[sacw] South Asia Citizens Wire | 21 Jan. 03

[Harsh Kapoor]

#1. Pakistan: People to be the priority (M.B. Naqvi)
#2. What did Pakistan do to help North Korea develop nuclear arms?=20
(Seymour M. Hersh)
#3. Peshawar: Fate of women crisis centre uncertain (Waseem Ahmad Shah)
- Officials Destroy Tapes and CD's in Pakistani Province
#4. A Christian in Pakistan ; An e-mail exchange (Azam Gill)
#5. Letters to DAWN re: visas to visit Pakistan and India (Anwar=20
Abbas / Premkumar Harimohan)
#6. Entries invited for the UNESCO-PPF (Pakistan Press Foundation)=20
Gender in Journalism Annual Awards
#7. India: Pseudo-secularism - II (Gail Omvedt)
#8. India: Anti-consensus, pro-hate (A.G. Noorani)
#9. India: Women's Self Respect Day

__________________________

#1.

[20 January 2003]

People to be the priority
By M.B. Naqvi

A paradigm change in Pakistan's foreign policy has to be anchored in=20
national purposes. Hitherto the main national purpose was to wrest=20
Kashmir from Indian control. Reflecting national priorities the=20
budget structure gave overarching priority to somehow pay for the=20
military that was required to wrest Kashmir from India. India's=20
larger resources have ensured Pakistan's growing inferiority in=20
conventional military strength. By 1971 everyone could see --- and=20
Islamabad tacitly admitted --- that another conventional war would=20
mean defeat.

Post-1971 situation in 1972 demanded a new way of tackling the=20
Kashmir problem. It was required to accept that Pakistan could not=20
snatch Kashmir. Or Kashmir problem could only be solved by=20
non-military means. At any rate, Pakistan's imperialistic design of=20
acquiring the entire Kashmir State was unrealistic. What could still=20
work was to let Kashmiris struggle to shape their own future or=20
Azadi. Main struggle was to be then between Indians and Kashmiris,=20
with Pakistan having no active role.

That did not happen. Z.A. Bhutto stuck to old concepts and purposes.=20
Pakistan tried to compensate for its inferiority in armaments by=20
secretly developing nuclear capability. Formally, by signing the=20
Simla Agreement he had effectively shelved the Kashmir problem.=20
Pakistan stayed quiet for 18 years. Perhaps the Indians got wind of=20
Pakistan's nuclear programme from Americans and carried out their=20
first nuclear test in 1974. Pakistanis swallowed it, exhibiting no=20
particular alarm. Pakistan announced a breakthrough in 1984 and=20
tension with India mounted. India warned Pakistan through the Brass=20
Tacks exercise. Pakistanis thought India will invade. In the winter=20
of 1986-87 Pakistan threatened to use its Bomb if the Indians crossed=20
into Pakistan.

For a decade Pakistan succeeded in neutralising India's conventional=20
superiority. They became gung ho about nuclear weapons. The Indians=20
did pipe down and remained quiet till 2002, when they threatened war=20
against Pakistan's abetting of Jihadis. Confident behind the nuclear=20
shield, Pakistan started a proxy war to help Kashmiris' struggle by=20
arming and training them. Pakistan's precise aims could be inferred.=20
At first the idea was to tire out the Indian Army by a constant=20
haemorrhage in Kashmir and Pakistan Army would then inflict a coup de=20
grace. Later it shifted to just keeping the Indian Army pinned down=20
--- thereby making Pakistan secure.

Indian Army disregarded its own and Kashmiris losses. It was clear by=20
1998 that India resigned to a long proxy war and did not mind the=20
price. It cost over the 1990s' decade 60,000 to 70,000 Kashmiri=20
lives. And it was Pakistanis who felt the resource crunch: they had=20
to run two arms races: conventional and nuclear. The nuclear race,=20
once mutual deterrence is achieved, requires an expensive command and=20
control system, constant technological updating of all equipment and=20
a whole new conventional arms race. Pakistan went bankrupt by Dec'98.=20
Reeling under western sanctions, only the sequel to 9/11 has buoyed=20
up the economy by cash injections and debt rescheduling. It is a=20
temporary relief.

Matters came to a head in 2002. India threatened war if Pakistan does=20
not stop the "cross border terrorism", with all major powers echoing=20
it. President Musharraf blinked and in his June speech agreed to the=20
demand. Although the Jihad has not ended, both Indians and foreigners=20
have realised that there are limits to what Musharraf can do; there=20
are other powerful forces that can defy him and have. Hence the=20
withdrawal of Indian Army October last year.

Two conclusions emerge: the Jihadist Kashmir policy has failed and=20
has imperiled Pakistan. Kashmiris are as far from Azadi as ever and=20
Indian hold on Kashmir is as firm as ever. Kashmiris realise Pakistan=20
cannot go on sustaining Jihad and time has come to wind it down.=20
Pakistanis had bankrupted themselves for a policy that eventually=20
forced Pakistan to choose between a pointless proxy war and fighting=20
a nuclear war that neither side will win. It is not a sane choice.=20
The Kashmir policy is senseless.

