SACW | 29 April 03

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire  |  29 April,  2003

#1. Nuclear WMDs in South Asia (M.B. Naqvi)
#2. Welcome move on Kashmir: Why peace is imperative (Praful Bidwai)
#3. Excerpts from The End of India (Khushwant Singh)
#4. India: Press Statement : Gujarat - A State Under Seige (Sahmat &
Communalism Combat)
#5. India: Rajasthan's Sahariya Women Resist Repression:Shahabad Dharna
#6. India: Letters to Editor, The Hindu (Mukul Dube)
#7. India: Politics of 'trishul' taking centre-stage (K.K. Katyal)
#8. Anti Terror Law clouds riot relief in Gujarat
#9. India: Chauvinist politics of Shiv Sena (Edit, The Hindu)


--------------


#1.


South Asians Against Nukes List | 28 April 2003
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SAAN_/message/535

Nuclear WMDs in South Asia

By M.B. Naqvi

[28 April 2003, Karachi]

There is something curious about the likely purposes of the recent
visit of India's hardline Defence Minister George Fernandes to
Beijing. Indian Premier Atal Behari Vajpayee had only recently made
the overture for talks with Pakistan. There must then be some link
with Pakistan too. In Beijing Fernandes firmly reiterated India's
nuclear doctrine of 'No First Strike'. Perhaps it was appropriate
that the Defence Minister was sent, who after the Pokhran nuclear
tests in May 1998, had nominated China as the main security threat to
India. But Pakistan and the nukes must have figured in talks with
Chinese leaders. NWMDs anyway have to be discussed between India and
Pakistan.

So long as Indian and Pakistani governments say what they say ---
that Indian WMDs are there to serve its core interests and concerns
while Pakistan's basic security is predicated on its WMDs --- a modus
operandi between them is, in this writer's view, impossible. Not many
people fully realise the mischief these nuclear WMDs do. While India
has those nuclear-tipped missiles aimed at Pakistan, no Pakistani
general or civilian government can trust that those weapons would not
be used against Pakistani targets in a grave crisis. Similarly while
the nuclear-tipped Ghauris, Abdalis and others stand aimed at India,
no responsible Indian can trust Pakistan's intentions. It is in the
nature of these weapons; no adversary can be trusted with them in a
Crisis anywhere. Mutual trust and nukes don't gel. Period.

There is unending rhetoric from Bomb-lovers about deterrence and a
possible d=E9tente or a Nuclear Restraint Regime, based on Confidence
Building Measures. India and Pakistan are overt nuclear powers for
five long years. Has deterrence worked? Did the two go beyond signing
a Memorandum of Understanding regarding a desired d=E9tente or NRR?
Could that understanding be ever negotiated? Why was it not discussed
despite good drafts provided by the Americans to both sides? Indians
loftily dismiss the reason for this failure to Gen. Musharraf's
Kargil adventure. Have they asked the simple question: how could
Pakistani military, in the context of India's proven nuclear
deterrent, go ahead with cocking a snook at it?

It is a serious question requiring serious inquiry. This involves the
basic mischief that nuclear weapons do. The first thing that happens
after a country crosses the nuclear threshold is a swollen head of
its policy planners. An arrogance of power penetrates into their
thinking processes. Remember the arrogant and bellicose statements of
Messrs L.K. Advani and Vajpayee made soon after May 13 Pokhran tests;
they are all on record. By unexpectedly exploding six nuclear devices
a bare 25 days later, Pakistan government confused the Indians. True,
the Indians twice tried to start talks in accordance with the false
expectations raised by their nuclear gurus who had been selling the
nukes in both countries as a means of maintaining peace through
deterrence. The other side wasn't buying.

While the arrogance of power in the case of Indians, thanks to their
democratic framework, has remained confined to dreams of eventual
grandeur based on overwhelming power being acquired and a certain
moderate behaviour is mandated by plurality of decision makers,
Pakistan's military rulers went overboard. Conscious of their nuclear
capabilities, they converted Kashmiris spontaneous and nonviolent
mass movement in 1989 into an armed insurgency and called it Jihad.
In Afghanistan they virtually went berserk and played king-makers in
the 1990. They began to dream of strategic depth --- against India,
of course. They punched well above their height. Results can be seen
today: the US is wary; India is extremely inimical; Afghans of even
Karzai's kind dislike Pakistanis. It is totally out of tune with most
major powers.

The fact of the matter is that the doctrine of deterrence has not
worked. Ideally, Pakistan should be deterred by Indian nuclear might
and India should be duly respectful of Pakistan's capabilities. Are
the two adequately deterred? Bold will be the man who will answer in
the affirmative. Which general or government can miss the fact that a
Ghauri will take two to three minutes to reach its target in India?
Indian Prithvi too will take the same time to wreak terrible
destruction in Pakistan. No government or an Army can take a rational
or calculated decision or even to pick up the telephone within three
minutes, if they do get an inkling. Today, the brutal fact is that
both countries are on hair-trigger alert; both will launch on the
first indication that the other is activating its missiles. A sadder
fact is that they have to remain on this dangerous, instant alert ---
all the time and always --- with its expected accidents and failures.

