SACW | 20 Feb 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire   | 20 Feb.,  2005
via:  www.sacw.net

[1]  Pakistan - India and bus rides beyond the 
minefields of Kashmir (M.B. Naqvi)
[2]  Bangladesh: Now or Never [ Govt must act to 
curb fundamentalists ]  (Edit., Bangladesh 
Observer)
[3]  India: Democracy endangered (Communalism Combat)
[4]  India: Fresh light on 1984 riots (Kuldip Nayar) 
[5]  India:  Who Pulled The Trigger...Didn't We All? (Arundhati Roy)
[6]  India:  Science, scientists and science 
movements in India -- a comment on Pervez 
Hoodbhoy's  'India Through Pakistani Eyes' , SACW 
- 18 February 2005 (Meera Nanda)
[7]  Upcoming events in India:
(i)  Sahmat  - A road naming event after the late 
Kafi Azmi, a people's poet (New Delhi, 22nd Feb)
(ii)  A seminar on Caste and Class (Bombay, 25 Feb 2005)



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

[1]

PAKISTAN - INDIA AND BUS RIDES BEYOND THE MINEFIELDS OF KASHMIR
M.B. Naqvi
February 19, 2005

An agreement on starting a bus service between 
Srinagar and Muzaffarabad by April 7, has been 
called a breakthrough. Indian Foreign Minister 
Natwar Singh and Pakistan's Foreign Minister 
Khurshid Mehmood Kasuri went beyond this 
particular bus service and envisaged the 
resumption of Rajasthan-Sindh railway link by 
about Oct. this year. Even more important is the 
Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline has been agreed 
upon in theory; specifics have to be discussed 
later and include not only many details. There 
seems to be other international diplomatic 
complications too.

Is it a breakthrough? Factually these steps are 
no more than Confidence Building Measures, from 
the Pakistani official viewpoint, though perhaps 
somewhat more than mere gestures from India's 
viewpoint. Pakistan has kept each such measure a 
stand-alone project, not connected with a general 
opening up. That means if one bus service or one 
or two railway links are restarted, it does not 
mean that South Asia will soon become like Europe 
where all contacts, trade and investments are 
virtually free.

It is necessary to keep these differences in 
view. Their origin is of course Islamabad's 
abiding interest in Kashmir: despite all new 
avowals that Kashmir is no more than one of the 
eight subjects to be discussed with India, the 
traditional link in the Pakistani mind between 
Kashmir and everything else remains in place. 
Whether or not it is openly admitted, Pakistan's 
insistence on simultaneous progress on all 
subjects is not too far away from the old stance. 
It has only verbally diluted the old stance of 
Kashmir or nothing and has grudgingly accepted 
the need for somewhat more normal relations 
between the two countries.

It will be useful for all to keep the forces that 
are shaping the foreign policies of the two 
countries in focus, although India-Pakistan 
relations cannot properly be treated as no more 
than a foreign policy matter; deeply felt 
emotions, both friendly and hostile, are involved 
while cultural commonalties are thousand and one. 
Which bespeaks the complexity of the subject.

Even so Pakistan foreign policy, in one sense, 
appears disjointed: while the country has been 
the most allied ally of the US for most of its 
existence, its world view never diverged much 
from the American desires and designs. It has 
kept India de-linked from its general world view. 
India, on the other hand, despite treating 
Pakistan in effect separately, has a unified 
focus: it wants to go on modernizing and 
enriching itself with a view to emerging as a 
great power. For India, Pakistan is a part of its 
neighbourhood, not necessarily a key to its 
foreign policy, and, on the whole, remains 
subordinate to its central design.

The dissonance between the two countries' 
assessment of Kashmir is actually the cause of 
two widely different world views. Further 
difficulty is added when analysis yields the view 
that Pakistan's policies can also be said to be 
as uni-focal - in the sense that it has regarded 
Kashmir as the touchstone and even its apparently 
overarching relationship with the US was, in many 
ways, subordinated to its Kashmir purpose; it 
indeed helped in order to face India.

It is an explosive mixture of purposes because in 
practice Pakistan had set itself up as a rival of 
India. This is now incompatible with peace and 
normal cooperative relationship between the two 
countries. This contradiction needs to be 
overcome. It can only be done by being conscious 
of all these facts and readiness of both the 
countries to adjust their purposes in a fashion 
that more than merely normal good neighbourly 
relations are needed. The 2002 confrontation 
showed that the old policies were bound to result 
in a clash that ultimately may mean war. The same 
2002 experience shows that, whatever the actual 
reasons, both countries were unable to go to war. 
If other situations of the kind arise, the result 
would be the same. If so, the need for some 
change and serious reformulation of the purpose 
is necessary.

