[sacw] SACW #1 (25 Oct. 01)

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 25 Oct 2001 02:45:48 +0100


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

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

#1. Oh! For a bit of commonsense (M.B. Naqvi)
#2. Pipedreams and daydreams (Irfan Husain)
#3. Attacks on NGOs in Pakistan (Matt Salusbury)
#4. Bangladesh: Sad tales of gangrape of minority women, attacks on Hindus
#5. India: Muslim stereotype crumbling - Cleric's prostitute slur=20
against actress brings divide into open as moderates demand greater=20
voice in media
#6. Book Review: Fundamentalism and the Politicization of Cultural Differen=
ces

________________________

#1.

The News International (Pakistan)
October 24, 2001

OH! FOR A BIT OF COMMONSENSE
by MB Naqvi

The writer is a well-known journalist and freelance columnist

Let's be realistic. The next Afghan government is to be made by=20
American smiths alone. Pakistan has been eliminated from this whole=20
business. Actually the US is at war with Pakistani proteges, if not=20
proxies: the Taliban. Tony Blair of UK looked like giving a=20
consolation prize to General Pervez Musharraf by declaring in=20
Islamabad that Pakistan has valid concerns about the formation of=20
Afghanistan's next government. Colin Powell withdrew even that before=20
touching down in Islamabad. He ticked off India, Pakistan and all=20
other meddlers: the US would not give a veto to any other power over=20
government-making there. In other words, the Yanks mean to nominate=20
their own guys. Pakistanis, stunned as they were on the military=20
regime's U-turn on Taliban, are being asked to forget all about=20
strategic depth dreams. Has the full extent of the change been=20
realised?

Pakistanis find it hard to learn from history or their own=20
experience. The government and all its cheer leaders are signing=20
wonderful songs of devotion to ex-King Zahir Shah; their loyalist=20
sentiment, a sudden development, would do honour to his one-time=20
courtiers. But no one seems to have asked President Musharraf or Bush=20
questions. A King who was overthrown 28 years ago and after him a=20
nationalist republican dictatorship and later a communist regime=20
ruled Afghanistan, effecting many changes in Afghan perceptions.=20
Later still, there was an anti-Communist, foreign-supported rebellion=20
that succeeded. There followed three Pakistan-made governments of not=20
much varied hues of Islamicists, all intolerant and ruthless=20
dictatorships, with their components given to pillage, rapine and=20
murders. Now experienced men of affairs and experts have hit upon the=20
idea of Zahir Shah as the only possible saviour of Afghanistan, as if=20
time has stood still for all these eventful 28 years and Afghans'=20
minds have retained their pristine tribal purity.

There is also a wonderful mantra on official lips: a broad-based=20
government is what Afghanistan needs. True, the idea has been around=20
since the Soviets withdrew their troops. The UN and supposedly=20
Pakistan have supposedly been chasing this ghost. It has always=20
eluded them. Now the US, UK, Pakistan and the entire new=20
anti-terrorist alliance is claimed to be engaged in the arduous=20
labours of beating into shape a broad-based government. In more=20
tranquil times a broad-based government meant one that enjoyed a=20
large mass of support from its people. Now what do they mean by this=20
term?

Superficially, they seem to imply an Afghan government that includes=20
representatives of major ethnic groups that make up the Afghan=20
population. In practice, it means some representatives of the=20
Northern Alliance - Tajiks, Uzbeks, Turkmens and others from northern=20
areas - and some representative of the Pushtoons of the south.=20
'Representatives' did one say? No, no, not representatives in the=20
sense of popular or elected ones. Just warlords, with a militia, will=20
do because there has never been an election. That means all warlords=20
among Pushtoons, Uzbeks and Tajiks will want to muscle in. All such=20
ethnic groups are in millions. Not all wanting to be in the=20
government can be in it. So, either an outright victory or someone=20
far more powerful's nomination will be the necessary qualification=20
for getting into the charmed circle-to-be. That's why Powell shooed=20
off Pakistan and India from being obstreperous. It is now America's=20
turf.

