[sacw] SACW #2 | 11 Jan. 02

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 10 Jan 2002 21:19:21 +0100


South Asia Citizens Wire #2 | 11 January 2002

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

#1. The Right to Protest (Dr Riaz Ahmed)
#2. Pakistan: 6 religious parties form alliance to contest polls
#3. Bangladeshi Diaspora groups Sound Off U.S. leaders cite religious=20
persecution in Bangladesh
#4. SRINAGAR JOURNAL: Left Orphaned by War: The City and Its Children=20
(Somini Sengupta)
#5. India's deadly defence: the 1,800 mile long minefield
#6. Pakistan : Children for peace, LPP seminar information
#7. Situation in Pakistan (M. B. Naqvi)
#8. India: Letter to the Editor re Arrest and Torture of Syed Geelani
________________________

#1.
[10 Jan.2002]

The Right to Protest
By Dr Riaz Ahmed

India and Pakistan are on the brink of a war. Like its counterpart in India
the military dictatorship of General Musharraf is also not doing much to
ease tensions. Instead it is compromising to the US and the Jihadis on the
international and national fronts. Pakistanis and Indians are angry at
hate-mongering of the governments. Peace rallies are being held in major
cities. The Joint Action Committee, an umbrella group of radical NGOs,
socialist organisations and non-NGO peace groups of journalists and
professional engineers and statisticians had a successful vigil on December
31st at the Press Club. Encouraged by the response they decided to hold
another at Hassan Square, the new city centre. But the police was not happy=
.
As soon as the protestors gathered on January 8th the police started
dispersing them. Some adamant protestors who refused to disperse were pushe=
d
around despite appeals that the vigil was peaceful and against war. The
police won=92t pay any heed to it man-handled men, women and children. Two
were arrested and one bruised. The hundreds who arrived later were turned
away.

The organizers were angry because they were assured earlier by the DIG
police that a side-walk protest would not be stopped. They went to the pres=
s
club and demanded immediate release of arrested and an inquiry against the
police officers involved. Most were baffled. =91the vigil was for peace, we
were against war, but the police waged a war on us=92 said one of the
youngsters.

Isn=92t this a usual story? Another issue and Day in and out protestors gat=
her
at Press Clubs around the country and the police allows them a =91side-walk=
=92
protest. So what was wrong with the Hasan Square protest? Well, as one of
the friends said 'because it was not at the Press Club'.

Of course, the question for most of the liberals, progressives and those
taking the regime of General Musharraf as 'liberal, anti-fundamentalist'
anti-war=92 is that why would his government attack peace-protesters? Isn't
the General for peace? Ironically the statement is self contradictory and
the history of the dictator in General Musharraf shows that he has more
pretence for peace and has done more to create disruption. It will be a
folly to expect a military regime to give us the rights we all take for
granted. The argument here is not that 'why the military regime would attac=
k
the peace protesters' but it has to be that 'what causes it to attack all
those who criticise' challenge and protest against ruling elite's policies'=
.

For years the civilian and military governments have imposed ban on assembl=
y
and protest of people. The infamous section 144 or Emergency is the term
used for such bans. But for years premises outside press clubs are the
'sacred' places. You can almost always protest outside press clubs. Its
convenient for the protestors as police does not confront; it is convenient
for the pressmen as reporters and photographers on
working-class/civil-rights beats don't have to go to the 'story' as it come=
s
to them! However it is most convenient for the government.

Press clubs are in the quietest old-city areas. Insignificant traffic passe=
s
by. Such places give all kinds of benefits to the government. By allowing
protests and pictures of protesters the government appears liberal:
safeguarding the rights of its critiques. It is convenient for the police a=
s
it need not worry about protests appearing all over in the city. Anger gets
vented and thus the small numbers of protesters get cooled down. In this wa=
y
the protest gets limited, controlled, manageable. It also gets localized,
isolated and de-sensitized. Press Clubs are neither near big thoroughfares
nor working people pass by these places. This demoralizes the protestors as
they never get to get the solidarity the dearly need.

