SACW | 28 Aug 2004

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire   |  28 August,  2004
via:  www.sacw.net

[1]  Bangladesh: Landmines Campaigner Arrested
[2]  Pakistan:
- Reforming education: madrassas and the public sector (Abbas Rashid)
- Pakistan, US take on the madrassahs (Owais Tohid)
[3]  India: Reading the riot act  (Pamela Philipose)
[4]  India:   Religion, Politics and the Modern State (Ram Puniyani)
[5]  India: SANSAD Condemns Extremist Attacks in Bangladesh
[6]  India: Patriotism, the last refuge (Badri Raina)
[7]  India:  Anand Patwardhan's War and Peace wins National award
[8] India:  Fundamentalists at Work
- Sing Vande Mataram  in Bombay's Schools or 
leave India: Shiv Sena (News Report)
- Newspaper editor stabbed by Muslim fundamentalist (RSF Release)


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

[1]

BANGLADESH: LANDMINES CAMPAIGNER ARRESTED

(Washington D.C., August 27, 2004) — The government of Bangladesh
should immediately release Rafique Al Islam, a 44-year-old country
representative of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL),
Human Rights Watch said today.

Mr. Al Islam was arrested on August 21 at his home in Cox’s Bazar by
soldiers from the Rapid Action Battalion, who also seized equipment and
documents. The authorities have neither charged him nor provided a basis
for his arrest.

“It is an outrage that this respected member of the Nobel Peace Laureate
ICBL has been arbitrarily arrested and detained,” said Stephen Goose,
executive director of the Arms Division of Human Rights Watch and
senior representative of the ICBL’s Coordinating Committee.

Mr. Al Islam is the ICBL’s Bangladesh country representative and he has
provided the Bangladesh country update for the ICBL’s annual Landmine
Monitor Report since 2000. Human Rights Watch serves as coordinator of
the Landmine Monitor initiative and is a co-founder of the ICBL, which
received the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize. Mr. Al Islam is also the country
director of Nonviolence International, a non-governmental organization
registered with the government of Bangladesh that coordinates a group of
Bangladesh organizations that support the landmine ban.

“Mr. Al Islam is a well-known and well-respected member of our
coalition,” said Mr. Goose. “His arrest and detention is very surprising and
disturbing to us, especially given the positive leadership role that the
government of Bangladesh has played recently in banning antipersonnel
mines.”

Mr. Al Islam and other members of the ICBL have worked closely and
cooperatively for many years with numerous Bangladesh diplomats and
military officials on the landmine issue.

As one of the 143 states parties to the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, Bangladesh
currently serves as co-rapporteur of the treaty’s Standing Committee on
Stockpile Destruction. Bangladesh ratified the Mine Ban Treaty on
September 6, 2000.

Human Rights Watch’s letter to Bangladesh Prime Minister Khalida Zia
can be found at: http://hrw.org/english/docs/2004/08/27/bangla9272.htmcom


______


[2]

The Daily Times - August 28, 2004

PAKISTAN: REFORMING EDUCATION: MADRASSAS AND THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Abbas Rashid

