SACW | 4 Jan 2005
sacw
aiindex at mnet.fr
Tue Jan 4 08:01:02 CST 2005
South Asia Citizens Wire | 4 Jan., 2005
via: www.sacw.net
[1] Pakistan: Jinnah's August 11, 1947 speech and Islamists (Ishtiaq Ahmed)
[2] On Contradictions of Pakistan politics (M B Naqvi)
[3] US - Pakistan: Busharraf: Four More Years (S Akbar Zaidi)
[4] India: Lessons From The Tsunami - Prevent,
prepare & protect (Praful Bidwai)
[5] India: Donate Generously For The Tsunami Affected People! (NAPM)
[6] India: letter by Nandita Das, actress and
activist, to support Aman Biradari
[7] Call for papers : "Towards Global Labour History"
--------------
[1]
Daily Times
January 04, 2005
JINNAH'S AUGUST 11, 1947 SPEECH AND ISLAMISTS
by Ishtiaq Ahmed
The Quaid's 11 August 11, 1947 speech is an
anathema to the Islamist (fundamentalist) lobby
in Pakistan. It is considered an aberration and
not surprisingly the recent moves in Pakistan to
raise its status have been condemned by the
Jamaat-e-Islami and other rightwing parties.
The most intriguing aspect of the Pakistan story
is that if the main Islamist groups opposed its
creation - as is commonly believed - then, how
could they gain control over the state and impose
their repressive version of Islam on Pakistan?
This has been a difficult puzzle to solve for
scholars who concentrate on the constitutional
aspects of the evolution of the Pakistan demand
and neglect or trivialise the electoral campaign
launched in the Muslim majority provinces of
Punjab, Sindh and the NWFP in the end of 1945.
The fortnightly confidential report of February
2, 1946 sent by the Punjab governor, Sir Bertrand
Glancy, to the viceroy, Lord Wavell, it is
observed:
"The ML (Muslim League) orators are becoming
increasingly fanatical in their speeches. Maulvis
and pirs and students travel all round the
province and preach that those who fail to vote
for the League candidates will cease to be
Muslims; their marriages will no longer be valid
and they will be entirely excommunicated... It is
not easy to foresee what the results of the
elections will be. But there seems little doubt
the Muslim League, thanks to the ruthless methods
by which they have pursued their campaign of
'Islam in danger' will considerably increase the
number of their seats and Unionist
representatives will correspondingly decline."
The Muslim League allied itself to the largest
group among religious leaders, that of the
Brelavis who controlled thousands of mosques and
Sufi shrines in the Muslim majority provinces
such as Punjab. Some dissident Deobandis, such as
Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Shabbir Ahmed
Usmani and their factions also entered the Muslim
League fold. These clerics were won over because
an understanding was given that Pakistan will be
a state based on Islamic values and laws.
A problem that the Muslim League had to deal with
from within the Muslim community was the fact of
bitter sectarian divisions. For example, the Shia
minority was wary of a Muslim state coming into
being that might be based upon Sunni principles.
This is evident from the correspondence between
the Shia leader Syed Ali Zaheer and Jinnah (who
was a nominal Shia himself) (Bakshi, SR, The
Making of India and Pakistan, Select Documents:
Ideology of Hindu Mahasabha and other Political
Parties, New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publication,
1997).
The Ahmadiyya group was also reluctant to support
the demand for a separate Muslim state because of
fear of persecution. (Report of the Court of
Inquiry, 1954: 196). It was only when a leading
Ahmadi, Sir Zafrullah, was won over by Jinnah (he
later very ably pleaded the Pakistan case before
the Punjab Boundary Commission) that the
Ahmadiyya leadership started supporting the
demand for Pakistan. To all such doubters, Jinnah
assured that Pakistan will not be a sectarian
state. Consequently the majority of Shias and the
Ahmadiyya as a whole supported the Pakistan
demand.
There is, however, an element of surprise in the
way the Shariah-oriented constituency advanced
its influence once Pakistan had come into being.
Its leader was Abul-Ala Maududi, an arch
fundamentalist, who during the freedom struggle
stood for the establishment of an Islamic state
and opposed the idea of a national state of
Muslims. He believed that Jinnah and other
leaders were too Westernised and secularised to
work for the glory of Islam. He began revising
his position by asserting that the Muslim League
had achieved its goal by invoking the name of
Islam and therefore Pakistan was potentially an
Islamic state. This assertion was largely true.
