SACW | 21 April - 5 May 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire  | 21 April - 5 May,  2005

[This issue of SACW is dedicated to the memory of 
two world citizens, public intellectuals and 
activists Andre Gunder Frank and Jugnu Ramaswamy, 
whose recent deaths are a great loss for many on 
this list. ]

[1] The State of Sectarianism in Pakistan (International Crisis Group)
[2] Press Statement  re Indo Pak Peace Process 
(Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace, 
India)
[3] Indo Pak Peace Process - How irreversible is 'irreversible'? (M B Naqvi)
[4] India Vacillates On Nepal: Don't compromise with despotism (Praful Bidwai)
[5] India: Secular Spirit (Edit., The Telegraph)
[6] India: Sangh goes on air, indirect to home (Hemendra Singh Bartwal)
[7] India: Manipur- An Incendiary Script (Pradip Phanjoubam)
[8] India: Art can't be supressed by fundamentalists: Punjab artistes
[9] India: Space science in the lord's hands (G.S. Radhakrishna)
[10]  Announcements:
Upcoming conference on "Political Hinduism" (Los Angeles - May 6-7, 2005)

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

[1]

International Crisis Group - Asia Report No. 95
18 April 2005

THE STATE OF SECTARIANISM IN PAKISTAN

Executive Summary And Recommendations

Sectarian conflict in Pakistan is the direct 
consequence of state policies of Islamisation and 
marginalisation of secular democratic forces. 
Co-option and patronage of religious parties by 
successive military governments have brought 
Pakistan to a point where religious extremism 
threatens to erode the foundations of the state 
and society. As President Pervez Musharraf is 
praised by the international community for his 
role in the war against terrorism, the frequency 
and viciousness of sectarian terrorism continues 
to increase in his country.

Instead of empowering liberal, democratic voices, 
the government has co-opted the religious right 
and continues to rely on it to counter civilian 
opposition. By depriving democratic forces of an 
even playing field and continuing to ignore the 
need for state policies that would encourage and 
indeed reflect the country's religious diversity, 
the government has allowed religious extremist 
organisations and jihadi groups, and the madrasas 
that provide them an endless stream of recruits, 
to flourish. It has failed to protect a 
vulnerable judiciary and equip its 
law-enforcement agencies with the tools they need 
to eliminate sectarian terrorism.

Constitutional provisions to "Islamise" laws, 
education and culture, and official dissemination 
of a particular brand of Islamic ideology, not 
only militate against Pakistan's religious 
diversity but also breed discrimination against 
non-Muslim minorities. The political use of Islam 
by the state promotes an aggressive competition 
for official patronage between and within the 
many variations of Sunni and Shia Islam, with the 
clerical elite of major sects and subsects 
striving to build up their political parties, 
raise jihadi militias, expand madrasa networks 
and, as has happened on Musharraf's watch, become 
part of government. Like all other Pakistani 
military governments, the Musharraf 
administration has also weakened secular and 
democratic political forces.

Administrative and legal action against militant 
organisations has failed to dismantle a 
well-entrenched and widely spread terror 
infrastructure. All banned extremist groups 
persist with new labels, although old names are 
also still in use. The jihadi media is 
flourishing, and the leading figures of extremist 
Sunni organisations are free to preach their 
jihadi ideologies. Leaders of banned groups such 
as the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, Sipahe Sahaba and 
Jaish-e-Mohammed appear to enjoy virtual immunity 
from the law. They have gained new avenues to 
propagate their militant ideas since the chief 
patrons of jihad, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) 
and the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI), have acquired 
prominent and powerful roles in Musharraf's 
political structure.

The Islamisation of laws and education, in 
particular, graphically illustrates the Sunni 
sectarian bias of the Pakistani state. General 
Zia-ul-Haq's Islamic penal code, retained by 
General Musharraf, is derived entirely from 
classical Sunni-Hanafi orthodox sources. The same 
is true of "Islamic" textbooks in public schools 
and colleges. The Shia minority -- and, in some 
cases, even the majority Sunni Barelvi sect -- is 
deeply resentful of this orthodox Hanafi Sunni 
bias in state policies. Within Sunnism itself, 
the competition for state patronage and a share 
in power has turned minor theological debates and 
cultural differences into unbridgeable, volatile 
sectarian divisions. After decades of co-option 
by the civil-military establishment, Pakistan's 
puritanical clergy is attempting to turn the 
country into a confessional state where the 
religious creed of a person is the sole marker of 
identity.

Except for a few showcase "reformed" madrasas, no 
sign of change is visible. Because of the 
mullahs' political utility, the military-led 
government's proposed measures, from curriculum 
changes to a new registration law, have been 
dropped in the face of opposition by the MMA 
(Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal) and its madrasa 
subsidiaries. Instead, financial and political 
incentives to the mullahs have raised their 
public profile and influence. The government's 
approach towards religious extremism is 
epitomised by its deals with extremists in the 
tribal areas, concluded through JUI mediation 
after payment of bribes to militant leaders.

The anomalous constitutional status and political 
disenfranchisement of regions like the Federally 
Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and the Northern 
Areas have turned them into sanctuaries for 
sectarian and international terrorists and 
centres of the arms and drugs trade.

