[sacw] SACW | 25 Jan. 03

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 25 January 2003

#1. Sri Lanka investigates its 'disappeared' (Frances Harrison)
#2. Resume Dialogue and Restore Links - Demands Delhi Chapter of=20
Pakistan India Peoples forum for Peace and Democracy : Public=20
meeting on 30 December , New Delhi
Also: Press statement from the India Chapter of the Forum
#3. Setting terms for Kashmir talks (Radha Kumar)
#4. The Great Indian Unwelcome (John Dayal)
#5. India: Pani Paltans (Edit, Times of India)
#6. Book Review: History stranger than fiction by Partha Chatterjee=20
(Reviewed by Shailaja Neelakantan)

__________________________

#1.

BBC
24 January, 2003

Sri Lanka investigates its 'disappeared'

By Frances Harrison

BBC Sri Lanka correspondent A commission of inquiry has started to=20
look into the plight of hundreds of civilians who disappeared in the=20
northern Sri Lankan town of Jaffna when the military retook the area=20
from Tamil Tiger rebels seven years ago.

Any serious attempt to confront past human rights violations=20
connected with this war seems highly unlikely
The commission was formed in response to growing protests by the=20
relatives of the disappeared.
The relatives are hoping against the odds that their husbands and=20
sons might still be alive in a jail somewhere in the south of the=20
island.
However, it is unlikely this commission will do any better than Sri=20
Lanka's four previous commissions looking into involuntary=20
disappearances.

Closed hearings
The secretary of the commission, MCM Iqbal, said the first session=20
would look into 66 of the total of 232 complaints.
The first day's hearings, held in camera, took place in Jaffna and=20
the remaining two days will be in the town of Chavakachcheri.
Both sides have much to lose from a thorough investigation of events in Jaf=
fna
Most of the complaints concern Tamils who were allegedly picked up by=20
the army for questioning and then disappeared without trace after=20
government forces had recaptured Jaffna.

But there are also 35 complaints by Muslims whose relatives=20
disappeared, allegedly at the hands of the Tamil Tiger rebels in the=20
early 1990s.

'Lacks teeth'
The approach this time will be to involve the relatives of the=20
disappeared in the process of inquiries so they understand the=20
difficulties and do not accuse the commission of bad faith.
Peace negotiators say it is going to be too acrimonious to delve=20
into past wrongs
But those involved in this commission privately complain that it=20
lacks teeth. They say it has already met with a lack of co-operation=20
from the military.
For their part, defence officials say they are willing to co-operate=20
but have not been formally notified of the commission's standing.
They say they do not know if the commission has judicial powers or=20
whether accused army officers can appear with legal representation.
The lack of communication between the relevant bodies and the lack of=20
public expressions of support from the politicians suggests the=20
setting up of this latest commission is a gesture to keep the=20
protestors quiet.
One person involved with the commission said he was absolutely sure=20
it would not be able to trace a single person responsible for the=20
disappearances.

Investigations stalled
The London-based human rights organisation, Amnesty International,=20
has accused both sides in the Sri Lankan civil war of gross human=20
rights violations.
It has said has reliable evidence that the bodies of 600 people who=20
disappeared had been disposed of in shallow graves in Jaffna. That=20
was four years ago.
Forensic experts did start exhumations in one site at Chemmani. But=20
the investigations stalled and those involved now say they do not=20
have the funds for a second round of DNA tests.
The ministry of defence conducted its own internal investigation into=20
the disappearances of civilians in Jaffna in 1996. But its findings=20
have still not been made public.
Any serious attempt to confront past human rights violations=20
connected with this war seems highly unlikely - not least because=20
both the military and the rebels have much to lose from such an=20
inquiry.
Peace negotiators on both sides make much play of their commitment to=20
human rights. But at the same time, they say it is going to be too=20
acrimonious to delve into past wrongs.

______

#2.

Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/PIF/

Dear=20
Friends, =
23rd=20
January 2003

The diplomatic relations between the two governments of India and=20
Pakistan could not have been any worse than what it is these days.=20
Beginning with visa denials, to threat to 'crackdown on illegal=20
immigrants', to assaults on diplomats of each other, culminating in=20
virtual Nuke threats and war mongering=8A we have seen it all.

We expected that demobilisation of the two armies from eyeball to=20
eyeball situation would convince the governments of Pakistan and=20
India, to restore normalcy. Instead the governments have replaced=20
coercive diplomatic policies to punish ordinary Pakistanis and=20
Indians. The snapping of communication links and restrictive visa=20
regime has affected 10 crore Indians whose near and dear ones live in=20
Pakistan and virtually put a stop to people-to-people contacts. We=20
believe that promotion of such contacts alone can widen the=20
constituency for peace and democracy and non-militaristic resolution=20
of all outstanding issues between the governments of India and=20
Pakistan.

We therefore demand:

1. Restoration of (a) non-restrictive visa regime, (b)=20
communications between the two neighbors; and,
2. Resumption of dialogue

On January 11, 1948 Mahatma Gandhi sat on an indefinite fast with the=20
13-point charter of demands. These demands related to protecting=20
Muslims and their assets from being plundered as well as fulfilling=20
India's commitment to share the Treasury with Pakistan. 54 years=20
after that we are once again on a regressive curve in our relations=20
with Pakistan and progressive increase in persecution of Muslims.=20
Hence as Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy, Delhi=20
Chapter, we take the initiative to remember the day of Gandhiji's=20
martyrdom through a Public meeting addressing these issues.

We call upon all concerned citizens and organizations to join us in=20
this meeting, which will be also the time to take-off a nationwide=20
campaign with the above mentioned demands.

Venue : Deputy Speaker's Hall, Constitution=20
Club, Rafi Marg, New Delhi
Time : 2:30 pm to 6:00 pm
Date : Thursday, the 30th of January 2003

Thanking you,

In Solidarity,

T.K. John=20
Vijayan MJ
Chairperson, Delhi Chapter, PIPFPD=20
Convener

Vijayan MJ

PIPFPD Secretariat
B-14 (SF), Gulmohar Park,
New Delhi - 110 049
# (011) 2656 1743 / 2651 4847 / 2651 1504 (Fax)

o o o

Pakistan India Peoples' Forum for Peace and Democracy
(India Chapter)

Press Statement=20
23rd January 2002

PIPFPD India Chapter condemn the continuing harassment of the Indian=20
Charge de Affairs Shri Vyas at Islamabad. The Pakistan Government now=20
has counter-accused Indian authorities of similar charges. Such=20
actions on the part of the Indian government or the government of=20
Pakistan, certainly do not pave the way for a dialogue between the=20
two countries.

We also urge both these Governments to take a more balanced and=20
mature view to end this totally unacceptable and avoidable impasse in=20
the current relations between the two countries. This is the least=20
the peoples of both Pakistan and India deserve from their leadership.

Admiral Ramdas=20
Sushil Khanna

Chairperson =
Gen.=20
Secretary

National Secretariat,
B-14 (SF), Gulmohar Park,
New Delhi - 110 049
# (011) 2656 1743 / 2651 4847 / 2651 1504 (Fax)

_____

#3.

The Hindu
Jan 25, 2003
Opinion

Setting terms for Kashmir talks

By Radha Kumar

The international community stands ready to use leverage over=20
Pakistan for substantive change, if India will accept that this=20
change will only come step by painful step.

THE INDIAN Government and the political leaders are known for taking=20
a big gamble, and then failing to keep the pot warm for the win.=20
Holding elections in Jammu and Kashmir under the threat of mujahideen=20
attacks was a big gamble for India - and the country paid a heavy=20
price when more than 800 civilians, political workers, election=20
officials and security forces were killed.

Nevertheless, most people agree that the results were worth the=20
price. Kashmir today has a coalition Government and a State Assembly=20
in which all the major groups have a stake, except for the=20
separatists. The new State Government is trying hard to give the=20
separatists a stake too, with a "healing touch" policy that has won=20
accolades both at home and afar.