This policy was the logical culmination of policies based on=20
inherited assumptions and attitudes --- the characteristics of Muslim=20
Separatism --- that were about identity and self-image. Historically=20
the majority of Muslims, originally low-caste Hindus, affected a=20
superiority complex, especially in Northern India. They feared being=20
falling down into the vast assimilative sea of Hindudom surrounding=20
them wherein they will be at the bottom of social heap. May be they=20
would be punished for former uppishness and for real or imagined=20
wrongs. That explained their demonstrative adherence to Islam, which=20
is what distinguished them from Hindus. Their religious exhibitionism=20
and a superiority complex led to emphases on differences with Hindus=20
and regarding themselves as rulers' kith and kin deserving privileges=20
and safeguards --- the leitmotif of pre-independence Indian Muslim=20
politics.

Others' refusal to accept Muslims demands, calculated to preserve=20
imagined privileges, angered them and an adversarial attitude=20
vis-=E0-vis Hindus developed. Muslims thus demanded weightage ---=20
actually equality of treatment with Hindus --- reservations and=20
separate electorate. These came from, and strengthened, two traits:=20
first, not to accept democracy's implications, especially the=20
equality with Hindus. The second was to depend on a ruling or=20
hegemonic power to get them their due. Pakistan politics has actually=20
reflected these traits: democracy soon collapsed and a new ruling=20
elite, civil and military bureaucracy, continues to usurp power. The=20
second trait of depending on the US hegemon to keeping India (Hindus)=20
in check gave an illusion of equality. This dependency syndrome that=20
produced the ever readiness to hitch Pakistan's wagon to the American=20
star survives.

Last October's election and this January's bye-elections have damaged=20
the Pakistan-American relations. Americans too have taken note that=20
MMA's rise is directly related to their own unpopularity, especially=20
in NWFP and Baluchistan. It is growing elsewhere too. Pakistan has=20
thus to somehow work out a new and more equation with US, without=20
forgetting the existing vulnerabilities.

Pakistanis have to cut the umbilical chord with the Indians and start=20
behaving as a separate and independent nation by treating India as=20
another country. Remember there are no free lunches. Other nation=20
states, including the US, have no obligation toward Pakistan=20
vis-=E0-vis India and see India as a rising power and an attractive=20
market thanks to its size and state of development. It can also be a=20
useful strategic partner to great powers. No power will prefer=20
Pakistan at the expense of India. Pakistan can never run an arms race=20
with India with others' aid.

Pakistan can do something about India's attractiveness: to develop=20
itself. That is blocked by military's control over politics. In a=20
military-run Pakistan cannot make on development, especially human=20
development, the top priority. It will never understand that national=20
strength cannot be borrowed; it has to be developed. Only the people=20
can make Pakistan strong, not the Army. Defence preparedness, not=20
backed by domestic economic strength, is sure to be inadequate and=20
brittle.

Other policies follow. Kashmir is for Kashmiris and they have to make=20
their destiny themselves; Pakistan has no locus standi. That releases=20
Pakistan from illusions. Let Pakistanis forget the pre-natal quarrels=20
with the Hindu-domination and work out a new normal relationship with=20
India. Pakistanis and Indians should be cooperative friends. Both can=20
profit from free trade, economic cooperation, cultural exchanges and=20
a regional framework of economic development that SAARC could become=20
but is not. An eventual (political) entente should be the aim.

Things will become easier for all if only they can counteract the=20
mischief that nuclear weapons by their very presence do. So long as=20
Pakistani nukes exist no Indian government can trust Pakistan and=20
similarly the Indian Bomb's presence automatically negates India's=20
good intentions. Pakistani Bomb has not helped Pakistanis get either=20
Kashmir or security; Indians were threatening to wipe out Pakistan no=20
matter what its capability. The Bomb has not enhanced India's=20
stature; no one respects it as much as in Nehru's days. Both are=20
finally deadlocked with only one exit.

Nuclear Restraint and Nuclear Safe South Asia are vacuous schemes,=20
mostly hot air; there have no relevance to India and Pakistan, with=20
their present mental baggage. Peaceful ties require basic trust in=20
each other's intentions which is absent. The only way out is through=20
simultaneous and mutually verifiable nuclear disarmament. Only a=20
Nuclear Weapons Free South Asia makes sense.

If free of Jihad commitment, Pakistan can give India MFN status, open=20
up, start implementing SAPTA and SAFTA agreements, sign a=20
non-aggression pact, engage in cultural exchanges, restore=20
communications, dramatically relax visa restrictions and make SAARC a=20
vital and vigorously growing reality. With these the stature of both=20
will dramatically rise and others will show a different visage.

o o o

[ See other related material at:
- South Asia Citizens Web
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex
- India Pakistan Arms Race and Militarisation Watch at: ]
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IPARMW/

______

#2.

The New Yorker
(January 20, 2003)

The Back Burner

What did Pakistan do to help North Korea develop nuclear arms? And=20
when did the Bush Administration know about it?
by Seymour M. Hersh
http://newyorker.com/printable/?fact/030127fa_fact

o o o

[ See Related articles at :
- South Asians Against Nukes
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/NoNukes.html ]

______

#3.

