[sacw] SACW | 25 June 02

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire Dispatch | 25 June 2002

South Asia Citizens Web:
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex

South Asians Against Nukes:
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/NoNukes.html

__________________________

#1. A South Asian charter of human rights (Ishtiaq Ahmed)
#2. Medico Friend Circle, PUCL Vadodara & Shanti Abhiyan to release=20
their investigative reports on the
Gujarat pogrom (New Delhi, 25 June)
#3. Protect Free Speech - online petition re Filmmaker Patwardhan's=20
"War and Peace"
#4. PUCL (Gujarat) & Shanti Abhiyan, Vadodara to release reports on=20
Gujarat (Bombay, 25 June)
#5. Stop another carnage (Jaya Shrivastava, Aman Ekta Manch, Delhi)
#6. Hindutva vs Hinduism (AG Noorani)
#7. Support the Citizens Initiative Fund Raising Efforts for Riot=20
Relief in Gujarat
#8. Politics after Gujarat (Rajmohan Gandhi )
__________________________

#1.

The Daily Times (Lahore)
June 24, 2002 Main News

Op-ed: A South Asian charter of human rights

Ishtiaq Ahmed
Religion is an important factor in individual and collective=20
identity. This fact needs to be handled in a principled but firm=20
manner. Thus, while respect for religion should be the standard=20
policy of all the states, opposition to oppression in the name of=20
religion should be equally categorica
Modern human rights theory is based on the premise that peace in=20
society, between states and regions, and on the world level is=20
dependent upon respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual=20
and, by that token, also of the special rights of historically=20
disadvantaged social and cultural groups. Under article 1-3, member=20
states of the United Nations are committed to respecting the human=20
rights of their people. It is therefore logical that a universally=20
applicable standard of rights should be maintained and respected.
However, whereas human rights should be seen as universal claims of=20
individuals, their enjoyment in practice is always dependent upon=20
differing contexts and local conditions. At present there are three=20
regional arrangements: the European Convention for the Protection of=20
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Eight Protocols (1950);=20
the American Convention of Human Rights (1969); and the African=20
Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (1986). A fourth arrangement is=20
cultural rather than regional. It is the Arab Charter of Human Rights=20
of 1994 which is open for members of the Arab League from both Asia=20
and Africa.
Asia does not maintain a continental arrangement, most probably=20
because here the diversity of cultures, historical experiences as=20
well as differences in levels of economic development and ideological=20
systems are much greater. Perhaps it is more practical to think in=20
terms of sub-continental arrangements for Asia. It should not be=20
difficult to appreciate that South Asia is geographically and=20
culturally a distinct region and therefore a proper unit for a=20
charter of human rights.
It would be worthwhile converting the SAARC framework into a peace=20
project that would integrate South Asian states into a common human=20
rights framework. Although the cooperation of the states in the=20
region would be imperative for such a project to succeed, its=20
ultimate strength would lie in the ability of civil society to play=20
an active and leading role. Concerned South Asian scholars, human=20
rights activists, philanthropists, lawyers, retired government=20
servants and other enlightened members of civil society will have to=20
be mobilised to carry out joint actions to impress upon their=20
governments the importance of a South Asian Charter of Human Rights.=20
The following points should be considered when framing such a charter.
1. The cultural relativist refrain against the universalistic claims=20
of the present UN package of human rights is loud and shrill and=20
heard in many parts of the world. However, as far as I know, the=20
cultural relativists have invariably failed to develop any=20
philosophically and logically consistent alternative framework of=20
human rights. Much of what is presented under titles such as=20
'Hinduism and Human Rights' and 'Islamic Charter of Universal Human=20
Rights' are often heroic exercises in apologia, because a=20
pre-requisite of human rights theory is that the individual should be=20
free to make his/her moral and political choices. Religiously derived=20
human rights arguments never concede such freedom to the individual=20
and are therefore inappropriate as a basis for human rights.
2. Religion is an important factor in individual and collective=20
identity. This fact needs to be handled in a principled but firm=20
manner. Thus, while respect for religion should be the standard=20
policy of all the states, opposition to oppression in the name of=20
religion should be equally categorical. More importantly, rather than=20
human rights being subjected to cultural relativist restrictions, the=20
enlightened scholars of each religion should be encouraged to develop=20
a culturally authentic argument for the acceptance and adoption of=20
universal human rights. Therefore, all religions have to be reformed=20
in a direction that makes them compatible with human rights. Both=20
believers and non-believers should enjoy equal and similar human=20
rights as citizens of a state. The attempt should be to promote an=20
inclusive model of citizenship so that women, ethnic and religious=20
minorities and the depressed classes and castes can assert their=20
equal rights in a fearless manner.
3. We have to begin with the fact that Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism,=20
Islam, Sikhism, and Christianity - all have left their mark on the=20
South Asian society. Besides these religious influences, South Asia=20
has one of the oldest traditions of rationalism, and modern=20
philosophical outlooks, such as liberalism and Marxism, also enjoy=20
wide support among the politically conscious sections of society.=20
Such grand variety requires accommodation of diversity but within an=20
egalitarian framework of pluralism. In this regard, the question of=20
tolerance becomes paramount to a South Asian Charter of Human Rights.=20
Hitherto, the vanquished in South Asia were placed in some form of=20
permanent subordination, caste-wise or along lines of religion, and=20
then degraded but 'tolerated' as an inferior entity. The equality of=20
all human beings would need a special emphasis.
4. A South Asian Court of Human Rights should be constituted. The=20
idea of a court of human rights is imperative for a proper monitoring=20
of human rights. Jurists and lawyers of impeccable moral conduct and=20
high learning from each state should be selected to serve on such a=20
court. It should be possible for both private individuals and states=20
to bring complaints about human rights violation against another=20
state. The normal procedure of exhaustion of local remedies should,=20
of course, be followed. This means that the complaint should first go=20
to the domestic legal system. If redress is not found because of=20
government obstruction or the weakness of the judiciary or any other=20
such domestic factor, then there should be the possibility to seek=20
redress from the South Asian Court of Human Rights. If such a court=20
is truly independent of the various governments, the chances of=20
supervision and monitoring of human rights in the whole region can=20
become much more efficient. It may even facilitate the evolution of=20
similar or even identical laws in the whole region. SAARC member=20
states should automatically accept the jurisdiction of the South=20
Asian Court of Human Rights.
In the longer run the South Asian states may agree upon free movement=20
of goods, capital, labour and people. Borders may remain, but more as=20
symbols of identity and the past. The opposite of all this is also=20
possible. Wars, fuelled by nationalist and religious hatred, may=20
plunge the whole region deep into the pit of ignorance. But the=20
survivors of that tragedy will still have to find ways and means of=20
living together in peace and dignity.
The author is an associate professor of Political Science at=20
Stockholm University. He has authored two books and written=20
extensively for various newspapers and journals