But the Union Home Ministry seems to have adopted a dual policy of=20
offering talks to the separatists while continuing to withhold civil=20
rights from them, denying Yasin Malik medical treatment abroad and=20
suspending Mirwaiz Umar Farooq's passport. True, neither has been=20
exactly helpful when it comes to getting a peace process started.=20
Indeed, the Mirwaiz's recent reference to "our boys with the guns" on=20
the BBC's "Hard Talk" raised eyebrows in the West as well as in=20
India. But, as we know, few, if any, of the Kashmiri mujahideen are=20
his boys. A rhetorical statement that does the Mirwaiz and the=20
Hurriyat more damage than it does India is hardly a reason to refuse=20
him a passport.

This is the latest of a series of decisions indicating that the=20
Indian Government has opted to combine the healing touch policy with=20
isolating its opponents, whether Pakistani or Kashmiri, by=20
alternatively strong-arming and ignoring them. It is certainly true=20
that the secret of a successful peace process lies in isolating the=20
hard liners, but the means of doing this is by involving those that=20
can be involved and dealing fairly with those that cannot. Isolation=20
allows the hard liners to go unchallenged - involvement makes them=20
accountable to norms and standards that they would otherwise avoid,=20
and in the process it also gradually erases the hard lines. This is=20
one of the biggest lessons to be drawn from the successes, and even=20
more the failures, of other peace processes such as in Northern=20
Ireland.

Until the late 1980s, the British tried to go it alone in Northern=20
Ireland. They were able to contain the Irish Republican Army through=20
military means and intrusive intelligence gathering, from spies and=20
informers to road cameras and searchlights. By keeping the death=20
count low, they ought to have established one of the key conditions=20
for a peace process to get started. But the means they used aroused=20
as much resentment amongst the Catholics as they did relief amongst=20
the Protestants. At the same time they also attempted to isolate the=20
Sinn Fein through withholding its civil rights - refusing, for=20
example, to let the Sinn Fein leader, Gerry Adams, travel - moves=20
that were widely perceived as a blot on British democracy, and=20
prevented peace from returning to Northern Ireland.

By contrast, when Ireland and the U.S. persuaded Britain to let Mr.=20
Adams visit the U.S. and participate in peace talks, the IRA was=20
rapidly isolated and the Sinn Fein began to consider interim=20
solutions that have, over time, radically altered its claims. Today=20
the Sinn Fein is the member of a coalition government under British=20
sovereignty, with open borders to Ireland. True, the coalition has=20
failed to work and Northern Ireland seesaws between brief periods of=20
self-rule and longer periods of direct rule by Britain. But the=20
pressure is now on Northern Ireland's rival ethnic nationalists to=20
fix their problems, not on London. The IRA has maintained a ceasefire=20
and is committed to decommissioning. And the British Army is no=20
longer hated as before.

Admittedly, the Hurriyat is not the Sinn Fein. Its members still=20
oppose peace talks - or hedge them about with so many conditions that=20
they cannot be started - and they do not have the influence over the=20
militant groups that they once had. Nor are the Kashmir mujahideen=20
the IRA. Unlike the IRA, they have refused feelers for a ceasefire.=20
Radical Islamists - mostly non-Kashmiris - have dominated the=20
mujahideen since the late 1990s, and have launched new and hideous=20
campaigns to impose the burkha on women and exact revenge on alleged=20
informers.

These are factors to India's advantage. Kashmiris increasingly resent=20
the mujahideen and the Hurriyat has been severely weakened by its=20
dependence on them, and on Pakistan. India could perhaps go it alone=20
in Kashmir, if India were willing to sustain a healing touch policy=20
in the face of militant threats, or reduce the violence to a bearable=20
level.

