both fiction and non-fiction, focused on the expe!
riences of those who had lived through it. As a young man put it to me: 'What about the rootlessness of people like me?' His family was from Lahore, he said. After Partition they moved to Amritsar, but the violence there forced them to move away to Himachal, and then to Delhi. For the young man, the problem was that there was nowhere he could call home. And it was important to him to have a sense of belonging, a sense of home. In Meena Nayak's book, the 'child' of Partition whose life has taken shape outside of India and Pakistan further compounds this problem.

As someone who has lived with Partition histories and thought and written about them, I have come to feel that every kind of exploration is important, that the history of Partition is so multi-faceted that no one account or exploration can do it justice, and that there are so many areas of it that we have not even begun to touch upon yet. For me then, any addition to such explorations, and particularly when the work helps to open up new questions, is to be welcomed.

_____

#3.

The Telegraph
27 November 2000

FROM CEASEFIRE TO THE CESSATION OF HOSTILITIES 

BY RANABIR SAMADDAR 

The third ceasefire in Nagaland, this time agreed upon between the government of India and the National Socialist Council of Nagalim (Isak-Muivah), started on August 1, 1997. The Khaplang group of the NSCN also declared a "goodwill ceasefire" before the year ended on December 15. Though Kuki-Naga and Kuki-Paite clashes continued with less intensity, with ceasefire and the commencement of political dialogue between the government and the NSCN, there was hope in the public mind that the violent past would be buried in the quest for peace. The Naga Hoho also declared the willingness of all sections of the Nagas to live in peace.

What was less noticed amidst the widespread sense of relief was that along with this had started the old game of creating and propping up the opposition to the rebels in the form of the Nagaland chief minister, S.C. Jamir. Just six months before the declaration of ceasefire, Jamir had declared on December 28, 1996, his intention to seek Interpol aid to secure the extradition of the rebel leadership.

This was an indication that the history of the failed ceasefire of 1964 would be repeated. At that time, the participation of A.Z. Phizo, the leader of the Naga National Council, in the ceasefire talks had been opposed on the ground that he was in exile. The year, 1964, is worth remembering. Having created a new administrative unit called the Naga Hills Tuensang Area and placing it under the ministry of external affairs, Jawaharlal Nehru had entered into a 16-point agreement with a section of the Nagas to create the state of Nagaland within the union in December 1963. This statehood policy was primarily a piece of Realpolitik, dividing Nagas into moderates and rebels, and deepening the chasm between the government and society, and within society itself. Therefore it could not be the road to peace, and this was probably known to the government as well.

Six rounds of talks between the government and the rebels were held between 1964-67. Not surprisingly, nothing substantial emerged, although among the rebels there was a young man who later became the chairman of the NSCN, Isak Chisi Swu, and who had then participated in the dialogue with remarkable patience. The peace mission's efforts had brought nothing except the unsuccessful ceasefire agreement of 1964.

Just as the ceasefire agreement of 1964 signified nothing in terms of achieving a substantive political dialogue, there is now a possibility that the latest ceasefire may also come to nothing. The conditions agreed upon by the two sides — unconditional talks, talks at the highest level and the venue of talks to be outside India — may be woefully inadequate. Meanwhile, threats against the rebels allegedly continue, divisive tactics reportedly go on, and the substantive part of the discussion may be eternally postponed. Typically, Jamir commented in 1997 (and this was indicative of the government line of thinking) that the Naga Students Federation’s theme of rapprochement between various sections of the Naga society is not enough, and that without spending too much time and energy over what happened in the past, Nagas should think of this rapprochement in terms of "bridging the gap between past, present and future".

Both Jamir and the Baptist Church of Nagaland wanted to become players for peace. Predictably the rebels, wise after the experience of the Sixties, refused to accept the entry of Jamir who, in their eyes, was the manipulator of the peace talks in the 1997 World Baptist Conference in Atlanta. However, the ceasefire initially agreed to by the NSCN (I-M) for three months continued.

Other problems, besides the Jamir factor, soon raised their heads. The rebels would lose no time to remind anyone willing to listen to them, that the two previous ceasefires in 1964 and 1974 were either preceded or followed by a split in the rebel ranks and a political grant from the government of India that meant only surrender to them. The ceasefire in 1964 had been preceded by statehood, and that of 1974 had been followed by the Shillong Accord — both now recognized as disasters in the chronicle of the peace process.