_____

#2.

24 Jun 2002 16:19:30 +0530
Subject: Press conference
From: sarojini <samasaro@g...>

Dear friends,

This is to inform you that members of Medico Friend Circle, PUCL Vadodara
and Shanti Abhiyan would like to release their investigative reports on th=
e
Gujarat pogrom, share their expereinces, concerns and voice the demands.

The release is scheduled for 25th June, the eve of anti-emergency day, at 3
pm. The venue is - Women's Press Corps, 5 Windsor Place (near Meridian
hotel), New Delhi Phone 3325366.

The reports to be released are:

1. VIOLENCE IN VADODARA: A REPORT' by the PUCL Vadodara,
2. 'AT THE RECEIVING END: Women's Experiences of Violence in Vadodara' by
the Vadodara Shanti Abhiyan
3. 'CARNAGE IN GUJARAT- A Public Health Crisis' by the Medico Friends
Circle

Members of Medico Friend Circle conducted an investigation of the health
impact of the carnage in Gujarat. The report titled 'Carnage in Gujarat- A
Public Health Crisis' looks into the health conditions in the relief camps=
,
state of medical relief, provision of services to survivors in the public
hospitals, issues of medical ethics and the barriers to treatment faced b=
y
the victims of violence, medico-legal issues, attacks on medical
professionals, impact on health professionals, issues of mental health and
counselling and the essential needs for rehabilitation.

PUCL-Vadodara and Shanti Abhiyan fact-finding teams investigated incidents
of violence in different areas of the city and surrounding villages. The
area reports describe events in areas in and around Vadodara based on
interviews with victims in their own localities and in relief camps; detail=
s
from claim forms; depositions before the Citizens' Tribunal which held
hearings in Vadodara; and interviews with Hindu neighbours of victims and
residents of different areas.