But India's security forces are not equipped to contain violence=20
through military means and intelligence. Thousands of troops have=20
died in Kashmir, and are still dying. Though the Indian Army is=20
beginning to modernise, it will take time for the security forces to=20
develop effective containment strategies. In the interim, the=20
Government's tough counter-insurgency offers little incentive for any=20
mujahideen to cease fire, let alone decommission, and is always open=20
to abuse of human rights.

Even with incentives, the Indian Government cannot win a=20
comprehensive ceasefire without Pakistan's help, and this has not=20
been available. Unlike Ireland, which actively developed a peace=20
process with Britain, Pakistan continues to block peace initiatives=20
in Kashmir. The release of Hafiz Sayeed and Masood Azhar indicates=20
that Pakistan has again reverted to promoting jehad in Kashmir. Hard=20
as it is to swallow, this means India will have to grasp at smaller=20
straws for peace than Britain or Ireland did, rather than asking for=20
the bundle. Yes, Pakistan could drastically reduce mujahideen attacks=20
in India and Kashmir, and yes, it is immoral that it uses jehad to=20
keep Kashmir in conflict and bring India to the negotiating table.

But the only way to get Pakistan to stop is step by step, as India's=20
own recent experience shows. The Indian Government took a big gamble=20
when it deployed half a million troops on the border with Pakistan=20
following the attack on India's Parliament. The gamble paid off when=20
the Pakistani Government arrested thousands of Islamic radicals and=20
drastically reduced logistical aid to the mujahideen.

These gains were frittered away when the Indian Government failed to=20
respond with incentives that could have been used to push Pakistan to=20
take the next important steps - to charge the arrested, close down=20
training camps and tackle the Haqqania, Muridke and Banuri jehad=20
centres. Had India quickly restored the contacts that were snapped=20
after the Parliament attack and offered talks on de-escalation,=20
especially cooperation to permanently end violence in Kashmir, Masood=20
Azhar and Hafiz Sayeed might not be free today.

Instead, by the time India did offer to restore snapped contacts,=20
Pakistan's position had hardened again - with the result that over=20
800 people died during the Kashmir elections.

Despite these unpropitious conditions, India took another big gamble,=20
this time with the healing touch policy in Kashmir. Its gains stand=20
similarly at risk if India pursues a policy of isolating Pakistan and=20
the Kashmiri separatists. Instead, India should call on Pakistan and=20
the separatists to help restore human rights in Kashmir by working=20
for a comprehensive ceasefire, especially as this would enable India=20
to roll back its counter-insurgency.

India has been burnt by past initiatives to achieve a ceasefire. The=20
Agra summit and the failed ceasefires of 2000 showed that Pakistan=20
and the Pakistan-backed mujahideen seek photo-ops rather than=20
concrete agreements to make peace. But today the international=20
community stands ready to use leverage over Pakistan for substantive=20
change, if India will accept that this change will only come step by=20
painful step. The single most important element for the "healing=20
touch" policy in Kashmir is to end the violence. Why refrain from a=20
little bet on talks for a ceasefire - and civil rights for all - when=20
undertaking the big gamble of winning Kashmiri hearts and minds?

(The writer is an Adjunct Senior Fellow, Council on Foreign=20
Relations, New York.)

_____

#4.

24 January 2002

The Great Indian Unwelcome

America boasts one of the biggest temples outside India (apart from=20
Angkorwat) staffed by the best Pundits from India on a Religious=20
Preacher Visa, and in the United Kingdom, a former Church building=20
houses another popular podium for Indian Sants, Munis and sundry=20
other preacher trying to convince the white man and women that=20
salvation lies through the Great Mantra and the Yoga Asana. While=20
even the most paranoiac of nations of the Twenty-first Century World=20
welcome savants from across the globe, the last Christian missionary=20
to get a formal Visa for India was back in the late Nineteen Fifties.=20
While the Congress government just chocked them off at the window of=20
the Indian embassies abroad when it was in power in New Delhi - Much=20
as Foreign Exchange permits under the FCRA so far, Visas to enter=20
India are given, refused or revoked, by the Centre, not by the State=20
governments -- the BJP government is quite happy if an element of=20
violence is added to the expulsion of a Christian preacher. Just how=20
will the Kerala police get expelled American preacher Joseph Preacher=20
to return to depose in the case against the RSS cadres who nearly=20
murdered him in January 2002 near Trivandrum, is a question that=20
Chief Minister A K Anthony needs to answer. And how will India react=20
if, under universal principles of reciprocity, the Western world=20
kicks out all those Sangh savants? Though all nations zealously guard=20
their Visa regulations to keep illegal or undesirable aliens out, it=20
is fear of crime or the prospective short term immigrant's failure to=20
convince that he will go back home, that may get him a Visa refusal,=20
certainly not religious bigotry. Bigotry, and the paranoia it begets,=20
unfortunately, is the solitary motive in the Indian case.

