[sacw] SACW #2 (26 Sept. 01)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | Dispatch #2
26 September 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

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

#1. Fortress America (Achin Vanaik)
#2. A Citizens Statement from Pakistan
#3. A Global Vigil For Peace on Oct 2 2001 [Gandhi's Birthday]
#4. Not In Our Name (Farish Noor)

________________________

#1.

The Hindu
Wednesday, September 26, 2001
Opinion=20

Fortress America
By Achin Vanaik

ON SEPTEMBER 11 morning, two hours before we were supposed to land at=20
Washington's Dulles airport, our plane got diverted to Montreal,=20
Canada. Making our way down by land over the next two days into=20
upstate New York, Maryland and Washington, one was able to get an=20
insight into the public mood not just from the international CNN-=20
type broadcasting stations or the major dailies but from a host of=20
local TV stations and local newspapers as well as from the average=20
citizen met and spoken with. The popular reaction provided sources of=20
both hope and despair. Hope, in that the shared moral outrage=20
expressed across boundaries of race, religion and ethnicity testified=20
to the existence of a universal humanitarian decency. Despair, that=20
this potential for a moral sensitivity that is impartial and=20
universal was stymied by the rapid surfacing of a predominantly=20
nationalist insularity of response to the tragedy.

The main question that preoccupied Americans was not why did this=20
happen but how could it happen? Or rather, insofar as the why=20
question was posed it was quickly disposed of to most peoples'=20
satisfaction. The perpetrators are mindless terrorists or religious=20
fanatics who hate America and what it stands for which is decency,=20
democracy, freedom, etc. Rare were the voices (mostly religiously=20
inspired pacifists or uncompromisingly liberal elements) who were=20
prepared to say that the U.S. must not seek revenge by waging war on=20
Afghanistan or engage in activities that would itself amount to=20
terrorism, i.e. killing the civilians of other countries. Rarer still=20
were the voices of those who were prepared to point out, even as they=20
expressed their pain and outrage against the attacks on New York and=20
Washington, that the U.S. Government's actions abroad have helped=20
create the breeding ground from which sub-state and combat group=20
terrorists have emerged.

Wholly admirable was the way in which people across the country=20
united to support and offer help in carrying out the necessary relief=20
measures. Similarly, there was a perceptive and sensitive discourse=20
in the media on what the efforts to avoid such attacks in the future=20
might portend regarding restriction of civil liberties thereby=20
weakening the freedoms and decencies of American society. Barring the=20
fringe, most public political figures opposed attacks on Americans of=20
Arab, South Asian origin or on ordinary Muslims in the country. That=20
would be a betrayal of the values that the U.S. is supposed to stand=20
for. Even rightwing Republican leaders made it a point to say that=20
this was not a war between the West and Islam but between the rest of=20
the world and terrorism.

Largely absent, however, was any recognition of the problems caused=20
by American foreign policy. The record here is simply awesome, both=20
in numbers and scale. It includes the nuclear bombing of civilians in=20
Hiroshima/Nagasaki, the use of chemical weapons in Vietnam where over=20
two million civilians were killed, the use of sanctions since the=20
Gulf War which have led to the deaths of 1.2 million Iraqis of whom=20
500,000 were children. Instead of any media self-introspection on=20
these grounds, there was an even stronger display of=20
self-righteousness than usual. Civilisation, best represented and led=20
by the U.S., was under attack. Therefore, all those (whether=20
countries, groups or individuals) who might refuse to support what=20
the U.S. Government intended to do in retaliation were effectively=20
enemies of not just the U.S. but of all civilised values.

Given such a mood, it was hardly surprising that two leaders of=20
Israel should try and seize the opportunity to harden the attitudes=20
of the American Government and public towards the plight of the=20
Palestinians. The former Israeli Premier, Mr. Benjamin Netanyhu,=20
called for the destruction of the Palestinian Authority as a=20
terrorist outfit while Mr. Ariel Sharon called Mr. Yasser Arafat=20
another Osama bin Laden. They were supported by numerous prominent=20
American personalities declaring in print and TV/radio that now=20
America knew what Israel has been suffering all along. Matters were=20
not helped by repeated broadcastings of film clips of Palestinians=20
celebrating the attacks. Mr. Arafat's act of donating blood was not=20
an effective counter in the public relations battle being waged by=20
the American right and Israel at this juncture.

