[sacw] SACW #2 | 26 Sept. 02

Harsh Kapoor aiindex@mnet.fr
Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:09:42 +0100


South Asia Citizens Wire #2 | 26 September 2002

__________________________

#1. Education by hatred (Praful Bidwai)
#2. Modi Versus India: Modi has become the symbol of the party=B9s new=20
way forward (Mahesh Rangarajan)
#3. Joint Appeal for Peace
A condemnation of the terror attack on the Swaminarayan Temple=20
(Secular South Asian Groups)
#4. Press Statement - The All India Democratic Women=B9s Association
#5. Statement on Terrorist attack on Swaminarayan temple (Ekta, Bombay)
#6. Public Forum on Gujarat in UCSD San Diego, Sept 28, 2002

__________________________

#1.

The News International (Pakistan)
Thursday September 26, 2002

Education by hatred

Praful Bidwai

When India's foreign minister Jaswant Singh went to Kandahar in=20
December 1999 to exchange civilian hostages from a hijacked Indian=20
Airlines plane for three men (including Ahmed Omar Sheikh and Maulana=20
Masood Azhar) detained in India under serious terrorist charges, the=20
sarasanghachalak (supreme leader) of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh=20
described the trade-off as an act of "Hindu cowardice", no less!

This might sound scathingly, weirdly self-deprecatory coming from the=20
head of a virulently militant organisation dedicated to promoting=20
"Hindu pride", indeed, Hindu supremacism, for three-quarters of a=20
century. But it reveals, as nothing else, the power of stereotypes=20
that Hindu/Muslim communalists in South Asia have constructed about=20
one another. Such images have been disseminated over decades through=20
stories, myths, jokes, films, skits and, increasingly, books.

They have been so fully internalised within the ethnic-chauvinist=20
discourse that it is hard to begin a serious dialogue between Indians=20
and Pakistanis without discarding, attacking or dismantling these=20
cliched views.

Some of the stereotypes go back to 19th century colonial=20
historiography, which divided India's past between different=20
"religious" periods and dynasties. Among the most important=20
stereotypes are the image of the Hindu as the quintessential "wily"=20
Bania - "weak, unable to fight and timid" - and of the Muslim as=20
"brave and valiant" (or if you like, "violent and hot-tempered").

As Rubina Saigol, a Lahore-based independent researcher and freelance=20
writer on feminism and educational issues, argues, "the Two-Nation=20
Theory was a binary construction used by history and social studies=20
textbook writers to create the India/Hindu as the opposite Other of=20
the Muslim/Pakistani."

Textbooks, prescribed or approved by the state, have become one of=20
the most contested spaces in this tussle over identities. This is=20
true, with a vengeance, of India, where the Hindu Right has been=20
trying since the 1970s to censor, rewrite or suppress textbooks. Its=20
special targets are works by liberal or left historians who question=20
both "colonial" and "nationalist" schools of history-writing, and who=20
put people and socio-economic processes at the centre of their=20
concerns.

"Saffronising" education has been at the very core of the BJP's=20
agenda since it came to power in 1998. This has met with stiff,=20
principled resistance at several levels from educationists, scholars,=20
teachers, social activists and political leaders of all persuasion=20
except Hindutva.

The resistance has now received a temporary setback with a judgment=20
of the Supreme Court in a public-interest petition moved by three=20
eminent citizens, including an award-winning right-to-information=20
activist, a social scientist, and a journalist-commentator. Two of=20
the petitioners are Hindus (one married to a Muslim), and one a=20
Christian.

They questioned the role of the government-sponsored NCERT (National=20
Council for Education Research and Training) in formulating the=20
National Curriculum Framework (NCF) on which future textbooks will be=20
based. Regrettably, the verdict upholds the validity of the devious=20
methods NCERT used to write the NCF.

The textbook process in India progresses from the National Education=20
Policy (last revised 1986) to the NCF. From this are derived both the=20
syllabi and textbooks for different classes. Once adopted by the=20
Central Board for Secondary Education, the textbooks get disseminated=20
through most schools, even private ones.