Apart from the area reports, the report presents history of communal
violence in Vadodara, role of police and media, women's experiences, relied
and rehabilitation packages. It also lists names of those accused as
perpetrators including the police and political leaders.

'At The Receiving End, Women's Experiences of Violence' highlights the
police atrocities on women of the minority community of Vadodara through
the period of February end till mid May 2002. It also brings out certain
recurrent themes that emerged from women's testimonies. Women's demands as
well as PUCL-Shanti Abhiyan's recommendations for justice are presented.
Selected testimonies included in the report give an idea of the range of
experiences that the women went through.

The speakers will include - Shri Jagdishbhai Shah- the well known
Sarvodaya leader and President of Gujarat Sarvodaya Mandal, Renu Khanna of
PUCL, also an active member of SAHAJ (Society for Health Alternatives) an=
d
Medico Friend Circle, from Vadodara; Dr. Ritu Priya, Centre for Social
Medicine and Community Health (JNU), member of MFC and NB Sarojini,
Convenor MFC and an active member of Sama Health Forum, Delhi.

We request you to be a part of the press release and the public meeting.

Sincerely

N.B Sarojini Renu Khanna
Convenor PUCL Shanti Abhiy=
an
Medico Friend Circle Baroda
Phone 6968972, 6562401 Phone: 0265 -340223
samasaro@n... chinu@w...

_____

#3.

PROTECT FREE SPEECH:
FILMMAKER PATWARDHAN'S "WAR AND PEACE"
--------------------------------------

Renowned Indian filmmaker Anand Patwardhan's latest
award-winning documentary "War and Peace" is facing
obstacles once again by the Indian Censor Board, who
are actively obstructing screenings in India. This
film brilliantly documents Indo-Pak tensions after
1998 nuclear test explosions and peace efforts on both
sides.

The Censor board has been proactively stopping private
screenings despite prior permission and is intent on
delaying censor certification and has prescribed many
ridiculous and outrageous cuts. These include the
diktat: "Delete the entire sequence with visuals and
dialogue spoken by Dalit leader" and "Delete the
visuals and dialogues of entire tehelka episode
wherever it occurs in the film" and "Delete the entire
visuals and dialogues spoken by Political Leaders
including the Minister and Prime Minister."

Please sign an online petition in support of the film
and forward to friends who may be willing to sign.

http://www.petitionOnline.com/ekta_wp/petition.html

More details at: http://www.ektaonline.org/patwardhan/

------------------TEXT OF PETITION-----------------
To: The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting,
India

Re: PROTECT FREE SPEECH: FILMMAKER PATWARDHAN'S "WAR
AND PEACE"

We, the undersigned, wish to bring to your notice our
deep concern about the plight of Anand Patwardhan's
award-winning documentary "War and Peace" submitted
over a month ago for certification to the Censor
Board. We urge you to take speedy measures to release
the film to the general public without any further
delay.

"War and Peace" is a three-hour long documentary that
has won several awards, including two major awards at
the recently concluded 7th Mumbai International Film
Festival, an event organized by the Films Division of
India (FDI), a governmental body that falls under
your purview.

The film's message of peace and religious tolerance
acts like a soothing balm in a world today that is
deeply fractured by the politics of hatred and
violence. In view of the horror in Gujarat and the
dangers of nuclear catastrophe, there is an urgent
need to build peace both within the country and
without.

Given the enormous significance of the film in the
context, we are indeed astounded that the Censor Board
appears to be delaying the film's release instead of
taking all possible steps to expedite it and arrange
for its widest distribution.

While, according to official admission, the film has
not been banned, censor board officials have been
proactively stopping private screenings of "War and
Peace" even in such cases where prior permission was
obtained for the screening. For instance the FDI
obtained special permission from May 31st in Kolkata
to screen award winning films regardless of whether
these had censor certificates. The screening was
however blocked and the organizers, obviously under
pressure from above, insisted that a copy of the film
"hadn't arrived", even though a signed receipt
disproves their claim.

After the examining committee saw the film on June 6,
Patwardhan was not given a chance to meet the
examiners on the pretext that "there was no consensus"
in the group. The following week he was issued a
notice to cut many portions of the film. These include
the diktat: "Delete the entire sequence with visuals
and dialogue spoken by Dalit leader" and "Delete the
visuals and dialogues of entire tehelka episode
wherever it occurs in the film" and "Delete the entire
visuals and dialogues spoken by Political Leaders
including the Minister and Prime Minister."

