[sacw] SACW | 10 Jan. 03

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 10 January 2003

CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY -- GUJARAT 2002: A report on the 
investigations, findings and recommendations of the Concerned 
Citizens' Tribunal
on http://www.sabrang.com.

FOREIGN EXCHANGE OF HATE- IDRF and the American Funding of Hindutva
A report on the US-based organization -- the India Development and 
Relief Fund (IDRF), which has systematically funded Hindutva 
operations in India.
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/2002/FEH/

__________________________

#1. Pakistan-India tensions more dangerous than Cold War: US (Jawed Naqvi)
#2. Late Prof Rafi Ullah Shehab on MMA's Islamisation drive in Pakistan
#3. Beginning of the end in India (Rajni Kothari)
#4. January issue of Himal
#5. Halting Hindutva's March (Praful Bidwai)
#6. Amartya Sen warns against exclusivism (Anita Joshua)
#7. A comment on the just-concluded Asian Social Forum (Praful Bidwai)

__________________________

#1.

DAWN
09 January 2003

Pakistan-India tensions more dangerous than Cold War: US
By Jawed Naqvi

NEW DELHI, Jan 8: The United has described the tensions between India 
and Pakistan as more dangerous than the scariest period during the 
Cold War, according to the text of an official statement made 
available by the US embassy on Wednesday.
In what can only be construed as a major policy statement on the way 
ahead for India-Pakistan relations but downplayed by the Indian 
media, US State Department envoy Richard Haass spoke tersely and 
directly to New Delhi about the need to mend fences with Islamabad.
The following is an excerpt from an address Haass delivered in 
Hyderabad on Tuesday. "Let me now talk about another area that 
continues to colour the US partnership with India: that of 
Indo-Pakistani relations," Haass said. "Neither the United States nor 
India want our bilateral relationship to be conducted through the 
prism of India's relationship with Pakistan.
"The United States - as much as India - wants to devote the time we 
spend talking about the threat of conflict in South Asia to other, 
more positive issues. America - as much as India - is eager to see a 
thriving, peaceful and democratic India take its place in the world.
"But it is simply a fact of life that India will not realize its 
immense potential on the global stage until its relationship with 
Pakistan is normalized. "If India were to have a better relationship 
with Pakistan, it would be free to emerge as the major world actor 
that it ought to be. The festering conflict with Pakistan distracts 
India from its larger ambitions, helps create the environment that 
scares off capital, and absorbs valuable resources.
"The ability of both Pakistanis and Indians to reap the benefits of 
the 21st century will depend to a large degree on their willingness 
to build a more normal relationship with one another.
"The current situation is distinctly abnormal - even by the standards 
of adversaries. Today, the Indo-Pakistani relationship is less 
developed than that between the United States and the Soviet Union at 
the height of the Cold War. "Even in the worst of times, trade flowed 
between the two countries, Washington and Moscow hosted ambassadors 
from the other country, and cultural exchanges went ahead.
"Throughout the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union - 
who were not neighbours like India and Pakistan, but two countries on 
opposite sides of the globe - recognized that maintaining 
considerable interaction was in their mutual interest.
"In the absence of the most basic contacts and the most minimal lines 
of communication, tension between India and Pakistan constantly risks 
sparking a broader conflict with potentially cataclysmic consequences 
- for India, for Pakistan, for the region, and, if I might say, for 
the United States.
"But, even if such a conflict never materializes, the omnipresent 
spectre of it has huge tangible costs. It limits the ability of both 
India and Pakistan to seize opportunities to better the lives of 
their peoples.
"The time, energy, and resources New Delhi and Islamabad now devote 
to countering one another could instead be focused on tackling 
respective domestic challenges as well as the problems of Asian 
stability writ large.
"Given the wide repercussions of Indo-Pakistani tensions, it is no 
wonder that the international community has repeatedly called on the 
Indian and Pakistani governments to normalize their relationship. It 
is a responsibility they have to their own peoples, to their 
neighbours, and all of humanity.
"The world is not asking India and Pakistan to do anything that other 
states have not done. Numerous countries have moved beyond their own 
contentious histories in order to secure a better future. Look at 
Germany and France, Japan and Korea, Brazil and Argentina. And now 
the United States and Russia.
"A more normal relationship between India and Pakistan is not 
impossible to envision. Normalcy does not mean an absence of 
disagreement. Rather, normalcy means a resilient relationship that 
would allow India and Pakistan to weather inevitable shocks and 
setbacks without the risk of violent conflict or a nuclear crisis.
"Normalcy means that differences are resolved through diplomacy, not 
force. In this time of heightened tension, we are in an unusual 
situation where neither country has a High Commissioner in the 
capital of the other.
"But even in less tense times, diplomatic presence and exchange was 
minimal. An expansion of diplomatic links could facilitate 
people-to-people contacts and lay the groundwork for greater 
bilateral cooperation on a range of common interests.
"Normalcy also means a relationship wherein Indians and Pakistanis 
from all walks of life can easily travel to the other country for 
family visits, tourism, sports or business. It should not take more 
time to fly from New Delhi to Islamabad than it does to fly from 
Delhi to London.
