[sacw] SACW #1. (01 Oct. 01)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | Dispatch #1.
01 October 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

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

#1. Standing a 20-year nexus on its head ( AYAZ AMIR)
#2. Murders in the Sky and on Ground (RANABIR SAMADDAR)
#3, Parochial interests and oil will pollute the "anti-terrorist" fight
Our 'freedom', their 'terror'? ( PRAFUL BIDWAI)
#4. Resist The Culture Of The Gun (V.K. TRIPATHI)

________________________

#1.

DAWN
28 September 2001

Standing a 20-year nexus on its head
By AYAZ AMIR

Once again a successful attempt is afoot to confuse the Pakistani=20
public. It is being told that the military government has made a=20
brave and correct choice in not siding with the Taliban and in=20
agreeing to assist the United States in its still fuzzy war against=20
'global terrorism'. This proposition is worth examining, if only=20
briefly.
Regardless of the guilt or innocence of Osama bin Laden, only a=20
Pakistani government gone mad could have sided with the Taliban at=20
this juncture. And if a mad Pakistani government had taken such a=20
step it would have faced the wrath of the Pakistani people first=20
before facing anything else from the US. The common Pakistani would=20
have been appalled at such a decision. So what is the military=20
government taking credit for? That it did not go down the path of=20
madness?
The real choice before it was either to go the whole hog with the=20
Americans, without asking any questions, or to preserve a semblance=20
of calm and while offering assistance question the Americans on=20
specifics and the likely fallout of future events on Pakistan. Would=20
Washington have considered such a demarche as rebellion?
All this talk of Pakistani installations being wiped out in four days=20
by American military might, and of an American-Indian nexus=20
developing to punish Pakistan, is not so much counsel of fear as of=20
outright absurdity. We wouldn't have been telling the Americans to go=20
to hell. We would merely have been trying to see through the haze.=20
This might have provoked American bluster but for how long? American=20
rhetoric is already toning down (not that CNN or other TV channels=20
are greatly helping this process). So it would have been in our case,=20
without our precious 'nuclear strategic assets' facing the threat of=20
instant annihilation.
But we sought wisdom in panic and promised the Americans everything=20
they asked for. If this was the brave and correct choice made by the=20
military government then it is a matter of opinion that no other=20
course was available.
While military specifics are blanketed in uncertainty one thing is=20
for sure: after the storm passes Pakistan will be left alone holding=20
a flood of refugees. We can't cope with our own problems. How do we=20
cope with the problems of a war brought to our doorsteps? Debt=20
rescheduling and the partial lifting of US economic sanctions will=20
provide us much-needed relief. But are these rewards adequate to the=20
problems that we are likely to face?
Far from focusing on the refugee question, Pakistan's diplomatic and=20
military bonzes are still pursuing the chimera of a pro-Pakistan=20
regime in Afghanistan. For 22 years, no less, we have played this=20
game, now supporting one faction or leader, now another. To no avail.=20
>From Hikmatyar, once the ISI's darling, to the Taliban, our=20
king-making efforts in Afghanistan have come to haunt us. But we=20
refuse to learn and even at this time Foreign Minister Sattar is=20
warning the world about the consequences of supporting the Northern=20
Alliance.
Why can't we get over our Afghan obsession? It has distorted national=20
thinking more than any other issue. Sectarianism, the militarization=20
of religion, the spawning of a maulvi and 'jehadi' culture, the=20
spread of madrassah education and the besmirching of Pakistan's image=20
abroad are all offshoots and consequences of this.
Something else too. The lines between domestic and external policies=20
have become blurred as a result of this involvement. The forces of=20
religion which should have been confined at home have become regional=20
players. The intelligence agencies whose role should be confined to=20
external vigilance have spread their wings to dabble in domestic=20
politics. Therefore while the spirit of jihad has distorted foreign=20
