SACW | 25 Dec. 2003

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire  |  25 December,  2003
via:  www.sacw.net

[1] Statement on Anti-WMD Decisions by Iran and 
Libya (Pakistan Peace Coalition)
[2] Nepal: Turning civilians into combatants (Seira Tamang)
[3] Pakistan-India: Could Musharraf Be Right? (Bharat Bhushan)
[4] India Upcoming reflection meet on 
Communalisation of tribal and dalit communities
[5] India: Outsider as 'Other' | Politics of 
Identity and Exclusion (Anuradha M Chenoy)
[6] India: Modi shadow on Christmas
[7] True secularism against overt display of religiosity

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

[1]


Pakistan Peace Coalition
ST-001, Sector X, Sub-Sector V,
Gulshan-e-Maymar,
Karachi-75340
Pakistan

[Date: 24 Dec 2003]

STATEMENT ON ANTI-WMD DECISIONS BY IRAN AND LIBYA

Pakistan Peace Coalition (PPC) welcomes the 
recent decisions by Iran and Libya to
abandon their quests for weapons of mass 
destruction, first by Iran by opening itself for 
very
intrusive monitoring of its nuclear 
establishments, and then by Libya by abandoning 
any
programmes of WMD that it may have had.
However, these unilateral steps from Iran and 
Libya are likely to serve only a limited purpose,
if no further progress is made towards global 
disarmament under article 6 of the NPT and
towards further de-nuclearisation, especially of 
Israel, to enhance security and stability in the
Middle East. Without Israel's joining in the 
moves towards making the Middle East weaponsfree
zone, these developments will be perceived as 
Western powers having coerced these
two countries to give up their nuclear option in 
order to make Israel supreme in the region.
Next in line ought to be Pakistani and Indian 
nuclear weapons programmes. The existence of
nuclear weapons in this region will always remain 
a source of great worry. The geography
and the history have made sure that no other 
region of the world is as likely to see the use of
nuclear weapons as South Asia. Now that there is 
a thaw in the relations between the two
countries, this is the opportune moment to extend 
the improvement of relations to the level of
declaring South Asia a nuclear weapons-free zone.
In addition, the PPC understands well that the 
posture of the United States under the rule of
the militant neo-conservatives is also a factor 
that stands in the way of global nuclear
disarmament. PPC therefore stands shoulder to 
shoulder with all those forces in the world
that struggle to ward off American imperialist designs.
MB Naqvi, President - PPC
Dr. A.H.Nayyar
Dr. Zaki Hassan
Dr. Tariq Sohail
Mr. Mohammad Tahseen
Ms. Sheema Kirmani
Ms. Sheen Farrukh
Mr. Aaijaz Ahmed
Ms. Sarah Siddiqui
Mr. Rahim Bux Azad
Mr. Aslam Khawaja
Ms. Nasreen Chandio (MPA)
Mr. Khalique Ibrahim Khalique
Ms. Noor Naz Aga
Mr. Mansoor Saeed
Hafiz Siddiq Memon
Mr. Karamat Ali
Dr. Aly Ercelawn
Dr. A. Aziz
Dr. M.A. Mahboob
Mr. B.M.Kutty
Mr. Irfan Mufti
Dr. Asad Sayeed
Mr. Khalid Ahmed
Ms. Sania Saeed
Mr. Shahid Shafat
Mr. Sohail Sangi
Mr. Usman Baloch
Mr. S. Akbar Zaidi
Mr. Noordin Sarki
Mr. Mirza Aly Azhar
Mr. Mushtaq Meerani
_________________________________

SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN):
An informal information platform for
activists and scholars concerned about
Nuclearisation in South Asia.
SAAN Web site URL:
www.s-asians-against-nukes.org

South Asians Against Nukes Mailing List:

To subscribe send a blank message to:
<saan_-subscribe at yahoogroups.com>



_____

[2]

Nepali Times
19-25 December 2003
COMMENT

by SEIRA TAMANG

Turning civilians into combatants
When the social fabric is in tatters, it is only 
a small step away from civil militia to death 
squads, private armies, vigilantes and warlordism.

ROBIN SAYAMI

A culture of fear has enveloped Nepal. 
Parachuting conflict specialists may link it to 
the purported Nepali culture of fatalism, but 
there are several inter-connecting threads, not 
the least the royal takeover and its backing by 
certain Kathmandu-based embassies followed by 
military aid in the name of protecting people, 
peace and democracy.