In 1951, he prepared a 22-point programme which
proposed thorough Islamisation of Pakistan at all
levels. Although the principle of elections was
accepted, the Shariah was to be the supreme and
only source for regulating the constitutional,
legal, political and other sectors of life.
The Islamists had to wait until July 5, 1977 when
General Muhammad Zia ul Haq captured power by
overthrowing the elected government of Zulfikar
Ali Bhutto. However, the process of relying on
Islam to define national identity, constitution
and law had already begun under the modernists.
General Zia was a follower of Maududi and
sympathised with the Deobandi form of Islam. He
visualised a social order in which all sectors of
life including administration, judiciary,
banking, trade, education, agriculture, industry
and foreign affairs were regulated in accordance
with Islamic precepts. In 1979, Zia announced the
imposition of the Hudood Ordinance, based on
primitive forms of punishment for adultery, false
accusation of adultery, drinking alcohol, theft
and highway robbery.
In 1985 separate electorates were reintroduced
(they had been abolished in 1956 when Pakistan
was declared a republic), whereby non-Muslims
were to constitute a separate body of voters and
thus entitled only to elect non-Muslim
legislators to the various assemblies. Their
right to take part in ordinary law making was
severely restricted. Thus the fundamentalist
lobby completely undermined the August 11, 1947
speech of Jinnah. In 1986 a Blasphemy Ordinance
was enforced which made any derogatory remark
about Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) a
serious crime.
Zia was killed in a plane crash on August 17,
1988. After him elected governments came into
power but none dared repeal the Islamic laws
introduced by him. His Islamisation policy paved
the way for the growth of an oppressive and
anti-intellectual environment in Pakistan.
Cleavages between the Sunni and Shia sects
deepened and widened. Many Christians and Ahmadis
have been charged with blasphemy and harsh
sentences have been passed on some of them. Women
in general have been victims of the so-called
moral uplift and correction campaigns of the
state. Externally, Pakistan got involved in
fostering the arch fundamentalist regime of the
Taliban in Afghanistan.
These policies began to be abandoned after 9/11
under pressure from the USA. Under the present
circumstances the probability of Islamist
resurgence is rather small.
______
[2]
ON CONTRADICTIONS OF PAKISTAN POLITICS
by M B Naqvi
Karachi January 3:
A major latent contradiction of Pakistan politics
may be beginning to boil over, though not for the
first time. These contradictions are many and
indeed are the results of askew political
geography.
To begin with, there is the pressing
contradiction between all the many political
forces that are proclaiming their intention to
work hard for restoring democracy, as ordinarily
understood. This is with reference to the
outstanding reality of power having been cornered
by one institution: the Army. On the New Years
day, one of the three major political alliances,
viz. six religious parties alliance MMA, observed
its black day against a "second coup" by Gen.
Pervez Musharraf, the first being when he
overthrew the constitutional government of Nawaz
Sharif and the second one being the recent
reneging on his promise to the MMA that he would
doff his uniform (i.e. that he would retire from
the Army) and would remain the President till
2007 and Army Chief till further orders - by
himself.
Many questions arise: is it really the beginning
of the putative grand and united agitation by all
the major political alliances or would it also be
a damp squib, as the MMA's Block Day proved to be
- thanks to Almighty who sent plenty of rain and
snow to ensure its failure.
The outlook is mixed. Insofar as two major
political alliances are concerned, viz. Alliance
for Restoration of Democracy (ARD) and MMA, they
remain mutually suspicious. Not merely that. Each
suspects that the other would cut a deal with the
General if the General's purpose so demands and
he offers suitable terms. Even inside ARD, the
two major parties that tower over 14 others -
viz. Benazir Bhutto's PPP and Nawaz Sharif's
Muslim League - suspect each other's intention
because the General's aides tactfully contact one
or the other party at a given time to try and
make a deal with it on behalf of the General,
leaving the other in the lurch. The General
promises only sharing of power. As a result each
major political party or combinations suspects
all the others of the intent to cut a deal with
the General at the expense of others. The General
is of course smug and thinks his power is
unchallenged.
But each party in ARD is self-righteous; it
thinks that it alone is a steadfast fighter for
democracy; the other are less trustworthy. Or
else why would, for instance, the PPP go on
secretly negotiating the terms of power sharing
with the General's envoys. Similarly PPP as well
as Nawaz League condemn MMA for having stabbed
the opposition in the back and sided with the
General on the all-important issue of helping the
General's self-written constitutional amendments,
known as Seventeenth Amendment, to become a part
of the Constitution with MMA votes.
