[sacw] SACW #1 (13 Dec. 01)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire - Dispatch #1 | 13 December 2001
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

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

#1. Sri Lanka: Was women's vote the secret weapon? (Cat's Eye)
#2. Pakistan...: The Beast Within ----Iii (Mohammad Wakil)
#3. Pakistan: Dangerous Games (M.B. Naqvi)
#4. [India Should Reject] Israel's Palestine War - Bush Doctrine in=20
action (Praful Bidwai)
#5. Announcement: India: Sexuality and Rights Institute
#6. Seminar Announcement: 'Re-fashioning the State in Sri Lanka' by=20
Jayadeva Uyangoda (13 Dec., Paris)
#7. Sunil Khilnani Review's : 'Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru=20
Gandhi by Katherine Frank'

________________________

#1.

The Island (Sri Lanka)
Wednesday 12 December 2001

Cat's Eye
Was women's vote the secret weapon?

Observers of the December 5th elections have remarked not only the=20
high turn out of voters but also the visible presence of unusually=20
large numbers of women at the polling stations, casting their votes.=20
For whom did they vote is the question. In the absence of any=20
gender-based statistics on how women, voted or any pre-election polls=20
on how they intended to vote, one can only surmise that many of them=20
voted for the party that made women's issues a key component of its=20
election strategy.
The Cat's Eye column, has since 1997, been urging politicians in Sri=20
Lanka not to forget the fact that women are over 50% of the=20
electorate and that by paying heed in the legislature to women's=20
demands, they would reap the rewards at election time.
As Cat's Eye wrote in May 1997, on the USA and British elections:
'Clinton won the hearts and votes of women and achieved a 17 point=20
gender gap in his favour (in 1996), Tony Blair (in 1997) learned much=20
from the US election.'
Blair not only increased the number of women candidates, leading to=20
victories for 120 Labour women, but he also appointed a record 19=20
women Ministers and Junior Ministers. This paid dividends in the next=20
election of 2001 when Labour easily romped home.

Women in Parliament

In Sri Lanka nine women have been elected to parliament and it is=20
expected that three or four more will be on the national lists. If 12=20
or 13 women become MPs it will be a slight increase in women's=20
representation - from 4% in 2000 to 5.3%, - still below the South=20
Asian average of 7%. Here are the details:

Women MPs Votes

United National Party
Chandrani Bandara (Anuradhapura) 54,969
Chitra Manthilake (Kandy) 51,768
Mary Larine Perera (Puttalam) 46,043
Amara Piyaseeli Ratnayake (Kurunegala) 50,963

Peoples Alliance
Ferial Ashraff (Digamadulla) 28,802
Somakumari Tennekoon (Kurunegala) 42,918
Sumedha Jayasena (Moneragala) 30,239
Pavitra Wanniaratchi (Ratnapura) 84,173

Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (People's Liberation Front)
Anjan Umma (Gampaha)

While several well-known faces from the UNP lost - Renuka Herath,=20
Sunethra Ranasinghe, and Shanathini Kongahage - two new women MPs are=20
from the UNP (Manthilake and Perera). The four PA women MPs were in=20
the old parliament and two PA women candidates Surangani Ellawela and=20
Yvonne Sriani Fernando lost. What is interesting to note is that the=20
nine elected women are from constituencies outside the Western=20
Province. No women won from Colombo, and except for Anjan Umma, the=20
Western Province has no elected women. Half the elected women are=20
from the North Western and North Central Provinces while the Northern=20
Province remains a male bastion.
The UNP campaign was marked by a head-start on the issue of gender=20
equity. Nearly a year ago - during the 2000 general election 12 -=20
women's groups issued, a Women's Manifesto outlining women's demands=20
on political participation, law reform, health, education, the=20
economy, media representation and ethnic conflict as well as changes=20
in customary laws, harmful cultural practices and traditions=20
oppressive to women. The Manifesto was widely advertised in the media=20
in three languages and was sent to politicians and opinion-makers.=20
While many commented on the Manifesto, a young MP, Milinda Moragoda=20
took it up, tabled it in parliament at the last budget and spoke on=20
the issue, criticising the Ministry of Women's Affairs for its lack=20
of dynamism. At the recent election many candidates took up the=20
'woman question' and Ranil Wickremasinghe made a direct appeal to=20
women voters in his election speeches. This was a unique feature of=20
the 2001 election. In previous years, the women's lobby had urged=20
politicians of all parties to take up gender issues, but to no avail.
What is more, in a blaze of publicity, the UNP issued a Vanitha Diri=20
Maga - also called the Women's Manifesto of the UNP, spelling out=20
promises for women including womens shelters in every electorate,=20
women's police units, medical clinics, legal advice centres, day care=20
centres, 25% women in decision making bodies of political parties,=20
25% women in local election nominations and the establishment of a=20
Women's Council of 50 members to promote legislation on women.
Other candidates followed the leader and the personal propaganda=20
handouts of many UNP candidates had sections devoted to promises to=20
the women voters. This new factor in Sri Lanka's political culture=20
seems to have paid dividends.