One diplomat said at the time that the royal move 
had to be supported because of a lack of 
alternatives. One cannot but help wonder what 
would have happened had there been no foreign 
intervention at that or other crucial junctures 
in our history. Could Nepalis, left to our own 
devices (a thought unbearable to many official 
foreigner friends apparently) have done any 
worse? Would we have been able to better initiate 
processes that militarise society and enfeeble 
our democratic structures? Would we have been 
able to cultivate a more widespread culture of 
fear and suspicion?

This is spreading amidst the day-to-day anonymous 
deaths of villagers, and now comes the idea of 
the civilian military campaign and its 
accompanying Village-Town Security Concept (VTSS) 
under which locals are to be trained and armed to 
resist Maoist insurgents. The plan has been 
widely condemned by groups such as Amnesty 
International, the International Commission of 
Jurists (ICJ) and national human rights bodies. 
Exactly why the Rural Volunteer Security Groups 
and Peace Committees is such a terrible idea and 
will have longterm and disastrous impact for 
Nepal is clear from Guatemala's experience with 
such voluntary civilian militia.

As pointed out by Amnesty International, such 
plans "place the civilian population in grave 
danger by seriously compromising their 
neutrality". In contravention of the Geneva 
Convention, the establishment of a civil militia 
blurs the distinction between civilians and 
combatants and renders all civilians at higher 
risk. The term 'volunteer' is made irrelevant in 
such situations: one must volunteer or be 
labelled a Maoist with all its concomitant 
consequences. In the long run, this will have 
disastrous implications in tearing apart the 
social fabric, for one must either be 'with' the 
'volunteers' or 'against' them-there is no 
neutral ground.

Since the government cannot risk having the guns 
turned back on them, the civil militias are 
likely to be badly trained and armed. Thus the 
approach in practice appears little different 
from the Maoists and their tactics of using human 
shields.

The strategy of arming civilians in 
counter-insurgency was used to devastating effect 
by US-backed regimes in Latin America, notably 
Peru and Guatemala. In 1995 the Committee against 
Torture in the United Nations called for the 
complete abolition of so-called 'Voluntary 
Committees of Civic Defence' in Guatemala in view 
of the human rights violations and violence 
committed by these civilian auxiliaries. While it 
was officially disbanded in 1996, in November 
2003 civil patrols in the northern area of 
Guatemala kidnapped and demanded a ransom for the 
local mayor. Once initiated, these civil militia 
cannot be easily disbanded. The difference 
between civil militia and death squads, private 
armies, vigilantes and warlordism is less tenuous 
than we think.

In Nepal, the RPP has taken over the civilian 
apparatus. We have CDOs under effective military 
control within a unified command structure who 
are unlikely to go against the directives of the 
army which surrounds them. Now, we also have 
armed civilians who constitute another coercive 
force. In the midst of this, the government plans 
to have elections. Elections can be held. The 
question is, will they be free, fair and 
unfettered by fear?

It is not clear from where the idea of a 
voluntary civilian militia emerged. It may have 
been a conflict adviser with a background in 
Latin America who flew in, scribbled some notes 
and flew back out. It may have resulted from the 
input of Kathmandu-based embassy staffers here 
for three to four year before their next posting. 
They will go on with their lives, we Nepalis have 
to live with the consequences.

Explaining a plan to keep a village safe by 
encircling it in a wall of barbed wire, Lt 
Colonel Nathan Sassaman, battalion commander of 
the forces occupying Abu Hishma, Iraq, said the 
following: "With a healthy dose of fear and 
violence, and a lot of money for projects, I 
think we can convince these people that we are 
here to help them."
We have been encircled by, and enmeshed in, all 
of those three variables in Nepal for a while 
now. But it is becoming harder for many of us to 
remain convinced that donors of all shapes and 
sizes are here to help us. The paradox is that 
the logic of the fear, violence and money has 
made it harder for Nepali people to press for 
peace and real democratic change without the help 
of foreign intervention. And that is a fearful 
prospect.

Seira Tamang is a political scientist based at Martin Chautari.


_____

[3]

The Telegraph
December 25, 2003

COULD MUSHARRAF BE RIGHT?