Deterrence depends upon credibility of the nuclear weapons and
delivery systems plus the second strike capability. The enemy will be
deterred only if the adversary, despite being nuked first will make a
nuclear riposte. It also involves wholly rational decision-making:
only resorting to NWMDs when being absolutely sure that the enemy has
broken his spoken or unspoken commitment about not mounting a wanton
attack. This particular requirement of peace-through-deterrence
theory is a tall order. Look at hundreds of accidents and alarms
about enemy being attacked during east-west cold war. They had 27 to
30 minutes to verify and be restrained. In volatile South Asia the
available time can only be three minutes. Imagine the accidents,
glitches, technical malfunctions and the power of rumours and or
passions between Pakistan and India.

Americans and their chelas in Delhi and Islamabad have talked glibly
of a rough balance of terror between the two and then the two will
live in peace ever thereafter. They forget the element of trust is
the first to go in nuclearisation. CBMs are no substitute for mutual
trust. During the last 10 or 12 years, with CBMs in place, these
facilities were forgotten and were not used whenever a Crisis arose
threatening a war. The two, apart from being so close to each other,
cheek by jowl in fact, have purposes that can be achieved only at
some cost to the other. So no experience of US-Soviet d=E9tente-making
is actually relevant. Deterrence is anyhow a bogus concept and
insufficient basis for peacekeeping between India and Pakistan, given
the proneness to accidents and a culture of carelessness.

Moreover, semantics apart, who believes in the doctrine of 'No First
Strike'? Imagine the scenario: a war is starting or has started
between these two neighbours. Now which commander in India will
masochistically wait, while keeping his nukes primed, until Pakistani
generals have pressed the red button first --- thus suffering
absolutely unacceptable destruction of, say India's one or two
urban-industrial centres --- as the theory is adumbrated. The world
is told to believe that after Indian High Command has made sure that
this has actually happened, they will then order their own riposte
that will be so massive as may send Pakistan to the Stone Age. Is
this military behaviour amidst the dust and din of war credible? This
is all too fanciful and unreal.

Just as India's No First Use is not credible, Pakistan's doctrine of
reserving the right to use the nuke first --- in a critical situation
where basic security of state is threatened, of course --- is also
suspect. Its first use is predicated on a critical situation during a
conventional war. If so, this use is even less credible because (a)
the situation being already critical, such use will not ensure any
relief or cessation of hostilities, much less victory; (b) it is sure
to invite retaliation in kind which may lead to a worse defeat.
Moreover, by the time the critical stage is reached, the capacity to
use the option may have been compromised. A power with inferior
conventional strength needs to avoid war altogether or start off with
a nuclear strike. For, the use of nuclear weapons can only result in
excessive destruction in both and old notions of victory and defeat
do not apply.

What the opposing generals are more likely to do is to try and
preempt the other. Thus there may be a race between the two sides to
be the first to strike --- and as massively as may be feasible or
judged adequate. The two, as of now, remain engaged in hectic arms
races of various kinds. Why else are they conducting so many missile
tests? Whatever relevance Mr. Fernandes' No First Use doctrine may
work with regard to China, US or others, it has little to Pakistan.

There is no way the nuclear weapons can help win a war or maintain
peace. All other uses of nuclear weapons in a possible war do not
make sense. They will cause senseless destruction of vast areas. Not
that preemptive use is sane. Thanks to dispersion of nuclear weapons
in each country, both nations may end up with wholly unacceptable
devastation for no rational purpose. Use of nuclear weapons on this
Subcontinent is anyhow insane and can only result in Mutually Assured
Defeat. Indeed, the damage to non combatants outside India and
Pakistan can neither be avoided nor justified.

The only sane and rational thing is for common South Asians to mount
an effective peace movement and let both New Delhi and Islamabad be
compelled by their respective people to do without nuclear weapons
altogether. A wholly non-nuclear South Asia will be so many shades
saner and safer. It won't solve all the problems, of course. But the
nightmare of a senseless nuclear war will disappear. Let peaceniks be
given a chance --- or rather they should assert themselves here first
and show that Pakistan does not produce only hawks, if also mostly
bogus.

______


#2.


The Daily Star (Dhaka)
April 28, 2003

Welcome move on Kashmir: Why peace is imperative

Praful Bidwai, writes from New Delhi
Whatever one's reservations about Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee's party and
its ideology, one must heartily welcome his decision to visit Kashmir
in a bid for reconciliation and peace. On April 18, he became India's
first Prime Minister to address a public meeting in the Valley since
"azadi" broke out in 1989. This also speaks of the changed ground
reality.

His visit, coming six months after the largely free and fair Assembly
elections, has kindled new hopes. If it is followed up with wise and
purposive moves, we could see some real progress in resolving one of
the world's most troubled, complex and bloody disputes.

Mr Vajpayee attempted a "double whammy". He held out the "hand of
friendship" to Pakistan. And he offered a dialogue with different
currents of opinion in Jammu & Kashmir. Both offers were soon hedged
in with conditions. But they indicate a welcome softening of stance.

The change of tone and tenor has outlasted the dampening effect of
the qualifying statements which followed, namely, talks with Pakistan
would only take place once "cross-border terrorism" ends.

Of the two initiatives, on Pakistan and Kashmir, the first is more
important and likelier to succeed--for three reasons. First, Pakistan
has by and large responded positively and said it is willing to hold
a dialogue "any time, any place and at any level."

Second, there is growing recognition within both governments that
they cannot indefinitely sustain their mutual hostility. They are
under the Major Powers' pressure to defuse it.

