SACW | 8 Jan 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire   | 8 Jan.,  2005
via:  www.sacw.net

[1] Pakistan - India: Talking Peace, Making War 
(Zia Mian, A H Nayyar, M V Ramana)
[2] Rehab. and Reconstruction should promote 
civil society and democratization in Sri Lanka 
(SLDF)
[3] Pakistan:  Religious Discrimination Through Passport (Rehman Faiz)
[4] India: State Tyranny in Orissa (Angana Chatterji)
[5] Protest BBC's inclusion of an outfit of the 
Hindu right on their list of Tsunami relief 
organizations
[6] Book Review (Purabi Panwar)


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

[1]

The News International
January 08, 2005

[PAKISTAN - INDIA] TALKING PEACE, MAKING WAR

Zia Mian, A H Nayyar, M V Ramana

Albert Einstein famously observed that, "You 
cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for 
war." This straightforward piece of common sense 
wisdom is lost to leaders in Pakistan and India. 
They seem intent on talking about trying to 
prevent war and yet insist on pushing ahead as 
hard and fast as they can on getting ready for 
the next war. They continue to make and buy 
weapons, even as peace falls by the wayside.

Hardly a day goes by without a report of 
Pakistani and Indian officials, foreign 
secretaries or foreign ministers meeting and 
talking. This a welcome respite from the past 
several years of tension interrupted by crises 
and threats of war. But if the current round of 
nuclear talks is to amount to more than talks and 
agreements that formalise the status quo, leaders 
and the public in India and Pakistan will need to 
talk about and agree to concrete measures that 
help slow the momentum towards ever larger and 
more destructive nuclear arsenals.

A large part of the problem facing nuclear talks 
is that leaders and people in Pakistan and India 
are of two minds when it comes to their nuclear 
arsenals. On the one hand, they recognise that 
these weapons cast a dark, potentially fatal 
shadow over the future of both countries. India's 
foreign minister Natwar Singh declared "To me 
personally, the most important thing on our 
agenda should be the nuclear dimension". General 
Musharraf claimed that "we have been saying let's 
make south Asia a nuclear-free zone" and added 
that "If mutually there is an agreement of 
reduction of nuclear assets, Pakistan would be 
willing".

At the same time, officials and leaders on both 
sides seem bewitched by the power of the bomb. 
They each believe that the threat of massive 
destruction represented by their nuclear weapons 
is a form of protection, and so a force for good. 
Lost in this nuclear logic, they are forced to 
concede that the possession of nuclear weapons by 
the other state serves the same purpose. The 
joint statements released after both the 
expert-level talks on nuclear confidence building 
measures in New Delhi in June and when the 
Foreign Secretaries met in Delhi affirmed the two 
sides see the nuclear capabilities of each other 
as a "factor for stability."

The idea that nuclear weapons are a 'factor for 
stability' flies in the face of both reason and 
experience. The incredible destructive power of 
nuclear weapons is meant to spawn fear in 
adversary states. But this fear also incites 
these states to seek the same weapons and 
produces a widening spiral of instability and 
escalation. The decades of superpower cold war 
are a history of hostility, crises and ever 
growing conventional and nuclear arsenals. 
However, nuclear weapons did serve to create 
stability in one area. They have ensured and 
protected a vast nuclear weapons complex, one 
persists even now, fifteen years after the Cold 
war ended.

There is abundant evidence since the May 1998 
nuclear tests that there is no stability to be 
found in the shadow of the bomb. Crisis has 
followed crisis. First there was the Kargil war. 
Then India and Pakistan were enmeshed in another 
military confrontation involving an estimated 
half a million troops, about two-thirds of them 
Indian, facing off across the border. An Indian 
army officer spoke of plans for a quick attack 
that would set back "Pakistan's military 
capability by at least 30 years, pushing it into 
the military 'dark ages'," adding that 
"casualties in men and machines in such an 
operation will be high and the military has 
firmly told the politicians to prepare the nation 
for losses and delayed results, as fighting will 
be fierce." The Indian Army chief has since 
confirmed details of the plans.

So what have the two sides talked in the nuclear 
talks. The only 'new' measure that has been 
trumpeted is another hotline, this time linking 
the two foreign secretaries, through their 
respective foreign offices, "to prevent 
misunderstandings and reduce risks relevant to 
nuclear issues". J. N. Dixit, India's national 
security adviser wrote in November 1990 that 
prime ministers Chandrashekhar and Nawaz Sharif 
decided to establish a direct hotline and to 
activate the hotline between the offices of the 
foreign secretaries and the directors of military 
operations. In Dixit's judgment "hotline 
conversations between the director-generals of 
military operations remain routine and the prime 
ministerial hotline has seldom been used, as has 
the hotline between the two foreign secretaries". 
So much for hotlines.

The other agreed measure that has been 
highlighted is the agreement to notify each other 
of upcoming missile tests. This was in fact 
agreed to in Lahore in 1999 and was part of the 
Memorandum of Understanding signed there. Since 
then, the two states have been informing each 
other about missile tests, of which there have 
been many. Now, five years later, they have 
simply agreed again that they will conclude such 
a notification agreement.