These are astonishing demands that cut at the very
roots of democracy. Our right to freedom of expression
and our right to information are protected under the
constitution.

We find these actions of the Censor Board to be
unbelievable and deeply disturbing. We urge you to
take immediate steps to arrange for the speedy release
of the film without cuts.

Sincerely,

Please sign petition at
http://www.petitionOnline.com/ekta_wp/petition.html

_____

#4.

June 24, 2002

Dear Friends,

We invite you for the release of two reports concerning the recent=20
communal carnage at Gujarat by Justice Hosbet Suresh (Retd.).

The reports have been brought out by PUCL (Gujarat) & Shanti Abhiyan,=20
Vadodara. The first report focuses on the communal carnage at=20
Vadodara and the second report deals specifically with the atrocities=20
on women during this carnage.

PUCL and Shanti Abhiyan have been actively involved in the=20
preventive, relief and rehabilitation aspects arising out of the=20
carnage.

The meeting will be also addressed by J. Manjrekar and Trupti Shah=20
who are members of the above organisations and by Najma Sheikh, who=20
was an eyewitness to some of the incidents.

The meeting is coorganised with Insaniyat, a coalition of groups and=20
individuals fighting for secularism in Mumbai.

Venue : Mumbai Marathi Patrakar Sangh, Patrakar Bhavan, Azad Maidan,=20
Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai - 400 001

Date : June 25, 2002 (Tuesday)

Time : 4.00 p.m. - 5.30 p.m.

For further details contact Amarjit Singh at 3759657 / 3716690

Sincerely,

Mihir Desai

_____

#5.

The Hindustan Times
Tuesday, June 25, 2002
Letters to the Editor=20
Stop another carnage

We are concerned about the safety of Muslims in Gujarat, already=20
terrorised and humiliated beyond endurance, on the occasion of the=20
rath yatra scheduled to take place in Ahmedabad on July 12. The yatra=20
has for many years been used by the VHP to parade its hate-filled=20
version of 'Hindutva' and provocatively routed with violent slogans=20
through Muslim localities. This year the yatra promises to be more=20
bloody than ever before, particularly in the light of Ashok Singhal's=20
threat at the VHP Margdarshak Mandal on June 22 that Indian Muslims=20
will henceforth have to live in refugee camps as in Gujarat.

A police officer in Ahmedabad told a Delhi women's organisation that=20
with 300,000 VHP activists on the roads, the police apprehend=20
uncontrollable violence. Is Gujarat still a part of India or, as VHP=20
boards proclaim in Ahmedabad, the 'Gujarat Pradesh of Hindu Rashtra'?=20
That this not a question of simple 'faith' is evident from the fact=20
that the head priest of Puri's Jagannath temple has disassociated=20
himself from the yatra.

We call upon all forces committed to the defence and survival of=20
democracy to move in concert to stop another mass massacre.

Jaya Shrivastava, Aman Ekta Manch, Delhi

_____

#6.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/250602/detide01.asp
The Hindustan Times
Tuesday, June 25, 2002
Op-Ed.

Hindutva vs Hinduism
AG Noorani

Each in his own way, Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Lal Krishna Advani have=20
justified the worst fears of what lay in store for the nation were=20
the BJP to win power and belied the hopes of those who thought that,=20
under their leadership, the BJP would "moderate", that is loosen, if=20
not cut, its umbilical cord with the RSS and become a national party.=20
The duo's reaction to the attacks on Christians since 1998, to the=20
Staines' murder, and to the Gujarat pogrom revealed them in their=20
true colours. Their recent statements on Savarkar and Hindutva dispel=20
all doubt.

The contrasting styles explain why people were deceived for so long.=20
Advani was forthright but adroit. Vajpayee was cleverly ambiguous.=20
The message was identical - they are Savarkar's Hindutvaites.

Vajpayee praised Savarkar while releasing a book on Bhagat Singh who=20
broke with his mentor, Lala Lajpat Rai, on Hindu communalism. On=20
March 27, he said that "when Swami Vivekananda speaks of Hindutva,=20
nobody can call him a communalist". But some "defined Hindutva in=20
such a manner that it is better to keep a distance from it".

