SACW | 23 May 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire  | 23 May,  2005

[1] Lal Jayawardena (1934-2004) A Colloquium in 
Remembrance (Lyn Squire with the assistance of 
Priya Raghavan, Sanchari Roy, Partha Pratim Sahu)
[2]  Pakistan- India: Desire for peace (Zulfiqar Shah)
[3]  India : A Year after the Fascist Rout (J. Sri Raman)
[4]  India: A shocking absence of outrage (Editorial, The Hindu)
[5]  India: Barred! Moral policing is retrograde, 
dangerous (Editorial, The Tribune)
[6]  India: Aggressive Vegetarianism (Ram Puniyani)
[7]  India: Letter to the Editor (Nirmalangshu 
Mukherji, Vijay Singh and Ali Javed)
[8]  India: Terror angle in Akshardham, not Godhra: POTA panel


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


[1]


The Economic and Political Weekly
May 14, 2005

LAL JAYAWARDENA (1934-2004)
A Colloquium in Remembrance

Many would perhaps not agree, but Lal Jayawardena 
believed in holding ideas loftier than narrow 
vested interests. It was his firm conviction that 
ultimately good would triumph over evil.

Lyn Squire with the assistance of Priya Raghavan, 
Sanchari Roy, Partha Pratim Sahu

Lal Jayawardena passed away on April 8, 2004. A 
year to the day, Liaqat Ali and Vinod Dubey, 
lifelong friends of Lal, convened a colloquium in 
memory and honour of this outstanding economist, 
brilliant diplomat and wonderful human being. 
Organised by the Global Development Network, the 
event was inaugurated by prime minister Manmohan 
Singh at his residence in the presence of a 
distinguished gathering of Jayawardena's 
relatives, friends and colleagues. Participants 
then proceeded to the Habitat Centre where 
panelists, all notable economists in their own 
right and long-standing colleagues of Lal, 
offered their thoughts and reflections on some of 
his many intellectual contributions to our 
understanding of development. This brief report 
on the event will, it is hoped, serve as a 
lasting tribute to a truly remarkable man.

Capturing His Essence

Lal's stature and renown is reflected in the 
stature and renown of those saluting him, as well 
as in their verbal praise. Consider these quotes 
from some of the world's most distinguished 
economists and intellectuals:
- Rehman Sobhan remarked that as a diplomat and 
international civil servant and as a researcher, 
Lal Jayawardena was well known for his penchant 
for constantly "pushing at the frontiers" of 
economic thinking and policy-making.
- Nobel Laureate, Amartya Sen, described Lal as 
having the "rare ability to be energetically 
sensitive to the predicament of people everywhere 
in the world" and as someone who was "deeply 
sympathetic to radical changes and wanted to 
build a society that would be foundationally more 
just".
- Prime minister Manmohan Singh emphasised Lal's 
longstanding commitment to Indo-Sri Lankan 
collaboration and interaction when he said "A 
befitting tribute to Dr Lal Jayawardena will be 
to remain faithful to his ideas and ideals of 
cooperation between India and Sri Lanka."
- Ajit Singh characterised Lal as "an 
intellectual, a lover of life, and a humane and 
gifted leader".

These few comments from among the many delivered 
at the colloquium provide valuable insights into 
the passions and pursuits to which Lal devoted 
his life. Yet none is as memorable or fitting as 
Manmohan Singh's observation that Lal truly 
believed in the ultimate victory of "ideas over 
vested interests". If any single phrase can 
capture the essence of such a remarkable man, it 
is this.

Of special note were the tributes from Sri Lanka. 
Although unable to attend in person, Kumari 
Jayawardena sent a message of thanks to all those 
"university friends, his teachers, and his 
colleagues" who participated in "an event that 
Lal himself would have greatly enjoyed". A 
message from the president of Sri Lanka, read by 
D E W Gunasakara, minister of cultural affairs 
and national integration, and a statement 
delivered by Ranil Wickremesinghe, leader of the 
opposition, were testimony to Lal's high standing 
throughout the political spectrum. Tributes also 
came in the form of substantive discussions of 
key development issues. Under the chairmanship of 
N Ram, editor-in-chief of The Hindu, six 
panelists (Ajit Singh, Jean Drèze, Rehman Sobhan, 
V R Panchmukhi, Saman Kelegama and Nagesh Kumar) 
shared their views on structural adjustment, 
poverty and hunger, employment, and south Asian 
regional cooperation, each of which is 
both crucial for the developing world and central 
to Lal Jayawardena's economic thinking and the 
ideals he advocated wherever he went.

Cambridge

The cobbled streets and elegant and ornate 
corridors of Cambridge have been known to inspire 
many an intellectual. Between 1953 and 1963, Lal 
Jayawardena completed the economics Tripos with a 
'double first' and earned his PhD at the 
University of Cambridge. These years of Lal's 
life were full of idealistic aspirations and the 
exuberant energy rendered by youth and its 
endless capacity to inculcate an otherwise rare 
value of 'hope'. After all, it is the young who 
dream and envision new futures.