Twenty-Twenty Bharat Bhushan

There are three things that Pakistan's President 
General Pervez Musharraf must not do if the 
process of normalization of ties with India is to 
proceed apace.

He should not invite Indian or Pakistani editors 
for breakfast and have a heart to heart chat with 
them (under no circumstances should he get the 
event filmed); he should not try and answer every 
question that is asked of him on the relationship 
with India; and, he should not compete with Atal 
Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani by countering 
every statement that they make.

The General does not have to win an election in 
India. There is no need for him to convert the 
domestic compulsions of the demagogues of the 
Bharatiya Janata Party into his own constraints.

General Musharraf has been brave in saying that 
Pakistan is willing to even set aside the United 
Nations resolutions to address the Kashmir 
question. The late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had done 
the same thing when he signed the Shimla 
Agreement and agreed to a bilateral negotiation 
to resolve the issue. Nawaz Sharif had also 
quietly set them aside when the Lahore process 
was set into motion.

What is different about General Pervez 
Musharraf's statement that came at a time when 
neither the UN nor anyone else in the world was 
asking for a plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir? And 
why did he make it without preparing the public 
opinion in his country to accept it?

This was not a concession that India sought at 
this time. And Madeleine Albright's view that 
plebiscite is a solution is neither here nor 
there because she represents no one but herself 
on the lucrative celebrity lecture circuit.

What General Pervez Musharraf seems to be 
suggesting by his statements is a willingness to 
be flexible in starting negotiations on the 
cancer that has eaten the innards of the two 
countries for more than half a century. He has 
been arguing for quite some time now that both 
India and Pakistan need to go beyond stated 
positions on Jammu and Kashmir. Saying that 
Pakistan was willing to go beyond the UN 
resolutions is his way of showing flexibility.

General Musharraf may want India to reciprocate 
by playing down the orthodox position that the 
whole of Kashmir is an "integral" part of India 
and that the only agenda is the return of 
Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. India has to now make 
a determination about whether it is also willing 
to show some flexibility on the Kashmir issue and 
what that flexibility might mean.

India cannot keep avoiding the mention of Kashmir 
in its relations with Pakistan or keep 
pussyfooting about calling it a "dispute". Let us 
recognize it for what it is, then go on to 
address the issue. History will not forgive the 
leadership of the two countries if they were to 
bequeath this cancer to even their future 
generations.

The 12 proposals for building confidence put 
forward by India have received a generous 
response from Pakistan. It is time to move on 
from there. There is no doubt that General 
Musharraf is serious about resolving the issue. 
India should also be clear about whether it wants 
to get into a serious negotiating mode on Kashmir 
at the moment or not. If there is a willingness 
to resolve the Kashmir question, then New Delhi 
must acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with 
the General's suggestion that negotiating 
positions need to be flexible. The existing 
frameworks and the known positions of both sides 
are not going to lead to a solution.

Both sides will have to reject the existing 
frameworks, which have failed in this respect - 
that is the historical, legal and the military 
framework. In all these frameworks the 
differences between India and Pakistan are 
irreconcilable.

In the historical framework, India says that the 
sovereignty lay with Maharaja Hari Singh and not 
with the people of the princely state of Jammu 
and Kashmir. So, when he signed the Instrument of 
Accession, what his subjects may have wanted was 
immaterial. The two-nation theory favoured by 
Pakistan says that the people of Kashmir should 
have opted for one or the other emergent 
nation-state on the basis of religion. The 
two-nation principle was an instrument of 
governance developed by the colonial state for 
British India. Once British paramountcy ended, 
there was no question of using that principle by 
the post-colonial secular state in India. In any 
case, India can claim to be the second largest 
Muslim country in the world, so there is no 
question, as far as New Delhi is concerned, of 
allowing Muslims in Kashmir to opt for the 
Islamic state of Pakistan.

In the legal framework, there are two options - 
of adjudication and of arbitration. Neither is 
acceptable to India. As for the military 
framework, it has not helped resolve anything. 
The three wars fought, the Kargil conflict and 
the eyeball-to-eyeball face off in 2002 are a 
testimony to this. Now that both the countries 
have gone nuclear, the possibility of resolving 
the Kashmir issue militarily has become even more 
remote.