The missile test notification agreement, when it 
comes, will do nothing about limiting either 
state from continuing to test missiles with ever 
longer range, greater accuracy, and more 
destructive power. General Musharraf announced 
proudly "We are conducting a missile test every 
second day" and India's defence minister Pranab 
Mukherjee made clear that missiles would be 
tested 'as and when required'.

A little common sense shows there are some 
obvious things that Pakistan and India could do, 
if they want to do more than just build 
'confidence' while their nuclear arsenals keep 
growing and becoming ever more deadly.

Both India and Pakistan have emphasised 
repeatedly that they seek only a 'minimum' 
nuclear arsenal. General Musharraf's remarks 
about Pakistan's willingness to consider a 
'reduction of nuclear assets' makes clear that 
this threshold has already been crossed. This 
should be no surprise. Pakistan and India have 
been making the fissile material (the nuclear 
explosive) for their weapons as fast as they can 
for decades. They already have enough for several 
dozen nuclear weapons each.

If they each used only five of their weapons 
against the other's cities (one bomb per city), 
it is estimated that there would a total of about 
three million deaths and an additional 1.5 
million severely injured. The experience of death 
and destruction on this scale would be beyond 
imagination for either country.

Given that India and Pakistan can inflict this 
much devastation using only a fraction of their 
nuclear weapons stockpile, it is beyond any 
understanding why they continue to produce more 
fissile material for more nuclear weapons. The 
two countries should stop making more fissile 
material. And, no more of the existing fissile 
material stockpile should be turned into nuclear 
weapons. Each additional weapon could destroy yet 
another city.

Despite the destructive capacity they have 
already created, nuclear weapons establishments 
in India and Pakistan, as in similar 
establishments in other countries with nuclear 
weapons, pursue research and development 
activities to make their nuclear weapons both 
more destructive and more compact. If the future 
is to offer something other than the paranoid 
logic of racing to build more and more lethal 
weapons, the two governments should call a halt 
to such activities.

One step towards curtailing new weapons 
development is a ban on testing nuclear weapons. 
India and Pakistan have repeated their unilateral 
declarations to conduct no further nuclear 
weapons tests. But, neither seems willing to sign 
the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), 
the 1996 international agreement banning 
explosive nuclear weapons tests - which has been 
signed by all the other nuclear weapons states 
(US, Russia, Britain, France and China, as well 
as Israel), and by 166 other countries. A natural 
corollary to the ban on nuclear weapons testing 
is a ban on flight testing of ballistic missiles. 
Such a ban would inhibit the development of 
longer range and more accurate, thereby more 
destructive, missiles. The furious pace of 
missile development in south Asia and the 
tit-for-tat testing programmes makes such a ban 
all the more urgent.

There is another area of possible agreement. In 
the Lahore agreement, the two governments 
committed to "reducing the risks of accidental or 
unauthorised use of nuclear weapons". These risks 
are directly linked to the deployment of nuclear 
weapons; deployment might involve, for example, 
putting the weapons on ballistic missiles or 
keeping the weapons at military airbases close to 
planes that may carry them. If nuclear weapons 
are not given over to military forces and not 
kept ready to use, there is much less danger of 
them being used by whoever happens to have charge 
of them at that moment, or of them being involved 
in an accident.

As part of the Lahore agreements, India and 
Pakistan committed "to notify each other 
immediately in the event of any accidental, 
unauthorised or unexplained incident that could 
create the risk of a fallout with adverse 
consequences for both sides, or of an outbreak of 
a nuclear war between the two countries, as well 
as to adopt measures aimed at diminishing the 
possibility of such actions or incidents being 
misinterpreted by the other." The two states 
should agree to draw up together a list of all 
the possible "accidental, unauthorised or 
unexplained" incidents that they would like the 
other side to tell them about. This would lay the 
basis for sharing descriptions of what measures 
each has taken to reduce the risks of possible 
accidents and unauthorised incidents.

There are many other ideas that can emerge if 
there is a will for peace. The obstacles to 
substantive negotiations are the nuclear weapons 
complex, the military and the foreign ministries, 
and the mindless, violent nationalism of the 
political parties that have embraced the bomb. It 
is these that have brought us to the point of 
having to worry about the risk of a nuclear war 
that might kill millions and the now ever present 
risk of nuclear accidents.

The writers are physicists; Dr Mian and Dr Nayyar 
are from Pakistan, Dr Ramana is from India

______



[2]

8 January 2005

For Immediate Release

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction efforts should nurture an independent
civil society and promote democratization in Sri Lanka

The Sri Lanka Democracy Forum extends our sorrow and heartfelt condolences
to all victims of the December 26 Tsunami in South Asia and the region.
The scale of the devastation in Sri Lanka, even for a country torn by
years of armed conflict is difficult to comprehend.  For Sri Lanka it is
truly a national tragedy.  The disaster has left no community untouched.
It thus demands an island-wide relief response that transcends ethnic
politics.  We congratulate all efforts to assist the victims of this
disaster, originating in Sri Lanka and internationally.  And in particular
we welcome and applaud the outpouring of civilian generosity in its wake,
witnessed in Sri Lanka and indeed globally, which speaks to the
unbreakable bond of human compassion.

