[sacw] SACW | 13 Jan. 02

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 13 January 2002

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

#1. Give Peace A Chance (Ahmed Rashid)
#2. Victim of macho nationalism (Praful Bidwai)
#3. Provoke Peace! Join The Demo. - Vigil in Karachi (18 Jan 2002)
#4. Nuclear war is not a bilateral matter (M. J. Akbar)
#5. Hindutva : The Sarcophagus of F (I.K.Shukla)

________________________

#1.

Far Eastern Economic Review
January 17, 2002
PAKISTAN AND INDIA
Give Peace A Chance
President Musharraf has tried to ease the tension on the=20
Subcontinent, but the incessant military build-up could create an=20
unstoppable momentum
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Ahmed Rashid/LAHORE and SARGODHA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A COUPLE OF UNEXPECTED handshakes and some conciliatory remarks from=20
Pakistan's President Pervaiz Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal=20
Bihari Vajpayee at the recent meeting of South Asian leaders in=20
Kathmandu briefly raised the hopes of millions around the=20
Subcontinent.

But the peace dialogue and easing of tension that they all longed for=20
did not materialize, despite the added diplomatic pressure from=20
United States President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony=20
Blair, who visited both capitals, and nudging from nations such as=20
China and Russia.

An indication of the heightened tension came soon after the close of=20
the January 5-6 South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation=20
summit in Nepal, when mortar and artillery fire erupted along the=20
border after India shot down what it claimed was a Pakistani drone.

Underlying the danger, and virtually ignored by world leaders, is=20
that the incessant border military build-up by both nations is=20
creating its own momentum, which could overtake any future diplomatic=20
efforts to resolve the crisis. Analysts warn it could easily lead to=20
a pre-emptive strike by either side-as happened during conflicts in=20
1965 and 1971.

Indian outrage at the deadly December 13 attack on its parliament is=20
at the heart of the showdown, and New Delhi says the steps since=20
taken by Musharraf to crack down on the Islamic militant groups=20
blamed for the raid-Jaish-e-Mohammed and Laskar-e-Toiba-do not go far=20
enough. The Pakistan-based groups are fighting for independence in=20
Indian-controlled areas of disputed Kashmir.

Following a meeting in Islamabad on January 7 with Blair, Musharraf=20
denounced terrorism in all its forms and pledged to unveil within=20
days a plan to combat militancy in the country. India and the United=20
States said the statement did not go far enough. "I don't think the=20
situation is defused," Bush said in Washington on January 7, adding=20
that Musharraf must clearly state "that he intends to crack down on=20
terror."

But while Musharraf has the public's support in trying to defuse=20
tensions with India, he can only go so far on Kashmir without risking=20
a backlash at home.

Stoking the fire, Indian military leaders and politicians have called=20
on the government not to back down and to punish Pakistan by=20
launching strikes on militant training camps in the=20
Pakistani-controlled slice of Kashmir.

Senior Pakistani military officers, faced with India's tough talk and=20
mobilization of hundreds of thousands of troops and armament along=20
their mutual 2,900-kilometre international border and the Line of=20
Control in Kashmir, clearly fear the worst.

They say were taken by surprise when India began to move several=20
divisions of its Eastern Command to the Pakistan border in late=20
December and then announced it would it would hold three-month-long=20
military exercises in the border provinces of Punjab and Rajasthan.

"These are the largest Indian troop movements in history," asserts a=20
former Pakistani army chief. "How the Indian army can now roll it=20
back without losing face, even if talks do start, I just don't know."

Senior army officers claim the Indian exercises are aimed at=20
synchronizing the strike forces of India's eastern and western=20
commands in preparation for an attack on Pakistan on a much wider=20
front than just Kashmir. "This is much more serious than India=20
planning a skirmish or two in Kashmir," says a Pakistan army general=20
in Rawalpindi. Adds a senior bureaucrat, "India seems to have made=20
the decision to punish Pakistan for its 12 years of support to the=20
Kashmiri people's armed struggle."

Musharraf is trying to roll back that support, cracking down on=20
Islamic militant groups demoralized by the defeat of the Taliban and=20
Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda group in Afghanistan. These groups=20
expected the army to continue backing their guerrilla operations in=20
Indian-controlled Kashmir.