During this critical period of his life, Lal 
interacted with a unique group of remarkable 
intellectuals from south Asia, among whom were 
Jagdish Bhagwati, Amartya Sen, Manmohan Singh, 
Rehman Sobhan and Mahbub ul Haque. This 
interaction helped him nurture ideas and 
perspectives on the role of the developing world 
and its rightful place in the global economic 
regime and to formulate new visions. Lal's early 
career reflected the intellectual passions of his 
Cambridge days. As a still young economist, Lal 
became a member of Sydney Dell's group on the 
international financial system in UNCTAD and was 
later elected to the Committee of Twenty for the 
Reform of the International Monetary System 
(1972-74). Lal was also the chairman of the 
deputies of the Group of Twenty Four (1974-75) 
and an eminent advisor to the Brandt Commission 
on International Development Issues (1978-81).

Ajit Singh captured well Lal's interests in the 
major development issues of the day with his 
presentation on the growing role of the 
developing world (particularly India and China) 
in today's global economy. He spoke of the 
concerns of governments and workers in the 
developed world regarding the possibility of job 
loss due to the availability of low-wage skilled 
and unskilled labour in these countries. 
Characterising these concerns as unduly 
pessimistic, Ajit Singh argued that unlike the 
Golden Age (1953-70) for economies like Japan and 
Italy, India and China did not possess exports 
large enough to challenge the north and cause any 
'real' job loss. If anything, the increase in 
Chinese exports would subsidise American 
consumers and cause an effective outflow of 
capital from China.

Addressing another important concern, he said 
that despite the so-called information technology 
revolution, output, employment and productivity 
in the world economy have grown at a rate lower 
than expected. According to Ajit Singh, these 
problems are the result of demand-side 
constraints whereby the trend rate of growth of 
demand has been lower than that of supply. These 
problems would have to be overcome, in order to 
prevent the possibility of jobless growth and to 
increase the demand for labour without increasing 
inflation. In this context, he emphasised the 
need for enhanced cooperation between nations, 
the importance of managed trade and capital 
movements and sustainable growth.

Credit for creating the concept of the third 
world and giving it prominence in international 
debates and diplomacy inevitably falls to 
political leaders, but the real architects of the 
developing world were the dedicated professionals 
like Lal and his contemporaries who retained the 
ideas and ideals of their undergraduate days and 
brought them to life in the harsher global 
realities of today. Ajit Singh's presentation 
exemplified this rare blend of pure economics and 
policy relevance so characteristic of Lal's work 
throughout his life.

Colombo

Lal Jayawardena was deeply committed to the cause 
of poverty reduction and promotion of economic 
growth in the developing world in general and Sri 
Lanka in particular, as well as to correction of 
the foundational injustice that characterises 
much of human society today. In his capacity as 
secretary to the Treasury and Secretary in the 
Ministry of Finance and Planning (1975-78), he 
played a key role in negotiating Sri Lanka's 
major economic policy reform package of 1977, 
which opened up the economy. The work he did 
while holding high posts in different departments 
of the government of Sri Lanka also bears ample 
proof of his visionary, imaginative and 
courageous policy-making in the context of Sri 
Lanka's economic growth.

Keeping in mind the deep commitment Jayawardena 
displayed towards poverty reduction and economic 
growth, Rehman Sobhan discussed the role of 
structural adjustment programmes (SAPs). Building 
on work arguing for a more heterodox approach to 
structural adjustment that was initiated by Lal 
and involved Lance Taylor, Steve Marglin and 
Tariq Banuri, he emphasised the need for reforms 
that go "beyond the realms of normal structural 
adjustment." Sobhan pointed out that the 
principal reasons behind the failure of the 
earlier "one-size-fits-all" approach were the 
neglect of poverty reduction as a central premise 
of development policy-making and its treatment as 
only "an incidental derivative", along with lack 
of recognition of the fact that existence of 
poverty essentially stems from social injustice 
that even democracy often fails to address. In 
most countries, SAPs did not enjoy the electoral 
support of the masses and were mainly perceived 
as an external imposition, resulting in negative 
growth rates, structural atrophy and emergence of 
the 'failed state'. Some remedial measures 
suggested by Rehman Sobhan in this regard 
included the "incorporation of workers' rights to 
corporate wealth", the right to good quality 
education for all so as to prevent the formation 
of a society "divided on lines of education and 
skill" in an increasingly knowledge-driven world, 
the extension of micro-credit to macro-finance 
and the creation of a "political culture 
sensitive to the poor" along with provision of 
democratic access to the state to ensure 
"relevant structural adjustment".

Continuing with this theme, Jean Drèze made 
hunger and poverty the centerpiece of his 
presentation. Very much in the spirit of Lal's 
efforts to push the intellectual frontier, he 
highlighted some lacunae in current research on 
issues of hunger and poverty. He argued that the 
role of violent conflicts in the creation and 
perpetuation of poverty had been particularly 
neglected. Children, despite being some of the 
most marginalised members of society, have also 
received little attention in economic research. A 
third lacuna is the lack of serious involvement 
with political economy, noticeable, for instance, 
in simplistic views of the democratic process. In 
conclusion, he emphasised the urgent need for 
making economic research more relevant to public 
policy and public action.

Since his undergraduate days, Lal remained true 
to his mission of improving the lives of all Sri 
Lankans, with economic growth being a key 
ingredient in his mind. His idea that the road to 
the eradication of hunger and poverty was through 
"relevant structural adjustment" and inclusive 
growth was amply borne out in the colloquium 
discussions.