policy priorities, the spirit of intervention and guidance has=20
destabilized national politics. Getting out of this mess is a more=20
pressing necessity than shoring up our sinking finances.
The present moment brings with it an opportunity. For the first time=20
since 1978 - when after the Taraki coup we got involved in Afghan=20
affairs - the nexus between home-grown fundamentalism and the=20
military has been broken. The clerics are on one side, the military=20
commanders on the other. This is the real godsend for Pakistan, even=20
more than the lure of economic benefits. The people of Pakistan were=20
helpless before this alliance and on their own could never have=20
ruptured it.
But for Pakistan to fully recover from the effects of this alliance,=20
this rupture has to be made permanent. Putting the religious parties=20
in their place is not a problem. They have always lacked popular=20
support and still do. Which is why their calls to the public have=20
largely gone unheeded. The more important task is to eradicate the=20
maulvi or fundamentalist mindset from the intelligence agencies. If=20
one of the spin-offs of the present crisis is this, some of the=20
irrationality dogging national policy these last 20 years will be=20
removed. As Ardeshir Cowasjee has aptly put it, the enemy is within.=20
Let us look to it rather than to demons such as the Northern Alliance.
As to the expected bonanza from dancing to America's tune, let us put=20
it in perspective. Money is one thing, the ability to use it another.=20
For our services in Afghanistan during the eighties we got plenty of=20
money. Where did it all go? Where has Indonesia's oil wealth gone? Or=20
for that matter, Nigeria's? In both cases pilfered by a corrupt=20
oligarchy.
This is where self-respect and national dignity come in. The work=20
ethic, without which no development is possible, is closely linked to=20
such intangibles as dignity, honour and the ability to look adversity=20
in the eye. The notion current in Pakistan that we have no dignity=20
and therefore should not worry too much about how we get some=20
economic advantage is little different from the mentality of the=20
street-walker. Allied to this notion is the belief that showing the=20
faintest streak of independence is akin to national annihilation.=20
National weakness can't get purer than this.
Look at neighbouring Iran, a terrorist state in American eyes. The=20
British foreign secretary comes to pay a visit and inclines his body=20
ever so slightly when he meets the Iranian president. The two sides=20
hold useful talks but soon after Jack Straw's departure the Iranian=20
spiritual leader, Ali Khamenei, delivers a blistering attack on the=20
US and says that Iran will not be part of any coalition against the=20
Taliban (even though, let us bear in mind, there's no love lost=20
between Iran and the Taliban). No one is talking of flattening Iran.=20
Agreed, our economic difficulties are greater. But then the economic=20
argument, stripped to essentials, underlies the philosophy of the=20
street-walker.
Clarity is the first casualty in such a situation. If one talks of=20
national pride, it is taken to be jingoism. If it is said that we=20
explore details with the Americans and seek guarantees for the=20
problems that are bound to arise, it is read as support for the=20
Taliban. If military wisdom - which, after all, is responsible for=20
our Afghan imbroglio - is questioned in any way, we say national=20
unity is threatened. It is a time for unity but also a time for=20
scepticism because once events are on the march it may be too late to=20
ask any questions.
Another thing. When US anger is assuaged after punishing the real or=20
imagined perpetrators of the recent terrorist attacks, Pakistan will=20
still be left with the necessity of living in peace with its=20
neighbours. There will still be an Afghanistan to our right and an=20
India to our left, and an unsettled Kashmir on the roof of the world.=20
Now that we are riding high on the tide of world opinion it would be=20
especially becoming on our part to renew the invitation to the Indian=20
prime minister to visit Pakistan. What if India tried to embarrass us=20
during the present crisis? Must we play tit-for-tat with it always?=20
To do something not out of compulsion but free choice will make us=20
look good and lend an aura of statesmanship to our diplomacy.