Only six months ago, India and Pakistan were ready to go to war. The
reasons why they didn't, continue to hold. The global situation after
Iraq has also highlighted their vulnerability on account of Kashmir
and nuclear weapons.

Washington, in its most aggressively expansionist phase, has
threatened to turn its attention to South Asia. On March 31,
Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "the whole of the
subcontinent's problems" are part of the US' "broad agenda". Russia,
=46rance and Britain too have called for an India-Pakistan dialogue.

Third, a certain momentum favouring a short time-frame for an
India-Pakistan meeting has emerged, with the planned visit of US
Deputy Secretary Richard Armitage in May. Both India and Pakistan
will probably make positive gestures before his arrival.

More important, Mr Armitage will probably "facilitate" an
India-Pakistan summit--just as he brokered peace between them twice
last year.

This doesn't argue that a Vajpayee-Musharraf meeting will happen or
succeed. Even one terrorist act in India, whether or not sponsored by
Pakistan, can scuttle it. The meeting's success will depend on how
far the two governments move away from their "first positions" and
explore peaceful coexistence.

This, above all, means they accept war is not an option. Neither side
can win it. India's conventional superiority over Pakistan has
steadily eroded from 1.75:1 in 1971, to 1.56:1 in 1990, to barely
1.22:1 now. (The winning ratio is normally 2:1 or higher).

India-Pakistan's nuclear capability is a "great leveller". Nuclear
wars cannot be won.

=46or the summit's success, Islamabad must drop its traditional Kashmir
plebiscite demand. More important, it must verifiably give up
supporting militant violence in Kashmir. Such support has done
nothing to advance Kashmir's cause.

Equally, New Delhi must drop its old stated position that Kashmir is
"an inalienable part of India". The issue must be opened up. The
Kashmiri people must be involved in settling it.

Changing old stands won't be easy. But if a robust beginning is made
soon, the process of reconciliation could get rolling. At times,
process is everything.

The biggest obstacles here will be the hawks, who have a stake in
perpetuating enmity. In Pakistan, they are jehadi Islamists, both
inside and outside the army. In India, they are BJP Right-wingers.

Their leader, Deputy Prime Minister Advani, torpedoed the 2001 Agra
summit. He vetoed a draft declaration after Mr Vajpayee and Gen
Pervez Musharraf had agreed to it. Mr Vajpayee didn't assert himself
and allowed the summit to collapse.

This time, the BJP has supported Mr Vajpayee's peace gesture, but
reluctantly. Its first response was to oppose it. Earlier, it
welcomed Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha's diatribe against Pakistan
as a "fit case" for "pre-emptive war".

This is an important election year for the BJP. It faces four state
Assembly elections. Rather than embark on an uncertain
Kashmir-Pakistan policy, it might be tempted to fall back upon the
familiar hawkish line.

Even more difficult will be reconciliation within Kashmir. Here, the
Centre has no clarity whatsoever. J&K offers a great opportunity
because of its relatively credible election and a state government
with its "healing touch"--despite the impediments created by a
constantly carping BJP and an uncooperative Centre.

However, the Centre is fumbling at the level of strategy. It said it
would talk to all who abjure violence. Yet, it didn't invite the
All-Parties Hurriyat Conference. There is little political sense in
talking only to those for whom J&K's integration with India is
unproblematic. It must win over the others.

They include the APHC. The Hurriyat's influence may have declined.
But it still remains significant. Because it wasn't invited, it has
decided not to meet official interlocutor N.N. Vohra.

Mr Vohra has a thoroughly vague brief. He has taken an over-cautious,
even timid, approach. He published his itinerary in Kashmir's
newspapers, but didn't invite specific groups!

This attitude must change. Kashmir's past experience with
interlocutors--Messrs K.C. Pant, Arun Jaitley, R.K. Mishra or A.S.
Dullat -- hasn't been happy. To have credibility, Mr Vohra must
pro-actively, aggressively, talk to all currents of opinion as a step
towards an apex-level political dialogue.

It is hard to see the Home Ministry going this far. A breakthrough on
Kashmir will probably have to wait upon progress in India-Pakistan
relations. But reconciliation must start, internally and externally.

Too much is at stake -- not least, the lives of millions who could
turn into radioactive dust should an India-Pakistan war break out.

Praful Bidwai is an eminent Indian columnist.


______


#3.

