SACW | 14 April 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire  | 14 April,  2005

[1]  UN Secretary General Rebuffed by 
pro-Islamist coalition (IHEU Press Release  )
[2]  Bangladesh: Ensure security of Ahmadiyyas: ASK
[3]  Kashmir /  India: Are we not then a fickle lot? (Jawed Naqvi)
[4]  'Talibanization' Fears in Pakistan (Owais Tohid)
[5]  Letters to the Editor - Dawn (Mukul Dube)
[6]  India: Will Lotus Bloom or Wither? Twenty 
Five years of Bharatiya Janata Party (Ram 
Puniyani)
[7]  India - China:
(i) The Road to China (Sanjib Baruah)
(ii) Go For A Slight Change of Route (Tansen Sen)
[8]  Announcements:
(i) James Ivory in Conversation (New York, April 14)
(ii)  Request re upcoming exhibition by ANHAD (New Delhi)
(iii) Film Screening screening of WAPSI (New Delhi, April 16)
(iv) US Hegemony and South Asia - A talk by Tariq 
Ali (New Westminster, BC [Canada] April 29)


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

[1]

International Humanist and Ethical Union
1, Gower Street, London Wc1E 6Hd, U.K.


For Immediate Release                         
		         Palais des Nations, 
Geneva
12th April 2005

PRESS RELEASE


UN SECRETARY GENERAL REBUFFED BY PRO-ISLAMIST COALITION

Less that a week after UN Secretary General Kofi 
Annan warned the UN Commission on Human Rights 
meeting in Geneva that its ability to perform its 
tasks had been undermined by the "politicization 
of its sessions and the selectivity of its work", 
the Commission today accepted by 31 votes to 16 
an extraordinarily pro-Islamist resolution 
sponsored by Pakistan on behalf of the 57 states 
of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC).

The  resolution, innocuously entitled "Combating 
Defamation of Religions" expressed "deep concern 
that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated 
with human rights violations and terrorism" yet 
failed to condemn, or even mention, those who 
defame a religion by carrying out acts of 
violence in its name.

The approval of this resolution is likely to 
further damage the already fragile reputation of 
the Commission, and give new voice to those 
supporting the Secretary General's proposal for 
the Commission to be wound up and replaced by a 
Human Rights Council, open only to states fully 
committed to human rights.

The vote followed an urgent appeal by IHEU on 7th 
April to the delegations of the 53 member states 
not to accept the draft resolution without 
inserting a paragraph calling upon the 
international community "to condemn all who 
defame religion by claiming to kill in the name 
of their religion or God." This appeal went 
unheeded.

A similar resolution was passed by the Commission 
in 2004, but by a smaller margin. This year, 
however, the sponsors, no doubt buoyed up by last 
year's success, added a worrying new clause 
stressing: "the need of effectively combating 
defamation of all religions, Islam and Muslims in 
particular, especially in human rights forums". 
IHEU believes this is a clear warning to expect 
attempts to silence any discussion of human 
rights abuse by Islamic states at the Human 
Rights Commission in the future.

Responding to today's news, IHEU President, Roy Brown said:
"The irony of the OIC calling for tolerance and 
respect for all religions and their value systems 
appears to have escaped most of the states voting 
for this resolution", adding: "The Islamic states 
would do well to practice tolerance and respect 
for diversity at home before preaching about it 
at the UN". He went on to say that "attempting to 
silence criticism of Islamic abuse of human 
rights while failing to condemn those who kill in 
the name of Islam speaks volumes for what this 
issue is really about".

Notes:

IHEU is the world umbrella organization for 
Humanist, Secularist, Freethought and Ethical 
Culture organizations, with 95 member 
organizations in 35 countries.

In a statement to the 61st Session of the 
Commission on Human Rights on Tuesday April 5th, 
[copy attached], IHEU reiterated its long 
standing defence of freedom of religion and 
belief.

However, IHEU and its member organizations are 
opposed to all moves aimed at stifling legitimate 
criticism of any religion or its practices, 
particularly in the field of human rights.

For further information please contact:
Roy Brown, President, IHEU on +41 79 212 5603, or
Babu Gogineni, Executive Director IHEU on +44 207 631 3170 or +44 7801 570 150



Statement by Main Representative Roy Brown, Tuesday 5 April 2005
Commission on Human Rights: 61st Session.   (14 March - 22 April 2005)
Freedom of Expression (item 11c) and Religious Tolerance (item 11e)

[Only the words in bold were actually spoken, the 
words in square brackets [] were not]

Mr Chairman.

The International Humanist and Ethical Union 
wishes to thank the Special Rapporteur [on 
contemporary forms of racism, racial 
discrimination, xenophobia and related 
intolerance] for his report on defamation of 
religions [E/CN.4/2005/18/Add.4] and particularly 
for his recommendations to the various religious 
communities to promote dialogue with other 
cultures and religious traditions. The world is 
currently witnessing an upsurge of religious 
conflict, and history shows that the greatest 
enemy of religion has always been another 
religion.

In the context of the right to freedom of 
expression, [item 11.c] and religious intolerance 
[item 11.e], however, we wish to put on record 
our objection to the paragraph of the report in 
which the Special Rapporteur speaks of:
"a tradition of secularism that denies religions 
the possibility if not the right to play a role 
in public life. This form of prejudice against 
Christians or ideas based on religion, which 
exists both in Europe and the United States, 
mainly concerns questions relating to sex, 
marriage and the family".
In this, the Special Rapporteur appears to have 
confused secular opposition to the imposition of 
dogmatic Christian views on western society, with 
discrimination against Christians, and even to 
have confused secular protection of freedom of 
conscience and support for the separation of 
religion and state, with prejudice against 
religion.