If protests are held in public places -- major Karachi thoroughfares like
Hasan Square, Nazimbabad, Liaquatabad, Pak Colony, etc -- not hundreds but
thousands will come to know about them. People will get to see the
protestors they sometimes notice in print only. The protestors and
passers-by will come into real-life contact. Ideas will be exchanged,
debates made and more will join the protestors. The protesters will get
solidarity. The passer-byes will know that 'some are protesting'. They will
realize that protests 'are possible'. This will be a realization that may
radicalize millions into thinking that it is possible to disagree, it is
possible to protest. This will be a first step towards real emancipation of
the people. It will begin the story: 'an act of the people by the people'.

Our rulers, including the police that works for it, know that they have to
stop this realization from materializing -- that it is possible to protest,
question and demand a safer, better world. Above all the state wants to
maintain the idea that the state cannot be challenged. On the other hand th=
e
state wishes to keep all the rights for itself.

The state enjoys all rights, while it denies even the miniscal to the
masses. One of its components, the military, exercises the most draconian o=
f
rights. For example, General Musharraf has the right to: highjack a plane
in protest against it not being allowed to land; remove an elected prime
minister from office at the point of a gun; dismantle parliament; subjugate
judiciary, remove an elected President and appoint himself in his place;
extend his tenure as military chief for an infinite period; promise that he
will transfer power in three years and than break that promise; constitute
accountability courts and free the unaccounted. The list goes on. Not only
do they exercise all arbitrary powers taken upon themselves just because
they are armed but the ruled are never asked for any decision taken on thei=
r
behalf by those ruling. As a whole the state denies the masses a right to
live peacefully when it uses its right to: wage wars=97it has done so may a
times without ever taking the permission of the masses; deny a livelihood
when it uses its right to privatize and denationalize factories, schools an=
d
colleges =96 it has done this for the past ten years despite successive
failures of privatization; refuse free education while it allows private
universities charging massive fee affordable only by the rich -- it has
continued raising fee at government and private institutions without ever
asking any of the students or parents; negate the right of fair trial while
it uses all laws made by its dictatorial, unelected rulers to perpetuate
their rule of exploitation and injustices. Above all the state denies the
right of the people to control their own lives by deceiving them that
through military dictators, parliamentary democracy or rule of law everyone
is free, equal and at liberty.

It is this right of the people to control their own lives that threatens th=
e
state-power and its military rulers most. They are least bothered about the
Jihadi protests, as the ruling class knows that jihadis can be controlled
and their protests are usually state-orchestrated. When jihadis protest it
is one section of the ruling class temporarily pitched against the others.
But in case of ordinary people it is the rulers verses the ruled. History
tells the ruling class, if not the ruled class, that the right to protest i=
s
the fundamental right -- when given, begins the destruction of the
exploiting class.

To control their own lives the masses have to begin from the position where
they are placed -- that is of being ruled, being denied. In the military
rule the basic denial is the right to disagree, criticize, that is the righ=
t
to protest.

Rulers in general and military rulers in particular know that to allow
protest is to allow people to think about their own lives =96 the lives of =
the
powerless =96 and to act to change it. Criticism bares open that which is
fetishized. Protests concretize this re-thinking of the masses. They always
begin with the demand for that which has been or is under threat of being
taken away =96 that is the reforms. Nationalized teachers protest against
denationalization. Government workers protest against privatization. Slum
dwellers against shortage of water, electricity and now against demolitions=
.
Peasent-workers against rising costs of farm-inputs, the right to own the
land they work on. Civic groups against the right of women and minorities
under threat by the fundamentalists. Peace groups against the probability o=
f
peace being broken etc. However once these small sections of working and
supplementary classes begin to protest against depleting rights there is a
greater probability of this protest transforming into a movement for greate=
r
rights. The ruling class never wants the masses to take that path.

A military rule knows that it cannot risk giving the right to protest. If
people protest then the might of the state will recede. Military rule relie=
s
solely on the threat to use force. However a prolonged military rule itself
takes away the might conceived in its coercive stance. This is what happene=
d
in General Zia's dictatorship. Five years into his rule he was faced with a
massive movement for restoration of democracy. From then on the military
ruler had to give in to various demands. This may happen with General
Musharraf as well. Sure the history will not repeat exactly as before but
this time the state is weak, economically in ruins and the bourgeoisie
democratic institutions have lost their legitimacy. It all may help to
fasten this pace.