Helsinki

Lal's penchant to push the frontiers of thinking 
was perhaps most evident in his tenure as the 
first Director of the United Nations University's 
World Institute for Development Economics 
Research (UNU/WIDER) (1985-93). Here Lal 
displayed his characteristic energy and 
enthusiasm in leading WIDER to become a premier 
institution in the world promoting serious, 
independent and high quality research as well as 
practical deliberations. Lal's membership of the 
UNU/WIDER Study Group that produced the 'Okita 
Plan' for recycling Japan's surplus to developing 
countries is a case in point, clearly reflecting 
his concern for the long-term financial 
requirements of these countries.

With respect to south Asia, perhaps his most 
important achievement was the WIDER-sponsored 
study on the Indo-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement 
(FTA). Lal had argued the case for economic 
cooperation in south Asia before it appeared on 
the agenda of the South Asian Association of 
Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The Trade, 
Manufacturing and Services Study of the SAARC 
Secretariat was instrumental in introducing some 
practical initiatives for fostering economic 
integration in the region on a multilateral basis 
but the WIDER-RIS-government of Sri Lanka study, 
led by Lal Jayawardena, expedited the process by 
emphasising trade liberalisation in a bilateral 
framework. Lal continued with this activity even 
after entering the government. As the deputy 
chairman of the National Development Council in 
Sri Lanka, Lal together with the Indian 
Ambassador in Sri Lanka at that time, Shiv 
Shankar Menon, pushed the idea of an Indo-Sri 
Lanka FTA that finally came into operation in 
March 2000.

Focusing on Lal's contribution to south Asian 
cooperation, V R Panchamukhi examined the two 
decades of SAARC progress and lamented the still 
slow pace of integration in the region. To 
rejuvenate the SAARC process he suggested 
expansion of the geographical coverage; placing 
the economic agenda in the driver's seat and 
relegating political irritants to the backseat; 
better information flows and adoption of 
confidence-building measures to reduce conflicts 
of perceptions; moving beyond mere trade 
liberalisation to issues such as 
trade-expansion capability, promoting intra 
regional investment flows and technology 
transfers along with effective product 
harmonisation, and pooling intellectual 
and policy resources to confront the challenges 
of globalisation.

Saman Kelegama continued the focus on Lal's 
endeavours to promote bilateral free trade 
agreements in south Asia, especially between Sri 
Lanka and India. He discussed the emergence of 
the south Asian Free Trade Agreement and the 
incorporation of economic cooperation into the 
SAARC agenda. He pointed to some of the benefits 
to Sri Lanka of the Indo-Sri Lanka FTA including 
a reduced trade deficit and increased exports to 
India. Nagesh Kumar looked at the Agreement from 
India's perspective, emphasising investment 
opportunities as well as possibilities of setting 
up production bases in Sri Lanka to exploit her 
rich reservoir of natural resources. Extension of 
the Indo-Lanka FTA to other south Asian countries 
may also lead to the emergence of 
sector-specific free trade hubs in different 
countries of the region.

Whatever the particular focus of the three 
presenters on this topic, the conclusion was 
common: Lal can truly be credited with helping to 
introduce the Indo-Sri Lankan Free Trade 
Agreement that has become the prime mover of 
trade between India and Sri Lanka and a model for 
the rest of the region.

At the time of his death, Lal Jayawardena was the 
first chair of the board of directors of the 
Global Development Network (GDN), a worldwide 
association of research institutes and 
researchers, dedicated to generating, sharing and 
applying social science research to policy for 
the purpose of development. In many ways, this 
assignment represented a continuation of Lal's 
efforts at WIDER to bring the perspectives of 
researchers from the developing world to bear on 
the most pressing national and international 
issues of the day. Now, however, the research 
that is being supported is conducted entirely in 
the developing world, rather than in Helsinki.

Lal helped guide GDN through its formative years 
and his leadership and initiative helped to 
create the substance and character of GDN as it 
is today. Those of us associated with GDN like to 
think of the network as a living memorial to Lal. 
In closing the colloquium, Bina Agarwal, a fellow 
board member of GDN, captured the spirit of Lal 
through some poetry readings and expressed the 
gratitude of the entire GDN community. As our 
special tribute to this remarkable man, great 
economist, and leading development specialist, 
GDN will commemorate his life and his thinking by 
assigning his portrait a place of honour in the 
newly-opened offices in New Delhi.



_______


[2]


The News, May 22, 2005

DESIRE FOR PEACE

Peace march from one saint's shrine to another brings thousands of
people together from India and Pakistan

By Zulfiqar Shah

On May 10 in Multan, thousands of citizens thronged at Chowk
Kumbharwala to greet a small delegation of peace marchers coming from
the other side of the border. To some people it may seem like a
simple event but it took three years for a small group of committed
activists on both sides of the border to realise this unique idea.

It was an annual convention of Pak India Peoples Forum in Karachi
when Dr. Sandeep Pandey, a renowned Indian peace activist and
intellectual, floated the idea of a peace march in December 2003
which sounded nothing more than a crazy idea then. Many thought it
impossible in the strained relations between the two nuclear
neighbours.

Pandey then visited a civil society organisation in Karachi and
shared the idea in detail, surprising many of its staff members who
kept quiet for the moment. But it was the tiny figure of activist
Aslam Khawaja who raised his hand saying, "I am with you, come what
may."