Pivotal to the process is consultation between teachers, experts and=20
officials, and between the Centre and states. The principal agency=20
here is the Central Advisory Board on Education (CABE) - a 104-member=20
body consisting largely of state representatives. CABE (established=20
1920) is uniquely empowered to approve the NCF. Without CABE, the=20
states' views would be excluded - spelling dangerous=20
overcentralisation.

However, CABE never approved the NCF produced two years ago. It was=20
deliberately bypassed. This was wilful sabotage of democratic=20
process. NCERT, headed by a crony of education minister Murli Manohar=20
Joshi, systematically excluded independent scholars and educationists=20
from the NCF discussion process. Rather than organise a free exchange=20
of views through structured seminars, it merely put the NCF draft on=20
its website and mailed it out to individuals.

The NCF-2000, "finalised" by NCERT, is based on the concept of "value=20
education" which is itself centred on religion. This violates the=20
principles of secularism and equality and the right to education.=20
Under India's Constitution, the state cannot favour religion, nor=20
under Article 28 support "religious instruction".

But the NCF roots its entire philosophy in religion as "a major=20
source" of "universal" values central to education. Thus it says:=20
"What is required today is ... education about religions, ... the=20
values inherent therein and also a comparative study of the=20
philosophy of all religions..." It claims that "the essence of every=20
religion is common, only the practices differ."

This violates the National Policy on Education-1986, from which alone=20
the NCF can be legitimately derived. NPE does not even mention=20
religion. The Supreme Court has held in any number of cases that=20
"religion cannot be mixed with any secular activity of the state. In=20
fact, the encroachment of religion into secular activities is=20
strictly prohibited".

However, NCERT ruthlessly insinuated religion into the NCF. It also=20
censored several existing textbooks - to promote Hindutva. NCERT's=20
syllabi and censored textbooks depict Hinduism as the "essence" of=20
India and other religions as "alien". Parts of them exclude Islam and=20
Sikhism from the list of "Major Religions".

In the NCERT-doctored textbooks, Vedic culture is made contemporary=20
with Harappan civilisation, although centuries separate them. History=20
is presented as a succession of dynasties. Twentieth-century=20
communalism is reduced to the Muslim League (as if Savarkar did not=20
father the Two-Nation Theory and the RSS did not exist). There is no=20
mention of the Hindu Mahasabha's collaboration with the British.

>From what I have read, there are analogous biases in Pakistani=20
textbooks too. Their "official" history jumps straight from Harappa=20
and Mohenjo-Daro to the next "real" civilisation, which "naturally"=20
begins with the "Islamic conquest" of Sindh. The intervening=20
"Buddhist" and "Hindu" periods are treated as pitiable voids or=20
aberrations. Scholars like K K Aziz and Mubarak Ali have exposed the=20
biases in such "history".

Pakistani civics textbooks too blatantly project "nation-building"=20
principles purportedly derived from patriarchical Islam.=20
Counterpoised to this is the contemptuous treatment of India as=20
"feminine", "weak" and "mean".

To return to India, a close, critical reading of the NCF should have=20
persuaded the Supreme Court to order its reformulation. But it did=20
not recognise the NCF's communal slant. It relied on a technicality -=20
that CABE is not a statutory body. But then, nor is NCERT. The=20
judgment is another blow to Indian secularism - barely six months=20
after the Gujarat pogrom.

There is a lesson in this for all South Asians. We cannot rely on=20
established institutions alone to guard the citizen's rights, nor to=20
combat stereotypes. We have to fight for our rights primarily on our=20
own. And that's going to be a long haul.

_____

#2

The Telegraph (India)
Thursday, September 26, 2002

MODI VERSUS INDIA
- Modi has become the symbol of the party=B9s new way forward

Mahesh Rangarajan

The author is an independent researcher and political analyst This=20
article was written prior to the attack on the Swaminarayan temple

A fortnight is a long time in politics. But it is enough to show how=20
far a ruling party out to win at all costs can stoop. It also reveals=20
the mood of panic in the Bharatiya Janata Party=B9s managers that=20
drives them to inculcate deeper divisions among the people at large.=20
The prime minister spoke in tones of compassion in New York. His own=20
party men, whether in Visavadar or Varanasi, New Delhi or Jammu=20
adopted a strident, unrepentant stance. One speaks of moderation; the=20
other advocates its polar opposite. There is a change in the wind,=20
and one that augurs ill for the country at large.