Secularism should not be confused with militant 
atheism. We urge the Commission to recognise that 
a truly secular society - one that is neutral in 
respect of all religions - is a necessary 
safeguard against religious intolerance - 
discriminating against none and
favouring none. The United Nations is itself a shining example of secularism.


Humanists and Secularists have long been among 
the most stalwart defenders of freedom of 
religion or belief. [The great Indian Humanist 
and jurist VM Tarkunde rightly saw secularism as 
a solvent to help reduce religious conflict in a 
multicultural society.] The alternative to 
secularism is state religion which, by 
definition, favours one system of belief over all 
others. Democracy must mean more that the 
dictatorship of the majority. In states where one 
religion is dominant, the rights of minorities 
must have constitutional safeguards.

In a statement to the [60th session of the] 
Commission last year [under agenda item 14] we 
urged the Commission to recognise the distinction 
between defamation of a religion and criticism of 
its doctrine and practices, and the publication 
of academic research into its origins and 
history. Concerns about defamation must not be 
permitted to stifle honest inquiry and freedom of 
expression.

Freedom of expression is a basic freedom that we 
must all work to protect and preserve. Everyone 
has the right to speak and act according to their 
conscience, provided only that they respect the 
right of others to do the same.

Thank you.

_______


[2]

The Daily Star April 14, 2005

ENSURE SECURITY OF AHMADIYYAS: ASK
Staff Correspondent
The Ain O Salish Kendra (Ask), a legal aid forum, 
yesterday demanded security of the Ahmadiyya 
Muslim Jamaat across the country.

In a statement, the Ask protested the move of the 
International Khatme Nabuyat Movement (IKNM) to 
lay siege to Ahmadiyya Mosque at Sundarban 
village under Shyamnagar upazila in Satkhira 
district on April 17.

IKNM Chairman Noor Hossain Nurani has announced the siege programme.

The Ask said Islami bigots have been repeatedly 
torturing and attacking Ahmadiyya Muslims, and 
occupying their mosques.

Due to governments' inaction followed by direct 
or indirect shelter to Islami bigots, the 
situation is deteriorating fast, it added.

The ASK urged the law enforcement agencies to 
remain alert to foil the IKNM's move.

The South Asian People's Union against 
Fundamentalism and Communalism has also condemned 
the IKNM's threat to lay siege to the Ahmadiyya 
Mosque at Satkhira village.

In a statement, the union leaders said the 
Bangladesh wing of Pakistan-based IKNM has been 
violating the constitution by attacking Ahmadiyya 
mosques and people repeatedly.

Signatories to the statement included National 
Professor Kabir Chowdhury, Barrister Shawkat Ali 
Khan, Justice KM Sobhan, and Julfikar Ali Manik.


______


[3]


Dawn - April 11, 2005

ARE WE NOT THEN A FICKLE LOT?