Even in 1964, the ceasefire had extended to the rebel operations in Manipur. But this time the ceasefire was confined to Nagaland areas only. This denied the stand of the NSCN (I-M) that Naga areas had all along included parts of what is known today as upper Assam and Manipur, and that an eventual political dialogue would have to deal with not only the artificial entity called the Nagaland, but the Naga nation. I.K. Gujral declared in Parliament that fratricidal confrontations between Naga groups and other rebel groups had seriously disturbed public order, and the ceasefire in Nagaland would usher in progress. Rumours started circulating to the effect that peace talks would lead to the break-up of Manipur. The chief minister, Rishang Keishing, declared in the state assembly that the union home ministry had assured him that "there was no question of disturbing Manipur's territorial integrity in view of the peace talks with Naga rebels".

The union home secretary, K. Padmanabhaiah, declared that the agreement would be valid only in the state and a panel would be formed to supervise the agreement. But while certain ground rules were framed and decided upon, political aggression by the Union government continued. It was at best a "moth-eaten peace and autonomy cheque" being offered by the government.

Meanwhile, the Armed Forces Special Powers Act continues to be implemented. On the basis of this, raid and search operations are continuing. Threats of detention without trial, search and seizure, shooting to death, public control measures, confiscation, and declaration of public assemblies as illegal remain as ever. Nagaland remains beyond the bounds of Articles 19 and 21. The ceasefire monitoring office of the NSCN (I-M) in Dimapur was suspended for sometime and has been allowed to function only recently.

In the Naga areas of Manipur, land alienation of the Nagas through the extension of land acts continues. The ceasefire has not brought a halt to the operation of the old colonial laws, such as the Land Acquisition Act of 1884 and the Forest Laws. Yanganpokopi has been taken from the Maring Nagas for a national park. One hundred thousand acres of land have been taken from the Tangkhul Nagas. Loktak hydroelectricity project has resulted in land alienation among the Zeliangrong Nagas. Similarly, political talks are now interrupted by new demands and questions by bureaucrats to the extent that the NSCN (I-M) leader, T. Muivah, was forced to declare, "We are not toys to be played around with". The government, of course, had the last laugh when Muivah was arrested in Thailand early this year, a development that showed the rebels the reach of the government's arms. So, though the ceasefire has been extended this year with effect from August 1 for another year, things are beginning to!
look ominous.

All this is not a product of a malice-driven campaign. Swaraj Kaushal, the government's interlocutor in 1998-99, spilled the beans at the time of his fall from grace, when he remarked in his widely quoted report, "We agreed to the word 'ceasefire' whereas this should have been 'cessation of hostilities'". Kaushal, of course, did not explain what he meant by that.

Cessation of hostilities is a broader term. It would have implied not only ceasefire, but also withdrawal and cessation of all measures considered as hostile. It would have meant, in the first place, withdrawal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, the scourge of the local people. It would have inaugurated a gradual, but concrete, plan of demilitarization including withdrawal of army to the barracks, stopping of physical checks and harassment. It would have implied cessation of menacing patrolling, full restoration of civil liberties, and above all, the withdrawal of the ban on the NSCN (I-M).

Also, it would have meant cessation of hostilities in Manipur. In short, with a broad-spectrum step, this would have signalled an agenda for the creation of trust, essential for a peace dialogue.

Instead, what has happened? On alleged grounds of inter-Naga clashes, the ceasefire-monitoring cell office of the NSCN (I-M) in Dimapur was closed down. The mutual charges of violation of ground rules were allowed to continue. On April 6 this year, Major Peter Parik reportedly asked the NSCN (I-M) to vacate the designated camp at Munglaimukh. The complaint about this went unheeded. Before that, on March 22, Captain Jouhal of the Indian army had again reportedly issued a similar “request” for the movement of the armed forces personnel in certain rebel-controlled areas.

A member of the monitoring group of the NSCN (I-M) was arrested and held without trial in Diphu jail. Several other cadre were detained during the ceasefire period under the National Security Act. The houses of some members of the rebel army were raided. On July 25 this year, Momba Moa, a rebel army sergeant major, was arrested at Jingkieng Nongshiliang in Meghalaya. Some of the outposts of the rebel monitoring arrangement were forcibly closed down. For six months, the government took no initiative to have the ceasefire monitoring group meeting.