Parallel legal and judicial systems, which exist 
in many parts of the country with the blessing of 
the state, undermine the rule of law. The reform 
of discriminatory laws and procedures has, at 
best, been cosmetic -- they remain open to abuse 
by religious fanatics. Bereft of independence, 
the judiciary is unable to check the rising 
sectarian violence. Subjected to political 
interference, an inefficient police has become 
even more incapable of dealing with sectarian 
terrorism.

President Musharraf's lack of domestic legitimacy 
has forced the military to rely on alliances of 
convenience with the religious right, based on 
the politics of patronage. In the absence of 
international support, moderate, secular and 
democratic parties will remain in the political 
cold. The choice that Pakistan faces is not 
between the military and the mullahs, as is 
generally believed in the West; it is between 
genuine democracy and a military-mullah alliance 
that is responsible for producing and sustaining 
religious extremism of many hues.

Given the intrinsic links between Pakistan-based 
homegrown and transnational terrorists, the one 
cannot be effectively contained and ultimately 
eliminated without acting against the other. The 
government's unwillingness to demonstrate 
political will to deal with the internal jihad 
could cost it international support, much of 
which is contingent upon Pakistan's performance 
in the war against terrorism. The U.S. and other 
influential actors have realised with regard to 
their own societies that terrorism can only be 
eliminated through pluralistic democratic 
structures. Pakistan should not be treated as an 
exception.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To the Government of Pakistan:

1.  Recognise the diversity of Islam in Pakistan, 
reaffirm the constitutional principle of equality 
for all citizens regardless of religion or sect, 
and give meaning to this by taking the following 
steps:

(a) repeal all laws, penal codes and official 
procedures that reinforce sectarian identities 
and cause discrimination on the basis of faith, 
such as the mandatory affirmation of religious 
creed in applications for jobs, passports and 
national identity cards;
(b) repeal the Hudood laws and the blasphemy laws;
(c) disband privately-run Sharia courts in the 
North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and take 
action against religious organisations operating 
them;
(d) do not use zakat or other sources of 
government funding to finance the activities, 
educational or otherwise, of any sect; and
(e) purge Islamic Studies textbooks of sectarian 
material that promotes or undermines specific 
sects.

2.  Disband, in furtherance of Article 256 of the 
constitution, all private militias, including 
those organised for sectarian and jihadi causes.

3.  Make curbs on sectarian leaders and extremist groups more effective by:

(a) publicising the evidence for banning jihadi groups;
(b) implementing the laws against hate-speech and 
incitement of communal violence;
(c) taking legal action against the 
administration of any mosque or madrasa or 
religious leader responsible for verbal or 
written edicts of apostasy;
(d) taking legal action against the 
administration of any mosque or madrasa whose 
leader calls for internal or external jihad;
(e) cancelling the print declarations (licences) 
of jihadi publications and prosecuting the 
publishers;
(f) closing down madrasas run by sectarian and jihadi organisations; and
(g) ending registration of new madrasas until a 
new madrasa law is in place, and registering all 
madrasas under this new law, including those 
currently registered under the Societies Act.

4.  Appoint prayer leaders and orators at mosques 
and madrasas run by the Auqaf Department (the 
government department of religious endowments) 
only after verifying that the applicant has no 
record of sectarian extremism, and dismiss those 
sectarian leaders who are employees of the Auqaf 
Department.

5.  Review periodically the activities of all 
government appointed clergy and strictly enforce 
the ban on loudspeakers used in mosques other 
than for permitted religious activities.

6.  Implement police and judiciary reforms, including the following:

(a) ensure institutional independence and 
guarantees against political interference;
(b) guarantee the physical security of judges 
presiding over cases of sectarian terrorism; and
(c) end the political and policing role of 
intelligence agencies and establish parliamentary 
oversight of their activities.

7.  Use federal prerogative to veto the MMA's 
Islamisation agenda, including the Hasba Bill.

8.  Provide constitutional and political rights 
to the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) 
and the Northern Areas by:
(a) doing away with their special status and 
deciding on a final constitutional and legal 
status after negotiations with their directly 
elected representatives;
(b) granting decision-making powers and local 
administrative and legislative authority to the 
Northern Areas Council;
(c) setting up and linking courts in these areas 
to Pakistan's mainstream judicial institutions; 
and
(d) ending the practices of raising tribal 
lashkars and paying bribes to militants.

9.  Regulate the arms industry in FATA to prevent 
the proliferation of weapons countrywide.

To the United States and the European Union:

10.  Press the Musharraf government to carry out 
its commitment of introducing a madrasa 
registration regime and instituting a regulatory 
authority in conformity with international 
conventions on terrorism and extremism.

11.  Urge the Pakistan government to repeal 
discriminatory legislation that targets women and 
minorities.

Islamabad/Brussels, 18 April 2005


_______


[2]

21 April 2005

  PRESS RELEASE

  The Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace
  (CNDP), India, warmly endorses the
  establishment of bus links between Srinagar and
  Muzaffarabad, the opening of cross-border trade
  routes between India and Pakistan, and the
  commitment by both sides to a peaceful resolution of
  the hitherto intractable 'Kashmir problem'. The
  peace process however, despite the formal
  declaration, is not "irreversible" but is itself
  hostage to the possible emergence of distrust and
  suspicion between the two countries in the future.
  In this context the CNDP registers its deepest
  disappointment and dismay that the India-Pakistan
  talks completely failed to take note of the
  possibility of a nuclear war which stares both the
  countries in the face, whether by deliberate action
  or unintentional slip. They failed to agree to any
  measures to reduce such risks and to eventually
  eliminate their respective arsenals. Hence, we once
  again urge both governments to take concrete
  measures to reverse the open-ended nuclear arms race
  that consumes scarce resources and sharpens
  animosities and tensions.