"Normalcy means that the cricket matches between India and Pakistan 
that once captivated millions in South Asia and around the world 
would be only one of many kinds of people-to-people interaction. 
Normalcy means market-driven commerce. Today, legal trade and 
investment between the two countries is virtually non-existent.
"Developing natural commercial links could bring greater prosperity 
to both countries and, in the process, build constituencies for 
normalization and increase the stake that each country has in the 
peaceful resolution of disputes. In this regard, it is time to take 
practical steps to bring about a South Asian Free Trade Area.
"Most of all, normalcy means that Kashmir would be addressed 
peacefully. In fact, much has already changed in Kashmir, even since 
my last visit to South Asia this past autumn.
"The US welcomes the new state government in Jammu and Kashmir and 
commends its bold initiatives to reduce tensions and bring about a 
climate of reconciliation in a region that has too long been mired in 
strife."And we are pleased by the commitment of the central 
government to hold a serious dialogue with the J&K state government 
and others in Kashmir. These discussions are essential if the quest 
to improve the lives and livelihoods of the Kashmiri people is to 
succeed.
"Now is clearly a moment of opportunity in Kashmir - one that New 
Delhi, the Mufti government, and the people of the region can 
collectively translate into tangible political and economic benefits.
"Such efforts will not in themselves 'solve' the complex issues of 
Indo-Pakistani differences, terrorist violence, human rights, and 
governance that converge in Kashmir. But they are important steps in 
the right direction.
"They will bring Kashmir closer to a solution that will be peaceful 
and honourable for all sides, one that will allow Kashmiris to live 
their daily lives in safety, with dignity and opportunity.
"Sadly, this opportunity continues to be narrowed by terrible acts of 
violence in Kashmir. I am saddened by the recent assassination of 
Abdul Aziz Mir, one of the governing coalition's Assembly members.
"I am also deeply disturbed by the horrific murders of three young 
Kashmiri women on 19 December and by the deaths of others in 
subsequent weeks. Let me be clear: violence serves the interests of 
no one. As Mehbooba Mufti, vice-president of the People's Democratic 
Party, said in a recent party statement, 'it is a historic fact that 
the gun yields nothing, but adds miseries to the people and users'."
"I cannot predict what a solution to the Kashmir problem might look 
like or when it will come. But there are a few things about which I 
am certain. First, the status of the Line of Control will not be 
changed unilaterally.
"Second, the LoC will also not be changed by violence. To the 
contrary, in the absence of a jointly agreed Indo-Pakistani 
alternative, everyone should act to ensure the continued sanctity of 
the LoC. For its part, the US will continue to urge President 
Musharraf to do everything in his power to permanently end 
infiltration into Kashmir. Pakistanis must realize that this 
infiltration is killing their hopes for a settlement to Kashmir.
"I have been to Pakistan many times, most recently this past October. 
I believe I have an appreciation for the depth of feeling Pakistanis 
have for Kashmir. "Nevertheless, I would discourage Pakistanis from 
allowing their focus on resolving the Kashmir dispute to block 
progress on other issues that involve India and that hold out the 
promise of an improved bilateral relationship. I have worked on 
regional conflicts for almost three decades - be it Cyprus, Northern 
Ireland, or the Middle East. "And if there is one lesson I have 
learned, it is that the inability to resolve big issues should not 
stop progress on the little ones. The path to large breakthroughs is 
often paved with agreements on small issues.
"The US stands shoulder to shoulder with India in its battle against 
terrorists, be they those who struck at New York and Washington in 
September 2001 or those who targeted the Indian parliament a few 
months later.
"Indeed, given all that India has suffered at the hands of 
terrorists, I can understand Indian government's statements that 
India will not have a dialogue with Pakistan until terrorism 
emanating from Pakistani territory ends. However, I am concerned that 
such a position does not provide the basis for a sound, long-term 
policy for India to deal with its neighbour.
"Indeed, I would argue that India, like Pakistan, has an interest in 
removing conditions to dialogue. India is too great a country, too 
important a regional and potentially global player, to allow a 
relationship with a neighbour to keep it from realizing its potential 
on the world stage.
"Resuming a range of contacts with Pakistan at this time would not 
mean rewarding terrorism. Indians should not view efforts to improve 
relations with Pakistan as a favour to its neighbour. Rather, Delhi 
should seek to diminish tensions with Islamabad as a way of securing 
a better future for itself. India should also recognize that there 
are important developments unfolding in Pakistan that can contribute 
to a more stable, secure region.
"I would hope that New Delhi would respond to these changes by taking 
small steps - beyond the welcome reduction in military deployments on 
the international border. India could acknowledge encouraging events 
where they exist, including Pakistan's assistance in the war against 
Al Qaeda and the Taliban, President Musharraf's vision of a reformed 
Pakistan, and the emergence of civilian leaders.
"India should look for opportunities to reach out to and reinforce 
the new civilian government in Islamabad. Supporting positive 
developments in Pakistan does not mean condoning or overlooking the 
many serious matters that Pakistan still must address. But it does 
mean saying and doing things that help encourage favourable trends 
within Pakistan and make possible more normal ties with it."