DAWN
20 January 2003

PESHAWAR: Fate of women crisis centre uncertain
By Waseem Ahmad Shah

PESHAWAR, Jan 19: The campaign launched by the elected members of the=20
Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal against establishment of a women crisis=20
centre here has put the NWFP government in an awkward position.
The project was jointly launched by the Department of Social Welfare,=20
Government of NWFP, GTZ, Islamabad, and Aurat Foundation, and has=20
been operational since Jan 1.
The campaigners against the crisis centre, including a shelter home=20
for destitute women, have not given any plausible reason for the=20
removal of the centre from the locality, Siddique Colony, Faqirabad,=20
but they claimed that they would not allow the centre to function=20
there.
The elected MNA of the MMA from the area, Shabir Ahmad Khan, and MPA,=20
Dr Zakir have joined the campaigners and in one of their meetings=20
they claimed that the issue would be raised in the assembly. The=20
building for the centre was provided by the department of Zakat, Ushr=20
and social welfare, government of NWFP.
It is learnt that the German Ministry of Economic Cooperation and=20
Development, which has been funding the project, has conveyed to the=20
provincial government that it might consider withdrawing from other=20
projects in the province in case the crisis centre faced problems in=20
its functioning.
In recent meetings with the NWFP chief minister, Akram Khan Durrani,=20
and provincial minister for social welfare, Hashmat Khan,=20
representatives of the ministry have raised concern over the campaign=20
against the crisis centre. Presently, the GTZ is partner in different=20
projects pertaining to health and education in the NWFP.
Sources told Dawn that some leaders of the Jamaat-i-Islami, a=20
component party of the MMA, have been trying to convince their MNA=20
not to oppose the centre as it would bring a bad name to the MMA=20
government and would also strengthen the impression that the MMA was=20
averse to issues of women development.
"We don't want a women shelter home to function in our locality as it=20
will affect the social environment here," informed a resident of the=20
area. He added that there is no other reason for opposing the project.
Sources privy to the whole issue informed that initially a local=20
leader of the Awami National Party, who reside in the locality,=20
started the campaign. Meetings were held in the local mosque. Later=20
on, the MNA and MPA also joined the campaigners as most of them are=20
their voters.
However, when the central leadership of ANP came to know about the=20
situation it has warned its local leaders not to oppose any project=20
of women development and free legal aid to destitute women.
Sources privy to the whole situation informed that Begum Naseem Wali=20
Khan took personal interest in the issue and directed its members not=20
to become part of any conspiracy against the centre. "ANP is a party=20
which always raised voice for women's rights and it will never allow=20
its members to indulge in any anti-women development campaign," Begum=20
Wali has told the ANP leaders here a few days back.
The project manager of the centre, Dr Riffat Aziz, informed that the=20
centre was having a 24-hour hotline service and women in need of=20
support or shelter would be able to contact this centre for help and=20
protection.

o o o

The New York Times
January 19, 2003

Officials Destroy Tapes and CD's in Pakistani Province
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

PESHAWAR, Pakistan, Jan. 18 (AP) - Officials in a deeply conservative=20
Pakistani province destroyed audio and video tapes and compact discs=20
today as part of a campaign to wipe out material the authorities deem=20
obscene.

In front of a crowd of more than 1,000 people, officials doused=20
gasoline on the materials piled up in a bazaar in Peshawar. The=20
police chief, Tanveer ul-Haq Sipra, then set the pile on fire.

"We are determined to fulfill our promises about Islamization and=20
cleaning up society," said Maulana Haji Ihsan ul-Haq,=20
general-secretary of the Muthida Majlis-e-Amal, or United Action=20
Forum.

The organization, an alliance of six religious parties, came to power=20
in North West Frontier Province in elections held in October with=20
promises to put Islamic law, or Sharia, into effect. [...].

______

#4.

Date Subject Author
01/20/2003

Re: A Christian in Pakistan, Part I (Azam Gill) Azam Gill
MyBlueEar

Sylvia Mortoza said:

"It is strange, but when I came to live in Pakistan during the=20
fifties I did not see any sign of hatred or even mild dislike for=20
Christians. Just down the road from where I lived resided a Christian=20
lady who was living with her Muslim son. Another son played cricket=20
for an English club. His name was Billy Ibadullah."

Gill replies:

Without daring to challenge the validity of Sylvia's observations=20
during a three/four year stay in Pakistan during the fifties, the=20
analyses and assessment of inter-communal relations require more. I=20
could cite further examples to support her observation, and even more=20
to challenge her conclusions.

Sylvia reminiscences:

"Another Christian lady was married to the eldest son of a wealthy=20
landowner of Cambellpur in the Punjab. Although married to a Muslim,=20
she too had remained Christian. No one objected."

Gill replies:

The Muslims in Pakistan raise objections leading to bloodshed only=20
when a Christian man marries a Muslim girl. Even when a Muslim man=20
marries a Christian girl, the children are expected to be raised as=20
Muslims. They say it comes from their religion.

Sylvia also remembers:

"And where we lived in Wah Cantonment we had a club and a swimming=20
pool where mixed bathing took place - and still nobody objected. In=20
fact I found the Pakistanis as a whole, and the Punjabis in=20
particular, very broad-minded and tolerant of others' ways."