Many are voluble on Loya Jirga. This is now a sort of totem for=20
Afghans. But can't people remember all the varied calls for Loya=20
Jirga for diametrically opposed purposes. How many times have we not=20
heard calls for it? Today, Maulanas, Fazulr Rahman, Samiul Haq and=20
others of this school of politics have called for Loya Jirga. Fine.=20
So have Ajmal Khattak, Wali Khan and Mahmoud Achakzai. Would the=20
actual members attending the Jirga be exactly the same? Who will=20
determine the participants? Will it not the person or authority=20
convening it? How many have called for it at different stages - for=20
widely different purposes. Didn't Dr Najibullah call a Loya Jirga in=20
his days and didn't it Okay his reforms? The worthies should stop=20
pretending that they are all calling for the same thing.

A whole romantic mythology has been built up around Pushtoons.=20
Although Pushoonwali is a genuine article, much of the mystique=20
around the unique Pushtoon way of arriving at a consensus through a=20
Jirga, comprising officially-paid Maliks and other well-to-do tribal=20
leaders, was originally a part of British romancing of their army. It=20
might be that earlier Afghan masses were too ignorant and simple to=20
disobey a Jirga, a hoary tradition of Panchas in the rest of South=20
Asia. But times change and with that the level of awareness and=20
functional independence of the individual grows. This has happened=20
all over South Asia. Would Afghans be the only exception who refuse=20
to take notice of the march of time and their level of awareness and=20
determination to save their own and their families' skinsin wars,=20
droughts and civil wars does not improve? Could it be that it suits=20
the well-to-do Pathans to go on pretending that Pushtoons and Afghans=20
are still the same as they were in previous centuries.

Moreover the chatter about a broad-based government (under Zahir=20
Shah) is a snare. How precisely will a government become broad-based?=20
The consensus among Pakistani officials appears to be: if it has=20
ministers that belong to Pushtoons and other minority groups in the=20
right mix, it will be one. That has several additional catches in it.=20
What is a 'right mix' of Afghan nationalities or ethnic identities?=20
Which Pushtoons it will have? And who will select and what is the=20
criteria for selecting? That goes for all ethnic groups. Finally, who=20
precisely will choose the next government? Maybe Islamabad is=20
demanding - supposing it can - a few of its Pushtoon nominees? One=20
hopes not. Not even a brigade of wise men can choose the right mix of=20
nationalities and names of ministers out of all the candidates, with=20
their long sharpened knives.

Now that history has forced, against Islamabad's dearest wishes, its=20
exclusion from Afghanistan's major affairs, lock, stock and barrel,=20
it is about time that Pakistanis instead of trying to influence US=20
policy recognised simple verities. First, Afghanistan should be for=20
the Afghans. Let all others be irrelevant to the future of=20
Afghanistan. And that includes Pakistanis. Whether the Americans will=20
be a part of the crowd staying out is not certain. But we can wish,=20
say and even hope that they too will keep out while the Afghans go=20
about the business of rebuilding their government, homes, economy and=20
a political life.

The question recurs: who actually should and will select the next=20
Afghan government. A made-in-America regime will last while American=20
bombers and commandos remain hovering around to save it. It will=20
collapse speedily enough after Americans withdraw and civil war will=20
resume. If Loya Jirga institution might not work, as is being argued=20
here, because it excludes the actual Afghan people from determining=20
the future shape of the state and composition of the next government,=20
what will? There is now no ordered society and conceivably there may=20
be no known authority except a commander or warlord of an area or=20
city. How can common Afghans be brought together, consulted or=20
enabled to express their wishes? Well, there is no known Afghan way.=20
There are far too many groups and armies and ambitious warlords in=20
every corner of that devastated country. And too many ambitious=20
outsiders desiring to somehow determine who rules this strategic=20
area. There seems to be no alternative to a big outside power=20
imposing order and a government. That will today be the US. Is that=20
OK?

By no means. We all want to change the law of the jungle in which the=20
strong imposes its will on the weak. This is however the reality of=20
international relations today, notwithstanding the sop of the UN.=20
Actually to describe this as the jungle law is an insult to both=20
animals and nature. The strong eat the weak because that is the only=20
way to survive; no carnivore actually forces weak to act the way it=20
wishes. The thing to do is to change this jungle-looking situation. A=20
weak animals' trade union is needed and their cooperation is the only=20
solution.

