[sacw] SACW (13 Sept. 01)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire
13 September 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

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

[1.] Pakistan: An unclear roadmap ( M.B. Naqvi)
[2.] India: Report on "PEOPLES' PARLIAMENT Against the present=20
Government Policy of Education
[3.] USA / India : On Another Plane ( Amitava Kumar)
[4.] USA: Urdu Scholarship in Transnational Perspective (Sept. 28-30, 2001)
[5.] Feminisms in Asia [ an upcoming workshop in Bangalore, India]

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

#1.

The News International (Pakistan)
12 September 2001

An unclear roadmap

MB Naqvi

The writer is a well-known journalist and freelance columnist

One takes this quote as the text from veteran Kashmiri leader and=20
Chief of the Muslim Conference, Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan: "I have=20
been saying for the past four years that the agencies have taken up=20
the role of forming governments and if ever I met General Musharraf,=20
I will tell him candidly ... he is bound by the agencies. Rather he=20
is their prisoner",said the veteran politician talking to a group of=20
newsmen in Rawalpindi.

The point the Sardar wishes to highlight is the role that the=20
intelligence agencies are playing in Azad Kashmir politics. But the=20
question is not confined to that AK. Far more importance attaches to=20
the role these agencies are going to play in the upcoming political=20
journey to what has been described as the 'real' democracy. This is a=20
major uncertainty in view of the track record of these agencies in=20
the country. Whether President General Pervez Musharraf is or is not=20
a free agent vis-a-vis the agencies should be best left to the three=20
parties concerned to sort out: Sardar Qayyum, the President and the=20
intelligence services Chiefs. But in view of the persistent reports=20
of the administrative interference in the recent local bodies polls=20
and the record of the efforts of the 'agencies' toobtain 'positive=20
results' for the Army Chief of the day is none too inspiring. The=20
subject is no longer taboo or even controversial; it is now commonly=20
recognised as a fact of life.

For one thing, there is plenty of documentary evidence - affidavits=20
by highly placed officials in the SC and various other obiter dicta=20
of relevant persons - regarding 1990 general election. The ones=20
conducted by caretaker governments later are commonly believed to=20
have been tinkered with in the same quest for premeditated outcome.=20
The lack of credibility of senior officials with quasi-judicial=20
functions during the days of the so-called democratic governments is=20
a fact with which the country has to live with. The question arises:=20
how can we have, then, a fair election?

That this particular uncertainty is corrosive of the national=20
integrity and unity goes without saying. There is such a miasma of=20
mistrust among the politically aware citizenry and the so-called=20
military-dominated establishment that a transition to democracy=20
through free polls raises questions. That this does not augur well=20
for the future is a truism. But the rulers and the so-called=20
establishment, in their arrogance of power, do not realise how=20
dangerous the situation is. They are all keen about national=20
security. And yet they ignore the first prerequisite of security:=20
citizens' general emotional and intellectual acceptance of the way=20
the state is being run. Describing what democracy is unnecessary; a=20
good college student can write an essay underlining its vital=20
necessity without which the state's own future would be in doubt.=20
Just as proper economic development requires democratic governance -=20
and not merely the ambiguous 'good' governance - there can be no=20
national security without the ownership by the people of the state=20
and the way it works. This is a point the world takes for granted=20
whether or not our dinosaurs recognise it.

If the next elections also produce intended results, not all the=20
consequences may be foreseeable. The next election will be watched=20
over by international observers - from the Commonwealth, the US, NGOs=20
and other governments in a more or less touristic fashion; no other=20
way is feasible. The techniques of administrative interference in the=20
electoral process in this country are so sophisticated as to be=20
virtually undetectable. There is certainly no crude ballot stuffing=20
in most constituencies or any undue pressure on the voters. And yet=20
the administration has managed to produce intended results that do=20
not appear to run counter to observable trends. No ordinary foreign=20
observer has been able to put his fingers on any particular=20
malpractice in the past three elections. The integrity of bureaucracy=20
in this country was lost a long while ago, such as is customary in=20
stable democracies, including India. It was lost as far back as in=20
1953-54 when a so-called bureaucratic coterie around Governor General=20
Ghulam Muhammad cornered ultimate power and democracy became a=20
lifeless caricature of itself. The democracy in the years between=20
1986-99 was also 'by your leave'.

