SACW | 19 May 03
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex@mnet.fr
Mon, 19 May 2003 04:44:59 +0100
South Asia Citizens Wire | 19 May, 2003
Action Alert: In Defence of the Indian Historian Romila Thapar
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/Alerts/IDRT300403.html
---------------
#1. India -Pakistan: Trading with the enemy (Farrukh Saleem)
#2. India -Pakistan: Let Punjabis show the way to peace (Ishtiaq Ahmed)
#3. Letter of Protest by Scholars and Intellectuals Against the
Attack on Romila Thapar
#4. Correspondence: Letter received by SACW from Brannon Parker (who
created the internet petiton against Romila Thapar) and the Response
to Brannon Parker
#5. On Line Petition Defending the Library of Congress appointment of
Dr Romila Thapar to the Kluge Chair
#6. On Sociology of Communalism (Asghar Ali Engineer)
--------------
#1.
The News International, May 18, 2003
Trading with the enemy
Dr Farrukh Saleem
On 27 December 2001, Pakistan and India traded harsh diplomatic
sanctions. On 31 December 2001, Pakistani and Indian forces traded
fire along the Line of Control (LoC). On 1 June 2002, India and
Pakistan traded abduction accusations. On 8 January 2003, Pakistan
and India traded nuclear war of words. People who begin trading goods
stop trading fire.
http://www.jang.com.pk/thenews/may2003-daily/18-05-2003/oped/o4.htm
______
#2.
The Daily Times, May 18, 2003
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=3Dstory_18-5-2003_pg3_2
Let Punjabis show the way to peace
Ishtiaq Ahmed
There is no reason to fear that any open and unrestricted contact
between the peoples of the two Punjabs will undermine the two-state
solution that was agreed upon in 1947
These days the governments of India and Pakistan are making sensible
moves towards normalisation of relations. We can only hold our breath
and hope that this time the spoilers, who are well-entrenched on both
sides and are proud to be known as hawks, will not gain the upper
hand and bring to nought the positive statements and friendly
gestures of preceding weeks by taking maximalist positions that the
other side cannot possibly accept.
Past efforts by the governments of India and Pakistan have followed a
set pattern. Hopes have been raised high with the heads of the two
governments meeting and proclaiming an end to the era of
confrontation and the opening of a new chapter in their relations
which would include easing of travel facilities and expansion of
trade. An important feature of such declarations has been the
acknowledgement that the Kashmir dispute (the Indians prefer to call
it an "issue") needs to be resolved peacefully. Thereafter, nothing
substantial happens and after a while things go awry.
Just to recall the latest such events, it was in February 1999 when
things looked truly bright on the peace front. Prime Minister Atal
Behari Vajpayee had made the historic visit to the Minar-e-Pakistan
where he publicly acknowledged that despite opposition to the idea of
Pakistan the Hindu nationalist forces were now ready to accept the
reality of Pakistan. But the architects of Kargil had other plans and
a wasteful border war left hundreds of young men dead and wounded on
both sides.
Another opportunity arose at the time of the Agra Summit in July
2001. On that occasion the Indian side assumed an intransigent
position only hours before a joint declaration was to be made by Mr
Vajpayee and General Pervez Musharraf affirming their commitment to
peace and friendly relations.
It is an old, well-established principle that when two antagonists
cannot resolve their disputes and conflicts peacefully they are
advised to invite a third party to mediate between them and find fair
solutions. In this regard, Pakistan has been willing to accept third
party mediation but India remains adamant not to submit their claims
on Kashmir to any third party. As I have argued in earlier articles
relating to Kashmir, the Indian and Pakistani positions on that
dispute pertain to security and economic concerns. Unless we create a
climate whereby both sides may learn to appreciate that their
security and economic prosperity, along with that of the people of
Kashmir, is actually enhanced from a rational sharing of its
resources no real progress can possibly be made on Kashmir.
Under the circumstance, would it not be worthwhile to introduce new
actors into the process of conflict resolution? These have to be
found from within India and Pakistan. They should not be government
officials and functionaries because that has already been tried
unsuccessfully. It would also not suffice to have the annual meets of
civil society actors such as the Pakistan-India Peoples Forum for
Peace and Democracy in various Indian and Pakistani cities. The Forum
has done much good work in the field but it is constrained by both
the delegations upholding the official positions of their governments
on Kashmir. The net result is that nothing happens that can break the
deadlock.