SLDF urges concerned parties to reject militarism and communalism, and to
concentrate efforts on improving the delivery of relief and effective
reconstruction assistance to all persons affected by the disaster.   No
single entity - not the Sri Lankan government, not the LTTE - can handle
the disaster relief rehabilitation and reconstruction on its own.  Rather,
a crisis of this magnitude requires a national effort with the support of
the international community.

As these efforts continue it is essential that all actors: the government,
the LTTE, all local and international NGOs and agencies, strive for
transparency, accountability and coordination.  In any emergency, areas
with a developed and vibrant civil society have a better chance of
advocating assistance for themselves.  This is the case in many parts of
Sri Lanka.  But in the North and East, particularly in areas long
devastated by the war and militarization, where the development of
independent civil society institutions has been obstructed, the ordinary
people have had no space to organize independently and have been at the
mercy of those in power.

In the days immediately preceding the Tsunami disaster, tensions between
the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government were high.  The recruitment of
child soldiers and adult fighters by the LTTE was escalating in
preparation the LTTE said, for the possibility of war.  The Sri Lankan
military had expanded its arsenal and increased recruitment of troops
during the cease-fire.  International humanitarian organizations working
in Sri Lanka expressed public alarm that the spiralling political violence
in the country’s North and East was threatening relief and development,
not to mention the rule of law, diversity, freedom of expression and
pluralism.

These conditions were never acceptable under any circumstances, but the
destruction wrought by the Tsunami and the ensuing demands of
rehabilitation require an immediate change in attitude and approach by all
parties.  In this context, war is simply not an option.  The requirement
put in place by the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) that either party must
give two weeks notice before terminating the agreement is insufficient.
SLDF calls on the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE to declare an
immediate, long-term moratorium on fighting of at least four years as a
first step towards augmenting and ensuring a much violated CFA.  The Sri
Lankan government should reallocate a substantial portion of its defence
budget towards relief and rehabilitation.

Despite the enormous good will shown by ordinary Sri Lankans throughout
the country to the people of the North and East affected by the disaster,
aid has been slow in reaching far-flung communities in the region, and the
parties themselves continue to engage in troubling behaviours.  The Tamil
press and certain parliamentarians have accused the Sri Lankan government
of discrimination in the delivery of relief – showing preference for the
Sinhala south over Tamil areas.  While the shortages in the North and East
have been serious, there have also been repeated allegations that LTTE
cadres have inhibited the delivery of assistance -- setting fire to a camp
housing persons displaced by the tsunami after the people accepted
assistance from army, intercepting trucks carrying relief supplies,
refusing unfettered government or international access to areas under its
control, and preventing independent NGOs from operating.  SLDF is already
receiving reports that military recruitment by the LTTE has resumed,
taking apparent advantage of the increased vulnerability of displaced
people.

These actions are unacceptable, particularly given the gravity of the
situation faced by Sri Lanka's coastal communities.  Both parties must
take immediate steps to ensure that delivery of aid is not inhibited in
any form, that the reasons for shortages are clearly understood by the
public and addressed, and that their forces strictly adhere to the
existing terms of the CFA.  Particularly essential are the protections of
civilians outlined in article 2.1, which in accordance with international
law prohibit such acts as torture, intimidation, abduction, extortion and
harassment.

The coming years should not only be a time of national reconstruction but
also of national reconciliation, where a peace with democracy and a
permanent political solution to the ethnic conflict can be rooted in the
efforts to reconstruct the social and economic landscape ravaged by the
Tsunami.  Such a peace with democracy can only be possible in the context
of moves towards demilitarization, both through disarmament and the
nurturing of an independent civil society.  SLDF reiterates its demand to
make protection of human rights central to this process.  This at a
minimum calls for an end to political killings, end to child recruitment
and release of all child soldiers, an end to systematic extortion and an
end to inter-ethnic violence.

Sri Lanka Democracy Forum
www.lankademocracy.org

______


[3]

RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION THROUGH PASSPORT

Rehman Faiz

Keeping in line with the efforts of the 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 
to introduce global standards for travel 
documents, the government started issuing 
machine-readable passports earlier this year. The 
format for the new passports was borrowed from 
the ICAO and was the same as has been adopted by 
several other countries. One new feature is that 
the passports do not include a column to specify 
the holder's religion. (The column had been 
introduced in Pakistani passports in 1980 by the 
government of General Zia ul Haq.)

This apparently routine change in the passport 
format drew a sharp response from the six-party 
religious alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal 
(MMA), which won a substantial presence in the 
Pakistani parliament in the October 2002 
elections. "We feel that the omission of the 
religion column is an attack on our very identity 
as Muslims," MMA leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman 
told reporters in Karachi last month.

That demand was rubbished by Interior Minister 
Aftab Sherpao some three weeks later. The 
government, he told a press conference in 
Islamabad, had no intention of retaining such a 
column in the MRPs.