Ignoring the Natural Advantage

The PA in contrast, in spite of having the 'natural advantage' of a=20
woman leader, chose to ignore the issue, apart from a few references=20
in its party manifesto to taking on the needs of women and children.=20
It now looks as if they made a huge mistake. Given that the high cost=20
of living is a real women's issue, the PA failed to counteract this=20
with attention to other real womens issues like domestic violence,=20
economic exploitation, discrimination and the lack of women in=20
parliament and local bodies.
This leads us to the question - why are women leaders not conscious=20
of the power of the women's vote - which is half the electorate? Why=20
don't they do more for women when they are in power, and grasp the=20
chance to become the voice of women? Very few, if any, of the women=20
leaders of the Asian region have been gender sensitive, perhaps in=20
the misguided belief that they would thereby lose the men's vote. Or=20
is it that women in power become token men and don't want to hear=20
about women's demands? Is it that they (mistakenly) fear that the=20
label 'Feminist' would be disadvantageous? The Sri Lankan election=20
result proves that the women's vote could be crucial for electoral=20
victory and that campaigning for women, does not alienate men, but=20
might win their support.

Lessons of the Election

There are many lessons to be learnt from the election results. We=20
feel that two issues predominate. One is that ignoring gender equity=20
and failing to take on the cause of half the population may be a=20
recipe for defeat. The other is that falling into the trap of=20
communal/racist politics and failing to tackle the problem of peace,=20
devolution and the minorities may turn off the voters. The Sri Lankan=20
voters are wise and mature. They are not moved by anti-minority=20
rhetoric and may have even been heartened that the elephants and=20
tigers were getting together and thought that this was a good omen=20
for peace! In short we believe that those who resort to ethnic=20
chauvinism and male chauvinism do so at their own peril.

______

#2.

THE BEAST WITHIN ----III
by Mohammad Wakil

The most enlightened critics of US foreign policy come from the West, and
more specifically, from the US itself. They vary from freethinking
intellectual rebels like Professor Chomsky, to mainstream, hard-core
American establishmentarians like Ambassador Beck (former US Ambassador to
Iraq). Almost all of them query the moral foundation upon which US
policy-makers, and its average citizens, justify their claims to American
exceptionalism and American unilateralism.

Their criticisms are bold, and sometimes caustic, honest but rarely
derisive. Their observations are sharp and insightful, not just plaintive
lament and angry finger-pointing. The issues they raise are intended to she=
d
light upon the problems that the US may encounter as a result of its curren=
t
political, cultural and economic pursuits. By reaching out to broader
American audiences, such critics hope to periodically disengage the average
American's obsession with domestic Disneyesque pursuits. The goal is to
produce a better-informed voting citizenry. The more interested, more
informed and more pluralistic Americans become, the surer the world can be
of turning into a better, safer planet. The American public's opinions and
feelings about the "rest of the world" matter. They will certainly influenc=
e
the election of tomorrow's policy-makers in the Senate and Congress who
could be more emancipated, more knowing and less discriminatory than today'
s.

Domestic critics in the US are not afraid to ask why America today is
probably the most disliked, if not hated, nation in the world. More than
just a rhetorical question or a jaded statement, it is intended to invite
enquiry and debate. The idea is to examine the moral and ethical roots that
feed America's political insensibilities and global insensitivities.

What have we in Pakistan done to question the moral foundations upon which
we justify our wars against India, against East Pakistan, in Kashmir, and i=
n
Afghanistan? Do we harbour some toxic beliefs that could explain the hatred
of Bengalis towards us in the sixties and seventies, or of Indians, and of
Afghanis today? What causes our ethnic and sectarian leaders to regard each
other with such malevolent hatred ?

Or are we really too afraid to even ask?

Human behaviour is not mostly guided by divine, celestial mega belief-
systems that religions embody. On a day-to-day basis, more often than not,
our daily practices are guided by core micro-beliefs that have little if
anything to do with religion. For instance, a person who reacts aggressivel=
y
to criticism may harbour a core micro-belief, such as:

" I believe I am always right. I believe it is good to defend my pride. My
pride comes from being right all the time. Any criticism of myself that
suggests I could be wrong is an offence and insult to my pride. I will be
right to defend such a violation of my pride"

Micro-beliefs that guide (or misguide) our daily management of social
relations, have little to do with mega-beliefs associated with religious
morality. They have everything to do with personal experience,
socio-cultural upbringing, level of education, state of physical, mental an=
d
emotional health, exposure to a diverse body of knowledge, together with
some familiarity with the beliefs and practices of other peoples. An
increase or decrease in the benefits derived from each of the above, can
critically alter the micro-beliefs that guide our daily behaviour.

