[sacw] SACW | 27 Dec. 02

[aiindex <aiindex@mnet.fr>]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 27 December 2002

__________________________

#1. How terror feeds terror (Praful Bidwai)
#2. Fight Hindutva head-on (Praful Bidwai)
#3. Puja at the Qutub Minar (Rajeev Dhavan)
#4. Communal crimes and punishment (Editorial - The Hindu)
#5. The Worst Case Scenario - Gujarat should compel thoughts about salvaging the nation? integrity (Ashok Mitra)
#6. Spur Secularism in India ( Editorial - Los Angeles Times )
#7. Ayodhya - Invented symbol
It was employed with great acumen to mobilise negative feelings towards Muslims (Mushirul Hasan)

__________________________

#1.

The News International, December 27, 2002

How terror feeds terror

Praful Bidwai

Recent events suggest that the militancy in Jammu and Kashmir has taken a particularly vicious turn. Little children have been pitilessly targeted and killed and women who refuse to wear burqas beheaded. Some 80 children have reportedly been murdered in Kashmir during the past eight months-some, like the three killed earlier this week, in their sleep. It is utterly revolting to suggest that this campaign of murder has anything to do with any "freedom struggle" or Kashmiri "alienation". Apologists for such acts of extreme brutality can only discredit themselves in the eyes of the Kashmiris.

It is probably no accident that barbaric and cruel methods are being used just when the fledgling Mufti Mohammed Sayeed government is trying to release political prisoners, reduce tensions and begin a process of healing.

Most people of Kashmir seem to hope that Sayeed will succeed. At minimum, they at least want to give his coalition government a chance. There are at least two groupings that don't: the BJP's Islamophobic Right wing, and Pakistan's diehard anti-India conservatives. Both are doing their utmost to scupper and sabotage reconciliation and dialogue in J&K.

BJP leaders have spared no opportunity from Day One to attack Mufti's "healing touch" policy, maligning it as "terrorist-friendly". They have become especially strident after the Raghunath temple attack in Jammu, which they dishonestly and cynically link to the release of political prisoners. The Pakistan-based supporters and handlers of some of those involved in the recent spate of killings have behaved no less cynically.

These terrible developments are taking place just when the BJP's Right wing is triumphant following the Gujarat victory-literally on a pile of corpses. The BJP's national executive meeting of December 23-24 has concluded the Gujarat verdict is "a mandate for the Hindutva ideology" and a rejection of secularism.

The BJP's strategy in the coming elections in several Indian states is to "replicate the Gujarat experience"-that is, polarise the electorate along religious lines. It will try aggressively to capitalise on "terrorism" in India and the world by equating Hindutva with "the forces of nationalism", and suggesting that Hindutva's opponents are "soft" on terrorism.

Party president M Venkaiah Naidu has persuaded himself that the BJP's success in Gujarat was premised as much on the "terrorism" platform as upon communal violence: "As the Gujarat election process peaked, national perceptions crystallised on the central issues of terrorism and extremism ... Our political adversaries were rightly recognised as willing to compromise on national interests ... The people ... had been watching the country being bled by terrorists ... Gujarat elections offered an opportunity to effectively articulate their concerns on these larger issues..." This they did by voting for the BJP, feels Naidu.

The point is not whether Naidu is right or wrong, but that the BJP will target its appeal in the near future specifically to a section of the Hindu middle class, particularly its opinion-shaping segment, which has become acutely preoccupied with terrorism. I have deliberately (but unusually for me) used official and conservative sources to highlight this phenomenon.

This preoccupation arises partly from the recent attacks on temples (Akshardham and Raghunath mandir) and the numerous terrorist episodes since December 13, in which some 60 people were killed, a majority of them Hindu civilians, largely outside the Valley. Taufiq Subhan attributes this partly to September 11, after which "a new international framework has emerged which demonises the Muslim globally". (Subhan is the pseudonym of an Indian official posted abroad, who wrote a very thoughtful piece in The Asian Age last Monday).

Subhan says Pakistan's involvement "in extremist Islam and in Islam-based violence in India has given this an immediate regional dimension. However, what has provided (it) urgent national significance ... are ... violent episodes cynically and cold-bloodedly planned in Pakistan and executed by their jehadis in India."