However, it was a surprise, to say the least, 
when this week former Prime Minister Chaudhry 
Shujaat Hussain, who heads the governing PML 
party, announced that the party wanted the 
religion column back in the passports.

Mr Hussain's declaration raised eyebrows all over 
the country, leaving political observers 
wondering what had led the former premier to 
embark on a path that was in clear conflict with 
Gen Musharraf's stated agenda of "enlightened 
moderation".

The alliance argues that the omission of a 
religious column would allow Ahmadis, a minority 
sect declared to be non-Muslims by the Bhutto 
government in 1974, to travel to Makka for 
pilgrimage. On the other hand two Saudi missions 
in Pakistan have access to the complete database 
on which the MRPs are based and that database 
records the religion of every holder. In any 
case, it is not the Saudis that are objecting.

It seems to be a classic example of religious 
orthodoxy finding sustenance from local political 
compulsions. Overt religious symbolism was an 
essential part of Gen Zia's strategy for 
Pakistan's Islamization. Even some 16 years after 
his death, the supporters of his legacy seem 
adamant not to let religion drop away from public 
eye at any level.

Even as the machine-readable passports 
controversy continues, there are indications that 
the government, instead of insisting on its 
current stance, may relent. There is talk that 
the machine-readable passports may have a page 
added to them - it would be non-machine readable 
and give the religion of the holder. In that 
eventuality, the world may find another reason 
for looking at Pakistan as a deeply orthodox 
nation inherently incapable of coming to terms 
with the modern world. In fact, the hidden agenda 
behind this move is to give further rise to the 
already existing severe religious discrimination 
in Pakistan.

The 1973 Constitution of Pakistan (which has been 
indefinitely suspended as of the 1999 coup) 
states that Islam is the state religion of 
Pakistan. Article 20 states that every citizen 
has the right to practice his or her own religion 
and that all religious denominations have the 
right to establish and maintain religious 
institutions. Article 21 says that no one may be 
forced to receive religious instruction or 
participate in religious ceremonies relating to a 
religion not oneís own, and that educational 
institutions which are maintained wholly by a 
religious community may teach the faith of that 
community. Article 31 enjoins the government to 
take steps to enable the citizens of Pakistan, 
individually and collectively, to live according 
to the fundamental precepts of Islam. Article 227 
declares that all exiting laws should be brought 
into conformity with the ìInjunctions of Islam as 
laid down in the Holy Quran and sunnah.î The 
president of the country is required to be a 
Muslim. Muslims are permitted to convert but that 
proselytizing among Muslims is prohibited.

A 1974 constitutional amendment declared that 
Ahmadis, who consider themselves to be Muslim, 
are not Muslim. In 1984, a law was added to the 
penal code prohibiting Ahmadis from calling 
themselves Muslims or using Islamic terminology. 
Punishment is up to three years imprisonment and 
a fine. These declarations had become unique 
examples in the history of the modern world which 
deprive certain community to call themselves what 
they believe to be. In 1986, another law was 
passed which declares the death penalty for 
anyone convicted of blaspheming the prophet 
Mohammed. This law has frequently been used to 
threaten Ahmadis, Christians and Muslims.

In 1990, a religious court ruled that the penalty 
for crimes under the law (Section 295-C of the 
country's Constitution) is execution. 
<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_edn1>[i] 
The law states: "Whoever by words, either spoken 
or written, or by visible representation, or by 
inputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or 
indirectly defiles the sacred name of the Holy 
prophet Mohammed...shall be punished with death 
and shall be liable to a fine." The law is being 
used in Pakistan to discriminate against 
religious minorities: largely Christians, and 
Ahmadis.

The constitution somehow provides freedom of 
religion and states that adequate provisions are 
to be made for minorities to profess and practice 
their religions freely; however, in practice the 
governments impose limits on freedom of religion.

Specific government policies that discriminate 
against religious minorities include the use of 
the ìHudoodî Ordinances, which apply different 
standards of evidence to Muslims and non-Muslims 
and to men and women for alleged violations of 
Islamic law; list specific legal prohibitions 
against Ahmadis practicing their religion; and 
incorporate blasphemy laws that have been used to 
target reformist Muslims, Ahmadis, Christians, 
and Hindus. Both the Hudood Ordinances and the 
blasphemy laws have been abused, in that they are 
often used against persons to settle personal 
scores.

Iqbal Haider, then the Law Minister, urged reform 
of the blasphemy law because several individuals 
had been falsely accused. There was a suspicion 
that the motivations of their accusers was to 
settle old scores or to intimidate others. In 
response, some extreme Fundamentalist Muslim 
leaders put a price of $40,000 on Haider's head.

On 1994-JUL-28, Amnesty International urged Prime 
Minister Benazir Bhutto to change the law because 
it was being used to terrorize religious 
minorities.<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_edn2>[ii] 
The AI press release stated: "Pakistan's 
blasphemy laws are so vaguely formulated that 
they encourage, and in fact invite, the 
persecution of religious minorities or 
non-conforming members of [the] Muslim majority."