It is a different matter that the General has
brazenly gone back on his promise of retiring
from the Army. The MMA had broken ranks with
other opposition parties and did what the General
most needed to have total power. Now that the MMA
is shouting hoarse that the General has cheated
them by not leaving the Army job, the others
simply point out that it serves them right. Why
did they break with the opposition as a whole in
the winter of 2003? And so the bickerings go on.
It must be admitted that so far, only the Nawaz
League, which had so many of its deputies bolt
for the greener pasture of treasury benches,
remains steadfast in opposing all the General's
works lock, stock and barrel. The PPP, it does
seem, was willing to negotiate and indeed was
doing so, certain in the belief that sooner or
later the General will have to hold the elections
and the PPP would romp home with a plurality of
seats. But here a minor coup took place against
the General himself before the deal could be
clinched.
This minor coup was staged not by any General but
by the socalled King's Party, the PML with the
suffix of QA. Their leader, former Home Minister
under Nawaz Sharif, threatened that the entire
ruling PML that has so far supported Musharraf
through thick and thin would simply disappear and
the General will be left at the mercy of the PPP
alone. Here, the General does seem to have beaten
retreat and the on-going negotiations with the
PPP have been given up.
All in all, the opposition strongly desires to
launch a raging and tearing campaign against the
military's stranglehold over the whole state
apparatus. They all desire democracy of the
ordinary kind that does not require adjectives.
But, and it is a big but, the chances of
political elements uniting on one point -
anti-military rule - are not as bright as some of
the enthusiasts volubly wish, though it is not
impossible; it has been achieved several times in
the past when united struggles against
dictatorship of the day were launched. The
question now is whether the people would respond
in the manner that they did in the earlier
instances.
Many observers and commentators hold that the
people have become too apolitical and cynical;
they do not seem to be ready to undergo the
expected oppression by the security forces. In
all the three major agitations since 1960s, the
results have been mixed: true, the ruling General
was dethroned in two cases - but he was replaced
by another General. In the third case the people
suffered a setback and the sitting General stayed
put for another five years. That has made the
people cynical and more or less downhearted.
Some commentators have asked a pertinent
question: why would a citizen endanger his life
or limb, knowing how a military ruler will react.
Restoration of democracy is regarded by common
people with a certain cold affirmation: yes, it
would be nice to have democracy but he or she
sees no burning desire to start endangering his
or her own life or limb for an abstract ideal -
and knowing that may be another General will
seize power as happened in the past. They
pointedly note that peoples immediate problems
resulting from high inflation, high unemployment
and poverty are not being meaningfully mentioned
by any opposition party; nor do they credibly
show how they would reverse these trends and give
people a more beneficial governance. The PPP and
the Nawaz League promise nothing but cleaner and
more democratic governance. MMA is more
interested in religious issues and has no time
for mundane issues of prices, jobs or
availability of civilized amenities to the common
people. In short, the people notice that these
parties and alliances are struggling for things
that do not directly concern their lives. Why
would they respond positively to the united or
disunited opposition groups?
There are several other contradictions that are
also at or near the boiling point. None of the
major opposition parties is prepared to open its
mouth on the crucial issues of regional autonomy,
the general Center-State relationship or how to
divide the national pie. Even the government
machinery today is deadlocked on issues like
Kalabagh Dam, Thal Canal, a National Finance
Commission decision on divisible pool of revenues
or the division of Indus River System's waters
among the provinces. No political party has a
clear-cut programme except for a few smaller ones
in the ARD. But they differ with the two major
parties on such issues. Most of the larger
opposition parties are as ambiguous on these
issues as is the Musharraf regime. These issues
are radically dividing the political elements as
also the friends and foes of the General. The
outlook remains part bleak, part more of the same
- somehow.
______
[3]
Economic and Political Weekly
January 1, 2005
BUSHARRAF: FOUR MORE YEARS
With four more years of Bush as US president, and
his war on terror continuing with even greater
messianic zeal, General Musharraf's political
longevity in Pakistan is assured. But this bodes
ill for the people of Pakistan and for any hope
that democracy will be restored, strengthened and
matured.
by S Akbar Zaidi
George W Bush's re-election will probably mean
the reinforcement and probable acceleration in
the Bush foreign policy doctrine backed up by the
US war machine. Unlike many previous US
elections, the outcome of election 2004 will have
major consequences for the US itself, for the
world in general, and perhaps crucially, for
Pakistan and its future as well. In many ways, it
ensures General Pervez Musharraf's future and
longevity as president, and also as chief of the
army staff for as long as the Americans continue
to back him, certainly for as long as Bush's war
against terror continues. While these elections
were as close as the one in 2000, their
importance was far greater. The US was not at war
in 2000, 9/11 had not taken place, and Pakistan
was then called a non-democratic country run by
an unelected military general. All that has
changed in the last four years.