The truth, of course, is that Swami Vivekananda did not speak of=20
Hindutva but of the profundities of Hinduism. It was V.D. Savarkar=20
who coined the word Hindutva in 1923 to propagate a cult of hate.=20
Hinduism is noble and ancient. It teaches man the very technique of=20
Self-Realisation. Hindutva is modern and ignoble. It debases man by=20
arousing his worst emotions, hatred and fear.

Vajpayee tried once again to square the circle on May 6 saying, "I=20
accept the Hindutva of Swami Vivekananda. But the kind of Hindutva=20
being propagated now is wrong and one should be wary of it." This=20
style is typical of the man. Vajpayee knows that Vivekananda never=20
spoke of Hindutva. He distances himself from Hindutva without=20
repudiating it and falsely attributes the ideology to Vivekananda.

Advani bared his outlook and style at Port Blair on May 4. "There is=20
no reason to feel shy of Hindutva, propounded at great length by Veer=20
Savarkar. It's an all-encompassing ideology with its roots in the=20
country's heritage." Not for him the gloss of Vivekananda. "We must=20
remember that the pioneers of Hindutva like Veer Savarkar and RSS=20
founder Hedgewar kindled fierce, nationalistic spirit that=20
contributed to India's liberation." In a dig at Vajpayee he asserted:=20
"There is no need to redefine Hindutva." Its propagation in Gujarat=20
did not create an atmosphere of mistrust which led to the carnage.=20
"Our views on Hindutva are held against us as if we have done=20
something terrible."

That, the BJP has. It is set to do much worse. It is re-writing=20
history to depict the RSS, a rabidly communal force which opposed the=20
freedom movement and supported the British during the Quit India=20
movement, as nationalists. It is determined to use State power to=20
change the moral and intellectual climate of India.

As Dr B.R. Purohit's work Hindu Revivalism and Indian Nationalism=20
ably points out, "With the growth of Mahasabha and RSS ideologies, a=20
new current of nationalism - the Hindu Nationalism - grew powerful in=20
the country. Hindu nationalism, instead of supplementing the forces=20
of Indian nationalism, tried even to supplant it. The opposition of=20
Indian nationalism by 'Hindu Rashtravad' was detrimental to the=20
steady growth of the former=8A The two nationalisms, as Dr Beni Prasad=20
puts it - the Hindu and the Indian - were fundamentally in opposition=20
to each other with respect to their ideals."

In his pamphlet Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? published in 1923, Savarkar=20
emphasised that "Hindutva is not identical with what is vaguely=20
indicated by the term Hinduism". There is "a clear line of=20
demarcation between the two =8A Hindutva is not identical with Hindu=20
Dharma; nor is Hindu Dharma identical with Hinduism."

Its publishers, S.S. Savarkar wrote in the preface: "Veer Savarkar=20
had to coin some new words such as 'Hindutva'=8A" Vajpayee has said=20
that RSS supremo M.S. Golwalkar's We Or Our Nationhood Defined (1938)=20
was "withdrawn". Golwalkar acknowledged that Savarkar's book Rashtra=20
Meemansa was "one of my chief sources of inspiration". An application=20
by the RSS to the district judge, Nagpur, signed by Rajendra Singh=20
and Bhaurao Deoras in 1978, criticised Gandhi and the Congress and=20
swore by the book We (Para 10) as well as Golwalkar's Bunch of=20
Thoughts (Para 7). The latter rejects "Territorial Nationalism"=20
(Chapter X), espouses "Cultural Nationalism" and brands (Ch. XII)=20
Muslims, Christians and communists as "Internal Threats".

The BJP's founder, S.P. Mookerjee, was finance minister in the League=20
ministry headed by Fazlul Haq ("loyalty to my leader"). His party was=20
also in coalition with the League in Sind. Mookerjee advised the=20
governor "how to combat this 'Quit India' movement in Bengal".=20
Savarkar himself wrote abject apologies and assurances to the British.

Morarji Desai was no devotee of the Nehru family. In February 1979,=20
he declared the jail complex in Port Blair a national memorial but=20
studiously ignored Savarkar. Why?