"This was really encouraging, and I thought now it's possible," says
Pandey, one of the peace marchers and organisers of the present
show. "I had already discussed it with Pakistani peace activist and
labour leader Karamat Ali who supported the idea and joined hands."

It was undoubtedly a difficult idea and the problems ranged from visa
to security of peace marchers who were to walk for about two months
in the two enemy countries.

But for Karamat and Pandey, the two main organisers, it was very much
possible. Activism coupled with political vision gave them the
conviction that they could turn it into a reality.

Interestingly, Pandey was lucky to have the endorsement of Pak India
People's Forum India chapter and other networks for the idea.
Pakistani side initially faced problems in having such an endorsement
but later all networks joined hands and Pakistan Peace Coalition
(PPC), a composition of different organisations, came forward to host
the activities in Pakistan.

Despite all difficulties, the peace march started on March 23 2005,
two years after it was initially conceived, from the Dargah (shrine)
of Nizamuddin Aulia in Delhi. It culminated at the shrine of Ghous
Bahauddin Zakarya in Multan.

No Pakistani peace marcher was issued a visa to participate in the
march in the beginning. "It was ironic that the peace marchers were
not issued visas since it was promised by top leadership of the two
countries," says Karamat Ali, a representative of Pakistan Peace
Coalition and organiser of the march in Pakistan. "Instead of
facilitating this march, governments tried to create obstacles in its
way."

Organisers of the event say that before the start of the march, they
had a meeting with the prime minister of Pakistan and Indian high
commissioner in Islamabad and both sides promised to issue visas. It
did not turn out to be so when passports were sent in. They got lost
on the excuse of some 50 years old security clearance syndrome.

While the Indian marchers started the walk, Pakistani marchers
eagerly waited for visas. "We wanted to join them but it was beyond
us. We stayed in Lahore hoping to cross the border every day," says
Aslam Khawaja, a peace marcher from Sindh.

Finally, nine Pakistani peace marchers were issued visas and were
able to join their Indian friends. "We walked with them for five days
only as they had already covered a long way," says Khawaja.

Interestingly, when the March reached Wagah border on April 18,
Pakistan government resorted to the same delaying tactics in issuing
visa, which compelled the organisers to halt the march. After hectic
efforts of a number of peace activists in Pakistan, 12 Indian
marchers were issued conditional visas which demanded of them to
travel in vehicles to Multan and did not allow them to walk.

Hundreds of Pakistanis greeted them when they crossed the border on
May 8. In Multan thousands of people marched with the convoy from
chowk Kumbharwala to Dargah Ghous Bahauddin Zakarya where Makhdoom
Shah Mahmood Hussain Qureshi, the spiritual heir of the shrine and a
member of parliament, received them. People had come from different
places to join the march.

In Karamat Ali's view: "Despite obstacles, the march remained
successful as we were able to bring out the issues." He says the idea
was to help promote interaction among the people, so that they talk
to each other on different issues. In India peace marchers met 500-
600 people daily.

The marchers, many of them trained peace activists, discussed issues
like nuclear disarmament to peaceful solution of Kashmir and were
able to get thousands of signatures on a petition they carried, which
demanded a peaceful solution of Kashmir issue and no-war pact between
the two neighbours.

"It was not an easy job to talk to ordinary people on such sensitive
issues. But we really got very positive response, as there was no
hostility. You could not imagine these things a few years back," says
an Indian peace marcher. All this shows peoples' desire for harmony
and peace.

Many people wondered why were the shrines of saint selected as the
starting and ending points for the peace march. Was it to promote
religion?

"The reason to link the march with the shrines of two saints was to
highlight the sufic aspect of religion. Sufis fought against
extremism and tyranny so we wanted to make this march symbolic,"
explains Karamat.

The other reason was to involve the current spiritual heirs of these
shrines in peace process. "I must appreciate that both the spiritual
leaders co-operated more than our expectations," he says.

Nizamuddin, spiritual heir of the shrine of Nizamuddin Aulia,
travelled from Delhi to accompany the march from Lahore to Multan.
While Shah Mahmood Qureshi received the march in Multan and attended
the peace conference.

Undoubtedly, the participation of Shah Mahmood Qureshi will impact
the peace process in a positive way. His opposition to spending on
weapons in a conference of about 1000 people was a success for anti-
arms activists.

Though peace marchers were not allowed to walk into Pakistan,
organisers say they are very much satisfied with the outcome. Though
many of them think that the idea of walking on Pakistani roads is
still alive.

"We will march on foot from Wagha to Multan whenever we get
permission," reiterates Karamat. "We are writing to the authorities
to fulfill their promise and allow the peace marchers to walk in
Pakistan like they did in India."

He said people to people contact is very important because this
region has less contact comparing to Asean and other
regions. "Participation of common man in the peace march shows the
urge of peace among ordinary citizens. It's time the governments
recognised this need and moved fast towards peace as well."


_______


[3]


truthout.org
21 May 2005

INDIA : A YEAR AFTER THE FASCIST ROUT
by J. Sri Raman

May 22 marks the first anniversary of the
government that took over after the electoral
overthrow of a fascist regime in India. Can we truly
celebrate it as a day of deliverance?

The Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA)
government, under Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, plans
countrywide celebrations in which it would like not
only the coalition partners but also its outside
backers including the Left to participate. The
defeated and still sulking National Democratic
Alliance (NDA), under the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP), is busy preparing a political "charge-sheet"
against the Manmohan team.