By Jawed Naqvi

When the Kashmir buses were about to roll last 
week, Yasin Malik was recovering in a private 
hospital in Delhi from a life-threatening 
surgery. Malik has had a nightmarish medical 
ordeal since his incarceration in Indian jails, 
and torture there.
Nursing him caringly was Syed Abdur Rehman 
Geelani, himself living under the shadow of 
death. Geelani recently survived a mysterious 
assassination attempt when bullets were pumped 
into his body by an as yet unidentified gunman. 
Three of the bullets are still lodged inside, one 
menacingly close to the spine.
But Geelani faces a far bigger worry than the 
mysterious assassins. The Government of India, 
through its prosecuting agencies, has petitioned 
the Supreme Court to overturn the High Court's 
verdict that freed him in the attack on the 
Indian parliament on December 13, 2001. In 
theory, at least, a death sentence is still 
possible.
Unlike the hard-line militants and religious 
leaders who see the bus as a ruse for India and 
Pakistan to forget about the Kashmir issue, 
Malik, as a respected resistance chief opposed to 
Indian rule in Jammu and Kashmir, was inclined to 
see in it an opportunity to unite his people on 
both sides of the LoC.
On Thursday, as Indian leaders addressed a 
sparsely attended meeting inside the heavily 
fortified Sher-e-Kashmir stadium in Srinagar, 
Malik saw that rare opportunity being frittered 
away. No one in Kashmir was seriously interested 
in what the Indian prime minister or the Congress 
president had to say. Their presence was believed 
to be ill-advised.
Were it allowed to be an all Kashmiri affair as 
it should rightly be, Malik believes that a 
veritable peace procession was set to line the 
bus from Srinagar to Uri. "It would have taken 10 
days to reach Uri. People would have kissed it 
and showered it with love and prayers at every 
inch of the journey," says Malik.
According to him, thousands of ordinary Kashmiris 
were ready to come to the street to walk with the 
bus all the way to the LoC. Malik should know 
since he personally collected nearly two million 
signatures of his fellow Kashmiris recently, of 
those who want to assert their right to be 
included in future India-Pakistan peace talks 
concerning their homeland.
The bus has, therefore, clearly raised a few 
embarrassing questions for both India and 
Pakistan, including an old and prickly one. Just 
who controls the levers of war and peace, of 
euphoria and hysteria in the subcontinent? This 
question was posed by writer activist Arundhati 
Roy during the Vajpayee-BJP rule but still awaits 
an answer in the Manmohan-Congress era.
Add another question: if peace niks have taken 
over in both countries today as seems to be the 
apparent case, where have all the hawks gone? 
Have they had a change of heart? If so, are they 
contrite today about the 2002 stretch of blood 
curdling essays and hostile glares?
The grudging answer to Arundhati's question is 
that the nation-states of India and Pakistan, 
like all other nation-states play the control 
game with their citizens.
Claims that people on both sides want peace may 
be true. But did they not want peace in 1965 or 
1971 or during the Kargil stand off, or in 2002? 
If so where were all the public displays of love 
and amity we see today? If not then what has 
changed?
Did the people not support the acquisition of 
atom bombs by their countries in 1998, in India's 
case even in 1974? Is it not possible that people 
are a bit like the crowd seen in Shakespeare, 
swayed by the oratory of a Brutus now and a Mark 
Antony then? Are we not then a fickle lot, easy 
to manipulate by a dictator the other day, by a 
half-baked democrat today and by a 
dyed-in-the-wool fascist tomorrow?
Some well-meaning and highly respected columnists 
have been gushing about the bus service. They see 
in it hope for the future as nothing else ever 
allowed them to see.
"It is only very rarely that nations and 
governments create history in ways that 
immediately matter to their people and even 
empower them," wrote a usually level-headed 
Indian analyst who shall remain unnamed here.
"The launching of the two-way 
Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service is without 
doubt one of those very rare occasions. The 
process reached a path-breaking moment when 30 
Pakistanis crossed the Line of Control at Kaman, 
soon followed by 19 Indians approaching from the 
opposite direction."
Well if 30 Pakistanis and 19 Indians crossed the 
LoC, where were the Kashmiris? Or have we already 
moved on to the next question, having resolved 
the issue of the identity of those who live in a 
land called Kashmir? That is the kind of question 
that Yasin Malik was glued to in his hospital bed 
when the buses rolled out. That is the kind of 
question S.A.R. Geelani would be pondering even 
as the Supreme Court hears a potentially 
calamitous petition that could bring him death.
* * * * *
A book is just out on a mysterious event that 
sent India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear 
war. "December 13: Terror over Democracy" by 
Nirmalangshu Mukherji, a philosophy teacher at 
Delhi University, is a painstaking research of 
court documents and newspaper clippings of the 
case in which four people were accused of 
plotting to attack the Indian parliament on 
December 13, 2001.
The book seeks to describe how the media, the 
police, the political executive and the judiciary 
acted in complicity to promote a largely unproven 
story. As a result, says Mukherjee, the question 
'who attacked the Indian parliament" remained 
unanswered, and the human rights of the accused 
were seriously violated.
An introduction by Professor Noam Chomsky lends 
more authority to the book. "We cannot 
underestimate the threat of terror, or the 
cynicisms of centres of powers in pursuit of 
their own often despicable ends," writes Chomsky. 
It is within this context that we should consider 
a detailed investigation carried out in this 
important and careful study, he says.
"And it is within the same context, I think, that 
the people of India should respond constructively 
to the call for a serious parliamentary inquiry 
into what actually happened and its roots."
One of the puzzles the book dwells on is that 
although Pakistan's intelligence agencies were 
supposed to have ordered the attack, it strangely 
and inexplicably turned out that the same groups 
named in it by India were the ones who targeted 
President Musharraf at least twice and nearly got 
him.

______


[4]

The Christian Science Monitor - April 13, 2005

'TALIBANIZATION' FEARS IN PAKISTAN
Activists blocked a co-ed road race last week, as 
religious parties geared up for local elections 
in July.
By Owais Tohid | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - More than five years since 
President Pervez Musharraf's coup, religious 
extremists are moving to the forefront in 
challenging Pakistan's political order.

Last week, hundreds of extremist demonstrators 
armed with bamboo sticks blocked a 10K road race 
near the finish line to protest the participation 
of women runners. A gun battle with police 
ensued, leaving several people wounded.

In a surprise to many here, the incident took 
place not in the conservative tribal areas, but 
in the country's Punjab heartland. In reaction, 
protesters picketed Parliament Monday, calling on 
the government to "save the society from 
Talibanization."

Through strikes, protests, and the passage of 
strict local ordinances, Pakistan's religious 
parties have grown more brazen in their challenge 
to the secularization central to President 
Musharraf's rule. Political analysts are 
concerned that the sidelining of mainstream 
parties under may be aiding the radicals in the 
run-up to local elections in July.

"There is a perception among the think tanks in 
Washington and Pakistan that both the main 
opposition parties should be given some room, as 
their absence would strengthen politically the 
extremist parties," says Ayesha Haroon, editor of 
Pakistan's The Nation newspaper. "We may see a 
more radical path if democratic outlets are not 
relaxed."

Pakistan's two previous prime ministers, Benazir 
Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, live in exile. But in a 
move widely seen as a positive step toward 
restoring democracy, Ms. Bhutto's husband was 
recently released from prison and plans to run 
her party's affairs in Pakistan.

Mr. Sharif, meanwhile, by some accounts remains 
barred from politics for another five years. But 
he still acts as leader of his mainstream party. 
To prevent losing his conservative constituency 
to the religious parties, he has thrown his 
backing behind a nationwide strike called this 
month by the religious parties.

'Enlightened moderation'

The strikers are protesting President Musharraf's 
"enlightened moderation" program aimed at 
bringing liberal values to the society and 
improving the image of Pakistan.

"Pakistani people are Islamic and they will not 
allow the government to contradict Islamic 
teachings," says Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, central 
leader of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), an 
alliance of religious extremist parties. "The 
enlightenment and moderation are to promote 
Western culture."