He had, as home minister of Bombay, assigned his police and his=20
advocate-general, the celebrated C.K. Daphtary, to the prosecution=20
inter alia of Savarkar in the Gandhi murder conspiracy case. Asked by=20
Savarkar's lawyer, L.B. Bhopatkar, on August 24, 1948: "Did you have=20
any other information about Savarkar besides Prof. Jain's statement=20
for directing steps to be taken as regards him?", Desai replied:=20
"Shall I give the full facts?" The question was swiftly withdrawn.

Savarkar was acquitted only because the approver, Digmber Badge's=20
evidence, which damned him, did not have independent corroboration as=20
the law requires. But Judge Atma Charan accepted Badge as a truthful=20
witness. "He gave his version of the facts in a direct and=20
straight-forward manner. He did not evade cross-examination or=20
attempt to evade or fence with any question." His version was that on=20
January 17, he went with Godse and accomplice Narayan Apte to=20
Savarkar's home and that he heard Savarkar, while bidding them=20
farewell, declaim "Yashasvi houn ya (be successful and come)". On the=20
way back, Apte told Badge that Savarkar had predicted that=20
"Gandhiji's 100 years were over - there was no doubt that that work=20
would be successfully finished=8A"

If a person charged with conspiracy to murder one's friend is=20
acquitted on a similar ground, would one shake hands with him? Gandhi=20
was no ordinary mortal. Godse hailed Savarkar in the court as the=20
"most faithful advocate of the Hindu cause". The BJP's election=20
manifestoes of 1996 and 1998 extolled Hindutva and Vajpayee and=20
Advani have high praise for its author, Savarkar. Vivekananda would=20
have despised him and his Hindutva.

In a perceptive essay entitled Swami Vivekananda's Construction of=20
Hinduism, Prof Tapan Raychaudhuri, Emeritus Professorial Fellow, St.=20
Antony's College, Oxford, recalled that "he was among the earliest=20
nationalist thinkers to claim the Indo-Islamic past as part of the=20
Indian heritage". He noted with disgust that "the VHP has the=20
audacity to claim him as their own". The scholar remarked, "It is=20
difficult to imagine him as the ideological ancestor of people who=20
incite the ignorant to destroy other people's places of worship in a=20
revanchist spirit."

_____

#7.

Support the Citizens Initiative Fund Raising Efforts for Riot Relief=20
in Gujarat
http://www.insaniyat.org/ad/ad.htm

_____

#8.

http://www.hindu.com/stories/2002062500051000.htm
The Hindu, June 25, 2002
Opinion
Politics after Gujarat

By Rajmohan Gandhi

Let the Congress and the Left attempt a partnership in the States and=20
at the Centre and form a front that would exert a gravitational pull=20
on the regional parties.

GHASTLY HAPPENINGS may at times create an unexpected opening, and=20
Gujarat's unveiling of the callous face of the Hindu right, which=20
should properly be called the un-Hindu right, may have done just=20
that. That face has caused minds to tick in the Congress, in the Left=20
parties, in several regional parties - and most significantly in the=20
large unaligned segment of Indian opinion (in all castes and classes)=20
that judges events as they take place. And while the unveiling has=20
clearly been accompanied by some emboldening in sections of the Sangh=20
Parivar, others in that Parivar or sympathising with it also seem to=20
have joined the ranks of the perturbed.

Gujarat's BJP Government, which did not protect the lives, honour and=20
properties of the innocent, continues to cover up its complicity,=20
refuses to enter rapes, murders and arsons on its registers, and of=20
course refuses to book the murderers, rapists and arsonists. It=20
refuses even to admit that something shameful happened after Godhra.

What happened in Gujarat may happen elsewhere; what happened to=20
innocent and helpless Muslims may happen to innocent and helpless=20
non-Muslims. Flashing across many minds, this thought has the=20
potential to unite many if not most non-BJP parties. The Abdul Kalam=20
episode has no doubt provided a distraction from this thought, and=20
from a crucial corollary of that thought, which is that safety of=20
life and secularism are two sides of the same coin. The Kalam=20
question seems also to have produced a unity of all non-Left parties,=20
including the BJP, for a specific purpose and moment. But the=20
diverting Kalam episode will soon be over, and the worry about the=20
safety and honour of the weak, unprotected and innocent women and men=20
of India will return to haunt the BJP.