_________

#2.

(? September 2001)

Murders in the Sky and on Ground
RANABIR SAMADDAR
(Director, Peace Studies Programme, South Asia Forum for Human=20
Rights, Kathmandu)

Counted, the murders in the sky on 11 September would be probably=20
somewhere near six thousand, enough to make us immune to murders=20
here, sit up and take notice, but nowhere deaths at some places else.=20
But seen on the screen, heard, and read, their effect is apocalyptic.=20
>From death in the sky in two strikes, it has transformed into a world=20
phenomenon, which deaths of thousands and millions in the Middle=20
East, Rwanda, and the Balkans in the last decade could not achieve.=20
It could be achieved not by similarity, but by difference between=20
deaths.* Thus, if your deaths are fifty thousand, they are not much;=20
if our deaths are six thousand, they should belong to humanity. If=20
your deaths are on the ground, they are banal; if our deaths are on=20
the sky, they are extra-ordinary. If the killing field was in your=20
country, then it was your country's one thousand years' past and the=20
present that was at fault; if the killing field is in my imaginary=20
space of innocence for 250 years, then our innocence must outshine=20
your culpability, for these deaths have hit the cradle of=20
civilization. If you have demanded your way of life, you are=20
dangerous; if we have demanded our way of life that is because, we=20
have the inalienable right of self-determination. Your response to=20
killings of your kinsfolk should be reconciliation; our response is=20
retribution. Our dream of greatness is historical necessity, yours is=20
fascism. All the rules apply to you not to us. Perhaps this is what=20
baroque death is, a chasm between single deaths and the death=20
universalized, deaths that become universal not by numbers, but by=20
the density of death achievable only by acceleration of its effects.

The attacks from the sky to murder people who were literally unable=20
to run away to the ground were a major atrocity. In scale they may=20
not have reached the level of Clinton's bombing of Sudan destroying=20
half its pharmaceutical supplies, and Sr. Bush's and Jefferson=20
Clinton's blockade of Iraq killing unknown numbers of people, but in=20
intensity, they will be more, with harsh security controls and many=20
possible ramifications for undermining civil liberties, internal=20
freedom, racial tolerance, and the little geopolitical sanguinity=20
still left. This crime is a gift to the baroque art that had almost=20
died, an art whose utility lay in making the significance of death=20
universal, and the denial of whatever was living. In one shot, to be=20
correct two shots, old wickedness has been wiped off the register,=20
which had the record of American missiles smashing into Palestinian=20
homes and US helicopters firing missiles into Lebanese ambulance in=20
1996, American shells crashing into a village called Qana, Lebanese=20
right-wing militia, paid and uniformed by America's friend Israel,=20
raping, hacking, and butchering their way ahead through refugee=20
camps, the bombing of baby food producing plant in Baghdad, the=20
massacre at My Lai, but that is long enough past to forget, and much=20
more.

Deaths bring new possibilities with the ending existing geopolitical=20
sanguinities, possibilities in form of funerary baroque. The toys of=20
defence shields may aim at blocking the road of the Chinese to the=20
sources of energy in the Middle East, to encircle Iran and Iraq after=20
the American success in squeezing Syria and Lebanon between the two=20
pro-American regional powers, Israel and Turkey. Furthermore through=20
their influence in Afghanistan the Americans may acquire the ability=20
to enhance their influence over Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan where a=20
considerable amount of gold and patrol were recently uncovered, also=20
influence the internal dynamics in Iran and Iraq, which must come=20
with the change in the political scenario in Afghanistan.=20
Explorations into the geopolitical ramification of the so-called=20
terror-deaths can go far. The Great Game, when it began, began with=20
deaths; the new great game is on, and who could doubt that the=20
baroque deaths were an affirmation of old power, solemn and terrific,=20
by adding something new to it?

What is terrorist killing and terrorist death? Not killings of=20
terrorists not even killings by terrorists, but killings that arouse=20
terror - a terror-death, a death that terrorizes, a terror that=20
produces death, a death that will not be considered normal, banal,=20
but exceptional and so different from the living as to produce=20
terror. Therefore, part of the population in various parts of the=20
world unable to fathom the deaths in the sky will not be terrorized=20
at the deaths up there in the buildings touching the sky, but=20
terrorized at the prospects of deaths that those deaths in the sky=20
will have brought upon them. Terrors of different kinds, and this=20
difference that the baroque cannot erase - in fact the more universal=20
the death the more are the differences. Americans were not terrorized=20
at the deaths in Rwanda, Tamils were not terrorized at the killings=20
in Punjab and Bengal; death is therefore universal while terror is=20
differential. We know that for the last half-century killings have=20
gone on with indifference of many not affected immediately, but we=20
also know that deaths have become now matter of concern, they produce=20
terror, death has become a being, an act that leaps into=20
universality. Torture of the dissenting sects in medieval times,=20
regular throttling of infants and children to death by the Ottoman=20
emperors, stoning of liberals to death in the rugged squares of a=20
city, or shooting of communists by firing squads in soccer stadium -=20
in all these death is protocol. The protocol is of establishing what=20
should be alive, compared to the great anonymous slaughters in wars.=20
The latter scarcely rank as events, though acknowledged as facts.=20
They are slave massacres, unknown, collective, plebian. But=20
paradoxically in making death a baroque act, the singularity is=20
destroyed. Massive deaths become banal, in time what the anonymous=20
deaths have been.