According to a recent report, the federal 
interior ministry has evolved new conditions for 
the registration of madrassas in the country. 
Among other things those applying for 
registration are expected to demonstrate that 
they have proper buildings with basic facilities 
as well as disclose their sources of funding. The 
madrassas are also expected to submit the 
syllabus being taught to the authorities and the 
number of students is to be ascertained prior to 
registration. Reportedly, in a meeting between 
the NWFP minister for religious affairs and 
representatives of madrassas, the latter were 
particularly resentful of the conditions 
pertaining to submission of the syllabus and the 
disclosure of funding sources. Earlier, the 
government had sought to encourage registration 
by linking it to financial support via access to 
zakat funds. The objective was to mainstream 
madrassas by reviewing the syllabus and 
introducing subjects such as computers and 
English. The response then was poor as is likely 
to be the case again. Registration under the 
Deeni Madaris (Voluntary Registration and 
Regulation) Ordinance 2002 is, as the name 
suggests, voluntary in nature. It was not clear 
earlier, nor is it now, as to what action the 
government may take in the event of 
non-registration. Reportedly, the provincial 
minister for religious affairs, Hafiz Akhtar Ali, 
announced last month that the federal government 
had lifted the ban on madrassas getting 
registered under the Societies Act. Of course, 
many already are. And that is a framework that 
those running the seminaries are comfortable 
with. But, as the news indicates, the government 
is again trying to come up with a distinct 
registration package for the madrassas.
The Pakistan Madaris Education Board (PMEB) 
established by the Musharraf government in 2001 
has the objective of setting up model madrassas. 
It can also grant affiliation to existing 
madrassas willing to add the teaching of secular 
subjects to the traditional curriculum. The 
government appears upbeat about this effort. A 
recent communiqué of the Embassy of Pakistan in 
Washington states that under the provisions of 
the PMEB Ordinance, 2001 three model madrassas 
were established in Karachi, Sukker and Islamabad 
in 2003. These madrassas are apparently following 
the new curricula and the Islamabad madrassa was 
set up exclusively for girls. If these madrassas 
were expected to have some sort of a `ripple 
effect,' it has yet to make itself felt.
The issue of reform in madrassas has become the 
focus of considerable attention in the aftermath 
of September 11, 2001 and the rise in terrorist 
acts within Pakistan. Most madrassas are not 
engaged in terrorist activities. The real problem 
is the mindset they create and the likelihood of 
those who pass through these seminaries being 
inducted in a network of violence beyond and 
within Pakistan's borders. Reportedly, about $204 
million has been earmarked for a five-year year 
madrassa reform programme which is expected to 
reach thousands of madrassas.
It needs to be kept in mind that most of the 
madrassas are not averse to receiving government 
funds, nor even to the addition of secular 
subjects. They know that this will only make them 
more attractive to their core constituency of the 
very poor. If the thrust of the basic teaching 
that encourages intolerance and violence remains 
the same, computer education and English will 
simply get incorporated into a world view and a 
mindset that the students come to acquire. To 
address this issue, the report of the 
International Crisis Group (ICG) released earlier 
this year recommends the establishment of a 
Madrassa Regulatory Authority which makes 
registration mandatory and has the power to 
implement a standardised curriculum that guards 
against the promotion of sectarianism, 
intolerance and violence in these institutions.
Equally, it is important that the government 
takes more concerted steps to improve conditions 
in the approximately 150,000 public sector 
schools. If parents are convinced that these 
schools offer education that is relevant and 
consistent with minimum standards they will try 
much harder to send their children to government 
schools rather than madrassas. Further, the state 
should consider subsidising the poorest of the 
poor in its own schools. To attract the madrassa 
constituency the subsidy will have to go beyond a 
waiver of fees or free textbooks. Over a million 
children are a part of the madrassa system. They 
come from the most deprived backgrounds. In most 
cases their parents, if they could afford it, 
would prefer mainstream education for them, as 
long as they were convinced that it would make a 
significant difference to their lives.
What also needs urgent attention, therefore, is 
the state of the public sector schools. 
Undoubtedly, the world-view of the students of 
these schools differs from that of their madrassa 
counterparts but the gap is probably narrowing. 
But reforming the public sector education system 
may not be a hole lot easier than reforming the 
madrassas. The recent furor over the proposed 
changes in the curriculum is a case in point. 
Similarly, an effort to provide room to public 
sector schools for linking up (if they so choose) 
with a more credible examination system has come 
up against determined resistance led by 
politico-religious groups that are a dominant 
factor in the public sector education system. 
Consider the survey cited by Khaled Ahmed in his 
Urdu press review (Daily Times August 13, 2004). 
It was conducted in Lahore in June by daily 
Pakistan. We do not know how representative the 
sample is here or how accurate the results. But, 
here is one of its findings: 78 per cent parents 
and 97 per cent teachers opposed the Aga Khan 
Foundation taking part in the educational project 
in Pakistan. Even if the results are very broadly 
interpreted, it is clear that those who most 
resist change in the public sector education 
system, and there may be some overlap here 
between the latter and the madrassa network, are 
being able to carry out an effective campaign 
that will continue to undermine efforts at reform.
Abbas Rashid is a freelance journalist and 
political analyst whose career has included 
editorial positions in various Pakistani 
newspapers


o o o

The Christian Science Monitor - August 24, 2004

PAKISTAN, US TAKE ON THE MADRASSAHS
By Owais Tohid | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
GUJAR KHAN, PAKISTAN - Are the US and its allies 
taking down terrorists as fast as Pakistan's 
madrassahs are pumping out new ones?

So far, the answer to the US defense secretary's 
famous question is, probably not.

As Islamabad touts dozens of Al Qaeda arrests 
made in recent weeks, 1.5 to 1.8 million boys are 
attending Islamic seminaries. Many schools are 
seen as nurseries for radical Islam, with some 10 
percent having links to militant groups, Pakistan 
officials estimate.

Recent reforms haven't touched places like Gujar 
Khan, a town 35 miles from Islamabad, where boys 
sit on the floor of a small madrassah. They sway 
as they recite the Koran under the glare of their 
teacher, Qari Zahir Shah, who swings a tree 
branch in the direction of any pupil who errs.

"These are parrots of heaven," says the young 
cleric at the Jama Masjid Khulfa-e-Rashadeen 
school. "We teach our students purely Islamic 
teachings to make them pure and ideal Muslims who 
will not hesitate to sacrifice their lives for 
the cause of Islam."

Despite resistance from clerics and the sheer 
scale of the task - there are some 20,000 
madrassahs in Pakistan - the government, with US 
help, has embarked on several initiatives to 
combat zealotry by broadening educa- tional 
offerings. A little over 300 madrassahs have 
introduced elementary subjects like English, 
math, science, and computers, and US funds have 
revitalized some government schools.

"It is a difficult task, but we are very 
optimistic as changes have started happening," 
says Pakistan's education minister, Zubaida 
Jalal. "The message is that we are not touching 
religious education, but your child needs to be 
educated in modern subjects to see the other side 
of the world as well."