It would be disingenuous to think that the Pakistani peoples' individual
beliefs and practices as citizens and ethnic communities have been fashione=
d
by religion.

Indeed, they have been determined by anything but that. An overwhelming
majority of Pakistanis can neither read nor write in their own language.
When it comes to seeking inspiration from the Holy Quoran, a majority
recites the Arabic text without understanding a word of it. They are unable
to read the translation of Quranic verses in their own language. They are
therefore vulnerable to the versions that semi-literate clerics offer them.
Unsurprisingly, the minds and hearts of the clerical tribe are shackled to
historical biases and prejudices that sectarian leaders import into their
renderings of the Quoran.

This majority's personal experiences of life and living have been painful.
Their social and cultural deprivation, their level of poverty and ignorance=
,
their lack of education, have left scars in their mental and emotional
health, possibly even upon their cognitive abilities. They are rarely
exposed to a diverse body of knowledge. Knowing little of the worlds'
history, its geography, its sociology and its sciences places many
Pakistanis at a disadvantage. It seriously jeopardises the average Pakistan=
i
's ability to analyse and understand news and information on politics,
economics, science and technology.

Even worse, their ability to understand and interpret Islam is significantl=
y
compromised. Indeed the congruency between what they preach and what they
practice may appear impressive. But it would be a mistake to equate such
congruency with credibility, authenticity or, for that matter, "Islamism".
One may believe that Islam sanctions honor killings and therefore one may
practice honor killings. However, to discriminating Muslims everywhere, suc=
h
congruence only lends an element of incredibility to Islam.

Dark, morbid micro-beliefs arise out of experiencing a deprived life i.e. a
life deprived of mental, physical, emotional, cultural, educational and
spiritual fulfilment. Bad cases as we know, make bad laws. Lives that are
grounded in poverty and deprivation produce unhappy souls. Our living
experiences give rise to micro-beliefs that are independent of the
mega-beliefs espoused by our religion. No religious morality will support
the belief among many poor communities that "the rich should not be trusted=
.
We have every right to manipulate their guilty conscience to our advantage.
After all, they never have any scruples. Why should we?" Such micro-beliefs
are invariably derived from actual life experiences. These experiences are
socio-economical in nature and rarely engage religion.

Illiterate Muslims in extremely poor, underdeveloped countries like Yemen,
Somalia, Afghanistan interpret Islam differently from their more educated
counterparts in relatively developed countries like Malaysia, Iran and
Turkey. Muslims living in scorchingly rugged desert conditions display
harsher, more aggressive temperaments than those inhabiting cooler lands
with lush green valleys, lakes and forests. Sheer common sense suggests tha=
t
differing socio-economic levels, different histories, geographies and
educational cultures inherently breed "natural differences" within the
Muslim world, the Christian world, the Judaic, Buddhist and Hindu world,
etc.

But un-enlightened clerics view variances among muslim individuals,
communities and sects as undesirable distortions of some obscure "Islamic"
norm. They distort the ways that Muslims perceive each other. So fragile an=
d
brittle are their belief-systems, that they feel threatened by dissident
graffiti on the walls, and by countless "others" who are not like them.
Their religious practice is governed by a need to recreate familiar
environments, a phantysmical replica of the nomadic desert-state during the
period of Hazrat Omar's Caliphate. They would insist on Muslims sharing the
same language (preferably Arabic), similar tastes and habits. Even more
absurd, they would insist upon their Islam's miraculous immunity from the
influences of the rest of the world. The creation of such insular
environments by tyrants in human history, has, as we know, enabled their
grip on absolute power and control.

Such foolhardy, infantile efforts at correcting anamolies in Islamic
identity are refracted through the prism of emotional negativism. Anger,
jealousy and hostility guide these efforts.

These chronic problems and unfortunate dilemmas of un-enlightened clerics
are of their own making, not ours. It is they and not we who must take
ownership of, and responsibility for their conflicts with modernity.
However, it falls upon us secular minded Muslims to respond to the solution=
s
they wish to impose upon our civilised world through terrorism.