Leading the charge was the Hindu hriday samrat or ruler of the hearts=20
of Hindus, the chief minister of Gujarat. First came the scoop by a=20
news channel which broadcast audio tapes of Narendra Modi=B9s=20
controversial speech where he asked people to =B3teach a lesson=B2 to=20
those who have large families. To drive home the point, he explicitly=20
referred to ham paanch, hamare pachis, an allusion to Muslim families=20
which practise polygamy and have many offspring.

Coming as it did after weeks of attacks, and months of tardy relief=20
measures for the afflicted, this is spreading hatred among different=20
sections of the population. Not only is Modi unapologetic about the=20
massacres, he is penalizing honest officers in the police and=20
intelligence services who are simply doing their duty. Modi=B9s speech=20
in Besarji, Mehsana, one of the worst affected districts in the whole=20
state remained at the centre of the storm. But the national=20
commission for minorities dealt gingerly with the matter, careful not=20
to embarrass the ruling party in any way. Modi has toned down his=20
utterances but the message is clear.

Soon after strong denials of his choice of words, came the give away.=20
The Vishwa Hindu Parishad announced plans to distribute copies of the=20
audio in order to warn India and Indians in general and Hindus in=20
particular against the menace of minority inspired separatism.=20
Violence in deeds can now be backed up with open contravention of the=20
law of the land and by an elected head of a state government, no=20
less. In case there was any doubt, the high command of the party also=20
chipped in congratulating the chief minister on his success in=20
assuaging Gujarati pride and Hindu honour.

Where this is taking the party is clear as crystal. Atal Bihari=20
Vajpayee=B9s power is ebbing by the day. He is able to manoeuvre by=20
aligning with vocal lobbies like the newly formed bloc against=20
disinvestment. He strikes the right note at after dinner sessions and=20
parties abroad. But his grip over his party, never very firm, is now=20
loose. The second line of leaders is more strident, raring to go=20
ahead with the core ideology of the party and unencumbered by any=20
serious commitment to a common minimum programme. Vajpayee may be the=20
head but the body, heart, and mind are all way beyond the kind of=20
rhetoric first popularized by L.K. Advani in his rath yatra of 1990.

Yet, there is a difference. Old and experienced campaigner that he=20
was, the then party president was careful in his choice of words. He=20
never spoke of Muslims, only of =B3minority-ism=B2 and the =B3pseudo=20
secular=B2 creed. He took pains to avoid joining in slogans for the=20
demolition of the Babri Masjid, instead asking that the stone be=20
shifted to a new spot. But there is little doubt; he opened up the=20
political space for a more strident, even virulent, brand of=20
rhetoric. First it was the VHP with choice demagogues like Sadhvi=20
Rithambara. Now, it seems the dividing lines between the party and=20
the fraternal organizations are melting away.

At every place and on any occasion that presents itself, partymen=20
seize the initiative and propagate their own ideological agenda.=20
Being in power gives them the added advantage of having the state=20
machinery at their beck and call. Patronage of culture, education and=20
art are also useful levers in the service of the cause. In the=20
process, the party is opening up Pandora=B9s boxes to reap short-term=20
gains. It will have little control over the longer-term consequences,=20
which will be deeply damaging to the body politic and the integrity=20
of institutions.

Modi is not alone nor is he as exceptional as is often believed. In=20
the state assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir, the Rashtriya=20
Swayamsevak Sangh has even backed three rebel candidates of the Jammu=20
State Morcha against the official party candidates. Not even serving=20
ministers of the Union cabinet are immune from this tendency. In her=20
speeches in Jammu, the information and broadcasting minister, Sushma=20
Swaraj, said she saw =B3nothing wrong=B2 in the demand to divide the=20
state into three. This is in direct conflict with the proclaimed=20
policy of the government laid down in the house by the deputy prime=20
minister, L.K. Advani.