By John Dayal

In possibly the best political joke of the current year, newspapers=20
reported that Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishan Advani, riding his=20
own private plane for the first time in a tour of Qatar and France,=20
asked the Qatar government to give more religious freedom in its=20
country. This just about coincided with the fourth third anniversary=20
of the burning alive in Orissa of Graham Stuart Staines and his two=20
sons on 22 January 1999, a month short of the anniversary of the=20
start of the anti Muslim Genocide in Gujarat, and almost on the day=20
when American evangelist Joseph Cooper was being told to get out of=20
India for having gone to a village church meeting near=20
Trivnanthapuram in Kerala where he was all but killed by the local=20
armed RSS cadres.

(A lesser joke of National Minorities Commission vice chairman=20
Tarlochan Singh asking the US government to be sensitive to Sikh=20
feelings post September 11 was buried in the national outcry over the=20
commission's expected defence of the murderous RSS in the Cooper=20
case.)

Almost all the guilty arraigned in the 1992 demolition of the Babri=20
Masjid have in the last ten years been given Visas by the United=20
Kingdom and the United States, and have used those Visas to go and=20
preach their brand of Hindutva to their nostalgic followers among the=20
Non resident Indians. Kupahalli Sudershan, the reigning Fuhrer of the=20
Rashtriya Swayamsevak sangh, Ashok Singhal, the man who wants=20
Pakistan, Muslims and Christians blown off the map of South Asia, has=20
just been to the US, and BK Modi, working hard to forge a Buddhist=20
Hindu alliance against he global alliance of Islam and Christianity=20
in his version of the clash of civilisations, has an office and home=20
in both new York and London, used with great =E9lan to continue his=20
campaign for Hindutva.

Quite obviously it is different strokes for different folks in the=20
world of Visas, and India, the biggest beneficiary coming and going=20
is not too bothered that its hypocrisy is showing.

Barring the fundamentalist nations of Saudi Arabia and its=20
neighbourhood, and Israel, dictatorships such as Burma and Pakistan,=20
no country in the world has as bigoted a Visa policy as India. Unlike=20
many of them, who are blatant at worse and transparent at their=20
politest, India pulls a smokescreen on double standards and bigotry=20
over its own Visa regime.

As with a few other things, it is not the BJP and its Sangh Parivar=20
who are the creators of these rules, gleeful implementers though they=20
may be. Like the Foreign Contributions Regulations Act, FCRA, the=20
hostile Visa regime too is a product of the nefarious Indian=20
emergency where the likes of Sanjay Gandhi, as much a Khaki as Lal=20
Krishna Advani, devised some of these regulations to keep a check on=20
political and other enemies, sourcing their bigotry all the way to=20
the right wing of the post-Independence Congress with its=20
exploitative and selective hostility to the Muslims and Christians.

There is no denying the fact that Visas are a reflection of sovereign=20
rights of nations as to who they want to enter their country, an who=20
they exclusively want kept out. At various times, the Visa (the=20
universality of the term made it inevitable that one of the largest=20
business groups would borrow the concept to devise the plastic money=20
which has no borders -- your ubiquitous credit or debit card) has=20
been a term of friendship, or a punitive measure to convey discord=20
and suspicion.