In other words, the people of 186 odd states plus Switzerland should=20
'unite for peace' in the UN General Assembly and create an=20
international security force or peace enforcers for Afghanistan. It=20
should ask the US to peacefully hand over Afghanistan to the UN=20
Trusteeship Council, place it directly under UN General Assembly and=20
it should run Afghanistan for five to seven years with the help of=20
officers from small democratic states - to re-establish an=20
administration, restore vital infrastructure, reconstruct the economy=20
and re-establish rule of law - if necessary borrowed and adapted laws=20
from any modern state that grants human rights to its people - allow=20
free political expression and activity, while armed Afghan groups are=20
disarmed and the country prepared for a free election. Once an=20
elected Assembly emerges, let power be transferred to it. This is not=20
fanciful. That is what the UN did in Cambodia, though it will cost=20
some money.

There are precautions to be taken. All the mumbo jumbo that has kept=20
Afghans poor, voiceless, divided and sans rights all along - should=20
be firmly rejected. Loya Jirgas being proposed are advocated by those=20
who hope to slip in a few nominees of their own into it. It is the=20
poor, unlettered (not ignorant) Afghans who should be empowered with=20
the vote and other human rights. Maybe they will make mistakes. So=20
what? What have Pakistanis or Turks or Egyptians to show for all=20
their 'development'? At any rate, Afghanistan is, and should be, the=20
business of all Afghans, not merely for their rich only. They are=20
normal human beings and deserve normal human rights.

Then, there is the most difficult of all precautions. Keep the big=20
powers out. That means the veto-infested UN Security Council is also=20
to be kept out. True, the UN General Assembly is not a collection of=20
supermen or angels. They too have not been heroes. But they are us=20
and that is all we have. Even as a pretension and a promise, it is=20
useful.

World's liberal opinion, especially in the west, has a task ahead. It=20
has to force major powers to opt for a fair and humane solution for=20
the Afghan imbroglio. A government of US stooges presupposes=20
long-term US imperial presence in the area, motivating others to=20
counter and replace it. That equals perpetual strife and cold wars.

A word for us Pakistanis. We should celebrate that we are off the=20
hook. To be king-makers in that land was an imperial venture by a=20
bankrupt state, itself aid addict and requiring bailouts every now=20
and then. It was foolhardy. Some major players of power game were=20
bound to shove us aside. It is fortunate we did not have to pay the=20
full cost of our misadventure. We could not have developed=20
Afghanistan economy in order to exploit its natural resources for our=20
profit - the name of the imperial game. Heavens be praised that=20
Messrs George Bush and Osama and Omar have made it possible for us to=20
get out of Afghanistan without paying too high a price. It is much=20
better to concentrate on reordering our own none-too-stately house.=20
There are plenty of things that have been ignored in the fascination=20
for the brave music of a distant Afghan drum.

______

#2.