I should like to propose an entirely new way of approaching
India-Pakistan relations. Let the people of the two countries meet
without any fixed political agenda to deal with. For a start it must
be the Punjabis on both sides of the Wagah-Attari Border who need to
be engaged in the peace process.
Contrary to the official rhetoric about the 1947 Punjab riots, my own
research shows that most of the people of Punjab did not want to
abandon their hearth and home and wanted to stay put despite their
province being partitioned on the basis of religious majorities. Even
when they were leaving their villages and towns they were hoping to
return as soon as the communal madness was brought under control.
That of course could not happen.
In the 1950s the Pakistan High Commissioner to India Raja Ghazanfar
Ali Khan allowed East Punjabis to freely visit West Punjab during an
India-Pakistan cricket match at Lahore. The people of Lahore and
Punjab offered the visitors such moving hospitality and generosity
that the bloody riots of only a few years earlier seemed to be an
unreal nightmare. Grown up men of all religions were seen embracing
each other and crying and asking each other for forgiveness.
It is my contention that under international law and the higher moral
law deriving from the universal conscience, the right to visit one's
place of birth is an inalienable human right and must be granted to
all human beings. In my interviews relating to the 1947 riots
conducted recently in Pakistan, I was quite surprised how greatly
Punjabi Muslims valued the right to go back and visit not only their
homes but particularly their ancestral graveyards. Many of them want
to go back at least once and offer fateha at the graves of their
parents. They could not do that because at that moment the main
consideration was to save their lives and quickly cross the border
into Pakistan. The Hindus and Sikhs who fled West Punjab are equally
emotional and they would like to visit their ancestral homes, schools
and colleges.
I don't believe for a moment that Punjabi Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs,
Christians and others bear a permanent grudge against each other. On
the other hand, my research shows that on both sides there is a
realisation that India and Pakistan are two separate and independent
states and they will and should remain so in the future.
There is no reason to fear that any open and unrestricted contact
between the peoples of the two Punjabs will undermine the two-state
solution that was agreed upon in 1947. On the contrary what is likely
is that they will in their traditional wisdom generate enough good
will that resolving the Kashmir dispute to the advantage of all the
peoples of this region will appear to be the only sound option. So
let's allow Punjabis to meet and mix freely for three months.
______
#3.
Source URL: http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/Alerts/ProtestLetter17052003.html
Letter of Protest by Scholars and Intellectuals Against the Attack on
Romila Thapar
[Sent to the Library of Congress and released to the Press on 17 May 2003]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are shocked at the letter of protest that is circulating in on the
Internet against the appointment of Professor Romila Thapar as First
Holder of the Kluge Chair in Countries and Cultures of the South at
the Library of Congress, USA. Professor Thapar has been undoubtedly
one of the most eminent Indian historians, whose prolific scholarly
contribution has opened up new ways of looking at India's past.
The petition shows an amazing lack of familiarity with Professor
Thapar's writings. Since the 1960s Professor Thapar has written
powerfully against the colonial stereotypes that India had no past,
no sense of time, and no historical consciousness. The petitioners
attribute to her precisely those ideas that she has spent a lifetime
battling against.
But clearly the problem is that Professor Thapar's conception of
Indian past is different from that of the petitioners. Professor
Thapar has looked at a variety of cultural traditions in the making
of ancient India. To the petitioners Indian past is monolithic,
unified and unmistakably only Hindu. Those who disagree with this
notion are accused of committing cultural genocide.
This is a not just a shocking intolerance of perceptual differences.
It is a politics that seeks to silence critique, and battles for a
notion of the past that is homogeneously Hindu. It is part of a wider
attack that we are witnessing in India today against intellectual and
artistic freedom, and against cultural plurality. In a political
milieu where dissent is being regularly repressed through
intimidation, this petition against Professor Thapar and the hate
mails that accompany it, become particular cause of concern.
We strongly protest against this attack on Professor Thapar.