India-Pakistan relationship should clearly be 
seen as an ambivalent one. Its dynamics are that 
either it goes on improving. Or it will go on 
deteriorating. The two countries have been in a 
impasse now for half a century. Hence the three 
wars and many serious skirmishes.

The only purpose that can and should command 
acceptance by both sides is a grassroots-level, 
people-to-people reconciliation and friendship, 
to be promoted by state actions. Let India be as 
great a power as it can become. But it should be 
friends with Pakistan, indeed partners with it. 
For Pakistan, the Kashmir situation has to be 
rethought. Since the two countries are nuclear 
powers, the adversarial stances of both in the 
presence of serious dispute cannot be sustained 
or taken to their logical conclusion. Hence the 
necessity for seriously-intended change. For 
Pakistan, the Kashmir purpose must be to see the 
Kashmiri people safe, secure and free while 
making some progress. If it is has no imperialist 
purpose in view; let the welfare of the Kashmiri 
people be the actual criterion for a serious 
compromise between Indian and Pakistani purposes 
vis-à-vis Kashmir.

Additionally, Pakistan primarily needs economic 
progress if it is not going to be a failed state 
- in about a decade after the American umbrella 
is lifted. Instead of just one aim of Kashmir, 
the welfare, freedom and economic progress of 
Pakistani people need to be its highest priority, 
especially arresting poverty's march. A 
breakthrough will come when the two states 
mutually adjust their Kashmir policies.


______


[2]

Bangladesh Observer
February 19, 2005

Editorial

NOW OR NEVER

Things have finally come to a head. The attack on 
two leading NGOs (Non-Government Organizations), 
BRAC and Grameen Bank, has been the proverbial 
last straw that totally shattered the 
government's claim of being in control of the law 
and order situation. Neither the government nor 
the fundamentalists who are presumed to have 
carried out the attack seem to have any idea of 
the stature or clout the latest victims of 
Islamist ire have globally. Whether one likes it 
not BRAC is not only the largest employer in 
Bangladesh but also the biggest NGO in the world. 
Just to give an indication of BRAC's stature one 
just has to remember that it was the BRAC boss 
Fazle Hossain Abed who read out the keynote paper 
on the World Bank's performance at the official 
celebrations in Madrid on its 50th anniversary. 
It is not only the World Bank but there are many 
other funding agencies in the world where the 
organization is represented at the highest level. 
In fact, it would be difficult to find anything 
else to the contrary. The Grameen Bank has also 
gained great mileage particularly after past 
American president Bill Clinton endorsed it as a 
global model.

The latest incidents are a continuation of what 
has been happening in the country lately. The 
fundamentalists are challenging and destroying 
everything that has been held sacred by the 
Bengalis traditionally. They will leave no stone 
unturned, literally. Jatras, the traditional folk 
theatre of Bangladesh that directly employs at 
least 50,000 people and holds the society 
together has come under attack. The government as 
usual has buckled under and instead of hitting 
back at the troublemakers has rewarded them by 
satisfying  their demands of banning jatras. The 
government is encouraging violence by doing so. 
It will further embolden those who believe in the 
power of the gun and the bomb.

If we were to go by the administration's logic 
the next thing in line for the ban will be NGOs. 
If the adminstration had that power it would have 
done so long time back. Fear of donor reprisal 
holds them (government) back. But the government 
must have underestimated the international 
community's interest in a violence-free 
Bangladesh. But that too should be clear by now. 
The annual donor consortium meeting has been 
substituted for good with a conference on 
governance starting next week in Washington D.C. 
The main agenda of the meeting will be the 
sliding law and order situation and corruption. 
The message should be pretty clear for those 
whose bread and butter depend on foreign aid.

The murder of Shah A M S Kibria, MP, former 
finance minister, top international civil servant 
and senior diplomat has also not only shocked the 
nation but the international community as well. 
It is not every day that one creates a person of 
Kibria's caliber and stature. And his killing is 
not a stray incident. The gradual increase in the 
sophistication of weapons has also been noticed 
with great alarm. It only indicates that those 
behind the attacks on innocent, unarmed civilians 
are increasingly getting powerful. If the 
government fails to do rein them in, we are 
afraid the international community will not sit 
back. Embargoes on aid may follow. There could be 
other punitive measures too. The government may 
well remember that General Pinochet was issued 
with a warrant in Madrid and arrested in London 
for crimes committed in Chile two decades back.