The reforms include:

* A five-year, $1 billion plan introduced in 2003 
aimed at putting secular subjects on syllabuses 
and bringing madrassahs under the purview of the 
Education Ministry.

* A $100 million commitment to rehabilitate 
public schools signed in 2002 by the US Agency 
for International Development (USAID).

* A 2002 law requiring madrassahs to audit their 
funding and foreign students to register with the 
government. The number of foreign religious 
students has since dropped from thousands to 
hundreds as the government issued and renewed 
fewer visas to religious students.

Ms. Jalal says that the five madrassah education 
boards made up of senior clerics have agreed to 
the mainstreaming plans, though the program is 
being rolled out slowly as a pilot project in 320 
schools.

US support for reform

The US is helping bankroll the government's 
madrassah reforms behind the scenes, while 
providing visible support to Pakistan's public 
schools through USAID.

The group aims to train 45,000 schoolteachers to 
improve literacy. They have already opened 200 
literacy centers through partnerships with the 
private sector. And they have rehabilitated 256 
schools out of a goal of 1,200 in the 
underdeveloped provinces of Sindh and Balochistan.

"We are trying to help provide a better, viable 
alternative to the public by training teachers 
and improving the educational system so that poor 
parents do not have to send their children to 
madrassahs," says Sarah Wright, senior education 
officer at USAID.

Many religious leaders and clerics are bitterly 
opposed to the government plans.

"When they cannot run their own educational 
institutions properly then how can they run 
madrassahs?" asks the secretary-general of the 
Wafaq-ul Madaris, the largest education board 
charged with overseeing 8,000 madrassahs. The 
board represents the Deoband school of thought, 
an ideological offshoot of Wahhabism.

Some liberal progressives also oppose the reforms 
by invoking the public school system. They argue 
that by reforming and funding madrassahs, the 
government in effect extends to them legitimacy, 
and strengthens them as a parallel system.

"Why should we promote a system that uses 
religion exclusively as a framework? They have 
played a negative role, and their influence needs 
to be minimized, not institutionalized," says 
Najeeb Anjum, an educator and a retired navy 
commander.

Mudassir Rizvi, a political analyst who has 
worked extensively on madrassahs, also takes a 
dim view of the government's cautious approach to 
reforming the seminaries.

"The introduction of only elementary subjects in 
madrassahs cannot make them models. Now, 
terrorists speak English fluently and can use 
[the] computer very well," says Mr. Rizvi. "The 
main issue is to remove sectarian tinges and 
extremist views from the syllabi of madrassahs 
and to hold clerics accountable for the massive 
funding they use to run madrassahs. Unfortunately 
the key issue has remained on backburner due to 
the pressure of the clergy."

Roots of a parallel system

There were only 137 madrassahs in 1947 when 
Pakistan came into being after the partition of 
the Indian subcontinent. The madrassahs 
flourished in the late 1970s and 1980s during the 
rule of the late former military dictator, Zia-ul 
Haq, who patronized the clerics at a time when 
Pakistan became the front-line of an 
international fight against the Soviet occupation 
of Afghanistan. Land was given to madrassahs and 
chunks of foreign money poured in from Saudi 
Arabia, Iraq, the Gulf states, and Iran.

Thousands of students at madrassahs were trained, 
recruited along with foreign Islamic militants, 
to wage jihad along with Afghan mujahideen 
factions against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. 
The Taliban movement in Afghanistan was directly 
formed by madrassah students.

Meanwhile, in Pakistan, the institution of the 
madrassahs turned into the political constituency 
of Pakistani mullahs, a platform which fosters 
extremism and sectarianism and is seen as a 
supply line for jihadist groups.

"They are the biggest charity system in Pakistan 
providing free meals, board, and lodging to the 
kids from poor families in the absence of quality 
educational system. So their world cannot change 
overnight," says educator and analyst, Tauseef 
Ahmed.

"If people have the alternative to send their 
kids to get good and free education in government 
schools, then half of madrassah students will 
start going to schools," says Mr. Tauseef.

Interior Ministry officials estimate that around 
ten percent of madrassahs may have links with 
sectarian militancy or international terrorism.

"Most madrassahs do not impart military training 
or education but they brainwash the students and 
that is more dangerous. The habits can be changed 
but not the souls. The fairytales of these 
students come from the battlefield. Thus 
characters like Osama and Mullah Omar are their 
heroes," says Tauseef.

What parents want

In Gujar Khan alone around 50 madrassahs are 
functional compared with less than 10 government 
educational institutions. Khwaja Qaisar enrolled 
his 13-year-old son in Jama Masjid 
Khulfa-e-Rashideen, a mosque cum madrassah, to 
memorize the Koran some three years ago. Mr. 
Qaisar, a former cabdriver in New York, was 
deported from America in 2002 after strict 
immigration laws were introduced to check 
terrorism. His two other sons go to a private 
school.

"I thought to send my son to [a] madrassah so the 
sins of my seven generations [can] be washed away 
and they can be blessed with heaven," he says, 
referring to the traditional belief that if 
someone memorizes the Koran, it ensures him and 
seven generations of his forebears a place in 
heaven. "I am educated and want him to be a pilot 
or an engineer after he completes madrassah 
education."