Death is an occasion always for states to come to sense. Revolution=20
needs deaths, much more than that a statist counter-revolution needs=20
death as the necessary protocol. The State, in order to make a come=20
back, requires a murderous rite. The victim holds office, he is=20
innocent, he is clean, he had no complicity with murders, he typifies=20
the daily life of rule - he was not exceptional. His death is=20
therefore dying at the hands of a murderer, the duration of an act,=20
the slaughter of innocence, the catastrophe of silence, a death that=20
requires baroque funeral - in form of wholesale incarceration of=20
family and clan members to death, of the wife led to the pyre, of=20
rounding up members of a locality to the execution ground, a=20
memorial, or forming a State or States. The effects outshine the=20
occasion, or the effects outshining the cause are the occasion, the=20
monumental Taj Mahal in building and destroying in honour of death.=20
We must not eat for some days, observe certain purifying rites, force=20
others into penance, silence, and agony, kill a few or thousands to=20
avenge, build a mausoleum - a kind of denial of death by absorbing=20
immediately this death into monuments of other acts that include the=20
dying of others, an avenging angel that will make killing (of others)=20
look like a suicide (of selves). In this way, the State returns with=20
all controls. It returned repeatedly in Mughal India, in Ottoman=20
Turkey, in Agrippina's Rome, in Socrates' Athens, in Sheikh Mujibur=20
Rehman's Bangladesh, or after the killings of Prince Ferdinand and=20
then thousands and thousands who followed the Serbian Prince into=20
dying in the second decade of the last century. In revolution, more=20
in restoration, power needs the protocol of dying. Death by terrorist=20
or a terrorist death is like life, for it brings so many back to=20
life. Consider for example the following: the State that comes alive=20
after some deaths (in Indira Gandhi's case in India or Premadasa's=20
case in Sri Lanka, after one single death), victim who becomes the=20
decor of life (Gandhi, Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr.), unconcerned=20
who become the anxious victims-to-be (Central Asia in 1990s), and the=20
counselors who find their vocation earlier snatched away from them by=20
the banality of life and death restored back to them now (Europeans=20
to the Balkans). The change in the form of murderous tool does not=20
matter. Hand (throttling), rope (tying), knife (assassinating), rifle=20
(shooting), bombing (en masse destroying), ramming aircraft=20
(piercing), atom bomb dropping (finishing everything in fire and=20
smoke), chemical weapon (poisoning), death by injection (pleasant=20
death), and guided missiles (revolutionary killing, the RMA) - all=20
these are incidental. Essential is death achievable through killing=20
and achievable of terror. The fundamental principle is that, this=20
death was not certain, terror did it; it may visit me. Even after the=20
most furious act of omission or commission, the most severe ruler=20
like Emperor Aurangjeb would have pardoned me, but this death may=20
visit me any time. Therefore the ghost must be laid to rest, rubble=20
must be turned into ashes, the corpse must be taken out of grave and=20
given new burial - again the mode is purely instrumental, the=20
murderous function of a killing is the protocol of the power that is=20
living.

Death begins however with attack on life, though its function=20
is to make at least some lives reaffirm their souls. Thus the deaths=20
in the sky were an attack on " way of life", reinforcing old=20
polarities, old struggles between "democracy" and "totalitarianism",=20
"modernism" versus "backwardness", "pluralism" versus the "imposition=20
of one opinion", and "rationality versus fundamentalism", in other=20
words between "life" and "death". Born again Christian=20
fundamentalists, supported by the most reactionary and religious=20
coalition, which includes people such as the infamous Pat Robinson,=20
avenge deaths by waging the war of modernity and rationality against=20
fundamentalism. It has been always so, everywhere, wherever modernity=20
had to be rescued from its own fate.