DAWN (Pakistan)
20 October 2001

PIPEDREAMS AND DAYDREAMS
By Irfan Husain

Our paranoid preoccupation with conspiracy theories and the boundless=20
capacity Muslims have for self-delusion never cease to amaze me. Had=20
the consequences of these follies not been so tragic, they would have=20
been downright hilarious.
Consider the horrifying events of September 11 as an example: several=20
weeks later, millions of Muslims continue to believe that the=20
Israelis were behind the strikes on New York and Washington. As=20
proof, they assert that 4,000 Jews absented themselves from their=20
workplaces at the Twin Towers on that fateful day.
Reasonably educated and intelligent people have declared this rubbish=20
to me as gospel truth. When I have tried to reason with them,=20
pointing out that there was no way for anybody to determine the faith=20
of those present or absent from the WTC buildings within days of the=20
tragedy, there is never a cogent reply. Indeed, employment records in=20
the United States do not include information about religion.
My interlocutors simply cannot grasp the reality that Israel would be=20
the last country on earth to risk the wrath of the United States, the=20
source of so much of its wealth and power. They argue that Zionists=20
staged this attack to somehow frame Muslims so that the Americans=20
would become their enemies, but are unable to explain what Israel=20
would gain by this. Their clinching argument is that Muslims are=20
simply incapable of planning and carrying out such a complex=20
operation.
Then there is another school of conspiracy theorists that maintains=20
in all seriousness that it was actually the American government that=20
attacked its own cities. The 'reasoning' behind this far-fetched plot=20
is that this would give the Bush administration an excuse to bomb=20
Afghanistan, throw out the Taliban and build a gas pipeline across=20
that country from Turkmenistan to the Arabian Sea.
These crackpot theories, ludicrous though they are, are firmly=20
entrenched in the minds of millions of Muslims. These same people=20
probably also believed the hype about the invincibility of Iraq's=20
Republican Guards and the 'mother of all battles' they were supposed=20
to put up against the American-led coalition in the Gulf War. In the=20
event, they were pulverized by the long bombing campaign that=20
preceded the land assault, and then mercilessly slaughtered in a=20
'turkey shoot' as they fled from their bunkers and trenches.
Now as American planes blast targets across Afghanistan, the Taliban=20
and their supporters are again falling into the same trap, and=20
boasting that American troops will 'meet the same fate as the=20
Soviets' when they land. No such thing will happen because the=20
Americans will simply not send in a large number of soldiers. Also,=20
the analogy with the Soviet invasion is false as in the latter case,=20
the Mujahideen had a sanctuary in Pakistan, and the financial and=20
diplomatic support of a superpower. The Taliban enjoy none of these=20
advantages, and the firepower the Americans can bring to bear is far=20
superior to the resources the Soviets could muster.
But we blithely ignore such realities, and are disappointed each time=20
a Muslim nation is humiliated by a western power. This=20
disillusionment adds to the bitterness and anger that has built up in=20
the Islamic world towards the West. But in order to compete more=20
effectively with this perceived foe, many orthodox Muslims want to=20
turn the clock back: instead of using the modern tools of reason,=20
logic and science, they seek to return to the imagined purity of=20
early Islam, purging society of all modern influences so that somehow=20
we would regain the supremacy and glory of the all-conquering armies=20
that swept out of the Arabian peninsula fourteen centuries ago.
This romantic daydreaming is fine for a Sunday afternoon after a=20
heavy lunch, but to base the goals of entire societies on it is=20
madness. Unfortunately, this shallow rationale is now prevalent in=20
Muslim countries around the globe. Even educated people have=20
succumbed to this pipedream. In a way, this is a seductively=20
attractive path: instead of having to put in the hard work involved=20
in building a modern, progressive society, how much simpler to just=20
transform ourselves into good Muslims by rigidly following the letter=20
of the holy scriptures. This will ensure God's blessings on the true=20
believers - blessings that have been withheld because we have=20
deviated from the path shown to us by the Almighty.
Unfortunately, as there is no single interpretation of God's=20
revelations and what constitutes the ideal Islamic society, there has=20
been endless conflict among the various schools of thought that=20
divide Muslims. Sunnis and Shias are often at each other's throats;=20
sects are declared 'non-Muslim' for not adhering strictly to a=20
particular dogma; and for centuries, the slaughter among the=20
believers has been far bloodier than war with the infidels.
Weakened by internecine conflict and thus easily colonized by Western=20
powers, most of the Islamic world has been left at the starting=20
blocks in the race for scientific progress and economic prosperity.=20
Rich Arab states have been unable to translate their enormous oil=20
wealth into political power or military might; and when they have,=20
they have mostly used it against their own people or other Muslims.=20
None of them has sought to use their resources in building up their=20
educational systems and their scientific base. As a result, they=20
remain importers of western technology, and send their own children=20
abroad for higher education.
As Muslims see themselves falling further and further behind, and=20
watch impotently as Palestinians and Iraqis are killed and=20
humiliated, their rage against their own rulers and the United States=20
mounts steadily. In a relatively new development, young Muslims born,=20
raised and educated in the West are being radicalized into taking up=20
arms for Muslim causes. And as the United States is perceived as the=20
source of so much angst and suffering in the Muslim world, there is=20
every possibility that these home-grown young militants will launch=20
the next wave of attacks.
In this low-intensity war without end, there will be no victors and=20
no losers, only hostages to hatred and suspicion on both sides.=20
Unfortunately, there is no indication that either side will change=20
policies and attitudes any time soon. Among fundamentalist Muslims,=20
rationality and a scientific approach are anathema as they would be=20
marginalized and dogma would be questioned in a modern dispensation.=20
But until Islam has its own Reformation, Muslims will continue to=20
wallow in the past while ostrich-like, they keep their heads firmly=20
in the sand.