With the US invasion first of Afghanistan and
then of Iraq, the region between the Nile and the
Ganges has changed quite dramatically. US foreign
policy backed by its war machine now dominates
and directs international, regional and domestic
political processes across this region, most
importantly in Baghdad, Kabul and in Islamabad.
With Bush reassured another four years, and with
the belief that the US electorate has endorsed
his vision and his doctrine of waging war against
America's enemies in order to make the US a safer
place, we can expect much more of the same. In
this game plan, Pakistan (especially under the
leadership of General Musharraf) plays a key role.
Events since September 11, 2001, have shown how
much the US war on terror has relied on Pakistani
support and particularly on the support of the
Pakistani military. Similarly, with the US
backing General Musharraf for his support to US
military action in the region, the General knows
that the Americans need him to continue with
their goals in the region. For this reason, he
has been able to extract a huge degree of
latitude to get away with a great deal on issues
that would otherwise have forced far greater
criticism from the US administration.
Pakistan is at the moment, a non-democratic state
ruled by a military general who came to power
through a coup against a democratically elected
prime minister, and was 'elected' through a
dubious and contentious referendum and was
endorsed by a parliament which lacks much
credibility in the eyes of democrats anywhere in
the world. Pakistan also has weapons of mass
destruction, a fact that is publicly known and
for which one does not need certification from UN
weapons inspectors. It has also been caught -
again not mere suspicion here - in nuclear
proliferation, selling nuclear secrets to Iran,
North Korea and Libya. Pakistan also houses
alleged terrorists and is a base where many
al-Qaida and Taliban members have found
sanctuary. In addition, it also has a large
number of home-grown jihadis and Islamic
fundamentalists, many of whom have tasted
military action fighting in the name of Islam in
Chechnya, Kashmir and Afghanistan. By every
stretch of imagination and by any measure of
comparison, Pakistan falls into what the George W
Bush doctrine would certify as the 'axis of
evil'. Yet, Pakistan is now a 'major non-Nato
ally'. If ever there was a case for US duplicity,
Pakistan is perhaps the best example.
It was just a few short years ago when then US
president Clinton visited India and then
Islamabad and reprimanded General Musharraf for
derailing democracy. Pakistan was close to being
declared a 'rogue state' for (at that time)
suspected proliferation and an undeclared nuclear
programme. The country was near-bankrupt on
account of sanctions imposed as a consequence of
the nuclear tests and because of General
Musharraf's coup. With major donors like Japan
having to end all aid programmes and with the
might of the US and other western (and
democratic) nations not voting in favour of
Pakistan in international aid forums and
consortiums, Pakistan's credit rating plummeted.
No investor, foreign or Pakistani, was willing to
invest in the country no matter how lucrative the
possible returns. Clearly, in 2001, Pakistan was
on the precipice of disaster with General
Musharraf's technocratic government vulnerable to
domestic political and economic pressures.
September 11, 2001 changed all that.
Just as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in
1979 guaranteed General Zia ul Haq's political
longevity, it took another invasion of
Afghanistan which rescued General Musharraf in
2001. With Ronald Reagan fighting the communists
in Afghanistan, General Zia had found his
saviour, just as George W Bush fighting Islamic
fundamentalists 25 years later has emerged as
General Musharraf's protector. With Bush
re-elected, General Musharraf knows that at least
the Americans are not going to rock his boat.
With Richard Armitage saying that 'for us
Musharraf is the right man at the right place, at
the right time and at the right job', and with
Colin Powell1 adding that Pakistan was moving in
the 'right direction' under General Musharraf and
that we (or the Pakistanis, perhaps?) needed 'a
little bit of understanding' as we watch General
Musharraf 'go through this process', General
Musharraf has no need of any further affirmation
nor of any need to prove his credentials or for
legitimacy. Presently, with President George W
Bush fixated on his war on terror and in his
search for Osama bin Laden, General Musharraf has
been handed a carte blanche like no other
Pakistani general before him. While both Ayub
Khan and Zia ul Haq were major beneficiaries of
US support, the reasons (as was the era) then
were different: both generals were largely
fighting many imaginary (and a few real) US wars
against communism. These wars were being fought
on ideological battle-grounds far removed from US
territory. General Musharraf, in contrast, is
fighting a real US war as a consequence of
attacks on the US homeland. Because of this, his
position is far more important to the US than
that of Pakistan's two previous military leaders.