But the 13-year-old son, Mehr Ali, replies 
sharply: "I want to be a commando so I can kill 
all the infidels." His teacher, Qari Zahir Shah, 
nods in approval.


______


[3]

[ The Indian Express -  August 27, 2004 | Columns
URL: http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=53892 ]

READING THE RIOT ACT
Is an anti-communal law the answer to the Gujarat violence?
Pamela Philipose

The voices from the Gujarat abyss are breaking 
out. They provide valuable clues as to how a 
situation developed which saw the violation of 
every canon of civilisation in 16 of the state's 
25 districts. This exercise of exposing to public 
scrutiny the events of those turbulent days may 
perhaps never have taken place if it were not for 
some persistent civil libertarians, a media that 
was at least partially engaged and a responsive 
Supreme Court. It is fortuitous, this combination 
of factors. While the anti-Sikh riots of 84, the 
'89 Bhagalpur riots, the Mumbai carnage of 
'92-'93 have been allowed to disappear from 
public view, we have now as a nation - possibly 
for the first time - a valuable opportunity to 
understand why Gujarat happened and what we can 
do to ensure that it does not happen again.

As the trials in the Best Bakery and Bilkis 
Rasool cases take place in Mumbai; as testimonies 
before the Nanavati-Shah inquiry commission 
appointed to look into the Godhra carnage and its 
aftermath continue; as closed cases are hopefully 
revived in Gujarat, we may be able to plot the 
points of constitutional breakdown and hold to 
account those responsible. For instance, we now 
know from a former Gujarat additional chief 
secretary, that the decision to bring the charred 
remains of the kar sevaks killed in the Godhra 
outrage to the Sola Civil Hospital in Ahmedabad 
for the arthi, against the usual procedure of 
sending bodies back home, was taken by the chief 
minister himself. We now know, thanks to records 
maintained by the additional director-general in 
charge of intelligence and now made public, that 
FIRs filed by riot-affected Muslims were being 
systematically suborned by the police. We now 
know that a senior police officer at the site of 
Gulbarg Society burning did not call the police 
control room because he was told not to "clog" up 
police phone lines and that another thought it 
fit to burn the bodies of 13 Muslim victims and 
destroy evidence of a massacre.

  The jagged pieces of this complex jigsaw, as 
they fall into place, will hopefully provide 
definitive clues to pivotal queries, especially 
those relating to that crucial first phase which 
set the stage for what followed: How did coach 
S-6 of the Sabarmati Express catch fire? Why were 
just two constables despatched to disperse the 
mob that had attacked the train, even though 
Godhra had its own force of railway police 
numbering over a 100? Why did it take so long for 
the Modi government to call in the army? What 
transpired at that meeting the CM held on the 
evening of February 27 with senior police 
officers?

To state that Gujarat represents a gigantic 
failure of the criminal justice system, from the 
lowliest police chowki to the high court, is to 
state the obvious. Would an anti-communal law 
have prevented this? We have at present, 
according an estimate, no less than 15 different 
laws applicable in a riot situation. Section 153A 
of the Penal Code, for instance, specifically 
bans the promotion of "communal disharmony" and 
the "disturbance of public peace". Yet another 
law may become just a decorative device to 
testify to the "secular" credentials of a 
government, at best; or a powerful weapon of 
control in the hands of the state, at worst. The 
scope for misuse is always present because all 
laws cut both ways. Section 153 A has been used 
more effectively to ban scholarly works than to 
quell communal disturbances. Besides, a federal 
law of this nature would be useless if state 
governments do not enact similar laws since law 
and order falls under their jurisdiction.

Given these realities, does it still make sense 
to enact a anti-communal law? The debate on the 
issue has just begun. A group of citizens has 
already come out with a Draft Model Law, 
tentatively termed the 'Prevention of Genocide 
and Crimes Against Humanity Act, 2004' and the 
Law Commission is possibly working on a draft as 
well. One argument in favour of such a law is a 
very obvious lacuna that exists despite our 
numerous anti-riot laws. Nowhere do existing laws 
specifically target hate crimes and communal 
violence. Could a law, for instance, have 
prevented the forcible displacement of Kashmiri 
Pandits? The economic boycott of Muslims in 
Gujarat? The physical and mental torture 
perpetrated on a group of people who appear 
"different", as the forcible tonsuring and 
killing of Sikhs during the riots of '84 
witnessed? Possibly.

Several international referents exist for such a 
law. In the US, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 
1999 seeks to fight crimes motivated by hatred 
based on race, religion, national origin, or 
colour. It was the existence of such laws, 
incidentally, that enabled quick justice to be 
done in the case of Sikhs who were attacked in 
the US after the 9/11 strikes.