Gill replies:

And where we lived in Lahore, this was not the case! Engineer Lewis=20
Hussein's family (Christians) were members of the Lahore Gymkhana. My=20
father was allowed to be one, but was just too much of a Jatt to take=20
his family clubbing. We did, however, go to cheer him in Gymkhana=20
riding competitions. Uncle Lal (Christian) was one of the managers=20
for Black and Decker, a former Police Officer, married to the=20
Divisional Education Inspector, and the son of one of India's=20
best-known judges - distinguished Brahmin converts. The local tandoor=20
bakery refused to bake their dough because they were Christian! My=20
father sent a couple of hearty plainclothes police sergeants to have=20
a word with the tandoor wala. When Queen Elizabeth visited Lahore,=20
she was referred to as the Big Sweepress, Chuhri, and S'haen who'd=20
come to give the sweepers a hand with cleaning up Lahore!

We can keep throwing incidents of individual observation at each=20
other, and they could go on forever. In my forthcoming novel (out in=20
June) Flight to Pakistan, there are a number of acknowledgements to=20
army officers who risked their careers to stand by me. My batman is=20
mentioned with his army number that I still remember - he was loyal=20
to the death, but he hated Christians! For the first few months in my=20
service, he refused to believe I was one! It was Muslim friends in=20
influential positions who advised us, and then helped us to leave=20
Pakistan.

All this does not disprove the persecution of Christians in Pakistan.

Just as the lovely family and personal relations prior to and even=20
during the alleged genocide of Bengalis by West Pakistanis you=20
mentioned in your recent posts does not mean there was no genocide.=20
Neither does it mean it happened overnight. It was the culminating=20
point of festering contempt and resentment, and I know how the=20
Bengalis I met resented being treated as second-class citizens=20
because of their darker skin and smaller size. Yet, since 1947, they=20
had been clubbing, socializing and swimming together.

Azam Gill France

Author of "Blood Money" - a "first class thriller" - Len Deighton

The Blue Ear message to which this one is a response can be read at:=20
http://www.blueear.com/message.cfm?MessageGUID=3D2C7EAD26-A067-45EF-A487-38=
235B041237

______

#5.

Letters to the Editor
DAWN, 13 January 2003

More equal than others

Without a doubt, Kuldip Nayyar is a friend of Pakistan and the=20
Pakistanis. This is evident from his writings on subjects relating to=20
the subcontinent. He is also an unbiased and unprejudiced writer=20
because, where necessary, he makes scathing criticism of India's=20
policies and programmes and does not shout "Mera Bharat Mahaan" from=20
rooftops, as most of his fellow scribes, politicians and even=20
creative people do nowadays.
I have had the privilege of speaking to him while in India with a=20
group of Pakistani schoolboys in 1997 and 2001 and he certainly has a=20
passion for Pakistan-India friendship. That is why one would like to=20
say that not only Mubashir Hasan but also many more Pakistanis should=20
have been present at the Wagah border to welcome Kuldip Nayyar with a=20
warm embrace.
A friend of mine, a schoolteacher in Karachi, saves throughout the=20
year so that his wife and he can travel to Hyderabad (Deccan) to meet=20
their families. The wife particularly looks forward to this annual=20
travel to meet her sisters some of whom are not particularly well off=20
to make the journey to Pakistan to meet their sister and=20
brother-in-law. One year when the wife was unwell and a lot of money=20
was spent on her medical treatment, my friend sold his old car to pay=20
for the airfare to Hyderabad (Deccan) and back. "My motorcycle is=20
good enough for my wife and I to move around and for my travel to=20
schools," said the friend with modesty.
In May 2001 I called my friend Sudhir Vyas, acting Indian High=20
Commissioner, to enquire if my friend and his wife could travel via=20
Wagah by walking across the no-man's land even, if necessary, by=20
carrying their own baggage if Pakistani and Indian collies have long=20
since moved elsewhere to make their living.
Mr Vyas replied.... well, never mind his actual words, but the crux=20
of the matter was that there was no way anyone could cross the border=20
even on foot. Then he went on to joke that perhaps both of us could=20
start a travel agency to arrange travel to India via Dubai which is=20
turning out to be more lucrative than a round-trip to London from=20
Pakistan and vice versa. The friend skipped the travel in 2002.
Why then was Kuldip Nayyar allowed to perform the same journey across=20
the no-man's land, his nostalgia for the same trip undertaken 55=20
years ago notwithstanding. His love for our people deeply honoured.=20
Why should there be two sets of laws for people with differing=20
backgrounds? Indeed, why should a hue and cry be made over the fact=20
that Asma Jehangir, Mubashir Hasan and I. A. Rehman had been refused=20
visas to visit India recently? Thousands upon thousands of Pakistanis=20
and Indians have been refused visas to travel to the other country=20
and their travels and meetings have not made life any easier for the=20
peoples of the two countries and are not likely to do so in the=20
future if the governments on sides of the divide continue to be=20
pig-headed!
ANWAR ABBAS
President, Pakistan-India People's Forum, (Karachi Chapter), Karachi