Benazir Bhutto attempted to change the law, but 
was unsuccessful. She did direct all district 
magistrates to release any accused persons under 
this law until their case had first been 
investigated. The subsequent Prime Minister, 
Nawaz Sharif won two thirds of the seats in 
parliament in 1997-JAN with strong support from 
Muslim religious fundamentalists. His government 
had reversed the ruling of the former prime 
minister. Individuals were then being arrested 
for blasphemy, and held without bail, while their 
cases were being investigated. No Christian 
charged with this crime had ever been granted 
bail.<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_edn3>[iii]

In 1993 the Supreme Court of Pakistan heard a 
case by a number of Ahmadis who asserted that 
they were being deprived of their religious 
rights and freedoms, as guaranteed under Article 
20 of the constitution. The appeal was rejected. 
The court felt that granting the Ahmadis equal 
rights would be against public order. They said 
that Shi'a or Suni Muslims, who vastly outnumber 
the Ahmadis, consider the "movement ideologically 
offensive.<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_edn4>[iv] 
The majority opinion of the court stated that 
many Islamic phrases were, in effect, copyrighted 
trademarks of the Islamic faith. Thus the use of 
these phrases by Ahmadis was a form of copyright 
infringement; it violated the Trademark Act of 
1940. They also found that Ahamdis were 
committing blasphemy when they spoke or wrote 
specific Islamic phrases.

The Bishop of Lahore, Alexander John Malik, said 
that the blasphemy law "is a tool for religious 
cleansing. The government is considering 
appending to the blasphemy law an amendment that 
will provide heavy penalties in the event of 
false accusations." Bishop Malik commented: "I 
think the government is quite willing to listen 
to us. It is the extreme mullahs who are making 
trouble."

Random acts of violence have occurred in Pakistan 
for many years between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. 
These often take the form of unprovoked attacks 
on peaceful Muslims at prayer.

With increasing interconnectedness of the people 
around the globe there is need to transform 
Pakistan into a welfare state that enjoins 
religious freedom, tolerance and equal rights to 
all irrespective of their theology, faith, creed, 
sex, belief or religion. No one is to be 
victimized or subjected to oppression, bias or 
hatred merely because of his religious beliefs 
and sentiments. I think Pakistanis should welcome 
introduction of global standards for travel 
documents like machine-readable passports and 
should not support any religious discrimination 
through passport.

It is historical fact that Pakistan was not 
created for the rule and ascendancy of any 
particular religion or school of thought. 
Everyone without an exception, irrespective of 
his belief and creed has equal claim over 
Pakistan. Here I can quote the Founder of 
Pakistan Mohammad Ali Jinnah, who in his address 
to the Constituent Assembly on 11th August 1947 
had unequivocally declared,

"Ö You may belong to any religion or caste or 
creed ñ that has nothing to do with the business 
of StateÖ. We are starting with this fundamental 
principle that we are all citizens and equal 
citizens of one StateÖ Now, I think we should 
keep that in front of us as our ideal and you 
will find that in course of time Hindus would 
cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be 
Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that 
is the personal faith of each individual, but in 
the political sense as citizens of the State".

"You are free; you are free to go to your 
temples, you are free to go to your mosques, or 
to any other places of worship in the State of 
Pakistan".

Considering ever-increasing responsibilities as 
the members of the global society this becomes 
our duty to ensure religious freedom for all 
members of religious minorities and schools of 
thought and to accord equal treatment without any 
discrimination on grounds of faith or religion. 
Not only that each one of them should get his/her 
due rights, but the policy of religious tolerance 
be so designed that all religious minorities and 
those having different schools of thought, sect, 
faith, sex or belief may order their lives, 
rituals and religious practices in accordance 
with the dictates of their own faith and

<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_ednref1>[i] 
John Stackhouse, "Pakistani law has Christians up 
in arms," The Globe and Mail, Toronto ON, 
1998-JUN-8.
[ii]  "Pakistan Urged to Alter Blasphemy Laws," Chicago Tribune, 1994-JUL-28
<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_ednref3>[iii] 
John Stackhouse, "Pakistani law has Christians up 
in arms," The Globe and Mail, Toronto ON, 
1998-JUN-8.
<http://us.f202.mail.yahoo.com/ym/Compose?box=Inbox&Mid=7840_7073854_48567_2435_47692_0_42655_105241_2613476536&inc=&Search=&YY=50632&order=down&sort=date&pos=0#_ednref4>[iv] 
"The Situation of Ahmadi Muslims in Pakistan," 
at: 
<http://www.alislam.org/pakistan/hr-pak1.htm>http://www.alislam.org/pakistan/hr-pak1.htm



______


[4]

Humanscape Magazine,
Volume XII. Issue I. January 2005

State Tyranny in Orissa
By Angana Chatterji

An aluminium plant in Orissa is expected to 
displace and dispossess 20,000 people, and impact 
rights to life and livelihood across 82 villages. 
In return, it might provide employment to about 
1,000 people over 20 years.