Excerpts from The End of India

By Khushwant Singh

Khushwant Singh makes a fervent plea for separating religion from the
state in India to put an end to the communal madness in that country.
As our numbers multiply, so do our problems. I am convinced that the
suicidal rate of increase of our population has contributed to the
rising communal tension in our country. There is terrible congestion
in our cities and small towns, where millions live cheek by jowl in
filthy and trying conditions. Resources are scarce and there aren't
enough jobs available. Naturally, tensions build up at the slightest
provocation. Tempers are frayed and explode into violence. Instead of
going for the person against whom you have a grievance, it is easier
to gang up with members of your own community and go for those who
are not.
Communal groups, of every community, have always taken advantage of
this. The difference now is that Hindu communal groups are trying to
unite the Hindus - 82 per cent of the population but traditionally
divided into several mutually antagonistic caste and linguistic
groups - to gang up against a common enemy. This common enemy
according to them is the 'foreigner', namely the Muslims and the
Christians who must be forced into a subordinate status or hounded
out or even decimated.
In Gujarat we saw how the Sangh used the grievances of the poor and
the jobless and the perpetually insecure and acquisitive Indian
middle class to further its evil agenda.
Economic motives for violence have always been around and the
minorities have always been the victims of such violence. The
Moradabad riots were triggered by Punjabi immigrants wanting to break
the Muslim monopoly over the brassware industry. It was the same in
Jalgaon and Bhiwandi (Maharashtra) where outsiders, largely Sindhi
and Punjabi Hindus, destroyed Muslim weavers in order to grab their
business.
In Haryana the Hindu backlash against Sikh terrorism in Punjab was
directed against the Sikh shopkeepers of Panipat, Karnal and
Yamunanagar. In riot-prone Hyderabad, Hindu mobs went for Muslim
property including a Khadi Bhandar because the owner of the building
was a Muslim. In Gujarat, not surprisingly, factories and shops owned
by Muslims were burnt down, and in the villages, adivasis were let
loose on Muslim money lenders.
A factor that adds to the problem is the rapidly increasing number of
the educated unemployed. They were the single largest group behind
terrorism in Punjab. It is the same in Kashmir. In Gujarat many of
the Hindu terrorists who killed and raped Indian citizens were also
unemployed men. Looting banks, robbing the rich, spreading terror
gives them a sense of power.
The scenario is grim and getting grimmer day by day. What can be done about =
it?
=46irst, we have to learn to live with it. As I have said before, we
cannot wish communalism away. We cannot pretend communal differences
are seen only during riots and don't exist otherwise. They always
have and they will in the future. So we must all, Hindus, Muslims,
Christians, Sikhs, somehow overcome our stereotyped notions of
communities other than our own.
We must avoid the tendency to build community-based housing
societies, schools and clubs. Hindus and Sikhs must understand that
the Muslims of India do not have to atone in perpetuity for the
historical mistakes of some past rulers of their faith who were in
fact more concerned about the security of their empires, not their
religion. Muslims have as much right to this country as anyone else.
If they are foreigners, so are we. The only people who are indigenous
are the adivasis, whom we have all but made extinct.
The misuse of official media, All India Radio and Doordarshan, for
propagating religion must stop. It has done immense harm by isolating
communities further and putting the clock of scientific progress
backwards. I attribute much of the blame for the resurgence of Hindu
fundamentalism to serials on the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. The
practice of religion must be restricted to places of worship and not
imposed on others through public broadcasting means, loudspeakers,
processions and holding samagams in public parks.
When we are face to face with communal passions, what are the
preventive and punitive methods we should adopt? The most important
preventive method is to strengthen our Intelligence. This has become
a cliche but it is very important. Our Intelligence has been so poor
that we hardly get a warning ahead of time that communal passions are
building up. It is only after somebody has been stabbed or some
houses burnt down that the police, as our newspapers say, swing into
action.
We must also restructure our police force. We should adopt the simple
principle that the minority communities should be over represented.
If it is a Muslim area the police should be largely Hindu. If it is a
Hindu area the police should be largely Muslim. This is necessary
because it restores confidence in the minorities as it is the fears
of the minority that you have to try and assuage. Care should be
taken to see that sub-inspectors certainly belong to minority
communities because they are the most important police officers who
deal with the actual situation in any particular area.
When a riot really breaks out, what should we do? I have the
following suggestions to make:
=46irst, wherever a riot breaks out, the police officer in charge
should automatically be suspended, because the breakdown of the law
enforcing machinery is clear evidence of dereliction of duty; it is
the police officer's duty to know that tension was building up and he
should have taken steps to defuse it. After a new police officer -
preferably from outside the area - is put in charge, the entire
administration of that particular locality should be placed in his or
her hands. It is for the officer, along with the district magistrate,
to impose curfew in the area and take whatever steps they want, to
contain violence.
We must also provide for summary trials of mischief-makers.
Perpetrators of communal riots are seldom brought to court. Rarely
are communal killers punished, because nobody is willing to give
evidence against them. Provisions should be made for summary trials
on the spot where the incidents have taken place, and the magistrate
should be empowered to impose collective fines on the area and to
order public flogging of the people he feels were responsible.
Of course, none of this will work unless we unequivocally embrace the
idea of secularism as defined in our constitution and kick out any
government that is even remotely communal. Otherwise we will have
more governments like Modi's which will transfer out police officers
not for their failure to prevent riots but for their failure to
engineer and encourage them. It is tragic that we have corrupted the
meaning of secularism, given it alternative definitions that suit us.
Some people have even suggested we should banish secularism from
India.
Some five years ago, speaking at an official welcome function
organized by the then BJP government of Delhi, the Shankaracharya mid
that the word 'secular' should be expunged from the Constitution. He
need not have laboured the point: for all practical purposes, barring
the communists most of our political leaders have deleted secularism
from their lexicons. The Lakshman Rekha between politics and religion
no longer exists. Religion has invaded the domain of politics and
completely swamped it. Thus we have driven the last nail in the
coffin of secularism as envisaged by Pandit Nehru.
At the cost of repetition, let me refresh readers' minds that
secularism has two meanings: the western concept makes a clear
distinction between functions of the state which includes politics
and functions of religion which are confined to places of worship,
public or private. This is the concept that Nehru accepted, preached
and practiced.The other concept was equal respect for all religions.
This was propagated and observed by men like Bapu Gandhi and Maulana
Azad and lasted as long as the two men were alive. After that it
deteriorated to a mere display of religiosity. If you were a devout
Hindu you went to a Muslim dargah or threw an Iftar party to prove
you were secular. If you were Muslim, you celebrated Diwali with your
Hindu friends. Secularism was reduced to a sham display. Time has
shown that as far as secularism is concerned, Nehru was right; Gandhi
and Azad were wrong.
The need of our times is to revive the Nehruvian notion of
secularism. People in politics or holding elected public offices must
not publicly engage themselves in religious rituals. Nehru never did.
He did not encourage godmen, saints or mullahs or priests, to intrude
into affairs of the state. The slide began with his daughter Indira
Gandhi. With her, people like Dhirendra Brahmachari became formidable
figures. Astrologers and tantrics were included in decision-making
circles.
We had the likes of Buta Singh, Balram Jakhar and Rajiv Gandhi paying
homage to Deoraha Baba. We had the likes of Chandraswamy and
Satellite Baba performing yagnas in homes of ministers and chief
ministers. The Congress even wooed the Shahi Imam for the Muslim
vote. And then we had Sahib Singh Verma's Delhi government and later
the BJP-led NDA government inviting the Shankaracharya to be a State
guest and to decide on legal issues of national importance.
Religion is being brought into every aspect of life. This must stop;
it is the road to madness. Sing your bhajans and shabads, say your
namaaz and prayers as many times as you want, but in your home or
your place of worship. That is for the salvation of your soul. Leave
the soul of the nation to our constitution and the law.
India needs a new religion
The ideal solution of course is for India to adopt a new religion. I
know I am being unrealistic, but I would like to share this idea with
my readers anyway. Perhaps a few of you will become converts to good
sense and I will have done my bit to beat the 'fundoos'.
Bernard Shaw once wrote that every intelligent man makes his own
religion though there are a hundred versions of it. Evolving a
personal religion for myself has been a lifelong quest. It was, as
Allama Iqbal put it:
Dhoondta phirta boon main, ai Iqbal, apney aap ko
Aap hee goya musafir, aap hee manzil hoon main
(O Iqbal, I go about everywhere looking for myself,
As if I were the wayfarer as well as the destination)
After many years of study of the religion I was born into (Sikhism),
studying the scriptures and lives of founders of other major
religions of the world, and teaching comparative religions at
American universities, I feel I am equipped to express myself on the
need to evolve a new religion for Indians who have the courage to
think for themselves. It is based on the assumption that most people
need some kind of faith; that one's emotional content is provided by
the faith one is born into, the rituals of which formed an essential
part of one's upbringing. What is required today is the acceptance of
what is basic in the religion of birth but removing from it the
accretions of dead wood that have accumulated around it and which
militate against reason.
Khushwant Singh, one of India's most outstanding journalists and
columnists, was educated at Government College, Lahore and at King's
College and the Inner Temple in London. He has been founder-editor of
Yojana, and editor of The Illustrated Weekly of India, The National
Herald and The Hindustan Times. Among his published works are the
classic two-volume History of the Sikhs, and novels including Train
to Pakistan, I Shall Not Hear the Nightingale, Delhi and The Company
of Women.
Analyzing the communal violence in Gujarat in 2002, the anti-Sikh
riots of 1984 and the sporadic Hindu-Muslim clashes in different
parts of India, Khushwant Singh points out how the rise of religious
fundamentalism among the Hindus threatens to undermine the country
itself. The book is a wake-up call for every Indian citizen.