Denying the right to protest does not mean that protests will not take
place. In fact the recent protests have proved in contrary to that
assertion. The more people protest the greater there is a desire to protest
more. And if the protesters succeed in getting a demand realized then it
gives confidence to argue for more reforms. In the past one year or so
radicalization of our society has intensified. Earlier on it was the global
anti-capitalist/anti-globalization protests adjacent world institutions.

Since the war on Afghanistan the protesters movement has intensified. So
when India and Pakistan threatened war the peace activists were quick to
respond and within days they were at the Press Club. Within a week they wer=
e
out there at Hassan Square and the mood was fantastic. New faces, younger
people and mostly women =96 these are the color and mix of the new movement=
.
Most are inexperienced. Almost all have the threat of state-violence in
mind. Certainly all the seniors preach about non-violence. But the events o=
f
January 8th have said something else. That it is the state that denies the
right to protest; attacks those calling for peace; uses all violent means
against unarmed civilians. It also proves that it is useful to protest as
many are waiting to see others doing so and will be willing to join. It
showed that protesters could resist. It is this local movement to resist
that has begun to take shape. The protesting school and college teachers,
hotel workers, government and bank employees, peace and women rights
activists have begun to find their way of venting their anger =96 the they
have only begun to resist.

The world history shows that like all rights the right to protest is never
given by the state; rights are always taken, achieved. The right to protest
is one of the most difficult under military rule. But the new movement of
resistors has shown that it is possible to move beyond Press Clubs, out int=
o
the larger places and relate to the masses. It has shown that the right to
protest will never be legitimized by the state. If our lives have to change
and we wish to control them then this right need only be legitimized in the
minds of masses. Little preaching can help in restoring that realization, i=
t
needs practice. More protests against war, deprivation and denial are the
only way that we can challenge fundamentalists and the rulers who support
such ideas.

Dr Riaz Ahmed
Department of Applied Chemistry
University of Karachi
Karachi 75270
Pakistan
Phone Off: 9221-9243131 Extn 2279
Res: 9221-4527042

_____

#2.

The Nation (Pakistan)
6 religious parties form alliance to contest polls
http://www.nation.com.pk/020102/today/main/top9.htm

______

#3.

Newsday (USA)
January 7, 2002

THE NEW NEW YORKERS
Bengali Groups Sound Off
U.S. leaders cite religious persecution in Bangladesh

By Merle English
STAFF WRITER

As U.S. forces pursued the last vestiges of the Taliban, leaders of
Bengali-American religious and community groups citywide want President
George W. Bush to turn the searchlights on their country as a possible
haven for terrorists.

About a dozen heads of Hindu, Buddhist, Christian and human rights
organizations gathered in Jackson Heights at the end of November to
discuss their fears of what they are calling "Pogrom 2001" in Bangladesh.

The leaders said since a new government came to power Oct. 1, systematic
terrorist attacks have been made on Hindus, Buddhists and Christians in
the largely Muslim country.

A dossier of Bangladesh newspaper stories they compiled indicated that
murders, beatings, rapes; looting of homes, businesses, temples and
churches; and threats of expulsion if they did not convert to Islam have
forced thousands of Hindus to seek refuge in neighboring India.

Many of the refugees are being pushed back across the border by Indian
authorities, according to the group. Progressive Muslims also were being
persecuted, they said.

Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and her Bangladesh Nationalist Party - which
won an Oct. 1 election defeating the rival Awami League - are targets of
the group's outrage for allegedly not acting against "right wing and
Islamic fundamentalist and Taliban."

Those factions, they say, are in the coalition government. They blame
those factions for "minority cleansing."

"We don't want another Afghanistan. This should be stopped, and America as
leader of the free world should take the lead," said Sitangshu Guha,
convenor of the Bangladeshi Hindus in America and Friends in Manhattan. He
spoke for the group.

"We support America in [its] fight against terrorism ... In this context
we want America to keep an eye on Bangladesh," Guha added. "Mr. Bush,
please do us a favor. Help the Bangladesh religious minorities. Save them
from the Taliban fundamentalism."

But officials with the government of Bangladesh dispute those dire
pronouncements. Rafiq Khan, the Bangladesh consul general in New York, was
in Bangladesh in December. He said the government supports the U.S. stand
against terrorism and that "there is no sign of Talibans. We're following
democratic principles there," he said.

