[sacw] SACW #1 (26 Nov. 01)

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Mon, 26 Nov 2001 01:28:00 +0100


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

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

#1. In Talks on Afghan Future, Women Aren't Present (Keith B. Richburg)
#2. Women=B4s Rights in Afghanistan (Hans-Jaap Melissen)
#3. After the Taliban's retreat: Durable peace or dirty war? (Praful Bidwai=
)
#4. Out of the Frying Pan
After the Taliban, will Afghanistan's women really be free? (Judith Lewis)
#5. RAWA's call for URGENT action re tomorrow's meeting in Bonn
#6. A missed opportunity (Harsh Sethi)

________________________

#1.

The Washington Post
Sunday, November 25, 2001; Page A22

In Talks on Afghan Future, Women Aren't Present
Many Fear Exclusion Could Prevent Creation Of a Fair Government

By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Foreign Service

KABUL, Afghanistan, Nov. 24 -- In her 16 years as a professional=20
radio broadcaster, Jamila Mujahed has been at her microphone for some=20
of this city's most memorable news events: the toppling of President=20
Najibullah in 1992 and the march of Islamic holy warriors into the=20
capital, and, four years later, the arrival of the Taliban.

So it seemed only fitting that when the Taliban fled and the Northern=20
Alliance arrived on Nov. 13, it was Mujahed who brought Afghans the=20
news on the evening broadcast of Radio Kabul.

Now Mujahed has another very public message, one aimed at U.N.=20
officials and German diplomats organizing the Afghan political=20
conference scheduled to begin in Germany on Tuesday: Open the meeting=20
to professional women like herself, and give women a say in shaping=20
Afghanistan's future.

"This is very unfortunate that they have not invited women to join=20
this meeting," she said. "No one has experienced such brutality=20
against women anywhere in the world as what happened in Afghanistan.=20
I want to go and tell everyone the things that happened to me and my=20
colleagues these past five years."

The meeting in Bonn is being hailed as a first step toward ending=20
decades of civil strife and helping Afghanistan's warring factions=20
form a truly representative and broad-based government.=20
Representatives of several Afghan factions will try to hammer out=20
plans for an interim government to replace the Taliban and prevent=20
the country from descending into anarchy.

But many Afghans here -- not only women, but also professionals,=20
academics and others -- are chafing at the highly restricted=20
invitation list.

The Northern Alliance, the armed anti-Taliban faction that seized=20
control of Kabul and about half the country during the past two=20
weeks, is the only group from inside Afghanistan that is attending=20
the Bonn conference. A delegation representing Afghanistan's former=20
king, Mohammed Zahir Shah, will be attending from Rome, where he has=20
been in exile since 1973. And two other groups that have held=20
political talks in the past -- the Peshawar Assembly for Peace, named=20
after the Pakistani border city, and the Cyprus group -- also will=20
attend. In all, just 30 Afghans will meet to begin mapping out the=20
country's future.

In the view of many left on the outside looking in, whatever=20
government eventually emerges from the process will be neither=20
representative nor broad-based. "It will be a less-than-50-percent=20
government," said Sariya Parlika, a women's rights activist.=20
Excluding female representatives in Bonn, she said, "is a clear human=20
rights violation."

"This is only the gun barrel that is sending representatives," said=20
Said Amin Mujahed, a history professor at the Academy of Social=20
Sciences in Kabul and the husband of Jamila Mujahed. "It's not the=20
scholars or the professionals or the other educated people in=20
Afghanistan. It's only the war factions and King Zahir's people. It=20
can make a government, but not a broad-based one."

The United Nations is sensitive to such criticism but says the makeup=20
of the conference is for Afghans to decide.

At a recent news conference, U.N. special envoy Francesc Vendrell=20
said, "This meeting will be as representative as we can make it,=20
given the very short notice." When asked about the participation of=20
women, he said it was up to the invited groups to include women as=20
part of their delegations -- and not up to the United Nations "to=20
tell the Afghans who to invite."

Today, U.N. spokesman Eric Falt told reporters, "The women of=20
Afghanistan . . . have a central role to play in the country's=20
future." He said the Bonn meeting would demonstrate "how much our=20
encouragement to include women in the delegation has been listened=20
to."

Even if women are present at the Bonn meeting, no one expects the=20
number to come close to representing their percentage of the Afghan=20
population. Because of the large number of men killed in two decades=20
of war, women make up about 60 percent of Afghanistan's 26 million=20
people, according to most estimates.