The End of India
By Khushwant Singh
Penguin India.
=46or more information log on to www.penguinbooksindia.com
ISBN 9-14-382994-0
163pp. Indian Rs200

______


#4.

April 26, 2003

Press Statement

Gujarat - A State Under Seige

Terror continues to be unleashed systematically against the Muslim
minority in Gujarat through indiscriminate arrests and illegal
detentions by the Ahmedabad Crime Branch of at least 80 Muslim youth,
the selective application of POTA against 12 Muslims for alleged
involvement in the Haren Pandya murder and 123 accused in the Godhra
mass arson. Muslim women, relatives of allegedly absconding accused
and even of
detained persons, have also been brutally abused during questioning
by the Ahmedabad police. A delegation of Muslim women petitioned the
Ahmedabad Police Commissioner, Kaushik on this matter the day before
yesterday. The Sunni Bohra community is the
singular target of these actions.

While the investigation into Mr Pandya's murder has been formally
handed over to the CBI, it has effectively been entirely 'hijacked'
by the City Crime Branch. Over the past fortnight, police officers
like PN Barot and others directly accused of close proximity to the
ruling political dispensation have been brought in and are
terrorising people in order to extort money from them.

One year later, the Genocide in Gujarat continues through social and
economic boycott of Muslims in atleast 10 of the 24 districts of the
State and a politically vindictive state headed by Chief Minister
Narendra Modi seeks to subvert all criminal investigations int the
incidents of violence last year. Moreover a sinister and systematic
plan to
target over 325 Muslim-run Institutions, including madrassas and
others has been put in place with the help of the Education
department, Charity Commissioner's Office and the city and State
police. A survey of madrassas has already been made supervised by the
State Home Minister to put this Operation in place. Meanwhile,
Christian Institutions have also been picked for objectionable
questioning by the state's education department.