The Indian government’s argument was that these outposts were being misused for rebel activities and regrouping. The army’s argument was that while there was a ceasefire, its normal activity under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act should and would continue. The added irony to the already twisted scenario was that the NSCN (I-M) was an illegal organization. It had been allowed to function within "strict limits" by the government in the interest of peace, and it wanted the latter to realize that.

No wonder, the NSCN (I-M) thinks that the ceasefire has only enabled the government to continue its policy of suppression under the garb of the cessation of fire. It complains of 149 incidents of violation of ceasefire by the government. Equally unsurprisingly the government, following the murder of a senior functionary of the Khaplang group and the attempted assassination of Jamir, thinks that the ceasefire has become, for the rebels, a "license to kill".

The Nagas wonder what the ceasefire is worth if no substantive dialogue takes place, and injustice and the denial of basic rights continue. If the Indian constitution can be amended about 80 times, why can it not be done once more for bringing peace? If the legal-bureaucratic process is allowed to overtake the political process, will not this ceasefire embitter a situation which is already sullied between two unequal parties?

Ceasefires, in the recent history of peace politics all over the world, have been shown to be a part of the politics of war. That is why, in Sri Lanka, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam never took government offers on ceasefire seriously. In Kashmir, the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front declared a ceasefire which led to nothing. The ceasefire declared by the Hizbul Mujahedin collapsed on account of a lack of trust and the lack of a policy in the government to conduct the political dialogue.

A ceasefire delinked from the agenda of democratic peace is typical of a statist peace where the state thinks that by talking to the leader of the adversarial camp, peace is achieved. It is a thinking that divorces from the peace process the condition and feelings of the people, their desire for justice, and their activism for peace.

Is not the recent Palestinian experience enough to make us realize the futility of this much-talked-of peace process? Do we not have the alternative ethic of truth and reconciliation, which is built on the path of transforming retributive justice to restorative justice? Not only diplomacy, but also popular participation and sociopolitical initiatives make the peace process democratic and sustainable. The ceasefire in Nagaland is fast crumbling. The only people who will enjoy such a situation will be those who live off guns.

The sole way to salvage the peace process in Nagaland is to involve wide sections of the people — the Naga Students’ Federation, the Naga People's Movement for Human Rights, the Mothers’ Front, the Naga Hoho, the church and various other solidarities who have sympathy for the cause for which the rebels took up arms, but who desire justice and peace. Unfortunately, neither the government nor the rebels had the larger vision to argue for a democratization of the process. To do this they have to free themselves from this deadlock by broadening the agenda and extending their notions of who ought to be participating in the peace process. 

_____

#4.

The Hindu
11 November 2000
Letters to the Editor

COVERT CENSORSHIP 

Sir, - I am a subscriber to VSNL's internet service with the following email address
skaziknde.vsnl.net.in. Since September end, 2000, I noticed that all emails to and
from me to Middle East Socialist Network (MESN) could neither go through nor
reach me. MESN is an e-group with 123 members across the world who receive
messages regarding news and political developments in that region. Its members are
largely researchers or people interested in political events and struggles in that
region. Anyone can access the MESN website and messages at
www.egroups.com/group/mesn. 

After futile attempts to set things right myself, I came to know from the MESN
moderator that my account had, for some unknown reason, been ``blocked'' by my
server. On October 31, upon visiting the VSNL office at Bangla Sahib Road, it was
confirmed by VSNL that my account had indeed been blocked. Upon inquiring as
to why this had been done without my knowledge or consent, one of VSNL's
managers - Mr. Goel from the Customer Services Section - informed me that since
``Muslims have links with Pakistan and because of reasons of security'', they had
taken this step. Upon protesting this covert, undeclared censorship, Mr. Goel, with
a grandiose gesture, declared ``We can do anything''. He alleged that ``some
people'' had complained against me - an allegation which he has failed to prove or
substantiate. MESN only emails its subscribers, and also has an anti-spamming
policy, so the question of anyone receiving any unsolicited mail from MESN does
not arise. 

My mail was ``unblocked'' after filing a written complaint and meeting a couple of
other managers! Needless to say VSNL is still to account for its outrageous
unwarranted policing and censorship of my mail. I would like to ask Mr. Goel and
VSNL: is this how you treat your Muslim customers? Are we, once again, to be
collectively branded and placed in the ``suspect'' category due to the prejudice and
communal bias of VSNL officers? 

Seema Kazi, 

New Delhi 

_____

#5.