Signatories:
Professor Hermann Kulke
Chair of Asian History,
Kiel University, Germany
Ranajit Guha
Stanley J. Tambiah
Harvard University
Professor T.N. Madan
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Professor Sumit Sarkar
Department of History
University of Delhi
Professor Partha Chatterjee
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Sheldon Pollock
George V. Bobinskoy Professor of Sanskrit and Indic Studies
Dept. of South Asian Languages and Civilizations
University of Chicago
1130 E. 59th St.
Chicago, IL 60637-1543
Professor Anthony Grafton
Henry Putnam University Professor
Department of History
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544
Professor Robert Tignor
Chair, Department of History
Department of History
Princeton University
Professor Kenneth McPherson
Mercator Professor
South Asia Institute
University of Heidelberg
Im Neuenheimer Feld 330
69120 Heidelberg
GERMANY
Dr Sudipta Kaviraj
School of Oriental and Afrcian Studies
London
Prof. Fred Dallmayr,
University of Notre Dame.
Professor Kapil Raj
Ma=EEtre de conf=E9rences (Associate Professor)
Alexander Koyr=E9 Centre for the History of Science
Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales
54, boulevard Raspail
75006 Paris, France
Professor Gyanendra Pandey
Department of Anthropology and History
John Hopkins University
=46rancis Robinson,
Professor of the History of South Asia in the University
of London,
Royal Holloway, University of London.
Professor Supriya Chaudhuri
Dept. of English,
Jadavpur University
Professor Sukanta Chaudhuri
Dept. of English,
Jadavpur University
Professor David Washbrook
St Antony's College
University of Oxford
=46rederique Apffel-Marglin
Anthropology Professor
Smith College
Northampton. Mass, 01063, USA
David Neal Lorenzen
Dr Benjamin Zachariah
Lecturer in International History
Department of History
University of Sheffield
United Kingdom.
Professor Jayati Ghosh
Centre for Economic Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Abhijit Sen
Centre for Economic Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Profesor Chandrashekhar
Centre for Economic Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Prof. Dr. Marlene Njammasch
Institute for Asian and African Studies
Seminar for South Asian Studies
Humboldt University
Unter den Linden 6
10099 Berlin
Dr. Ravi Ahuja, Assistant Professor of
History, South Asia Institute,
University of Heidelberg,
Sambudha Sen,
Reader , Department of English,
University of Delhi.
Profesor Gyan Prakash
Princeton University
Professor Satyajit Rath
Institute of Immunology
Aseem Prakash
=46ellow
Giri Institute of Development Studies
Lucknow - 2260 24
India
Professor Madhura swaminathan,
Indian Statistical Institute,
Kolkata, India
Professor V. K. Ramachandran,
Indian Statistical Institute
Kolkata, India
Dr. Dagmar Hellmann-Rajanayagam
Sch=FCtzenstr. 8
85757 Karlsfeld
Germany
Rashmi Paliwal
Ekalavya
Bhopal
Madhaya Pradesh
Subramanyam
Ekalavya
Bhopal
Madhaya Pradesh
Shohini Ghosh,
Reader, MCRC, Jamia Millia Islamia,
New Delhi
Dr G.Arunima
University of Delhi
Balmurli Natrajan
Assistant Professor
Anthropology
Iowa State University
Ames, Iowa 50011
U.S.A.
Ajay Sinha
Associate Professor
Art Department
Mount Holyoke College
South Hadley, MA 01075
Tim Schwabedissen
Kiel University, Germany
Dr. Mukulika Banerjee
Department of Anthropology
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT
Professor Saurabh Dube
Centre for Asian and African Studies
El Colegio de M=E9xico
Mexico
Ajantha Subramanian
Harvard University
Professor Tirthankar Roy
Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics
Pune, India
Dr Ishita Banerjee
Centre for Asian and African Studies
El Colegio de M=E9xico
Prof. Dr. Jakob R=F6sel
Kesava Rao Siripurapu
TEESTA SETALVAD
JAVED ANAND, Bombay
Dr. Indira Ghose,
Lecturer, Department of English,
=46ree University of Berlin, Germany.
Dr. Mandakini Dubey
Duke University
Dr. Ashwini Chhatre
Department of Political Science,
Duke University.