The US' need for General Musharraf's continued
role in George W Bush's war on terror implies
that the General can disregard issues that
pertain to restoring substantive and real
democracy to Pakistan and to being held
accountable for going against the key tenets of
Pakistan's constitution which disallows the
military from taking over. It also allows General
Musharraf to amend the constitution with the
Thirteenth Amendment or further still, to wear
his uniform and continue as President of Pakistan
and as chief of army staff at the same time. In
all this, the US (along with other western
powers, one must add) turns a blind eye just
because Pakistan is the frontline state in the
US' war on terror.
With four more years of Bush in the White House
and with his war on terror continuing with
greater messianic zeal, Bush II will ensure
General Musharraf's political longevity. But
this, as a consequence, bodes ill for the people
of Pakistan and for any hope of the process of
democracy being restored, strengthened and
matured. It is now mere speculation as to what a
John Kerry victory would have meant for Pakistan,
but with a shift in focus, priorities and
ambition, it would have at least been better for
future prospects for democracy in Pakistan.
Perhaps it would have also weakened the dominance
that the military has acquired in Pakistani
politics on account of this backing from
Washington. Sadly, for four more years, the
Busharraf alliance is well entrenched and
democracy still a long way away.
Note
1 Both officials have since resigned from their
jobs in the US state department.
______
[4]
Praful Bidwai Column,
January 3, 2004
LESSONS FROM THE TSUNAMI
PREVENT, PREPARE & PROTECT
By Praful Bidwai
Vast swathes of land in Southeast and South Asia
stand devastated by a tsunami triggered on
December 26 by an earthquake off the coast of
Sumatra, causing unprecedented human suffering
and loss of property. Indonesia, Sri Lanka and
India were hit the hardest. In India, it is the
Andamans and the Southern states, in particular,
Tamil Nadu, that bore the brunt of the tsunami's
fury. The shock and grief produced by the tidal
wave is all the greater in South Asia because
tsunamis-which are gigantic sea waves caused by
massive displacements due to earthquakes,
volcanic eruptions or submarine slides-are rare
in this region, unlike in the Pacific, which has
witnessed nearly 800 of them over the past
century.
That, however, does not justify the Indian
government's failure to sound the alarm despite
the Meteorological Department receiving definite
information 90 minutes earlier about the
earthquake unleashing the tidal wave. The Met
Department faxed the information to former
Science & Technology Minister M.M. Joshi, who
lost that office seven months ago! No warning was
issued. More bureaucratic bungling and conflict
between official agencies followed. The Home
Ministry on December 30 issued a false alert
creating panic and disrupting relief operations.
Chaos prevailed for hours till S&T Minister Kapil
Sibal clarified the matter.
The earthquake causing the tsunami was the
greatest anywhere during the past four decades.
Its intensity was about 1,000 times greater than,
say, the Latur earthquake of 1993. Its impact was
indeed extensive, including collapse of
buildings, uprooting of railway tracks and roads
and disruption of natural drainages. The damage
necessitates a high-powered large-scale relief
and rehabilitation programme. It would be a shame
if bureaucratic obstacles or lack of resources
are allowed to come in the way of relief on the
scale warranted by the calamity.
However, it would be an even greater disgrace if
we fail to learn the right lessons from recent
natural disasters, and thus continue to subject
ourselves time and again to preventable loss of
life. The first lesson is that it simply won't do
to say that the latest event was exceptionally
catastrophic and the damage could not have been
contained or mitigated. We practised such
self-deception at the time of the Orissa cyclone
five years ago by calling it a "super-cyclone".
The term was subtly employed to insinuate that no
damage-limitation methods could have worked in
the face of that cyclonic storm.
This is totally false. Had simple, old-fashioned,
low-tech and inexpensive things like cyclone
shelters been built and properly maintained, they
could have saved hundreds of lives. Cyclone
shelters are rugged, two- or three-storeyed
concrete structures that can withstand 300 kmph
winds and tidal waves. Affected village people
can take refuge, and emergency food and water
rations can be stored in them. In Orissa, their
maintenance was sorely neglected. There was
avoidable delay too in sounding cyclone warnings
and in ordering evacuation. The first casualty of
the cyclone was the official Disaster Management
Cell itself! On Dec 30 too, the person who sent
false alert was DMC in-charge Secretary AK
Rastogi.