o o o

Letters to the Editor
DAWN, 20 January 2003

More equal than others

Anwar Abbas, the president of the Karachi chapter of the=20
Pakistan-India Peoples Forum, in his letter, 'More equal than others'=20
(Jan 13), echoes the feelings and perceptions of millions of Indians,=20
who consider themselves friends of Pakistan and its people.
I find it very difficult to believe that Pakistani friends of India -=20
Asma Jahangir, Mubashir Hasan and I. A. Rehman - are denied visas to=20
visit India. We Indians must feel privileged and honoured that such=20
great advocates of peace between our two countries would even want to=20
visit us.
India would honour itself in honouring such warriors for peace by=20
inviting them to visit India. But such a churlish action by the=20
Indian government makes me wonder if even Prime Minister Vajpayee=20
wants peace and friendship between our two countries.
By keeping Indians and Pakistanis away from each other, the two=20
governments simply prolong the agony and the extreme poverty suffered=20
by millions on both sides.
PREMKUMAR HARIMOHAN
New York, USA

_____

#6.

Entries are invited for the UNESCO-PPF (Pakistan Press Foundation)
Gender in Journalism Annual Awards for two print media journalists
from Pakistan.
One award will be for excellence in gender sensitive reporting
and will be open to both male and female journalists. The award
will recognize models of excellence and best practices in coverage
of gender related issues.
The second award will be for outstanding coverage of any issue
by a female journalist. The award will recognize the competence
and contributions of women to journalism who are role models to
women entering or planning to enter the profession.
News, columns, articles, and features published in Pakistani
publications during 2002 will be eligible for the Rs. 25,000
UNESCO/PPF Gender in Journalism Annual Awards. Journalists
and writers may nominate their own work, and editors and others
are encouraged to nominate stories they feel promote the
objectives of the award.
A panel of eight journalists and media professionals will judge the
entries. English or Urdu translations must be attached to entries
that are in other languages. The last date for receipt of entries is
January 31, 2003. Awards will be announced on the International
Women's Day: March 8, 2003.
Entries should be sent to the Coordinator, UNESCO-PPF Gender
in Journalism Award, Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF), Press
Centre, Shahrah Kamal Ataturk, Karachi, Pakistan. Tel: (92-21)
262-8729. Fax: (92-21) 262-1275. Email: ppf@c...

_____

#7.

The Hindu
Jan 21, 2003
Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Pseudo-secularism - II

By Gail Omvedt

A defence of secularism... has to begin with a critique of the ideas=20
that religion and society were uniquely intertwined in India, and=20
that Hinduism was uniquely tolerant.

WE NEED to ask some hard questions to understand why the current form=20
of secularism has apparently failed. There have been two forms of=20
Congress secularism - the Gandhian version, which believed Hinduism=20
was tolerant, and the Nehruvian version which added that whatever the=20
characteristics of the various religions may have been, it did not=20
matter because economic development and scientific culture would=20
provide a sufficient basis for secular tolerance. The Gandhian faith=20
in Hinduism's tolerance is shared by almost all intellectuals today;=20
the Nehruvian faith is still held by the Left. Both are wrong.

First, it is impossible to "found" secular values, or any values, on=20
reason and science alone. This has been a basic proposition of almost=20
all sociology, whether it derives from Weber, Durkheim or even Marx:=20
reason and science themselves have a complex relationship with=20
socio-economic production, and require a moral foundation. Nehru was=20
simply unrealistic in this respect, however noble his faith may have=20
been; and Indian leftists are equally unrealistic in ignoring the=20
particular characteristics of Indian society that have had crucial=20
influence on both economic development and scientific progress.

Second, a defence of "secularism", or any view that the state in the=20
modern world should distance itself from traditional religious=20
communities, has to begin with a critique of the ideas that religion=20
and society were uniquely intertwined in India, and that Hinduism was=20
uniquely tolerant. Such intertwining is a characteristic of all=20
pre-modern societies, and tolerance was never a special=20
characteristic of varna Hinduism or of Islam. (I use the term "varna=20
Hinduism" to distinguish the particular form of "Hinduism" which=20
based itself on traditional ideas of varnashrama dharma and the=20
authority of the Vedas and the Brahmans). Tolerance was also not a=20
characteristic of medieval Christianity! In Europe itself, the=20
supposed home of "modern secularism", it took centuries and bloody=20
wars for the state to withdraw itself from the control of the church.=20
Today, the process of this withdrawal is not complete in Europe or in=20
the U.S., in spite of the degree to which religious freedom was=20
deeply embedded in its founding values. Even today, in the U.S., huge=20
tax concessions are given to church-run religious educational=20
institutions (especially Catholic schools), while citizens are forced=20
to say that they pledge allegiance "to one nation, under God, with=20
liberty and justice for all" - an imposition on those citizens who=20
are atheists or who follow spiritual teachings that do not have the=20
concept of God.