Therefore, the two adversaries have to agree to 
go beyond these existing frameworks if they want 
to solve the Kashmir issue. This is what General 
Musharraf seems to be suggesting. Once there is 
agreement on this, then a search for new 
framework can begin.

If it is not possible to resolve the Kashmir 
issue immediately, even then a certain kind of 
relationship with Pakistan is possible which 
would not be entirely adversarial. Between 1972 
and 1988, India and Pakistan did not have an 
adversarial relationship, and the relationship 
was not Kashmir-centric. Because of a variety of 
factors since then the relationship has become 
hostage to the Kashmir issue.

Often solutions are not possible when a situation 
is not malleable. The attempt then can be to 
first make it malleable by bringing the 
temperature down.

To do this, India and Pakistan can initiate a 
series of Kashmir-related confidence-building 
measures. Besides the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad road 
link, perhaps other roads can be opened up - say 
Uri-Chakauti and Jammu-Sialkot. There can be 
experiments with Friday markets along the border 
and the line of control. Kashmiri students from 
the other side can be allowed to come and study 
in educational institutions on the Indian-side of 
Jammu and Kashmir. India can pull out a brigade 
or more of its armed forces from the valley to 
generate goodwill.

There can be many imaginative measures, which if 
properly graduated and spread over a couple of 
years, can bring the temperature on Kashmir down. 
The important thing is to stretch the process of 
confidence-building. This would also allow the 
Pakistan establishment to rehabilitate the 
jihadis who cannot go on polishing their guns for 
years to come - they can be trained to become 
carpenters, plumbers, farmers or other 
self-employable professionals. Pakistan can also 
use the time to choke the funding of the jihadis, 
stop their training, dismantle their launching 
pads and re-assign, transfer or give golden 
handshakes and retire their handlers in the 
Inter-Services Intelligence.

In effect, the two countries would have then 
created conditions which might allow the next 
generation in India and Pakistan to deal with the 
Kashmir issue in a more reasonable way - say 10 
to 15 years hence.



_____

[4]


Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 19:09:29 +0000
From: Shabnam Hashmi for ANHAD <anhadinfo at yahoo.co.in>

Dear friends,

1. The recent election results painfully reveal how deep is the penetration
of communal ideologies in remote tribal regions of central India. We are
particularly anguished by the lack of success of secular and progressive
political and social organisations to put up significant resistance to
this sectarian juggernaut. All of us need to be stirred to act even more
cohesively and collectively to put up a united battle to the advance of
fascism.

In all regions with large tribal belts where communal organisations are
active, we must urgently reflect intensively with partners and friends
about what are the causes of the spectacular success of Hindutva forces
to win over almost the entire tribal belt of idea. How do we reclaim
social justice and secular agendas for tribal areas.

Equally bewildering and ominous is the attraction 
of communal ideologies for increasing segments of 
dalit people. This is particularly ironical 
because Hindutva forces have traditionally 
resolutely denied dalits a place of equality 
within the social order, and dalit people 
continue to suffer brutal forms of untouchability 
and atrocities. Yet they are being successfully 
mobilised to join hands with their oppressors 
against another discriminated social group.

In order to reflect on the causes of the spread of communal ideologies
to oppressed social groups, and what can be done 
to combat these, but to revive a genuine 
egalitarian agenda, a small reflection meeting is 
being organised in Bhopal on 3 January,2004 at 
indian Institute of Forest Management , Nehru 
Nagar, Bhopal -462003

(Phone : +91-755-2775716, 2773799 Fax : +91-755-2772878) from 10 AM to 5PM.

Meeting is being called by a number of groups including Anhad.

2. ANHAD is also exploring the possibility of 
organising an evening of protest poetry, music, 
street theatre etc on January 3rd in Bhopal to 
rededicate ourselves to the struggle ahead 
against the growing communalism.

Warm regards,

Harsh Mander, Shabnam Hashmi, Gauhar Raza, Apoorvanand


_____


[5]

The Times of India
December 25, 2003

Outsider as 'Other' | Politics of Identity and Exclusion
ANURADHA M CHENOY
[ WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2003 12:00:00 AM ]
Two hundred years ago, Immanuel Kant wrote that 
"we are unavoidably side by side". This, however, 
has not prevented communities from continuously 
constructing new "outsiders". Sometimes the 
outsiders belong to another religion, on other 
occasions to another ethnicity, region or caste. 
Once an outsider versus the insider mindset is 
created, it keeps excluding other groups while 
forcibly homogenising itself.