Talking of tsunamis, the world has witnessed many
greater ones than the latest wave, with tides as
high as 20 metres, or higher. For instance,
Alaska in 1958 was hit by a true monster with a
height of 540 metres-higher than Taipei-101, the
world's tallest building! Similarly, India too
suffered three major tsunami strikes-in 1881,
1941 and 1945. The second wave was caused by an
earthquake in the Andamans with a very high
magnitude (Richter 8.5).
The latest earthquake was detected in time by the
Pacific Tsunami Early Warning System but there
was no address in the Indian Ocean region to
which the information could be communicated. This
lacuna must be filled: all Indian Ocean states,
including India, should join the 26-member
Pacific System.
A second lesson is that natural disasters are
natural only in their causation. Their effects
are socially determined and transmitted through
mechanisms and arrangements which are the
creation of societies and governments. Natural
disasters are not socially neutral in their
impact. Rather, they pick on the poor and the
weak, who are far more vulnerable than the
privileged and the well-provided for. Consider
the following:
· The United States and Europe are prone
to disasters like earthquakes. Yet, according to
the environmental research group, Earthscan,
earthquakes killing more than 10,000 people have
not occurred in them, only in the Third World.
· Hurricanes and cyclones frequently hit
the east coast of the US. But the toll they claim
is incomparably smaller than the havoc caused by
similar events in Bangladesh, India and the
Philippines.
· The average natural disaster kills 63
people in Japan. But in Peru, the average toll is
2,900-or 46 times higher.
· Around the same time as the Latur,
California (US) was hit by an earthquake of a
magnitude 100 times more powerful. But only one
person died in the US, while 11,000 to 13,000
people perished in Latur.
· When Hurricane Elena hit the US in 1985,
only five people died. But when a cyclone slammed
Bangladesh in 1991, half a million people were
killed.
The reason why many more poor people from the
Third World die in natural disasters has nothing
to do with the intrinsically deadlier nature of
the calamity itself. Rather, the poor are
socially and physically vulnerable-being forced
to live in congested, overcrowded and unsafe
conditions in dangerous areas. The typical
medical and relief infrastructure in the Global
South is hopelessly inadequate and usually the
first to crumble under the impact of a calamity.
Above all, emergency relief provision-especially
of absolute necessities such as shelter, food and
water-is appallingly bad.
A third lesson is that governance has a great
deal of bearing on how a society copes with
natural disasters. If there is transparency in
official decision-making, the toll tends to be
much lower. This is especially the case where
governments are responsive to people, and where
early warnings are sounded, and accurate and
adequate advice and information is disseminated
about the availability of rescue and relief
services, emergency telephone numbers and
addresses, and there is stocking of provisions,
including medicines.
This does not happen in most Third World
countries. Many are extremely hierarchical in
their social structures; their rulers feel no
obligation to disseminate information and advice
to the underprivileged. These countries are also
marked by poverty and paucity of resources such
as radio receivers or telephone connectivity. The
paucity leads to denial of access to valuable
information. Human life is wantonly lost. The
poor suffer the most. The scale of damage,
whether social, physical or environmental, is
always socially determined.
A fourth lesson is that many Third World
societies are severely under-regulated for
safety. Either they have no laws on zoning of
residential and commercial activities, nor
environmentally sound building codes. Or, such
regulations are routinely violated. For instance,
millions are forced to live in unsafe shanties
simply because they cannot afford a legal title
to secure shelter. They squat and create a
slum-using unsafe, sub-standard and flimsy
materials, which give way when disaster strikes.
The poor are often compelled to use inflammable
goods like plastic which magnify the potential
damage.
In most Southeast Asian societies, there are no
laws against constructing buildings as close to
the coastline as the owner wants. In India, there
is a stipulation under the Coastal Zone
Regulations that no permanent structure should be
constructed within 500 metres of the high-tide
line. But this is often openly flouted by hotels,
shops, prawn hatcheries, and private house-owners.
In recent years, growing pressure of
commercialisation has led to the proliferation of
construction activity in seaside resorts right up
to the high-tide water-mark, leaving no safety
margin whatever. This is especially true of
Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, including
important and already congested resorts like
Phuket. These activities-all in pursuit of a fast
buck from the tourist trade-are downright
predatory in nature. They destroy highly
effective natural shields and buffers like
mangroves, and create new risks and dangers-with
disastrous consequences.