'Genocide', as opposed to 'hate crimes', is of 
course a more substantive categorisation. It was 
first used by the Nuremberg tribunal. In 1946, 
the UN General Assembly took up an item entitled 
'Prevention and punishment of the crime of 
genocide'. It was to result in a Convention that 
came into force in 1951. Article I of the 
Convention condemns genocide - in peace or in 
war. Article II defined it as "any of the 
following acts committed with intent to destroy, 
in whole or in part, a national, ethical or 
religious group". The definition included 
"killing" members; causing serious bodily/mental 
harm to them and deliberately inflicting 
conditions of life calculated to bring about 
their physical destruction in whole, or in part. 
Punishment was to be meted out, not just for the 
acts themselves but even for those that were 
preparatory in nature. It upheld the principle of 
individual criminal responsibility of the 
"constitutionally responsible rulers", "public 
officials" or "private individuals".

Of course, even the best law is only as good as 
the institutions that deploy them. Also no law 
can replace the complex process of building a 
civil society that is humane and sensitive to 
human rights. Getting such legislation into the 
statute books would, without doubt, be an arduous 
and contentious process. But it would help build 
a social consensus on the absolute 
unacceptability of acts such as those Gujarat 
witnessed so recently. It would signal that India 
is serious and uncompromising in its intent to 
fight crimes of hate, crimes against humanity.


______


[4]

Issues in Secular Politics | August 28, 2004

RELIGION, POLITICS AND THE MODERN STATE

Ram Puniyani

Last two decades have witnessed a constant invocation
of religion in the arena of politics. From George
Bushís crusade against terrorism to Osama bin Ladenís
Jihad against the greatest Satan, US, to our own home
bred Hindutva ideology which aims at Hindu Rashtra,
one constantly gets to hear that politics is to be
guided by religion. So when Mr. Advani, the pioneer of
Ram Temple movement which brought Hindutva to the
fore, stated in Ahamadabad that if there was no
religion in politics then it was of no use to him
(July 26 2004), it was not much of a surprise.

There are many an arguments on this line, which regard
Secularism as a western concept, it being against
religion, it being appeasement of minorities, it being
an artificial graft in the body politic of India the
country, which is the land of spirituality etc.

It is not only the Advani parivar, which will argue on
these lines. This parivar is in the company of
Talibans, Zia Ul Haque and others from near the
borders who also conduct their politics in the name of
religion. On the face of it the two trends may sound
antagonistic while there is a deeper conceptual unity
in both the streams. This stream is joined by an
unexpected quarter of Post Modernists, the likes of
Ashish Nandy to whom Secularism is a Western graft
unsuitable and unnecessary here as diverse communities
here have been living together peacefully in the same
geographical area.

Somewhere in the middle of this argument Gandhi is
quoted as if he was against secularism, also Nehru is
quoted as being against religions and imposing this
ëaliení concept in Indian context.

This Advani-Nandy duo suffers from multiple
confusions. To begin with secularism is not a mere
Western concept. It is true it began in the west. But
it began not to sort out the quarrels between
religions but it came up with the introduction of
Industrialization, with the emergence of two modern
classes, Industrialists and workers. Till that time it
was the King-Landlord who had the divine sanction to
rule on the direct approval of the almighty. While
King was the Son of God, landlord his representative,
the clergy the most visible part and the custodian of
religion, was the legitimizer of this ideology.

Secularism essentially was an outcome of
secularization process in which the divine power of
the king-landlord and the social hold of clergy was
done away with.

While secularization is presented as an external
process, the deeper inner logic of this was to do away
the hierarchy of caste and gender. In Indian context
due to colonial rule and the Landlord-British
alliance, the process of secularization could not be
completed. The hold of Landlord-Priest and the
accompanying values of caste and gender hierarchy
persisted though in less intense form. At this point
of time secularization process was represented by
Jotiba Phule, Savitribia Phule, Bhimrao Babasaheb
Ambedakr and Periyar Ramasamy Naicker social level and by
the likes of Gandhi, Nehru and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad
at political level. While many a differences can be
seen if one sees their ideologies in a superficial
way, the deeper unity of their thoughts was apparent
as these luminaries spearhead the social process of
opposing the inferior treatment to Shudra and women at
social level and relegating the clergy-landlords at
political level.

Advani is able to confuse himself as the word religion
has many components and many meanings. Gandhi did
state that those who think religion has nothing to do
with politics understand neither religion nor
politics. This is his oft-quoted sentence. But what
does ëhisí religion mean, needs to be seen. The first
and foremost, one has to see the claim of being
custodian and so the arbiter of religion is taken away
from clergy, Mullah and Brahmins. Than one has to see
that religionsí facets are diverse, moral values; holy
books; holy places; communitarian functions and the
like. Also one has to see that within a single
religion there are various sects. What people like
Gandhi and Azad mean by religion is totally in
contrast to what Advani, Taliban, Jinnah and Godse
mean by it. As per Gandhi, ì Indeed religion should
pervade everyone of our actions. Here, the religion
does not mean sectarianism. It means a belief in
ordered moral Govt. of the universe. This religion
transcends Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity etc. It
does not supercede them. It harmonizes them and gives
them reality.î (Gandhi quoted in Madan 1997,3 Indian
Journal of Secularism). The claim of Nandy's that
Gandhi could do without the concept of secularism is
again based on the ignorance about values of father of
the Nation, ì Religion and state will be separate. I
swear by my religion, I will die for it. But it is my
personal affair. The state has nothing to with it. The
state will look after your secular welfare, health,
communications, foreign relations, currency and so on,
but not your or my religion. That is everybodyís
personal concernî. (Gandhi quoted in Madan, 1997,4
IJS).