______

#3.

[ Appearing in Red Pepper, London, UK]
o o o o

22nd October 2001
News: ATTACKS ON NGOS IN PAKISTAN

Disturbing reports are coming in from Pakistan's North West Frontier=20
Province and Bajaur Agency (tribal area) bordering with Afghanistan=20
of attacks by fundementalist on local NGO's in the wake of the=20
bombing raids across the border. According to a local source,=20
"offices have been burnt to the ground, equipment furniture and=20
vehicles either destroyed or stolen, personal homes attacked, some=20
destroyed and a life-threatening attack on individuals."

The attacks began on the night of 7th October, after the first air=20
strike on Afghanistan. "Across the border in Tahtbhai, news is=20
circulated through various mosques to groups=8A.apparently awaiting the=20
news. The mobilization begins. By 9am=8A..a protest march turns into a=20
mob calling for revenge for the military attacks. But (revenge)=20
against who?=8A.(the) focus is on NGOs who have been working for the=20
communities welfare."

The first target was an NGO working with women. Their "hospital was=20
surrounded, its office denuded of equipment, petrol and kerosine oil=20
is doused and the place set on fire." A women's skills training=20
centre had its "office ransacked, equipment=8A.either destroyed or=20
stolen=8Avehicles burnt and set on fire." Then the mob went for the=20
leader of the NGO, " his home is similarly attacked and burnt to the=20
ground." Local sources believe "attacks are led by=20
local..preachers=8A.instigated by the Jamaat-e-Ulema -Islam political=20
party" who perceive NGOs as a threat in the upcoming local elections,=20
in which many NGO people are standing as candidates.

At 10.45 on 10th (?) October, yet another local women's development=20
NGO was the target of "the mob=8Aled in a procession". Fifteen minutes=20
earlier, police guarding the NGO's office had been called away. The=20
mob then attacked the home of the NGO's leader, shouting "These are=20
the children of America, burn them!" An elderly man was beaten up,=20
while the family "in the midst of the flames and smoke, fight their=20
way out to safety."

Also in Takhbhai a social welfare organisation had its building=20
"completely ruined=8A.we have no furniture, no equipment, no machines"=20
according to a staff member, who adds that religious parties "have=20
been promoting the idea that NGOs are trying to promote a=20
non-religious, non-Muslim society=8A..promoting unislamic principles=20
and taking people away from Islam." All NGOs have stopped working in=20
the area. In some cases the police refused to file a case against the=20
people identified as involved in the attacks. The government=20
administration is itself under attack-in one incident in Sher Gar one=20
policeman died and another was badly beaten.

According to other local witnesses, religious party leaders "say that=20
those not joining the protest (against NGOs) have no faith. So people=20
were forced to join the procession for their own protection." In=20
Banjuar Agency, 30km from the Afghan border, the attackers "gather=20
through the night, it seems using FM radios installed in various=20
mosques=8A..the slogans raised were anti-American and=20
pro-Afghan=8A=8A4,000-5,000 gather in the bazaar led by violent people=20
who call upon the crowd to attack those who speak of secularism and=20
democracy."

An NGO that deals with the problem of landmines had its office=20
completey destroyed. HRCP, Pakistan's largest human rights group, was=20
the target of a fatwa passed "condemning them as infidels who have to=20
be finished off."

In Quetta province, there have been recent attacks on an NGO and a=20
lawyer's office. Punjab has so far been spared such attacks, although=20
NGOs there are being denounced as "western agents."
- Matt Salusbury (mattsal@g...)

______

#4.

[Bangladesh Mahila Parishad ( Bangladesh Womens' organisation) is a=20
prominent national platform for women's rights activists in=20
Bangladesh]

oooo

The Daily Star
25 October 2001

SAD TALES OF GANGRAPE OF MINORITY WOMEN, ATTACKS ON HINDUS

Staff Correspondent
Bangladesh Mahila Parishad (BMP) yesterday observed that the=20
repression on minority communities in the country was taking a=20
serious turn as the administration refrained from taking any action=20
against the attackers.
The women's organisation further observed that the authorities=20
concerned were refusing to accept the fact that soon after the=20
election, the minorities were subjected to terrorist attacks.=20
Minority women were specially the victims of rape and sexual=20
harassment by political terrorists in many places in the country.
Acting General Secretary of the BMP Dr Maleka Banu narrated stories=20
of some of the repressed women at a press conference at the Jatiya=20
Press Club yesterday.