The point one is trying to make is that this (1986-99) charade of=20
managed elections cannot be accepted. There has to be now a true=20
transfer of power - not to a Prime Minister or to this or that party.=20
This has to be to the citizens through their Parliament. All power=20
must henceforward reside in Parliament. Everybody else, bureaucracy=20
and the army included, have to be subordinated to it in reality and=20
perception. Is that on the cards in this roadmap? What is likely -=20
though it is still ambiguous - is that there would be arbitrary=20
constitutional amendments and the Parliament would probably be a body=20
of persons, who would be, one way or another, committed to ratifying=20
them as a price for a share in power. This was what obtained between=20
1986-99; the Parliament and governments were junior partners who took=20
orders from GHQ on sensitive issues. Which issues were sensitive was=20
decided by the military high command. This was and would be a=20
negation of democracy. The Parliament will have to be truly sovereign=20
or else there should be no pretence to democracy. All parties must=20
put their cards on the table face upwards.

The Pakistan of 2001 is already beset with tremendous challenges. The=20
economy, despite two years-long hectic restructuring is still=20
dependent on IMF bailouts and on a nod and wink from US Treasury.=20
Unless we get the next bailout package, including sizeable=20
rescheduling of debt servicing, we would all sink in formal=20
bankruptcy and its consequent sanctions. The position has become=20
wholly untenable. Islamabad's freedom of policy-making has now become=20
a fiction. It has to take crude dictation on all policy matters - and=20
not merely economic.

The polity is threatened by religious Right that is only a few shades=20
less orthodox and inflexible than the Afghan Taliban. Let no one make=20
any mistake: The Taliban may be more inflexible and ultra-orthodox.=20
But they do not diverge from the substantive orthodoxy of the major=20
religious parties of this country: Jamiat-e-Ulema Islam in all its=20
various factions and the Jamaate Islami. The drive for power among=20
them is nearly as strong as in Pakistan Army. Like the army, they are=20
conscious of their own armed strength: the Jihadi organisations. The=20
latter may be oriented to Kashmir today. But should the Kashmir issue=20
be somehow resolved or removed for practical purposes, what would=20
these Jihadis do? They would retrain their guns on other objectives=20
nearer home.

The sectarian terror is stalking the land from Parachinar and Skardu=20
to Karachi; the only exception is the countryside of Sindh. The=20
uncertainties about the sectarian terrorists include both the=20
intelligence agencies' role and that of the Jihadis - all three of=20
whom are the fruits of the poisonous seeds that Zia sowed in the=20
1980s. The chickens are now coming home to roost. All these=20
terrorists and Jihadis of today may have cut their umbilical chord=20
with the army now. But the chord had connected them directly to=20
Intelligence agencies and the military high command indirectly. This=20
is a fact that cannot be forgotten. The whole state can flounder if=20
the menace is not resolutely checkmated and defanged.

Our governments' masterful conduct of foreign policy, despite their=20
victory in Afghanistan - piggyback on the US government - has=20
resulted in Pakistan state being isolated. All the western powers had=20
disapproved the military intervention of October 12, 1999 and had=20
imposed sanctions on this country that are yet to be lifted, except=20
the ones of Germany. Then, Pakistan seems to have warmly responded to=20
the lifeline thrown by China. Others too are beginning to come round.=20
But then this development of the Chinese getting closer threatens=20
Pakistan being sucked into the nascent Sino-American cold war. No=20
doubt this is still tentative and the efforts to deliberately fudge=20
the issues have not yet ended. But its ramifications and pressures=20
are being felt; it is a true cold war. This poses manifold=20
uncertainties and risks for a country with a tottering economy and a=20
brittle and virtually explosive political life; Islamabad is swaying=20
in the wind. This is a blunder bus policy rather than realpolitik,=20
with Afghanistan as the fulcrum.

______

#2.

Report on "PEOPLES' PARLIAMENT Against the present Government Policy=20
of Education" held on 8.8.2001 in Lucknow, organized by the "Citizens=20
Against Fascism".

BACKGROUND :

'Citizens Against Fascism' is a joint forum of progressive=20
organizations and individuals committed to flight against communal=20
and divisive forces in the country.