Islam was not tolerant in its early period; neither was Christianity,=20
neither was varna Hinduism. In pre-modern times, all religions sought=20
to control state power in order to enforce their conceptions of the=20
sacred and the moral life; this normally included stigmatising other=20
views and those holding them; making such people second class=20
citizens in various ways, often destroying their religious sites and=20
attacking their sources of wealth. In all societies, the process of=20
modernisation has involved a struggle against this form of use of=20
state power - a process we call "secularisation". The intertwining of=20
sacred and social values, the way in which religions used state=20
power, varied. For Islam, it meant the idea that all Muslims were=20
equal members of a socio-religious community coupled with an urge to=20
bring all into the fold; this meant a fairly high degree of=20
intolerance for outsiders. For varna Hinduism, in contrast, the state=20
could "tolerate" different ways of life for different social groups=20
while insisting on the superiority and privileges of upper castes and=20
the disabilities of the lowest, i.e. being intolerant to claims of=20
equality.

The spread of Islam sought to make all people faithful Muslims. It=20
did so in various ways, by presenting them with a faith that gave=20
universality and equality for most, that stimulated their devotion,=20
that provided a new culture for many; it also used state power,=20
treating non-Muslims as second-class citizens whose status was often=20
precarious. Occasionally, force was used to convert people. But varna=20
Hinduism was not that tolerant either. Kings owing allegiance to=20
forms of varnashrama dharma destroyed the sacred places of Buddhism;=20
it was the Shaivite Shashanka, for example, who uprooted the tree=20
which was a symbol of the Buddha's enlightenment, while ideologically=20
the puranas of the Gupta period endorsed killing Buddhists, shudras=20
and others. The enforcement of the varna system was more oppressive=20
than the Shariat to significant numbers of Dalits and low castes;=20
thus, in later years Dalit-Bahujan leaders such as Mahatma Phule in=20
the 19th century could see this process of conversion as a liberating=20
opportunity for Shudras and Dalits enduring caste enslavement.

It is true that there were long centuries in India, where people of=20
different religious ideas and cultural values lived together in=20
peace. During these centuries, attitudes of tolerance for each=20
other's religious faith did develop and a process of symbiosis and=20
cultural pluralism resulted. But this was primarily due to two=20
factors. First, practical sultans and rajahs realised the need for=20
accommodation, and along with military and aristocratic forces=20
evolved ways of living together and common styles of life. The=20
Rajput-Mughal symbiosis is one example of this. Second, at the mass=20
level, there were innumerable Sufis and Sants who fought against=20
mullah Islam and priestly Brahmanism, pioneering equalitarian and=20
universalistic values and practices, which established ties among=20
communities rather than dividing them along caste and sectarian=20
lines, as part of a critique of the existing religious-political=20
powers. In other words, "secularism" or religious pluralism, in=20
India, has been a struggle and an achievement, not something that has=20
sprung automatically from the basic values of the dominant religious=20
and caste-class establishments. Establishing secularism today also=20
requires a fight against religious establishments and caste-gender=20
inequalities. One problem is that few proclaimed secularists have=20
recognised this. An important exception has been the philosopher=20
Akheel Bilgrami. In arguing that Nehru's secularism was at best a=20
holding action since it was in fact imposed "from outside" the=20
political process, he stresses that the process of building a=20
politically negotiated agreement among different religious groups and=20
communities requires fighting hierarchies such as Brahmanism. In=20
fact, the mutual understanding needed to live together in peace=20
cannot be achieved as long as the Brahmanic leadership of the VHP=20
presumes to speak for all "Hindus," or the orthodox mullahs for=20
"Muslims" or upper-caste church hierarchies for "Christians" and so=20
on. The varying religious and cultural communities in India have to=20
constitute themselves in new and more democratic ways. An example=20
might be seen in the early 20th century movement of the Akalis to=20
take control of Sikh holy places out of the hands of the traditional=20
mahants - a fight that contrasts starkly with the fact that the=20
temples of the bhakti movements are still controlled by priests of=20
only one caste.

What are the chances for alternative processes to take place?=20
Dalit-Bahujans and others in all the different religious communities=20
have begun to assert themselves; this takes varying forms. There have=20
been movements of "OBC Muslims" or "Dalit Christians"; there are=20
alternative cultural and literary movements everywhere. There are=20
important stirrings at the base of Indian society today, movements of=20
cultural and religious democraticisation. But these need political=20
and intellectual support. Here, if reluctance to deal with basic=20
ideological flaws, floundering by the Congress, sidelining of caste=20
and religious issues by the Left, and opportunism by Dalit-based=20
parties such as the BSP all continue, the outlook for a truly=20
democratic and pluralistic secular society, and the concurrent=20
dangers of intensified violence in the name of religion, will remain=20
dismal.

(Concluded)

____

#8.

The Hindustan Times
January 21, 2003
=09=20
Anti-consensus, pro-hate

by A.G. Noorani

The year 2002 witnessed one of the worst pogroms in the country=20
since Independence and a systematic spread of hate to secure an=20
electoral victory.

That object was accomplished. One would have expected that in its=20
aftermath, the prime minister of India would, in his traditional new=20
year musings, issue a fervent plea for unity in unambiguous terms in=20
a manner he alone can and should, bar, of course, the president of=20
India. The forces of hate and violence must be fought, not appeased.=20
As the Bible says: "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall=20
prepare himself to the battle?"