Courtesy: Tehelka.com

QUESTION to Mr. Kushwant Singh:

I have been reading your column on tehelka.com quite
regularly and I must say I quite enjoy some of the
answers provided from the wealth of life experiences
that you have gained. 

I have a simple (maybe not as simple as it sounds)
question for you. What motivational forces drive you
week after week to give advice to strangers whom you
haven't met and probably will never meet? Is it just
for the monetary benefits associated with such a
position (I assume you are pretty well off). 

Or does it give you a sense of satisfaction (or call
it a smug sense of self-satisfaction, ego-trip) that
one obtains from influencing the lives of others? 

The reason I ask you this because I think advice is
like a "second-hand 1935 Willy's jeep seen the war,
been sent to the junkyard. fitted with recycle parts
and resold to the next unsuspecting bloke who walks
in". Someone of your stature doesn't need to sell
these antiquated automobiles! 

Abhiram Dukkipati

===

KUSHWANT'S ANSWER

You are right I don't need money to live as
comfortably as I do. Nor am I motivated by the desire
to leave a hefty bank balance for my two children who
earn their own living. I do not render advice through
tehelka though it pays me well for doing so. 

My sole motivation for tendering advice to strangers
is that I feel I should at 87 warn them of the pains
facing society in the hope that it will do some good.

I am deeply concerned with the rising tide of
intolerance in the name of religion and tradition
which is stifling freedom of expression. 

I was the only Indian journalist who criticised what
Bhindranwale was preaching while he was still alive. I
also lodged my protest against the ill-advised and
criminal operation Blue Star, continued terrorism and
the demand of Khalistan. I have reason to believe my
stand brought about a change in the thinking of the
Sikh community. 

Now I am bothered by the increasing religious
intolerance among the Hindus sponsored by the RSS,
Shiv Sena, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and BJP leaders like
Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi - both accused in the
Babri Masjid destruction case. In addition, Joshi has
introduced astrology and Vastu Shastra in Hindu
rituals as subjects of study in college. 

I feel, as an Indian, all this in the name of Hindutva
must be opposed as strongly as possible. I do so
because I love my country and do not want to see it
move backwards.

______

#6. 

[Recieved from Frederick Noronha]

India-Politics-Ayodhya

VHP TO MOBILIZE VOLUNTEERS FOR AYODHYA TEMPLE CONSTRUCTION

by Mohammed Shafeeq, India Abroad News Service

Hyderabad, Nov 26 [2000] - The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP, World Hindu Council) has
announced plans of constituting a nationwide army of volunteers to construct
a temple to Lord Ram at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh.

Making this announcement at a public meeting here Sunday, VHP president
Ashok Singhal said the temple will be constructed by force alone. The VHP
seeks to build the temple at a disputed site where the Babri mosque once
stood. Fanatics belonging to Hindu right-wing groups demolished the medieval
mosque on December 6, 1992.

"We need not depend on others for construction of the temple," Singhal said
without referring to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government of
Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee. The BJP is considered to be close to
the VHP.

Singhal warned that the VHP would not tolerate further delays in the
construction of the temple.

"Every village, town and city in the country will have a 'kar sevak'
(volunteer) committee," Singhal said. He asked potential "kar sevaks" to be
prepared to make any sacrifice at short notice. He recalled that on an
appeal from Hindu religious leaders, "kar sevaks" had demolished the Babri
mosque within five hours. He said there was need for launching a similar
movement to construct a grand temple at the same site.

"We can do it on our own. We do not need help of others," Singhal
reiterated.

His statement is seen as an indication of a growing rift between moderate
leaders of the BJP and Hindu fundamentalist organizations like the VHP over
the Ram temple's construction. The moderate leaders of BJP want to wait for
the court verdict on the dispute.

Singhal also called for strengthening Hindus. He made this comment while
referring to the increasing activities of Pakistan-backed extremists in the
country.

He said Kashmir was a haven for the Pakistan-trained terrorists and Hindus
were living like refugees in their own country. "More than 350,000 Hindus
have become refugees in Kashmir while another 175,000 Hindus have taken
refuge in Uttaranchal," he said.

The VHP president said the killing of Christian missionary Graham Stewart
Staines had been "exaggerated" the world over to malign Hindus even when
they were victims of massacres in their own country. Staines and his two
minor sons had been set afire in a village in Orissa last year.

Singhal said successive governments since independence had "given us a gift
of 400 million illiterates". The task of educating these unlettered people
could not be left to Christian missionaries and hence Hindus should move
ahead, he said.