There were sporadic incidents in the villages and rural areas, Khan said,
but "the government is determined to remove any sort of terrorism from
Bangladesh."

Khan said Zia ordered law enforcement agencies to take action against
anyone, "even if they belong to her party."

Nevertheless, to draw attention to the incidents in their homeland, the
group has held community meetings, protest rallies and launched a
letter-writing campaign.

As the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist & Christian Unity Council, U.S.A., it
sent a Nov. 19 letter to Bangladesh Prime Minister Zia; Bush; Rep. Joseph
Crowley (D-Jackson Heights), chairman of the Bangladesh Caucus in
Congress; British Prime Minister Tony Blair; UN Secretary General Kofi
Annan; and Atal Vajpayee, India's prime minister.

"We are trying our best to save our relatives in Bangladesh," Guha said.

Seventeen members of Congress, including Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-Bayside)
and Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-Brooklyn), also wrote Zia in November, calling
on her government to "rectify the situation."

Crowley will visit Bangladesh in early January and plans to meet with
religious minorities, Christopher McCannell, an aide said. He will discuss
the treatment of the Hindu minority with government members.

A U.S. State Department spokeswoman said Shaikh Hasina, the former
Bangladesh prime minister whose party was defeated, raised the issue in
Washington after the election.

The spokeswoman said the United States and Bangladesh have a strong
relationship based on shared democratic systems and that country's
"moderating role in the region and within Islamic organizations."

"We anticipate working closely with the new government of Bangladesh on a
host of joint concerns, including counter-terrorism and human rights and
respect for the rule of law," the spokeswoman said.

Mina Farah of Richmond Hill, a Bengali-American dentist, author,
entrepreneur and activist, is a Hindu married to a Muslim. She helped
coordinate the Jackson Heights meeting.

"I am very angry," she said. "Every day there have been murders. Our
government is denying this is happening. They are saying the opposition
leader is making up these things and blaming it on her [Prime Minister
Zia]. My family are not safe and are thinking of going to India. But why
should they leave their motherland?"

Farah said she will visit Bangladesh in the new year to "see for herself."

The Jackson Heights gathering produced newspaper reports that suggest the
Hindus are victims of a backlash because they allegedly supported the
defeated Awami League.

Mohammad Aminullah of Corona, founder and former president of the
Bangladesh American Public Affairs Federation, said he initiated the
Bangladesh Caucus and believes the incidents are exaggerated for political
purposes.

"The people who lost want to give a hard time to the newly elected
government," Aminullah said. "The situation is not as bad as they report
it to be. This also happened when the BNP lost. These things happen in
Third World countries."

But Bangladesh officials say the issue is overblown.

"There are some people who want to use this issue for political purposes,
so they're trying to color it a different way," Rafiq Khan said. "I don't
think Taliban will have any place in Bangladesh."

______

#4.

The New York Times
January 10, 2002

SRINAGAR JOURNAL
Left Orphaned by War: The City and Its Children

By SOMINI SENGUPTA
Somini Sengupta/The New York Times
Aijaz Ahmed Ganai, the 12-year-old son of a slain Kashmiri militant,=20
lives in an orphanage in the heart of Srinagar, a city that has been=20
devastated by the fight for territory between India and Pakistan.

SRINAGAR, Kashmir, Jan. 9 - Pressed hard against a cliff at the dead=20
end of a twisting road in the old city here, a cluster of squat red=20
buildings houses the lingering misery of Kashmir. It is an orphanage=20
for boys, a great many of whom were left fatherless and destitute by=20
the bloody 12-year guerrilla war in this Himalayan valley.

Some of them are sons of dead militants. Some of them don't know how=20
their fathers were killed. Not many remember their fathers at all.=20
They know only that one day their mothers packed their clothes, told=20
them to tend to their studies and had them ferried from their=20
villages to the orphanage here.

For all the gloom that has descended over this city, it is a cruel=20
twist that its name in the ancient Indian language Sanskrit means=20
city of the sun. Srinagar, the summer capital of Kashmir, is at the=20
heart of the disputed territory between India and Pakistan, the spoil=20
for which they are poised to fight their fourth war.