True, there is no conclusive proof of Pakistan's involvement in these attacks. But the widespread view that Pakistan is so involved has allowed the BJP to equate terrorism with Pakistan, and work up nationalist hysteria. The hawkish L K Advani has exploited this to the hilt. He rarely misses a chance to turn up at the site of a terrorist attack and blame Pakistan-with or without evidence.

Hysterical chauvinism has served to strengthen Hindu-communal prejudices against Indian Muslims, who are wrongly seen as Islamabad's collaborators and supporters of Taliban-style Islam. In reality, everyone from Thomas Friedman to B Raman (formerly of the Research and Analysis Wing) has noted the exemplary moderation and restraint shown by India's Muslims over the past 20 years.

Raman writes: "In the 1980s, not a single Indian Muslim joined the mercenary force created by the (CIA) to fight against the Soviet troops in Afghanistan. When bin Laden created his International Islamic Front in 1998, many Islamic extremist organisations joined it. Not a single Indian organisation-not even from J&K-has done so. Hundreds of Muslims from all over the world rushed to Afghanistan to help the Taliban and al-Qaeda (after the October 2001 strikes). Not a single Indian Muslim-not even from J&K-has done so."

Subhan too concludes: "Not one person from the 150 million-strong Indian Muslim population has ever participated in any jehadi activity anywhere in the world. This is when tens of thousands jehadis" from elsewhere have ... "wreaked havoc globally".

The contrast between the Indian Muslim's image and reality, and its exploitation by Hindutva, highlights a grievous threat to pluralism in India-and to the cause of India-Pakistan reconciliation and peace. We must all honestly reflect on the causes and consequences of this-in both countries.

India has been reluctant to discuss Kashmir. It cites the Shimla agreement to reject external mediation or multilateral discussion-only to duck a bilateral dialogue. But, as Asad Durrani, former director-general of the ISI, says, many Pakistanis believe that "supporting the insurgency in Kashmir (is) the only way to keep the issue alive". Yet, the stronger the support, the lesser the "insurgency's" autonomy-and the greater its external subordination.

As secular-liberal Indians fight the BJP, the time has come for their Pakistani counterparts to rethink this "support". It is absurd to try to keep the Kashmir issue "alive" by force, or by turning a blind eye to infiltration. Keeping Kashmir "alive" thus only betrays a lack of respect for the Kashmiri people's ability or will to make a rational choice.

Any support to violent, fanatical groups, which aim to kill harmless civilians, is not only immoral. It is liable to generate reactions which are equally indiscriminate and destructive. This applies to both India and Pakistan, to the Punjab and Kashmir, and to Gujarat. Gujarat is the most hair-raising example of how rank prejudice and visceral hatred can be stoked in the name of fighting terrorism-and then converted into votes.

This vicious cycle must end if India and Pakistan are not to plunge lemming-like into self-destruction.

_____

#2.

The Hindustan Times, Friday, December 27, 2002 

Fight Hindutva head-on 

Praful Bidwai

It is an utter and unmitigated disgrace and a setback to Indian democracy that Narendra Milosevic Modi has returned to power in Gujarat after presiding over Independent India? worst-ever State-sponsored pogrom of a religious minority. 

Modi reaped a rich harvest of hatred in a state that has in many ways been uniquely communalised for a decade or more, and where poisonous Hindutva has penetrated into the deepest interstices of civil society. 

Nothing other than such penetration can explain why the BJP? vote rose by six percentage-points despite its abysmal governance ?which turned India? fastest-growing state into a maladministered economic laggard and a cesspool of social backwardness, and despite the jungle law and barbarism that have prevailed in Gujarat since February 27. 

However, as the tremors from Gujarat subside, it is becoming apparent that Modi? victory was neither as spectacular and comprehensive as it first seemed, nor solely/mainly the result of Hindutva? appeal. The BJP? greatest gains were in north and central Gujarat, the regions worst affected by the post-Godhra violence. 

The Congress? 51 seats and the JD(U)? two seats seem puny vis-?-vis the BJP? 126 (out of 182). But the anti-BJP parties came within striking distance of victory in 40 other constituencies, with their combined vote exceeding the BJP?. Had the Congress won, say, two-thirds of these, it would have bagged a respectable 80 seats, against the BJP? 95. 

A far greater source of Modi? victory lay in the secular opposition? failure to take on the BJP on its ?trong?points, not just weak?ones related to development, collapsing public services and corruption. The Congress ran an energetic campaign on these but adopted a soft-Hindutva line and totally dodged the issues of communalism, its menace to the citizen and constitutional democracy, and of Modi & Co? culpability for the post-Godhra pogrom. 