As part of its literacy campaign, the VHP is setting up single teacher
schools all over the country, he said. So far 300 such schools have been
opened and the number may go up to 7,000 by next year, he added.

--India Abroad News Service

______

#7.

From: Satya Sivaraman 
Saturday November 25, 2:57 AM

ON THE DOOR TO DOOR CAMPAIGNING BY THE RSS

RSS: What's that? Is that a cricket team?
"RSS" Isn't that a cricket organisation? Don't you
have nets? snaps Ms S. Khanna, a resident of Raigad
Nivas in Lalbaug, south-central Mumbai, barely a split
second after young Shraddhesh Pawar has told her he's
from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. 

Before he can tell her he is going door to door as
part of the RSS - Rashtra Jagran Abhiyan (Dussehra Day
to January 26, 2001) to communicate its ideology to
every family, there's another wild swipe "God,
everyone wants to be Sachin Tendulkar [wellknown Indian Cricketer] these days!"

The youngster hurriedly corrects her, slips an RSS
brochure into her hands and joins his four other
Swayamsevak friends next door. 

They hand over the brochure to the man in the family.
"May we paste a sticker of Bharatmata on the door?"
20-something Umesh Sawant, one of the activists asks.
"Do I have to pay for this leaftlet and sticker? If
yes, I don't want them; if no, I'll take both" the
man says. 

On to the next family. A 40-year-old Gujarati woman
reluctantly opens the door, plainly refuses to take
the leaflet, and slams the door shut. "If only it had
been a man, I would have given him a piece of my
mind," fumes one of the volunteers and moves ahead.

The rude receptions haven't ended. "Don't paste that
saffron sticker on my door," says an old man. "They
stay in Bharatmata, but they don 't want Bharatmata's
stickers on their doors," the Swayamsevaks retort. 

Undeterred, they move on to the next house, stretching
their smiles further. "We need Hindutva today more
than we needed it in the past," explains a Sangh
worker to middle-aged Maruti Mane.

"Yes, but my son already goes to the local Shiv Sena
shakha. Every day we fight because he spends most of
his time there," comes the answer.

Next to Naigaum (central Mumbai), where nearly 10
senior Swayamsevaks, all over 60, are on a similar
mission. Two activists for every family, they decide,
and spread out in the locality.

Ganpak Chalke's family warmly welcomes Vishnu Oak and
H.S. Kamat, offers them a seat and gives them a
patient hearing as they explain what RSS stands for. 

But before they can finish, Mr Chalke's wife pitches
in: "You say Hindus should be united, but when I went
to the local bhajan mandal, they allowed other women
to go home earlier because they have household chores
and forced me to sit through the bhajan. How will the
spirit of unity arise if they discriminate in this
way?" Speechless, the Swayamsevaks make their way out.

The welcome is equally warm next door. After taking
his seat, one Swayamsevak launches into a lengthy
introduction of the Sangh Parivar and proudly tells
resident Anant Gavande: "Vajpayee and Advani have
risen from the RSS ranks, that's why no one can point
a finger at them." Mr Gavande is livid: "What use? See
how they're behaving. 

They've surrendered before the militants, declared a
ceasefire. Indira Gandhi would have never done this.?
The Swayamsevaks go on the defensive. The ceasefire,
they say, is a strategy. What strategy? Our people,
our soldiers, are being killed, and you're talking
peace. Why do Vajpayee and Advani occupy seats in the
government?" 

There's a strong attempt to explain that if they don't
run the government, there will be instability. "Yes,
but the government should be firm or it is as good as
non-existent."

As debate on the Vajpayee government's policies hots
up, one Sangh member impatiently turns to the other
and cautions: "Don't talk about the BJP. We are here
to tell them about RSS." The subject returns to the
'socio-cultural' Sangh.

"We are working to unite Hindus." The rejoinder is
quick: "Hindus will never be united. I used to go to
the Sangh shakhas but gave up after a while. I've had
enough of Hindutva already." End of conversation. End
of the day's campaign.

En route to their homes, the over 60-year-old
Swayamsevaks show no signs of being discouraged by the
day's experiences. "Tomorrow we have to cover many
households. Come to the shakha early," says one to the
other.

"Bharatmata Ki Jai," they exclaim together with the
same enthusiasm as when they had started out, and part
ways.

______________________________________________
SACW dispatch 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/
////////////////////////////////////