The outsiders and insiders are then seen as 
possessing only specific and singular identity 
characteristics even though no one has just one 
identity. For instance, one may be a mother, a 
doctor, a tribal, a Christian, a Bihari, an 
Indian all simultaneously. But it is only her 
ethnic or religious identity that becomes primary 
in such group identification. All other 
identities are devalued with the purpose of 
valorising a specific identity over the others 
for the purpose of group formation.

These kinds of identity demarcations create 
categories of citizens that are subject to 
various exclusions that range from social and 
economic boycott, ghettoisation of communities to 
humiliation, ethnic cleansing and genocide. This 
is because of the belief that those outside the 
group become the ⤗other⤁, who is perceived as 
threats and are thus subject to violation or 
savagery.

Such identity construction is quite different 
from how identities are actually formed. Identity 
formation is never a unilinear affair that 
develops in splendid isolation. But, on the 
contrary, it is influenced by multiple currents 
that are full of exchanges, interchanges and 
cross-fertilisation but rarely stationary, 
isolated or unchanging.

There are, however, forces that are keenly 
interested in retaining the myth of purity of 
identity formation because identity politics is 
the easiest method of political mobilisation and 
can be used to construct a particular kind of 
nationalism. For such mobilisation, the myth of 
identity threats are transformed into violence 
through a variety of complex mechanisms. This is 
used as a diversion from other issues like a 
troubled economy or structural unemployment. 
Identity politics and the assertions of cultural 
nationalism are used to ride the wave of popular 
mobilisation for electoral purpose and the 
capture of power. Instances of caste, communal 
and now ethnic violence shows how communities 
discriminate and are violent against the other.

The political formations behind the recent "sons 
of the soil" clashes in Assam and Maharashtra are 
proponents of identity-based politics. The United 
Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) that is fanning 
the anti- Bihari sentiment leaving many dead and 
thousands homeless rose to fame on the basis of 
mobilising Assamese nationalism for a 'swadhin 
Asom' movement three decades ago, against the 
entry of Bangladeshi mig-rants as also other 
non-Assamese settlers.

When the ULFA attacked the symbols of the Indian 
state, they were considered insurgents and 
banned. Many of its leaders sought refuge in 
Bangladesh, whereupon they began praising 
Bangladesh, migrants and all. The ULFA lost out 
on public sympathy because of its double 
standards and because it indulged in extortion 
and violence. Mobilising against the Biharis on 
the pretext of railway jobs is a method to 
reinstate themselves in the public view as 
"Asom's boys" and re-establish a cultural 
nationalism of the local variety.

Similarly, the Shiv Sena known primarily for its 
anti-outsider movements in Mumbai claims to be 
part of the Hindutva brigade which for them is 
the binding factor of Hindu nationalism. Hindutva 
itself is an exclusionary construction, bent on 
keeping out all non-Hindus from the image of a 
Hindu nation. The Shiv Sena is now pitted against 
Hindus from other states, that they were so keen 
on homogenising against the Muslims. The Sena 
leadership has led ruthless attacks on poor 
Indians (Hindus for them) and openly declared 
that they would not allow outside job-seekers 
into the state. This establishes that the concept 
of a Hindu majority is an imaginary construct and 
that pluralities within that religion and between 
ethnic groups need to be accepted and respected 
to ensure the survival of this plural heri-tage. 
A nationalism based on self assertion denies 
human rights and even democracy.

The BJP-led NDA has had little comment on these 
projects that seek to revive regional chauvinism 
except to restore law and order and postpone 
railway jobs. This is a method of keeping the 
problem under wraps until it emerges again, 
rather than confronting, contesting and rejecting 
it as an unacceptable ideology, one that will do 
massive harm to the fabric of the Indian 
multi-ethnic state.

The statistics that have emerged in the case of 
railway jobs establish the extent of unemployment 
in comparison to the availability of jobs. It 
reveals that the euphoria around the high growth 
and GDP figures is based on quicksand and that 
the image of India as an emerging power is one 
with feet of clay. Further, when policies that 
vastly increase the differences between the rich 
and poor are in place, the theoretical and 
political practice of the politics of identity 
and exclusion will become commonplace.