The BMP sent a team comprising its central committee leaders to=20
Ramshil at Kotalipara and some other places in Bagerhat district to=20
investigate the incidents of rape committed against minority women.
The team interviewed 10 tortured women between the ages of 13 and 45=20
at Ramshil. Out of them, six were abducted by terrorists and=20
gangraped repeatedly for several days. Many of them were raped even=20
in front of their male family members and parents.
In Bagerhat district, the team talked with 15 women at Mollarhat,=20
Fakirhat, Paglabazar, Baragaola, Mejagaola, Baraigatha, Poddarbari,=20
Mothertuli, and Surigathi. Some of them were raped while the others=20
were sexually harassed. The BMP also found four rape victims at=20
Shriramkhati, two of them died from the torture.

The BMP expressed its utter surprise about the remarks made by the=20
home minister and other government officials who termed the violence=20
on minority women in many places 'set game', 'rumour' and=20
'exaggerated descriptions.'
"This is a crisis point for the country,' Maleka Banu said. "But the=20
leaders of both the government and the opposition parties are not=20
playing their due roles."
Her organisation demanded of the government to take immediate=20
administrative steps against the culprits, give them the highest=20
punishment for raping, and pay compensation to the affected families.

The BMP urged all political parties and conscientious citizens to=20
come forward with a helping hand towards the minority communities.

The BMP would provide legal assistance to the repressed women in=20
filing cases against the culprits.
It will hold a protest rally in front of the National Museum at 4 pm=20
today to mobilise public support against the violence on minority=20
women.
The press conference was also attended by Hena Das, Chairperson of=20
BMP, Bela Nabi, Vice President, BMP, Chitra Bhattacharya, Rakhi Das=20
Purkawastha and Rekha Choudhury.

______

#5.

Tehelka.com
24 October 2001

'WHO AMONG MUSLIMS LISTENS TO IMAM BUKHARI?'

Eminent film actor and activist Shabana Azmi is one of the vocal=20
liberal-moderate voices of Indian Muslims. During a recent television=20
debate on Muslim identity, she asked a question of Imam Bukhari, who=20
shocked everyone around with his retort - "Main nachne-gaane wali=20
tawaif ko jawaab nahin deta." ["I don't react to what dancing and=20
singing prostitutes say."] Shabana speaks to Arnab Pratim Dutta about=20
the Imam and their likes, and the creation of a false stereotype of=20
such boors as representative of the Muslim voice
New Delhi, October 23

You have been speaking on the Afghan-American crisis. How do you look=20
at the September 11 strikes?
I unequivocally condemn the terrorist attack on the United States.=20
You see, nothing can justify the killing of 7,000 innocent people.=20
But let me point out to you that post September 11, there seems to be=20
a concerted effort to polarise the world into two camps - the=20
"civilised" Western world and the "barbaric" Islamic world. It is a=20
matter of great concern and deep anguish for me.

I believe the pan-Islamic ummah is a myth. Islam is not a monolith.=20
It is spread over so many countries - more than 50 countries - and=20
takes on the colour and the culture of the country in which it=20
resides. So, it speaks in the moderate voice, the liberal voice, the=20
reformist voice, the conservative and the fundamentalist voice. To=20
equate the entire Islamic world with terrorism is both untrue and=20
unfair. It is strange that the Hiroshima bombings were never called=20
Christian terrorism; the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam's (LTTE)=20
actions are never called Hindu terrorism. Or for that matter, would=20
you describe Irish Republican Army (IRA) actions as Christian=20
terrorism? Then why give September 11 attack the tag of "Islamic=20
terrorism"?

How do you think this "two camps" theory crept in?
I feel that the Western media is responsible for this. The manner of=20
its portrayal of September 11 is responsible for creating this sort=20
of impression about Islam. I would even blame US President George W=20
Bush for this. After all, he was the first to say: you are either=20
with us, or with the terrorists. The irresponsible utterances of=20
people like Imam Bukhari added further fuel to fire. Their call for=20
jehad and support of the Taliban jeopardises Indian Muslims.