But Atal Bihari Vajpayee's Goa musings reveal, once again, that,=20
unlike Jawaharlal Nehru, the battle is not his to fight. He knew that=20
hate was spread in Gujarat - as it has never been in the country in=20
recent years - in the name of Hindutva. He decided to give the=20
concept respectability. "Secularism is being pitted against Hindutva=20
under the belief that the two are antithetical to one another. That=20
is incorrect and unacceptable." It is no consolation that, in a false=20
show of balance, he asked "some people" not to project Hindutva "in a=20
narrow, rigid and extreme manner".

Neither Vivekananda nor Aurobindo, whom Vajpayee quoted, ever spoke=20
of Hindutva at all - but of Hinduism. Why did he not follow their=20
example? Why did he opt for Hindutva, a term 'coined' only in 1923 by=20
V.D. Savarkar in his essay Hindutva? A person can be a devout=20
believer in the noble faith of Hinduism and yet be a committed=20
secularist. But one who believes in Hindutva cannot be secular.

Unlike Vajpayee, his deputy, L.K. Advani, had no hesitation in=20
declaring at Port Blair on May 4: "There is no reason to feel shy of=20
Hindutva propounded at great length by Veer Savarkar... We must=20
remember that the great pioneers of Hindutva like Veer Savarkar and=20
RSS founder Hedgewar kindled fierce nationalistic spirit that=20
contributed to India's liberation. There is no need to redefine=20
Hindutva."

The BJP's 1996 and 1998 election manifestoes swore by Hindutva.=20
Hence, Vajpayee's sophistry. He is the leader of the Hindutva brigade=20
but seeks to reach out to others repelled by the ideology and by the=20
deeds committed in its name. Throughout his essay, Savarkar, a=20
practising atheist, was at pains to demonstrate that "Hindutva is not=20
identical with what is vaguely indicated by the term Hinduism". He=20
had, repeatedly emphasised, "coined" the term Hindutva.

"There was a clear line of demarcation between the two conceptions,"=20
Hindutva and Hinduism. RSS supremo M.S. Golwalkar publicly=20
acknowledged his debt to Savarkar. His book Bunch of Thoughts has a=20
whole chapter denouncing "territorial nationalism" (Ch. X), that is,=20
all who are born on Indian territory belong to the Indian nation.

He adopted Savarkar's theory of "cultural nationalism". It is=20
embodied in the BJP's manifestoes of 1996 and 1998. "Our nationalist=20
vision is not merely bound by the geographical or political identity=20
of India, but defined by one ancient cultural heritage. From this=20
belief flows our faith in cultural nationalism which is the core of=20
Hindutva." Vajpayee deludes nobody by depicting Hindutva to be what=20
it plainly is not.

It is on this plank of Hindutva, as it is commonly, correctly=20
understood, that the BJP will fight the assembly elections and the=20
Lok Sabha elections in 2004. That bodes ill for our polity, divided=20
as it is already. No one talks of the politics of consensus anymore=20
these days, least of all the PM. He is out to project his party's=20
narrow agenda as that of the nation and criticise those who contest=20
this dangerous approximation.

At Mumbai on January 6, Vajpayee accused the opposition of putting up=20
hurdles in the government's path! "Whenever we attempt to go in the=20
right direction, we face difficulties." The instance he cited=20
revealed a lot. It was the changes in history textbooks. Given the=20
fundamental divide between the BJP and all the other political=20
parties on this sensitive issue, did his government care to forge a=20
consensus on it?

Amidst all this, a solitary plea for consensus has largely gone=20
unnoticed. It was made by a senior figure in the Congress who is=20
known for his distaste for partisanship - a quintessential statesman,=20
Manmohan Singh. The proposal he made was a modest one, but its=20
implications are far-reaching.

On December 20, in his customary speech as leader of the opposition=20
in the Rajya Sabha at the end of the winter session of Parliament, he=20
called for national unanimity on not pulling down the newly elected=20
Mufti government in Kashmir and pledged that the Congress would play=20
the role of a "constructive opposition".

He pointed out that Kashmir, the crisis in the Gulf, the future of=20
SAARC, the fight against terrorism and the means to achieve the=20
desired growth in the country would prove testing issues for the=20
country in the immediate future. Indeed, there is hardly any major=20
issue of national policy, especially in the foreign sphere, on which=20
any government can speak credibly and act successfully without a=20
national consensus.

In September 2001, a little over a year ago, Chinese Vice Minister=20
for Foreign Affairs Want Yi told an Indian correspondent that China=20
was not sure "if the Indian political establishment had arrived at a=20
democratic consensus that would be required to sustain the difficult=20
negotiations" on the boundary question.

He was absolutely right. Without the consensus, parleys on subsidiary=20
issues, like delineation of the line of actual control, serve only to=20
provide an illusion of progress. The main task - a settlement of the=20
dispute itself - no government has dared to tackle in all these=20
decades for fear of inviting a democratic backlash and imperilling=20
its own survival. Politics takes precedence over the national=20
interest.

In Kashmir, the Congress, a national party, is in coalition with a=20
regional party, the PDP. On some issues their views are bound to=20
differ. Party warfare at the national level will exacerbate the=20
situation.

None of this implies, of course, that the democratic debate be=20
suspended. In mature democracies, the debate proceeds apace amidst=20
continuous consultation between the government and the opposition. In=20
our deeply divided polity, there is very little of such consultation.=20
Having tasted the fruits of Hindutva in Gujarat, it is unlikely that=20
the BJP will heed Manmohan Singh's pleas. We are in for bitter and=20
divisive politics in the months ahead.