"I think women should have more of a role than men," said Faizullah=20
Jalal, a Kabul University professor who has pressed for the inclusion=20
of academics at the conference. "They have faced a lot of disasters=20
in this country."

Women have long been treated as second-class citizens in this=20
conservative Muslim country, but the Taliban stripped women of the=20
few rights they did have. After coming to power in 1996, the radical=20
Islamic movement prohibited women from working, banned girls from=20
attending school and made it illegal for women to be on the streets=20
without a male relative and without being covered head-to-toe in the=20
traditional long, flowing veil known as a burqa. Women caught=20
violating the rules -- even allowing an ankle to accidentally show --=20
risked a public lashing by Taliban guardians of "vice and virtue."

Just before the Taliban took over, 70 percent of Afghanistan's=20
teachers, half of its government workers and 40 percent of its=20
physicians were women. There were female lawyers, doctors and=20
journalists, and women helped staff the foreign relief agencies=20
working here.

Jamila Mujahed, now 36, was among those caught up in the Taliban's=20
reordering of society. A journalism graduate of Kabul University and=20
a veteran broadcaster, she was abruptly told by the Taliban that she=20
could no longer work because of her sex.

"We were used to being very free women," she said, describing how she=20
and her colleagues in the pre-Taliban world would remain at the=20
station until late at night working on big stories. "How do you feel,=20
changing to a world where you have no freedom? These five years=20
caused a lot of psychiatric problems for me."

She stayed at home. She wrote poetry. She said she sometimes took her=20
anger out on her children, hitting them. When she sought professional=20
help, she said, doctors told her "the only medicine they could=20
prescribe was going back to your job."

After facing those hardships, women like Mujahed say they deserve a=20
place at the table in forming Afghanistan's next government.

Particularly upsetting, to the women and others, is that so many=20
Afghan exiles will be attending the sessions while so many who stayed=20
in Afghanistan and suffered under Taliban rule will be excluded.

"The presence of women from Afghanistan is necessary," said Parlika,=20
the activist. "Afghan women from Western countries can just tell=20
tales about what a bullet can do. A woman from inside the country can=20
express it with her eyes. She can express it with her body. She can=20
express with her voice how the war has affected her."

=A9 2001 The Washington Post Company

_____

#2.

Radio Netherlands Internationaal
Friday, 23 November, 2001

Women=B4s Rights in Afghanistan
by our reporter in Kabul, Hans-Jaap Melissen, 23 November 2001
In areas of Afghanistan now controlled by the Northern Alliance, many=20
of the restrictions the Taliban imposed on women are being lifted.=20
Women are now free to return to work and to resume their education.=20
And they're no longer required to cover up completely in head-to-toe=20
burqas.

Most women in the capital Kabul are still wearing the burqa despite=20
the departure of the Taliban. But some threw off the cumbersome=20
garment in a public demonstration of their demand for respect for=20
their rights.

Hans-Jaap Melissen=B4s report, 3=B446" There's a sudden burst of applause=20
from a passing car, followed by loud jeers. The men in the car feast=20
their eyes on what, for many years, has been a rare spectacle in=20
Kabul: two women walking on the street wearing just a headscarf=20
instead of the traditional full-length burqa. Embarrassed by the=20
reaction their appearance has provoked, the women quicken their pace=20
and walk on.

The male reaction is typical of the current situation in Kabul, where=20
men seem to be enjoying their newly won freedoms much more than=20
women. The long beards and turbans are no longer a familiar sight,=20
but not many women venture out on the street without the=20
all-enveloping burqa. Even when wearing this usually light-blue=20
garment, only few women dare show their face. When approached for a=20
photograph, they immediately drop the veil and hide their faces=20
behind the cloth mesh.

Women=B4s Rights
"It's time to stand up for our rights, says Asha Akran. Tears roll=20
down her uncovered face. Asha takes part in a small demonstration of=20
women demanding respect for women's rights. "We just want to go back=20
to work," she says sobbing, "and the burqa must go." Nevertheless,=20
many other protesting women keep their faces covered. Asha explains=20
that they want to show the difference between the past and the=20
future. But some still fear the return of the Taliban and then "we'll=20
be beaten again".