And to provide an opening to the others. Of course, the task of=20
bringing together the Congress, the Left and a significant chunk of=20
the regional parties is exceedingly tough. The past divisions (those=20
over the Emergency and over V.P. Singh's departure from the Congress=20
were some of the sharpest) linger. There are differences on economic=20
policies. There is the hard challenge of power-sharing, especially in=20
States where the chief rivalry is between the Congress and the Left=20
or between the Congress and a regional party.

Yet, Gujarat has provided an impulse to overcome these hurdles. The=20
coming weeks and months will show whether the political leadership=20
spread across the Congress, the Left and the regional spectrum has=20
the wisdom to take advantage of the impulse.

This required wisdom can be broken down into four components. One,=20
political judgment - the ability to recognise a moment pregnant with=20
possibilities. Two, the good sense to acknowledge past and present=20
realities. (Thus, Congressmen can acknowledge that the Emergency=20
alienated many patriotic Indians, and non-Congress secular parties=20
can acknowledge that the Congress is needed for saving India from the=20
narrowness of the un-Hindu right.) Three, the patience and acumen to=20
negotiate win-win compromises among parties that have fought bitter=20
battles in the past. Four, a statesmanlike skill for using a=20
psychological moment to bring in elements long missing from the=20
Indian political scene.

For instance, an understanding that a Government's task in India is=20
not to set communities or castes against one another but to address=20
the need of citizens of all castes and religions for water,=20
electricity, roads, school and medicine.

In other words, the fight to protect every Indian's life can also be=20
a fight to better that life. Is it too much to ask the Congress, the=20
Left and regional parties to join hands to help India reach such a=20
goal, and to prevent the possibility of Gujarat repeating itself=20
there or anywhere else?

Yet, even this will not be enough. Any new Indian politics of secular=20
and democratic unity will have to extend its concern to the=20
subcontinent as a whole. Its ultimate goal will have to include the=20
defence and improvement of life in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri=20
Lanka and Bhutan as well.

The Congress, the Left, and their regional partners in the alliance=20
projected above cannot of course afford to drop the country's guard.=20
Hostility from neighbours will have to be firmly dealt with. But=20
politics after Gujarat can encourage a people-to-people as well as a=20
Government-to-Government effort for better relations on the=20
subcontinent, and aim for a gradual and measured transfer of the=20
subcontinent's resources from war machines to schools, hospitals and=20
roads, a transfer based on verifiable agreements and undertaken for=20
the sake of the deprived masses of Pakistan, Bangladesh and India.

Perhaps I am being unrealistic. Perhaps I am over-impressed by=20
history's examples, such as Churchill's success in mobilising against=20
the Nazis the numerous Britons raised for years on the belief that=20
communism and the Soviet Union constituted the main menace to=20
Britain. Perhaps I am a dreamer uncorrected by experience or age or=20
by the evidence of what interests middle-class Indians in a=20
globalised, TV-crazy, movie-mad, cell-phoning age. Perhaps I am too=20
attached to an inherited preference for a relaxed, confident and=20
tolerant Hinduism.

Perhaps I have been excessively affected by the charring, quartering=20
and raping of individuals in Gujarat and by the inaction over Gujarat=20
of Messrs. Vajpayee and Advani, and unduly influenced by the=20
appraisal of some that Gujarat has been a watershed event. The merely=20
modest possibility of a subcontinental nuclear clash may also have=20
swayed me.

If so I can hope to strike a chord with others with similar hearts or=20
stomachs. To the rest, I make a limited, cold, practical and yet=20
difficult suggestion. Let the Congress and the Left treat Gujarat as=20
a reason for abandoning pre-Gujarat animosities, and also for=20
overcoming the misunderstanding created by the Kalam episode. Let=20
them attempt a partnership in the States and at the Centre and form a=20
front that would exert a gravitational pull on the regional parties.

But what about the risk of provoking the Hindutva right? Is it not=20
possible that the latter would respond with more of what was done and=20
not done in Gujarat? This is indeed possible, although a fight for=20
the safety of the innocent may also appeal to a few within the Sangh=20
Parivar, especially when waged on behalf of every Indian.

Still, the hazard of provoking the others is real. What should be=20
added is that the hazard of not standing up is immensely greater.=20
Those with doubts on this score should consult any book on the course=20
of events in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. They may also profitably=20
study how in the 1980s and 1990s religious extremism grew in=20
Afghanistan and Pakistan.

--=20
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

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.
\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|=
//\\|//|//\\|//