A liberal, secular and national project in the 
current era can be installed primarily where 
there is a humane state and civil society. One 
that ensures that India is a space for all its 
citizens equally. That access is not denied on 
the grounds of religion, caste or region. It is 
only when these exclusions are removed that a 
national, humane and democratic project is 
ensured.


_____


[6]

The Times of India
December 25, 2003

Modi shadow on Christmas
IANS[ WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2003 05:06:17 PM ]
AHMEDABAD: Christians in south Gujarat might have 
to celebrate Christmas this year amid police 
protection with the festive spirit subsumed by 
the fear of being a cornered minority.

"Massive rallies and meetings are being held in 
Christian settlements of south Gujarat by 
rightwing outfits, who are harassing Christian 
minorities in every possible way. This has 
created a serious law and order situation," said 
Samson Christian, general secretary of the 
All-India Christian Council.

Dang district, for instance, is reliving the 
horrors of 1998 when churches had become the 
targets of a frenzied mob led by a rightwing 
group.

Five years later, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) 
is allegedly holding a massive Virat Hindu 
Sammelan, or massive Hindu meet, in Christian 
settlements.

Tribals who are said to have converted to 
Christianity are allegedly being coerced to 
participate in the VHP rally while the police 
watch. This even as the Gujarat High Court in an 
interim oral order on Monday directed the state 
government to maintain law and order during the 
Christmas season.

The court had given the order following a 
petition by the All-India Christian Council 
drawing attention to mounting tension in south 
Gujarat .

Giving an instance, Christian said, "On Sunday in 
Pareva village near Dahod in Panchmahals (100 km 
from here), loudspeakers were used without 
permission by anti-social elements who propagated 
hatred against Christians."

Local newspapers also reported a large VHP rally 
in a Christian settlement in Dolara village of 
Surat district, 350 km from here, where 
loudspeakers blared out hate messages against 
missionaries allegedly involved in conversions.

People were reportedly brought in trucks from 
neighbouring villages to a temple where VHP 
activists raised slogans of 'Jai Shri Ram' and 
warned tribals of dire consequences if they 
converted to Christianity.

______


[7]

The Times of India
25 December 2003

DECEMBER 25, 2003
THE TIMES OF INDIA
COUNTERVIEW
True secularism against overt display of religiosity
[ THURSDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2003 12:00:56 AM ]
In India , we've grown so used to hypocrisy and 
half-truths that when we are confronted with the 
truth we can't see it for what it is.

And so it is with the French decision and the 
idea of secularism that underlies it. For India 
's liberal elite, of course, secularism means 
something quite different from what it means to 
the French and indeed rest of the world.

It is not about the separation of church from 
state or religion from politics but the 
enthusiastic participation of state functionaries 
in all matters of faith. We've even got ourselves 
a weighty Sanskrit neologism to describe this 
desi corruption.

It's called sarvadharmasamabhava. In theoretical 
terms, it means that the Indian state is obliged 
to accord equal respect to all religions in 
public policy.

In practical terms, it translates into the most 
unseemly displays of religiosity by our political 
class: From ministers prostrating at the feet of 
self-styled godmen to leaders inaugurating their 
political campaigns at one or another place of 
worship.

And these, remember, are the less harmful examples of our secularism.

Think of Ayodhya and Gujarat and you get to the 
real mess that the Indian version of secularism, 
with its unthinking mixing of religion and 
politics, has produced. Yes, context and motive 
are important criteria in assessing any political 
decision.

But before we apply these standards to the recent 
French edict banning all markers of religious 
identity in state-run schools, let's apply them 
to our own sorry secular experiment.

Besides, any talk of context in the French case 
must take into account the country's proud 
republican tradition - of equality, liberty and 
fraternity - in which the state relates to 
individuals not as members of this or that 
community but as equal citizens.

Take away that history and no French citizen, 
much less a Muslim, would have the right to make 
the kind of criticism that he has so 
self-righteously directed against the banning of 
hijab in state-run schools.


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

Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on 
matters of peace and democratisation in South 
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit 
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South 
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
The complete SACW archive is available at: 
bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

South Asia Counter Information Project a sister 
initiative, provides a partial back -up and 
archive for SACW:  snipurl.com/sacip
See also associated site: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org

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

--