The clerics propose the establishment of a theocratic Islamic state based o=
n
7th century patterns of governance in Arabia. The plurality and multiplicit=
y
of many such states can, they mistakenly believe, eventually cause the
withering away of religious, inter-sectarian discrepancies within the
Islamic Ummah. All this sounds very lyrical to Islamist ears, but the
Taleban have already shown us their hand. They have displayed to the entire
world, without shame or guilt, the raw psychotic power that fuels their
medieval theocratic Islamic state: HATE. Their law-makers, judges, juries
and executioners all hate other muslims who cannot tolerate their creed;
they hate peoples of all other faiths be they Christian, Jews, Hindus,
Buddhists, etc.; they hate women; they hate education; they hate music and
the arts; they hate cultural heritage, they hate technology.

They even hate educated, clean shaved muslims! They hate them enough to bea=
t
them with sticks!

If by some magical means, one could peel off the Islamic veneer of these
Mullahs's inner belief system, the real truth would be revealed at a glance=
.
Tucked beneath this veneer are all those hidden beasts that cause suffering
among the ignorant, illiterate masses the world over: anger and pain,
jealousy, fear, hostility, insecurity, a pervasive sense of
self-insufficiency and defeatism. The jihad in their soul does not declare
with confidence and conviction: "We will purge ourselves of the beasts
within and win"; instead, it screams in bitter rage: "We will not loose! We
will release the beasts that reside within us, to attack those who hurt our
interests !"

True jihad, as we know, is an inner struggle between good and evil impulses
deep in our soul. To deny, with our heart, the evil lurking within, require=
s
us to re-evaluate our micro-beliefs along with the daily behaviours they
generate. Often the micro-beliefs have very little to do with Islam, or eve=
n
with our conscience.

For instance, to prevent East Pakistan from waging a successful war of
liberation against its oppressors in West Pakistan, our army generals'
behaviour sprang from the following micro-beliefs:

"Bengalis are an inferior people. We have the moral right to rule over them=
,
and civilise them into adopting our ways. They have no right to rise up
against us and dismember the unity of our country. The sovereignty of a
country is inviolable. Those who wage such a war are traitors. Their
rebellion should be crushed and Bengalis should be punished."

Beasts growled inside our hearts too: our anger, our arrogance, fear of los=
s
and humiliation, and a dismissive contempt for Bengalis and all they stood
for. Cementing all these was our desire for revenge. Exacting revenge seeme=
d
more palatable when we associated it with political justice, national
vindication, and other respectable-sounding ideas such as Islamic
brotherhood, Pakistani patriotism, one-nation theory, etc.

These evil micro-beliefs proved to be compelling. Compelling enough for
Pakistani troops to indulge in ethnic cleansing and/or genocide in East
Pakistan. How does this relate to the belief and practice of Islam in our
individual lives? If anything, the convictions that produced such brutality
and slaughter in East Pakistan, violated all the fundamental tenets in
Islam. (Ironically enough, for a long time, many Pakistanis persisted in th=
e
delusion that "the beast within" that we released in Bangladesh during its
formative stages, was the angry, betrayed face of Islamic solidarity and
brotherhood .)

Micro-beliefs such as the ones above, have corrupted our relationship with
Islam. It has also given Islam a harsh, unforgiving and intolerant face. It
is the face of foolish, semi-literate, uneducated clerics who have wreaked
havoc and terror with their militant, bigoted Islam. It is tragic that they
are permitted even now, to claim the lives of our innocent children. They
bring them into their Madrasahs and rob them of their parents, their
childhood and their future. They feed their frail, hungry bodies with bread=
,
and their starving spirit and minds with slogans of hate and war.

In permitting such a terrifying environment to surround us, we have
systematically destroyed our individual, social and national conscience. It=
s
effect upon us has been devastating: it has made us emotionally and morally
numb. We seem to be incapable of reflecting upon our own evil and unjust
practices in the past.

Today, Muslims relish hammering the point "that the West must understand th=
e
root causes of terrorism, and seek to eliminate them first". That's all ver=
y
well, even though Western scholars articulate causes and reasons more
penetratingly than we do about our own atrocities in our grubby backyards.

Have Pakistani muslims displayed a similar inclination to analyse and debat=
e
the root causes of the dismemberment of this country 30 years ago? Have we
eliminated them to secure ourselves against further dismemberment vis-=E0-v=
is
our Northern provinces?

Have we understood the root causes of why terrorist-minded clerics from
Pakistan have infiltrated the Islamist political arenas in Bangladesh,
India, Kashmir and Afghanistan?

What root causes explain the terrorist hot-beds that cannabalise our
children, our brothers and sisters, our sons and daughters?

Here is how a majority of Islamist minded Pakistanis understand the root
causes for all of the above in Pakistan:

"Our nation was dismembered by our enemy, India. They have always wanted
that because right from the start they wouldn't accept the birth and
independence of our nation state. So it is not our fault that we lost East
Pakistan to Indian terrorism.