No other place has been as pulverized by the rivalry between the=20
nations. And today, with the soldiers of India and Pakistan lined up=20
along their 1,800-mile border, no other place likely will.

"In both the nations, the governments are thriving on Kashmir,"=20
observed Abdur Rasheed, a retired government official here who helps=20
support dozens of women and children who have lost their men to the=20
conflict. "This is the battleground. We are the sufferers. Who else?"

The dispute over Kashmir, which has gone on for more than 50 years,=20
has spawned a violent insurgency, pitting guerrilla fighters against=20
Indian soldiers and paramilitary outfits. India accuses Pakistan of=20
fomenting the insurrection in Kashmir, India's only Muslim-majority=20
state. Pakistan, as well as many Kashmiris, accuse India of hindering=20
their right to self-determination.

The conflict has left a terrible human toll here - the orphans are=20
but one of many examples.

That toll is visible on virtually every street corner in this city.=20
Paramilitary forces stand bunkered behind stacks of sandbags on every=20
other block. Abandoned apartment houses have been taken over by=20
security forces. The sports stadium has suffered the same fate.

Of the dozen or so movie theaters that once operated in the city,=20
only two remain open. The rest have been abandoned or serve as=20
bunkers for India's Border Security Force. The streets are empty by=20
dark. People think twice about making dinner appointments. The=20
restaurants close by sundown, anyway.

The latest indignity heaped upon the people of the valley is a=20
severing of their connections to the world beyond. Kashmiris awoke on=20
New Year's Day to discover that their Internet connections had been=20
snapped. The long distance telephone shops that the vast majority of=20
people use to talk to friends and family outside the state have had=20
their long distance connections suspended, too. There is no word on=20
when service will be restored.

Indian officials contend that such steps were needed to stop=20
terrorists operating in the valley from communicating with one=20
another. For the same reason, mobile phone service is not available=20
here either.

So for over a week now, a car dealer hasn't been able to call=20
Chandigarh, some 400 miles to the south by road, to speak to his=20
factory dealer. An exporter of Kashmiri woolens hasn't been allowed=20
to send an e-mail to his American distributor in Utah. The purveyor=20
of a sweet shop has been unable to call New Delhi, to request what=20
were his daily rations of curd and cream.

The shopkeeper, Bashir A. Butt, shrugged off the inconveniences as a=20
fact of Kashmiri life. Things could be worse. They have been before.=20
"Maybe the government will say, `There's a curfew, close up your=20
shop,' " he said. "We can expect anything. People here, they are used=20
to these things."

Even today, the severed phone service mattered little anyway, at=20
least to the store owners. As is routine here, a one-day strike=20
shuttered the city's shops, in protest of the death of a young=20
Kashmiri man in police custody in New Delhi, the Indian capital.

For most Kashmiris, however, the lack of phone service meant that New=20
Year's greetings to friends and family elsewhere had to be put off.

"They say Kashmiris are an integral part of India," Prince Ahmed, 24,=20
said, biding the time at the long distance telephone shop of his=20
brother Muzzafir, "but don't let them talk to the rest of the=20
country."

On the streets of Srinagar, blood and guns have been such constant=20
features that the prospect of war hardly meets with outrage or panic.

Bashir Ahmed Dabla, a sociology professor at the University of=20
Kashmir, recounted the words of a student at one of his seminars=20
recently. The young man said he would be relieved if war broke out. "=20
`Let both countries kill us and the Kashmir problem will go away=20
automatically,' " Professor Dabla recalled hearing him say. "This=20
sentiment got the approval of most of the audience."

Few have felt the crunch of the conflict here as acutely as Aijaz=20
Ahmed Ganai, a 12-year-old boy who appeared to be drowning inside one=20
of the flowing woolen overcoats that Kashmiris wear in winter. His=20
father was a commander with a militant group called Al Jahad when he=20
was pulled off his scooter and gunned down by security forces.

The boy was 2 at the time, and he was called Irfan. He got a new name=20
after his father died - Aijaz, his father's alias. But he lost his=20
home. Four years ago, an uncle brought him here to the orphanage, the=20
Yateem Trust hostel, one of the largest and oldest in the city. They=20
rode the bus from their village, in the center of the valley, here to=20
the old city. It was the boy's first time in Srinagar.