Dr. Janet Sturgeon,
Brown University
Sheetal Majithia
Cornell University
Dr Abha Singh
Indira Gandhi University
New Delhi
Mayuri Amuluru
Mark Baker
=46orest Community Research
US
Professor Kim Berry
Head, Department of Women's Studies,
Humboldt State University.
Dr Nandini Sundar
Centre for Governance Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
Bharati Jagannathan
Miranda House
Delhi University
G. Asha
K.Saradamoni
Janaki Nair
Praful bidwai
Journalist
New Delhi
Dr. Werner F. Menski,
Senior Lecturer in Law
School of Oriental and African Studies
University of London
London WC1H 0XG
Arjun Dev
Indira Arjun Dev
Jean Dreze
India
Harjot Oberoi
Professor of South Asian History and Religions
Department of Asian Studies
1871 West Mall, Vancouver
University of British Columbia
BC V6T 1Z1, CANADA
Professor Tapati Guha-thakurta
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Professor Gautam Bhadra
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Professor Pradip Bose
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Dr Janaki Nair
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Professor Lakshmi Subramaniam
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Raziuddin Aquil
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Professor Anjan Ghosh
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Professor Manas Ray
Centre for Studies in Social Sciences
Calcutta
Tejaswini Niranjana,
Centre for the Study of Culture and Society
Bangalore
Ashish Rajadhyaksha,
Centre for the Study of Culture and Society
Bangalore
S.V.Srinivas,
Centre for the Study of Culture and Society
Bnagalore
Uma Maheshwari Bhrugubanda,
Columbia University
I.Mohan Krishna,
Independent film-maker,
Hyderabad
Dr Aloka Parasher-Sen
Department of History
University of Hyderabad
Dr David Hardiman,
Dept of History,
University of Warwick.
Dr. Satish Deshpande
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi University North Campus,
DELHI 110 007.
Professor Bina Agarwal
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Kanchan Chopra
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Dr Satish Deshpande
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Nilabja Ghosh
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Arup Mitra
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Saon Ray
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
S. Sakthivel
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Professor Patricia Uberoi
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Sudha Vasan
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Dr Mary John
Jawaharlal Nehru University,
Delhi 110 067
Joanna Jellinek
Publishing Editor,
Critical Quarterly
Ashwini Chhatre
Department of Political Science,
Duke University.
Janet Sturgeon,
Brown University
Sheetal Majithia
Cornell University
Mayuri Amuluru,
NYC.
Professor Susan Visvanathan
Centre for Social Systmes
Jawaharlal Nehru Univeristy
Mahasweta Chaudhury
Patrick Petitjean
REHSEIS-CNRS,
Paris
Dr. Jacques Pouchepadass
Senior Fellow, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris
Prof. Gyula Wojtilla
Department of Ancient History University of Szeged
=46arah Naqvi,
Independent writer
Dr Ian Mabbett
Reader in History,
School of Historical Studies,
Monash University,
Clayton, Vic. Australia 3800.
Dr Chandana Mathur
New School for Social Research, New York
Ines G. Zupanov
Research Fellow
Centre national de la recherche scientifique
CEIAS/EHESS
54, Bd. Raspail
Paris, 75006, France
Dr Francesca Orsini
University Lecturer in Hindi,
University of Cambridge
Anna Schultz
University of Illinois
Urbana-Champaign
Varuni Bhatia
Department of Religion
Columbia University
Sandeep Vaidya
125 Winter Garden
Pearse Street
Dublin 2
Ireland
K. Saradamoni,
Retired Professor, Economics,
Indian Statistical Institute.
Ritty Lukose
University of Pennsylvania
Dr. Bakirathi Mani
Assistant Professor
Department of English Literature
Swarthmore College
Dr Lata Mani,
Independent Scholar.
USA
Anupam Basu
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Department of English
Laila Friese
=46reelance editor
Cambridge, UK
Aaron Moore
Dept. of History, Cornell University
Dr F. 'Nalini' Delvoye
EPHE IVth, Paris
Ahmer Nadeem Anwar,
Sri Venkateswara College,
Dr Daud Ali
Lecturer in the Early History of India, School of
Oriental and African Studies, London.