The run-up to the anniversary has also witnessed a
polite but still prickly debate between the UPA and
the left on what the past year has delivered to the
people.

     Despite all the details of economic policies and
performance that mark the debate, it remains a
rhetorical exercise. They argue endlessly about the
extent to which specific tasks in the Common Minimum
Program (CMP) adopted by the UPA along with all its
supporters have been carried out. Buried deep amidst
all the ensuing balance sheets are the basic and
broader expectations that the political regime change
in New Delhi raised.

     The fascist dispensation under former Prime
Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee distinguished itself,
above all, as an enemy of peace - both internal and
external. The two events that will forever be
associated with it, both internally and
internationally, were: the Pokharan nuclear weapons
tests of 1998 and the Gujarat carnage of 2002. None of
the balance sheets of the UPA's performance in power
takes serious note of the new government's record in
offsetting the twin threats to peace.

     On both these fronts, for sure, there is progress.
But it is progress achieved by the people, with
precious little official contribution. It is the
people-driven part of the India-Pakistan "peace
process" that has paid some dividends and kept alive
even dim hopes of a distant solution to the problems
between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. The official
part of the process, on the contrary, has striven to
treat the nuclear threat as nearly non-existent. The
attempt, as we have seen before in these columns, has
indeed been to forge an India-Pakistan partnership in
seeking entry into the "nuclear club."

     BJP leader and former deputy prime minister Lal
Krishna Advani, addressing a group of businessmen
recently, taunted the Left on its opposition to
Pokharan. Said he : "If China makes a bomb that is
very fine. If the Vajpayee government did it, it was
jingoism." Nothing surprising there. The pro-bomb camp
has always sought to identify anti-nuclearism with the
Left and to damn it by denouncing the Left.

     What surprised, however, was a Left response.
While it answered all the other charges from Advani,
the Left opted to remain discreetly silent on
Pokharan. The unstated Left assumption is that the
bomb has ceased to be an issue after the BJP's
departure from power.

     The avowedly anti-bomb sections of the main ruling
party, the Congress, appear to share the assumption.
The prime minister himself has been at pains to stress
the need for "continuity" and "consensus" in foreign
and defense policies. Forgotten is the famous Action
Plan for Nuclear Disarmament, presented by former
Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi at the United
Nations in 1988. The phased plan would have committed
India to nuclear disarmament by 2010. Attempts by the
Indian peace movement to revive a national campaign
based on the plan, with the help of leaders of
hitherto firm anti-bomb commitment, have proven
fruitless so far.

     And what of Gujarat? Action promised in the CMP
against the perpetrators of the pogrom, which claimed
a toll of nearly 3,000 human lives, should have been
easier. All the more so for the fact that the carnage
has by now received much publicized condemnation from
even BJP luminaries, if only as part of
party-factional warfare. Justice to the
Muslim-minority victims, however, continues to be
delayed to the point of its denial.

     The CMP promises a new legislation to prevent the
recurrence of such massacres. The draft Communal
Violence Suppression Bill, however, has already drawn
flak as a draconian measure from groups of impeccably
democratic and anti-fascist credentials. The Bill aims
to prevent another Gujarat by vesting the federal
government with unfettered powers to intervene in
states in situations of the kind that shamed India in
2002. The Bill, if enacted, would indeed guarantee a
grislier Gujarat, if the BJP or the NDA were to return
to power.

     The people's mandate again has made a more than
perceptible difference here. Anti-minority invectives
from certifiable maniacs of the fascist fraternity
assail our ears with far less frequency these days.
The BJP has been forced onto its back foot on divisive
issues so dear to its heart. But official initiatives
carry no assurance of any long term advance towards
the larger objective of making the Gujarat pogrom as
obsolete as the plague.

     More discussed than anything else in the debate on
UPA's year in office is the way to "a double-digit
growth." No growth of any digit or description will
prove stable without first closing the path of
destruction that the fascist ideology spells.

     A freelance journalist and a peace activist of
India, J. Sri Raman is the author of Flashpoint
(Common Courage Press, USA). He is a regular
contributor to t r u t h o u t.


______


[4]

The Hindu
May 20, 2005

Editorials
A SHOCKING ABSENCE OF OUTRAGE

The gruesome attack on a woman engaged in a 
campaign against child marriage in Madhya Pradesh 
is a reminder that despite claims to being on the 
threshold of developed nation status, India has 
not been free from the worst forms of social 
backwardness and obscurantism. As if the incident 
was not shocking enough, the initial reaction of 
the State Government was scandalous. Instead of 
condemning the assault on Shakuntala Verma, a 
child welfare worker of the State Government, 
Chief Minister Babulal Gaur threw up his hands 
and asserted that it was not possible to stop 
child marriages. Ms. Verma was attacked by a 
sword-wielding man who barged into her home and 
tried to chop her hands off. After initially 
trying to pin the motive for the attack on 
personal enmity, the Madhya Pradesh Government 
belatedly admitted that it was indeed linked to 
the social worker's attempts to prevent a child 
marriage in a village in Dhar district. One 
person has been arrested but this has come 
following street protests in Bihar, anger in 
Parliament, and a Supreme Court notice to the 
State Government on a petition on behalf of the 
injured woman. Aside from seeking compensation, 
the petition demands the arrest of those behind 
the attack, and the prosecution of all officials 
concerned, including the Chief Minister, for a 
negligent attitude towards child marriages. The 
official attitude bears the hallmark of a `soft 
state' bordering on collusion with social 
reaction and law breaking.