"It is being done at the behest of the United States," Hassan Burki,=20
a spokesman of Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed on January 4. "These=20
detentions cannot stop our jihad in Kashmir." The authorities have=20
gone out of their way to stress that the crackdown, including the=20
arrests of the leaders of the two main groups, is for internal=20
security reasons only.

So far neither the fundamentalists nor mainstream Islamic parties=20
have taken to the streets because they know there is little public=20
support for them after several thousand Pakistanis died fighting for=20
the Taliban in Afghanistan.

PUBLIC SUPPORT VITAL
"I support the Islamic parties but at the moment I am more worried=20
about the possibility of war with India and I am not taking to the=20
streets and weakening Musharraf," said Riaz Mohammed, a shopkeeper in=20
Sargodha in central Punjab.

But Musharraf can only go so far to meet Indian demands without=20
losing public support, and there's growing suspicion among the=20
military and public that India's military build-up has only been=20
possible with U.S. support, at a time when America is using Pakistan=20
bases in its war on terror.

"How can India have the nerve to do this with U.S. forces on our soil=20
unless the U.S. has given India the nod," asks Amjad Noon, the mayor=20
of Sargodha district. "Everybody is thinking that when India attacks,=20
the U.S. may try to take out Pakistan's nuclear assets."

Pakistani officials publicly deny such linkages but they perceive=20
that India and the U.S. are playing a game of brinksmanship with=20
Musharraf.

India clearly sees this moment as a golden opportunity to end=20
Pakistan's support for the Kashmiri militants. New Delhi has issued a=20
list of 20 alleged Pakistani terrorists it wants extradited to India.=20
Musharraf, reversing previous decisions, said on January 7 he was now=20
ready to analyze the list.

New Delhi remains firm, while waiting for Musharraf's promised extra=20
measures. "Where is the question of a dialogue when there is no=20
change in attitude?," asked Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh on=20
January 7.

Some Western diplomats say the only thing that could bring India to=20
the table is nothing less than a complete renunciation by Pakistan of=20
terrorism in Kashmir and a ban on the groups fighting Indian rule=20
there. But Musharraf is unwilling and unable to renounce support for=20
the Kashmiri people, whose cause Pakistan sympathizes with-not least=20
because it could alienate the armed forces.

So far Musharraf has faced no opposition from his generals or the=20
powerful Interservices Intelligence, which has organized Pakistan's=20
support to the Kashmiris and the Taliban. Musharraf replaced the spy=20
agency's leadership in October, but getting rid of mid-level officers=20
sympathetic to the Islamic militants would be much more difficult.

"India must realize it cannot afford to humiliate Musharraf or the=20
army, it has to provide a face saver at the right moment," says a=20
European diplomat.

As the Kathmandu summit demonstrated, India clearly feels that moment=20
has not yet arrived. The summit was a carefully choreographed theatre=20
of India's refusal to talk and Pakistan's willingness to do just that.

Musharraf concluded his summit speech on January 5 by saying he=20
wanted "to extend a hand of genuine, sincere friendship to Prime=20
Minister Vajpayee." He then strode over to Vajpayee and shook his=20
hand.

Vajpayee replied that, "President Musharraf must follow this gesture=20
by not permitting any activity in Pakistan or any territory in its=20
control today which enables terrorists to perpetrate mindless=20
violence in India."

The Indian leader later told the summit that he had been betrayed in=20
all his peace talks with Pakistan since 1999. But India's sense of=20
betrayal will have to be matched with grace and statesmanship if war=20
is to be avoided.

______

#2.

"The Hindustan Times", New Delhi, January 10, 2002

Platform / Praful Bidwai

Victim of macho nationalism

Rather than hold the government accountable, the opposition has let=20
it off the hook. It hasn't criticized the military build-up, the=20
re-promulgation of POTO, the adoption of MCOCA, and the nuclear=20
war-mongering of the Sangh Parivar.

The Congress party is committing a grievous political blunder by not=20
strongly protesting the Centre's "extension" of the Maharashtra=20
Control of Organised Crime Act as an Ordinance to the National=20
Capital, where it rules with municipal powers, excluding=20
law-and-order. In Maharashtra, MCOCA was not a Congress-Nationalist=20
Congress baby, but a Shiv Sena-BJP-engineered product, a grotesque=20
"compromise" in a climate marked by a spate of fake "encounter=20
killings" by the police in the mid-1990s.