  Sukla Sen
  CNDP, India

_______


[3]

The News International
May 04, 2005

HOW IRREVERSIBLE IS 'IRREVERSIBLE'?

M B Naqvi

The joint statement issued after Delhi's 
Indo-Pakistani summit described improvements in 
their mutual relationship as "irreversible" 
because of the sizeable peace lobbies in both 
countries. War mongering is no longer popular. 
But how irreversible is this peace process?

Things are often deceptive in politics. 
Entrenched powerful groups in both countries do 
not want friendship between the two countries, 
not even trade and economic cooperation. They 
like freer cultural exchanges even less. The two 
bureaucracies, each excelling the other in rigid 
approaches and in being actually 
backward-looking, do not want to change. 
Bureaucracies are always meant to preserve a 
system. They cannot be expected to take 
significant initiatives "outside the box." It is 
not their job. That is the job of political 
leaderships, and they should make the 
bureaucracies implement their "out of the box" 
thinking which requires change.

The two governments are a long way from settling 
down as friends and have still to build many 
bridges. Governments can always reverse their 
stances. There is the sudden reversal of India's 
policy over Nepal, for instance. Only a few 
months ago, India angrily condemned King 
Gyanendra's wrapping up the elected system by 
assuming total power himself on Feb. 1 last. It 
stopped military aid to the Nepalese Army. Now 
suddenly it has decided to send him armaments 
against the wishes of India's leftists. One goes 
beyond a mere notice of this instance of a 
reversal for a reason.

The proffered reason was other countries would 
take advantage of the tiff between India and the 
Nepalese King and would start supplying arms to 
him. The "other country" in this case could 
either be Pakistan or China because America and 
the UK were on India's side against Gyanendra. 
Now China, in its own national interests, would 
never give an excuse to India, the US and the UK 
to unitedly oppose China's help to Gyanendra. As 
for Pakistan, it would never go against US and UK 
advice, all its gestures of independence 
notwithstanding. But even this flimsy threat of 
Pakistan establishing a relationship with 
Gyanendra was enough to unnerve the South Block.

True, there could be a different reason. Maoist 
inroads in India itself demand that the Indian 
government should enable the Nepalese Army to 
prevent its Maoists from coordinating with their 
Indian friends. Doubtless, the Indian bureaucracy 
is stoutly fighting against Indian Maoists. 
However, this Indian iron fist has not stopped 
Maoists from spreading operations from the 
Indo-Nepalese border down to Andhra Pradesh. The 
logic of fighting the Maoists at home could impel 
India to cooperate with Nepal's anti-Maoists. But 
India's stoppage of military cooperation with 
Nepal had no links with the decades old 
insurgencies in India. Pakistan's fishing in 
Nepal's troubled waters could only be a minor 
threat.

Another example is military exercises that India 
is about to hold near Jullundhur. Who would be 
the enemy to be vanquished in this exercise? The 
emotional underpinnings of such exercises make 
the enemy known: it is Pakistan. The Indian Army 
is for preserving Indian borders from Pakistan; 
the two are designated adversary states for each 
other. Three wars and many skirmishes have 
stabilised these enemy images. These inveterate 
enemies have recently gone nuclear. Pakistan's 
nuclear stance is India-specific. Thus reversing 
the enemy image is going to take time and much 
more than diplomatic bonhomie and sweet talk; 
something has to be shown to the people before 
they change their inimical attitudes. The feel 
good factor created by the many "permitted" 
cultural exchanges cannot long be sustained on 
sweet words alone. There has to be evidence of 
inter-state free trade, economic cooperation and 
a credible framework of a lot freer travel to 
permit cultural exchanges to do their magic.

The Army patronises many other forces. Among 
them, two deserve notice: the first is the 
political forces that demonise the enemy. In 
India there is the Sangh Parivar and parties like 
Shiv Sena that are anti-Pakistan and, up to a 
point, anti-Muslim. The Bharatya Janata Party 
represents their political interests. The second 
group associated with the armed forces (and the 
bureaucracies) comprises publicists. Whole 
battalions of them are embedded in the military 
establishments as well as civilian ones. 
Governments need special media persons to be 
properly guided by intelligence agencies; 
arrangements to this effect are in working order 
in both countries.

This is reality. Despite professed recent 
governmental desires of being friends hard 
progress has been slow and halting. A tribute to 
Americans is due for bringing India and Pakistan 
to the negotiating table. This has had a benign 
effect so far. It is for India and Pakistan to go 
further than the Americans want. They should go 
much beyond a mere normalisation of relations. 
They have tried hard to make the Composite 
Dialogue, agreed in 1997, productive. Despite 
many rounds, it has so far yielded no solution to 
any of the eight propositions.