The religious parties gained political victories 
in the wake of the US wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.

The MMA now rules the Frontier Province and 
emerged as a major coalition in the southwestern 
Balochistan Province.

"The mullahs have already gained political power 
after attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq by 
capitalizing anti-US sentiments and are now 
flexing their muscles on social issues to capture 
the society," says Shafqat Mehmood, a 
Lahore-based analyst and a columnist with the 
English-language newspaper, The News.

In some areas, strict Islamic laws have 
introduced gender segregation in schools, banned 
music, and prevented male medical technicians 
from examining women.

Activists have also defaced billboards that show 
women models. Religious political leaders also 
have plans to implement a hisba law, which would 
set up a religious police force along the lines 
of the ousted Taliban.

Now Pakistan's religious parties want to extend 
their gains nationwide through the local 
government elections scheduled for July.

"They just want to gain political mileage by 
distorting religion and its values, and are 
aiming for the local government polls to get hold 
of administrative control of the society," says 
Aamir Liaquat, the state minister for religious 
affairs.

The clean-shaven, young minister also hosts a 
popular religious TV program, ALIM ONLINE. 
"Musharraf's vision is to promote moderate 
thinking and help build a society according to 
Islamic values where these extremists cannot 
impose their archaic ideas at gunpoint."

Reform, then reversal

But Musharraf's vision of enlightened moderation 
has many hurdles to clear in a country where 
extremists long enjoyed the support of successive 
governments and the powerful military 
establishment.

And Musharraf's government has been criticized by 
rights activists and the media for backing off 
previously announced reforms, including the 
abolishment of the draconian Hudood Ordinances, a 
blasphemy law, and a separate column for religion 
in passports.

Some argue that the "flip-flops" further strengthen extremists.

"The mullahs have been getting more powerful, 
partly because of anti-US sentiments and also due 
to the government's backtracking on liberal 
stances that it took on social issues. It exposes 
the chinks in the vision of enlightened 
moderation," says analyst Mehmood.

For protesting rights activists, Musharraf needs 
to come down hard on the extremists to cleanse 
the society.

"The time has come for Musharraf to take the 
mullahs by the beard," says activist Ambreen. "If 
he wants our support then he should not come 
under the pressures of mullahs. Only then can he 
steer his ship out of the currents of 
fundamentalism towards enlightened shores."


______


[5]

Subject: Letters to Editor DAWN
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 07:46:30 +0530
From: Mukul Dube
To: letters at dawn.com

Editor, Dawn,

In your issue of 8 April, Ayaz Amir writes, "The more elusive democracy
and economic progress prove, the greater the temptation to seek refuge
behind the screen of Islam." To begin with, let us replace "Islam" here
with "religion". Next, let us look at what happened in India in the last
few years.

Relative to Pakistan, India has always had more democracy and more
economic progress. This, at any rate, is what several of my Pakistani
friends say and have said to me over the years; and it is also the view
held by much of the world. How, then, are we to explain the rise of
"Hindu" fundamentalist forces which perpetrated at least as much
mischief in the name of religion as anyone has ever done at any place?

Perhaps we should look beyond democracy and economic progress; or
perhaps we should re-consider our definitions of them.

Mukul Dube
D-504 Purvasha Anand Lok .. Mayur Vihar 1 .. Delhi 110091


______


[6]

WILL LOTUS BLOOM OR WITHER?
TWENTY FIVE YEARS OF BHARATIYA JANATA PARTY

Ram Puniyani

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has completed twenty five years on this sixth
April, 2005. Founded in 1980 on the plank of Gandhian Socialism it has
traveled a long journey.
BJP’s formation itself revealed a lot about its loyalties and political
agenda. Prior to the imposition of much dreaded emergency (1975) its
previous edition, Jan Sangh, its parent organization RSS and its
associates were permitted to join the JP movement (1975). This was a God
sent opportunity for this outfit, which was being looked down upon by
broad sections of Indian people for their involvement in murder of the
father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi. It was like having a bath in Ganges
for them.

In due course it dissolved itself into the coalition of forces which came
up as Janata Party, which romped to victory in the elections held after
the emergency was lifted. Having got the portfolios of external affairs
and information and broadcasting, apart from other things it opened the
gates of bureaucracy, media and education for the RSS swayamsevaks in a
big way and RSS presence in the structures of power started becoming more
dominant from then on.

Later some constituents of Janata party asked the Jan Sangh component to
severe its ties from the RSS, the one which stands for Hindu Rashtra, for
the principles which are totally antithetical to the ones of democracy, to
social and gender justice and affirmative action for weaker sections of
society. The Vajpayee-Advani and co. were very clear on the issue that
Jananta party and its likes can only be a vehicle to convert the Indian
nation into a Hindu nation so it does not mean much in the long term. They
broke the Janata party, kept the RSS loyalties in place and came out to
form BJP.

Deception is the credo of those who have hidden agendas and BJP is no
exception. It neither believed in Gandhian thought nor in Socialism but
for electoral exigencies it did projerct these as its goals. It did not
take them long to show their true colors. Its associates, VHP and others
had started consolidating a section of Hindus around various yatras. Post
Meenakshipuram incident, in which some dalits converted to Islam as a
protest against their oppression by caste Hindus, ‘Hinduism in danger’
became the battle cry and VHP raised hue and cry. Around this time the
Shah Bano incident, its immature handling by the Congress leadership gave
a big handle to BJP, something which it was waiting for desperately after
its electoral debacle in 1984. It ‘manufactured a discovery’ that there
was a Ram temple at the place where the Babri Masjid is located. And this
transformed the BJP from the insignificant force, sitting on the margins,
to the contender for parliamentary power over a period of time.