  The world has changed a lot but the both the 
obscurantist who want to take back the country to 
the Middle Ages and the government who are 
encouraging them, even if it is doing so tacitly, 
are equally liable in the eyes of the law.  

To avoid the ultimate sanction the government 
should have acted a long time back. It is already 
too late. Tomorrow it may not stand a chance.

____


[3]


Communalism Combat
February 2005

DEMOCRACY ENDANGERED

  [ Excerpts from a report, 'Democracy, Citizens 
and Migrants: Nationalism in the era of 
Globalisation, Delhi 2005, published by the 
Citizen's Campaign for Preserving Democracy]

If you are a Muslim and Bengali is the language 
you speak, the Delhi police needs no further 
proof that you are an illegal Bangladeshi 
immigrant to be summarily deported

The rising tide of fundamentalist forces all over 
the world has contributed significantly to the 
erosion of democratic traditions in the name of 
'freedom' and 'security'. Fear and paranoia are 
being instigated and manipulated to subdue 
societies into obedience and conformity. 
Cherished ideals of liberty and social and 
political equality are being undermined. We 
believe it to be the responsibility of citizens 
to resist the onslaught of reactionary and 
anti-democratic forces and to contribute what 
they can to preserve, protect, and strengthen 
democracy. The Citizen's Campaign for Preserving 
Democracy is, hopefully, one of the many emergent 
initiatives in this direction within the Indian 
polity.

We have been working in different areas of 
concern: with political prisoners, for victims of 
communal atrocities, and against the oppression 
of minorities, women, and the so-called lower 
castes. Recently, we have tried to bring to 
public attention the propensity of the State to 
declare certain sections of society as outside 
the pale of citizenship. Our investigations over 
the last few months in Delhi, into the issue of 
the purported "Bangladeshi" have revealed that 
there has been extensive violation of the rule of 
law in this matter. Right from round-up and 
arrest, to the supposed 'hearing' and 
deportation, no lawful procedure is being 
followed by the authorities. The entire process 
contributes to and manifests the criminalisation 
and communalisation of the state and the 
corruption of its legal and judicial institutions.

It is not only the human rights of "illegal 
migrants" that is under threat at present. All 
marginalised groups, as well as large sections of 
the informal working class, are being pushed to 
the edges of society. Much of this is being done 
in the name of 'protecting the environment' or 
'beautifying the landscape' or 'preserving our 
heritage'. There is at work a systematic process 
to disenfranchise the poor so that they have no 
voice in democratic governance or decision making 
or constitute a part of the 'political' landscape 
any more. The Citizen's Campaign for Preserving 
Democracy pledges itself to the struggle to 
preserve, protect, and strengthen India's 
democratic traditions. [...]

[ FULL TEXT AT: www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2005/feb05/hrights.html ]

____


[4]