Crucially, the Congress left the field wholly uncontested as the BJP equated Hindutva with nationalism and made thoroughly dishonest claims about the efficacy of its militant ?ounter-terrorism?strategy. Thus, Modi? rantings about Miyan Musharraf, which ludicrously accused Indian Muslims of colluding with the Pakistani State, went completely unchallenged. 

The Congress allowed Modi to indulge in rabid hate-speech about ?uslim treachery?and Gujarat? asmita (self-esteem) in avenging this ?with insensate violence. Shankarsinh Vaghela, who repeatedly stressed that he has ?o ideological differences with the RSS? had no answer to the calumny. 

The BJP? core-campaign combined xenophobic Hindutva with slander of Muslims and ?oreigners?(Sonia Gandhi), vitriolic jingoism and a Nazi-style cult of authority. 

The single greatest lesson from Gujarat is that the BJP cannot be successfully combated through ?onventional?approaches focusing on governance, caste equations or anti-incumbency alone. In today? circumstances ?defined by the spread of toxic nationalism, a culture of intense intolerance, and Islamophobia, especially in the post-9/11 period, there has to be a strong ideological-political campaign against Hindutva in all its variants, from Vajpayee-Advani to Modi-Togadia. 

Unless the secular parties approach the coming slew of state elections with this lesson clearly inscribed into their strategy, they may squander away the advantages they enjoy over the BJP in these states. None of these is even remotely communalised in relation to Gujarat, with its history of consolidation of rigid caste divides over two centuries; absence of social reform along with persistent upper-caste dominance; rapid growth and industrialisation without modernisation of attitudes, values and institutions; recent rise of backward-looking sectarian religious cults; 20- year long campaigns of violence targeting Dalits and Muslims; and not the least, the ultra-conservative influence of North American NRIs (of whom Gujarat has the highest proportion, among all states). 

In Gujarat, Hindutva serves as an ideological weapon for upper-class, upper-caste interests, to be used in an especially coercive way against democratic power-sharing urges from below. This is hardly true of Himachal, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh or Delhi (although the Congress is vulnerable, especially in Rajasthan, for governance and drought-related issues). 

The BJP must be soundly defeated in the state elections. At the national level, it must be politically unhinged. An adequate challenge to it needs five campaign planks, besides seat-sharing and coordination between all secular parties. 

- The BJP? core ideology of Hindutva must be ruthlessly exposed as divisive, extremist, deeply illiberal and incompatible with India? composite culture, its rich pluralism, and the constitutional values of democracy, secularism and universal citizenship. It is vital to remind the public that the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha played no role in the freedom movement ?their main enemy being Muslims, not colonialism. It is the Hindutva ideologues who founded the two-nation theory. 

- Despite its tub-thumping ?roactive?rhetoric, the BJP-NDA? strategy to prevent, counter and contain terrorism has proved completely bankrupt. Not only was India bled to the extent of Rs 10,000 crore ?four times the central health budget ?during the pointless 10-month long mobilisation of 700,000 troops in a caricature of Rambo-style militarism; some of the worst terrorist attacks (e.g. Akshardham) have taken place during the build-up, and more generally, during the NDA rule. 

Hardliners in India and Pakistan feed on, and have developed a stake in, one another. 

Indiscriminate State coercion or repression ?e.g. Kashmir or Ansal Plaza ?targets innocent citizens and inflames the social pathologies underlying terrorism, besides mocking at the Constitution and the State? legitimacy. ?roactive, beat-them-kill-them?sloganeering is no strategy. As none other than former RAW official B. Raman argues, this government has ?rivialised counter-terrorism? 

n The secular parties must frontally attack the BJP? portrayal of Islam as inherently anti-assimilationist and intolerant, and its demonisation of Indian Muslims as a jehadi Fifth Column. The Indian Muslims?total rejection of jehad is remarkable, exemplary, indeed unique. As Raman says, ?ot a single Indian Muslim ?not even from J&K??ever joined Afghanistan? US-sponsored mujahideen in the Eighties, Bin Laden? International Islamic Front in the Nineties or Al-Qaeda/Taliban more recently. 

To malign Muslims as anti-Indian and set them loyalty-tests reflects the meanest, narrowest possible mindset, one incapable of tolerance, appreciation of pluralism, syncretism and democratic decency. 