______

#2.

The Nation (Pakistan)
10 January 2003
Opinion Pages
http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/100103/editor/opi4.htm

MMA's Islamisation
Prof Rafi Ullah Shehab

Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) has achieved an extra ordinary success 
in the recent national elections. Their leaders have claimed that the 
masses voted for the Holy Quran which was the election symbol of the 
MMA as they wanted the enforcement of the Islamic system in the 
country. They have been able to form governments in two provinces and 
are in a position to translate their slogan of Islamisation into a 
reality. 
To give the impression that the MMA is serious to implement its 
agenda, their chief ministers have taken a number of steps to 
Islamise the society but unfortunately these could not be justified 
in the light of the teachings of Islam. Instead, as will be shown in 
the following lines, these were based on the defective knowledge of 
Islam which gave the impression that they have no idea of the 
methodology for enforcing the Islamic system.
It was expected from them to present a blue-print of the Islamic 
system which they wanted to enforce. But instead of doing so they 
declared to implement the recommendations of the Council of Islamic 
Ideology which were ignored by the previous governments. The present 
scribe had tried his best to get a copy of these recommendations but 
was told that these were secret documents. It is not known how the 
MMA came to know of it.
The Council had earlier tried to pamper the Ulema in the case of 
Muslim Family laws and family planning. These were totally against 
the clear teachings of Islam and I challenged the then chairman of 
the Council to have a public debate with me on these issues but they 
avoided. The Council was also associated with the codification of the 
Hudood Ordinances promulgated by the military dictator General Zia. 
These were welcomed by all the Ulema which agitated my mind and in a 
number of articles in the national Press established that these were 
based on defective knowledge of Islamic law. Now the MMA by placing a 
fresh ban on drinking have supported my viewpoint. It is imperative 
that before implementing these recommendations, these should be made 
public so that they could be judged in the light of Islamic teachings.
The MMA instead of solving the acute problems faced by the nation is 
wasting its energies on trivial issues. The attitude of its women MPs 
at the time of oath-taking, exposed their knowledge of Islam. They 
took their oaths while covering their full faces while gold ornaments 
glittered on their wrists.
The Holy Prophet (PBUH) in the light of the Quranic injunction had 
exempted the women from covering their faces, hands up to wrists and 
feet. All the great Muslim jurists held the same view. But the MMA is 
compelling women to cover their faces. They not only rejected this 
Quranic injunction but also ignored the stern warning of the Holy 
Prophet (PBUH) about wearing of gold ornaments by Muslim women which 
were declared as 'haraam'. He warned the believers that those who 
dared to provide gold ornaments to womenfolk, they would all be 
chastised with these ornaments on Judgment Day.
The MMA by ignoring the teachings of Islam about these issues, have 
converted Halaal (uncovering of faces) into Haraam and Haraam (gold 
ornaments) into Halaal. Keeping in view this attitude of MMA, fears 
are being expressed that it believes in a different version of Islam. 
The Islamisation steps taken so far have established that the 
programme was a fraud. They have placed a fresh ban on drinking wine 
while the Hudood Ordinance promulgated by General Zia some 
twenty-three years ago for this purpose has been practically rejected 
by them as un-Islamic.
Their ban on music which prompted them to raid video shops and attack 
on a circus in Quetta was more funny. Had they cared to have a look 
on the chapter 'Taqlees' in Seerat-un-Nabi by Allama Shibli, 
acknowledged by them as an authentic document, would not have 
provided a chance to their opponents to laugh on them. Similarly 
their insistence on replacing Friday instead of Sunday as a weekly 
holiday has amused the nation as no injunction in this respect is 
available in the Holy Quran or any other book of Islamic teachings. 
It is hoped that instead of wasting their energies the leaders of MMA 
will adopt the proper methodology for the enforcement of Islam.
This methodology insists on first enforcing those Islamic laws on 
which the jurists of all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence 
including those of the Jafriah school totally agree. Our previous 
rulers who were not reluctant to enforce the Islamic system, always 
argued that different Muslim sects have different interpretations of 
Islam and it was not possible to satisfy all of them. But they 
ignored the fact that there were some basic issues on which the 
jurists of all the schools totally agreed. The enforcement of these 
agreed basic issues would have helped in enforcing the complete 
Islamic system long time ago.
Financial system of Islam on which the foundation of Islamic Welfare 
State is laid, is one of these issues. Its major source of revenue is 
Kharaj on lands which are treated as the joint property of the whole 
nation managed by the State on its behalf. These lands can neither be 
purchased nor sold so the question of feudalism does not arise. Today 
feudalism is condemned by all the political parties. They at the time 
of recent elections promised to eliminate this evil from the country. 
So there will be no hindrance in the enforcement of the Islamic law 
of land management.
It may be mentioned here that it is one of those basic Islamic laws 
that even those Ulema who had adopted soft attitude towards monarchy, 
refused to compromise on it. They had issued a strong edict that if 
any Muslim ruler dared to tamper with it, he should be put to death. 
(Ahkam-ul-Quran by Qazi Abu Bakr Jassas vol: III, p-32).
As a result this Islamic law remained enforced in all Muslim 
countries throughout history. Its details are available in every book 
of jurisprudence including its primer 'Ma-La-Bud-Minho' which is 
taught to the students of Dars-i-Nizami in the very beginning.
This Islamic law will eliminate feudalism and immediately solve fifty 
percent of the nation's problems which are corollaries of this evil. 
The political system will be freed from their clutches. Agricultural 
lands will be handed over to the actual tillers who as a result of 
use of agricultural machinery were compelled to migrate to big 
cities. Their return will solve the problem of kachi abadis 
automatically. Ghost schools, which deprive the poor of their basic 
right of education, will be revived. There will be no honour killings 
which have brought bad name to the country. Last but not the least, 
the construction of Kalabagh Dam will become a reality as it is being 
opposed by feudals for their ulterior motives. 
Further, the Zakat & Ushr Ordinance which had struck at the very 
roots of Islamic law in Pakistan will have to be repealed at once, 
and the deduction of Zakat from the Haraam in bank-interest be 
stopped forthwith. Mufti Mahmood, the father of the Secretary General 
of MMA, had condemned this deduction on various counts dubbing it 
Haraam Riba. Unfortunately today a large number of Deeni Madaris are 
being run on this money. MMA will have to save them from this Haraam 
by restoring the Islamic status of Zakat.
There are many other issues on which the jurists of all sects totally 
agree such as providing shelter to the shelterless, ban on smoking 
and a unified education system. The enforcement of these agreed 
Islamic laws will pave the way for the enforcement of complete 
Islamic system. It is hoped that if the MMA is honest in its slogan 
of Islamisation, it will adopt this effective methodology and not 
waste its energies on trivial issues which have no relevance in the 
present day Muslim society.
Prof RafiUllah Shehab passed away on Sunday, January 5.