Having dumped Gandhian socialism it recruited Lord Ram, Ram Temple, to
build the party. The process of its mobilization of Hindus and
consolidation of a section of them into its supporters got a big boost
after the Mandal commission was brought in. The section of society totally
opposed to reservations and social justice thronged the yatras and other
campaigns of BJP and affiliates in a big way. Demolition of Babri, post
babri violence, burning of Pastor Stains, Godhra train tragedy’s
encashment into Gujarat riots were the steps which went a long way to
strengthen BJP electorally and made its base in section of elite,
affluent, upper caste Hindus. Through the mechanism of social engineering
it was also able to rope in a section of dalits and adivasis as not only
its supporters but also as its foot soldiers.

Its electoral ascendance in due course led to its grabbing power at the
center, first for thirteen days. At that time the likes of Fernandes,
Sharad Yadavs and Chandrababus could not dare to support such an out and
out communal outfit, whose hands were full of the Babri debris. In due
course their own power lust led them to support BJP, making it possible
for it to come to power as National Democratic Alliance. Its coming to
power showed in a tragic way as to how the democratic space is totally
dominated by opportunist and potentially right wing formations. Through
NDA, the total implementation of RSS agenda went on at great speed, the
core of these being the attempt to tamper with the Constitution and to
communalize the education system, the introduction of astrology, rituals
as the courses in universities, communalization of society and spending of
huge funds for RSS affiliated organizations, which in turn helped the RSS
paraphernalia to consolidate itself.

The incident of Godhra getting turned into the opportunity to unleash an
anti minority pogrom was possible for number of reasons. The first one
being the RSS affiliates’ strong presence in the political and civil
society of Gujarat, the second was the persona of Narendra Modi whose
shrewdness peaked the sky during and after the carnage conducted by his
state machinery. The third factor was the umbrella provided by the central
functionaries, Prime Minister and Home minister. Calculating that the post
carnage polarization will help BJP return to power it called for general
elections six months ahead of time and a media blitkriz was launched to
project its ‘achievements’, “Shining India” and all that. Its’ voting
percentage declined and the number of seats were reduced in the elections.

Where does it go from here? Is BJP no longer a threat to Indian democracy?
Democracy is a live phenomenon and any lapse on the part of citizens, the
lack of monitoring and counter pressures to power does reduce the extent
of democracy. Hitler and those who are committed to ideologies, which are
essentially against the democratic values are a different cup of tea.
Those ideologically committed to authoritarian system and those using
authoritarian system in an opportunistic ways are not the same. BJP
belongs to the former category as it is the political child of RSS, for
whom Rashtra, nation, means Hindus. Despite sophisticated presentations of
the same it will remain the same, a dictatorial system opposed to
democracy, opposed to liberal democratic values, opposed the values of
liberty, equality and fraternity (community). Its goal is to use
democratic space to bring in an authoritarian Hindu Nation a la Taliban’s
agenda in Afghanistan.
The threat of BJP and through it the agenda of RSS has not receded. Its
electoral defeat is not total and it still is acting as one of the major
force in Indian politics. It remains to be seen as to how the progressive
parties and section of Indian people see through the danger of BJP power,
its core program of abolishing democracy, and reject it as the alternative
pole.

The future of BJP hangs in balance. On one hand it has facilitated the
infiltration of swayamsevaks into the positions of importance in army,
bureaucracy, media and other wings of the state machinery, on the other it
has given an important space to its affiliates to root themselves in core
areas of Indian civil society, like Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram and the chain
of schools floated far and wide. In Gujarat what prevails is close to
“Hindu Rashtra in one state.”  Similar experiment is being tried in MP and
Rajasthan. In many other states, Kearla; Orissa RSS is digging its heels
in a stronger way. The other side of the report card is that by now it
stands totally discredited amongst a great section of Indian people, due
to its policies and its blatant communalism. The counter to this has come
at political level in the form of it being looked at with suspicion and
its ex allies rethinking the worth of their association with BJP. At
another and less visible level, civil society groups are realizing, with
increasing intensity, the threat of BJP, of communal politics and have
intensified the campaigns to oppose the politics of Hate propounded by it.
At the ground level, spreading of awareness about the values of Indian
freedom struggle, Indian constitution and these being opposed to BJP
politics, is picking up. The efforts are on for de-communalization at
ideological level, intensifying democratic cultural expressions and the
like. The effort to strengthen the broader democratic ethos in the society
is also picking up to a great extent. And all this will be a counter to
the politics of BJP. Which way the tide will turn will depend greatly on
the consistency of all these efforts over a period of time.


______


[7]

(i)

The Indian Express
April 10, 2005

THE ROAD TO CHINA

Far from Kaman Bridge and Karvan-e-Aman, a road 
waits to open up on another border. As Premier 
Wen Jiabao begins his visit, a Black and White 
focus on India, China and tomorrows world.

Sanjib Baruah

A few years ago, there was a story in the Assam 
Tribune from Arunachal Pradesh with the 
intriguing headline Dindu Miri: The man who came 
in from China. An ethnic Idu, Miri was born in 
1946 in a village in what was then the North-East 
Frontier Agency (NEFA) and educated in China from 
1955. In 1963, a year after the China war, he 
returned to NEFA from Beijing.

Referring to the Tibet region, he recalls China 
in those days to be nearer his village than any 
part of India. It was a four-day walk from the 
Agula Pass in the Dri Valley to Bapa village in 
Tibet where there was a community of fellow Idu 
tribesman. From Bapa he could cross to Rohlipo, a 
days walk, Alepo a three-hour walk and then a 
days walk to reach Beijingpresumably referring to 
the place from where he could find transportation 
to Beijing.