Terrorism was started by USA and Israel in the Middle-East. It was started
by India in Kashmir. Both these powers occupied Muslim lands. We support th=
e
Jihad of our freedom fighters in Palestine and in Kashmir. Our madrassahs
are therefore serving a noble cause for the creation of an Islamic Ummah. W=
e
will make sure that one day both Palestine and Kashmir will be free.
Whatever is happening today is not the fault of Muslims.

In any case, it is the US that created Saddam Hussain and Bin Laden, the
Taleban. They support corrupt tyrants and dictators for their own
self-interest. Yasser Arafat received the Nobel Prize for Peace. Western
powers created all that they today consider evil. Why are they blaming the
rest of the Islamic world for creating their own nightmare? It is not our
fault."

These are mostly defensive assertions, a set of micro-beliefs guiding our
policy and behaviour. At its worst, they amount to pathetic, hand-wringing
apologia. They do not reflect a critical, in-depth self-examination of the
factors, the propensities, the generically unique or specifically indigenou=
s
factors in our own land, in our tenets and culture, that may explain our
moral and intellectual bankruptcy today. Nor do they explain why and where
we have been going wrong with our political theory and practice these past
50 years.

Clutching at such shallow rhetoric and believing them to be a credible
enough examination of root causes only serves to perpetuate the vicious
cycle of our helplessness, despair and dependence upon the will of powers
far mightier than ours.
______

#3.

[ Published on 13 Dec in the Daily Star (Bangladesh)]
Dangerous Games
M.B. Naqvi

Karachi December 12:

The games the intelligence agencies play can be dangerous and tiresome.
Dangerous because they manipulate media by feeding distorted and partial
information for extraneous purposes of their own. It is tiresome for
careful readers and viewers to evaluate factual news by separating the
contaminated chaff from the grain of fact.

This thought arose from two stories on one and the same day in the
Pakistan press on Tuesday. One was lifted from New York Times in bulk
that threw a lurid light on ISI activities as a state within a state and
as a den of pro-Taliban operatives, the utter vulnerability of
Pakistan=92s nuclear weapons and the close links of Pakistani nuclear
scientists with Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda and Taliban in general. It
naturally extolled the American secret services efficiency and seemed
calculated to pave the way for the Americans to get the custody of an
unspecified number of Pakistani scientists or engineers who were
connected with their country's nuclear programme.

The other story was clearly inspired by Pakistan=92s own secret services
and it tried to show how it was Pakistan President himself who briefed
the CIA chief George Tenet on Dec. 2 in Islamabad about the Big Story of
Al Qaeda=92s nuclear ambitions and activities with all the particulars and
sources in Kabul, advising him to go in person to Kabul and see for
himself. Tenet is reported to have done just this. Apparently, the story
is correct. But that says nothing for the contacts between the original
two scientists and Taliban inside Afghanistan apparently for
humanitarian purposes of their NGOs --- supposedly long after their
retirement from government service.

Pakistan government had apparently been interrogating these two retired
scientists for about two months. They are Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmoud and
Ch. Abdul Majid. They have had contacts with Taliban and they are being
questioned ostensibly for breaching the service rules about not taking
official prior permission for visits outside the country. That is, if
the official explanations are correct.

But the CIA and other foreign agencies are apparently pushing for the
custody of not only these two impugned scientists but of at least six
others, two of whom or an additional two, are required to be
interrogated. Many here think that some of it is professional rivalry,
if not turf war, among a variety of intelligence agencies of different
countries including Israel, a close associate of American agencies.
There are also too many political prepossessions of each agency and
unavowed hidden agendas. Pakistani intelligence services, especially
ISI, are suspected of infiltration by pro-Taliban officers by all
western agencies as so many stories in the US media suggest.

Pakistani agencies appear to have their own suspicions of the
Anglo-American secret services of strong anti-Pakistan bias, as stories
that reek of inspiration from them suggest. The gravamen of Pakistani
spooks=92 suspicions is the American intent to somehow get at, or into,
Pakistan=92s hitherto secret nuclear programme; and their efforts to get
the custody of Pakistanis who have worked for the nuclear programme on
the suspicion that they may have helped Al-Qaeda acquire nuclear
know-how or materials may be only a smokescreen for that purpose.

While America and Pakistan are in fact cooperating closely with each
other in the war in Afghanistan, their old suspicions and wariness
appears to be still at work. The US-Pakistan relationship is obviously
ambivalent, with hostile attitudes almost seething below the surface.
This question of Pakistani scientists contacts with Al-Qaeda, whether
true or false or in between, hold the potential for much mischief both
for Pakistan-America relations and for domestics politics in the
country.