As a young reporter in the early Nineteen Seventies, I member that=20
despite several visits to the Soviet Union, there was no mark on my=20
passport to show my travels. The Soviet Union gave its Visa on a=20
separate sheet of paper instead of stamping it on the Passport. The=20
reason was simple. In those days of the Cold war, if you had a Soviet=20
Visa on your passport, you could be denied an American or European=20
Visa as a politically incorrect, pro-Soviet and thereby Anti-West=20
person.

It was worse if you had also visited Cuba, the thorn in the idea of=20
the USA, Libya, the thorn in everyone's side, and a few countries of=20
the same nature. Predictably, the Cuban, Libyan and other Visas came=20
on separate sheets of paper, leaving no black mark on your passport.=20
Similarly an Israeli Visa, till recently, would make you persona non=20
grata in most Arab countries, and Israel too wisely gave its stamp on=20
white paper, so to speak, instead of the navy blue of the Indian=20
passport.

For an Indian, the problem is that he needs a Visa to almost every=20
country but Hong Kong and Nepal, such is our reputation of trying to=20
settle down, or emigrate illegally, and such is out poverty that=20
other countries are afraid they may have to end up spending their=20
money on our welfare, or our return.

That, by the way really shows you whey NRIs, despite their love for=20
the cow and their love for the Ganges and their super patriotism, are=20
so eager to get an American citizenship by dumping their beloved=20
Indian passport - it makes travel easy an inexpensive. And the=20
passport guarantees safety (barring in Afghanistan).

In most countries, it is the fear of communist infiltration, drug and=20
arms smuggling and illicit migration that guides Visa policies. The=20
British Isles, a long favourite of Indians of all hues,=20
understandably has strict regulations when it comes to bachelors and=20
prospective brides. The US frowns on eligible bachelors unless they=20
have ea sizable bank balance. And convicted drug runners will no=20
doubt find it difficult to get past the American consulates. But thee=20
is no bar on preachers.

Every Indian Sadhu worth his Sanskrit, his ganja and hi saffron robes=20
dreams of an American sojourn of some length - the dollars and the=20
white acolytes are but a passing distraction. It is giving unto the=20
west what is due unto the west by way of a superior philosophy that=20
guides these pure monks. The Rolls Royce and Cadillac come later.

Visas are easy for any religious preacher, or priest. In the US, a=20
community can build a temple, and apply to import pure Brahmins from=20
India, or Nepal, as the case may be. Muslims of Indian origin can=20
invite their own ethnic Maulvi. Christians, of course have it=20
easiest, as do Sikhs. Each sub sect has its own preacher all the way=20
from Chandigarh, Chennai, Chembur or Cochin.

All the way from Swami Vivekananda downwards, men in Saffron have=20
found it worth their while to go to the United States and the UK, and=20
almost without exception, they have found themselves welcomed by=20
white, black and brown. The few exceptions have been Osho towards the=20
end of his life when the scandals of his ashram became a bit too=20
much, or a Hare Krishna community charged with mass paedophilia. Such=20
cases, fortunately, are few and far between.

For India, Visas, unless they are for shot term, dollar spending=20
tourism, become a major political weapon and serving its political=20
and religious agenda. While split families in Pakistan or Bangladesh=20
may also be victims, it is the Christian community which remains the=20
main target ever since Pandit Ravi Shankar of Madhya Pradesh, acting=20
under the inspiration of a long line descending from Madan Mohan=20
Malviya, Gobind Ballabh Pant, and perhaps even Bal Gangadhar Tilak of=20
an earlier generation, came up with the now notorious document on=20
alleged conversions in Madhya Pradesh by missionaries - the Niyogi=20
report.=20

In its wake quickly came the three anti conversion acts of Madhya=20
Pradesh, Orissa and Arunachal, and a whole host of other measures,=20
most of them clandestine. Missionaries across the country were served=20
expulsion notices (the figure is now about 1100 old missionaries,=20
mostly in their seventies or even older who have lived in India for=20
over half century each).The process continues even now.