A week after the liberation of Kabul, Afghan television went back on=20
air: with a female announcer and a female newsreader. Broadcasts are=20
limited to the evening, starting at 6 pm with a religious item,=20
followed by a children's programme. Young Afghan announcer Shikeda=20
Marem wears a headscarf. "The mere fact that I'm allowed to appear on=20
television brings home to other Afghan women that there has been a=20
real change in this country." Shikeda says she doesn't worry about=20
less liberal people pointing a finger at her. "I think everybody in=20
Kabul approves of what I'm doing now."

Watching Television
During the Taliban-era, Shikeda didn't work, not even secretly. "I=20
was at home most of the time and before I'd go out on the street, I'd=20
put on my burqa. Before the arrival of the Taliban, I used to work=20
for a children's programme on Afghan television. Once the Taliban had=20
left, it was easy to return to the air. After we had opened the=20
doors, we found all equipment still intact. Besides, many people had=20
hidden their TV sets all those years. Some had even secretly watched=20
international channels."

Nura Shahid would also like to go back to work and this is why she's=20
joined the demonstration, she explains. Nura has always been a=20
teacher and over the past few years, she has given clandestine=20
lessons to local children. "In the early nineties, the Mujahedeen=20
allowed me to work," she says. "Now they're back, I expect to be able=20
to teach again very soon." The small demonstration is confined to a=20
Kabul suburb as Northern Alliance officials had forced the women to=20
cancel plans to march to UN offices because of security concerns.=20
Many women end up just hanging around in the dreary residential area=20
between blocks of flats built under Russian rule and pockmarked or=20
heavily damaged by the succession of wars that followed.

Among the curious male onlookers, many are sympathetic to the women's=20
demands. This time, there's no applause and no jeering. One man sums=20
up the general mood: "I think women should decide for themselves=20
whether they wear a burqa in public or not."

_____

#3.

The Daily Star (Bangladesh)
26 November 201

After the Taliban's retreat: Durable peace or dirty war?

Praful Bidwai, writes from New Delhi
The best solution might be to place Afghanistan under UN trusteeship=20
for two to three years, during which an interim government, with=20
strong RAWA representation, rules under a multilateral peace-keeping=20
force...To combine principle with practicality, this solution will=20
need the UN's energisation along genuinely multilateralist lines.

The Northern Alliance has cut through Afghanistan like a knife=20
through butter. The fall of Mazar-i-Sharif and Kabul was sudden. No=20
less dramatic has been the overrunning of all but four of the=20
country's 31 provinces.

The speed of these developments is stunning. Politics and diplomacy=20
have failed to keep pace with them.

Democrats have something to celebrate in the Taliban's retreat. Its=20
claim to popularity based on a religion-politics mix stands smashed.

After five years of darkness, Kabul's playing fields are being used=20
not for public executions, but for football. The music is back in the=20
streets, so are beardless male faces, and above all, women out of=20
burqa.

But those replacing the Taliban are no liberators, no respecters of=20
human values. The Northern Alliance is essentially a collection of=20
former mujahideen thugs, with a horrifying human rights record.

NA constituents ruled Kabul between 1992 and 1996 through death,=20
torture and loot. Such was their pillage, mass rape, and brutality=20
that Mohammed Najibullah's regime, itself no model of democracy and=20
compassion, became something to be longed for.

In 1996, after 50,000 civilian killings, and thousands of rapes, many=20
Kabulis welcomed the Taliban. At least they didn't rape. And they=20
imposed some order, however despotic.

We shouldn't be misled by fond descriptions of the NA as=20
"foot-soldiers" of the "international coalition" or the suave images=20
of NA ministers like Abdullah, Qanooni and Fahim.

What they hide is the ugly reality of Gen Rashid Dostum, or of the=20
militias who, for instance, in 1997, massacred thousands of prisoners=20
of war after torturing and starving them.

Dostum has a hair-raising record: tying suspected defectors to tanks=20
which would be driven round and round till their bodies were chopped=20
into pieces.... Other NA generals too have used unspeakably barbaric=20
methods.

Most NA militiamen come from mujahideen groups which fought the=20
1979-89 Soviet occupation with Western (and Saudi) encouragement and=20
arms. The mujahideen's Islam was a penal code of severe strictures,=20
robbed of culture, compassion and even mysticism. They paved the way=20
for the Taliban ideologically, socially and politically.

RAWA, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan that=20
remarkable organisation of Afghanistan's only true heroes is against=20
the NA, as well as the Taliban.