It is another matter that the draconian Act has manifestly failed to=20
control organised crime in Maharashtra--witness the existence of=20
mafia-style gangs linked to numerous businesses, financial rackets=20
and the film industry. This is wholly unsurprising. Failure was the=20
main story of TADA too, with its overall conviction rate of 0.9=20
percent. The extraordinarily high discharge rate (66 percent) clearly=20
showed the police failed to make out prima facie cases or even frame=20
coherent charges against TADA suspects. The vast majority of the=20
accused were probably unfairly charged. The victims included striking=20
students, trade unionists, even milkmen.

The argument that the new law will improve Delhi's policing won't=20
wash. Preventive detection laws everywhere tend to encourage lax,=20
sloppy, irresponsible policing. They allow the police to detain=20
people on mere suspicion without painstakingly collecting evidence.=20
The judiciary is also rendered powerless to demand they perform=20
responsibly--until the damage has been done.

The Congress' decision to imitate, or acquiesce in, this BJP-style=20
obsession with "terrorism" and "security" undermines the sound legal=20
and political arguments that it itself advanced against POTO. What is=20
sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If the BJP/NDA offended=20
the Constitution and the spirit of democracy by re-promulgating POTO=20
after it failed to receive ratification in Parliament, the Congress=20
has not covered itself with democratic glory by its passive=20
submission to MCOCA's extension--effected without even the pretence=20
of consultation or debate.

The Congress' lapse is part of a larger failure of the Opposition as=20
a whole. The Opposition has allowed its good political instincts to=20
be blunted under the assault of near-hysterical jingoistic=20
nationalism driven by a "national-security-at-any-cost" obsession,=20
which the BJP has exploited to characteristically communal ends.

Right since September 11, particularly since December 13, a chasm has=20
opened up in India between those who want serious, purposive,=20
proportionate, balanced, well-focussed and targeted action against=20
terrorists of all varieties, and those who want to push other agendas=20
such as teaching Pakistan "the lesson of its life", crushing=20
citizens' human rights, trampling upon legitimate Kashmiri=20
aspirations, and communalising this society. The former want=20
anti-terrorist action to be part of a political agenda, including=20
policies to promote justice and social cohesion. The latter have a=20
crude big-stick militarist approach.

Much of the Opposition is rightly suspicious of the BJP's=20
ethnic-exclusivist militant nationalism, which tends to paint all=20
terrorism in Islamic hues. Most Opposition parties have generally=20
eschewed war-mongering. Some Left and Congress leaders have sharply=20
deplored it. Most Opposition parties certainly won't countenance a=20
military conflict with Pakistan, leave alone its potential escalation=20
to the nuclear level--with apocalyptic consequences.

However, they have advanced no real criticism of the official=20
strategy of brinkmanship. That is the Vajpayee government's chosen,=20
if devious, approach to Pakistan. It consists in ratcheting up the=20
level of hostility and confrontation, to push Pakistan to take=20
"visible", "decisive", action against terrorists, in particular the=20
20 named by India. The strategy involves not just coercive diplomacy=20
a la December 21-27, including excessively harsh measures like=20
severing all communication links with Pakistan. It necessarily=20
entails a huge military build-up to create and steadily sustain an=20
eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation.

The mediating factor in this brinkmanship is the United States which,=20
seriously worried at a possible breakout of war, pressures Islamabad=20
in order to extract its compliance. This has admittedly produced some=20
results, not least because Musharraf himself wants to crack down on=20
the "bigots" who he says have given Pakistan and Islam a bad name.=20
More than 300 Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Toiba suspects have been=20
rounded up. So this is not bilateral brinkmanship; it's trilateral.

However, the brinkmanship is deeply fraught. New Delhi has not=20
clarified what for it constitutes adequate, "decisive",=20
"anti-terrorist" action. It can whimsically shift the goalposts. It=20
is far from clear that it has an informed, intelligent assessment of=20
what Musharraf can deliver without jeopardising his own survival. And=20
there is a real danger that the military confrontation can spin out=20
of control. Military stand-offs have their own logic. In=20
India-Pakistan, even routine exercises (remember "Brasstacks" and=20
"Zarb-i-Momin"?) can trigger off spiralling rivalry. An=20
India-Pakistan war will be fundamentally unwinnable--and ruinous.