One thing is quite clear. Even if the evidence the U.S. Government is=20
accumulating is not sufficient to establish a legally defensible case=20
about an accused or suspect (Osama bin Laden in this case), it simply=20
could not afford to admit as much. The public desire for revenge is=20
so strong that it has to act. There are several historical precedents=20
for this, the most recent being after the 1998 bombings of U.S.=20
Embassies in East Africa. The U.S. bombed a pharmaceutical complex in=20
Sudan which suffered unknown ``collateral damage'' (i.e. civilian=20
deaths) and has ever since blocked an independent U.N. investigation=20
into its claim that it was justified in doing so because it was part=20
of Osama bin Laden's network of activities.

Of course, the U.S. Government is not simply responding to domestic=20
pressure. The speed with which `long range thinking' was put into=20
place was also remarkable. It is clear that it wishes to seize this=20
opportunity to launch something like an 8-10 year campaign to attack=20
(on all continents) all armed sub-state groups (and selected regimes)=20
which are considered to be unacceptable to American interests. So the=20
issue is not just Osama bin Laden and his network but the overthrow=20
of the Taliban regime itself, followed by other targets to be=20
highlighted as and when Washington chooses. This is not a war against=20
terrorism but an effort to establish maximum freedom of=20
military-political activity (of a kind and scale never before=20
envisioned) for the U.S. throughout the world.

Returning to India after the Washington trip, one was again shaken by=20
much of the public and media response. After initial expressions of=20
horror, the main preoccupation seems to be how India can obtain=20
enough foreign policy benefit, i.e. swing the U.S. Government over to=20
`our' side against Pakistan and its sponsorship of terrorism in=20
Kashmir. The overall result is that only a small minority (though=20
bigger than the even smaller minority in the U.S.) of publicly=20
articulated opinion declares that in the fight against international=20
terrorism, it is not just sub-state actors/combat groups (whether or=20
not supported/sponsored by states) that are the culprits but that=20
states themselves are guilty of directing/executing terrorism.

Indeed, that the sustainability, diversity of forms, and sheer scale=20
of state terrorist acts and campaigns is qualitatively greater and=20
more dangerous than that of sub-state actors. Moreover, among the=20
culpable states is not just Pakistan and its behaviour in Kashmir and=20
Afghanistan but India (in Kashmir and the Northeast), Russia (in=20
Chechnya), China (in Tibet), Israel, and a host of numerous other=20
states with, of course, the U.S. itself as far and away the worst=20
offender.

To any morally impartial view which seeks to fight international=20
terrorism no matter who is responsible for it, the idea of=20
establishing a concert of nations led by the U.S. as the main=20
international mechanism (regardless of its getting a manipulated=20
sanction from the U.N.) through which one must fight terrorism, is=20
utterly unacceptable. One cannot legitimise as the main=20
correctors/policers of international terrorism those who are=20
themselves guilty of terrorisms which then not only goes unpunished=20
or unrecognised but is made unrecognisable. The double standards=20
involved here are not just morally shameful but politically=20
counter-productive because they will lead to more widespread=20
bitterness and alienation reinforcing the appeal of those who claim=20
that sub-state terrorism is the only form of retribution to the=20
strong to whom the principles of justice do not apply. It is time to=20
stand up and oppose the U.S.-led coalition which will wage war on=20
Afghanistan and to call on India not to join it.

________

#2.

[Please note this is the final version of the statement issued to and=20
published in the press. An earlier version was circulated on SACW 25=20
Sept. 2001]

PRESS STATEMENT
Released on September 24, 2001

1. We share the immense grief and suffering of families and=20
communities caused by the brutal and murderous attacks upon innocent=20
people in the US. Since the carnage was also inflicted upon people of=20
all faiths and of many nations, including Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs=20
of South Asian origin, there is also much sadness in thousands of=20
homes across all of South Asia.

2. We call upon people of all faiths and nations to affirm a=20
commitment to peace, justice and democracy, and to reject all forms=20
of violence.

3. We call upon the US to review its policies in order to seek a=20
world order that is equal, fair and just for all nations of the world.

4. We call upon all states, to fully protect the social, economic and=20
political rights of all residents in their country regardless of=20
their ethnic and religious identity.

5. We call upon all people, to ensure that action against terrorism=20
addresses the root causes of terrorism, and that such actions are=20
grounded in the rules of international law and consensus of United=20
Nations.

6. We call upon the Pakistan government to create conditions for=20
development of a civil and tolerant society, to take urgent steps to=20
curb individuals, groups and facilities that promote religious and=20
ethnic militancy within Pakistan

7. We call upon the Pakistan Government to ensure that the=20
utilisation of any relief or economic benefits obtained as a result=20
of the new situation is planned and executed in a transparent manner=20
with the involvement of all interest groups, and are directed=20
towards the well-being of the ordinary people of Pakistan.