Dawn - 19 February 2005

FRESH LIGHT ON 1984 RIOTS
By Kuldip Nayar

Riots were "organized", some Congressmen 
instigating the anti-social elements to "target 
the Sikh community" without any "meaningful 
intervention" by the police. This is the import 
of the report by former Supreme Court judge G.T. 
Nanavati on the 1984 riots.
Understandably, he is reluctant to reveal the 
contents of the report because the home ministry, 
to which he has submitted it, is yet to place it 
before parliament. But he makes no secret of his 
unhappiness over the nexus that he has found 
between some Congressmen and the police. He 
describes one as exploitative and the other 
in-disciplined.
Nanavati's observations more or less confirm what 
some NGOs had said in the pamphlet, 'Who are the 
guilty?', published soon after the killings in 
Delhi. The pamphlet said that "the attacks on 
members of the Sikh community in Delhi and its 
suburbs during the period, far from being a 
spontaneous expression of 'madness' and of 
popular 'grief and anger' at Mrs (Indira) 
Gandhi's assassination as made out to be by the 
authorities, were the outcome of a well-organized 
plan marked by acts of both deliberate 
commissions and omissions by important 
politicians of the Congress (I) at the top and by 
the authorities in the administration."
Nanavati believes what happened in Delhi can 
happen anywhere in India and at any time because 
the police knows no limits and politicians no 
norms of behaviour. "I have seen the same pattern 
in Gujarat" where he is currently investigating 
into the rioting which had made Muslims as the 
target. He sees many similarities between the 
happenings in Delhi and Gujarat and he has no 
good word either for the politicians or the 
authorities.
"The army was late to arrive," says Nanavati. It 
was not familiar with Delhi and hence took some 
time to get acquainted with the different 
localities. To begin with, according to Nanavati, 
the army wanted to go only into the two areas 
that were adjacent to the Cantonment.
However, he does not comment on the allegation 
that the government had purposely delayed the 
induction of the army. He is particularly harsh 
on the prosecuting agency. "There should be 
something like the National Prosecuting Agency 
for the country" so that prosecution is 
independent, without any outside pressure.
Nanavati has no hesitation in saying that the 
authorities were not obeying instructions from 
above. "I have seen the orders issued by the top 
but there was no implementation."
This is, indeed, a serious charge which suggests 
that the authorities, particularly the police, 
had become itself a mob, without any check or 
control. Connivance is bad enough but the 
participation is something horrendous to 
contemplate in a democratic society.
When it comes to action against the guilty, 
Nanavati expresses helplessness. After 20 years, 
he says, there was no concrete evidence to 
pursue, nothing to bring the killers to book.
Still he has named four, five Congressmen, 
including a member of parliament. Nanavati opened 
five or six cases from the many the police had 
closed but gave up because he found it to be a 
wild goose chase. Two or three cases were going 
on in the court against some police officials, he 
says. Apparently, he had not gone beyond.
Nanavati's report says that the first incident 
took place around 2.30 pm on October 31, 1984, in 
the neighbourhood of All India Institute of 
Medical Sciences when some Sikhs were dragged out 
from their vehicles.
The then president, Zail Singh's motorcade was 
stoned around 5 p.m. Hell broke loose the 
following day, according to Nanavati. He is of 
the view that the fury lasted for one day, 
although some stray incidents took place 
subsequently. This is contrary to the general 
belief that the rioting continued for three days.
Nanavati admits that he is conscious of 
"limitations" in the report. To pick up the 
thread two decades later was not easy. Many 
people had died in the meantime and the court had 
given its verdict on several cases. Still he had 
done his best.
"I have not tried to whitewash anything. The 
report has to be read in its entirety to know 
where the blame lay," says Nanavati. "Some in the 
media were unfair to me because what was used as 
a leak was partly concocted and partly torn out 
of context."
He takes the credit for suggesting two steps for 
the rehabilitation of victims and their families. 
One recommendation is to pay the same 
compensation in other parts of India as has been 
done in Delhi - Rs 3.5 lakh for every person 
killed. The second is to ask the government to 
provide job to the son or any other person of the 
family which lost its breadwinner.
I wish the Nanavati Commission had gone beyond 
the rioting. I had something else in mind when I 
raised the demand in the Rajya Sabha for another 
commission. I wanted something on the lines of 
the Truth and Reconciliation Commission appointed 
by South Africa to go over the period of 
apartheid.
The whites were asked to confess what they did 
and were promised that no action would be taken 
against them. Many came forward and told the 
truth. For example, one said that he tried to 
kill Nelson Mandela.
Had New Delhi gone about the same way, some from 
among the politicians and authorities might have 
come forward to tell the truth. We would not have 
been clueless as we are today even after several 
inquiry reports.
Probably, our laws do not permit this. Even then, 
the commission's terms of reference should have 
been different. None expected any new evidence or 
something clinching to get at the guilty.
Nanavati was also for a similar commission. He 
says that he tried to pursue the same path but 
did not succeed in his efforts. "I asked many 
witnesses and others who appeared before me to 
rise above politics. But it looks as if I did not 
succeed." (The Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee 
was keen on finding the culprits and hanging 
them. It was not willing to condone their guilt 
even if they were to come out with the truth.)
Still we have the right to know why those who 
indulged in the rioting did so and how "the 
organized" killing came to be planned and 
executed. The pattern in Delhi and elsewhere was 
the same: looting and burning the property and 
then setting it on fire and even killing or 
burning the owners and occupants along.
The report, I am afraid, may not satisfy the Sikh 
community that has been wronged. But then even 
the most critical report cannot heal the wounds. 
Yet the government owes an explanation to the 
Sikhs or, more so, to the country.
Let the Prime Minister say in parliament at the 
next session that however limited the Nanavati 
report, the government seeks forgiveness from the 
nation and the victimized community. This will be 
statesmanship even though it may not serve the 
calls of politics.
The writer is a leading columnist based in New Delhi.