Despite it all, Manmohan Singh did well to speak as he did. His plea=20
was addressed not only to the government but to a wider audience. The=20
nation heard him enunciate a constructive alternative to the politics=20
of Hindutva. Unlike Hindutva, it is not an ignoble vision.

____

#9.

[20.1.2003]

WOMEN'S Self Respect DAY

Stree Adhikar Sangthan active in Delhi and some other places in North=20
India observed the 75th Anniversary of the 'Burning of Manu Smriti'=20
(25 December 1927) as Women's Self Respect Day on 23rd December=20
2002.It may be told that it was on this day 75 years ago that=20
thousands of people came together under the leadership of the=20
greatest of the Dalits Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar to consign to flames=20
Manusmriti the 'sacred' book which epitomised and legitimised the=20
subhuman existence of the socially and culturally downtrodden in the=20
Indian society, especially the dalits and the women .
According to the Sangathan officially the Manusmriti might have been=20
replaced by the more egalitarian Indian Constitution more than fifty=20
years ago but at an informal level it continues to hold sway over the=20
thinking and actions of a vast majority of the Indian people.=20
Dalits, women and a broad section of the other socially oppressed=20
strata are still condemned to live under the oppressive structures=20
and institutions sanctified by Manusmriti.

To underline the fact of the societal violence which continues=20
unabated till date Stree Adhikar Sangathan decided to celebrate the=20
day when Manusmriti was burnt as a day for Women's Dignity " Stree=20
Samman Divas". As part of this celebrations it decided to hold a=20
seminar to debate and discuss the condition of the Indian women whose=20
life is still mired in the age old patriarchal traditions and=20
institutions.It cannot be denied that the post independence women's=20
movement has taken great strides towards the path of women's=20
emancipation.But it need be underlined at the same time that much=20
remains to be done so that even ordinary women can participate in the=20
running of the society and the state with equal elan.

To recap the events 75 years ago it may be told that Dr.Babasaheb=20
Ambedkar had organised a public conflagration of Manu Smriti 75=20
years ago (25th December 1927) Definitley this was a hard blow on the=20
slavery of Dalits and Women going on for thousands of years. As a=20
first step to this earlier on 19-20 March 1927 thousands of Dalits=20
and others dedicated to social change marched under the leadership of=20
Dr.Ambedkar , to the Chavadar Lake at Mahad (Maharashtra) and drew=20
water from the lake which was prohibited to them by the upper caste=20
people. This symbolic act not only challenged the ageold Brahminical=20
system but was also a declaration of the Human Rights of the Dalits.

Stree Adhikar Sangthan endeavoured to bring into focus many important=20
issues on this occasion in the Seminar on 'Woman,Tradition and=20
Culture' at the Delhi University. It brought out the essential=20
similarities between Projects for emancipation of Dalits and of=20
Women and underlined the fact that not enough attention has been=20
paid to this aspect by the women's movement.

The occasion was also availed of to accord civic honour to Ms=20
Bhanvri Devi the valiant figheter against child-marriage and sexual=20
violence from Rajsthan. She was felicitated at the hands of an=20
equally determined fighter Smt..Shahjahan Apa,an eminent social=20
activist in Delhi. Smt. Bhanvri Devi was awarded a copperplate and=20
Rs,.10,000/- in cash.

The eminent scholar Smt. Uma Chakravarti and Prof.Tulshi Ram of JNU=20
spoke on the occasion.. They underlined some important points in=20
their deliveris. It was revealed Women have actively participated in=20
various movemens for their emancipation in India. They have also=20
played a leading role in movements against Globalisation to=20
Fighting Communal Fascism and from caste exploitation to fight=20
displacement .However, it has to be admitted that much still remains=20
to be done.The partriarchal social system based on age-old cultural=20
values and traditions are the two stumbling blocks in women's full=20
participation in the struggles. Despite the official liquidation of=20
the 'constitution' as laid down by Manu Smriti more than 50 years=20
ago it still holds the Indian society in a vice-like grip. The worst=20
sufferers of this are the Dalits and women. Prof. Tulsi Ram threw=20
light on the anti-Dalit and anti-Women character of Manu Smriti..Smt.=20
Chakravarti called for a proper understanding of the nature of the=20
caste,sex and class exploitation and effectively intervene in them.=20
Smt. Shahjahan Apa narrated how she came to join the social movment=20
after her own daughter fell a victim to dowry-death.Smt. Bhanvri Devi=20
clarified that her struggle for justice was still continuing.She=20
called upon that should she die without getting justice the struggle=20
should continue.It is significant to note that the influential=20
Gujjars from the village charged with rape of Bhanvri were let off by=20
the Court with the observation that upper caste people like them=20
could not commit such act with a Dalit woman. The entire crowd in the=20
Hall became sentimental when Bhanvri Devi was being felicitated.They=20
gave a standing ovation to her, the Hall reverbated with=20
revolutionary salutes to Bhanvri Devi.Slogans were also raised=20
denouncing the ageold Brahminical system.

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

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.
\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|
--=20