8. We call upon the Government of Pakistan to open up the media to=20
allow public debate on all national issues.

This statement is issued by Nazim F.Haji, on behalf of and in=20
concurrence with a group of Pakistani citizens who believe that the=20
urgency of the times calls for a renewed pledge to promote broad=20
public participation in issues of peace, justice and democracy. The=20
group sincerely invites fellow citizens of all faiths to lead towards=20
a new Pakistan.

Endorsements :

Arif Hasan Nisar A. Memon Dr. Badr Siddiqi=20
Yousuf Mustikhan
Karamat Ali Dr. Tipu Sultan Dr. S.T.Sohail=20
Dr. Rashid Jooma
Naeem Sadiq B.M.Kutty M.B.Naqvi=20
Dr. Zaeema Alvi Ahmad
Dr. Shifa Naeem Syed Ghulam Shah Raza Hussain Shah Nuzhat Kidvai
Dr. Aly Ercelawn Feroze Khan Najm ul Haq=20
M. Akbar Khan
Syed Qaiser Ali Umar Abbas S.Amir A. Husain

_________

#3.

GLOBAL VIGIL FOR PEACE ON OCT 2 2001 [GANDHI'S BIRTHDAY]

An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
Satyagraha is a relentless search for truth and a determination to=20
search truth.
Satyagraha is a process of educating public opinion, such that it=20
covers all the elements of the society and makes itself irresistible.
- M.K.Gandhi

Remember your humanity =8A=8A=8A.. Albert Einstein and Bertrand Russell

Since Sept 11 2001 our lives have been lived in the shadow of the=20
awesome TV images of violent attacks in the heart of the USA,=20
thousands of innocent lives lost, and countless acts of sacrifice and=20
heroism of ordinary people.

Even more fearsome has been what has followed: the unanimous sanction=20
for mobilisation of unbelievable force levels for war; and the=20
dangerous tendency by some sections of the leadership and the media,=20
to reinforce the link between terrorism and Islam, thus fuelling=20
resentment and attacks against peace loving people, mainly Muslims=20
and Arabs, the world over.

The internet has been flooded with thoughtful writings condemning=20
terrorism and violence, news of vigils for peace, and petitions=20
counselling caution and expressing fears that hasty action now may=20
lead us into World War III.=20

Our immediate concern is to forestall this last eventuality and to=20
convey this urgently to world leaders on behalf of millions of=20
ordinary citizens in a manner which will make a more powerful impact.

One way of doing this could be by using the Gandhian strategy of=20
Satyagraha - or non-violent civil action in the quest for truth- a=20
tool invented by Gandhi for mass mobilisation through non-violent=20
protest, and used effectively by Martin Luther King and Nelson=20
Mandela among others. We believe we can and must seize this moment as=20
an opportunity to raise our collective voices for Peace. People=20
around the world are meeting in the spirit of non-violence to=20
consider how we might all work together, to learn lessons from the=20
past, reflect on the present and to find a way ahead which does not=20
believe in an `eye for an eye'.

Please join us in mobilising the widest possible participation in A=20
GLOBAL VIGIL FOR PEACE on October 2 - Gandhi's Birthday - where=20
friends and neighbors can meet, talk, commune in silence or in song.=20
We do not necessarily need large rallies, but can plan a variety of=20
imaginative localised actions in small groups in offices, schools,=20
colleges, street corners, bus and train stations, community centres,=20
and places of worship, in villages, towns and cities across the=20
world. When many people walk together, surely we can build a new=20
Pathway?

While we use Gandhi's name, we also remember innumerable goddesses,=20
Gautam Buddha, Mahavir, Jesus Christ, Prophet Mohammed, Kabir,=20
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and millions of women and men all of whom=20
worked for peace, tolerance,compassion and sharing in different parts=20
of the world. Oct 2 was selected because it provides a convenient=20
date around which to build on the proven abilities of persons like=20
Gandhi to convince millions representing diverse beliefs and=20
opinions, of the critical need for tolerance, equity and justice as=20
critical ingredients for peace - and above all that the struggle to=20
achieve these must be non-violent, because the means were as=20
important as the ends.

Co-ordinating action around the world on a particular date might also=20
help achieve that important ingredient - a critical mass and=20
hopefully a chain reaction of good impulses which indeed is the only=20
way to achieve operation INFINITE JUSTICE!