One has seen than impact of religion in the politics
through the politics of Muslim League, Hindu
Mahasabha, RSS, Taliban and the like. It will be worth
its while to think as to with what aspect of life we
associate religion with. With the dictates of clergy
or with the humanistic teachings of saints. Here,
there is no point in asserting that clergy and saint
were both religious. Yes both of them were talking in
the language of religion, clergy on behalf of those in
power and saints on behalf of those poor and destitute
struggling for their survival. One has seen Advaniís
ëpolitics with religioní leading to demolition of
Babri Masjid, Talibanís ëpolitics with religioní
leading to demolition of Bamiyan Buddha.

The relationship between State-Politics and religion
could not have been defined better than what Nehru has
to say on the issue, "What it means is that it is a
state which honors all faiths equally and gives them
equal opportunities; that as a state, it does not
allow itself to be attached to one faith or religion,
which then becomes the state religion...In a country
like India, no real nationalism can be built up except
on the basis of secularity...narrow religious
nationalisms are a relic of the past age and no longer
relevant today."

(Author Teaches at IIT Mumbai)

______

[5]

SANSAD CONDEMNS EXTREMIST ATTACKS IN BANGLADESH

SANSAD strongly condemns the recent attack on the 
Leader of the Opposition in Bangladesh, Sheikh 
Hasina, by the Islamic extremists, which left 19 
people dead, and another 300 wounded. The growing 
wave of extremism and religious intolerance in 
Bangladesh is of extreme concern to all those who 
believe in secularism, democracy and equal 
rights. A culture of terrorism and violence has 
been established in Bangladesh as a result of the 
systematic murder, intimidation and harassment of 
people who dare to challenge the agenda of 
religious fanatics. The prevailing lawlessness 
and grave deterioration of  democratic order in 
Bangladesh has serious consequences for the rest 
of South Asia, particularly India and Pakistan, 
where secular democratic ideals and people are 
also under threat.
The alliance between the ruling establishment and 
the forces of religious extremism has been 
pushing Bangladesh towards intolerance and 
violence. The campaign of violence against 
democratic and secular voices in Bangladesh has 
led to the recent attacks and death threats to 
many academics, journalists and civil society 
activists in Bangladesh. We are greatly concerned 
that the ruling party has failed to check such 
incidents. The government's inability or 
unwillingness to stop violent attacks on the 
defenders of human rights has particularly added 
to the insecurity of the religious minorities in 
Bangladesh whose lives and property are under 
threat.
SANSAD further condemns the recent brutal attack 
on Dr. Humayun Azad, a prominent writer and 
academic, which left him near death and the 
subsequent death threats issued by religious 
fanatics to his family members, asking them not 
to go to the airport to collect his dead body. We 
also condemn the killing of journalist Kamal 
Hossain by extremists, and the death threats to 
journalists and editors of the largest Bangla 
daily, Prothorn Alo for conducting investigative 
stories on religious seminaries. Bangladesh is 
rapidly moving toward a fascistic Islamist state 
of the kind that we saw in Afghanistan. We urge 
the government of Bangladesh to curb the growing 
violence and intolerance and to protect 
secularism, which is one of the four pillars of 
the Bangladesh constitution.

SANSAD
South Asian Network for Secularism and Democra
Suite 435, 205 - 329 North Road, Coquitlam, BC, Canada. V3K 6Z8
phone : (604) 420-2972; FAX: (604) 420-2970
Electronic mail : sansad at sansad.org
  [Incorporated in British Columbia under the 
Society Act as a Non-Profit Society, # S-31797]


______



[6]

Hindustan Times - August 28, 2004 | Pg 8: Edit Page

PATRIOTISM, THE LAST REFUGE
The Big Idea | Badri Raina

It is a  tribute to the canniness of the British 
imperialists that even as they were not averse to 
dividing Hindus and Muslims in order to weaken 
the united struggle that the Congress-led freedom 
movement sought to build to oust them, they had 
no illusions about the political character of the 
communal formations they were dealing with.

For instance, a circular of the then Government 
of India to the Bihar government (No. F201/44 
Ests 16/3/44) had this to say: "After a 
protracted consideration in which the government 
of the C.E. and Berar and Bombay were also 
consulted, as the organisation was strongest 
there, it was decided that the RSS was a 
politico-commercial organisation which 
concentrated on the formation of a militant body 
on fascist lines."

Perhaps the best encapsulation by a foreign 
scholar is the following: "The leader principle, 
the stress on militarism, the doctrine of 
racial-cultural superiority, ultra nationalism 
infused with religious idealism, the use of the 
symbols of past greatness, the emphasis on 
national solidarity, the exclusion of religious 
or ethnic minorities from the nation-concept - 
all of these features of the RSS are highly 
reminiscent of fascist movements in Europe." 
(Donald E. Smith, India as a Secular State, 1963.)