______

#4.
[December 10, 2001]

Israel's Palestine War
Bush Doctrine in action

By Praful Bidwai

Few people could have imagined that the new "Bush Doctrine"--which=20
flatly equates terrorists with their sympathisers or=20
harbourers--would be applied to such devastating effect as it was in=20
Israel/Palestine. They include those, like this author, who had=20
criticised the total irrationality of such an equation, leading to a=20
"you-are-with-us-or-against-us" attitude, and the wreaking of revenge=20
upon innocent people. However, Israel has visited just such vengeance=20
upon the Palestinians, faithfully imitating the US. Prime Minister=20
Sharon was explicit: "Just as the US acts in its battle against world=20
terror, under the brave leadership of President Bush, ... so shall=20
we do ... with all the means at our disposal."

Three things make Israel's action particularly grotesque. First,=20
condemnable as they were, the December 1-2 suicide-bombings, killing=20
26, which provoked Israel's furious strikes, do not remotely approach=20
the magnitude of the Twin Towers carnage. Second, they do not even=20
metaphorically constitute a "war" on Israel, which threatens its=20
existence or justifies an overwhelming military response. Third,=20
Israel has held Mr Yasser Arafat "directly responsible" for the=20
terrorist bombings. Nothing could be more false, cynical and perverse=20
than Mr Sharon's statement that "Arafat is the main impediment to=20
peace and stability in the Middle East ... [He] has chosen the path=20
of terror ... [for] diplomatic gains...."

There isn't a shred of evidence that Mr Arafat or the Palestinian=20
Authority (PA) instigated the December 1-2 attacks. If anything,=20
Hamas militants carried them out against his counsel. Whatever one's=20
criticism of Mr Arafat's leadership--and he is vulnerable to the=20
charge of being too soft on Israel and dependent on America--it is=20
absurd to hold that he instigated or sheltered the terrorists. In=20
fact, he arrested 130 suspects at Israel's bidding. Preposterous=20
charges of PA-terrorist "collusion" mask Israel's own constructive=20
responsibility for the ghastly situation in Palestine and rationalise=20
its gung-ho military response.

That response has been egregiously excessive. Bombing the PA's=20
headquarters, Mr Arafat's helicopters and Gaza's sole airstrip,=20
menacingly pointing tanks at civilians, pummelling the PA's Force 17=20
security facilities, and pitilessly bombing northern villages, all=20
violate the condition of proportionality (of use of force) which is=20
central to the laws of warfare. Israel has declared Mr Arafat, the=20
one important moderate it could find in Palestine, as its deadliest=20
enemy. It can do no business with him, it says, because he is against=20
Israel's very existence.

Besides vilifying Mr Arafat, this is the Israeli Extreme-Right=20
lobby's way of attacking the Oslo peace process, and destroying what=20
is left of the PA's credibility. Israel has humiliatingly reduced Mr=20
Arafat to a petty policeman who either acts against his own people,=20
or faces further punishment. His freedom of movement has suddenly=20
vanished. The PA has been reduced to a pale shadow of what it was=20
meant to be under the Oslo process.

Israel's Extreme-Right, of which Mr Sharon has been the foremost=20
representative since the Sabra and Chatilla massacres of 1982, is=20
targeting the peace process because it wants to perpetuate the=20
occupation of the Palestinian homeland, in blatant violation of=20
international law, Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, and=20
world opinion. Mr Sharon has never hidden his opposition to the Camp=20
David (Israel-Egypt) accords or to Oslo. Like all Extreme-Right=20
Zionists, he is viciously against any accommodation with the=20
Palestinian people whom he regards as vermin and worse. He remains an=20
unabashed supporter of illegal Israeli settlements. He unleashed his=20
last attack on the peace process when he undertook his infamous=20
Jerusalem walk in September last year--provoking the second Intifadah.

The Extreme-Right has managed to hijack the Tel Aviv government,=20
thanks largely to Israel's fractious politics. It reckons that=20
overwhelming military action, coupled with Mr Arafat's humiliation,=20
will allow Israel to prolong its occupation of Palestine by 10 to 15=20
years, even at the cost of enormous turmoil, and violence against=20
ordinary Israelis and Palestinians. Such prolongation will have=20
horribly unjust and traumatic consequences for West Asia.

Let's call a spade a spade. Israel is in hostile, colonial,=20
occupation of land which belongs to the Palestinian people and is so=20
recognised. The creation of the State of Israel corrected a historic=20
injustice against the Jewish people who had suffered banishment and=20
persecution for 2000 years, culminating in the Holocaust. Tragically,=20
Israel visited the same injustice upon the Palestinians,=20
three-fourths of whom live in exile. So far, the peace process has=20
produced a set of moth-eaten Bantustans, with mere municipal powers.=20
Israel has failed to transfer more than 80 percent of territory,=20
leave alone sovereign, effective power, to the PA. The PA only wields=20
limited police powers--to be used not against external threats, but=20
its own people!