______


[5]

Outlook Magazine | Feb 28, 2005

WHO PULLED THE TRIGGER...DIDN'T WE ALL?
Must we in our hypernationalism take a man who 
has already suffered enough and reduce him to 
fish bait? Can we-and our media-stop judging 
S.A.R. Geelani

by Arundhati Roy

Several media reports, including the Outlook 
story about the February 8 attempted 
assassination of S.A.R. Geelani, suggest that I 
am among those who have accused the Delhi Police 
of carrying out the attack. Not true. While 
several people have made this accusation, I'm not 
one of them. I'm not in the business of making 
unsubstantiated allegations. What I said was that 
since the Special Cell of the Delhi Police has 
shadowed Geelani and kept him under close 
surveillance, they ought to know who was 
involved. Of course Geelani himself, both before 
and after this attack, has placed on record the 
fact that he feared for his life and that the 
source of his fear was the Special Cell.

Given the seriousness of the issue, and as a 
member of the All India Defence Committee for 
S.A.R. Geelani, I would like to put the event 
back into a context that is being rapidly 
forgotten.
There can be no doubt that the investigation into 
the December 13, 2001, attack on Parliament has 
been shabbily handled by the Delhi Police, indeed 
sinisterly so. We still do not know who planned 
the attack, or even the names and the real 
identities of the five militants who were killed 
outside the Parliament building on that day. At 
the time, the Delhi Police were obviously under 
pressure to produce results. And produce results 
they did. Riding the popular wave of 
hypernationalism, they disregarded procedure, 
legality and, of course, even basic integrity. 
The evidence against the accused, in particular 
S.A.R. Geelani, was full of loopholes, some of it 
was manufactured. On the basis of this faulty 
evidence, he was arrested and brutally tortured.

He spent a nightmarish year in prison, most of it 
under a death sentence. He was released after 
being acquitted by the Delhi High Court. (In the 
din about Geelani, it is easy and convenient to 
forget that thousands of people in Kashmir and 
the Northeastern states are being similarly 
treated by the police and security forces.)

I  have no idea who pumped those bullets into 
S.A.R. Geelani. However, in deference to the 
general public unease with the Special Cell, the 
investigation ought to be conducted by an agency 
other than the Delhi Police. While it may be 
unfair to accuse them without evidence, they 
certainly cannot be considered above suspicion, 
and must be investigated. Their bullying, 
ridiculous accusations against Geelani's lawyer, 
Nandita Haksar, the red herring they have floated 
about Geelani's sweater and 'missing' coat, their 
harassment of his family and their bizarre 
treatment of him as a suspect in the attempted 
assassination of himself-all this is doing very 
little to bolster their declarations of innocence.
Unfortunately, it is not the Delhi Police alone 
who behaved in underhand, sordid ways. During the 
trial of the Parliament attack case, several 
major national dailies and mainstream TV channels 
published and broadcast a plethora of lies about 
Geelani and his co-accused, without ever checking 
their facts. And now once again, the stage seems 
to be set for a repeat performance in which 
people make speculative accusations, the police 
issue baseless statements and the media conducts 
meaningless opinion polls by sms. Motives are 
being attributed and rumours spread by 
commentators, columnists, fledgling reporters and 
ignorant talk show hosts (and guests) busy trying 
to sound cool and knowledgeable, with no concern 
for how their idle and often malevolent boy-talk 
might affect real people's lives. Or am I being 
naive? Perhaps it's actually deliberate? Take, 
for example, the suggestion that the killer's 
motive was revenge-that Mohammed Afzal and 
Shaukat Hussain Guru (co-accused in the case) 
somehow masterminded the attack from their 
high-security cells in Tihar Jail's death row. Is 
it a strategy designed to sow divisiveness and 
discord in some notional "terrorist camp"? Is it 
designed to ensure that S.