To die is then to perceive life, whence the question - how did the=20
death come, how did the death become so liquid, how did terror become=20
real leaping to life from fantasy, what were the gods and bystanders=20
doing when the killer was taking position - in other words does death=20
have a structure, death that is supposed to do away with all=20
structures? In other words, what do we mean when the philosopher says=20
that terror-death is not "bookkeeping, but vegetation", reproduced=20
but not repeated, death in My Lai is and is not death in the=20
Manhattan, death on the ground is and is not the death in the sky?

______

#3.

"The Hindustan Times", New Delhi, September 28, 2001

Parochial interests and oil will pollute the "anti-terrorist" fight:=20
Our 'freedom', their 'terror'?
By PRAFUL BIDWAI

As the crescendo of war-drums build up, many of us slip into=20
selective amnesia. Four such lapses are important. First, a mere=20
metaphor--"war", used to describe the September 11 barbarism--is=20
being turned into a literal, legal proposition to claim an unlimited=20
right to "self-defence". "Self-defence" against armed attack is the=20
sole ground on which the United Nations Charter (Article 51) permits=20
a state to use armed force without the Security Council's=20
authorisation. But that too is subject to the state's obligation to=20
"immediately" report to the Council. It does "not in any way affect"=20
the Council's "authority" and "responsibility" to take whatever=20
measurers "it deems necessary" for international peace and security,=20
including limiting/terminating the military action.

However, the US and its allies are behaving as if they already had=20
blanket Security Council authorisation to use force however and=20
wherever they please--not just against states, but against that=20
diffuse, near-intangible target, "terrorism", including bin Laden,=20
Taliban, Hizbollah, and various networks in numerous countries. In=20
reality, various pre-September 11 resolutions (e.g. 1267 of 1998, and=20
1333 of 1999) demand that the Taliban stop providing sanctuary and=20
training to terrorists, and turn over bin Laden for trial for the=20
August 1998 bombing of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, on pain of=20
removal. Resolution 1368 (September 12) only calls upon "all states=20
to work together urgently to bring to justice the perpetrators,=20
organisers and sponsors" of the latest carnage.

For many people, "bringing to justice" does not mean war in the first=20
instance. A Gallup poll finds that a clear majority of Western=20
Europeans (67 to 86 percent) prefers extradition-and-trial to=20
outright military attacks (favoured by 12 to 29 percent) or "hunting=20
down" suspects. That's how it should be under a civilised, as=20
distinct from a West Wild "Wanted-Dead-or-Alive", approach. But we=20
are forgetting that means other than, and supplementing, war are=20
possible, and that use of force can't be disproportionate or=20
unlimited.

A second instance of amnesia lies in forgetting how ineffectual many=20
recent wars have been in attaining their stated goals--despite their=20
horrifying destructiveness. More than 10 years after Iraq was=20
pulverised, at the expense of $79 billion, back to the Stone Age, and=20
after 1.2 million civilians have perished under egregious sanctions,=20
Saddam Hussein still remains in power. The trauma of war, humiliating=20
inspections (without limitations in time or space), bans on Iraq's=20
sole export, and measures to starve it of food and medicine, has left=20
the entire Gulf region seething with discontent, the Kurdish question=20
unresolved, and democratisation or stability only remote=20
possibilities.

Again, NATO's Kosovo intervention probably killed many more civilians=20
than troops while destroying dummy cardboard tanks and leaving most=20
Serbian armour intact. But it didn't remove Milosevic from=20
power--only an election did--or adequately protect the minorities=20
(although it signalled opposition to ethnocide). Bosnia is a terrible=20
story of devious external interference, sharpening ethnic divisions,=20
European pusillanimity and abuse of force. The East Timor atrocities=20
happened under an Indonesian regime armed to the teeth by the US. Raw=20
military power couldn't prevent East Timor's independence.