Every year, in the six States of Madhya Pradesh, 
Chattisgarh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and 
Jharkhand, on a particular day of the Hindu 
calendar known in north India as akha teej and in 
the south as akshaya tritiya, thousands of 
children are married. This, in blatant violation 
of the 1929 Child Marriages Restraint Act (CMRA) 
under which no girl under the age of 18 or boy 
under 21 can wed. This year too, despite a 
directive from the National Human Rights 
Commission to the governments concerned to take 
all measures to prevent child marriages, many 
instances have been reported. According to a 2001 
UNICEF study, the number of prosecutions under 
the CMRA did not exceed 89 in any year. 
Admittedly, the law as it stands is weak. Child 
marriage is not a cognisable offence; carrying 
out arrests of offenders is difficult; and most 
important, the marriage itself remains valid. The 
Prevention of Child Marriages Bill introduced in 
the Rajya Sabha in December 2004 is more 
comprehensive and has some teeth. It seeks to 
empower courts to "stay" child marriages and 
provides for declaring such marriages void 
(although only on the basis of a complaint by the 
child). If the Government is at all serious about 
stamping out the outrageous practice, officials 
responsible for enforcing the law must be made 
accountable for every case of violation. In the 
long term, there is no solution other than making 
registration of marriages compulsory.


_____


[5]

The Tribune - May 20, 2005

BARRED!
MORAL POLICING IS RETROGRADE, DANGEROUS

WHEN they are not able to ensure regular 
policing, politicians of clay start taking 
recourse to moral policing. Maharashtra has 
earned quite a bad name for such misplaced zeal. 
But most often this task was performed by Shiv 
Sena goons and other disparate groups. Of late, 
even the government has taken a leaf out of their 
book and has tried to present a "clean image" by 
closing down dancing bars. Deputy Chief Minister 
R.R. Patil sounds like a man possessed while 
trying to justify the crackdown. He has given a 
million reasons for cleaning the streets this 
way, not one of which sounds authentic. Even if 
the dancing bars are a den of corruption that he 
and some of his colleagues make them out to be, a 
blanket ban is just not the answer. Flesh trade 
is an illegal activity; dancing isn't. It is the 
job of the police to stop the former. If the 
revolting trade continues to thrive, it is only 
because of the age-old practice of hafta. Just 
because he cannot make his men curb immoral 
activities does not mean he has the right to 
close down all dancing bars. Some of the 
policemen have occasionally indulged in custodial 
deaths and rapes. Should the entire police 
establishment be wound up for that reason?

Actually, the campaign has more to do with 
politics than with morality. The fear of the 
ruling combine was that the Shiv Sena men would 
raise a hue and cry over the "cultural 
degradation" caused by the bar girls, several of 
whom happen to be from Bangladesh and Nepal. So, 
it tried to be holier than them. That has forced 
the Sena to turn even more reactionary and 
comment on what women should wear and what they 
should not. Perhaps the Maharashtra government 
would try to be one up on these trouble-makers as 
well by forcing women to burn their "revealing, 
provocative" dresses and, instead, wrap 
themselves in cloth from head to toe.

Ironically, several prominent Congressmen like 
Sunil Dutt and Govinda have come out openly 
against the dancing bar ban. They may be 
influenced by voting considerations in their 
constituencies but it is very much necessary for 
all right-thinking persons to speak out against 
government high-handedness. Moral policing flies 
in the face of the cosmopolitan character of 
Mumbai and Maharashtra.

______


[6]

Issues in Secular Politics
May 2005 - I

AGGRESSIVE VEGETARIANISM

Ram Puniyani

Recently while travelling on the early morning flight
from Mumbai to Ahmadabad, I overheard my
co-passengerís non vegetarian breakfast being denied
by the flight steward on the ground that on Mumbai
Ahmadabad route, non vegetarian food is not served.
The same got confirmed a few days later when the
management of the said airlines publicly stated that
since the passengers on this route are mainly
vegetarians, and in case of some slip on the part of
airlines staff if the vegetarian passengers if by
mistake is served the non vegetarian food, it will be
hurting their religious sentiments.

Similarly during one of the trips to Ahmadabad when
sipping tea with one of the young IT professional
friend in his rented accommodation, I was aghast to
see the landlord barging into the flat and making
headway straight to the kitchen, inspecting something
and going away. I could not hide my amazement and
asked the young friend as to how someone can come and
straight to your kitchen and inspect your utensils,
and that too even without the courtesy of asking your
permission. He replied that it is more or less a
routine practice in the city where the landlords or
landladies keep a watch whether the tenant is cooking
non vegetarian food.

Also one house hunter in the city of Mumbai was
surprised that the real estate agent inquired about
his food habits before showing him the flats for sale.
He was also told that the particular housing complex
where he wanted to buy the house, they had the
unwritten (? written) rule that non vegetarians will
not be permitted in the housing complex.

By now it has become a routine for one to hear in
different workshops and seminars that Muslims are
having aggressive mentality because they consume Non
vegetarian food. There is a hidden sentence in this
which comes out easily when probed further that the
real reason for their having aggressive mentality is
that they eat beef. It comes as an addition that since
cow is holy for the Hindus, they at the same time are
hurting the sentiments of the Hindus.