This raises questions about Afghanistan's regime succession. It would=20
be a tragedy if one terrible abomination were replaced with a=20
slightly less terrible one.

Ethnic representation is only one of many criteria here. The US has=20
been promoting exiled King Zaheer Shah. Islamabad, having first=20
pooh-poohed Shah, is now falling back upon him as a means of=20
retaining Pushtun influence in the next government.

India, Russia and Iran are pushing their own candidates too. New=20
Delhi's support to the NA, highlighted by the visit of its 43-strong=20
delegation to Kabul, is opportunistic.

There doesn't exist a single force within or around Afghanistan,=20
which can take a dispassionate initiative for a representative,=20
broad-based government. The UN's 6+2 formula has failed. It is=20
proposing a 21-nation grouping and holding a major intra-Afghan=20
conclave in Bonn starting this week.

But the UN faces a credibility crisis. In recent years, it has=20
allowed itself to be kicked around by the US, and even by the=20
Taliban. It has to earn a legitimate role; it can't naturally claim=20
one.

Many proposals are on the table for a new Kabul regime: the UN's=20
"six-step" plan, another loya jirga, or an "Islamic" peace-keeping=20
force. All of them assume that a broad-based, stable, regime can be=20
created in Kabul until other arrangements (e.g. a Constituent=20
Assembly or general election) follow.

This assumption appears dubious. The contending interests and states=20
have extraordinarily wide divergences. They include sworn enemies:=20
Zaheer Shah and Mr Rabbani, New Delhi and Islamabad, Teheran and=20
Tashkent.

If the UN-backed "provisional council" plan fails, Afghanistan could=20
undergo a partition, broadly along the Hindu Kush: a broadly Pushtun=20
Southern segment ruled by the Taliban minus Mullah Omar; and a=20
broadly Tajik-Uzbek-Hazara North. Some people in the US favour such a=20
partition.

Such a "solution" like in India, Cyprus or Yugoslavia could prove=20
much worse than the "problem". It will lead to many Bantustans at war=20
with one another, and none with a viable economy. Warlordism will=20
rule.

This spells lethal trouble for the corruption-ridden Central Asian=20
republics, and more critically, Pakistan. Given the colonial Durand=20
Line's unpopularity among the Pushtuns more of whom live in Pakistan=20
than in Afghanistan this could inaugurate Pakistan's break-up, with=20
unmanageable consequences for India.

That's why we must not jubilate over Pakistan's current difficulties,=20
compounded as these are by the crossing over of 3-5,000 Taliban.=20
Islamabad may have failed to exploit its "frontline" status. With its=20
new bases in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the US is no longer as=20
dependent on Islamabad for military support as it was.

That's no cause for New Delhi to exult unless it wants to further=20
lower its dignity and standing. Islamabad has, tactically, played its=20
cards better. It has overcome its international isolation. It has got=20
$1 billion-plus in aid. New Delhi has only highlighted its Kashmir=20
obsession, while prostrating itself before the US.

Pakistan's "gains" will evaporate quickly. Its mountainous tribal=20
"agency" areas could become the Taliban's main sanctuary. The Afghan=20
"blowback" has already brutalised Pakistan's Northwest Frontier. This=20
could happen to Baluchistan, and even Punjab.

The US must not get entrenched in our neighbourhood. Anything that=20
destabilises this region's existing equations, while strengthening=20
Big Power interests, will work against India.

This calls for a cautious, principled, prudent approach. The best=20
solution might be to place Afghanistan under UN trusteeship for two=20
to three years, during which an interim government, with strong RAWA=20
representation, rules under a multilateral peace-keeping force.

To combine principle with practicality, this solution will need the=20
UN's energisation along genuinely multilateralist lines. The world=20
must give it a chance.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.

_____

#4.

LA Weekly.com
NEW WORLD DISORDER
November 23 - 29, 2001
.
Out of the Frying Pan
After the Taliban, will Afghanistan's women really be free?

by Judith Lewis
In a room at the back of Track 16 Gallery in Santa Monica, a number=20
of smartly dressed people, plastic cocktail glasses in hand, are=20
watching a film of women being tortured. The screening is part of=20
"The Algebra of Infinite Injustice," a November 14 benefit for the=20
Revolutionary Association of Women of Afghanistan, or RAWA, the=20
exiled humanitarian agency that has recently been championed by=20
celebrities from Oprah to Eve Ensler. In one scene, an old woman=20
staggers to her feet several times, surrounded by men who knock her=20
back to the ground; in another, children cry for their mothers, and=20
veiled women are beaten as they beg for food. The images are=20
sickening, but they come as no surprise - this is what we've come to=20
expect from Afghanistan.
[...]
[ Full Text at http://www.laweekly.com/ink/02/01/new-lewis.shtml ]

_____

#5.