Life under occupation is an unending purgatory for the vast majority=20
of Palestinians. The Gaza strip is marked by abject poverty levels,=20
among the worst in the Middle East. All PA entry and exit points are=20
tightly controlled by Israel. As is external trade, employment and=20
people's mobility--exactly the way the colonizing British, French or=20
Whites in apartheid South Africa controlled semi-slave labour.=20
Palestinians are treated in the most insulting way on a daily,=20
routine, basis. They are forced to crawl through long meshed pipes=20
across the border if they want to work as casual labourers in Israel.=20
At the slightest sign of protest or trouble, Israel declares=20
"closures". "Closures" are state-imposed bandhs. Each "closure" costs=20
Palestine an economic loss of $1 to 2 million. Closures alone have=20
more than wiped out all the "aid" received by the PA!

The situation has turned particularly grim in the 14 months of the=20
Second Intifadah. Contrary to Israeli claims, three to eight times=20
more Palestinians have died or been injured than Israelis in this=20
period. This is explained by Israel's repression, including firing on=20
peaceful demonstrators and stone-throwing children, and its policies=20
of "targeted assassination" and "collective punishment" of whole=20
villages for acts that cannot even be reliably attributed to their=20
residents. It is a tribute to the courage of the Palestinian people=20
that they continue to resist such vile repression. But it is also a=20
sign of their brutalisation, and desperation at the daily routine of=20
having their noses rubbed into the ground, that some of them have=20
taken to suicide-bombing.

Mr Sharon has seized on such acts to unleash his extraordinarily foul=20
agenda. Regrettably, he has US backing for this. Washington may not=20
go as far as endorsing his targeting of the peace process, but it=20
clearly gave the go-ahead to his plan to attack the PA's=20
headquarters. Mr Bush is making a colossal error. By supporting Mr=20
Sharon's excessive reaction, he is endorsing the logic of his larger=20
anti-peace agenda. Mr Sharon has trapped him with his own "doctrine".

What a sour irony this is! Mr Sharon was invited to Washington last=20
fortnight to be told to resume talking peace with Mr Arafat and stop=20
imposing impossible conditions like a "perfect" ceasefire. The US has=20
recently shifted its Palestine policy and called for an end to=20
Israel's "occupation" in the light of Resolutions 242 and 338. It=20
supports a "viable" Palestine--a sovereign state with East Jerusalem=20
as its capital. But fate engineered the December 1-2 attacks and Mr=20
Sharon came back with US endorsement.

Mr Sharon's present policy will enormously complicate matters for the=20
US in the Middle East. Washington will now find it hard to launch=20
Phase Two of its "anti-terror" war, for which its hawks are rooting=20
as the Afghan campaign nears its end, with the Taliban's surrender.=20
Vice-President Dick Cheney threatens action against "40 to 50=20
countries", including Iraq, Sudan and Somalia. Particularly ominous=20
here is Mr Bush's warning against Iraq, which revives the old=20
rhetoric about Mr Saddam Hussein's role in the September 11 outrage,=20
for which there is at best tenuous, circumstantial, evidence.

One can only hope that the US abandons its plans to launch Phase Two=20
of its "anti-terror" war. Its invasion of Iraq ten years ago, and its=20
insane sanctions since, have caused 1.2 million civilian deaths and=20
widespread resentment. Washington must urgently restrain Mr Sharon=20
and order him to stop torpedoing the peace process. Unless it wants=20
to light up a range of conflagrations in the Middle East, and breed=20
yet more terrorists, the US must rethink its strategy. Blind=20
retaliation will only aggravate matters. State terrorism can only=20
strengthen sub-state terrorism--and start an endless spiral of=20
violence. It is time to break the spiral.

We in India must contribute to this by rejecting the "Bush Doctrine",=20
and resisting pressures from our own Right to fight terrorism by=20
purely military means. Such pressure is evident in the clamour for a=20
"bold" and "brave" anti-Pakistan policy. Such a policy, which=20
imitates the US-Israeli "you-are-with-us-or-against-us" attitude,=20
will prove disastrous, especially if New Delhi starts a=20
"cross-border" operation in Kashmir. Today's already-tense situation=20
in Kashmir could aggravate if Taliban-style militants from=20
Afghanistan infiltrate into the Valley. This calls for highly=20
imaginative diplomatic and political, not military, responses--unless=20
we too want to breed more fidayeen suicide-bombers and=20
terrorists.--end--

______

#5.

Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:28:41 +0530
From: TARSHI <tarshi@d...>

The Sexuality and Rights Institute: Exploring Theory and Practice

The Sexuality and Rights Institute is an annual two week long
residential course that focuses on a conceptual study of sexuality. It
will examine the interface between sexuality and rights and its links
with the related fields of gender and health.

Sexuality spans multiple disciplines and areas of work. Accordingly, the
course content of the Sexuality and Rights Institute will draw from
different social science disciplines. National and international faculty
will teach the courses. They will employ different pedagogical methods
including classroom instruction, group work, case studies, simulation
exercises, fiction and films. The medium of instruction and discussion
will be English. Participants will examine sexual and reproductive
health programs as well as various legal and socio-cultural issues and
will incorporate their learning into planning and working on programs.

Course themes cover: Conceptual background; The Rights Framework and
Sexuality; Sexuality and Gender; Sexual and Reproductive Health and
Rights; Victimhood and Agency; Representation of Sexuality; Sexual
diversities. The core faculty includes: Radhika Chandiramani, Dr. Lynn
Freedman, Geetanjali Misra, Dr. Michael Tan, Dr. Jyoti Sanghera, and Dr.
Carole Vance. Other national and international resource persons will
also be part of the faculty.

Individuals working on issues of sexuality, rights, health or gender in
India are eligible to apply. A maximum of twenty-five participants will
be selected each year, based on their applications and personal
interviews. Candidates must be fluent in English. Participants are
required to stay for the whole duration of the course.

The Sexuality and Rights Institute will hold its first course in March
2002 in Pune, Maharashtra. Participants will stay on campus in
twin-sharing accommodation. The Institute will cover costs of lodging
and boarding for the 2002 course. Some travel scholarships will be
available on a needs basis.

The Institute is a collaborative initiative of CREA (Creating Resources
for Empowerment in Action) and TARSHI (Talking About Reproductive and
Sexual Health Issues). Both CREA and TARSHI are registered non-profit
organizations. Based on a vision of the right to sexual well-being for
all people, TARSHI works towards expanding sexual and reproductive
choices in people's lives. CREA aims at enhancing the capabilities of a
new generation of women leaders using a rights based approach to address
issues of reproductive and sexual health, violence against women and
gender equity.

The application form is attached. Application forms may be photocopied
and distributed. The last date for submission of application forms is
the 15th of December, 2001.

For more information, please contact The Sexuality and Rights Institute
at the following address:

The Sexuality and Rights Institute
49, Golf Links, Second Floor
New Delhi 11003, India
Phone & Fax: 91-11-4610711 & 4654603
Email: sexualityinstitute@v...

______

#6.

Seminaire de recherche

Jeudi 13 Decembre 2001
17h 00 - 19h 00

Re-fashioning the State in Sri Lanka:
Some Insights from Recent Political Theory

by Jayadeva Uyangoda ( senior Lecturer of Political Science, Colombo=20
University)

La Seance sera introduite par Christophe Jaffrelot

Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Internationales
56 rue Jacob
75006 Paris
( Metro: Saint Germain)

_______

#7.

The New Republic
Issue date 12.17.01
States of Emergency
by Sunil Khilnani

Indira: The Life of Indira Nehru Gandhi
by Katherine Frank (Houghton Mifflin, 448 pp., $35)

The glassy memorial that stands in the garden where Indira Gandhi was=20
assassinated by her own bodyguards in 1984 is among the most visited=20
secular sites in India. Morning and afternoon, busloads of Indians=20
arrive from across the country, whole families together, young and=20
old, noisy but respectful. Nearly twenty years dead, Mrs. Gandhi=20
stays vivid in popular memory. In the view of most Indians, she was=20
the best prime minister that they have ever had. She dominated=20
India's public life from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s; and with the=20
sole exception of her father, Jawaharlal Nehru, no other Indian has=20
put so deep an impress on their country's life.
Yet she is a bogeywoman to India's political and intellectual=20
classes. The Hindu- chauvinist-led government now in power contains=20
several members who were imprisoned by Indira Gandhi during the=20
Emergency, the infamous period between 1975 and 1977 when she=20
suspended democratic liberties, while the left and liberal=20
intelligentsia blame her for India's current travails, for its=20
corruption and nepotism, its sluggish economy, its fraying=20
secularism. Writers from V.S. Naipaul to Salman Rushdie have stitched=20
her up: she lives in the literary imagination as a malevolent,=20
megalomaniacal leader who ended the innocence of Nehru's=20
post-independence idyll, and was responsible (in Rushdie's telling)=20
for "the smashing, the pulverizing, the irreversible discombobulation=20
of the children of midnight." [...].

Full Text at: http://www.thenewrepublic.com/121701/khilnani121701.html

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

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