______

#3.

The Hindustan Times
Friday, January 10, 2003

Beginning of the end
Rajni Kothari
The full import of the Gujarat elections lies in the central role 
played by violence and its harvest. This was far more than the 
specific role played by either the BJP or even Narendra Modi. The 
groundswell of support for Modi and his party is to be found 
particularly in areas where communal riots were engineered or simply 
took place.

Even the anti-Muslim vitriolic thrust that got the support of not 
just the constituents of the Sangh parivar but also of diverse social 
segments - including the most peripheral and suffering classes - 
appears to be secondary to the frightening role played by violence, 
ranging from communal riots to mass murders across communities and 
classes.

This was the most important reason for the tidal wave that went in 
favour of the more militant segments of the BJP. It is, therefore, 
for nothing that the VHP's Praveen Togadia is talking of repeating 
the Gujarat performance in other states where elections are due in 
the coming months and years. As a matter of fact, it is the 
combination of the VHP led by the Togadia phenomenon and actual 
violence - the former riding on the latter and posing a challenge to 
the BJP national leadership - that provides the new political thrust.

It is a completely new and vitriolic impetus that goes not just 
beyond party politics that we have been used to, but also beyond the 
BJP and the complex structure of the Sangh parivar. Till now, this 
structure consisted of both the hard Hindutva preached by the likes 
of Togadia and segments of the RSS that were engaged in working 
towards equations with the BJP and the NDA coalition. What is 
emerging is not so much a competition between the Congress and the 
BJP, but an internal polarisation within the parivar, giving 
particular force and power to the VHP and individuals like Togadia 
who were earlier considered to be marginal players. This new lot have 
even pushed one-time hawkish elements like L.K. Advani into a corner.

In reality, the Gujarat election and the growing role of violence in 
Indian politics has mounted a major and unprecedented challenge to 
the democratic polity of India and a civil society based on great 
diversity and a pluralist overview. The Congress seems to find itself 
thrown overboard - finding itself defeated by a raw and deeply 
aggressive force that lies much beyond political parties, leadership 
and all other socio-political factors. Nothing else could have been 
so aggressively effective in carrying forward the powerful thrust of 
social violence in the form of communal riots that became the 
breeding ground of 'success' in the electoral outcome in Gujarat.