But the allies are divided, the opposition is still to get its act=20
together. The balance of forces in the country is slowly titling=20
against the ruling coalition on account of its non-performance. In=20
such a scenario, the appeal of ideology grows stronger by the hour.=20
And no one symbolizes or embodies this as well as Narendra Modi.=20
Having seen off a determined prime ministerial bid to oust him at the=20
Goa conclave in April, he has become a symbol of the new way forward.=20
Even his mass contact programme is cited as the model for the new=20
nationwide drive to reach out to the villages with the message of the=20
party.

Clear as the tilt is, the implications are deeply disturbing. A=20
speech of this sort by an elected official ought to attract=20
investigation, and possible filing of charges. There are enough rules=20
in the statute book against preaching such hatred. One thing is=20
clear. The party=B9s ability to hold such tendencies in check is=20
ebbing. It is not returning to its roots. More than that, it is=20
amplifying and playing on a message which is simple but chilling. A=20
polarized electorate and the politics of hate can be tried out.=20
Gujarat, as Ashok Singhal said, is site for an experiment, and the=20
aftermath of Godhra a test case. Make no mistake. It is not Muslims=20
or minorities, human rights advocates or the opposition whose future=20
is at stake. Such talk is as grave a threat to us all as the politics=20
of the late Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale.

It does more than =B3semitise Hinduism=B2 as S. Gurumurthy, the RSS=20
ideologue put it. It valorizes intolerance and celebrates violence=20
against innocents. It is no more exalted than the claims of Islamist=20
terrorists or the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam cadre who see an=20
enemy in each person who stands up to them. No wonder some of=20
Gujarat=B9s own well known religious figures have disassociated=20
themselves from the politics of =B3gaurav=B2, or pride, a misnomer if=20
there ever was one. It strikes at the heart of the idea of India. It=20
is not Modi versus Vajpayee: that is a political sideshow, crucial as=20
it may be. The real issue is Modi versus the spirit of the Union of=20
India. A troubling question and one all of us will have to come face=20
to face with, sooner rather than later.

_____

#3.

Joint Appeal for Peace
A condemnation of the terror attack on the Swaminarayan Temple

Sep 24, 2002
Cambridge, MA

"We, the volunteers of the undersigned organizations, are shocked and
horrified by the ghastly attack on the Akshardham temple in
Gandhinagar on the 24th of September. We are dismayed to learn that as
many as 30 people have been killed in this cowardly attack, and that
many other people have been injured. At this moment our hearts go out
to the families and friends of the innocent victims of yesterday's
mindless shootings. We share in their grief and pray that they find
the strength to overcome their loss.

The perpetrators of this reprehensible act must be apprehended and
swiftly brought to justice by a court of law; we urge the state to
move expeditiously on this count. We also call upon the Government of
Gujarat and the Central Government to take preventive measures to
quell further violence, and to maintain a strict and impartial calm
over the coming days, especially in view of the terrible violence over
recent months in Gujarat, from which the country has yet to recover.
Further, we urge all sections of the press to report on the current
incident in a truthful and non-inflammatory manner.

We fervently hope that the people of Gujarat and the rest of India
will maintain peace and harmony. We urge people from across the
country to form peace committees to guarantee the safety of their
neighbours of all communities. Only by remaining steadfastly united
can we, the people of India, foil the designs of the perpetrators of
violence."
Organizations/Individuals who agree to support the appeal

* Alliance For a Secular and Democratic South Asia
* Association for India's Development (AID) -Boston, USA
* Insaniyat, Boston, USA
* Sangam - Indian Students Association at MIT, Cambridge, USA
* South Asian Center, Boston, USA

_____

#4.

Date : 25/9/02
PRESS STATEMENT

The All India Democratic Women=B9s Association [AIDWA] strongly=20
condemns the terrorist attack in Swaminarayan Temple in Gandhinagar,=20
Gujarat in which more than thirty innocent people and children have=20
been killed and many others are severely injured. AIDWA expresses its=20
deep condolences to the family members of the victims of this outrage.
The AIDWA appeals to the people of Gujarat and particularly the women=20
of Gujarat to stand united against forces that seek to further the=20
deepen communal divide in Gujarat. Inhuman attacks such as these=20
that target innocent people and do not even spare children can have=20
no justification whatsoever.
The AIDWA demands that the Central Government and the State=20
Government of Gujarat take proper measures to ensure that peace and=20
harmony are maintained, particularly in view of the call for Bharat=20
bandh given by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad that had been the signal for=20
widescale violence post Godhra.