From: "RAWA" <rawa@r...>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 16:34:58 -0000
Updated URGENT action needed

Dear friends,

The Bonn Meeting will be held without inclusion of RAWA. However, your
emails/telephones/faxes to urge Mr.Brahimi, Mr.Vandrell and Ms. Karen
Hughes, Counselor to the President of the US, to include RAWA as the true
representative of the tortured women of Afghanistan in the meeting will not
go unheard. At least it is worth trying.

Please send your emails/faxes as soon as humanly possible.

Karen Hughes, Counselor to the President of the United States
Her fax number is 202 456 2983

Mr. Brahimi
His telephone number is 917 367 3029
email: brahimi@u...

Mr. Vendrell
email: f_vendrell@h...

Thanks in advance for your efforts.

Warmest regards,
Mehmooda
Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA)
Mailing Address: RAWA, P.O.Box 374, Quetta, Pakistan
Mobile: 0092-300-8551638
Fax: 001-760-2819855
E-mails: rawa@r..., rawa@i...
Home Page: http://www.rawa.org
Mirror site: http://rawa.fancymarketing.net

_____

#6.

The Hindu
Monday, November 26, 2001
Opinion

A missed opportunity

By Harsh Sethi

DESPITE THE heightened global talk about human rights, the inaugural=20
South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR) convention held in New Delhi on=20
November 11 and 12 went virtually unnoticed. It is not always that we=20
have a gathering of close to 600 leading peace and human rights=20
activists of the region, including over 250 from Pakistan. The latter=20
in itself should have constituted big news, more so at a time when=20
our relations with our western neighbour have touched a new low. So,=20
if despite attracting a plethora of big names and managing plenary=20
addresses from Ms. Mary Robinson, the United Nations High=20
Commissioner for Human Rights, and Prof. Amartya Sen, and even a tea=20
reception for the delegates from the President, Mr. K. R. Narayanan,=20
the event suffered a virtual blackout, it does call for some=20
introspection.

One possible reason for this relative inaudibility may be the deep=20
shift in the climate of the country towards the right. Neo-=20
liberalism has come to be crowned as the reigning ideology. There is=20
far more interest in the functioning of the sensex than the fate of=20
the poor. It is not surprising that a gathering of political=20
dissenters, for that in essence is what marks human rights activism,=20
should face a cold reception. It is also that our youth, the primary=20
mainstay of the sectors of dissent, are caught in a culture of=20
careerism and consumption. The veritable destruction of our=20
university campuses as vibrant sites for debate and discussion has=20
ensured that. Nevertheless, these, in my view, constitute at best=20
partial explanations.

There is, one suspects, a deeper problem marking human rights=20
discourse and activism, of which this conference was a reasonable=20
exemplar. At a time when the region is facing one of its biggest-=20
ever challenges in the continuing war in Afghanistan, a conflict,=20
which though not of our choosing has sucked every South Asian country=20
into redefining its external and internal policies, there was immense=20
expectation from the gathering. While no one present expressed any=20
sympathy for the Taliban - if anything they were keen on seeing the=20
last of it - there was widespread unease about the impact of the=20
bombing, in particular the deepening of the humanitarian crisis.=20
Equally strong was the apprehension of the spill-over effects of this=20
global war against terrorism in Pakistan and also India.

In failing to centrally focus on the implications of Afghanistan -=20
the shifts in regional power balances, the strengthening of the=20
internal security apparatus in each country, as also the likely=20
growth of sectarian/communal sentiment - the conference clearly=20
disappointed. The contrast with the response to the many public=20
engagements of Prof. Noam Chomsky, his trenchant critique of U.S.=20
duplicity as also the doublespeak of our regimes, could not have been=20
starker. As against the behaviour of our governments, which have=20
chosen to line up behind the U.S.-led alliance and seek differential=20
benefits by undercutting their neighbours, here was a chance to=20
articulate a non-partisan regional response. The opportunity,=20
unfortunately, was not grasped.