Having as its Convener Professor Roop Rekha Verma, an old and=20
tireless crusader against communalism, this forum includes=20
organizations like IPTA, Progressive Writers Forum, Janavadi Lekhak=20
Sangh, Saajhi Duniya, NIPA, Vanangana Sahoyg, Aali, Kriti Resources=20
Centre, SFI, AISF, Jan Sanskriti Manch and many intellectuals,=20
artists, teachers and students.

'Citizens Against Fascism' has been campaigning for the last 4 months=20
against the present government's various kinds of actions and=20
policy-announcements. The campaign has concentrated mainly on : the=20
'National Curriculum Framework' formulated by the NCERT; the=20
Birla-Ambani Report on Higher Education commissioned by the Prime=20
Minister; the UGC's Courses on Karmakanda, Paurohitya (Priestdom) and=20
Astrology; and the HRD Ministry's attempt to saffronise education in=20
the name of value education. In the campaign meetings were held in=20
Delhi and various cities of Uttar Pradesh to apprise the citizens,=20
especially the teachers and students, of the dangers in the=20
Government's educational policy.The Convener of 'Citizens Against=20
Fascism' Professor Roop Rekha Verma addressed the teachers and=20
students of several colleges to explain the anti-people and communal=20
character of the Government's philosophy of education as exhibited in=20
the aforementioned documents and actions of the Government and the=20
apex institutions controlled by them. With the same purpose a=20
convention was held in Lucknow on the 16th June 2001 which was=20
attended in large number by the educationists and citizens having=20
stakes in education. A pledge was taken to expose the dangers of the=20
Government's policy and it was decided to hold a 'Peoples'=20
Parliament' on this issue on the eve of the historic Quit India Day.

PEOPLES PARLIAMENT, August 8, 2001.

'Peoples Parliament' against the Government Policy on education was=20
held in the historic Safed Baradari in Lucknow and was attended by=20
more than 500 people representing teachers, students, parents,=20
artists and activists. It was presided by Shri K.N. Kakkar. Two young=20
scientists Mr. Amit Mishra and Ms. Saman Habib presented the main=20
points of the Birla Ambani Report on Higher Education (BAR) and=20
NCERT's National Curriculum Framework (NCF) alongwith the policy=20
points of HRD Ministry and UGC. This was followed by questions and=20
comments from the house. Speakers, including young students, raised=20
questions about the saffronisation of education, inclusion of=20
narrow-minded nationalism, gender - discrimination and high-cost=20
education due to privatization. Some speakers also expressed worry=20
over un-necessary burden of learning Sanskrit on small children.

Professor Anil Sadgopal of Institute of Education, Delhi University;=20
Professor Roop Rekha Verma of Lucknow University; Dr. Janaki Rajan,=20
Director, SCERT, Delhi and Ms. Anjali Noronha of Eklavya responded to=20
these questions and explained in detail how the ruling party at the=20
Centre is using education as a means to implement its agenda of=20
Hindutva and how its educational policy is scheming to keep the=20
masses outside the real benefits of education. Professor Roop Rekha=20
Verma emphasized the anti-people character of the whole scheme. She=20
lamented the fact that the Prime Minister chose two industrialists,=20
viz, Kumarmangalam Birla and Mukesh Ambani from his Trade and=20
Industry Advisory Council to advise him on the policy of Higher=20
Education and not any educationist. She explained how this report,=20
through its recommendation to privatize higher education, plans to=20
place the control of higher and technical education in the hands of=20
the industrialists and thus by making it too costly for the majority=20
of the people, plans to restrict it to a few hands only. She also=20
exposed worry over the fate of social sciences, humanities and=20
fundamental research in sciences should higher education be=20
monopolized by industrialists. Professor Verma reminded that our=20
state is a Welfare State and it is its duty to impart education and=20
make it available to the common people. Professor Verma also gave=20
many examples from the NCERT document (NCF) to prove that what the=20
Government through NCERT and UGC is scheming to do is to glorify and=20
strengthen the brahminical culture, which has been divisive and=20
oppressive, in the name of Indian Culture. It is also doing every=20
thing to damage scientific thinking and the spirit of inquiry, and is=20
encouraging superstitious mentality by opening the courses on=20
Karmakada, Paurohitya and Astrology. Karmakanda finds central place=20
even in the 'Value education' which the NCERT and HRD Ministry are=20
emphasizing repeatedly. Roop Rekha Verma also criticized the gender=20
-discriminatory vision of value education contained in NCF. She=20
lamented the fact that the official concept of 'Indian Culture' was=20
totally bereft of the culture of adivasis, dalits, women and=20
minorities , whereas these form the majority of the peoples of India.=20
Roop Rekha Verma said that the design of the Government was clear=20
that it wants to close the doors of the higher and technical=20
education for about 80% of the masses and thus deprive them of good=20
jobs and thus restrict the availability of the national resources to=20
only 20% of the people; and on the other hand to impart such=20
education at the school level which grounds the children's minds into=20
superstitions, narrow identities and fatalism so that they do not=20
question and rebel against this unjust social arrangement. Roop Rekha=20
Verma was especially critical of the NCF's proposal to make Sanskrit=20
compulsory because, as per NCF, in this language the common man=20
celebrates his festivals and performs his religions rituals. She=20
pointed out that the culture of the common man is manifested in=20
festivals only in his/her dialect and never in Sanskrit; no kajari,=20
teej or birha was ever sung in Sanskrit. And as far as religions=20
rituals are concerned, no minority or Adivasi ever performs them=20
through Sanskrit. The whole argument of NCF shows deep bias against=20
these sections of society by already identifying "India" with "Hindu"=20
and the later with "Upper Caste".