Rather than restrain and hold the government accountable, the=20
Opposition has let it off the hook as regards this dangerous=20
brinkmanship. It hasn't criticised the diplomatic sanctions, the=20
military build-up, the nuclear war-mongering. It hasn't suggested=20
where a wise compromise might lie--e.g. in accepting the handing over=20
of some of the 20 terrorists to Interpol. It has left everything to=20
the tender mercies of a government it doesn't trust.

The main reason for this is the fear that anti-Pakistan bellicosity=20
is genuinely popular: the people are itching for war; having burned=20
its figures over Kargil, the Opposition must learn not to combat=20
BJP-style macho nationalism. This is plain wrong.

True, the BJP cynically exploited Kargil--our "first TV war". But it=20
didn't win the 1999 elections courtesy Kargil. Take the three most=20
war-influenced states. The BJP lost half its Uttar Pradesh seats. In=20
Rajasthan, it gained from anti-incumbency and Jat discontent. In=20
Haryana, tactful alliance-building with INLD, not Kargil, helped...

The examples can be multiplied. The party's national vote shrunk by=20
three percent in 1999. There is no credible evidence today that=20
people desperately want war, rather than good, honest, diplomacy.

Responsible opposition isn't about tailing behind the government or=20
parroting current shibboleths. It's about formulating alternative=20
perspectives and policies that subserve worthy causes--in this=20
instance, promoting India-Pakistan reconciliation and=20
confidence-building, encouraging Musharraf to break the jehadi-ISI=20
umbilical cord, combating jingoistic communalism, and limiting Big=20
Power influence in South Asia. The Opposition had better wake up--and=20
oppose.--end--

______

#3.

From: "Beena Sarwar"
Subject: PROVOKE PEACE! JOIN THE VIGIL IN KARACHI
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2002 11:38:13 +0500

karachi, jan 18, 5.00 pm, QA mazar
DEMONSTRATION! PROTEST! VIGIL FOR PEACE!

Dear friends,

We are doctors, teachers, lawyers, journalists, IT specialists, political,
labour, women's rights and human rights' activists, housewives, senior
citizens, members of non-government
organisations, and above all, concerned citizens, parents, sisters and
brothers, and children.

After the Lahore Rangers' attack on the peace march to Wagah border on Dec
31 and the Karachi police's disruption of the peace demonstration on Monday
Jan 7, it has become even more imperative to exercise our right to assemble
in peaceful protest.

We demand:
- that India and Pakistan resolve their differences through peaceful
dialogue and withdraw forces from the border.
- that whatever action is taken against the police functionaries, as
promised by DIG Karachi in his apology to us, be made public.
- a clarification of government policy: on the one hand its on site
functionaries are allowed to disrupt peace activism, while on the other han=
d
it stresses its desire for peace with India.

PROTEST! DEMONSTRATE! JOIN HANDS FOR PEACE!
Date: Jan 18
Time: 5.00 pm
Venue: Quaid-e-Azam's Mazar, MA Jinnah Road crossing (gate opening to
Shahra-e-Qaideen), Karachi.

Action:
We will form a line that will keep extending as people join us.
We will collect signatures for peace on white banners.
We will light candles and place them on the railing around the Mazar.

WEAR WHITE, BRING A CANDLE. If you cannot come yourself, please inform thos=
e
who can.

(ends)

______

#4.