We appeal to the Nation, to Institutions of Democracy in the country,
to the National and Regional Media and to all secular political
parties to respond to the continuing tragedy, the low intensity
terror and genocide that continues in Gujarat.

Human Rights Defenders, our associates in Gujarat, social workers,
and Lawyers of the minority community fighting cases for Justice have
all been threatened and face a serious threat to their lives.
Activists and workers coordinating the Gulberg massacre, the Naroda
gaon and Pattiya carnage especially are receiving regular threats.

The main accused in the Gulberg massacres run free in the Chamanpura
locality and terrorise victim survivors trying to rebuild their homes
destroyed through blood and murder on February 28 last year. About 45
families constrained by poverty who have had to go back to Naroda
face verbal sexual threats from the major accused who are also
free.=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=
=DD=DD=DD=DD  =DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=
=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD=DD
The role of the State Public Prosecutors in the major carnages has
been highly questionable. The Godhra investigation, too is highly
politically motivated and 123 accused on whom POTA was applied last
month have not been seen by their families since then. Five were even
injected with serum that dulled their senses (an objectionable
practice violative of national and international law) during
questioning.

While tribal areas of the State reel with the onset of hunger and yet
another year of drought, the Constitution is being breached with
impunity in Gujarat. It is time that the entire civil society, as
well as all our institutions for enforcing the rule of law including
courts take stock of the situation in Gujarat which is no less
alarming than what prevailed
during the Nazi regime in Germany.

Addressed By Prashant Bhushan (Senior Advocate), Kamal Mitra Chenoy
(Academic and Human Rights Activists), Teesta Setalvad (Co-editor of
Communalism Combat and Secretary Citizens for Justice and Peace).

Sahmat & Communalism Combat
8 VP House, Rafi Marg, New Delhi 110001
Tel 2371 1276, 2335 1424.
E Mail: <sahmat@vsnl.com>, <sabrang@sabrang.com>

______


#5.

Dear friends,

Please find below an update on the Shahabad dharna, a courageous
initiative of Sahariya women  [in Rajasthan] against recent incidents
of police repression.

If you are a journalist or editor, please consider giving some
coverage to this event. It is possible to contact participants of the
dharna at 07460-224 513 (ask for Jagrat Mahila Sangathan from the
dharna).

Thank you for your support,

Jean [Dreze]

o o o

SAHARIYA WOMEN RESIST REPRESSION:SHAHABAD DHARNA ENTERS SECOND WEEK

Shahabad, 28 April. Surjan Lal, ward panch of Mundiar village in
Baran district, still trembles when he narrates how he was brutally
beaten by  the police last month, four times on the same day. He is a
frail man who could easily die of a few lathi blows. Luckily, he is
alive today, but the same does not apply to his neighbour Gulab Bai,
who was severely beaten on the same day and died of her wounds on 9
April.

Gulab Bai=92s death was the straw on the camel=92s back for the Sahariya
women of Shahabad tehsil, who are used to abominable harassment at
the hands of local officials, landlords and contractors. On 21 April,
they launched an indefinite dharna in front of the tehsil
headquarters, demanding justice for Gulab Bai and other victims of
police repression in Mundiar. The action is led by Jagrat Mahila
Sangathan, a local organisation formed two years ago by women from
the Sahariya tribe and other disadvantaged communities.

Testimonies presented at the dharna give a fairly clear picture of
what happened in Mundiar. The incident occurred on the day of Holi,
soon after the tehsildar drove to Mundiar and insisted on playing
Holi with the local Sahariyas. By all accounts, he was severely
drunk. A scuffled broke out after he fondled Sahariya women and
rammed his jeep on two bystanders. Someone slapped him, and the
enraged tehsildar called the police to teach a lesson to the
rebellious tribals. A whole contingent of RAC jawans soon surrounded
and stormed the Sahariya hamlet, =93like dacoits=94, as one of the
witnesses put it. Women, men and children were brutally beaten with
lathis. Even Malti, a young Sahariya women who had tried to hide
under a charpoy with her four-day old baby, was mercilessly attacked.

This account of the fact was confirmed not only by numerous
testimonies and role plays at the dharna, but also by independent
residents of Mundiar. The tehsildar=92s culpability is not in doubt,
and the protesters are asking for nothing less than his dismissal. On
24 April, a delegation from the dharna met the Distric Collector,
Shri Bhaskar Sawant, who promised that he would conduct a personal
enquiry within seven days, take firm action against the culprits, and
arrange compensation for the victims. On 27 April, another delegation
met the Chief Minister, Shri Ashok Gehlot, who also promised that
swift action would be taken. However, there are strong vested
interests on the side of the tehsildar, and the matter is far from
resolved. The administration may try to get away with transferring
the tehsildar, an outcome that would not be acceptable to the victims.

The agitation has to cope with many practical difficulties. The
dharna survives on grain donations from the surrounding villages, but
it it not easy for the Sahariyas to spare food at this time of
drought and hardship. Water is another serious problem. Shahabad city
is rapidly drying up and the administration has refused to arrange
water for the dharna. Many of the participants have been unable to
bathe for a week, and even drinking water runs out from time to time.