Professor Anil Sadgopal warned the house against the dominance and=20
control of multinational on education and also on our ideology. He=20
explained that as per the policy of educational privatization the=20
private companies will spend only 0.4% out of 0.7% money and the rest=20
0.3% will be spent by the Government although the latter will not=20
have any control over education. Only those subjects will get a place=20
in education which can be "marketed" and the others will be ignored.=20
It will be nobody's worry whether villages and the poor are having=20
any educational facility or not. Anil Sadgopal also gave many=20
examples from the books which are produced by Vidya Bharati and said=20
that since the same ideology is now built into Government's vision of=20
education, Hindu culture will be presented as totally unchangeable=20
and stagnant; history will be re-written to inculcate narrow-minded=20
nationalism and those cultures which entered India from outside, even=20
though several thousand years ago, will be treated as alien even now.=20
Professor Sadgopal said that in these documents there is no place for=20
non-brahminical caste or race, and thus their contributions would be=20
marginalized.

Professor Janaki Rajan was critical of the non-democratic method in=20
which the new documents have been accepted by the Government. Ms.=20
Anjali Noronha pointed out that from these documents the question of=20
basic rights and the value of equality are totally missing. She=20
emphasized that it is at the school age that these values have to be=20
imbibed. The document of NCERT speaks only of duties and not of=20
rights which is inappropriate.

The verdict of the Peoples' Parliament was that the present=20
government policy of education is anti-people and communal, and it=20
subverts the very purpose of education by encouraging unscientific=20
temper. The Peoples Parliament exhorted people to oppose this policy=20
and work for a framework of education which serves as a means of=20
social change in the direction of establishing an egalitarian society.

_________

#3.

Indian Express
September 11.

On Another Plane
Amitava Kumar

[...]
The first time I had visited the World Trade Center was when I took=20
my younger sister, Divya, and her little child there. We wanted to=20
see New York City from the top floor. The elevators raced to the top=20
in seconds: their speed was such that little metal signs outside the=20
doors warned pregnant women not to step in them. My niece, Mishu,=20
will turn seven on Sunday. She lives with her parents in a suburb of=20
Washington, DC. Today, after the explosion at the Pentagon, my sister=20
began to worry about Mishu. My mother also called her from Patna: she=20
wanted to know if we were all safe. After my mother's call, Divya=20
went to Mishu's school. Other parents were already there, picking up=20
their kids. Mishu was happy to get off early from school. She saw her=20
father waiting by the car and this pleased her too. She wanted to=20
know how come her father wasn't in his office in downtown Washington,=20
DC. Mishu's friend, Faria, was also being picked up by Divya. Faria=20
is a little older than Mishu. She looked at my sister and asked, "Is=20
everything okay?" Younger children have a prescience about them.=20
Mishu's questions to her mother became more anxious. What can you=20
tell a child about the attack on the Pentagon building if her chief=20
excitement at the moment is her coming seventh birthday? Divya said=20
that she began telling Mishu a story about "bad guys." It worked for=20
a while. In the evening, like most of us, Mishu had already achieved=20
an education on CNN. She asked my sister, "What is a terrorist?"=20
There, I thought, the crux of the matter. I asked my sister what was=20
the answer she had given Mishu. My sister said, "She has seen films.=20
So, I told her that these men were like the ones she had seen in=20
'Mission Kashmir.'" And then, wanting to tell Mishu more about India,=20
as perhaps many other Indian parents do, Divya began telling her=20
child also what she sees as India's history. She told Mishu about=20
Khalistan and the desire on the part of some Sikhs for a separate=20
homeland. The bombings and killings that had gone on in that=20
struggle. At the end of that story, my sister said, Mishu asked her,=20
and I quote her exact words, "Was their wish fulfilled?" Divya said=20
to Mishu, "No." And, she told me, Mishu said, "Thank God."