After finishing his education, Miri worked for 
the Chinese government as a political 
interpreter. He held that job during the 1962 
war. Our brigadier, he says, asked me to lead the 
Chinese troops towards Indian posts because I 
knew the routes to India.

In 2000 Miri was still working as a political 
interpreter. But his employer had changed: it was 
now the Indian government.

Miri remembers the days when he and other members 
of his community could meet their kinsmen across 
the border; now they stay in touch through secret 
messengers.

The story evokes an era when the territory 
between India and China was still a vague 
frontier. That era came to a violent end in 1962.

But Miris story is not unique. Border-crossings 
do not stop abruptly when frontiers get marked 
neatly on modern maps. The hidden geographies of 
illegal movements continue

Thus, some anthropologists believe, Kachins -- 
they are known as Kachin in Upper Myanmar, but as 
Singpho in Assam and Arunachal Pradesh, and 
Jingpo in Yunnan, China -- still share social 
bonds, kinship networks and a lingua franca.

Modern national maps and border disputes must 
appear rather strange to these peoples. It is 
hard not to sympathise with that view. After all, 
in a 50-km radius in this region, as Dutch 
historian Willem van Schendel points out, there 
are four settlements that are part of three 
sovereign states and four different world 
regions: Gohaling in Yunnan is part of East Asia, 
Sakongdan in Myanmar is part of Southeast Asia, 
Dong in Arunachal is part of South Asia and Zayu 
in Tibet a part of Central Asia.

Incidentally, Dong is advertised in Arunachali 
tourist brochures as the place where one can see 
Indias first sunrise. But Indian army forces are 
unlikely to let ordinary civilians go and enjoy 
it.

No one will represent the interests of these 
transborder communities in discussions between 
India and China, when the mandarins of national 
security of the two countries decide if the time 
has arrived to settle the border dispute.

But it is not hard to guess where these 
transborder communities will stand. The Home 
Ministry has given its nod to the reopening of 
the Stilwell Road that links Assam to the old 
Burma Road and then to Kunming in China. The 
Ministry of External Affairs favours the idea 
though, reportedly, the Defence Ministry wants 
more troops in that sector.

While reopening the road is expected to bring 
substantial trade benefits, the Kachins that live 
along this road have another reason to celebrate. 
They can now look forward to a day when they will 
be able to drive across the borderhopefully with 
legal border passesinstead of trekking across the 
mountains illegally to meet their kinsmen.

The author is visiting professor, Centre for 
Policy Research, New Delhi, and author of Durable 
Disorder: Understanding the Politics of Northeast 
India, OUP, 2005


o o o o

(ii)

The Telegraph - April 13, 2005

GO FOR A SLIGHT CHANGE OF ROUTE

Given Calcutta's unique status with regard to the 
Chinese, it should not be left out of the 
itinerary of the next dignitary from China, 
writes Tansen Sen The author is associate 
professor, Asian history and religions, the City 
University of New York

Adding to the flavour
The Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, just completed 
his maiden trip to India. Calcutta, which boasts 
of the country's only Chinatown and is governed 
by a communist party, was not on his itinerary. 
In fact, Calcutta has no direct air link to 
China, not even to Hong Kong. Not a single 
educational institution in the city offers 
advanced courses in Chinese language or history. 
The ruling communist party is ambiguous about the 
economic reforms of Deng Xiaoping that have 
transformed China into the most successful 
communist country in the world. The only 
noteworthy connection to China today is the 
excellent Chinese food served in restaurants in 
Tangra and other locations in the city. But, that 
too is on the decline as many Chinese 
restaurateurs move to greener pastures in Mumbai 
and Delhi.

Calcutta and China parted ways in the early 
Sixties, when deteriorating Sino-Indian relations 
resulted in the closure of the Chinese consulate 
in the city, the expulsion of the manager (and 
the subsequent closing) of the Bank of China, and 
the forced deportation of hundreds of Chinese 
immigrants in West Bengal.

The first Chinese came to Calcutta in the late 
18th century with the intention of accumulating 
wealth. Political upheavals in early 20th century 
China brought more settlers. The time also 
witnessed the arrival of many important Chinese 
personalities. In 1905, for example, the 
America-educated Tang Shaoyi was sent to Calcutta 
by the Chinese Emperor Guangxu to negotiate the 
status of Tibet. The negotiations, which 
concluded in Beijing, resulted in the British 
acceptance of Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. 
Tang went on to become the first premier of the 
Chinese republic. In the Forties, the Chinese 
consulate was home to Yuan Xiaoyuan, China's 
first female diplomat. During her tenure in 
Calcutta as the vice-consul, Yuan organized the 
Chinese community and offered Chinese language 
classes.

In February 1942, Chiang Kai-shek met Mahatma 
Gandhi in Calcutta. Chiang had come to India to 
discuss the possibilities of a joint military 
resistance to the expansionist Japanese army. In 
Calcutta, Chiang and his wife, Song Mei-ling, 
were guests of G.D. Birla. During a discussion 
with the Chinese guests, Gandhi regretted that 
the couple was unable to visit his ashram in 
Wardha. In response, Song Mei-ling is quoted as 
saying, "Who knows, we may be back sooner than 
later. And after all Calcutta is only 12 hours to 
[the Chinese capital] Chunking."