Even when major powers intervene militaristically in "noble" causes,=20
things can go disastrously wrong. Take "Plan Colombia", devised by=20
the US to wage another "war"--chemical and biological, on drugs. Over=20
the past decade, use of herbicides, killer spores and fungi on=20
300,000 hectares has destroyed peasant livelihoods, displaced=20
millions, deforested land, poisoned the environment, thus causing=20
extreme misery, to escape which people are forced to cultivate more=20
drugs. Coca cultivation has tripled in a decade as society got=20
militarised and democracy decayed under this new "war" refuelling the=20
old violence. This is not to argue against international=20
intervention, leave alone for absolute national sovereignty, but only=20
against the blind, socially-emptied, callous and arrogant frameworks=20
of intervention which mindlessly rely on maximal force, but reject=20
principled diplomacy and legal or social remedies.

A third form of amnesia obscures the very definition of "terrorism".=20
The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines "terrorist" as "one who favours=20
or uses" terror-inspiring "methods of governing or of coercing=20
government or community". We are being asked to forget the first part=20
of the definition, and by implication, the reality of numerous=20
terrorist governments and "governing" parties. Even where "state=20
terrorism" or state-sponsored terrorism is recognised, it is=20
cheerfully confined to "cross-border terrorism", synonymous with=20
Pakistan, never extended to other countries, including (randomly),=20
the former colonial powers (with their terrible recent record in=20
Africa and Asia), Russia (Chechnya), China (Tibet), Israel=20
(Palestine), Sri Lanka, Zaire, and above all, the US which has=20
sponsored and supported more terrorist regimes in the past=20
half-century than any other government. Thus, the Taliban is rightly=20
mentioned as Pakistan's creation and ally, but reference is seldom=20
made to its American parentage, patronage or use as instrument of=20
state policy. Yet, going by Ahmed Rashid's "Taliban: Islam, Oil and=20
the New Great Game in Central Asia", the US diabolically encouraged=20
and almost recognised the Taliban, as part of a big pipeline deal.

The fourth kind of amnesia means covering up past wrong-doing by the=20
"good" side in the present confrontation against "evil". The US=20
record here from Argentina to Zaire, through Angola, Brazil, Cuba,=20
Greece, Iran, Kampuchea and Vietnam, is unspeakably atrocious. So is=20
Pakistan's. But, to be brutally frank, hardly more defensible is=20
India's own past training and arming of one of the most sadistic=20
groups anywhere (the LTTE); creation of contra-type guerrillas in the=20
Northeast and Kashmir; and collusion with the CIA in the 1950s failed=20
Khampa "insurgency" in Tibet. India could also be accused of having=20
come close to sponsoring "cross-border terrorism" through client=20
guerrillas in former East Pakistan, and through Baluch and Sindhi=20
nationalists in the 1970s and 1980s. Ultimately, the LTTE returned to=20
haunt us--through Rajiv Gandhi's assassination. But that has provoked=20
little honest introspection.

It won't do to plead "we did this in good faith, for democracy, or in=20
the national interest", or "we weren't fully aware of the violent=20
consequences". All states proffer similar arguments. Pakistani=20
strategists claim they needed to control Afghanistan for reasons of=20
"strategic depth"--a bogus doctrine, if there ever was one. The US=20
inflicted unspeakable horrors upon the people of Afghanistan in the=20
1980s through the Mujahideen in the "larger" cause of "freedom"=20
(read, Cold War victory), and then abandoned them. When it sets out=20
today to defend "freedom" again, it doesn't appear credible to the=20
world's most impoverished and devastated people.

The fight against "terrorism" can only succeed if it is focused on=20
the right targets, conducted soberly and with measured, proportionate=20
force, as part of a comprehensive, holistic strategy, including=20
diplomacy and measures to address the root-causes of the discontent=20
that leads to the extreme frustration and desperation which breed=20
terrorism. Insofar as it relies on military force in the short run,=20
it must be based on highly discriminating moral balance (i.e.=20
rejecting "you're either-with-us-or-against-us" attitudes), on=20
respect for human rights, protection of non-combatants, and on=20
accountability and transparency. That's not the war we are about to=20
witness.