No fresh missionary Visas have been issued, not even to NRIs of put=20
Indian ethnic origin, since about 1957. Even nuns have been expelled=20
once their Visas and permits expired, though they were professors or=20
otherwise engaged in teaching and similar activity far removed from=20
active evangelisation.

India does not make the full terms of its Visa conditions clear, nor=20
is there a real manual available on the internet or in the market for=20
the guidance of the common people.

The secret instructions are available only to the Indian consulates=20
abroad, and to the political masters at home. Regulations become=20
known as they are implemented.

And therefore now we know that not only can tourists not indulge in=20
any religious activity (including participating in prayers where they=20
may have to read a Scripture passage?), but that foreign students=20
studying in India can also not engage in what is called religious=20
activity.

Does this mean that in free and democratic India, foreigners allowed=20
legally in do not have the same human rights and human dignity as=20
Indian citizens? Including the Freedom of faith?

The Indian foreign office, and the civil authorities who do the=20
hatchet work, have to answer this to the world at large.

_____

#5.

The Times of India
JANUARY 25, 2003
Editorial

Pani Paltans

There's a crisis building up in our midst, and the really frightening=20
thing is, almost all of us seem completely oblivious to it. Which is=20
strange, because most of us come face to face with it every single=20
day, when we turn on taps and get nothing.

In plush neighbourhoods, apartment-dwellers grumble and wait for the=20
water tanker to come around with the daily quota - for a charge, of=20
course. In less affluent areas, people wait eagerly for that one=20
hour in two days when they will get water, or trudge miles to the=20
ever-depleting village well.

Instances have been reported of famous lakes shrinking or drying up=20
completely. History tells us that Fatehpur Sikri had to be abandoned=20
due to paucity of water. Could it happen to the glitzy townships=20
mushrooming all over?

Don't scoff. Water table levels are on the decline in most parts of=20
the country. In some areas, ground water is expected to dry up=20
completely within a few years. But does any of this bother us? Of=20
course not. We have more pressing matters at hand, like putting pesky=20
minorities firmly in their place. Or acquiring nuclear weapon=20
delivery systems - which we hope we'll never have to use.

A few individuals have been doing yeoman service in propagating the=20
importance of water conservation, rainwater harvesting and=20
afforestation. They have demonstrated the effectiveness of=20
traditional methods, like earthen dams.

But their efforts simply don't add up to the scale required to=20
tackle a problem of this magnitude. The plan to link rivers seems=20
promising, but will take years to complete, even in a best case=20
scenario. And many argue that it is unworkable.

So can we have a government-blessed project that would involve a=20
well-trained, disciplined force - we could call them green brigades,=20
or pani paltans - travelling the length and breadth of the country,=20
educating the populace, and rolling up their sleeves to help augment=20
local efforts?

But where would such a body come from? Actually, the government=20
already has access to a huge reserve of manpower, in the form of=20
thousands of soldiers who have to retire while still in their mid-30s.

Rather than sending them home while they are still relatively young=20
and fit, why doesn't the sarkar simply redeploy them into the green=20
brigades? They could help wage a war against water scarcity - except=20
they'd be saving lives, not taking them.

____

#6.

Asia Times
January 25, 2003
BOOK REVIEW

History stranger than fiction
A Princely Imposter? The Strange and Universal History of the Kumar=20
of Bhawal, by Partha Chatterjee