Oddly enough, I too had been thinking of the Sikhs today. I was=20
thinking of the barbarity that was meted out to the thousands of=20
Sikhs living in Delhi and elsewhere in the riots that followed the=20
assassination of Indira Gandhi in October 1984. In the next few days=20
in the US, as the death toll is announced, there shall be an orgy of=20
fresh violence, perhaps not in any widespread manner on American=20
soil, but certainly elsewhere. Once it is confirmed that there has=20
been an Arab hand behind today's tragedy, a greater military might=20
will be unleashed in foreign lands. In this country, in community=20
halls, in bars, in homes, in comedy clubs, in classrooms, in films=20
and on television, there shall be fresh charges of hate against Arab=20
and other minorities. Propaganda will build its own prison camps of=20
disinformation and bigotry. And the armed forces will erect their=20
twin towers there. Will Indians in the US, given the dominance of the=20
Hindu right at home, remain untouched by all of this? I remember the=20
way in which in a DTC bus or in the streets, for several days after=20
the riots in Delhi, those very Sikhs who had been your neighbours=20
till yesterday suddenly looked so incongruous in our midst, so very=20
alien. In the US, Arabs and others who "look like them," which would=20
also mean Indians, will take on that subdued, hard-to-place=20
passiveness, that had overcome the Sikhs in the winter months of=20
1984. Who will teach the Americans this history? Who will teach Mishu=20
this history? On the radio today I heard a young lawyer talking to a=20
reporter. The lawyer's voice shook with what I imagine was hurt and=20
pride when she said "I cannot believe this is happening in our=20
America." Such innocence. Such ignorance. An Indian living in the US=20
will never say this. We have no such illusions of invulnerability. We=20
bear the scar of more painful histories. We look at what has been=20
unfolding on our television sets today, and we are able to put=20
ourselves on another plane. This is the plane on which we are=20
familiar and unsurprised, even if shocked, by the erupting=20
conflagrations of our times. We are veterans of conflict. We have=20
seen it all. We will even advise people on how to deal with=20
terrorists. And here, like experts in war, who think they know all,=20
we run the risk of making a fatal error. We will take our arrogance=20
learned at home and make it a part of our life in America. We will=20
teach our children to make the whole world our Kashmir. We will=20
become guns trained at the heads of the innocent.

Amitava Kumar teaches at Penn State University and is
the author of Passport Photos.

_________

4.

Urdu Scholarship in Transnational Perspective
September 28-30, 2001, Columbia University

On September 28-30, 2001, the Southern Asian Institute at Columbia=20
University will host an international conference in honor of retiring=20
Professor C.M. Naim of the University of Chicago. The occasion will=20
publicly recognize Prof. Naim's contributions to Urdu and South Asian=20
studies as a teacher, scholar, translator, and man of gracious ways=20
and liberal views. It will also provide an opportunity to reflect=20
retrospectively on the expansion of transnational, interdisciplinary=20
scholarship based in Urdu-language sources in United States, Europe,=20
India, and Pakistan over the last forty years.