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

On 1 December 2004, the Orissa Police attacked 
and critically injured 16 adivasis (tribals) in 
Kashipur, in Rayagada district. Many, 
disproportionately women, were arrested. More 
than 300 adivasis and Dalit (erstwhile 
'untouchable' castes) were targeted for 
protesting the creation of a police station and 
barrack for armed police at D Karol village, in 
proximity to the proposed aluminium plant site of 
Utkal Alumina International Limited (a joint 
enterprise of Aditya Birla Group, and ALCAN, a 
Canadian company) at Doraguda. The project is 
expected to cost Rs 4,500 crores, displace and 
dispossess 20,000 people, and impact rights to 
life and livelihood across 82 villages. The plant 
might provide employment to about 1,000 people 
over 20 years, exhausting bauxite resources in 
the process. The people were demanding that the 
State construct healthcare and education 
facilities instead. Those injured were 
sequestered in Rayagada jail, denied hospital 
care, and some were reportedly missing. Armed 
police, the Central Reserve Police Force, and the 
Indian Reserve Battalion patrol the area as 
thousands congregate, demanding justice.

The government of Orissa betrays its legal and 
ethical mandate by suppressing public dissension 
through police brutality. Exercising citizenship 
to encourage responsible government action, Dalit 
and adivasi groups have been dissenting the 
establishment of the aluminium plant. Why are 
state police prioritising the interests of 
corporations over those of citizens? Why are 
rights of those imprisoned being violated?

Kashipur witnessed State repression of adivasi 
communities in December 2000 as well, when state 
police fired on non-violent dissenters in 
Rayagada protesting the mining of their lands, in 
the process killing Abhilas Jhodia, Raghu Jhodia 
and Damodar Jhodia. In July 2003, the Orissa 
government permitted the unconstitutional 
transfer of lands in Schedule V areas for 
industrial use. Orissa's decision contradicts the 
1997 Samata versus Andhra Pradesh judgement, 
where the Apex Court had ruled against the 
government's lease of tribal lands in Scheduled 
Areas to non-tribals for industrial operations. 
In January 2004, adivasi villages - Borobhota, 
Kinari, Kothduar, Sindhabahili, in southeast 
Kalahandi  were razed by Sterlite, a 
multinational corporation building an aluminium 
refinery adjacent to Kashipur. The villagers were 
forcibly evicted. Terror, brokered by the State.

Bauxite mining and aluminium projects are ongoing 
in Kashipur, in Rayagada district, and at 
Lanjigarh, in Kalahandi district. The Lanjigarh 
project will mine bauxite at 4,000 feet from the 
northwest rim of the Niyamgiri mountains. Mining 
will displace the Dongaria Kondh adivasi 
community from their remaining home in these 
mountains. Bauxite deposits are located in 
Niyamgiri, Baphilimali and Khandualmali 
mountains, near the Karlapat sanctuary, abundant 
in biodiversity and the spring of river systems. 
Baphilimali, in Kashipur block, is estimated to 
contain a deposit of 1,957.3 lakh tonnes of 
bauxite. Lok Pakhya, a civil society 
organisation, calculates that the value of 
aluminium processed from bauxite in Baphilimali, 
will amount to, approximately, Rs 288,000 crores 
(US$ 65 billion) at current prices, while the 
State of Orissa will accrue Rs 1,200 crores (US$ 
260 million) in royalties, at Rs 60 per tonne of 
bauxite over 20 years. Who benefits? At what cost?

For 12 years, local communities in Rayagada have 
been protesting bauxite mining by a consortium of 
industries, condemning the breach of 
constitutional provisions barring sale or lease 
of tribal lands without consent. People dissent 
the devastation of their ecosystems, histories 
and futures, the destruction of forests, 
agricultural lands, mountains, perennial 
water-streams, the water retention capacity of 
mountains, integral to life and livelihood. 
Orissa is a tragic affidavit of the intersections 
of irresponsible globalisation, State complicity 
in defiling human rights, and police 
participation in fostering social violence.

In the 2004 election campaign, the Bharatiya 
Janata Party manipulated the 'jal, jangal, 
zameen' (water, forest, land) platform, 
appropriated from land reform movements to 
persuade adivasis in Orissa to vote for the 
party. The Bharatiya Janata Party-Biju Janata Dal 
government, allied Hindu nationalist 
organisations, and other major political parties 
manoeuvre Dalits, adivasis, and minority 
religious groups for sectarian interests, with 
abject disregard for the well-being and 
self-determination of these groups.

Mining in Rayagada and Kalahandi contradicts the 
United Nation's Declaration on the Right to 
Development, which mandates "free and meaningful 
participation" in development. It violates the 
right to life and livelihood guaranteed by 
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and 
contravenes the directives of the National Forest 
Policy, 1988, which legitimates the traditional 
claims of forest dependent communities to public 
resources. It negates the 'Provisions of the 
Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) 
Act' of 1996. Known as PESA, this law enables 
adivasi control over forest resources in the 
states of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, 
Himachal Pradesh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, 
Orissa and Rajasthan. It applies to tribal areas 
of eight states in central India that are 
administered by Schedule V and VI of the Indian 
Constitution. PESA accords adivasi communities 
the right to oversee industrialisation in tribal 
areas and receive just compensation as 
shareholders for land, resources, and social 
capital, and be active and equal agents in 
determining costs and benefits connected to 
technological and capital inputs.