Such a role of violence in effecting changes and transformations in 
the political process has also had its own political and 
institutional consequences. Basically, it has resulted in the 
complete turnaround of social and political forces leading to an 
erosion of both institutions and ideologies. In the process, it has 
signalled the ride forward of organised chaos and anarchy, making 
'violence' not just a process of undermining institutional aspects, 
but a force that heralds what one could call the 'beginning of the 
end'.

The consequences of this are likely to be quite far-reaching. All the 
dimensions through which we were able to analyse and discuss social 
and political phenomena in India - the democratic process, party 
politics, parliamentary institutions, the secular thrust of politics, 
civil society, the federal structure, the growing importance of local 
and decentralised levels, grassroots politics and moving towards new 
alternatives in keeping with people's aspirations and movements - are 
likely to suffer growing erosion and disintegration. All that will 
remain will be the strident growth of the raw and deeply corrosive 
force of violence on which neither national leaderships nor 
institutions engaged for decades in democratic nation-building are 
likely to have any capacity to intervene.

Then there is what I call the 'Togadia phenomenon'. In my view, this 
represents the new and fast-unfolding phase of the Indian State and 
its civil society indicating a complete rout of grassroots politics 
of the social democratic variety and of the kinds indicated by the 
upsurge of the masses and the peripheral classes at the lower reaches 
of the social structure. The latter were beginning to challenge both 
the status quo and the extreme swings towards the Right. The Togadia 
phenomenon has triggered an onslaught on the full panorama of 
democratic institutions and party politics, replacing it all by an 
already fascist restructuring of the polity and the nation.

The Togadia phenomenon has heralded a completely new political 
culture and its psychological and emotional nuances have emerged at 
the very bottom and middle tiers of civil society. It also engages in 
an outright remoulding of the diverse elements - institutional and 
cultural - involved in each of them. The full import of this is borne 
out by the growing alienation of the VHP under Togadia from both 
Vajpayee and Advani, both of them being targets of the VHP 
rabble-rouser's onslaught.

With it, we are witness to a major turmoil within the Sangh parivar 
itself, represented by the 'Vajpayee face' of the BJP, and the Sangh 
parivar and the newly assertive politics of Togadia. This point is 
particularly brought out by the latter's own political manifesto: "We 
will repeat Gujarat all over the country, making the whole country a 
laboratory to establish its 'supremacy' in India. This is our promise 
and our resolve." In fact he goes much further. He thunders, "If 
madrasas and the jehadi laboratory are allowed to educate to kill 
non-Muslims, why can't we have our own laboratory?"

>From all this emerges a new political cocktail: violence at large 
along with the new ideological thrust represented by the rabid, 
almost fascist manifestation of the politics of what started as the 
Sangh parivar. This is now reaching far beyond. Which is why I call 
it the 'beginning of the end'.

______

#4.

In the January Himal
+ Asia special - 5 specialists ponder the continent, or the lack of it
+ Nepal's war in the west
+ Commitment on the Himalayan slopes
+ Journeys of silence and forgiveness in Bangladesh
www.himalmag.com

______

#5.

Rediff.com
January 08, 2003

Halting Hindutva's March
Praful Bidwai

As political India debates whether the Bharatiya Janata Party can 
replicate the Modi 'formula' -- of using violence to create communal 
polarisation and win votes -- in the states that soon go for assembly 
elections, it becomes relevant to ask if the BJP's opponents too will 
repeat the strategies they employed in Gujarat.

An analysis of the final detailed election results shows that the BJP 
gained as much from 'negative' factors, or its opponents' mistakes, 
as it did from a 'positive' one, namely, its own communal appeal. 
While the second factor greatly influenced electoral choices in 
Gujarat's central and northern regions, which were worst affected by 
violence, the effects of the second were far more widespread.

It turns out that the BJP failed to cross the halfway mark, its votes 
totaling 10.13 million or 49.79 percent of those polled -- from an 
electorate of 32.9 million. Just 31 percent of the electors voted for 
it. The 'secular' parties bagged 9.44 million votes, totaling the 
ballots polled by the Congress, NCP, Congress 'rebels,' CPI, CPI-M, 
Samajwadi Party and Janata Dal-United. In addition to the 53 seats 
the Congress and JD-U won, there were as many as 40 other 
constituencies in which secular candidates would have won had they 
not divided the anti-BJP vote between themselves.

Of course, Gujarat's true shame is that the BJP's vote rose by six 
percentage points -- despite the butchery of 2,000 Indian citizens 
and the rule of lynch law, on top of its abysmal governance. But its 
victory was less sweeping that it first seemed.

Dividing votes was not the only mistake the secular parties made. The 
Congress' two other great errors lay in not fully mobilising the 
party's organisational machine, and more grave, in not taking the BJP 
head-on on the central issues of Hindutva, 'terrorism' and national 
'security.'