Avishek Ganguly
Dept of English & Comp Lit
Columbia University
Diya Das
Dept of Strategy & Human Resources
School of Management
Syracuse University
Ruchi
Columbia University
Dulali Nag
Unicef.
Dr Priyamvada Gopal
=46aculty of English
Cambridge University
Dr. Werner F. Menski, MA, PhD
Senior Lecturer in Law
School of Oriental and African Studies
University of London
London WC1H 0XG
Laura Carballido
Centro de Estudios de Asia y Africa
El Colegio de Mexico
Mexico
Damu Radheshwar AIA
Senior Associate
POLSHEK PARTNERSHIP ARCHITECTS
320 West 13th Street
New York, New York 10014
Sushma Joshi,
80th St, East Elmhurst, NY 11370
=46reelance writer
David Holmberg
Cornell University
Kath March
Cornell University
Andrew Willford
Cornell University
Ann Blackburn
Cornell University
Chris Minkowski
Cornell University
Ajantha Subramanian,
Harvard University
Laila Friese
=46reelance editor
Cambridge, UK
Dr Rudrangshu Mukherjee
Editor, Editorial Pages,
The Telegraph.
Dayita Datta
Vice Principal Welham Girls School, Dehra Dun
Bhaswati Chakravorty
Senior Assistant Editor,
The Telegraph
Dr. Christiane Brosius,
Department of Anthropology
South Asia Institute
University of Heidelberg
Im Neuenheimer Feld 330
69120 Heidelberg
Germany
www.sai.uni-heidelberg.de/ETHNO
Saugata Mukherjee
Centre for Linguistics & English
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Dr. Annie Montaut
Paris
Michel Paty
Aant Elzinga
Professor
Department of History of Ideas and Theory of Science
Goteborg University
Box 200 SE-405 30 Goteborg
Sweden
Professpor Dhruv Raina
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Prajit K Basu
Jisha Menon,
Stanford University
Cyril Ghosh,
Syracuse University
Paromita Kar
Sr Sub-editor-cum-reporter
The Statesman, Kolkata
Anupama Roy
Institute of Economic Growth,
Delhi 110 007
Meenu Tiwari
Institute of Economic Growth
& Univ of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
David Osorio
London, UK
Martine Osorio
London, UK
Jill Kitson
Australian Broadcasting Corporation
Dr Eivind Kahrs,
=46aculty of Oriental Studies,
University of Cambridge, UK
Vinay Lal
Associate Professor
Department of History,
University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)
Los Angeles, CA 90095-1473
Professor I K Shukla
Coalition for an Egalitarian and Pluralistic India
Los Angeles, California
Anil Lal
Roosevelt University
Chicago, Illinois
Dr Anju Relan
School of Medicine, UCLA
Los Angeles, CA 90095
Dr Sudeshna Guha
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology
University of Cambridge
Shukla Sawant
School of Arts & Aesthetics JNU
New Delhi-110067,
Geetanjali Shree
Writer in Residence,
South Asian Studies,
University of Edinburgh.
U.K.
Dr Nandini Gooptu
Queen Elizabesth House, Oxford
Dr Vijay Prasad
Trinity College,Hartford, CT, USA
Julia Eckert
Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology
Prashant Kidambi,
Lecturer in South Asian History,
University of Leicester, UK.
Aradhana (Anu) Sharma
Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Women's Studies
Department of Anthropology
Wesleyan University
Middletown, CT 06459-0502
R Ravishankar
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaig
Professor Spencer Leonard
University of Chicago
Professor Debali Mookerjea-Leonard
Cornell University
Imre Bangha,
Research Fellow
Indian literature and Aesthetics, PRASADA,
DE Montfort University.
Sophie Hawkins,
Lancaster University
England
Clare Talwalker
Ass. Professor of Anthropology
University of Dayton
Dr. Vasant Saberwal,
Director of Research, Moving Images, New Delhi.