The two states have fixed a "normal" relationship 
as their goal, though the Composite Dialogue has 
so far refused to move forward. Both are still at 
the starting point. However, many agreements on 
Confidence Building Measures, some along the LoC 
in Kashmir, may have been agreed upon, there 
needs to be some concrete agreements on disputes. 
These CBMs are welcome. But they are reversible. 
Can the bus between Srinagar and Muzaffarabad not 
be stopped? Can the Munabao-Khokhrapar line not 
be postponed again? The two Consulates General in 
Bombay and Karachi can be made to wait more 
years. The fact is the two bureaucracies are 
micro-managing the relaxation process. Each 
action is under strict control. No state is ready 
to give the citizens of the other the freedom of 
movement in its own country. The Indians in 
Pakistan are supposed to pose unexplained 
security threats. Similarly, Pakistanis loafing 
around Indian cities constitute an equally 
serious threat to India. The two bureaucracies 
remain unreconstructed and unaffected by new 
impulses.

The two countries are fated to keep going round 
the mulberry bush if their aim is no more than 
normalisation. Normalisation is a vague concept. 
It can mean Peru's relations with Mongolia. It 
can mean, at the other extreme, relations between 
France and Germany. We must know what kind of 
relations we want. There have to be common aims 
before relations can stabilise and start growing 
into a friendship. It is common objectives that 
hold the key. One recommends the goal of peoples' 
reconciliation between India and Pakistan from 
grassroots up. It has to be complete 
reconciliation that should be reinforced with the 
aims of common economic and cultural objectives.

Today India is desperate for a permanent seat in 
the UN Security Council. Here is Pakistan, 
supposedly working to be friends with India, 
openly campaigning against India being elevated. 
Nothing could be more absurd than the present 
sets of antithetical approaches. Why can't 
Islamabad think holistically whether it wants to 
change or remain in the comfort of old notions: 
India is the enemy. Why cannot a situation be 
visualized in which India and Pakistan would 
invite each other to enrich themselves culturally 
and economically through cooperation and trade? 
Here is an exciting goal: let the two jointly 
undertake to ensure that each Indian and 
Pakistani citizen becomes entitled to social 
security in his or her own state -- a minimal but 
progressive one. And it can be created at the 
cost of their military budgets, if necessary. 
That will deepen the friendship, especially if 
combined with cultural cooperation.


_______


[4]

Praful Bidwai Column
May 2, 2005

INDIA VACILLATES ON NEPAL: DON'T COMPROMISE WITH DESPOTISM

By Praful Bidwai

Did India lose in two days in Jakarta the 
tremendous goodwill it earned over three months 
in Nepal, by agreeing to meet King Gyanendra and 
resume the arms supply it blocked since the Royal 
usurpation of power of February 1? India is 
certainly in serious danger of doing 
so-notwithstanding the King's reported assurances 
about not extending the state of emergency beyond 
April 30.

The King quickly publicised the Indian offer and 
gloated that "Š we have got assurances that [the 
arms supplies] will continue." This gave New 
Delhi an opportunity to go public about the 
King's "roadmap" for restoring democracy and thus 
hold his feet to the fire. India squandered that 
chance and revealed utter confusion in its Nepal 
policy. This looks especially stark after the 
arrests of former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur 
Deuba and others.

Whether or not India's weapons offer is 
conditional, and whether or not it's limited to 
releasing a consignment already in the pipeline, 
a shift has doubtless occurred in New Delhi's 
stance. It has been in the making for many weeks 
and became apparent at the United Nations 
Commission on Human Rights in Geneva last month, 
when India, with the United States and Britain, 
blocked a worthy and tough resolution 
reprimanding Nepal and appointing a Special 
Rapporteur. The "troika" offered the King an 
escape route under a mild procedure only asking 
for "technical cooperation" (Agenda Item 19).

India seems to have diluted its principled stand 
against the Royal takeover for four reasons. 
First, there is the hyped-up fear in New Delhi 
that Nepali Maoists would infiltrate into India, 
aggravating the Naxalite problem. Second, the 
King pleaded that the Royal Nepal Army (RNA) is 
running out of the ammunition it badly needs to 
control the insurgents. Third, there was the 
fear-especially after the Chinese Foreign 
Minister's recent visit to Kathmandu-that China 
and Pakistan would occupy the space of influence 
vacated by India. And fourth, problems of mutual 
concern like water, environment and economic 
development would persist if India continued with 
its strong stand against the coup.

Remarkably, none of these considerations has 
anything to do with Nepali realities: most of the 
3,000 prisoners taken under the coup continue to 
be detained; draconian operations remain in 
force, including Tora Bora-style helicopter 
attacks that kill more civilians than insurgents; 
the media remains stifled by censorship. On the 
very day Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met the 
King, the Royal government plucked out from a 
plane three Nepalis, including a former Supreme 
Court justice and the Bar Association president, 
who were leaving Kathmandu to attend a conference 
in New Delhi.

Fears about the "Maoist factor" are, to put it 
mildly, exaggerated. The Naxalite movement is 
indigenous. Less than a fifth of the 175 
districts affected by it are anywhere near Nepal. 
Indian arms are likely to be used by the RNA to 
grossly repressive ends. Between February 17 and 
23, the RNA conducted a massacre in Kapilavastu 
district and then flogged the dead bodies in 
front of TV cameras in the presence of Nepali 
ministers.