Thus, the Congress allowed its factions led by Messrs Shankersinh 
Vaghela, Madhavsinh Solanki, Amarsinh Chaudhary and Urmila Patel to 
sabotage 'rival' candidates. The party controls 80 per cent of 
Gujarat's municipalities and 70 per cent of village panchayats. But 
it didn't bring their cadres into the campaign. It failed to 
coordinate its work with anti-communal NGOs. Instead of playing a 
hands-on role, Ms Sonia Gandhi left matters to the mediocre 
leadership of Mr Kamal Nath and Mr Vaghela, including candidate 
selection and campaign slogans.

The Congress' fatal error was that it didn't ideologically demarcate 
itself from the BJP nor challenged the BJP's equation of Hindutva 
with nationalism. Mr Modi's rantings about 'Miyan Musharraf,' and his 
ludicrous charges about Indian Muslims' 'treachery' and collusion 
with Pakistan, went uncontested. Mr Vaghela, who stressed that he has 
'no ideological differences with the RSS,' had no answer to this. Nor 
did the Congress refer to the communal pogrom. It left the field open 
to the BJP's toxic campaign on Godhra.

Logically, the Congress should have strongly attacked the BJP's 
demonisation of Indian Muslims as Pakistan's Fifth Column. The Indian 
Muslims' total rejection of jihad is remarkable and exemplary, indeed 
unique. As former Research & Analysis Wing official B Raman says, 
'not a single Indian Muslim -- not even from J&K' -- ever joined 
Afghanistan's mujahideen in the 1980s, bin Laden's International 
Islamic Front in the 1990s, or Al Qaeda/Taliban more recently. No 
Muslim from the rest of India has joined Kashmir's militant 
Islamicists. The amazing restraint and patriotic spirit shown by 
Indian Muslims is probably unmatched anywhere else.

Yet, the BJP's campaign all but equated Hindutva with nationalism and 
claimed a special, 'natural,' status for RSS-style 'patriotism.' The 
Congress should have ruthlessly exposed Hindutva as divisive, 
extremist, deeply ill-liberal and incompatible with India's composite 
culture, its pluralism, and the Constitutional values of democracy, 
secularism and universal citizenship. It should have pointed out 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. The 
Congress left the BJP's poisonous propaganda uncontested. Yet, it is 
precisely this national-chauvinist platform that the Congress, the 
principal Opposition party, will have to oppose in the forthcoming 
elections if it is to mount a spirited ideological challenge to the 
BJP.

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

This is the key to confronting the BJP in states like Himachal, 
Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Nagaland and Delhi -- apart 
from Manipur and Meghalaya -- where elections are due in coming 
months. The BJP will go to these polls on 
'national-security-is-in-danger-from-terrorism' platform. But it is 
here that the BJP is most vulnerable. For, no party has endangered 
'national security' as badly, as severely, as the BJP, by dividing 
the nation and severing it from the very people who constitute it. 
And none has tried to drive such a wedge between Hindus and others, 
and among the Hindus themselves.

Today, the BJP and the NDA government pursue this divisive policy by 
heightening the hostility with Pakistan, adding a viciously communal 
angle to it. The stratagem is based on identifying Pakistan as the 
external manifestation of the 'threat from within' (read, Muslims). 
That's why the government has created more and more obstacles to 
normalising relations with Pakistan and further restricted visas.

This mean-spirited move will reduce the number of cities Pakistani 
nationals can visit from 12 to only three. During 2002, New Delhi 
granted visas to less than 200 Pakistani nationals (normal figure, 
4,000 to 5,000), even refusing entry to Track-II participants and 
many delegates invited to social science seminars and NGO 
conferences. The government also wantonly sabotaged the SAARC (South 
Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) summit in Islamabad.

The secular parties, especially the Congress, must frontally contest 
the BJP's claim to fighting terrorism effectively with its so-called 
'pro-active' policy. For all its militant rhetoric and tub-thumping, 
the BJP-NDA's strategy to prevent, counter and contain terrorism has 
proved bankrupt. Not only was India bled to the extent of Rs 10,000 
crores -- four times the central health budget -- during the 
pointless 10-month-long mobilisation of 700,000 troops in a 
caricature of Rambo-style militarism. In fact, some of the worst 
terrorist attacks (Akshardham and Raghunath temple episodes) have 
taken place during the NDA's rule. As Mr Raman says, this government 
has 'trivialised counter-terrorism.'

The best strategy to counter Hindutva's 'national security' rhetoric 
is to counterpose people's security to it. This means focusing 
centrally on the people's minimum needs, and enhancing food security, 
income security, security of employment, gender security and, 
personal security. This approach will also involve measures to reduce 
tension with Pakistan by engaging it in a dialogue and mounting 
diplomatic pressure on it. It will be even more vital to start an 
internal dialogue in Kashmir to begin the healing of wounds.