DAWN
13 January 2002

Nuclear war is not a bilateral matter

By M. J. Akbar

British politicians like to come to India in winter for the weather,=20
and who can blame them? Christmas is a season of joy to the world,=20
peace at home and high spirits all around, but I wonder what they say=20
about the weather before central heating.
Christmas cards have done serious damage to the truth with their=20
serene white snow and bright shining star. The star shone brightly=20
over Palestine two thousand years ago, but Britain in December is a=20
different story. You can't even see a filmstar in a British winter,=20
except at the airport, heading for Hollywood. It is not widely known=20
that Michael Portillo, the man who might have become leader of the=20
Conservatives, had been holidaying in Delhi this Christmas. (The=20
Tories have a leader now, but I can't remember his name.)
The India visit of the man who interrupted Mr Portillo's dreams, is=20
better known. It is a relief to learn that Prime Minister Tony Blair=20
came to India to discuss war, and not goodwill and orders for British=20
industry. We are all big boys in the old Raj now. We want to be taken=20
seriously.
In the good old days, our wars were condemned, indifferently, by=20
responsible governments and applauded, vigorously, by responsible=20
arms-dealers, but no one did anything much to stop a war from=20
happening.
Within some eight weeks of independence Pakistan sent, according to=20
the October 17 and 24, 1947 diary entries of Sir George Cunningham,=20
the governor of the North-West Frontier Province, at least 2000=20
"trans-border tribesmen... probably 2000 Hazrawals... and many=20
thousands more from West Punjab" to a "jehad" (this is the spelling=20
he uses) against Kashmir. This is before there was any Kashmir=20
dispute between India and Pakistan, since the kingdom of Kashmir had=20
not acceded to either country till then. Those irregulars did not=20
conquer the whole of Kashmir, but they did make up the Maharajah of=20
Kashmir's mind for him and start a war that has not ended.
That first one took a long while to pause, fourteen months. There is=20
no evidence that anyone else was too concerned before, during and=20
frankly, even after. Today's superpowers were busy licking their own=20
wounds after five years of the most appalling devastation (nearly=20
forty million died in the Soviet Union and Germany alone), and a=20
fight between two wings of the just-divided and demobilised British=20
Indian Army must have seemed a distraction after Operation=20
Barbarossa, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Plus, India and Pakistan were=20
fighting with Enfields and Bren guns.
In 1965 BBC radio seemed more excited about the war launched by Field=20
Marshal Ayub Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto than the British=20
government, although Harold Wilson eventually did offer to step in to=20
sort things out. The offer is still open, if less advertised. The=20
1965 war ran out of gas. BBC ratings improved, enabling Mark Tully to=20
become a knight in 2002.
The 1971 war was not about Kashmir; maybe that is why it came to a=20
conclusion. Mrs Indira Gandhi spent nine months warning the world=20
about her options, and at least six months planning an actual=20
offensive. By the time the United States pretended to bother the war=20
had become just a war of nerves. Indira Gandhi had nerves of steel,=20
so she prevailed and the American aircraft carrier, allegedly ordered=20
up by Henry Kissinger, stayed out of the battle zone. Then came the=20
proxy war through the nineties. No one bothered once again. You need=20
a loud bang to wake up the world. The bangs were heard in 1999.
Now that both India and Pakistan have the capability to spread a=20
nuclear cloud over not only this subcontinent but also the richest=20
piece of real estate in the world, the oil-deserts to our west, the=20
world has taken notice. Nuclear sabres have a particularly nasty=20
rattle, even when they quiver under lock and key. Washington, the=20
capital of the world, has intervened on the telephone and will name=20
an official envoy for this problem. London, the summer capital of the=20
world, is in Delhi.
Tony Blair has mastered the art of saying the wrong thing at the=20
right time, or is it the other way around? His first message to Delhi=20
was sent from aboard his aircraft through the traditional means when=20
you want a denial option open for later, the media. Pakistan's view=20
on Kashmir deserved consideration, but there could be no space=20
permitted for the abatement of terrorism as a weapon in any dispute,=20
irrespective of the merits of the dispute. This is the Bush-Blair=20
doctrine, post-September 11. Knees jerked all over Delhi.
They were getting perturbed without thought, but that is the manner=20
in which knees tend to jerk. This, in different language, is exactly=20
the position that the government of India took during the talks in=20
Agra. Why did we agree to discuss the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan?=20
Because we accepted that its view deserved the consideration of a=20
dialogue. We were ready for talks that would have begun, if all had=20
gone well, in Agra and continued at intervals of three months until=20
the space between the positions of the two countries began,=20
hopefully, to narrow.
Our only condition was the point made forcefully, and decisively, by=20
home minister Lal Krishna Advani at Agra: that the peace process=20
could not be made hostage to terrorism. The Agra Summit failed over=20
one clause, a common commitment against "cross-border terrorism"=20
irrespective of the merits of any dispute or claim. India argued that=20
terrorism played havoc with the lives of innocents and was=20
unacceptable. Pakistan would not agree. Washington and London sighed,=20
and went on with business as usual. After September 11 they have,=20
thanks to their own pain, accepted that India's position was right.=20
Terrorism is unacceptable under any circumstances.
Mr Blair, who came to explain the Anglo-American view, could do=20
something effective; he could restore the Indo-Pak dispute to its=20
Agra position by explaining to Pakistan that it must join what has=20
become an international consensus, and give the commitment that it=20
will not give any support to cross-border terrorism. This should be=20
easier to do now that the world has changed. The Taliban existed=20
during the Agra Summit. They do not exist now, because Pakistan has=20
changed along with the world. The yardstick that Pakistan applied to=20
its west should apply equally to the east. The problems of Kashmir=20
can return to the talking table.
It is now inevitable that this discussion table will have more than=20
two sides, whether the third side is kept visible or not. Washington,=20
by indicating that it will name an envoy, has left its card on that=20
table. It may be politic on the part of Washington and London to keep=20
out of the picture when the television cameras roll, but Banquo's=20
ghost will be at the table.
Paradoxically, the power that raised the status of India and=20
Pakistan, nuclear arms, has also made it impossible for the two of=20
them to keep their war a bilateral matter. A nuclear confrontation=20
cannot, by its very nature, remain a bilateral concern. Even a=20
non-nuclear war is a problem that the United States cannot afford. It=20
is now back in South Asia, and this time it cannot walk away as it=20
did after defeating the Soviet Union. George Bush, who became=20
President after Ronald Reagan, simply left Afghanistan to its own,=20
and Islamabad's, devices, with tragic consequences.
The confusion of war would once again make the region a breeding=20
ground for terrorism. This war would be long, and there would be no=20
rules. Its tentacles would sting the West with poison. Afghanistan=20
has not settled yet, and it will take some time for the government to=20
establish real authority. No one, moreover, has answered one question=20
satisfactorily: where has the Taliban army gone? At the moment of=20
writing the Americans do not even know where Mulla Omar and Osama bin=20
Laden have gone. Many thousands of Taliban soldiers are somewhere,=20
waiting for another confrontation that might become an opportunity.
War used to be too dangerous to be left alone to generals. Now it has=20
become too dangerous to be left alone to anyone. Terrorism used to be=20
left alone for victims to deal with before September. It has now=20
become too dangerous to be left alone. The end of terror should mean=20
the beginning of what all rational societies seek, peace. The first=20
priority is to define the starting point of peace on this dangerous=20
subcontinent. The second priority is to lay the structure on which=20
the peace process can rest.
President Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee=20
have shaken each other's hand in Kathmandu. They must now have a=20
double-handed handshake to confirm that one hand knows what the other=20
is doing. Tony Blair and George Bush cannot do the handshaking for=20
India and Pakistan. But they can help. The first thing to do is to=20
get terror out of the life of this subcontinent.