India should not worry much about China and 
Pakistan becoming Nepal's substitute 
arms-suppliers. Pakistan is playing a small game, 
and has no major influence in Kathmandu. Neither 
Pakistan, nor more importantly China, would like 
to lose the greater benefits of peace with India 
for tiny potential gains in Nepal. India and 
China could well have issued a joint statement 
appealing for Nepal's re-democratisation during 
Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Delhi. This chance 
was missed. Finally, issues of India-Nepal 
bilateral concern would best be resolved if there 
is a representative regime in Kathmandu.

However, the weightiest reason why India should 
not dilute its stand against the King's 
usurpation of power is the Nepal situation 
itself. The coup has aggravated the crisis of 
governability and the monarchy has discredited 
itself. Nepal's political parties were thrown 
into disarray after the King unleashed a wave of 
repression. But now, they are recouping and 
planning to launch a focused agitation for the 
restitution of multi-party democracy. At a 
convention in Delhi on April 23, all major 
parties but one pledged themselves to a 
Republican order. As a minimum demand, they all 
agreed on a Constituent Assembly.

The Nepali people have tasted democracy for 15 
years and won't be easily cowed down by the King. 
Nepal's politicians may not be South Asia's most 
competent, coherent or clean leaders.  But as 
Nepali editor and commentator Kanak Mani Dixit 
says, "they do shine when compared to the 
monarchy's 30 years of misrule" until 1990.

Since the RNA's Unified Command took over under 
the monarchy in November 2001, Nepal has 
accelerated its march towards state failure. All 
its institutions, including the judiciary, are in 
trouble. The state's writ doesn't run in 70 
percent of the territory. The law-courts don't 
function in the 19 hill districts. The number of 
police stations has decreased from 1,500 to 350. 
The healthcare system has collapsed. Growth has 
come to a standstill.

Since the coup, the number of people being killed 
daily has risen almost three-fold. The number of 
"disappeared" persons is now 1,619, according to 
the Human Rights Commission. More than half of 
the budget of the country, 42 percent of whose 
people live below subsistence, is financed by 
external aid.

The King's takeover had little to do with 
"safeguarding democracy" or even fighting the 
insurgency. Rather, it was a reaction to the 
decentralisation and redistribution of power that 
has occurred under Parliamentary democracy. Power 
has increasingly devolved to regional groups and 
ethnic minorities outside the Kathmandu Valley. 
As Dixit says, a "doubling of the rural roads 
network, spread of telecommunications, and the 
opening up of overseas employment" has made 
Nepalis more "confident in challenging 
authority." The Royal coup was a reaction to this 
momentum towards democratisation-a desperate 
attempt to roll it back. It was profoundly 
reactionary.

The King has acquired a new instrument of 
coercion through the high-powered Commission on 
Corruption Control, which is being used to 
intimidate and harass political leaders, 
dissidents, even judges. Community radio, in 
which Nepal is a world leader, is being 
destroyed. King Gyanendra's record thoroughly 
falsifies the grandiose promises he has made, 
including that of restoring normalcy in 100 days. 
He has done his utmost to promote the interests 
of a narrow rapacious elite that thrives on the 
peoples' poverty.  Just before leaving for 
Jakarta, he passed on his mantle to his dreaded 
son Paras in a special ceremony organised by the 
World Hindu Federation.

Opposing the King does not amount to 
strengthening the Maoists. Indeed, it can 
encourage long-overdue reform, including land 
reform, and further decentralisation. The 
Maoists' methods can be criticised, but not their 
political platform-a representative, radicalised, 
democracy. Their violence fades into 
insignificance beside the excesses of the RNA, 
which is responsible for a majority of the 11,000 
people killed since 1996.

India, with the US and Britain, did great harm to 
the cause of Nepali democracy and pluralism a 
year ago, when it sent its ambassador (present 
foreign secretary Shyam Saran) to persuade a 
multi-party "Anti-Regression" initiative to call 
off a major agitation for restoring multi-party 
rule. The agitation might have pre-empted the 
coup. It's India's moral and political 
responsibility to rectify this blunder.

India must now revise its standard formulation 
emphasising the "twin pillars"- Constitutional 
monarchy, and multi-party democracy. She must 
squarely side with the popular forces fighting 
for democracy. The King is a despot. He has shown 
no intention of reforming his ways. Even if he 
lifts the emergency, he is unlikely to release 
prisoners, bring errant soldiers to book, restore 
media freedom, or install a broad-based 
multi-party government. The issue of lifting the 
emergency is a red herring. It's not good enough 
that Nepal return to the pre-February status quo. 
It must go further. India has been seen as a 
bulwark of support by the Nepali people. It must 
not let them down by legitimising the King's 
authoritarian rule.

A larger issue arises. What role should India as 
an aspirant to Great Power status and a Security 
Council seat play? This cannot be separated from 
India's potential contribution to making the 
world, especially its neighbourhood, a better 
place. India must help South Asia become a more 
open, democratic, plural, just and equitable 
society at peace with itself.

Leadership is not only about economic clout, 
military muscle or political power. It's about 
the purposes of power. These will be legitimate 
only if they promote universal principles and 
values. Taking one-fourth of humanity, which 
lives in South Asia, out of poverty and 
backwardness undoubtedly constitutes a universal 
good. India must contribute to it.