Indeed, the proximity of the city to the Chinese 
border made Calcutta the stage for the Allied 
forces engaged in the China-Burma-India theatre 
during World War II. Supplies were sent to the 
Chinese resistance through the seaport in 
Calcutta. In Ramgaur, north of Calcutta, the 
Americans set up a training centre for Chinese 
soldiers. Calcutta was also the regional 
headquarters of the US air force, which operated 
B-29 long-range bombers. By 1945, a telephone 
line was established between Calcutta and Kunming.

The communist revolution in 1949 triggered the 
influx of new Chinese refugees to Calcutta and 
eventually divided the community's allegiance 
between Beijing and Taipei. When the first 
ambassador from the People's Republic of China 
passed through the city, the Chinese community in 
Calcutta gave him an "enthusiastic reception". By 
1952, however, China's occupation of Tibet made 
many Indians disenchanted with the neighbour. The 
Chinese community in Calcutta was troubled by the 
new regime's persecution of landlords and former 
supporters of the nationalist government. They 
were also concerned about Beijing's propaganda 
machine in Calcutta. Beijing, it seems, was 
funding a communist newspaper in the city, 
providing loans to Chinese businessmen, and 
offering free education and food to the members 
of the community through its consulate in 
Calcutta. The pro-Taipei Chinese in Calcutta 
started a fervent campaign against the alleged 
communist "indoctrination" of the community. They 
called this the anti-communist nationalist 
salvation movement, which supported and 
contributed funds for the liberation of Mainland 
China.

The Indian government sided with Beijing. In 
November 1954, soon after Jawaharlal Nehru 
returned from his trip to China, two Chinese 
residents of Calcutta, including C.S. Liu, editor 
of a local Chinese newspaper sympathetic to 
Taiwan, were deported. A third Chinese was 
arrested under the Preventive Detention Act. 
Then, in August 1958, the Indian government 
cancelled a football match between India and Hong 
Kong, because some of the players in the Hong 
Kong team were allegedly "loyal" to the 
nationalist government in Taiwan.

The dalai lama's defection to India in 1959 and 
the subsequent border dispute between India and 
China gave the upper hand to the anti-Beijing 
Chinese organizations in Calcutta. Leaders of 
some of these groups wrote letters to the Indian 
government pledging their loyalty to India and 
expressed the desires of thousands of Chinese 
residents to become Indian citizens. In October 
1959, 8,127 Chinese in Calcutta were registered 
as foreign residents. Some of them held outdated 
passports issued by the pre-1949 nationalist 
government. Others identified themselves as 
citizens of communist China. There were also 
thousands of unregistered Chinese, who were born 
in Calcutta did not possess birth certificates, 
and were thus, stateless.

The ambiguous status of Chinese residents in 
Calcutta proved disastrous for the community in 
the aftermath of the Sino-Indian war. 
Surveillance over the Chinese in the city 
increased. Hundreds were charged with anti-Indian 
activities and detained at the Deoli camp in 
Rajasthan, and many were subsequently repatriated 
to Mainland China.

The Chinese population in Calcutta dwindled from 
about 20,000 to 10,000. Those who remained were 
perceived as enemies, deprived of rights to free 
movement and dismissed from their jobs in private 
and government enterprises. The only occupations 
that remained open for the Chinese in Calcutta 
were the restaurant business, tanning and 
shoemaking. The appalling treatment of Chinese 
residents and their isolation after the war are 
movingly recounted in Rafeeq Ellias's recent 
documentary, The Legend of Fat Mama.

In 1976, after a gap of 15 years, India and China 
restored diplomatic relations at the 
ambassadorial level. Since then, the two 
countries have witnessed substantial growth in 
political and cultural relations. Bilateral trade 
has improved from a few millions dollars to about 
$14 billion a year. The Indian consulate has 
reopened in Shanghai, and a Chinese consulate 
established in Mumbai. Direct flights now operate 
between Delhi and Beijing and between Mumbai and 
Shanghai. These developments seem to have 
bypassed Calcutta.

In 1998, the Central government finally allowed 
the naturalization of the ethnic Chinese living 
in Calcutta. However, the Indian intelligence 
community is still adamantly opposed to the 
reopening of the Chinese consulate in the city 
and the Chinese commercial mission that existed 
in Kalimpong before the Sino-Indian war. Clearly, 
the intelligence agencies continue to perceive 
China as a threat and cling to the unjustified 
fear that the Chinese will use their offices in 
Calcutta to promote anti-Indian activities. This 
stand not only fails to take into account the 
improving diplomatic relations, but also 
shortchanges India's commitment to 
confidence-building measures. In the post-9/11 
world, the Indian intelligence community should 
explore ways to collaborate with the Chinese 
against terrorist groups.

The establishment of the Chinese consulate, 
commercial mission, and perhaps, a Sino-Indian 
cultural centre in Calcutta will have a profound 
impact on furthering diplomatic, economic, and 
cultural relations between India and China. This 
will help revive the links between eastern India 
and the Yunnan region of China. Already, the 
vice-governor of Yunnan has pitched the economic 
prospects of this link to the Confederation of 
Indian Industry and Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, the 
chief minister of West Bengal, during his trip to 
Calcutta in 2004. The vice-governor had 
emphasized in an interview that the reopening of 
the China-Burma-India route would lead to a 
ten-fold increase in the province's trade with 
India, which approached $100 million last year. 
He also pointed out that Calcutta was only an two 
hours' plane ride from the provincial capital, 
Kunming. Indeed, it is time for Calcutta to 
reclaim its status as the nodal point for India's 
contacts with China by re-establishing air, road, 
and sea links to it.