Sunil deshmukh
1300 rockrimmon rd
stamford ct 06903
Jinee Lokaneeta
Sanjay K mishra
USC,Los Angeles
Geetanjali Srikantan
ALTERNATIVE LAW FORUM
India
Nikita Sud
St Antony's College
Oxford
Arunabha Ghosh
Balliol College
Oxford OX1 3BJ, UK
Dr. Jeffrey Cox
Professor of History
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa, US
Dr. Corey Creekmur
Associate Professor of Film Studies
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa, US
Dr. Alice Davison
Associate Professor of Linguistics
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa
Dr. Gigi Durham
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa
Associate Professor of Journalism
Dr. Paul Greenough
Professor of History
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa
Dr. Santhi Hejeebu
Visiting Assistant Professor of Economics and History
South Asian Studies
University of Iowa
Dr. Meena Khandelwal
Assistant Professor of Anthropology
South Asian Studies, University of Iowa
Dr. Priya Kumar
Assistant Professor of English
South Asian Studies, University of Iowa
Dr. Mark Sidel
Assistant Professor of Law
South Asian Studies, University of Iowa
=46arida Abdulla Khan,
Dept.of Education,
Delhi University
Modumita Roy,
Associate professor of english
Tufts univerity
USA
The Indian CEO Council
Asha Shahed
Ashish Chadha
Dept. Of Cultural and Social Anthropology
=46rancoise Mallison
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes
=46rance
Dr. Sabina Sawhney
Hofstra University
Pritam Singh
Oxford Brookes University Business School
Oxford
Dr S Kapila,
Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine,
Oxford OX2 6PE.
Gautam Premnath
Assistant Professor of English
University of Massachusetts Boston
Bina Fernandez
Wolfson College
OX2 6UD, Oxford, UK
Alaka Basu
Cornell University
Swagato sarkar
St.antonym's college
University of oxford
Oxford ox2 6jf,uk.
Dr. Frederick Smith,
Associate Professor of Religion and of Asian Languages and Literatures,
University of Iowa.
USA
Prof Barbara Harriss-White
Queen Elizbesth House, Oxford
Professor Adam Hardy
PRASADA
De Montfort University
Leicester LE1 9BH, UK
Aditi Thorat
Lincoln College
University of Oxford
Amit Ranjan Basu
Jawaharlal Nehru Univesrity
Dr. SangeetaDasGupta,
Visva Bharati University,
Santiniketan,
Dr. Padmanabh Samarendra,
S.A. Jaipuria College,
Calcutta University,
Siddhartha DasGupta,
Bangabashi Evening College,
Calcutta University,
Swarna Rajagopalan
Visiting Assistant Professor
Department of Political Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Urbana, IL 61801, USA
Dr Susan Daruvala,
=46aculty of Oriental Studies,
University of Cambridge
Preeti Chopra
Department of Architecture
University of California, Berkeley
Dr Sambudha Sen
Department of English
University of Delhi
Professor Rajeev Bhargava
Department of Political Science
University of Delhi
Dr PK Dutta
Department of Political Science
University of Delhi
Dr Prabhu Mohapatra
Department of History
University of Delhi
Mala Dayal
Ravi Dayal
Ravi Dayal Publishers
Naina Dayal
Dr Chitra Joshi
Reader, Department of History
Indraprastha College
University of Delhi
Dr Meena Bhargava
Reader, Department of History
Indraprastha College
University of Delhi
Mukul Manglik
Ramjas College
Univerity of Delhi
Rashmi Pant
Reader, Department of History
Indraprastha College
University of Delhi
Suvrita Khatri
Department of History
Deshbandhu College
University of Delhi
Dr Rana Behal
Department of History
Deshbandhu College
University of Delhi
Professor Aditya Mukherjee
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Mridual Mukherjee
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Tanika Sarkar
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Dr Kumkum Roy
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Kunal Chakrabarty
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Dr Hiraman Tiwari
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Samira Sheikh
Wolfson College,
Oxford OX2 6UD.
Dr Tapas Saha
National Institute of Health
Bethesda. MD 20892
Joy Pachuau
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Mahalakshmi
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Neeladri Bhattacharya
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Dr Yogesh Sharma
Centre for Histoircal Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Zoya Hasan
Centre for Political Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi
Professor Mushirul Hasan
Department of History
Jamiya Milia Islamia
New Delhi
Dr Jairus Banaji
Bombay
Rohini Hensman
Bombay
Dilip Simeon
New Delhi
Harsh Kapoor,
South Asia Citizens Web,
=46rance
______
#4.