This trend is picking on from last few years more
strongly. One can roughly say that it runs parallel to
the rise of communalism and communal violence in
society. It has become rooted in stronger fashion,
post Babri demolition along with demonization of
Muslims reaching a new high.

Two issues have been deliberately intertwined in the
social common sense. One is the non vegetarian food
causing violent tendencies and the second, the eating
of beef by Muslims and there by hurting the sentiments
of Hindus. It is very clear that the definition of non
vegetarian food varies from place to place and
community to community. Eggs are passÈ for some
vegetarians and strict no for others. Some regard sea
food, fish and the like as vegetarian while for others
it is non vegetarian food in all sense of the meaning.
Today World over roughly more than 80-90% of the
population is Non vegetarians so to say. While Muslims
in India are the object of wrath, apart from other
things, also for eating beef, the Europeans and
Americans do get away easily in this psyche despite
having beef as their staple diet. In the countries and
people who follow the biggest apostle of non violence
ever, Lord Gautam Buddha, the consumption of non
vegetarian food is no less in quantum. For that matter
right here there are innumerable communities for whom
beef has been a part of the food habits, non
vegetarianism being prevalent in most communities and
even amongst those who feel that Muslims are
aggressive because of eating non vegetarian food the
prevalence of eating non vegetarian food is
substantial.

A section of community has been discarding non
vegetarian food in a very strong way. Amongst these
sections of middle class, traders in particular are
taking the wows of vegetarianism. There are political
over and undertones also in this 'hate Non
vegetarians' thinking. One can go to the extent of
saying that Vegetarianism is also being used as a
social and political weapon to browbeat the minority
community. No doubt one has the choice of shifting to
vegetarianism with full commitment, but to be
intolerant to the non vegetarians and to label the
Muslims as having violent personality due to the food
habits is a part of political campaign.

Historically speaking beef was the staple food in
Vedic times (Cow is essentially food, Atho Annam Via
Gau). D.N. Jha in his classic book on the ancient
Indian food habits shows that it was with the rise of
agricultural society that the restriction was brought
in on cow sacrifice by Lord Buddha. The primary goal
was to preserve the cattle wealth. The ardent follower
of Buddhism, Emperor Ashok, in one of his edicts to
the royal kitchen orders that only as many animals and
birds be killed as are necessary for the food in the
kitchen. This was to put a break on the animal
sacrifice which was part of the Brahminical rituals.
It was as a reaction to this that Brahminism came up
to project cow as mother to show that it also has
concern for cattle. One can make an interesting point
a la Kancha Ilaih's "Buffalo nationalism", as to why
only cow was selcted to have the exalted place as a
mother, why not Buffalo? Has the colour politics
something to do with this. Needs investigation!

Than as far as the violent personality and food is
concerned, not much scientific literature is available
to prove the correlation of food with the violent
tendencies. Violence is a personality trait, in the
realm of psychology, which is shaped by familial,
social and political circumstances. It also keeps
changing according to the situation. A quiet person
can take to arms and violence when faced with adverse
physical situation. A person with a history of violent
behaviour can change to quiet behaviour, without
change of food habits, with the change in
circumstances.

There are systems of medicine, the traditional oneís
which classify food according to the Satwik (leading
to pure, quiet persona), Tamsik (increasing anger) and
Rajsik (royal) but it hasnít been vindicated beyond
stray empirical assertions. It is more than understood
in the modern system of medicine that the
psychological traits have all to do with the
circumstances at all the levels, family, social and
political. Despite some people holding on to human
nature and type of food, it is far from being
vindicated by any of the modern scientific studies.

There are groups of people taking to vegetarianism,
the vegans, on health grounds, which one can
understand. The element of religiosity is not mixed up
here. Neither are these people intolerant to the ones
who consume non vegetarian food. The phenomenon being
observed amongst the sections around, in the places
influenced by Hindu right, operates at the level of
religiosity. Vegetarianism here is a part of oneís
religion so to say. Being mixed up with religion it
becomes associated with emotions and thatís where the
strong rejection of non vegetarians in the
neighbourhood. How this has been turned as one more
tool of demonization of Muslims is a matter of
amazement for the writer of these lines. One also
feels like complementing the rumour mill of rumour
spreading society, which has achieved this feat of
using the food habits as yet another tool of spreading
hate.

Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer, the pioneer of Human rights,
narrates a story about Mahatma Gandhiís Muslim
friendís son visiting his Ashram on the day of Bakar
Id. Gandhi the vegetarian, ordered for the non
vegetarian food to be brought for him as for his
Muslim friendís son as it happened to be associated
with his festival. It is another matter that the
Muslim boy in deference to the rules of Gandhiji's
Ashram insisted that he will have no non vegetarian
food in Gandhiís ashram. Respecting each others
sentiments comes alive in his best form here. One sees
the similar respect for 'others' sentiments in the
will of Babur also who writes to his son Humayun that
since Hindus respect cows he should not let the cows
be slaughtered during his reign.

What a contrast to the present atmosphere where the
Vegetarianism is propagated and imposed in such an
aggressive way. One is not sure whether Non vegetarian
food leads to aggressive tendencies or rather one can
say violence is in the mind and mind is shaped by
social situations. One can certainly say that those
propagating vegetarianism in such a fashion are
intolerant to the hilt, and thatís for sure. One will
like to be informed, Narendra Modi, who presided over
one of the worst carnages of present times, is he a
vegetarian or a non vegetarian. This writer will wait
for the answer!