It is also vital to raise awareness about 
contemporary China among Calcuttans, including 
the ethnic Chinese residents and party members. 
Calcuttans, and indeed most Indians, remain 
unaware of Deng Xiaoping and his economic 
policies. They may know about the flourishing 
mega-cities such as Shanghai and Canton, but are 
unaware of the successful eradication of poverty 
in many rural areas. It is also important to 
understand how policies are implemented in China 
and why some of the Chinese models may or may not 
work in the Indian democratic context. While it 
is for the policy-makers to study, evaluate and 
implement Chinese models, the public must have a 
deeper understanding of their neighbour. Perhaps 
the cultural centre staffed by Indians and 
Chinese could foster this goal.

No other city in India has had prolonged, albeit 
erratic, contact with China. As India and China 
reinvigorate their relationship, Calcutta should 
not miss the chance to underscore and renew its 
unique status vis-à-vis the Chinese. So, when the 
next Chinese leader lands in India, Calcutta 
should be one of the highlights of his trip.


______


[8]     [Announcements: ]

(i)

Merchant Ivory Presents JAMES IVORY in CONVERSATION: How Merchant Ivory
Makes Its Films

Meet James Ivory and Ismail Merchant
Thursday, April 14, 2005 starting at 7:00 pm

Barnes & Noble, Lincoln Center
1972 Broadway, New York, NY 10023

Event Details:
Meet James Ivory and Ismail Merchant this Thursday as they celebrate the
release of their latest book "JAMES IVORY in CONVERSATION: How Merchant
Ivory Makes Its Films" written by Robert Emmet Long and available now from
University of California Press at Barnes & Nobles and Amazon.com. o o o o o

(ii)

Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:39:36 +0100 (BST)
From: Anhad Delhi <anhad_delhi at yahoo.co.in>
Subject: new exhibition

Dear friends,

We are working on an exhibition around the theme 
of communalism. We want to include the list of 
resource material available on the topic. Please 
do sent us the names of books, documentaries, 
films, audio cds, magazines, websites etc, which 
you think shd be included in the list .

Also looking for help in good quality 
translations from English and composing into 
Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, Marathi, Urdu, Punjabi, 
Oriya, Bengali, Gujarati, Kannada.

The exhibition hopefully wd be available by the end of the month.

sincerely
shabnam hashmi

(iii)

There will be a screening of WAPSI at India 
International Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi, on 
the afternoon of April 16th, 2005 The screening 
will start at 4:00 pm to be followed by a 
discussion with the filmmaker.
Please make it convenient to be there.

WAPSI
For most Indian's a journey to Pakistan is a 
journey of return of various kinds - to 
Nostalgia, hate, metaphor and reality. This film 
is one such travelogue, a song of hope, love, 
longing and betrayal. Starting from India's 
capital Delhi, it takes a detour via Kashmir, 
Gujarat and Indian Punjab. It travels back and 
forth between memory and history to explore the 
'idea' of Pakistan, what it has become and how it 
affects Indians and Pakistanis, who in spite of 
the divide, remain connected to each other 
through Hate and through Love.

A film by Ajay Raina.
Produced By: Public Service Broadcasting Trust.
Duration: 60 Minutes. (Also available in 2 parts)

(iv)

A SANSAD Public Forum

US Hegemony and South Asia

A talk by: Tariq Ali

Friday, April 29, 2005
7-9 p.m.
Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW) Hall
326 - 12th Street, New Westminster, BC.

  Internationally renowned anti-imperialist and 
anti-war activist, historian, journalist, film- 
maker, and novelist, Tariq Ali will be in 
Vancouver to speak on the impact of US 
imperialist war and war mongering on the world 
and its particular effect on South Asia.

There are significant developments in South Asia 
that are meshed with US designs for global 
domination. On the one hand the peace initiatives 
between Pakistan and India, including the 
recently launched bus service between Srinagar 
and Muzzafarabad across the Line of Control in 
Kashmir, are a positive development that is 
brought about both because the people of the two 
countries desire peace and because it serves the 
interest of the US government. On the other hand, 
the US agenda engages the Pakistan military in a 
long-drawn war in Waziristan and promotes a 
debilitating arms race between the two countries 
by selling them advanced F16 aircraft. While this 
sale will enrich the US arms industry and thus 
help the US global agenda, it will compel both 
Pakistan and India to devote their resources to 
militarization instead of the welfare of their 
people. The Baloch people, who are engaged in an 
armed struggle for greater autonomy and greater 
control over their resources face a Pakistan army 
equipped with advanced American weaponry to 
defend American interests such as the port of 
Gwadar in Balochistan, which is being developed 
as an outlet for Central Asian oil. In Nepal, the 
King, who with the financial and military support 
of India, Britain, and the US has been waging a 
ten-year long counter-insurgency against Maoist 
peasants, has taken over dictatorial power, put 
behind bars all political leaders, and suspended 
freedom of the press. How will the service of the 
US interest by the governments of South Asian 
countries impact on the lives and rights of the 
people of the region?


Tariq Ali is very well placed to address this 
question. He entered political activism as a 
student in Pakistan opposing the war in Vietnam. 
He continued his activism after moving to Britain 
as a student, and he has developed his expertise 
through the writing of a dozen books on Pakistan, 
India, the Middle East, and British and US 
foreign policy.

SANSAD
South Asian Network for Secularism and Democracy
Suite 435, 205 - 329 North Road, Coquitlam, BC, Canada. V3K 6Z8
phone : (604) 420-2972; FAX: (604) 420-2970
Electronic mail : sansad at sansad.org

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

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.