An integral part of any agenda to reduce risk,
improve safety and deal rationally with natural
calamities must oppose such predatory interests
and promote awareness of the need for public
action. This is itself inseparable from a larger
agenda to make governments more democratic-and
more accountable to the public. The latest
tsunami was bad news. But more tsunamis could hit
India in future. So will other natural
calamities. We must learn how to cope with
them-by internalising the lessons just discussed
and by joining the Pacific Early-Warning System.
Failure to do will be unforgivable.
Postscript: Maldives has declared a state of
emergency after the tsunami flooded two-thirds of
the capital, Male. This is a grim reminder of the
imminent danger from global warming for the South
Asian region. Male is only about three feet above
sea level and a four foot-high wave of water
submerged it and many of the 1,200 coral islands
that comprise the country.
______
[5]
Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005
Donate Generously For The Tsunami Affected People!
All of us are deeply moved and shaken by the tsunami tragedy. Although
tsunami has hit only 4-5 countries it has disturbed the entire globe. Figure
of affected persons is increasing every day. Amidst this monumental human
suffering, we hope that you will join hands with us to extend support to
these shattered lives. These people need all the monetary, material and
emotional support to reconstruct their lives not only now but especially
over the coming months.
"Maharashtra Machchimar Kriti Samiti" and "National Fishworkers Forum" the
constituents of "National Alliance of Peoples' Movements" have started work
in the Tsunami affected coastal areas of India. Leader of NFF and NAPM Mr.
Thomas Kocherry is presently in the affected area helping to coordinate the
relief and rehabilitation.
Tamil speaking volunteers and medical professionals are in great need at the
moment. The immediate help is available however the real challenge would be
when the reconstruction of the lost houses and livelihood material like
boats and nets would start. At that time volunteers who are prepared to work
and enough money will be required.
NAPM has decided to raise funds and send teams of volunteers for relief and
rehabilitation work. Please enrol your names and send your donations by
cheques or DD in favour of NFF Tsunami Relief And Rehabilitation Fund to
NAPM National Office, Haji Habib Bldg., A wing, First Floor, Naigaon Cross
Road, Dadar (East), MUMBAI 400014. Tel. No. 022- 2415 0529 (Alimbhai).
For further details please contact:
N.D.Koli, National Gen. Sec., NFF 9869115294
Prof. Sanjay M.G., National Co coordinator., NAPM 022-20623098 Parveen
Jehangir, Narmada Bachao Andolan 022-22185832
Sincerely yours,
Medha Patkar
Harekrishna Devnath
Aruna Roy
Rambhau Patil
Narendra Patil
Motiram Bhave
Ramdas Bhatkal
Ratnakar Matkari
Pushpa Bhave
Rajni Bakshi
Gajanan Khatu
Arvind Adarkar
Datta Iswalkar
Surekha Dalvi
Purnima Meher
______
[6]
[Posted below is a request letter by Ms Nandita
Das, an eminent actor and activist, to support
AMAN BIRADARI, an organisation founded to
strengthen peaces justice and harmony in the
country. ]
o o o
Hi there!
In the last five years, I have never walked even
500 meters! But on 16 January 2005, I'll be
joining more than 15,000 people in the Mumbai
Marathon, running the 7 km. "Dream Run". I am
going to push myself to the limit, because I am
running for a cause that I believe in strongly.
That cause in Aman Biradari, a grassroots
approach to strengthen peace, justice and harmony.
I know that you too would support such a cause
and would trust my judgment about choosing the
organisation. It's a small organisation and need
all the help they can get that's what inspired me
to run for the Marathon. Otherwise I am the last
person to do all this!
My first milestone is to raise at least rupees
one lakh for Aman Biradari, and I am starting
with my own initial contribution of Rs.10,000/-.
I am going to need all the support that I can get
from you and anyone you can get to contribute to
make this 'happen'!
You can read more about it and donate online at:
http://www.giveindia.org/give/user/static/marathon/ndas.htm
You can also send your donation by Cheque payable
to "GIVE Online" [GiveIndia is the official
charity of the Marathon], along with this leaflet
filled in the reverse to:
GiveIndia
301, New Delhi Indl. Estate
off Mahakali Caves Rd.
Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 099
Tel: +91-22-2687 8774/75
Every contribution will be acknowledged with a
receipt and tax certificate, and will be posted
on the GiveIndia website as well. UK and US
taxpayers will also receive tax benefits. Do give
as much as you can to support the cause. No sum
is too little (or too much)! Thanks so much! In
the end, it is entirely in our hands to create
the kind of world we want to live in...
Love,
Nandita
Yes! I would like to support Nandita Das!
Dear GiveIndia,
Please deduct (tick one) Rs. Rs.1,000 Rs.5,000
Rs.10,000 Rs._________ from my VISA/ MasterCard
credit card, bearing the card number:
expiring in with CVV no.
month year last 3 digits on back of your card
OR
Please find enclosed, my Cheque for Rs.____________ favouring 'GIVE Online"
drawn on ______________________ bank.
My contact information is as follows:
Name: _______________________________________________
My Address: _________________________________________
_________________________________________
City _________________ Pin Code: _______________
Telephone#: ____________________________________
(This will help us verify that you have indeed made this donation)
Signature: ___________________ Date: _____________
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Trx ID: __________ Recd On: ___________
Entered by: __________________________
Verified by: _____________Date: ________
______
[7]
ASSOCIATION OF INDIAN LABOUR HISTORIANS
42 Deshbandhu Society, 15 Patparganj, Delhi 110092, India
International Institute of
Social History, Amsterdam
The South-South exchange
programme for research on
the history of development
Towards Global Labour History:
New Comparisons
An International Workshop organized by
Association of Indian Labour Historians (India) under the
SEPHIS Programme and the International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam
November 10-12, 2005 at Delhi (India)
CALL FOR PAPERS
The workshop is being held to discuss the
possibility of a new framework for Global
labour history. There is an urgent need for
reconstituting the older frameworks which
had evolved around fixed binaries of space, time
and social relations. A more meaningful
way of comparison would be to focus on sites,
forms and relations of labour that
habitually straddle the classical divides of
labour history. Papers to be presented at the
workshop should focus on the following themes.
1) Legalities: For a new global labour history
there is a need to rethink notions of
law, legality and labour moving beyond earlier
distinctions between legal/illegal,
crime/labour, regulated/unregulated.
2) Mobility: With increasing attention now being
paid to circular mobility, cross border
labour migration and the history of mobile work
sites, mobility is brought back to
the centre of labouring experience.
3) Solidarities: Themes which transcend the organic models of community and
associational forms of class, comparisons of
transient and temporary solidarities,
forms such as social networks forged at
workplaces and neighborhoods at both the
global and the local level are expected to be
dealt with in the papers under this rubric.
4) Relations of Gender: What seems important
today is not just the visibility of
women and women's work, but the interrogation of received ideas such as male
working class formation and notions of
masculinity implicit in traditional notions
of solidarity.
5) Multiplicity of Labouring Identities: The
hyphenated identities such as homeworker,
peasant-worker, self-employed and 'labouring poor' - a term usually
reserved for the pre-industrial worker - have made a strong come back in recent
literature.
6) Impact of New Technology on Work: New technologies especially those based
on communications and information have deeply impacted labour relations. Both
dispersion and congregation of workforce is
occurring specially in the new economy.
Are there historical parallels for the way these
technologies have impacted work
relations?
Research Papers of publishable quality focusing
on the above themes are invited from
young and established scholars located in the
South (Asia, Africa, Latin America) and
in the North (Europe, America, Japan and
Australia). Twenty-five papers (including six
from the North) will be chosen for presentation and intensive discussion in the
workshop. The papers should demonstrate the use of innovative methodology and
primary sources. Authors are invited to submit
abstracts (in English) of no more than
600 words as well as academic curriculum vitae (maximum three pages). Proposals
must reach through email at the following address
<ailh2004 at rediffmail.com> by 7
March, 2005. Final draft of selected papers
(6000-7000 words) is due by 7 September,
2005 to ensure that airline tickets and other
arrangements can be done in good time.
Association of Indian Labour Historians (AILH)
will undertake to publish a selection
of suitably refereed papers soon after the workshop.
The organizers will cover travel costs and other
participation expenses for successful
applicants. However, air-tickets will be issued
only upon timely receipt of acceptable
papers, i.e. the paper submission deadline must be met.
Postal Address:
Association of Indian Labour Historians
42 Deshbandhu Society
15 Patparganj, Delhi - 110092
India
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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.
---
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail
/\ - against microsoft attachments
More information about the Sacw
mailing list