CORRESPONDENCE FOR YOUR ENTERTAINMENT:
Letter received by SACW from Brannon Parker (who created the internet
petiton against Romila Thapar)
http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/Alerts/responsetoBP.html#Letter%20recieved%20by%2=
0SACW%20from%20the
[also available at Hindutva site:: http://www.hvk.org/articles/0503/0.html
SACW Response to Brannon Parker [along with his letter]
(posted at the web page In Defence of Romila Thapar)
Available at: http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/Alerts/
______
#5.
On Line Petition Defending the Library of Congress appointment of Dr
Romila Thapar to the Kluge Chair
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/thapar/petition.html
______
#6.
(Secular Perspective 16-31 May 2003)
ON SOCIOLOGY OF COMMUNALISM
by Asghar Ali Engineer
One cannot understand phenomenon of communalism without understanding
the very nature of society. Society plays very important role in
genesis of communalism. One cannot divide unless society is divisible
along certain fault lines. These fault lines get further aggravated
in certain conditions. In feudal societies too these fault lines
exist but do not play politically divisive role as do in a colonial
or capitalist society, which are much more competitive.
It is important to note that Indian society was never homogenous
throughout history. It was highly diverse religiously, culturally,
caste-wise and linguistically but there was hardly any tension
between these groups. It all began with establishment of British rule
in India and so most of the scholars agree that communalism is a
modern phenomenon and not a medieval phenomenon.
Why the social cleavage got so aggravated with the advent of British
rule? The cleavage did exist all through but it turned hostile only
in the British colonial period. The explanation for this is quite
complex, as there are host of reasons for this. However, three
reasons are quite predominant which are as follows: The British
divisive policies, competitive nature of colonial, political and
social structure and backwardness of colonial society with stunted
economic growth.
The British rule was shaken with war of independence in 1857 as
Hindus and Muslims united to challenge British hegemony. It was
easier to divide as fault lines were sharpening and communal
consciousness was emerging among Hindu and Muslim elite. It is
further to be noted that communal phenomenon is basically an upper
class elite phenomenon. The Hindu elite welcomed the British rule as
a 'liberative' one and began to aspire for higher administrative jobs.
The Muslim elite - mostly feudals - on the other hand, considered
British rule as unmitigated disaster as not only they lost power but
also because they suffered most during the retaliatory action by the
British after 1857 uprising. They developed a sort of aversion for
the British rulers and were quite reluctant to take to modern
education introduced by the Britishers.
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, a great thinker and educationist urged Muslim
elite to go for modern education to better their future. Thus the
Hindu and Muslim elite began to compete for British jobs and
political favour. This widened the cleavage between the two elite.
The British fully exploited this in their favour. The formation of
Indian National Congress in 1885 also made the British more
apprehensive of rising aspirations of the 'Hindu nationalism' and now
began to manipulate Muslim feudal elite and play them against the
Hindu elite.
Thus the colonial society sharpened communal consciousness and the
British further fuelled separation through political manoeuvres. The
Hindu and Muslim masses remained aloof from these controversies and
coexisted without such hostilities. Among them neither there was
competition for jobs nor for political posts. However, there was some
trickling down effect.
The communal hostilities intensified with passage of time and
controversies about sharing power between Hindu and Muslim elite and
constitutional arrangement for sharing power. It must be noted that
communalism is product not of religious hostilities but of political
and economic struggle for share in power and resources between the
educated elite. It is not a subaltern phenomenon either as they are
not involved in such struggles.
Jinnah, a product of Lincoln's Inn in London, represented Muslim
elite, not Muslim masses. The orthodox 'Ulama, on the other hand,
were closer to the masses and represented their aspirations. No
wonder than that Jinnah and the Deobandi 'Ulama never saw eye to eye
on political matters. They were closer to Indian National congress
than to Muslim League, which was the party of the Muslim elite. They
supported the composite nationalism than Muslim separatism.
The British society was essentially a colonial society and masses had
no say in political matters, as there was no universal franchise.
After independence universal franchise was introduced and masses of
people began to participate in the political processes. For few years
after independence the Congress got elected to power. Its leaders
like Nehru and others enjoyed tremendous prestige and people of all
castes and communities continued to vote for it.