As Uma Bharti sets out on her so-called 'Tiranga 
Yatra', it is instructive to take note of the 
Sangh parivar's views on the Constitution of 
India as established by law. In a 'white paper' 
denouncing the Constitution as "anti-Hindu" and 
outlining the kind of polity it wishes to 
establish in the country on January 1, 1993, its 
front cover poses two questions: "Who is the 
destroyer of India's integrity, brotherhood and 
communal amity?" and "Who has spread starvation, 
unemployment, corruption and irreligion?" The 
answer is provided in the title of the white 
paper: Vartaman Indian Samvidhan (the present 
Indian Constitution).

The white paper goes on to stipulate: "We will 
have to think afresh about our economic policy, 
judicial and administrative structure and other 
national institutions only after nullifying the 
present Constitution." Further: "The damage done 
by the 200-year-long rule of the British is 
negligible as compared  to the harm done by our 
Constitution.  The conspiracy to convert Bharat 
into India continues." Swami Hiranand, the author 
of the foreword, goes on to lament how "Vande 
Mataram has been replaced by Jana Gana Mana, a 
song composed to welcome King George V".

Soon after the demolition of the Babri masjid, 
the author of the white paper, Swami Muktanand, 
held a press conference in New Delhi at the 
residence of a BJP MP, jointly with Swami Vamdeo 
Maharaj. They gave a call to the nation to reject 
the 'anti-Hindu Constitution': "We have no faith 
in the country's laws" and "the sadhus are above 
the law of the land".

In January, 1993, the then RSS supremo made the 
following comment on the substance of the white 
paper: "The present conflict can be partially 
attributed to the inadequacies of our  system in 
responding to the needs of the essential India, 
its tradition, values, ethos... Official 
documents refer to the 'composite  culture', but 
ours is certainly not a composite culture. 
Culture is not wearing of clothes or speaking 
languages. In a very fundamental sense, this 
country has a unique cultural oneness.

"No country, if it has to survive, can have 
compartments. All this shows that changes are 
needed in the Constitution. A Constitution more 
suited to the ethos and genius of this country 
should be adopted in the future." (Indian 
Express, January 14, 1993; A.G. Noorani's The RSS 
and the BJP, pp. 97-98). In a final word, as it 
were, the paper, after condemning reservations 
for SCs, STs and Backward Classes, concludes 
ringingly: "This Constitution can be called a 
pile of garbage."

It is worth recalling that in the correspondence 
that ensued between M.S. Golwalkar and the 
Government of India after the RSS was banned in 
1948, the then Home Minister, Vallabhbhai Patel, 
in his letter of May 3, 1949, responding to the 
draft constitution of the RSS, demanded that the 
RSS constitution include "a specific declaration, 
under Article 4 of allegiance to the Constitution 
of India as established by law and an explicit 
acceptance, in Article 5, of the National Flag."

On May 17, Golwalkar replied that these demands 
were "wholly out of place in the matter under 
consideration" (that is, lifting the ban on the 
RSS). The letter urged the Government of India to 
"recognise the difference between a Constitution 
and an oath of allegiance".

It was, therefore, as a necessary quid pro quo to 
the ban being lifted on it that the RSS agreed to 
include in Article 5 of its constitution the 
recognition of every citizen to be loyal to and 
to respect the State flag (not called the 
Tiranga), even as the same article continued to 
state that the "Bhagwa-Dhwaj - the age-old symbol 
of Hindu Culture" was to remain the flag of the 
RSS. Curiously, in the copy of the RSS 
constitution, there is no mention of allegiance 
to the Constitution of India as by law 
established. As to Parliament, the draft 'RSS 
constitution of India' states that it should be 
transformed into a 'Guru sabha' on non-elective 
principles.

So the question that has been asked several times 
in the last some years needs to be asked again: 
what is the relationship of the BJP and the RSS? 
Does the BJP subscribe to the tenets, views, 
principles regarding the Constitution, the 
national flag,  Parliament, and the polity of the 
nation? Or does it dissociate its politics as a 
participant in India's electoral, parliamentary, 
constitutional democracy from the perspectives 
that still inform the RSS and its many front 
organisations? How is it that while Uma Bharti 
today makes an issue of the national flag, she 
does not think of planting it first over the RSS 
headquarters at Nagpur on her way to Hubli?

The question becomes important also in the light 
of the manner in which the BJP has been treating 
Parliament since its electoral defeat. What is 
the nature and quality of the BJP's loyalty to 
Parliament and  to party democracy? Does its 
behaviour reinforce the view that parliamentary, 
judicial, constitutional institutions, 
procedures, pronouncements, traditions are 
acceptable to it only if these favour its 
politics? And does it still aim for a time when 
it may return to single-party majority government 
and then recast all these to make them conform to 
the RSS view of things?

There is, of course, the reality that Indians are 
too used - and too committed - to the 
Constitution as by law established, and to 
participatory democracy for anybody to worry too 
seriously about the damage the BJP does to all 
that. Yet, after a point, this is a cynical and 
lackadaisical position to take. If history is any 
guide, major systemic upheavals have taken place 
because we thought they never would. Keeping that 
in mind, the onus on all those segments of the 
political class who subscribe to the system we 
have given to ourselves - however they may 
despise this person or that party - to be 
vigilant is great.