A.R. Geelani will never be safe? Revenge for 
what? For the fact that despite being tortured 
Geelani refused to sign a confession or implicate 
anybody else in order to save himself?
On an ndtv chat show, two guests-the director of 
a jingoistic Bollywood film about Kashmir and an 
MP from Jammu-discussed the Geelani case. The 
film director said that most Kashmiri militants 
who do time in prison become police informers 
when they're released, and are routinely targeted 
by militants. The MP went on to add that he knew 
for a fact that militants made it a point to 
assassinate surrendered militants-not a single 
surrendered militant is allowed to survive, he 
said knowledgeably. Now neither observation is a 
gem of wisdom in and of itself-but bandied about 
in this context, it all becomes pretty wicked. 
Not surprisingly, the third guest on the show, 
Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, spokesman for the BJP, 
seized on this thesis with discernible pleasure.
So now, is it no longer enough for the media to 
continue to portray Geelani as a wily terrorist 
who somehow escaped the long hand of the law 
because of 'insufficient evidence'? Must he also 
be portrayed as a surrendered militant and a 
police informer? Is it not enough that he has 
been tortured, imprisoned and mistreated by the 
police and various other institutions of our 
vibrant democracy? Must he now be turned into 
fish bait, and made vulnerable to some 
suggestible, easily persuaded militant as well?
Regardless of who pulled the trigger on the 
evening of February 8, the fact is that a number 
of people are responsible for what happens to 
S.A.R. Geelani and his young family: those who 
(with no evidence) accused him of masterminding 
the Parliament attack; those who published 
falsehoods about him (and continue to do so); 
those who harass him and his family (and continue 
to do so) even after he was acquitted by the high 
court; those who made, broadcast (Zee TV) and 
endorsed (A.B. Vajpayee, L.K. Advani) a film 
about the attack on Parliament which claimed to 
be the truth but was based entirely on the Delhi 
Police version of the event. (The film was 
broadcast a few days before the sessions court 
sentenced Geelani, Afzal and Shaukat Guru to 
death).
Geelani and his family have suffered enough. Can 
we stop using them to fuel our crude patriotic 
fantasies and simple-minded cloak-and-dagger 
theses?
That's it from me folks. 'Bye now. Let the 
insults roll. Oh look! Here's one already...


Dear Sir
Once again you have subjected us to another of Ms 
Roy's pointless one-sided diatribes. As usual she 
flays us with her passion and poetry but no 
facts. When will she understand the difference 
between fiction and fact? Why can't she go back 
to writing award-winning children's books and 
leave us in peace? She is clearly a supporter of 
Islamic terrorism. She should try living behind a 
burqa and see what it feels like. Geelani and his 
ilk belong in Guantanamo Bay. As for Ms Roy and 
her ilk-they are taking unnecessary advantage of 
Indian democracy. She is an anti-Indian, 
anti-American anti-national. Moreover she is also 
anti-development. The only thing she is "pro" is 
publicity. She wants to take us back into the 
Bullock Cart Age. There is no place for people 
like this in the New India-the foremost, emerging 
international superpower.
india.patriot at siliconvalley.usa


______


[6]


SCIENCE, SCIENTISTS AND SCIENCE MOVEMENTS IN 
INDIA -- a comment on Pervez Hoodbhoy's  'India 
Through Pakistani Eyes' (SACW - 18 February 2005)

by Meera Nanda

February 19, 2005

Dear Pervez:  Thanks to this wonderful instrument of communication
called the internet, I happened to come across your account of your
travels in India.

I am glad you took the time to write down your impressions. To see India
through your eyes is very instructive.  You capture India s many
strengths and its many weaknesses very well.

I wanted to briefly comment on your observations regarding science in
India.

You very astutely noticed some contradictory tendencies in the
scientific community, both among scientists working in
research/'teaching institutions and those engaged in science for the
people movements.

Some of what you report affirms what I have been writing about and what
I talked about in my presentation in the seminar in Paris, where you
were one of the participants.

1.

First, the issue of peoples' science movements (PSM). It is true that
India is practically exploding with all kinds of new social movements
with many innovative methods of social protest and resistance against
state and capital. As you notice, science for the people movements are
"sweeping through towns and villages." As you know, this is not a new
phenomenon. Well known, grass-roots people's science movements have been
there for many decades.  Through all kinds of lectures, demonstrations,
street theater and other vernacular media, dedicated men and women do
their best to convey awareness of,  and excitement about, modern
science. In my younger days, I myself was totally enraptured by science
movements. They played a substantial role in my political awakening.

But it is important to ask some tough questions. What has been the
record? What is the target of these science movements? What has been
their lasting impact?

You hit the nail on the head when you write:   "While I found myself
admiring the energetic popular science movements, I was disappointed
that they pay relatively little attention to anti-scientific
superstitions that pervade Indian society."

Exactly!! 