The Orissa government has invested in generating 
an affirmative climate for brisk 
industrialisation, without regard for the massive 
social and ecological destitution that has become 
the tragic bi-product of modernisation in India. 
In November 2004, the World Bank sanctioned a US$ 
125 million Socio-economic Development 
Credit/Loan for Orissa. People's groups and Left 
political parties estimate that Orissa has 
received bids for investment amounting to Rs 
250,000 crores over the next decade, committed to 
large industries and related infrastructure. Such 
investment will lead to employment opportunities 
for only 175,000, analysts say, while two million 
are unemployed and another two million are 
underemployed. In contrast, an investment of Rs 
5,000 crores in cottage, small and medium 
industries can generate employment for about one 
crore. The Orissa government estimates that 20 
proposed mining projects and five large dams will 
displace 250,000 people, radically impacting 
mineral resources and the ground water base. Such 
development will decimate what holds value and is 
sacred to myriad communities, accelerating 
cultural genocide.

Corporate activity and State-sponsored 
development in Orissa remain divorced from 
people's participation in decision-making. 
Maldevelopment imperils environmental health, 
endangering people who depend on natural 
resources for subsistence. This is of particular 
concern in the context of growing liberalisation 
and corporate globalisation prioritised by the 
State in trade, industry, tourism and 
agriculture, and through the privatisation of 
public resources and infrastructure. The State 
often charges poor rural communities with the 
primary responsibility for ecological 
degradation, while plans for allaying rural 
poverty emphasise capital and resource intensive 
strategies as devised by the National Forestry 
Action Plans prepared by the Ministry of 
Environment and Forests in 1999. The Revised 
Forest Strategy of the World Bank, approved in 
October 2002, is another example of centralised 
policies that alienate the poor by privileging 
'free' market activity through endorsing the 
unchecked involvement of the private sector in 
development processes.

Dominant development has failed to halt the rise 
in the absolute and relative number of people 
below the poverty level in rural Orissa. While 
schemes and programmes focused on poverty 
alleviation have been continued in the Tenth Plan 
(2002-2007), their impact on rural poverty 
remains dubious. These agendas are ill-planned 
and mismanaged, surfeit with corruption, 
inattentive to the needs of 47.15 per cent of 
Orissa's population who live in poverty, making 
suspect the government's commitment to human 
rights and social security. Lack of access to 
common property resources, including water and 
forests, heighten impoverishment, and the 
wreckage wrought by the cyclone of 1999, the 
floods of 2001, the droughts of 2000 and 2003 
pose formidable challenges for environmental, 
political and social sustainability for the 36.7 
million residents of Orissa.

On 16 December 2004, four years after the 
Maikanch firing, more than 7,000 people gathered 
to commemorate those who died in struggle in 
Kashipur. Armed police and company goons assailed 
the dissenters, and targeted and detained members 
of the state legislative assembly attending the 
event. Outraged by the attacks, Left and 
progressive parties and organisations staged a 
demonstration in front of the Orissa Legislative 
Assembly in Bhubaneswar.

Resolute voices of dissent, in solidarity with 
the affected people of Rayagada and Kalahandi, 
unequivocally condemn the actions of Navin 
Patnaik's government. Yet, the construction of 
the armed police barrack continues in D Karol. 
History tells us that when irresponsible 
corporate globalisation and a callous and 
authoritarian State collaborate to marginalise 
local communities, it exacerbates social 
suffering, betrays the disenfranchised, and 
furthers gendered violence. The Orissa government 
and civil society must take immediate action to 
stop police brutalisation and mining operations, 
and set up an independent commission to inquire 
into the social and environmental damage 
resultant from past action. Investigation into 
human rights violations and plans for reparations 
must be central to the mandate of such a 
commission. Failure to do so will only further 
evidence the despairing breakdown of governance 
in the state.

Angana Chatterji is associate professor of social 
and cultural anthropology at California Institute 
of Integral Studies.

______



[5]

[All SACW subscribers are requested to write to 
the BBC to protest against their inclusion of an 
outfit of the Hindu right on their list of 
Tsunami relief organizations. Details below]

o  o  o

Dear Friends,

This is a call for help.

    ACTION ITEM 1: Please take a minute of your 
time to write to the BBC protesting their 
inclusion of a Sewa International front group 
(Hinduforum.org) on their list of Tsunami relief 
organizations - 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4131881.stm. 
PLEASE WRITE to the BBC online at: 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4000000/newsid_4000500/4000561.stm

    ACTION ITEM 2: Consider volunteering for 
regular, short letter writing efforts to various 
media. We will send you an alert with all the 
information needed. Typically this shouldnt take 
more than a few minutes of your time a week. 
While we are presently concerned with the misuse 
of Tsunami relief, the media effort may also 
extend to countering Sangh based efforts on other 
fronts, and also monitoring the press for news 
stories.  If interested please write to 
info at stopfundinghate.org

As you may know, various fundraising fronts of 
the RSS [India Development and Relief Fund 
(IDRF), Sewa International USA, Hindu Swayamsevak 
Sangh, Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America, etc.] 
have once again embarked on exploiting a tragedy 
to raise funds for RSS activities in India 
(www.stopfundinghate.org).