______

#5.

HINDUTVA : THE SARCOPHAGUS OF F
I.K.Shukla

The anti-human reliquary of fossils, freaks, and fascists so=20
outstandingly symbolized by Manu, Mill, and Mussolini is the shrine=20
at which the HinduTaliban have placed their votive offerings with an=20
impressive religiosity since inception. Two of the above flakes and=20
fanatics are foreign - the Brit faux historian James Mill, who=20
mutilated historical consciousness by triangulating Indian history=20
into Hindu, Muslim, and British (not Christian, as his own scheme=20
warranted), and the Italian monster who gave the world the bloody=20
regimen of fascism. The Roman caudillo had his blood brother not only=20
in Hitler, the "national socialist", but also the British fascist,=20
Oswald Mosley, all belonging to the same era and same syndicate of=20
sin and savagery that the HinduTaliban emulated and suffused itself=20
with. Similarly, too, the HinduTaliban are in good company, their=20
kinship extending from Omar's Afghanistan to Gaider's Austria, to Le=20
Pen's France, to neo-Nazis' Germany. All of them eminently fit for a=20
cage in a museum of abominations.

This foreign orientation of the ersatz Hindus paralyzed their mental=20
capacity and atrophied their moral sensitivity permanently. They=20
could never think of India on India's terms, its historical=20
experience, its imaginative enterprise, its traditional ethos, its=20
cultural cornucopia except as distorted and conditioned by aliens=20
like Mill and Mussolini, and aberrations like Manu. This triple=20
choke-hold damaged them as humans, rendering them into savage=20
sub-humans or ugly humanoids, and disabled them from both seeing and=20
hearing well whether far or near. Their alienation from the Indian=20
moorings of societal memory and cultural paradigm made them=20
interlopers and outlandish transplants, deracinated, and in=20
consequence, deranged. This malaise afflicts them all. The only way=20
this sickness of soul can be covered up is by posturing and bullying,=20
by vice and violence, by destruction and demolition, by death and=20
darkness. It should be no surprise then that the HinduTaliban, so=20
estranged from the national humanity, would wallow in atavism or=20
revanchism, for they have dug their snouts in the sands of a=20
fictional past. As for current concerns of the nation, they are both=20
blind and deaf. But not so dumb. Their demagoguery makes skies=20
shiver. Their torrent of lies strikes terror in the heart of ghosts,=20
let alone the hapless Indians.