Science for the people movements have not directly engaged with
religious worldviews, rituals and prejudices. It is necessary but not
sufficient, in my opinion, to teach naturalistic explanations of natural
phenomena in general to the people in everyday settings. But it is
equally important to use these naturalistic explanations to directly
challenge religious superstitions and prejudices. It is important,
indeed, not just to address ordinary people and children to motivate
them to think scientifically, it is important to challenge the priests,
the pandits, the astrologers directly. Nearly everyday, there is some
outrage or the other coming from the religious establishment which, in
India, is full of charlatans of the Vedantic orders (for the more
sophisticated) and god-men and other frauds at the folk level. By and
large, mainstream Indian science movements have not engaged with the
religious establishment.  That has been left to tired old "rationalist
associations" which hardly have any constituency. ( I admire them for
their courage and perseverance. But they are really voices in the
wilderness. Neither the old organized left nor the new social movements
on behalf of women, environment and such have established working
relations with them. )

Knowing your work, I know that you will agree that it is important to
enthuse and enlighten the young about scientific matters. It is a noble
task.  But as your comments make it clear, you agree that the harder
part is to take the fight to the religious ideologues, to challenge
their ways of thinking. Without that, naturalism and scientific temper
hang in thin air as abstractions. They have to be employed as weapons
against religion. Indian science movements have not fought that fight.

Why have PSMs  not taken the fight to the priests and the temples?  I
have my own views about it, which I have tried to develop in *Prophets
Facing Backward.* I believe that the nativist turn by an important
segments of Gandhian social activists and intellectuals made it
unfashionable to question tradition and religion. It became almost
obligatory to defend the "wisdom" of the masses, as opposed to the
"violence" of modern scientific ideas themselves. This kind of thinking
moved the focus to "safer" targets, like big development projects, MNCs
and such in which *modern*  technology and modern institutions were the
main culprits and people's traditions the source of resistance. . (I am
not suggesting that the left should not oppose MNCs  and big development
projects, as and when they need to be opposed.. But they have to be
opposed while defending a progressive, secular worldview; not in order
to defend the "people's wisdom" which contains many inherited prejudices
and superstitions.) Science movements imbibed the populism and cultural
traditionalism of leading Gandhian/postcolonial intellectuals who took a
highly anti-modernist position for nearly three decades, starting around
late 1970s (coinciding with Indira Gandhi's emergency). It is only the
shock of Hindutva that cooled down this passion for traditions.

Another minor but important point about science for the people
movements: In the absence of regular schools which can teach elementary
science in a non-religious idiom, all the many campaigns to "bring
science to the people" are mere band-aids. Yes, you try enthuse the
young with the spirit of science. Then what? What happens when your
movement moves on?  What do these kids do?

Bringing science to the people, I have come to believe, ought to be part
of the larger responsibility of the government to bring education to the
people. NGOs and people's movements are no substitutes for solid,
rigorous education. Rather than start countless number of NGO-run
schools, it would perhaps be more meaningful for the popular movements
to agitate for the government to fulfill its obligation to provide
decent, non-sectarian, secular elementary education to all children,
regardless of their ability to pay for it. Scientific education has to
be treated as a fundamental right.

					2.

Turning now to your other very interesting observation regarding
scientists themselves: you write  "Attitudes of Indian scientists
towards science are conservative. Progress through science is an
immensely popular notion in India, stressed both by past and present
leaders. But what is science understood to be? I was a little jolted
upon reading Nehru's words, written in stone at the entrance to the
Jawaharlal Nehru Institute for Advanced Research in Bangalore: "I too
have worshipped at the shrine of science". The notion of "worship" and
"shrine of science" do not go well with the modern science and the
scientific temper. Science is about challenging - not worshipping.  But
science in India is largely seen as an instrument that enhances
productive capabilities, and not as a transformational tool for
producing an informed, rational society."

Exactly!!

This is precisely what I was trying to say in my Paris talk when I
suggested - and you disagreed - that Indian scientists had not done
enough to challenge Hindutva's obscurantism.  Yes, scientists came out
to oppose astrology. But it was too little and too late. For so long,
scientists - especially physicists and biologists - have not only kept
silent on important matters of scientific method and naturalism, many of
them have actively perpetuated the myth that the Vedantic world view of
consciousness permeating matter has been affirmed by modern science of
physics and biology. They have, indeed, treated science as just another
form of Vedantic philosophy.