______


[7]


[  This letter was sent to TOI on 5 May. They 
have failed to publish it, or acknowledge the 
errors, so far.]


----- Original Message -----
To: <mailto:edit at timesgroup.com>edit at timesgroup.com
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 6:40 PM
Subject: LETTER TO THE EDITOR

Sir,

There are a number of factual errors in the item 
'Verdict reserved in House attack case' (TOI, May 
5, page 9 
[http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1098593.cms]). 
First, one of the accused is named 'Shaukat 
Hussain Guru', not 'Sandhu' as in the report. 
'Navjyot Sandhu' was the maiden name of Shaukat 
Hussain's wife, who was named 'Afsan Guru' after 
her marriage. Second, the number of injured in 
the Parliament attack was 16, not 13 as reported. 
Third, apart from Ram Jethmalani, Kamini Jaiswal, 
and Nitya Ramakrishnan listed in the report, Shri 
Shanti Bhushan, Shri Sushil Kumar, and Ms. 
Nandita Haksar are also defending the accused in 
the Supreme Court. The report failed to mention 
that that the distinguished lawyers are not 
charging any fees. Fourth, it is wrongly reported 
that the accused Mohammad Afzal is a 
Jaish-e-Mohammad activist. Para 281 of the 
Sessions Court judgment said that 'No evidence 
has come on record that any of these three 
accused persons [Afzal, Shaukat, and Geelani] 
belonged to or professed to belong to terrorist 
organizations Jesh-e-Mohammad or Lasker-e-toiba'. 
If Mr. Afzal's affiliations need to be mentioned 
at all, it is worth noting that he surrendered to 
the BSF in 1993 and had been in regular contact 
with the Special Task Force, J&K at least upto 
2000.

Sincerely,

Nirmalangshu Mukherji
Philosophy, DU

Vijay Singh
History, Satyawati College

Ali Javed
Urdu, DU


______


[8]

Indian Express
May 22, 2005

TERROR ANGLE IN AKSHARDHAM, NOT GODHRA: POTA PANEL
Local conspiracy, train blaze doesn't fit POTA, 
scrap charges against 131: review panel chief
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
AHMEDABAD, MAY 21: The Central POTA Review 
Committee has recommended to the Gujarat 
government that it drop all charges under the 
Prevention of Terrorism Act against the 131 
accused in the Godhra train attack case. The 
committee has said there was "no terrorist angle" 
in the burning of Sabarmati Express's S-6 coach 
on February 27, 2002, in which 59 people were 
killed.

However, it has upheld the application of POTA in 
the Akshardham case in which 46 were killed.

In its report submitted to the State 
Government-which had said that the blaze was the 
result of a ''well-planned conspiracy''-and the 
Union Home Ministry, the committee has said that 
''there was no prima facie case against the 
accused and this is not a fit case for invoking 
POTA against the accused.''

Talking to The Sunday Express from New Delhi 
about the decision to give the 131 accused a 
clean chit under POTA, committee chairman Justice 
(retd) S C Jain said, ''Our brief entailed that 
we find if POTA, the anti-terror law, was 
applicable against the accused in the case. The 
committee has found that there was no conspiracy 
and the attack on S-6 coach of the Sabarmati 
Express does not fall within the meaning of 
terrorist act.''

''Conspiracy was there but it was localised and 
does not fall within the definition of Section 
3(1) of POTA,'' Justice Jain said.

"In the Akshardham case, we have upheld 
applicability of POTA against all accused,'' said 
Justice Jain. ''There is prima facie case that 
there was a conspiracy which was hatched outside 
the country and POTA is applicable."

POTA was applied in the Godhra case after the 
arrest of Maulana Hussan Umarji, who the special 
investigating team probing the case, identified 
as the ''mastermind'' behind the carnage.

According to POTA, a terrorist act strikes at the 
unity, integrity, security or sovereignty of 
India by using bombs, explosive substances, 
firearms or poison or noxious gas and causes 
death or loss of property.

The committee, in its 30-page order, has said 
that the incident started on the platform and 
''it was a mob that set the coach ablaze''.

''While coming to our conclusion, we have gone 
strictly by the version and evidence of Special 
Investigating Team probing the incident,'' said 
Justice Jain.

Even though the review committee has recommended 
dropping of charges, it has not passed any 
strictures against the investigating agency ''as 
our job was strictly to see whether in given 
instances POTA is made out or not,'' he said.

The review committee has also sent copies of its order to the accused.

Now, the public prosecutor in the case will pass 
on the opinion of the review committee to the 
designate court and move an application for 
withdrawal of POTA provisions against the 
accused. "It will be now be for the designated 
judge whether to accept the recommendation or 
not," said a member of the committee.

An advocate for the accused, who did not want to 
be named said, "This is shocking news from the 
government, more so in light of the fact that the 
Gujarat High Court has made the recommendations 
of the review committee binding." Public 
prosecutor H M Dhruv said he was yet to receive 
the report from the government.

However, the order of Gujarat HC which upheld the 
constitutionality of the review committee and 
asked the designated court to look into its 
recommendations in light of the R M Tiwari and 
Saheen Welfare case, has been challenged in 
Supreme Court.



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

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.