- The BJP? Gujarat electoral victory must be legally challenged in constituencies where it blatantly used religion to gather votes ?a manifest malpractice. Secular parties and citizens must move meticulously drafted election petitions. The outstanding Crime Against Humanity report of the Concerned Citizens?Commission on Gujarat should serve as the backdrop of an anti-BJP chargesheet. 

- Finally, the secular parties must show they are not afraid of applying the law to prevent and punish communal hate-mongering and inflammatory demagoguery of the kind Modi, Ritambhara and Togadia specialise in. No civilised society can permit hate-speech. If Trent Lott had to quit his US Senate post for making racist remarks about segregation in the Forties, Togadia should spend several years in jail under our penal code. 

In forging such a strategy, the Congress must necessarily play a leading role. That is admittedly a tall order. Since December 15, the Congress has shown itself floundering and confused in analysing the Gujarat debacle. It must humbly accept that it needs not just ruthless self-introspection, but also external help ?just as it did in mobilising voters in Gujarat. 

Sonia Gandhi will do well to hold a series of serious, structured consultations and discussions between key Congressmen, and Left-liberal political leaders, academics, intellectuals and anti-communal NGOs and activists. The aggressive Hindutva challenge is too big to be countered by tired practitioners of manipulative politics, middle-path?issue-fudging approaches or soft-Hindutva strategies. 

Too much is at stake ?not least the future of democratic India as one of the world? most plural, multi-cultural, multi-religious societies.

_____

#3.

The Hindu, Friday, Dec 27, 2002 

Puja at the Qutub Minar 

By Rajeev Dhavan 

Such reclamation is an invitation to vague assertions armoured by political malevolence to split civilised governance in ways that have no meaning or purpose except the hate and spite that fuel it. 

THE YEAR 2002 draws to a close with reports that on December 21 the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal were stopped from performing a puja (prayer) at the Qutub Minar which they claimed `was built after demolishing... Jain and Hindu temples'. The Minar has existed for eight centuries. Is there a logic in seeking to claim it for prayer? If so, what is this logic? Does every alleged `Hindu' site have to be reclaimed? On what basis? Is this logic applicable only to the Hindus? Will it be extended to Buddhists? And, Muslim sites or Christian ones? 

And, if history is to be re-written, will the Sangh Parivar support Maori claims in New Zealand, Red Indian claims in America, the claim of the Mayas and Incas in Central and South America, the resurrection of all tribal sites in Africa? To such reclamation, there is no limit. It is an invitation to vague assertions armoured by political malevolence to split civilised governance in ways that have no meaning or purpose except the hate and spite that fuel it. It credits neither the Hindu faith nor the principles of governance that draw India together. 

L.K. Advani's `introduction' to the BJP White Paper on Ayodhya (1993) spoke of the kar sevaks who destroyed the Babri Masjid as "not just eras(ing) a symbol of our subjugation... (and) building a symbol of resurgence... but show(ing) us as if in a flash how far we have to travel". Clearly, India has to go back to the 13th Century to move into the future. The White Paper articulates "the recommencement of a suspended evolution... from Somnath to Ayodhya"?supposedly to fulfil "the Somnath spirit" to make Ayodhya the "greatest nationalist assertion in known history". Is all this real? Or just a nightmare? The party of the White Paper is in power. The BJP has prescribed no restraints on itself. Its supporters claim a full license to do what they like ?destroy, incite and terrorise with total impunity. 

>From 1992 to 2002, the BJP Parivar evolved a `political immunity' that the legal and political system will be so used as to protect the communally unscrupulous who fuel BJP-led politics. After the carnage and elections in Gujarat, Indian democracy has been `modified'. There was no President's Rule for the failure of secular governance in Gujarat. Contrast the threats made to Bihar and West Bengal. M.F. Husain's paintings were destroyed and permission given for his prosecution; but Narendra Modi's and Praveen Togadia's outrages go unpunished. Deepa Mehta's films were censored by fundamentalist mobs, but real `hate speech' is `loud-spoken' by the Parivar without restraint. Although the Places of Religious Worship Act, 1991, places a `1947 based' status quo on all religious sites except Ayodhya (which is to be resolved by courts), the Parivar espouses a provocative policy of reclamation of sites including the latest example of the Qutub Minar. Are we living in the 21st Century? Or, is