Given its ill-defined objectives, targets and methods, there's no=20
assurance that today's "anti-terrorism" operation will be a just war=20
waged in just ways and that other realpolitik-based considerations=20
won't get padded on to it. The worst of these would be oil and gas.=20
Central Asia has the world's second largest hydrocarbon resources.=20
Afghanistan and its Caspian Basin neighbours hold the key to their=20
control and exploitation. The New Great Game is all about that. It=20
has already involved players like Exxon, Shell, Unocal, Enron and=20
Mitsubishi, and "consultants" or supporters like Henry Kissinger,=20
Alexander Haig, Robin Raphael and Richard Armitage (currently deputy=20
secretary of state). Rashid painstakingly documents collusion between=20
the ISI, US, Unocal, and the Taliban. The temptation to play that=20
Game, albeit with new alignments, could visit another dark reign upon=20
the people of Afghanistan--and destabilise South Asia in ways utterly=20
inconceivable earlier. We stand warned.--end--

_______

#4.

Resist The Culture of The Gun
BY V.K. TRIPATHI

The tragedy of attacks on Twin Towers and Pentagon is two fold. First, it
forced six and a half thousand people to die a horrifying death. The
people trapped on the upper floors of the 110 storyed towers were put to
flames alive. Many jumped from the 90th floor and higher floors. The ones
riding the planes faced equally tragic death.

Second, it failed to awaken people to see the fire underneath the surface
from which volcano erupts. Violence lies right there at the heart of
Washington DC where annually 400 murders, drug trafficking, mafia
operations and other crimes take place. So is the situation in other
cities. The man who exploded Oklohoma building, killing 300 people, was a
white American, an ex-soldier of Gulf war. There is something in-built in
modern industrialized society that breeds, besides producing great
intellectuals, thinkers and industrialists, criminals too. It may have to
do with too much competitiveness, stark inequality, fragmentation of
family life and over emphasis of the state on muscle power for dominating
the world. After all Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo and the perpetrators of
devastating wars in last 50 years were all the products of modern
civilized society. It would be wise for industrialized nations to do a
serious soul searching and see the reality that they too are the
breeding grounds for terror, violence and devastation. Their governments
nurtured many criminals, fundamentalists and communalists from developing
nations to advance their self interests.

Look at Afghanistan. Till 1979 it was a peaceful place with no signs of
fanaticism whatsoever. It was at the forefront of helping Indian freedom
struggle and remained a trusted ally till 1979. Then super power rivalry
entered. President Taraqi was killed and Amin was installed declaring
allegiance to USA. Few days later Amin was killed and the new president
invited Soviet forces. USA mobilized rebels (including Talibans and
Bin Laden) and Pakistan to fight these forces. The super powers' rivalry
ruined the whole country. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed in
bloody struggles and civil war. Similar has been the fate of Vietnam and
other countries.

The poor countries too have criminal minded people in all strata
of society, including politics and business. The criminal-business nexus
is strong; the former help the latter to win contracts and suppress the
workers. Criminal-police nexus is equally strong. Communalism and
regionalism provide cover to crime and terror as a result perpetrators of
massive riots succeed in capturing power. The same classes are shouting
the loudest to fight terrorism. The terror can not be wished away unless
market forces and governments stop taking recourse to it to perpetuate
their authority. It also requires to develop a nonviolent way of living
and a nonviolent doctrine to resist injustice.

American people, particularly the students and the teachers, can take a
lead in resisting the culture of the gun and helping the cause of equality
and justice the world over. The US government's plank to wage a global war
against terrorism lacks credibility as it rests excessively on muscle
power. It may encourage one form of communalism against the other in third
world countries that may create havoc. The poor countries must learn to
solve their problems themselves and to develop economic self
reliance. There should be global collaboration for peace, education,
health and other constructive purposes but not for war.

_______

#5.

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

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://groups.yahoo.com/group/act/messages/ . To subscribe send a blank
message to: <act-subscribe@yahoogroups.com> / To unsubscribe send a blank
message to: <act-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
________________________________________
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.

--=20