The conference seeks to bring together social scientists and=20
humanists who have examined the cultural histories, social and=20
political debates, and literary developments in north India,=20
Pakistan, and the global community of Urdu speakers. The array of=20
scholarly presentations will reassert the centrality of Urdu as a=20
tool of knowledge in the production of a wide-ranging and influential=20
body of research. Prof. Naim's engagement with historians,=20
anthropologists, and political scientists as well as scholars of=20
literature, language, religion and other subject will be reflected in=20
the selection of papers for inclusion in the program. The best of the=20
collected papers will be published as scholarly volume by a major=20
university press.

Information: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/sipa/regional/sai/index.html

_______

5.

FEMINISMS IN ASIA
CSCS Coordinator for the Workshop: Tejaswini Niranjana

Dates: October 17-20, 2001
Venue: United Theological College, 63 Millers Road, Benson Town,=20
Bangalore 560046 [India]

Background Note

Today it would be indisputable that feminism has been one of the most=20
significant social movements of the twentieth century. The impact of=20
feminist initiatives has been as extensive as it is profound. In=20
thinking about questions of everyday life and relationships;=20
institutions such as education, the judiciary, the workplace;=20
structures of power such as the state or the trans-national=20
corporation; discourses like colonialism and nationalism; and the=20
disciplines (history, economics, political science, literary studies,=20
sociology, anthropology, philosophy, psychoanalysis and the=20
biological sciences), feminists have produced remarkable new insights=20
into the very fabric of our lives. Feminism has wrought irreversible=20
transformations in our attempts to produce knowledge, in our modes of=20
representation and our ways of looking.

In hindsight, it may not appear surprising that from about the=20
mid-19th century on, in hundreds of locations across the world women=20
began to organise for social and political change, around issues such=20
as suffrage, education, or access to the public sphere. Women's=20
magazines and newsletters were produced, and writing by=20
women--essays, pamphlets, fiction, poetry and criticism in a myriad=20
languages--became increasingly available. New modes of public protest=20
came to be fashioned. Women's activism in diverse areas provided the=20
ground for the analytical understanding of the situations we were=20
struggling against. While there were very few societies where this=20
was not happening, assertions such as "sisterhood is global", often=20
made by western feminists in the 1970s or 80s, were not welcomed by=20
feminists in other spaces. The universalising premise of such=20
assertions, it was felt, served to obscure the serious differences in=20
women's lives in different parts of the world, often--when one took=20
into consideration issues of class, caste or race--within the same=20
geo-political boundaries. Recent attempts at redressing this=20
imbalance invoke the concept of "local feminism" but from a "global=20
perspective" (eg., Amrita Basu ed., The Challenge of Local Feminisms:=20
Women's Movements in Global Perspective, 1995), where the term global=20
could easily be a stand-in for the older term western, which=20
functions as the hidden norm. What we propose as the underlying=20
premise for our workshop is a radical departure from this idea.

Objective

We begin with the concept "Asia", and proceed to problematize both=20
the sign and its referents. An earlier conference organised by CSCS=20
in February 2000 took some initial steps in this direction. We have=20
also been inspired by the efforts of the InterAsia Cultural Studies=20
project which is trying to create new lines of affiliation and new=20
tools for criticism across what has come to be called Asia. Our=20
desire is not to counterpose a unified region (Asia) with an equally=20
monolithic "West". What we want to do is suggest the possibilities=20
which might open up when we create a framework for comparison which=20
does not assume that the implicit reference point for all=20
discussions, political and conceptual, is automatically the West.=20
Our workshop will take initial steps to understand how to undertake a=20
comparative analysis of women's movements across Asia, in the belief=20
that the methodologies devised for such analysis will be of value for=20
academicians and theorists of social movements, and for community=20
groups and non-governmental organizations.

The emerging dialogue should focus not so much on fact sheets but on=20
the kinds of conceptual struggles undertaken by feminists who are=20
trying to theorize their specific dilemmas. On the surface, the=20
movements may seem to have much in common, in terms of originating=20
impulses, trajectories, even ambitions. But what we would like to=20
elicit in the course of our workshop are discussions of the texture=20
of women's problems as well as their attempted resolutions, outlines=20
of the conceptual moves by which specific political issues were=20
debated, analyses of what was at stake at critical moments in the=20
histories of our movements. For the sake of convenience, we will=20
focus on the last 20-25 years, and emphasize workshop participation=20
by those activists and scholars who have been engaged in thinking=20
through key feminist issues in their respective locations. We would=20
like to aim not for a quick or simple consensus but for laying a firm=20
foundation for sustained dialogue.