Their shriveled mind is afraid of multi-layered complexity, ill=20
equipped to comprehend constructs that cannot be reduced to binary=20
and infantile simplisms, ill adjusted to modernity and progress,
ill used to democratic dispensation and emancipatory aspirations of=20
humanity, allergic to pluralism and diversity, prone to confusing=20
unity with uniformity. The HinduTaliban are ranged against not only=20
the Indian masses, but also the world's millions struggling for=20
survival and dignity, freedom and self-determination. Bereft of=20
reason and deficient in a perspective that can encompass a larger=20
picture of history and time, the HinduTaliban have historically=20
borrowed their models and mores from abroad.. Thus they are the fifth=20
column wedged into the heart of India. Their interests are=20
incompatible with those of the Indian masses, since HinduTaliban owe=20
allegiance to and are avowedly and unabashedly subservient to foreign=20
governments and corporations. Through violent repression of domestic=20
resentment and resistance to their treacherous schemes they assure=20
alien warlords of "stability", conducive to "foreign investment"=20
(read, loot) at the expense of India's interests present and future.

It is no wonder HinduTaliban are votaries of the European cancer of=20
constricted nationalism that
has caused havoc in European history from which it hasn't recovered=20
yet. A caustic comment by Jonathan Friedman, University of Lund, is=20
apposite in the matter:
If only we understood how totally mixed we all are, there=20
would be no ethnic
strife in the world. The source of evil of roots is western=20
nationalism. We need
only reject the West and its language of identities to find=20
ourselves once again
in the true reality of hybridity. HAVE A NICE DAY.

This "true reality" scares the HinduTaliban, just as the true plight=20
of Hindu widows being known and shown mortally terrifies them (Deepa=20
Mehta's film Water had its set destroyed in Varanasi by the=20
pseudo-Hindu goons and lumpens). This is how they solve problems:=20
blanket them away, wrap them in criminal sanctimony. Another "true=20
reality" that sends a chill down the spine of the HinduTaliban is=20
"us" and "them". Friedman is again illuminative:
Who is "us" and who is "them" is forever being subtly=20
redefined as histories are
being told and retold; traditions invented and denied;=20
statuses ascribed and
challenged; allegiances forged and broken; and identities=20
claimed and rejected.
("Global Crises, the Struggle for Cultural Identity and Intellectual=20
Porkbarrelling: Cosmopolitans versus Locals, Ethnics and Nationals in=20
an Era of De-Hegemonisation", in Werner, P. and Modood, T., Debating=20
Cultural Hybridity: Multicultural Identities and the Politics of=20
Anti-Racism, Zed, London,1997.)

The politics of exclusion and conformity that the HinduTaliban insist=20
on has long been fit for the dung-heap. That it was not discarded and=20
burnt out of existence and memory has cost India dear.
The vogue of "counterfeit national memory" and the "ideological=20
enterprise of memory" that the Hindutva is embarked upon can only=20
maim and mutilate the nation and its psyche terribly, making it=20
dwarfed and defiled, destitute and degraded.

If India were not an outlaw state, I believe, the likes of Ad-vani,,=20
Singhal, Thackeray, Katiyar, and Sudarshan, according to the eminent=20
Hindi writer Rajendra Yadav, the Editor of the reputed Hindi monthly=20
Hans, founded by Premchand, (and I would add, Joshi, Bharati, Giriraj=20
Kishore), would have figured in Door Darshan TV's "Most Wanted" list.=20
With bounty on their heads. But their criminal depredations and=20
dastardly demolitions are being celebrated as "cultural nationalism"=20
and "Hindu patriotism". Such failure and criminal connivance of state=20
could be called a triumph only in Bharat of crooks and cowards.