Brinda Karat
General Secretary

_____

#5.

Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:15:44 +0530 (IST)
Subject: Statement on Terrorist attack on Swaminarayan temple

From
Prof. Ram Puniyani
Secretary EKTA, Committee for Communal Amity
Mumbai

The attack on Swaminaarayan mandir in Gandhi Nagar by terrorists deserves
severest of condemnation. Such insane actions are adding salt to the
injuries of Gujarati community. One must remember that these terrorists do
not represent any community, and they are the worst enemies of the
community they presume they are representing. Most of the Muslim
leadership has severely condemned this crime. It is not the time to have
bandhs but efforts which will act as balm to the wounds of Gujarat. Here
one recalls the tragic incidents of Mumbai riots (92-93) when riots, were
followed by the bomb blasts, which further aggravated the agony of the
community. What Gujarat needs a healing touch, which is not possible so
far as Mr. Modi continues to spew venom against the minorities through the
speeches being made during his 'Gaurav' Rath yatra. Such actions of his
are intimidating the weaker sections of society. Elements from amongst the
threatened community are likely to resort to insane actions more often.
Mr. Modi who has been the major defaulter in the Gujarat violence must be
sacked forthwith to restore the faith of people in the democratic norms.

_____

#6.

Subject: Public Forum on Gujarat in UCSD San Diego, Sept 28, 2002 at 4:30pm

Please attend this important public meeting. Please circulate widely among
your lists.

Insaaniyat not Insanity!

AID San Diego and Amnesty International San Diego are organizing a
discussion panel on September 28th, 2002 regarding the communal violence in
Gujarat

Gujarat Communal Violence - Towards communal harmony through constructive
dialogue

A joint effort by the San Diego chapters of Association for India's
Development and Amnesty International

When? September 28th 2002 at 4.30PM

Where? Cross Cultural Center, University of California San Diego

Directions: The Cross Cultural Center is located between the Literature
Building and Visual Arts facility, off Lyman lane on the UCSD campus in La
Jolla

>From I-5/I-805 take the exit on to La Jolla Village Drive and go West on i=
t
Turn right on Villa La Jolla Dr
Villa La Jolla Drive ends at Gilman Drive and at the junction you will find
the Gilman Parking Structure. Please park there
The parking structure is located at the corner of Gilman Drive and Russel
Lane. Walk down Russel lane till it meets Lyman Lane
Right onto Lyman lane. The Cross Cultural Center is on the left

Agenda:
Screening of "Hey Ram" a documentary by Gopal Menon

An open constructive dialogue chaired by three eminent panelists

Dr. Dipak Gupta: Professor of Political Science at SDSU. He is also the
Co-Director of the Institute for International Security and Conflict
Resolution (IISCOR) and a Research Associate of Fred J. Hansen Institute fo=
r
World Peace. Also, between 1998-2001, he held the first Fred J. Hansen Chai=
r
of Peace Studies. His research interest involves the causes of ethnic
violence, genocide and civil wars. He has also written extensively on the
devastating impacts of political instability on nations' economic growth. H=
e
has consulted with The Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the United Nation=
s
Terrorism Prevention Division, California Civil Rights Commissioner, USAID,
US Institute for Peace among others.

Dr. Rosemary George: Associate Professor of English Literature and Director
of Critical Gender Studies, UCSD. She is the author of The Politics of Home
and Burning down the House: Recycling domesticity. Her current research and
teaching interests are in Diaspora Studies with an emphasis on issues of
gender, culture and immigration.

Dr. Huma Ahmed Ghosh: Professor, Department of Women's Studies, SDSU.
Professor Ghosh has 10 years experience in teaching graduate and
undergraduate level Anthropology, Women Studies, and Asian Studies courses
pertaining to gender relations in Asia and international development. She
conducted research in India on the impact of agricultural development on
rural women and the status of women in the handicraft industry. Her current
research is on cultural adaptation strategies of immigrant Muslim women in
Southern California and on Islam and feminism.She is also interested in
identity formation of Asian Americans in the United States. More recently,
she is working on the history of women in Afghanistan.

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

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