Thematic Concerns of the Workshop

In the contemporary period, "Asia" is seen as a significant region by=20
Euro-America from perspectives somewhat different than those which=20
governed the discourses of power called "Orientalism" by the=20
Palestinian critic Edward Said. While "Asian" self-assertion may be=20
variously greeted by grudging respect (for the "economic miracle" of=20
the "Asian Tigers" in East and South-East Asia), aggressive hostility=20
(towards West Asian countries like Iran or Iraq), a mixture of=20
political censure combined with the desire for expanding markets=20
(eg., China or India), apparent Fund-Bank concern over poverty and=20
economic backwardness (South Asia in general), there are obvious=20
continuities between these attitudes and the historical relationship=20
between these countries and the "West". How might feminist=20
initiatives in "Asia" refigure these conventional understandings of=20
the region? What could be the value of thinking cross-regionally in=20
relation to women, especially in the face of continuing forms of=20
Orientalism?

To further complicate the picture, the relation between colonizer and=20
colonized within Asia is not always one between the west and its=20
others but sometimes between Asian countries (eg., Japan and Korea,=20
China and Korea), just as cultural imperialism could refer not only=20
to western hegemony but also to the visibility of a country like=20
India vis-=E0-vis its smaller South Asian neighbours, or China in=20
relation to Taiwan or Hong Kong. Today we also have the emergence of=20
supra-national regional blocs--West Asia, South-East Asia, South Asia=20
etc.,--which feature prominently in political and economic decisions=20
both within Asia and internationally. In the formerly colonised=20
societies (the third world, the "south") and across "Asia" (we=20
include in this term the areas referred to as South Asia, East Asia,=20
West Asia and South-East Asia), a close historical connection between=20
nationalist struggles and feminism is commonly to be found. This=20
feature of women's movements appears to be specific to societies=20
which have experienced colonialism of various kinds, at the hands of=20
the British, the Dutch, the French, the Chinese, the Japanese or the=20
Americans. It is a feature that could well be said to mark one of the=20
major differences of these movements (as for example in South and=20
South-East Asia) from feminism in the west. However, in a later phase=20
many of the women's movements have also engaged in a critique of=20
their nation-state, for not fulfilling the promises made by=20
nationalism to women and other disadvantaged groups. What might be=20
the relationship--contentious or otherwise--between feminists and the=20
state? How do we map the changing contours of the state in the last=20
few decades? What can we learn from different feminist attempts=20
across Asian nations to negotiate with, confront, and refigure the=20
state?

While older hierarchies have been recast by nation-state formations=20
in the last hundred years or so, a major challenge for feminisms in=20
Asia has been that of understanding the intersection of gender=20
discrimination with other forms of inequality, and of forging=20
productive political alliances which could further our analysis and=20
activism. The foregrounding of women's issues has sometimes been seen=20
as though in opposition to, rather than aligned with, those of race,=20
caste, class, community, or nation. The task for feminists would be=20
to investigate, and incorporate into their analytical frameworks, the=20
simultaneous shaping of women's identities by all these discourses.=20
Of related interest: how do we investigate "women" as the site of=20
contemporary productions of caste, class and religious identity (as=20
for example in India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia or China)? And=20
how do we understand the newly visible struggles around sexuality and=20
sexual preference and their contentious and complicated relationship=20
with women's movements (which may appear to posit a homogeneous, and=20
heterosexist, identity for woman)?

A crucial issue for feminists in Asia is likely to be that of=20
critical vocabularies. Frequently faced with the charge that feminism=20
is an alien import, women have responded by producing indigeneous=20
geneaologies for their activism, and by employing critical terms=20
derived from local languages and situations. At the same time, there=20
remain tensions around the widespread use of concepts such as=20
patriarchy or gender coming out of certain traditions of western=20
feminism. One of the agendas of our workshop will be to rethink from=20
a feminism perspective the history and politics of translation and=20
examine the stakes in the production and dissemination of critical=20
concepts in various Asian contexts and across the region.