Reviewed by Shailaja Neelakantan

In the early 1920s, an ash-smeared sanyasi, or holy man, clad only in=20
a loincloth, appeared in the Bengal town of Bhawal, in India. Despite=20
his protests, he was declared to be Ramendra Narayan Roy, the heir to=20
the estate of the Bhawal zamindars - a man thought to have died 12=20
years earlier. The prince's sister accepted the man as her brother,=20
and the tenants who lived on the estate also supported him, believing=20
that a holy man would not be as rapacious a landlord as his=20
predecessors.
But the former prince's wife and the British government contended=20
that the man was an impostor. Both the "widow" and the government had=20
an interest in denying the legitimacy of the sanyasi. After the=20
apparent death of the second kumar, or prince, in 1909, the Bhawal=20
estate was taken over by agents of the British.
The arrival of the mysterious man, who came to be called "the Bhawal=20
sanyasi," gave the former owners a renewed claim to the land,=20
threatening both the British stake and the generous stipend received=20
by the prince's widow, who had been forced out of the family after=20
his supposed death.
A protracted legal battle ensued, featuring an array of the country's=20
eminent lawyers and more than 1,500 witnesses. Stories circulated=20
that the prince was profligate and a sexual philanderer, that his=20
wife was having an incestuous affair with her brother, and that the=20
family squandered its wealth. Both the Dacca District Court and the=20
Calcutta High Court declared the sanyasi the real prince. But the=20
case was not resolved until, on appeal by the prince's wife, it=20
reached the London Privy Council, which upheld his legitimacy in=20
1946. Two days after the verdict, the man who'd appeared from the=20
jungle to become the talk of two continents suffered a fatal stroke.=20
His wife was a widow once again.
Visiting professor of anthropology at Columbia University, Partha=20
Chatterjee's book about the case, A Princely Imposter? proves that=20
history can be more compelling than fiction. In essence, this is a=20
mystery that - as the question mark in the book's title of the book=20
indicates - even Chatterjee cannot solve. Like a good mystery novel,=20
the book is a gripping read, racy and full of suspense.
Chatterjee recreates the Bengal of the mid 20th century with=20
Dickensian flair. But this is also a serious work of history. Without=20
ever losing his grip on the taut narrative, Chatterjee uses the case=20
to discuss the issues of nationalism, gender, caste and colonial=20
oppression.
He argues that the Bhawal sanyasi became a "focus of anti-colonial=20
sentiments" and claims that the case reveals the "secret history of=20
Indian nationalism". Anti-colonial sentiment gained strength during=20
the protracted legal battle, Chatterjee writes, so that by 1946 India=20
wasn't the acquiescing colony it was in 1921. Educated, middle-class=20
Indians now held important positions in the judiciary.
According to the author, "... there is no mistaking the nationalist=20
location of the legal-political thinking" of the two Indian judges=20
who were instrumental in declaring the sanyasi as the bona fide=20
prince. "[The judges] represented the generation of Indians who had -=20
discursively, ideologically, often institutionally - prepared=20
themselves for a transfer of power."
And, since the British government claimed the sanyasi was an=20
imposter, the Indian judges' verdict was an act of nationalist=20
self-assertion. What better way to cock a snook at their colonizers?=20
The local British received another slap in the face when on appeal=20
the London Privy Council, the final arbiter for the case, upheld the=20
Indian judgment.
The decision sent a signal that Britain had begun to believe that=20
Indian affairs were now best left to the judgment of Indians,=20
Chatterjee argues. Though the possibility of a tacit conspiracy of=20
"secret" nationalism in the Indian courts is intriguing, Chatterjee=20
leaves too many questions unanswered. Why would men whom Chatterjee=20
describes as "stalwarts among nationalist lawyers" defend a debauched=20
feudal lord who represented an exploitive system the nationalist=20
movement abhorred?
The prince had not been an exemplary human being. As an affluent=20
zamindar (landowner), he had taken a child bride and devoted his life=20
to hunting and womanizing, rather than the improvement of his estate=20
- much less the lot of its tenants. Far from being ignorant of his=20
decadent life, these stalwart nationalists called the prince's old=20
mistresses to the stand to prove that he suffered from syphilis.
In the final analysis, Chatterjee doesn't supply enough convincing=20
reasons to explain why the choice of a domestic oppressor over a=20
foreign one amounts to a secret history of India's nationalist=20
movement.
A princely imposter? The Strange and Universal History of the Kumar=20
of Bhawal, by Partha Chatterjee, April 2002, Princeton University=20
Press, ISBN: 0-691-09031-9, Price US$19.95, pp 429.

--=20