In spite of these hardships, the dharna is in high spirits and the
participants are determined to stay in place until justice is done.
Sahariya women are making good use of this opportunity to voice their
concerns on the microphone through speeches, songs and slogans.
Public support has been coming from far and wide, with delegations
joining the dharna from Jaipur, Hyderabad, Delhi and other distant
places. On 26 April, the dharna even enjoyed the visit of a party of
European tourists who were most impressed with the event and
entertained the audience with some Hindi film songs they had learnt
on the way. Meanwhile, the tehsildar has vanished - yet another
indication that his conscience is far from clear.

_____


#6.

28 April 2003

Letters to Editor
The Hindu
Rafi Marg
New Delhi 1

Dear Sir or Madam,

It is some decades since we changed to the metric system and I am
beginning to comprehend the meaning of the kilometre and the litre:
even if mile, furlong and gallon still come more naturally. Give me a
person's height in centimetres, though, and I imagine a midget or a
basketball player until I have made the conversion into feet and
inches.

The adoption of the metric system had much to commend it, of course.
This cannot be said of the renaming of Delhi's radio channels to
"Rajdhani", "Agarbatti", "Indraprastha", "Sohan Halva" or whatever.
The old names, "A" and "B" and so on, were enough to distinguish
between the channels, and everyone knew which meant what.

Why does a government or a minister in power never seek to make a
mark simply by doing a good job? They always leave marks, much like a
dog marking a tree, by messing with things that have worked well
enough.

And if they must do the dirty on the past, surely they should do it
across the board. Cannot JNU be renamed Vinayak Savarkar Pathshala
after the Notional Hero whose portrait adorns Parliament? All those
pseudo-secularists might even learn to lie and rant in correct Vedic
fashion.

Yours truly,

Mukul Dube


N.B. This letter contains no spelling or typing errors.

_____

#7.

http://www.hinduonnet.com/stories/2003042902941300.htm
The Hindu
Tuesday, Apr 29, 2003

Politics of 'trishul' taking centre-stage
By K.K. Katyal

`Trishul', `lathi', `prasad', `Bhojshala', cow, conversions - these 
are the issues that figure prominently in the political discourse 
these days. This is the response of our politicians to the pressures 
generated in advance by the Assembly election in four States 
scheduled for later this year. There is nothing unusual for the 
political scene to warm up in the run-up to the contests, regarded 
crucial by all the parties. Coming barely a few months before the 
general election, the trial of strength in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, 
Delhi and Chhattisgarh will both be a barometer of the electoral 
climate and a curtain raiser to the bigger fight.

One would have expected the poll rhetoric to focus on matters such as 
development, employment opportunities, corruption, quality of 
governance and last but not the least internal and external security. 
In practice, we find controversies on petty, narrow matters crowding 
out serious, substantive issues of national interest. This throwback 
to medievalism on the eve of the Assembly poll is disturbing indeed. 
What if these trends and tactics persist till the Lok Sabha elections 
towards the end of next year? Shed some tears, countrymen, this is 
going to be the nation's agenda in 2003-04, in the 21st Century, when 
we have made big strides in IT and related areas.

This development, clearly, is an offshoot of the Gujarat poll and the 
prime responsibility is of the BJP though its opponents are not 
blameless either. Having tasted victory on the strength of the 
Hindutva wave, in the wake of the Godhra train tragedy and the 
communal pogrom, the BJP was tempted to create a majority wave in the 
four States. As has been its experience in the past, Hindutva appeal, 
by itself, was not strong enough to steer it to victory. Had that 
been the case, the BJP would have won hands down in the last Assembly 
election in Uttar Pradesh where it had the advantage of making 
electoral use of Ayodhya. It had to be Hindutva plus, that is, the 
addition of a local emotive issue. This was the crux of the Modi 
strategy in Gujarat and it had to be re-created elsewhere.

The VHP, which was its architect in Gujarat, got active in Rajasthan. 
That was the genesis of the campaign for distribution of `trishuls' 
(tridents). Initially, the drive was restricted to the Dalits on the 
ostensible plea that they needed to be empowered. However, the fear 
of a backlash by the non-Dalit sections led it to broaden the base of 
the campaign. The subsequent events are known - especially the arrest 
of the VHP general secretary, Praveen Togadia, the master of 
ceremonies for the distribution of tridents or `trishul diksha', and 
his release on bail.

The Congress Government in Rajasthan took a tough stand, after the 
reported directive to the Chief Minister by the party high command to 
counter firmly the moves to create communal disaffection. The law, of 
course, has to take its course but total reliance on the legal 
approach - to the exclusion of political campaign - could be 
counter-productive. Already, the BJP, along with the VHP, has sought 
to derive political capital out of the State Government's action 
against Mr. Togadia - slapping the charge of "conspiracy to wage war 
and overawe the State by criminal force''. Meanwhile, Mr. Togadia has 
announced his resolve to organise `trishul' distribution ceremonies 
all over the country in a "democratic and constitutional way". 
`Trishuls' threaten to dominate the political stage in the coming 
months. Not a happy prospect.

Believing that two wrongs make one right, the Rashtriya Janata Dal 
leader, Laloo Prasad Yadav, is going ahead with a major drive to 
distribute `lathis' (batons) to counter the Sangh Parivar's challenge.

The Bihar Government's administrative machinery is involved neck deep 
in the preparations for a rally in Patna on April 30. Mr. Yadav sees 
nothing wrong in the use of `lathis' - in self-defence - and 
demonstrates how it can be used without attracting the penalties 
under the law. Not to be left behind, Amar Singh of the Samajwadi 
Party led a Kshatriya rally of sword-brandishing activists in a bid 
to assert the superiority of their caste.