Aijaz learned of his father's fate from a newspaper clipping his mother kep=
t.

Aijaz is a shy boy, with big eyes and a beauty mark under his bottom=20
lip that gives him a slightly coquettish look. He sees his mother=20
during Eid, the annual Muslim feast. He wants to be an engineer, he=20
said, not a mujahedeen, and buried his face, giggling, in his=20
overcoat.

_____

#5.

The Guardian
Thursday January 10, 2002

India's deadly defence: the 1,800 mile long minefield
Outlawed weapons create no man's land on border

Simon Tisdall and Ewen MacAskill

Indian army and security forces have embarked on an unprecedented=20
project to lay hundreds of thousands of anti-personnel mines along=20
the entire length of its 1,800-mile border with Pakistan.

The operation, in response to tension in disputed Kashmir, reverses=20
gains made in the past five years by international anti-mine=20
campaigners and threatens further to entrench the military=20
confrontation between the sub-continent's two nuclear-armed powers.

The minefields will be up to three miles deep in places. Along with=20
accompanying Indian defensive installations this will create the=20
longest, fully-fortified border in the world, running from the Indian=20
Ocean to the Himalayas. It will dwarf the western front of the first=20
world war and the Maginot Line of the second and amount to south=20
Asia's equivalent of the Berlin Wall.

Indian troops have been evicting farmers and seeding large areas of=20
arable land over the last month with anti-personnel landmines=20
outlawed under the Ottawa mine ban treaty of 1997. These minefields=20
are in addition to those laid in the three Indo-Pakistani wars since=20
independence from Britain in 1947.

The development represents a serious setback to the world-wide=20
campaign against APLs championed by Princess Diana and actively=20
supported by the Labour government. The UK ratified the treaty in=20
1999 and is committed to pushing for a global ban. The US, India and=20
Pakistan have refused to sign.

Jitendra Misra, political counsellor at the Indian high commission in=20
London, confirmed yesterday that new mines were being laid. "We do=20
deploy landmines but we do it in a most responsible manner," he said.=20
"We fence the areas and mark them very clearly and use them only on=20
the border, not anywhere else." He added: "We have reluctantly been=20
forced to take the measures in self-defence."

Mr Misra was unable to specify how many mines were being laid or over=20
how wide an area. The International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL)=20
estimates India has a stockpile of between 4m and 5m mines and=20
Pakistan 6m.

Pakistan is also thought to have been laying mines along the border=20
in recent weeks. A spokesman for the Pakistan high commission was=20
vague yesterday. "We may have," he said. Kashmiri separatist groups=20
condemned by India as terrorists also use APLs.

Casualties from mine explosions along the border have been rising in=20
recent days. At least 11 people were killed by Indian devices in the=20
Punjab region last Saturday. A few days earlier, 19 Indian soldiers=20
were killed in a similar explosion at the border in Jaisalmer in=20
Rajastan.

The decision by India and Pakistan to resort to minelaying comes=20
after weeks of escalating tension following last month's attack by=20
allegedly Pakistani-backed militants on the Indian parliament in New=20
Delhi. Yesterday there were continuing, sporadic exchanges of fire=20
across the Kashmir border and India claimed that Pakistan had mounted=20
an air incursion by a unmanned drone over its territory.

In a bid to calm the crisis, the Bush administration announced last=20
night that the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, will follow Tony=20
Blair to India and Pakistan next week. The Indian defence minister,=20
George Fernandes, is also due to visit Washington to discuss=20
burgeoning bilateral defence cooperation.

The extended minelaying operation undercuts five years of hard work=20
by campaigners, non-government organisations and European governments=20
that have seen a drop in casualties from landmines worldwide. An=20
estimated annual rate of 26,000 deaths and injuries has been halved=20
as a result of the Ottawa treaty, a worldwide clean-up campaign,=20
increased aid and environmental programmes, and a reduction in=20
conflicts. Pakistan and India manufacture their own weapons after the=20
post-1997 collapse of the international trade in landmines.

The ICBL, an umbrella organisation representing anti-landmine=20
pressure groups, wrote to the Indian prime minister, Atal Bihari=20
Vajpayee, this week saying it "is gravely disturbed that Indian=20
troops are laying new anti-personnel landmines along the border with=20
Pakistan". A similar letter was also sent to the Pakistan leader,=20
General Pervez Musharraf. Both leaders were urged to think again=20
urgently.