The case for doing so in Nepal is all the greater 
considering India's special relationship with it, 
the 1,700 km-long open border, their citizens' 
right of residence and work in each other's 
countries, as well as historic ties of culture. A 
failing state and a deeply convulsed, troubled 
and disintegrating society in Nepal cannot be in 
India's interest. The King is the surest 
guarantee of disaster. He must be opposed-on 
principle and in practice.-end-

_______


[5]

The Telegraph
April 25, 2005  | Editorial

SECULAR SPIRIT

Other-worldly aspirations never went against 
worldly acquisitions - any well-to-do temple in 
India would stand witness to that. Managing the 
wealth of the houses of worship is a complicated 
job, and the Supreme Court does not think that it 
need be left to believers alone. This is 
suggested by its response to a petition 
challenging a Kerala high court ruling, brought 
by the president of the Guruvayoor temple 
protection committee and a Vishwa Hindu Parishad 
leader. The petition objects to Marxist ministers 
nominating members to the temple committees as 
Marxists are against religious practice. The 
Supreme Court has made two points in its 
judgment. It has said that to be a Hindu a person 
need not go to a temple or follow particular 
rituals. This statement makes an incisive 
distinction between Hinduism and Hindutva. Its 
second, and equally important, point is that 
management of a temple has nothing to do with 
religion, it is a secular task and should be 
conducted in the same manner as the 
administration of any other institution. That is, 
when the state has taken over the job of managing 
the worldly affairs of a temple, as in the case 
of Guruvayoor or of many of the temples in Tamil 
Nadu, the system of ministers nominating members 
to temple managing committees should not be 
affected by the faith or political ideology of 
the government in power.

The Supreme Court's clarity is in contrast to the 
murky tussles concerning temple management that 
must lie behind the petition. Whatever might have 
been this petitioner's primary concern, it would 
seem that, generally, faith is hardly the core 
issue. The sphere of temple management offers an 
arena for tourneys for power and less 
metaphysical prizes, with the aura of sanctity as 
a useful screen behind which such profane 
struggles can continue undetected. The lurid tale 
of the Kanchi math is a good recent example.

So while the Supreme Court has made the relevant 
clarifications, it is also necessary to take the 
question further. A secular state can be secular 
only by divorcing itself strictly from the 
functioning of the various religions of its 
people. Its "tolerance" need not be exhibited in 
the organizing and subsidizing of pilgrimages or 
ceremonies for all faiths. Neither should its 
leaders try to curry favour with the electorate 
by displaying their deep respect for the 
spiritual heads and holy men of different 
religions. But such a divorce is impossible if 
the state takes over the administration of places 
of worship. A government in a secular state does 
not provide the places of worship; there is no 
reason why it should look after them. As it is, 
the notion of secularism is a deeply troubled 
one. A secular state administering temples is 
likely to confuse perceptions further.

______


[6]

Hindustan Times
May 3, 2005

SANGH GOES ON AIR, INDIRECT TO HOME
Hemendra Singh Bartwal
New Delhi, May 2, 2005

The Sangh Parivar soon won't be cribbing about 
its leaders being 'misquoted' by 'biased' news 
channels with the launch of 'Sudarshan TV'.

Floated by a dedicated swayamsewak, the channel 
is expected to project the Sangh's Hindutva 
ideology and viewpoint. And though the Sangh is 
not going to be directly involved in the 
channel's operations or funding, it has certainly 
welcomed it.

Incidentally, the resemblance of the soon-to-be 
launched channel's name to RSS chief KS Sudarshan 
is purely coincidental, or that's what its 
promoters would like everyone to believe.

Whatever the case, Sudarshan - who bitterly 
complains about the "biased" Indian media 
dominated by what he calls "Macaulay-putras and 
Marx-putras" - is definitely looking forward to 
not to being 'misquoted' on the channel.

Sources say the Rs 100-crore project has been 
granted clearance by the I&B Ministry.

Coming at a time when the Sangh is under heavy 
attack from various quarters, Sudarshan TV is 
expected to come in handy when Sangh leaders want 
to counter what they call "distorted and 
malicious propaganda" with their own 'version' of 
news and views.

"This will be an aggressive channel... Other 
channels make goats out of the youth while we 
will turn them into roaring tigers," declared its 
chairman Suresh Chavhanke, a Pune-based business 
magnate.

Admitting he is an active swayamsewak, he denies 
Sudarshan TV will be directly influenced by the 
Sangh, saying that it is a commercial venture 
that will be run on professional lines. "It is a 
patriotic channel whose mission is 
nation-building. It will be guided by the 
objectives of dev, desh  and dharma," he said.

Chavhanke maintains that the channel's name 
refers to the mythical 'Sudarshan chakra' wielded 
by Lord Krishna in the Mahabharata. Besides, in 
Hindi, Sudarshan also means "good viewing", he 
adds.

______


[7]

Outlook Magazine
Web | April 26, 2005    

MANIPUR- AN INCENDIARY SCRIPT
The atrocious act of arson at the Manipur State 
Central Library where all of its more than 
1,45,000 books were destroyed on April 13, 2005 
is just the latest in the storm of revivalism 
blowing across the violence-wracked state.
Pradip Phanjoubam

A storm of revivalism is blowing across the 
valley districts of Manipur, spearheaded by an 
organisation that calls itself MEELAL (Meetei 
Erol Eyek Loinshillon Apunba Lup, or the United 
Forum for Safeguarding Manipuri Script and 
Language), and has culminated in the atrocious 
act of arson at the Manipur State Central Library 
where all of its more than 1,45,000 books were 
destroyed on April 13, 2005.