In Madhya Pradesh, the Congress sought to pre-empt the BJP bid to 
generate a Hindu wave (of which the campaign for the entry of the 
Hindus into Bhojshala was the first salvo) through two moves. One, 
the Chief Minister, Digvijay Singh, wrote to the Prime Minister to 
take steps for a ban on cow slaughter throughout the country. The BJP 
was sore that it was being deprived of a major electoral card. But 
what rattled the party was the Congress charge that the top BJP 
campaigner in the State and the candidate for the chief minister's 
post, Uma Bharti, offered a heart-shaped cake at the Jam Sanuli 
Mandir in Bhopal on Hanuman Jayanti, which had egg as one of the 
ingredients. And that she chanted: "Happy birthday Hanumanji''. The 
"cake kaand'' threatens to be a major campaign issue against her. Ms. 
Bharti fumes and frets, denies the charge, demands a CBI enquiry, 
blames the Congress for stooping low but remains on the defensive. In 
the process, all other pressing matters are forgotten.

With all these issues - along with religious conversions - which 
could erupt on the electoral scene any time, the platform for the 
Assembly poll takes a bizarre turn. But who cares.
_____


#8.

The Telegraph
Tuesday, April 29, 2003

Law clouds riot relief
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1030429/asp/nation/story_1920971.asp


_____


#9.

The Hindu
Apr 29, 2003
Opinion - Editorials
http://www.hinduonnet.com/stories/2003042900281000.htm    

Chauvinist politics
BY CALLING FOR an end to the influx of non-Maharashtrian migrants in 
Mumbai, the Shiv Sena chief, Bal Thackeray, is attempting to revive 
the politics of regional identity and sub-nationalism that have been 
lying dormant in the larger Hindutva project of his party. Although 
the announcement of 1995 as the cut-off year might seem like a 
softening of the original `Mumbai-for-Maharashtrians' slogan, Mr. 
Thackeray is only giving new pragmatic forms to Marathi chauvinism 
that constitutes the core of the Sena's politics. While the original 
slogan was aimed at migrants from the South, especially Tamils, the 
present campaign is directed mostly at people from Uttar Pradesh and 
Bihar who have found employment in the business metropolis in the 
past few years. Indeed, the Sena leader wants pre-1995 non-Marathi 
settlers in Mumbai to join hands with the natives in the proposed 
struggle to evict the recent migrants. Apart from this minor 
difference, necessitated by changed circumstances, there is no real 
modification of the Sena tactic of whipping up Marathi sentiments 
against `outsiders.' The cut-off year relates to the efforts to 
relocate Mumbai slums when the Sena-BJP alliance was in power, and 
does not hold added significance.

Evidently, Mr. Thackeray is giving a regional, cultural identity 
twist to the problems of urban concentration that are certainly not 
unique to Mumbai. True, Mumbai suffers greatly, perhaps more than 
other Indian cities, from the growth in hutments and slums, but the 
solution does not lie in formulating the problem in terms of 
linguistic chauvinism. The Sena chief looks ready to again instigate 
Maharashtrians against people from other States coming to the 
metropolis in search of livelihood. There is a clear design of making 
political capital of the perceived resentment among Maharashtrians at 
Mumbai losing its Marathi culture and taking on a cosmopolitan 
character. But, even though the focus of his Marathi chauvinism is 
Mumbai-centric in the present instance, there is no doubt that Mr. 
Thackeray intends to move beyond the particular case of the 
metropolis. His reference to non-Marathis holding ministerial 
positions in Maharashtra is indicative of his thinking in this regard.

The articulation of the `Me Mumbaikar' programme in the party organ, 
Saamna, comes after Uddhav Thackeray and Raj Thackeray, son and 
nephew respectively of the Sena chief, expressed similar opinions. 
Some other Sena leaders have actually demanded the imposition of 
Constitutional curbs on inter-State migration. The anti-migrants 
campaign thus appears to be part of a deliberate strategy of 
returning to a Marathi majoritarian agenda without, of course, 
abandoning any political gains from sticking to Hindutva. Mr. 
Thackeray himself is against any linking of his latest call with the 
issue of Hindutva, insisting he is only speaking up for the locals of 
Mumbai. In some respects, this return to regionalism by Mr. Thackeray 
is a recognition of the Sena's failure in trying to follow the BJP 
trajectory of growth using Hindutva at the national level. Apart from 
commanding the support of a few fringe elements, the Sena made no 
impact in other parts of the country. Actually, even as Mr. Thackeray 
unveiled the `Me Mumbaikar' programme, the BJP ruled out an alliance 
with the Sena outside Maharashtra. For obvious reasons, the BJP 
cannot back the Marathi chauvinistic demands of the Sena as any 
restriction on the right of a citizen to move within the country 
would make a mockery of Indian nationhood. But essentially there is 
no difference in the approaches of the two parties. Mr. Thackeray 
might target Tamils and Muslims and Biharis at different points of 
time, but he will not shift focus from his majoritarian agenda, 
whether it is Hindutva or a Marathi variant. In this, the Sena is one 
with the BJP.

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

SACW is an informal, independent & non-profit citizens wire service run by
South Asia Citizens Web (www.mnet.fr/aiindex).
The complete SACW archive is available at: http://sacw.insaf.net

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
--