Most particularly, after all its experience with 
the 'India Shining' days, segments of the media - 
especially the electronic ones - who represent 
economic interests that see a haven in the BJP, 
must make up their mind: would they prefer a 
strengthened BJP even if it means kissing goodbye 
to all the essentials of the system that has done 
us such great service? Or ought they play a role 
in protecting our constitutional arrangements 
even if that means that you don't always get the 
government that would be nice to all your 
interests?

Needless to say, in such matters, neutrality is 
not a commodity the nation can afford.

_____


[7]

ndtv.com

WAR AND PEACE WINS NATIONAL AWARD

Friday, August 27, 2004: (New Delhi):
Anand Patwardhan's War and Peace has won the 
National Film Award this year for best 
non-feature film.
The award comes at a time when over 300 
documentary filmmakers from around the country 
including Patwardhan are fighting for freedom 
from censorship for documentay films.
Several award winning senior documentary film 
makers have boycotted several festivals 
screenings and the National Awards on principal 
to fight the need for censorship.
War and Peace attacks the nuclear tests conducted 
by both Pakistan and India. The Censor Board 
banned it in 2002 but the ban was lifted in 2003 
after Patwardhan approached the court.
"The previous government had put people with 
similar mindsets into the Censor Board who are 
still there and all films that had secular themes 
or critiques found themselves banned and stuck in 
the can including mine," said Patwardhan.
But Patwardhan who is part of a movement called 
Vikalp, an association of over 300 documentary 
film makers formed this February against the need 
for censorship of documentary films is unhappy 
that other documentary film makers have been 
forced out of the competition.
He blames this on the Centre's recent diktat, 
which requires documentary film makers to submit 
their films to the Censor Board before being 
considered for an award.


______


[8]

[ Fundamentalists at Work ]

Mid-Day - August 27, 2004
http://web.mid-day.com/news/city/2004/august/90931.htm

SING VANDE MATARAM OR LEAVE INDIA: SENA
By: PTI August 26, 2004

Adopting a tough posture over Vande Mataram, the 
Shiv Sena today said those refusing to sing the 
prayer-song for the motherland have no right to 
stay in this country.
Vande Mataram is our national pride those 
refusing to sing it have no right to stay in this 
country, Sena executive president Uddhav 
Thackeray said.
The Sena leaders reaction came when his attention 
was drawn to Raza Academy, a minority 
organisation, opposing the Brihanmumbai Municipal 
Corporation's decision to make rendering of Vande 
Mataram compulsory in all civic schools across 
the metropolis.

The Sena-BJP ruled BMC yesterday decided to make 
singing of the song compulsory in all civic 
schools in the city.
"If you can not pay obeisance to our nation, then 
you do not have any right to stay here," 
Thackeray said and adopting an aggressive stance 
asked if "we are not supposed to sing Vande 
Mataram, then are we expected to pay respect to 
Dawood Ibrahim."
The Sena leader strongly supported the BMC, ruled 
by the saffron combine, to make compulsory 
singing of Vande Mataram in civic schools.

o o o

Reporters Without Borders
Press Release
India 26 August 2004

Newspaper editor stabbed by Muslim fundamentalist

Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans 
frontières) said today it was deeply shocked by 
the attempted murder late yesterday in Mumbai of 
Sajid Rashid, the editor of the Hindi-language 
edition of the daily Mahanagar. Rashid was 
stabbed twice in the back.

The organisation called on the Maharashtra state 
authorities to take all necessary measures to 
identify and arrest those responsible for the 
attack and to protect the staff of Mahanagar, 
which was already the target of violence two 
months ago.

If it is confirmed that Rashid was targeted 
because he had defended free expression, the 
attack poses a disturbing threat to all 
independent news media in Mumbai, Reporters 
Without Borders added.

Rashid was attacked by two men who approached him 
in the evening not far from the newspaper's 
offices. Nikhil Wagle, the editor of Mahanagar's 
Maratha-language edition, said one of the men 
asked Rashid if he was "the one who insulted the 
Koran" and the other then stabbed him.

Rashid, also vice-president of the movement 
Muslims for Secular Democracy, wrote about the 
issue of free expression in Islam in June, 
causing anger in Muslim fundamentalist circles in 
Mumbai, and since then he has been receiving 
anonymous threats. He filed a complaint but the 
police did not investigate. It was only after 
yesterday's attack that the police decided to 
give him protection.

Mahanagar has been the target of violence by both 
Hindu nationalists and Muslim fundamentalists, 
with the former accusing the newspaper of being 
"pro-Muslim and "anti-nationalist, and the latter 
accusing it of blaspheming against Islam.

Three of its journalists were physically attacked 
when the newspaper's offices were stormed by 
members of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata 
Party (BJP) on 29 June, but the police made no 
arrests. There have been five other violent 
attacks on the newspaper since it was founded but 
no one has ever been brought to trial.


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

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/
SACW archive is available at:  bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

Sister initiatives :
South Asia Counter Information Project :  snipurl.com/sacip
South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org
Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/

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