If you can, please gather signatures on a simple statement saying:

NO TO TERRORISM - NO TO WAR - NO TO VIOLENCE!

YES TO PEACE, JUSTICE AND EQUALITY FOR ALL!

Send these with your names and location to UN Secretary General -=20
Kofi Annan, US President Bush, and your own Head of State.

In any case let us know if you met and what happened when you met.=20
`We' and `Us' are just a group of concerned friends from across the=20
world - with no political affiliations but a shared vision for=20
humanity.

--

Dear Friends

This is in continuation of my letter regarding the Global Peace Vigil on
October 2, 2001 about which I wrote to you yesterday.

It would really be very useful if you could organise something in your
areas, regions etc.

In case you decide to do something in your region/area send a copy for
information to the following addresses where we can keep a record of all
such actions.

Harsh Kapoor <aiindex@m...>
Lalita Ramdas <lramdas@v...>
Kamla Bhasin <k.bhasin@v...>

Harsh Kapoor is setting up a website on this vigil and you will be
informed
about it.

In peace and solidarity

Kamla Bhasin

________

#4.

Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 16:33:33 +0000

Comment for New Straits Times (Malaysia)

Not In Our Name

By Farish A. Noor

As the hawks of war gather to shed the blood of innocents once again,=20
we are forced to hear our names being mentioned as the intended=20
recipients and beneficiaries of such barbarity. While leaders of=20
Western governments talk about launching 'crusades' in the name of=20
'humanity' and 'civilisation', equally opportunistic self-proclaimed=20
'leaders' of the Muslim ummah have begun to call for a 'Jihad' in the=20
defence of Islam.

What is blatantly clear for all to see is how the language of=20
politics is being used and abused by politicians - be they dressed in=20
suits or the mantle of the Prophet. And with this abuse of political=20
discourse comes the utilisation of key terms and signifiers that have=20
all but lost their meaning. Universal categories like 'Civilisation',=20
'Humanity', 'Islam' and 'Jihad' have been put to work to further what=20
can only be particularist aims, and worse of all, done with our 'best=20
interests' at heart.

So when the leaders of the United States talk about shedding innocent=20
blood 'for the future of humanity', who are they referring to? Are=20
they referring to their own supporters who are baying for the blood=20
of others to be shed for the sake of vengeance? Or do they take into=20
account the thousands of Americans who have come out openly in=20
solidarity with others and who have called on their own government to=20
choose the option of peace and justice?

Likewise when the leaders of the Taliban and that self-appointed=20
'warrior of Islam' Osama Ben Laden talks about the need for a 'Jihad'=20
against the West, are they talking about their own fanatical=20
followers? Or have they thought for even a second about the millions=20
of Muslims the world over who regard their brand of reactionary and=20
exclusivist Islam as repugnant and totally contrary to the teachings=20
of the religion itself?

We who are caught in between need to speak out against this flagrant=20
abuse of political rhetoric that is carried out in our names. For=20
millions of people the world over, terrorism remains an immoral and=20
evil phenomenon that we all categorically reject. And this rejection=20
is truly universal- No civilised society accepts terrorism as a=20
justifiable act, whether it is carried out by rogue militia units or=20
governments.

But what is even more important is for us to reclaim control of the=20
discourse of rights, democracy and religion so that it does not fall=20
into the hands of the Pharisees and war-mongers who can only turn it=20
into a vehicle of war. 'Humanity' means much more that what the=20
President of the United States may think, and 'Islam' certainly is=20
too big a concept to be grasped by the narrow-minded mullahs of the=20
Taliban and Osama Ben Laden.

Should conflict occur- and the likelihood is that it will- the people=20
of the world must come together to build and strengthen the bonds of=20
common humanity that cuts across the barriers of politics, religion=20
and race. The only meaningful alliance that can be built in the midst=20
of this confusion is one based on a common understanding of universal=20
justice that unites communities rather than driving them apart and=20
against each other. Muslims in particular must realise that our true=20
allies are those peace-loving advocates of democracy and justice in=20
the West, and not the Mullahs who call upon us to murder others in=20
the name of our religion.

We may not be able to stop the abuse of political language, and no=20
doubt there will be plenty more 'crusades' fought in the name of=20
Civilisation or Religion in the years to come. But we need to make=20
this point clear at least: The war-makers and terrorists of the world=20
may well fight till the last man and the last victim, but this=20
senseless bloodshed should never be carried out in our name.

End.

_______

#5.

_______

#6.

_______

#7.

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

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.