Some of the other questions we would like participants to engage with:

--institutionalisation: women's studies and the university, NGOs, the=20
state, funding issues;
--debates around modernity and "modernization", including both=20
economic and cultural dimensions; women and cultural identity;=20
discussions of globalization;
--the paradigm of "development" prescribed for/taken up by=20
non-western societies and its impact on feminism;
--the women's movement and discussions of citizenship/democracy; the=20
debate about secularism;
--conceptual framing of issues such as domestic violence, sexual=20
harrassment, etc.;
--women and sexual identities;
--politics of women's health; mental health and feminization of labour;
--theorizations of desire and subjectivity; politics of representation;
--controversial regional issues like struggles of sex workers,=20
migrant labour, sex tourism;
--inequalities within and across Asian countries and the dilemmas for femin=
ism.

[The questions are not in any particular order, and the list is by no=20
means exhaustive. Participants are urged to add (and address) issues=20
which they think relevant.]

The above topics are listed out in an attempt to provide a statement=20
of the field. We will not necessarily cover all these topics in the=20
brief span of the workshop.

Workshop Format

There will be two kinds of sessions, panel discussions with three=20
speakers per panel (15-20 minutes each), and paper presentations (30=20
minutes), with a roundtable session on the last day to evaluate the=20
objectives of the workshop and discuss how to further them.

An important feature of the workshop is that it comes out of, and=20
feeds into, our Centre's continuing concerns (a) about social=20
movements in general and feminism in particular; and (b) about=20
enlarging the scope of discussion in Indian civil society to take=20
other related contexts into consideration and learn from their=20
problems and resolutions. As our earlier conference demonstrated, we=20
are keen on shifting the focus of debate so that the main reference=20
point is no longer the West.

The strength of the framework for our workshop lies in its resolutely=20
inter-disciplinary interests, a legacy of the women's movement. A=20
number of people from our feminist study group and the larger=20
feminist network we are part of have contributed to the conceptual=20
elaboration of the issues to be discussed, making this a truly=20
collaborative venture. Most of us have long years of experience in=20
the women's movement in different parts of India; we have also taught=20
for a number of years in women's studies and allied fields, both at=20
graduate student level and in teacher training. Our expertise ranges=20
from history, philosophy, political science and sociology to=20
literature, art history, film theory and cultural studies. Many of us=20
have been active in the larger public sphere through our writings,=20
videos/films, and interventions in policy discussions (in the areas=20
of law, education and legislative representation, for example).

Women's studies conferences in India often tend to be very general=20
(in their attempt to "add women" to every discipline) and lacking in=20
conceptual rigour and clarity; activist and NGO conferences, on the=20
other hand, often take for granted some basic assumptions about=20
women's oppression which have become part of our commonsense, ending=20
up blocking further investigation rather than opening up new areas=20
for analysis. Where our workshop will break new ground is in inviting=20
participants with strong credentials in the areas of both scholarship=20
and women's activism, who have expended considerable energy in=20
thinking and writing about feminism even as they have taken part in=20
the everyday struggles of the movement. We expect this background=20
will bring a richness of analysis to the questions posed by the=20
workshop, and allow us to enlarge our comparative frames in=20
meaningful and thought-provoking ways.

While a few privileged Indian feminists have been taking part in=20
conferences in other Asian countries, it has not always been possible=20
to bring the comparisons with other places into our activism and=20
scholarship. One of the reasons could be that the discussions with=20
Asian feminists have not really happened in our own context, or=20
included diverse kinds of women from the movement in India (such as=20
journalists, lawyers, film makers, publishers, health professionals=20
and educationists). We hope our workshop will serve as a platform for=20
better exchange between Indian feminists and those from other parts=20
of Asia. The workshop discussions are bound to stimulate new debates=20
in the Indian women's movement about specific questions here (eg.,=20
sexuality, women's work, new media and technologies) which have not=20
received the kind of attention they might have, but which have been=20
important topics for discussion in other Asian contexts.

We believe that the cultural questions foregrounded by our workshop=20
(in relation to nationalism and modernity, globalization, the=20
translation of critical vocabularies and their implications for=20
women's issues) will be discussed for the first time in a genuinely=20
comparative Asian frame. We emphasize once again: while there exist=20
profound historical connections and commonalities between the=20
different Asian countries, our normal instinct is to establish=20
comparisons between each location and the "West". Our workshop=20
intends to establish sound precedents for a different kind of=20
practice which will initiate inter-Asian comparisons.

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

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.