Sue Wixley, a spokesperson for ICBL, said the move by Indian and=20
Pakistan added greatly to insecurity in the sub-continent.

"It puts civilians and soldiers at risk now and for years to come.=20
Nobody wins in this situation, everybody loses. That's why most=20
governments have already outlawed mines.

"We condemn any use of mines loudly and clearly. We call on India and=20
Pakistan to refrain from using mines."

Britain has been pushing for a universal ban on APLs. A Foreign=20
Office spokesman said yesterday: "The UK is at the forefront of the=20
campaign for a global ban on anti-personnel landmines." He added: "We=20
encourage other states to ratify the convention."

The department for international development said in a policy=20
statement last autumn that Britain was obligated "to promote the=20
globalisation of the ban on APLs and to help developing countries=20
implement their obligations."

The department said Britain was committed "to provide a more=20
coherent, timely and cost-effective response to the global challenge=20
of landmines."

But London's position is at odds with that of George Bush's=20
administration, which insists that it must retain APLs and other mine=20
weapons and sub-munitions, such as the cluster bombs used recently in=20
Afghanistan, for its own defence and for the defence of allies such=20
as South Korea.

Guardian Unlimited =A9 Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002

_____

#6.
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002
From: Labour Pakistan
Subject: Children for peace, LPP seminar information

Dear friends,

Labour Party Pakistan is holding a "children for peace" demonstration on
12th January at 3pm in front of Lahore Press Club. LPP Mustafabad=20
Lahore unit is
organisng the demo. Children under the age of 14 will desplay banners and
baloon for peace will be there.

This is to condemn the war fanaticism promoted by the Indian and Pakistan
governments. Overwhelmingly papulation of Pakistan is at present for peace.
There is no religious fundamentalists hue and cry for the war as was=20
the case in
the past.

On 15th january, LPP Lahore is organising a seminar "Peace, Not War" at 3pm
at Lahore Press Club auditorium.

Umer Baluch LPP Sind Secretary, Dost Mohammed Channa LPP Sind Chairman,
Abida Bashir Butter LPP national executive committe memeber, Farooq Tariq, =
LPP
general secretary, Shoaib Bhatti, LPP Chairnman, Romana Shabnum member Aziz
Bhatti Town lahore Council and LPP national Committee memeber, Azra Shad LP=
P
Lahore secretary will be the main speakers at the seminar.

Please come to these events if you are in Lahore.

Frateranally,
Amir Suhail,
LPP lahore secrertary information

_____

#7.

Situation in Pakistan
M. B. Naqvi
Karachi Jan 9:

Following what the British Prime Minister Tony Blair is said to have
told President Pervez Musharraf --- it was in the nature of an ultimatum
--- the latter is shortly to address the nation in which he will, as is
billed, 'change history'. Confident expectations, fed by the touring
9-member team of US Senators and Congressmen, centre on a new and
stronger campaign against extremist religious parties and socalled
Jehadis. This should address many of the Indian concerns. President
Musharraf is also expected to take new policy initiatives vis-=E0-vis
India.

The pressures on President are surely intense. India has massed troops,
tanks, guns and missiles and aircrafts on the borders in a threatening
mode. It is demanding the handing over of 20 wanted terrorists and a
general policy shift of supporting the insurgents in Kashmir. Apparently
the US and UK have bought the Indian stance of rejecting the Pakistani
description of Kashmiri insurgents as freedom fighters. Blair, after
consulting with US President George W. Bush, was said to have been tough
with Musharraf in demanding total stoppage of terrorism of all shapes
and kinds after making plain the new definition of terrorism that leaves
no scope whatever for armed struggle for the right of self-determination
despite the UN Charter's provision for it.

A Toronto newspaper, Star, has reported that Blair threatened Musharraf
by saying 'Pakistan risks the same fate as its former ally Afghanistan'
if it persists in attaching political labels to acts of violence=92. The
report went on to say: "Terrorism is terrorism wherever it occurs,
whoever are victims. We have shown in Afghanistan that if the collective
will is there, then the back of these terrorist organisations can indeed
be broken." That is that according to the west.