MEELAL initiated its violent campaign to 
'immediately' have the Bengali script replaced by 
the indigenous Meitei Mayek in written Manipuri, 
and to have all school text books written in this 
script from the current academic session. 
Presently, and for almost the last 300 years, the 
Bengali script has been the medium of written 
Manipuri. MEELAL activists have been going about 
visiting schools, snatching textbooks written in 
Bengali and burning them for almost two months 
now, with the Okram Ibobi led Congress government 
merely 'waiting and watching' - now very much its 
trade mark policy for 'tackling' crises - in the 
hope that the storm will eventually spend itself 
and pass.

Regardless of numerous appeals from the 
government and a good section of the vocal 
public, MEELAL intensified its campaign and added 
an economic blockade of the state, over and above 
its textbook burning spree. Many freight trucks 
that entered Imphal against the blockade call 
ended up in ashes, in the heart of capital, in 
full public view and under the very nose of the 
government.

At one stage, MEELAL even issued a diktat that 
all vernacular dailies should begin using Meitei 
Mayek by March 1. The newspapers initially 
refused to do so, provoking MEELAL's ire, with 
activists raiding newspaper distribution centres 
and intimidating hawkers, starting March 11, till 
the newspapers complied with their diktat. In the 
initial sweep, even local English dailies were 
not spared. In protest, newspapers in the state 
stopped publication for three days and 
journalists staged a sit-in protest against the 
intrusion on their freedom, until a settlement 
was negotiated under which MEELAL was to allow 
the distribution of newspapers if the vernacular 
newspapers reserved some space on the front page 
for news written in Meitei Mayek. 

The government continued its watching game. All 
except one daily complied with the agreement, but 
many were extremely compliant and even went the 
whole hog in using the entire front page for news 
written in the Meitei Mayek. However, these 
enthusiasts retracted their extreme gesture of 
support after they found no takers among their 
readers, and their circulations dropped.

______


[8]

The Hindu, May 4, 2005

ART CAN'T BE SUPRESSED BY FUNDAMENTALISTS: PUNJAB ARTISTES

Chandigarh, May 4 (PTI): Expressing concern that 
a handful of "fundamentalists" in the name of 
religion were out to harass them in a bid to curb 
their freedom of expression, theatre and 
television artistes drawn from various parts of 
Punjab and Chandigarh today resolved that they 
will keep highlighting the issues plaguing 
society despite all odds.

"Nobody can gag our voice. If there are wrongs 
happening in our society we can't shut our eyes 
and look other way. It is our duty to convey to 
the people what is right by staging plays, 
through satire etc," veteran theatre artist from 
Punjab Gursharan Singh said during a press 
conference here. Theatre personality from 
Chandigarh G S Channi said, "No religion imposes 
any kind of censorship and it is only a handful 
of people who exploit religion for their vested 
interests."

Chandigarh Sangeet Natak Akademi's chairman Kamal 
Tiwari said if an artist's right to highlight the 
social issues was snatched in the name of 
"religion or by fundamentalist elements then it 
will be very unfortunate".

The artistes had gathered here to express their 
solidarity with famous satirist Jaspal Bhatti, 
who is facing a Court case here over one of his 
street performances in Chandigarh last year.

Another artist Davinder Daman said that even 
first Sikh Guru, Nanak Dev and Saint Kabir used 
to "encourage people to think on scientific lines 
and shun rituals which did not have any 
scientific backing".

Theatre and Film Artistes Association President 
Shavinder Mahal urged the artistes to unite on 
one platform. "We will unitedly fight against the 
individuals or organisations who will try to 
divide the artistes' unity and our audiences on 
communal lines," he said.


______


[9]

The Telegraph -  May 05, 2005

SPACE SCIENCE IN THE LORD'S HANDS

G.S. Radhakrishna

Hyderabad, May 4: If the rocket crashes tomorrow, blame Lord Balaji.

Indian space scientists placed miniature replicas 
of the rocket that is set to blast off tomorrow 
morning from the Sriharikota spaceport and the 
two satellites it would carry at a shrine to the 
god for his blessings.

The replicas were taken to the sanctum sanctorum 
of the reigning deity of the Tirupati Tirumala 
Dewasthanam and ordained as priests chanted Vedic 
hymns.

Authorities of the temple in Tirupati in Andhra 
Pradesh, where the spaceport is located, 
confirmed that 15 scientists from the Indian 
Space Research Organisation, led by its chief, Dr 
G. Madhavan Nair, came to the town yesterday to 
seek the deity's blessings.

A temple spokesman quoted Nair as saying: "I am 
in Tirupati to offer prayers for the success of 
the launch."

"I cannot believe they actually did this," said 
Prof. Ajay Sood, head of physical sciences at the 
Indian Institute of Science in Bangalore.

"For an individual, going to a temple may be an 
issue of faith, but to mix the space programme 
with religion is very wrong," said Prof. Kasturi 
Lal Chopra, president of India's Society for 
Scientific Values and former director of the 
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.

Tomorrow's launch is aimed at putting every 
Indian household on the map. One of the 
satellites, the 1.5-tonne CARTOSAT-1, mounted 
with two cameras for "stereographic" imaging, 
carries with it the ambitions of India's space 
programme.