More problematic than the specifics of the convention - timing,=20
agenda, participation and tone - are the difficulties in formulating=20
an authentic regional response in a human rights framework. Despite=20
regular assertions of civilisational unity, it is evident that=20
regional ties, interactions and, therefore, frameworks remain weak.=20
The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), for=20
instance, has still to emerge as a viable regional arrangement. Visas=20
are difficult to get and cross-border trade and equity flows=20
minuscule, particularly if we compare them to East and South East=20
Asia. If anything, our governments work hard at restricting the=20
fragile people-to-people interaction. The circular by our Home=20
Ministry placing curbs on foreign scholars, more so from the region,=20
is a case in point. The Musharraf regime has gone further, explicitly=20
forbidding any collaboration between Pakistani scholars and their=20
Indian counterparts. It does appear that our human rights fraternity=20
has not been immune to these tendencies.

Take any of our conflicts which involve more than one country viz.=20
Kashmir. The human rights discourse seems unable to transcend=20
national divisions. It is difficult to come across Pakistani human=20
rights statements which admit the validity of, even partially, the=20
Indian concern about cross-border terrorism. Even the various=20
Indo-Pak. fora, which undoubtedly have rendered a signal service in=20
reducing the atmosphere of mistrust and hostility, have been unable=20
to go beyond appeals for peace and resumption of dialogue and=20
condemnation of state terrorism. Violence by non-state actors remains=20
a sticky point, not just its classification - whether these are=20
militants, freedom fighters or terrorists - but its role in=20
continuing the imbroglio.

More disappointing than the lack of consensus on issues of state=20
terrorism, the role and behaviour of anti-insurgency forces, or the=20
need and otherwise of draconian legislation is the record of actual=20
intervention on humanitarian issues - the rights of displaced=20
persons, widows and children. Only of late are we witnessing some=20
effort by human rights communities and NGOs in both pressuring and=20
working along with official agencies in ensuring adequate space and=20
resources to non-combatants for leading a secure life.

As important as evolving a regional framework and charter on issues=20
of conflict resolution is the need to address structural and socio-=20
cultural discrimination marking each of our societies. Despite=20
claiming a legacy of tolerance, pluralism and multi- culturalism, we=20
can hardly deny that our linguistic, cultural and religious=20
minorities face systemic discrimination and exclusion. At least the=20
recent WCAR meet at Durban saw all South Asian groups bring the=20
issues of untouchability and Dalits to the fore. But why is it that=20
our progressive groups have little to say about the violation of=20
human rights - torture, rape, economic boycott, forced dislocation=20
and eventual out-migration - of the Hindu community in Bangladesh.=20
Surely not because this does not easily square with our normal=20
secular discourse. The net result is that the issue is left free for=20
appropriation by right-wing, often fanatical Hindu, formations,=20
further adding to communal tension. It is insufficiently appreciated=20
that unless this issue, as also that of Kashmiri Pandits, Quadianis=20
in Pakistan, Chakmas in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and the Nepali=20
speakers in Bhutan is taken up by a non-partisan regional forum, it=20
will be difficult to rescue it from a majority-minority framework or=20
from the tactical responses of the concerned nation-states. We have=20
seen how atrocities on the Indian Muslim communities, which do excite=20
external concern, are perceived as an illegitimate intrusion into a=20
nation's sovereign affairs.

We have referred to Afghanistan, Kashmir and the situation of=20
religious minorities not because they are the only or even the most=20
important problems facing the region. The Neemrana Declaration, which=20
preceded the SAHR conference, provides a detailed listing. And these=20
range from broader concerns of militarism and nuclearism, distorted=20
developmental priorities resulting from an uncritical acceptance of=20
globalisation and privatisation, the growing tendency to=20
short-circuit democratic procedures and undermine institutional=20
accountability to more specific issues like the rights of=20
cross-border migrants, the trafficking of women and children and so=20
on.

The danger is that in an effort to be comprehensive we may so=20
overload the agenda that in the end all we will be left with is a=20
politically correct, right-sounding declaration, one that has no=20
teeth. A movement and an organisation, to be efficacious must grasp=20
and build on the specificities of the moment. Alongside outlining=20
broad principles, it must equally lay out a plan of intervention,=20
that is if it desires to build and energise a wider community.

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

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