This would seem to be a moment of truth for the military regime. It is
being asked to make another U-turn --- this time in its Kashmir policy.
This is like asking the Pope to visit brothel --- not to preach but for
the other purpose. It does look as if Musharraf will do as told. It so
happens that most liberal minded Pakistanis will approve of this new
departure. But the means that are being applied to --- diktat by America
--- cannot but be distasteful. If only the policy change had come about
through the democratic process, it would be satisfying --- and lasting.
Changes made under duress are superficial, partial and temporary.

The political background is disquieting. While mainstream parties are at
sixes and sevens in the absence of Parliament and top leaders, their
mouths are shut on day-to-day politics in the emergency created by the
war scare resulting from India's aggressive military moves. A closing of
ranks is dictated by the usual political practice. They have to be
silent on many issues. Besides, Musharraf is right when he says that
silent and vast majority is neither for the Mullahs nor with the
socalled Jihadis. Except the religious lobbies, a section of the Army
and a tiny section in Punjab and Muslim League, known as the Nawai Waqt
school --- largely an extension of Army --- no one subscribes to the
ideology that has sustained Jehad.

This latter lobby is angry, very angry, with Musharraf. A supporter of
Musharraf M.P. Bhandara, a former member of National Assembly, has
written an article in Dawn, the heading of which is: "Was it a coup
bid?" He says: "the minutia of events of December 13 leads to the ardent
speculation that it was an audacious coup d=92etat staged by a lunatic
fringe of Islamic extremism with possible help from former or serving
elements in the ISI. Its aim might have been to reverse the U-turn of
Pakistan's current pro-US policy and remove President Musharraf by
providing causus belli for an Indo-Pak war with perhaps a nuclear
dimension. They may yet succeed."

The situation is serious enough. Apparently, there is no other line. But
this lunatic fringe --- that may be both lunatic and a fringe but it is
not marginal or without some clout --- would like Pakistan to say No to
the US and reverse Musharraf's policies. It is not only not afraid of
war with India, it wishes it. It is anxious to nuke India. "What are
these weapons for if they are not to be used", as one former military
man said to this correspondent.

_____

#8.

Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002
From: "R.R.Punyani"
EPW (Mumbai, India) Letter To Editor January 05, 2002

Arrest and Torture of Syed Geelani

We the undersigned are alarmed at the tendentious reporting on the alleged
involvement of Syed Abdul Rehman Geelani in the December 13 attack on the
Indian parliament. In contrast the media has not carried his side of the
story. As it is having been charged under POTO an innocent person has very
little chance of escaping destruction of his/her life and liberty.
In a number of visits by several teachers and civil rights activists to
Syed Abdul Rehman Geelani in Tihar jail he has insisted that he is
innocent of the charges levelled against him. He was picked up on the day
of the incident from outside the Khalsa college and taken to some
farmhouse where he was stripped and hung upside down, then beaten and had
the filthiest communal abuse hurled at him. During the third degree that
he was subjected to, he was made to sign on blank papers as well as a
statement that he was not tortured. When he was presented before the
magistrate in his chamber several high-ranking police officers were
present. He chose to keep quiet when asked whether he was maltreated
fearing further physical abuse. However, he refused to make any
'confession' since he maintained he was innocent. He told us that when he
asked one of the officers who was interrogating him what was his crime he
was told "you are educated". We believe Geelani's guilt is that he is an
educated Kashmiri Muslim.

Currently in judicial custody he was removed from ward 8 which houses
Kashmiri detinues to ward 2 which houses people charged with heinous
crime. We fear for his life because everytime he is taken out of his
solitary cell other detinues bray for his life.

The paranoia exhibited by the authorities is such that his wife and two
children, both minors, were kept in Lodhi road police station for three
days and their whereabouts were hidden from their family and friends.

We appeal to every democratic-minded person to protest his persecution
especially for projecting him as guilty without establishing the charges
made against him. The rule of law in a democracy demands presumption of
innocence. We, therefore, demand the withdrawal of application of POTO and
for restoration of Geelani's civil liberties including his teaching
position.

N D Pancholi, Anand Chakravarti, Tripta Wahi, Vijay Singh, Tapan Bose, K M
Singh, Rajesh Tyagi, Vinod Khurana, Gautam Navlakha.

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

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.