In a recent television debate, Imam Bukhari called you a=20
"nachne-gaane wali tawaif" (a prostitute who sings and dances).=20
What's your reaction?
Let me tell you, it does not bother me a wee bit. In fact, I feel=20
sorry for the poor fellow. It shows him up for what he is and the=20
kind of respect he has for women, for artistes and for those who dare=20
to challenge him.

Do you think he will continue to speak in the same language?
This one statement will do him great damage, because he speaks in the=20
name of Islam, and Islam accords the greatest respect to women.=20
Muslims can now see through him.

But which section of Muslims listens to moderates such as you?
It is a myth, you know. May I ask you, who among Muslims listens to=20
Bukhari? I will give you an example to convince you. You see, a=20
couple of years ago, Imam Bukhari had issued a fatwa that all Muslims=20
must vote for a particular candidate in his own Muslim-dominated Jama=20
Masjid area. That candidate even lost his election deposit. So much=20
for the following he has. The likes of the Imam are given legitimacy=20
not by the people but by the political leadership. Over the years,=20
every time a Muslim issue needs to be addressed, political leaders=20
consult the rabid rabblerousers, never the moderates. For their own=20
petty political ends, politicians build people like Imam Bukhari.

How far are Muslims responsible for such a situation?
Would you hold the entire Hindu community responsible for Ashok=20
Singhal's act? The problem is that the Partition in 1947 left such=20
deep scars on the Muslims who stayed behind, that they deliberately=20
kept away from the affairs of their community for fear of being=20
called "communal". The moderate Muslim did not speak up when a Muslim=20
was butchered in Malliana, killed in Bhiwandi, annihilated in=20
Moradabad. The Babri Masjid demolition was a watershed for the=20
moderate Muslim. He realised that he had to respond to the needs of=20
his community. Ever since, the moderate Muslim has always spoken up.

But Muslims have no moderate leadership. That perhaps is why men like=20
Bukhari take on the mantle of the community's representatives. Who do=20
you think represents Muslims - the moderate or the fundamentalist?
No, men like Bukhari are the self-appointed leaders, who speak on=20
behalf of Muslims of their own accord. Look at it this way - the=20
media reported that Bukhari called for jihad. Did the media report=20
that not a single Muslim has taken up his call? Did anyone from Delhi=20
go on jihad? You see, the self appointed fundamentalist leaders do=20
not provide any solutions for this - they re-enforce only the=20
"communal" aspects of Muslim identity, using rhetoric to whip up=20
communal frenzy. The moderate, on the other hand, speaks about=20
education, employment and health. Muslims have now learnt the=20
pitfalls of falling into the fundamentalist trap. Therefore, they do=20
not listen to the call of the fanatics.

Do you think that Indian Muslims are constantly suspected and asked=20
to prove their loyalty?
Yes. We are constantly asked to prove our loyalty for no rhyme or=20
reason. This disgusts a person like me. But you see, this time=20
around, it is not only the 15 crore Indian Muslims who are being=20
questioned. All Muslims around the globe are being asked to pay the=20
price. Even American Muslims are living in terror. It is a dangerous=20
situation.

But how does one go about correcting the prevailing misperception of=20
Muslims in India?
I don't know. I can tell you, however, that there is too much=20
opinion, and too little information, even about Indian Muslims. We=20
need to stop knee-jerk reactions and work against prejudice. The=20
media has an extremely important role to play in providing various=20
shades of opinion, and focussing on the grey areas. Let us not think=20
in black and white terms. And let us stop playing up fanatics. This=20
will go some way in changing the stereotype image of Muslims.

______

#6.

Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 07:02:20 +0000

BOOK REVIEW
Name of the Book: Identity Mania: Fundamentalism and the=20
Politicization of Cultural Differences.
Author: Thomas Meyer
Publisher: Mosaic Books, New Delhi
Year: 2001
Pages:128
Price: Rs. 250

Inter-ethnic rivalries are today one of the major threats to global=20
security. Most countries have now emerged as plural societies to=20
varying degrees, and the rise of ethnic strife poses major challenges=20
to their stability and progress. Right-wing scholars, of whom the=20
most well-known is the American Samuel Huntington, paint a grim=20
picture of the world to come: incessant warfare between different=20
civilizations, particularly between Islam and the 'Judea-Christian'=20
West. The current conflict in Afghanistan, we are told, is but the=20
beginning of a global nightmare.
Meyer's book comes at a time when the 'conflict of=20
civilizations' thesis is gaining increasing popularity, determining=20
even the policy decisions of governments, and now no longer limited=20
to isolated pockets in the academia. Meyer seeks to rebut the grim=20
Huntingtonian prophecy of doom, and in this he succeeds brilliantly.=20
While recognizing that the politicization of cultural and religious=20
differences is indeed a increasingly worrying phenomenon in today's=20
world, he insists that cultural differences by themselves need not=20
necessarily lead to conflict and violence. Rather, if sanely managed,=20
cultural differences can lead to the promotion of a rich pluralism=20
and thereby strengthen civil society.
Each culture and ethnic group, Meyer points out, seeks to=20
define itself in fundamentally two ways. Firstly, by focusing on what=20
unites it members, that is, on what they share in common, in terms of=20
shared values, beliefs, practices and historical memories. Secondly,=20
and this has particular relevance for the question of inter-ethnic=20
relations, on what sets it apart from other groups. Identity=20
formation thus is a complex process built on, in part, on stressing=20
of inter-group boundaries. While Huntington and his ilk insist that=20
the boundary-formation process inevitably leads to conflict, Meyer=20
argues otherwise. He sees the possibility of a shared discourse, of=20
human rights, secularism and democracy, and of universal values held=20
in common, as being able to build bridges between different ethnic=20
and cultural groups, despite their differences. The task before us,=20
then, he says, is to explore and build through creative and=20
constructive dialogue on what different cultural groups have in=20
common, for it is only in this way that a plural global society can=20
manage its differences in a rational and non-violent manner.
Taking Huntington to task, Meyer argues that the basic=20
assumptions of the 'clash of civilizations' thesis are themselves=20
problematic and do not stand the test of critical scrutiny. Thus, the=20
notion that civilizations are neatly demarcated, well-defined=20
homogenous wholes pitted against each other has no basis in empirical=20
fact. Rather, there are considerable overlaps, in terms of shared=20
beliefs, practices and values. Then again, each civilizational entity=20
is characterized by a rich diversity, something that Huntington=20
completely ignores. The internal differences within each=20
civilizational entity may be even more marked than what sets two or=20
more civilizations apart from each other. Some groups within a=20
particular civilization may have more in common with groups belonging=20
to another civilization than with other groups within its own.
Despite the inherent problems with the 'clash of=20
civilzations' thesis, Meyer admits that much of the world today is=20
characterized by the 'politicization of cultural differences' and=20
religious 'fundamentalism'. He argues that religious 'fundamentalism'=20
is not the essence of religion as such. Pointing to what he calls the=20
different 'styles' of articulating and expressing religious=20
commitment, he says that totalitarian 'fundamentalism' is but of=20
many different ways of understanding religion. What needs to be=20
understood are the complex set of factors that make some people=20
choose a particular =91style=92 of religious expression over other,=20
competing styles. Thus, in the case of 'fundamentalism', an amalgam=20
of economic, political and social factors make for the increasing=20
appeal of this form of religious expression over others for some=20
people or social groups. For instance, he says, 'fundamentalism' in=20
parts of the Muslim world must be seen in the context of Western=20
hegemony, the lack of democracy in many Muslim countries, the=20
repression of all forms of internal opposition and so on. It is not,=20
then, that Islam, by its very essence, as Huntington would insist, is=20
fundamentalist and necessarily in conflict with the rest of the world.
This slim volume is a very welcome contribution to the raging=20
debate on the politics of religion and inter-cultural relations.=20
Although thin on empirical detail, it provides an interesting counter=20
to the sterile arguments of those who insist that there can be no=20
meeting grounds between different civilizational entities.

Sender:
Yoginder Sikand
4304 Oakwood Apts.
8th Main, 1st Cross
Koramangala-III
Bangalore-560034 [India]

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

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since 1996. To=20
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