The Congress must not be apologetic about this alternative security 
perspective. It should know that the BJP lost heavily in the Jammu 
region in the last assembly election precisely because its militant 
'anti-terrorism' rhetoric proved hollow. The electorate saw through 
its boasts and concluded that the BJP's policies had made Jammu more, 
not less, insecure. The Punjab militancy ended in the mid-1990s -- 
not through the rhetoric of war, or 'tough' and draconian measures 
against pro-Khalistan fanatics. It's only when the terrorists 
alienated the people through extortion and violence, and when popular 
support for their cause completely dried up, that Pakistan could no 
longer fish in Punjab's troubled waters.

The Congress must confront the BJP on these issues. It must stress 
human security, a people-centred agenda, and show that it has a 
healthy, wholesome conception of advancing the interests of all 
Indian citizens, irrespective of religion or ethnicity. Admittedly, 
this won't be easy for the Congress, which is timid and confused, and 
'naturally' tends to follow a soft-Hindutva approach and fudge 
issues, rather than deal with them squarely.

To rise to the occasion, the Congress will need external help, 
especially new intellectual and ideological-political inputs. It must 
stop pretending, a la Pranab Mukherjee, that it has no 'real allies' 
except the NCP and Trinamool. It should begin a series of discussions 
with committed anti-communal forces: Left-liberal political leaders, 
academics, intellectuals and anti-communal activists, and evolve 
collective strategies with them to beat back the Hindutva challenge. 
Re-secularising India is not any one party's agenda.

Politically unhinging the BJP and denying it legitimacy and electoral 
success is an imperative for all secular parties and social 
movements. The coming year will witness a tough battle for the soul 
of Indian nationhood. The Congress must not lose it by default -- as 
it did in Gujarat.

______

#6.

The Hindu
Friday, Jan 10, 2003

Amartya Sen warns against exclusivism
By Anita Joshua

NEW DELHI JAN. 9. The Nobel laureate, Amartya Sen, today spoke out 
against the growing tendency within the country to project itself as 
an exclusive society, and stressed the need to protect the openness 
that has been the hallmark of India since time immemorial.

Speaking at the first plenary on `India and the Diaspora - Forging a 
Constructive Relationship' at the Pravasi Bharatiya Divas here, Prof. 
Sen warned Indians against adopting a ``frog-in-the-well'' attitude, 
and made out a strong case for valuing, defending and fighting for 
the spirit of openness in which Indian civilisation blossomed.

Particularly critical of the efforts to appropriate certain 
mathematical principles and Sanskrit as India's exclusive 
contributions to the world, the economist said such claims ignore the 
fact that both flourished and were enriched by contacts with the 
outside world.

Though Prof. Sen did not elaborate on the reasons for raising an 
issue that has preoccupied public debate in India before a 
predominantly NRI audience, the delegates got a taste of the issue 
the Nobel laureate was addressing in the second plenary with the 
Union Minister for Human Resource Development, Murli Manohar Joshi.

At the outset itself, the Minister sought to drive home the point 
that India had a brilliant tradition in science and technology; 
something that even Prof. Sen did not dispute. However, lamenting the 
fact that few people were aware about India's age-old scientific 
temper, Dr. Joshi claimed that India was privy to various scientific 
principles in the pre-Christian era , that Indians were the pioneers 
in mathematics, physics and astronomy, and that zero was an Indian 
discovery.

While Prof. Sen did not once deny the fact that ancient India was 
rich in knowledge - be it mathematics, Sanskrit or astronomy - and 
conceded that ``we have reason to be proud of our tradition'', his 
contention was that ``we should remember that it was an open and 
dynamic tradition''.

And, he anchored his argument on the fact that the greatest Sanskrit 
grammarian, Pannini, was an Afghan. Similarly, while acknowledging 
that astronomy flourished in India, he said there can be no denying 
outside influences in this area as elsewhere which, according to him, 
helped India become the vibrant and dynamic civilisation the world 
knows it to be.

Though Prof. Sen drew a fuller house than Dr. Joshi, the two 
consecutive sessions provided the overseas Indians a fleeting glimpse 
of the debate on ``saffronisation'' with the economist celebrating 
India's ``unity in diversity'' even as the Minister sought to show 
modern India's effort to become a knowledge superpower as just an 
attempt to regain lost ground.

--
[SEE ALSO:
Rediff.com
09, 2003 | 18:07 IST

Nobel laureate Amartya Sen was joined by dignitaries from around the 
world to warn India not to destroy its cultural diversity, but to 
celebrate it and make it a model for the rest of the world.

http://www.rediff.com/money/2003/jan/09pbd7.htm

______

#7.

The Hindustan Times
Friday, January 10, 2003

A great movement is born
Praful Bidwai
The just-concluded Asian Social Forum (ASF) saw a unique confluence 
of grassroots social movements, people's organisations and radical 
NGOs which interrogate globalisation and counterpose equality, human 
rights and justice to the shop-worn agendas of transnational big 
business.

Even for a city of contrasts (consider Nizamshahi or information 
technology vs abject poverty or child labour), what Hyderabad 
witnessed this past week was unparalleled: on the one hand, a 'global 
partnership' summit of the Confederation of Indian Industry caucusing 
in a five-star hotel; and on the other, the Asian Social Forum, with 
15,000 activists from all over the continent celebrating the spirit 
of solidarity in the Nizam College grounds.