Exact numbers are simply not available -for no one is keeping count -
but I challenge you: visit ANY modern guru or ashram, be it the
reformist Ramakrishna Mission or a charlatan such as Sai Baba. You will
find well-educated, well-known scientists, with Ph.D.s in advanced
topics in cutting edge sciences drinking in the obscurantism of these
gurus. (Indeed, there is a famous confession by a professor of IIT who
was advised by monks of Ramakrishna Mission to teach physics in IIT as a
chapter of Advaita Vedanta -which he proudly did).

India is home of the world's third largest scientific workforce. Yet, in
India you will find most obscurantist teachings which verge on medieval
vitalism  ( and New Age obscurantism) -- i .e.  nature as animated by a
dis-embodied life force which has the attributes of consciousness --
being peddled by any number of modern  gurus who cater to the upper
class, English educated urbanites. I challenge you to find me even one
sustained critique of these ideas from the Indian scientific community.
There isn't any. There was a tradition of Marxist philosophy of science
which emphasized sensory experience and naturalism to question the
soul-stuff. But it died when its major proponent (Debiprasad
Chattopadhyaya) died. Since then, the trend has been in the other
direction: You find many more scientists, with their Ph.D.s dangling
after their names, affirming the scientific status of  the wisdom of
Vedic sages.

Indeed, I have come to believe that rather than take science to the
people, Indian scientists first need to develop the scientific temper of
their own class/upper caste, pampered community.

Indian science is extremely under-developed when it comes to
establishing a culture of rational thought. Indian scientists worship at
the altar of science without using it to challenge the traditions they
have inherited.

Their silence has been costly, for it has allowed Hindutva nationalists
to perpetuate the ridiculous claim that Vedic wisdom is true because it
has been affirmed by modern science. (Which respectable, empirically
warranted theory of physics or biology affirms the existence of
consciousness in matter, as Vedanta teaches?? Except for fringe
scientists, hardly anyone in the scientific community interprets quantum
mechanics, evolutionary theory or empirical studies of consciousness to
defend the kind of spirit suffused universe Hindu gurus and
intellectuals celebrate as "scientific."

Neo-Hindu philosophers and Hindu nationalists have managed to erase all
boundaries between mystical experiences and properly scientific (i.e.
sensory) experiences. This has allowed them to declare Hinduism to be a
religion of "experience" and "reason" and therefore superior to
irrational creeds like Christianity and Islam which depend upon faith
and revelation.   While they are overly eager to demolish the personal
God of Abrahamic faith, Hindu intellectuals have refused to cast a
critical look at the Vedantic conception of God as disembodied
soul-stuff. If God as a person is dead, then so is God as Brahman, the
impersonal Absolute consciousness.

By and large, Indian scientists have either bought into the myth of
modern science converging with Vedantic conception of a spiritual
cosmos, or they have remained silent. But silence in the face of
obscurantism is immoral.

I just thought of sharing these thoughts with you. I hope we will
continue to discuss these ideas in future. With my best regards  

Meera Nanda



______



[7]    [UPCOMING EVENTS]

(i)

SAHMAT
8, Vithalbhai Patel House, Rafi Marg,New Delhi-110001
Telephone- 3711276/ 3351424/23710348
e-mail: sahmat@ vsnl.com

19.2.2005

Dear friend

A road is being named after the late Kafi Azmi, a 
people's poet on 22nd February at 2.30pm at Delhi 
Public School, R.K.Puram, New Delhi. Shri Somnath 
Chatterjee, Speaker Lok Sabha will be the chief 
guest. A.B.Burdhan, Mr. Manmohan Singh, Javed 
Akhtar and Shaban Azmi will be present on the 
occasion.

Please make it convenient to attend.

SAHMAT

_____

(ii)

CASTE AND CLASS

The Managing Committee extends to you a warm 
invitation to attend a seminar organised by 
Indian School of Social Sciences, Mumbai, to 
commemorate the late comrade B. T. Ranadive

Venue: Kashinath Dhuru Hall, Dadar (W. Rly)
Day & Date: Friday, 25th February 2005
Time: 5.30 p.m.

Speakers:

Com Prabhakar Sanzgiri
Maharashtra  State Committee CPI(M)

Shri Premanand Rupawate
Jt. Secretary, Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee

Smt. Rekha Thakur
Bharatiya Republican Party

Dr Rajenra Vora
Professor of Political Science, University of Pune, will preside

S. M Paranjape
(Secretary)
Indian School of Social Sciences, Mumbai
Tel: 28850300 / 9323567124

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

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.