We will have now Cargills and Kargils as Bhartiya temples of mega=20
death. War as business, coffins as party coffers, our landmines=20
killing our soldiers and laborers on our border with Pakistan (Luke=20
Harding, The Guardian, London, 11 Jan.), after Mexico- Russia-=20
Argentina India becoming another graveyard- courtesy global=20
colonialism, caste system touted and justified as human rights, gag=20
on dissent and diversity of opinion, corruption of massive=20
proportions afflicting every branch of government and infesting every=20
activity in the society, debt and its servicing ballooning=20
uncontrollably, fabricating a "history" out of mythology and fairy=20
tales, a communally askew administrative machinery, periodical=20
pogroms against minorities-Tribals-Dalits, sovereignty in hock to=20
aliens, foreign policy subservient to vintage terrorists, free=20
falling of rupee - these describe a nation on the brink of an abyss.=20
That the saffron brigadistas think it is something to celebrate is a=20
scandalous state of affairs, defining and becoming only them.
How selectively conditioned and critically numb the social conscience=20
becomes can be witnessed in just one example out of a myriad.=20
Rajendra Yadav has called Hanuman "the first terrorist". Should he=20
have, for precision's sake, said "our" first terrorist? How come we=20
never ask why Ram told a lie to Shurpankha (who will ever name his=20
daughter so?) : I'm married, go to my brother who isn't. Why is it a=20
funny thing for a princess's nose to be cut off or bruised? It was no=20
offence a princess asking a prince for marriage. Similarly, Bhishma=20
kidnaped three princesses from Varanasi, Amba-Ambika-Ambalika. And=20
yet, he is a revered figure! There was not one battle that the=20
Pandavas ever fought openly anywhere. Yet they are called brave=20
warriors of the age! There are several such injustices and=20
indecencies littering Mahabharata. But are they ever pointed out?

One who did point these out, Protiva Bose, in her Bengali=20
interpretation of the epic titled Mahabharater Maharanye (In the=20
Great Forest of Mahabharata), in 1997, Vikalp, 1 Bidhan Sarani, 2nd=20
Floor, Kolkata 700 073), has already been translated in Asamia and=20
Oriya, but not in Hindi or English, and thus remains unknown. This is=20
one subtle way of silencing reason and research. Is it because the=20
periphery would seem not to suffer from inhibitory inquiry as much as=20
the so-called centre? That shows that the "centre" has a vested=20
interest in maintaining ignorance and promoting obfuscation=20
permanently. Publishers in the heartland dare not publish anything=20
that questions and challenges the received wisdom and age old dogmas.

Everything now is Maha. Mahaaarati (which launches mass murders of=20
Muslims), Mahashivaratri ( heralds temple terror in Ayodhya),=20
Mahajanmashtami (violence), Maharamnavami (viciousness),=20
Mahajalabhishek (villainy), etc. These are HinduTaliban=20
nomenclatures. They are farthest from the Hindu festivals that were=20
known, in an age gone by, as Aarati, Shivaratri, Janmashtami,=20
Ramnavami. So, this new appellation Maha denotes death and hatred,=20
violence and degeneracy. Poles away from any religiosity of yore. How=20
willingly and rapidly the "Hindus" were converted to this cultist=20
perfidy and sectarian sordidness is a thing of extreme anguish and=20
amazement.

But, since wonder, anger, and inquiry are now dead or verboten, here=20
is an explanation. Just as the ugly and burdensome garlands=20
(Mahamala) meant for today's leaders aren't for wearing, similarly=20
these are not festivals any more. These are communal mobilization=20
events. They lost their popular appeal and religious significance=20
long ago because of this sacrilege.

This is the age of Mahabrahmans. They are the ruling clique. That is=20
why there is so much death, destruction, violence, vice, deprivation=20
and darkness, without respite, scarring and ravaging the land,=20
bleeding it bone white. Today, it may be a term of honor. But in the=20
recent past, as far as memory stretches, it was not so honorable or=20
desirable a profession or title.

Mahabrahmans presided over obsequies, a funeral rite or ceremony, and=20
collected offerings to the dead ones. Our Mahabrahmans are doing no=20
less. What was limited to Hindus has now been extended to the whole=20
of Bharat. This is Bharatising ( read,brutalizing) India, the=20
Hindutva way. Another feather in the HinduTaliban cap: The earlier=20
Mahabrahman collected the harvest of death once in a while, and on=20
individuals. The latter day Mahabrahmans are presiding over the death=20
of a nation and collecting the tribute to Yama hourly and in a=20
thousand ways. The enterprise makes them proud- and profit-swelled.

A sarcophagus for the HinduTaliban? Yes, because they ape the=20
Semitic, and adore the "ancient".
11Jan.2002

______

#9.

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

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.