However, the political scenario began to change sharply at the end of
sixties. Few general elections had brought more political
consciousness among different caste and communities. Each caste and
community began to develop heightened consciousness and began to
demand greater share in power. Among Hindus only upper castes had all
the political or economic benefits so far. Now increased
participation in political processes made minorities and lower caste
people understand importance of their vote and they began to make
increased demands thus changing the dynamics of political change.
This gave new dimension to communalism, which we had inherited from
the British period. Economic changes also added to the social strife.
With land reforms middle castes in various states acquired more
social clout and they demanded greater share in political power. The
Reddys and Cammas in Andhra Pradesh, Patels in Gujarat, Marathas in
Maharashtra, Yadavs in Utter Pradesh. and Bihar etc. acquired much
greater clout and political parties began to woo them.
During early eighties Mrs. Gandhi realised the potential of these
newly emerging castes and sought their support for electoral
purposes. For these castes communalism provided an easier route to
power in some cases. Thus Patels in Gujarat flocked around BJP to
claim greater share in power. Also other backward castes found it
very attractive to support communal outfits.
A sociological study of castes supporting VHP will be quite an
interesting phenomenon. Most of the backward caste people finding no
place in established secular parties found ready acceptance in
outfits like the VHP. And to be in VHP, one has to compete with
others in displaying communalism. The communal rhetoric helped them
doubly: it helped them rise in the esteem of upper caste Hindus and
also ensure them quicker rise in political power hierarchy.
The BJP which earlier had narrow upper caste base found it extremely
difficult to win few parliamentary seats. It felt the necessity to
widen its base. Initially it opposed implementation of Mandal
Commission in 1990. But soon it realised its political potential and
began to woo the OBC's to its fold. For these OBCs it was not easier
to rise to the higher ranks of the political hierarchy. They thus
flocked to VHP, which was a militant Hindu organisation. The extreme
communal rhetoric made them more acceptable to the Hindu nationalist
organisation.
It is such extreme rhetoric, which ensured quick rise of OBC leaders
like Kalyan Singh who rose to became chief minister of U.P., Uma
Bharti, Sadhvi Rithambara, Acharya Dharmendra Acharya Giriraj Kishor,
Pravin Togadia and others. Ramjanambhoomi became their peg to hang
their political aspirations on. It was confrontationist politics all
along for them. More extreme the rhetoric quicker the rise. The Shiv
Sena too attracted those castes which were below Mahars in the caste
hierarchy in Maharashtra. The Mahars already had acquired political
clout due to struggles by Ambedkar but those below Mahars had no such
clout. It is Shiv Sena looking for expanding its political base gave
them political importance and attracted them.
The Muslim politics too underwent similar change. In pre-partition
days Muslim politics was monopoly of upper class Muslims known as
ashraf. Most of the ashraf from minority areas like Utter Predesh.
and Bihar migrated to Pakistan leaving behind low caste and poor
Muslims known as ajlaf. Most of these Muslims were artisans and
belonged to lower professions.
It is these Muslims who began to acquire economic clout in
post-independence India. They began to rise in class hierarchy and
upper class status and began to aspire, like OBCs among Hindus, for
more political power and this drove a section of them to religious
and fundamentalist rhetoric. The confrontationist postures some of
them acquired during Shah Banu movement and Babri Masjid issue also
has to be seen in this light. This confrontationist postures from
both sides led to sharpening of communal consciousness and eruption
of communal violence became more intense and widespread during
eighties and early nineties.
The Indian society will continue to experience such violent caste and
communal eruptions as long as it does not find political and economic
equilibrium in terms of castes and communities. The rise of OBCs on
one hand, and impact of globalisation on Indian economy on the other,
will continue to cause occasional eruption of violence in Indian
society for quite some time. Caste and communal polarisation will be
with us as long as we are not able to create more egalitarian society.
______
#4.
______
#5.
The Deccan Herald, May 19, 2003
Expatriates' ideological battles: Remittance of hate and anger
By L K Sharma
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/may19/top.asp
______
#6.
The May / June issue of the-south-asian has been published
URL: http://www.the-south-asian.com.
_____
#7.
India Pakistan Arms Race and Militarisation Watch (IPARMW) # 119
19 May 2003
URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IPARMW/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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.
--