Once lodged into orbit 618 km above earth, the 
satellite can read images smaller than a motorcar 
by identifying features down to 2.5 metres across.

The satellite will help urban and rural planning, 
land and water management, relief operations and 
environmental assessments.

CARTOSAT-1, which represents the highest payload 
carried so far by a polar satellite launch 
vehicle, will also carry a 42.5-kg HAMSAT, a 
micro-satellite that provides amateur radio 
services.

The scientists spent almost half an hour in the 
sanctum sanctorum and later took part in an 
elaborate ritual for another hour when priests 
showered ashirvachanam (blessings) of the deity 
on them.

"Some of the scientists even put currency notes 
in the temple hundi (container) for the success 
of the launch," said the temple spokesman. 
Sources said the prayers followed astrological 
predictions that the launch could be delayed.

This is not the first time space scientists have 
turned to god before an expedition into the 
distant heavens. Former Isro chief K. 
Kasturirangan, too, had invoked divine blessings 
before a launch.

"This practice is in vogue since the days of 
Kasturirangan," said D. Narayana Rao, director of 
the MSP radar station at Tirupati who had 
organised the temple trip.

Tomorrow's launch is scheduled for 10.19 am when 
the PSLV C-6 (picture on right) will take off 
from the newly-built second launch pad, 1.5 km 
south of the first launch pad in Sriharikota.

President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who has a 
scientific background, inaugurated the second 
launch pad today.

______


[10]     [Announcements: ]


CONFERENCE ON "POLITICAL HINDUISM"

The Center for the Study of Religion, with additional
funding from the Asia Institute and the Center for
Modern and Contemporary Studies, and the assistance of
the Department of History and the Colloquium on South
Asian History and Cultural Studies, presents

a major conference on "Political Hinduism" at the UCLA
Campus, 6-7 May 2005.

Venue:  Haines 118 [Central Quad], 9- 6 PM both days
(Friday, May 6 and Saturday, May 7).  The conference
is free and open to the public.
Parking is $7 and available at Lots 2 and 3.

Conference Director:  Vinay Lal, Department of
History, UCLA [vlal at history.ucla.edu]

Brief Description:
The political ascendancy of the Hindu right in India
since the mid-1980s has been a subject of much
scholarly inquiry.   This conference is not intended
to cover terrain that has already been well explored,
but rather it seeks to open new lines of inquiry and
bring cultural anthropologists, scholars of Hinduism,
media and cultural studies practitioners, historians,
and scholars of Indian culture more broadly into
conversation with each other.  The distinguished
scholars who will be presenting papers at this
conference will pose different kinds of questions,
such as:   What is the relationship between Hindu
militancy and Hindutva to Hinduism on the ground?
Have Hindu modes of worship and religious practices
witnessed any dramatic changes?  We have all heard
much about 'Vedic science', but is the Hindi film also
a barometer of these changes, and not only in the most
obvious ways (increasing references to
terrorism in Pakistan, for instance)?   Again, we have
heard (correctly or otherwise) a good deal about the
elevation of the Ramacaritmanas into an allegedly
hegemonic text under the aegis of Hindutva, but can we
entertain broader considerations about how certain
texts, religious practices, deities, and 'margas' have
prospered while  others have declined, been demoted,
or have suffered from neglect? is it only the upper
castes which have mobilized in the name of Hindutva,
or have the lower castes done so as well?  Can there
be 'political Hinduism' that is something other than
Hindutva?

PROGRAM:  ALL events will be held in HAINES 118

Friday, May 6

9 - 9:30 AM  The Politics of Hinduism:  Introduction
to the Conference
Vinay Lal (History, UCLA)

9:30 - 11 AM  Tilak's Arctic Home Theory:  Religion,
Politics, and the Colonial Context
Madhav Deshpande (Sanskrit and Linguistics, University
of Michigan-Ann Arbor)

11:15 - 12:45 AM  Vande Mataram: the Genesis and Power
of a Song
Julius Lipner (Divinity, Cambridge University, UK)

12:45 - 2:15 PM   LUNCH

2:15- 3:45 AM   Religious Categories, Translation and
Everyday Life
Veena Das (Anthropology, Johns Hopkins University)

4 - 5:30 PM  C. Rajagopalachari and the Cultural Work
of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Paula Richman (Religion, Oberlin College)


Saturday, May 7

9 - 10:30 AM  Making Hinduism Global: New
Guru-Oriented Religious Movement as Confluent with or
Counter to Hindutva?
Joanne Waghorne (Religion, Syracuse University)

10:30 - noon Nationalist Nostalgias, Diasporic
Desires: Identity and Tradition in an Era of
Transnational Media
Purnima Mankekar (Cultural and Social Anthropology,
Stanford)

Noon - 1:15 PM  LUNCH

1:15 - 2:45  PM   Ramdev and Ravidas: How Hinduism
gets Political for Dalits
Chris Pinney (Anthropology & Visual Culture,
University College London)

2:45 - 4:15 PM   Getting a Life:  The "Hanumayana" as
Emerging Epic
Philip Lutgendorf (Hindi and Indian Studies,
University of Iowa)

4:30 - 6 PM   Patriotism and the Hindi Film
Ron Inden (History, and South Asian Languages &
Civilizations, University of Chicago)


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

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.