The first event was dominated by a select group of dark-suited 
business potentates, foreign officials and Indian ministers from L.K. 
Advani downwards. The second was a riot of colours and a melange: of 
grassroots campaigners on livelihood issues and human rights, 
environmentalists and feminists, trade unionists and seed-conserving 
peasants, people's science-movement and healthcare activists, 
peaceniks and anti-displacement campaigners, writers and social 
scientists, radical theatre-people and filmmakers.

The first group came from leading corporations in India and the West, 
known for their successful brands and fat profit-lines; the second 
from the North-east, Asia and Afghanistan, Palestine and Pakistan, 
Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia, as well as India. It comprised people 
known for their work against foreign military bases and occupation, 
for freedom from debt, for the right to food and free speech, for 
human security.

It is a telling commentary that when 400 volunteers from the second 
group peacefully picketed the venue of the first, they were arrested 
by the police of India's most business and IT-savvy chief minister.

The ASF began with a plenary addressed by firebrand activist Medha 
Patkar and ended with one presided over by former President K.R. 
Narayanan. Between the two were eight major conferences, 160 
seminars, 164 workshops, scores of cultural events - and countless 
processions, demonstrations and tableaux. This sums up the awesome 
range and scope of the ASF and its rainbow-coalition character better 
than anything else.

The common theme running through these was grassroots democracy, the 
fight against exclusion, the imperatives of equality, global justice, 
human emancipation and people-(not profit)-centred development. In 
one line, the message was: the anti-globalisation movement is here, 
and for real!

The ASF is part of the great global justice movement that began at 
Seattle in 1999, and took an organised expression through the World 
Social Forum's meetings in Porto Alegre, Brazil, with the slogan, 
"Another world is possible!"

The global justice movement is one of the most spectacular mass 
mobilisations of our times. The WSF is a powerful forum of 
interaction between social activists and the liberal-progressive 
intelligentsia. The movement has shaken the leaders of global capital 
and its managerial institutions (the World Bank, IMF, G-8, OECD, etc).

But the ASF's own roots lie in the Asian soil, in the numerous 
movements which have grown over the past quarter-century or more in 
the continent - for survival with dignity, for peace, gender 
equality, decentralisation, for direct democracy, Dalit rights, for 
ecologically sound development and social liberation. These movements 
have reshaped societies from South Korea to Nepal, geopolitics from 
the Persian Gulf to the Malacca Straits and development policies from 
Japan to the Philippines.

India occupies a special place here. As the great historian E.P. 
Thompson would say, India has witnessed an avalanche of people's 
movements and civil society initiatives like few other countries 
have. India is also the site of especially lively, organic, two-way 
interaction between popular movements and the radical intelligentsia.

However, there was a disproportionate number of Indians at this 
'Asian' event: only 780 of the 14,426 registered participants came 
from abroad. One reason for this is that New Delhi cussedly delayed 
granting visas to hundreds of delegates. The worst example of this 
was the systematic deletion (by Advani himself) of well-known 
Pakistani activists' names from the almost-approved list, including 
Asma Jehangir, Pervez Hoodbhoy, I.A. Rahman and A.H. Nayyar. 
Ironically, they happen to be among the staunchest and best-known 
critics of Islamabad's hawkish policies - a point that couldn't have 
been missed by New Delhi's own hawks!

A valid criticism of the ASF programme is that it was far too 
India-(or India-Pakistan)-centric. Another is that the ASF workshops 
were so physically dispersed (which Indian city can accommodate 
15,000 people in multiple conference centres located close to one 
another?) as to lack connectedness and a centre of gravity. Yet, the 
ASF was a tremendous learning process.

It is hard to summarise the rich diversity of its deliberations - 
stretching from the sharing of experiences of different struggles 
against neoliberal economics and privatisation of natural resources, 
and for the defence of livelihoods, to drawing up alternative 
perspectives and programmes.

The ASF uniquely offered four platforms: the first-ever large-scale 
interaction between India's established mass organisations and its 
'New Social Movements', a dialogue between them and movements from 
the rest of Asia, a forum to evolve common analysis and strategy, and 
a high-energy cultural intercourse that took on the appearance of a 
gigantic mela, a week-long festival celebrating some of the greatest 
causes of our times.

The ASF was a landmark event, an exhilarating beginning. It needs to 
be followed up - both through further dissemination of its core-ideas 
to grassroots levels, and laterally, through replication elsewhere, 
even as the Porto Alegre process maintains its own integrity and 
distinct identity. One sign of a great social movement is the variety 
of messages and appeals it contains, and the many organisational 
forms it can assume. Going by that criterion, the movement against 
unequal globalisation, and for a just world, has a great future - not 
least in Asia.

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

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (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.
\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|//\\|//|
--