Unfortunately, the BBC has also fallen into their 
trap. In "Asian disaster: How to
help"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4131881.stm], 
the BBC has ended up indirectly endorsing Sewa 
International (SI) for relief work (The BBC links 
to http://www.hinduforum.org which prominently 
lists SI).

You might remember that the British group, Awaaz 
South Asia Watch had brought out a report [In Bad 
Faith: British charity & Hindu extremism] 
exposing SI's links with the 
RSS.[http://www.awaazsaw.org/ibf] According to 
Awaaz's latest press release "Sewa International 
UK / Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh UK are currently 
under investigation by the Charity Commission in 
relation to the funds raised in the UK following 
the Gujarat Earthquake in 2001."

Looking at these facts we urge you to write to the BBC at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4000000/newsid_4000500/4000561.stm

and let them know that they can't legitimise organizations like SI.

Once you've submitted your feedback, please also 
write to us at info at stopfundinghate.org so that 
we have an estimate of the feedback BBC is 
getting.

In a similar vein many media groups in the US 
have been giving coverage to the IDRF and SI-USA. 
Given these organisations hideous record of using 
such funds for sowing hate, it's incumbent upon 
us to alert potential donors as to the real 
nature of these organizations. Here, we could use 
a LOT of help. If you're interested in being part 
of a a media campaign please write back to us at 
info at stopfundinghate.org

The campaign would involve one alert a day with a 
list of links to media reports which promote the 
ëreliefí work of RSS fronts without giving the 
reader any knowledge of their hate driven 
ideology. You would then be required to write to 
these media agencies to counter such promotion of 
hindutva forces by US media.

Hoping to get your support.
In solidarity
Members of the CSFH Collective (www.stopfundinghate.org )



______



[6]

The Telegraph
January 07, 2005

JOURNEY TO A NEW LIFE

Coming out of Partition: Refugee Women of Bengal
By Gargi Chakravartty,
Bluejay Books, Rs 295
[ISBN: 8188575453 , Place of Publication: New 
Delhi , Publisher: Bluejay Books , Edition: 1st 
ed. , Year of Publication: 2005]

In any disaster, natural or man-made, women are 
the worst sufferers. The afflictions of their 
dear ones, especially children, hit them very 
hard. The Partition of India was one such 
disaster which affected the lives of many women, 
especially in Punjab and Bengal. While much has 
been written about the effects of Partition in 
Punjab, not much is known of how it affected 
people's lives in Bengal, especially women who 
had never stepped out of their homes. The 
Partition forced them to set up house, bring up 
children under trying circumstances and 
supplement family income in whatever way they 
could.

Coming Out of Partition talks about the lives of 
refugee women in Bengal, who refused to let the 
odds get the better of them. Instead, they chose 
to rebuild their lives in the refugee colonies in 
and around Calcutta. In her book, Chakravartty 
culls her material mainly from newspaper reports, 
her own experiences and interviews with refugee 
women in erstwhile East Pakistan.

Most of the research on women and Partition, 
writes Chakravartty, has been a chronicle of 
loss, violence and oppression. These are relevant 
aspects of Partition. But there is also a need 
for throwing light on other areas which are no 
less significant says the author. For instance, 
"Šthe ways in which uprooted women have faced the 
enormous challenge of rebuilding and reshaping 
their lives in alien conditions and how some of 
their concerns evolved into a new women's 
movement." This is something which Chakravartty 
deals with here.

The book starts with the story of Hindus 
migrating from East Pakistan during Partition. It 
goes on to analyze the reasons which prompted 
them to leave their homes. The emotional trauma 
of Partition, writes Chakravartty, left an 
indelible mark on its victims. This is reflected 
in the words of a female character who says, "It 
was painful even to think of leaving the country. 
The first thing, which struck me was that I would 
not be able to watch the sunset on the river 
Buriganga from the terrace of our house." 
Chakravartty's book concludes with an account of 
her experience of communal riots that shook 
Calcutta after the Prophet's hair was reported 
missing from the Hazratbal Mosque.

The book also deals with the empowerment of 
refugee women. The Bengal famine of 1943 laid the 
foundation for the women's movement in the state 
and Partition helped to consolidate it. It also 
recounts the sweeping changes in the lives of 
refugees, thereby giving a "people-centric 
perspective" to Partition. For these women, 
Partition involved much more than a mere physical 
relocation. It also meant starting a new life 
with minimal resources and adjusting to a milieu 
that was, more often than not, contemptuous about 
their cultural traits.

Chakravartty's book does have its faults though. 
For instance, it does not say much about how 
Bengali Muslim women responded to Partition. 
Moreover, the factors which led to the 
segregation of refugee women from the women's 
movement, and those that resulted in the 
empowerment of Bengali women in general, have not 
been elucidated.

What makes Chakravartty's book interesting is its 
gendered approach to history. It compels the 
reader to look back on a particular phenomenon in 
Indian history in a new light.

PURABI PANWAR


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

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.