SACW | 26 May 2005

sacw aiindex at mnet.fr
Wed May 25 19:31:19 CDT 2005


South Asia Citizens Wire  | 26 May,  2005

[1] The successes and failures of Pakistan's nukes (M B Naqvi)
[2] India: BJP's dirge on 'democracy'  (J Sri Raman)
[3] India: Sensitive Souls (Editorial, The Telegraph)
[4] A lethal mix of censorship and identity 
politics wreaks havoc in Indian public life, yet 
again (Ananya Vajpeyi)
[5] Book Reviews:
  - Story-Wallah: Short Fiction From South Asian 
Writers Edited by Shyam Selvadurai
  - Husband of a Fanatic by Amitava Kumar
[6]  Announcements:
(i) Public Meeting: 'Mill Lands : The final chance' (Bombay, May 26, 2005)
(ii) Lecture by Vahida Nainar- 'Women and Genocide' (Montreal, May 28, 2005)
[7] Hindutva groups among those receiving McDonald's settlement money
[8] India: High Court dismisses PIL on Taj Mahal
[9] India: Self-Respect Marriage Proposal 
Provokes Hindutva Ire  (Yoginder Sikand)


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


[1]

The News International
May 25, 2005

Nukes' seventh anniversary-III
THE SUCCESSES AND FAILURES OF PAKISTAN'S NUKES

M B Naqvi

From the start Pakistan's nuclear programme was 
military-oriented and India-specific. The initial 
proposition was that Pakistan was a weaker rival 
of India and had business to transact with India 
that could require application of military force. 
The ambivalent nature of India-Pakistan relations 
is known, with its three wars and three 
semi-wars. Pakistan was decisively defeated in 
1971 and concluded thereafter that there is no 
future in conventional wars with India because it 
is richer and can always outspend Pakistan. 
Pakistan therefore decided to go nuclear to 
offset India's advantages.

When exactly Pakistan started its nuclear 
programme does not signify; it was sometime in 
1970s. Pakistan succeeded in the middle of the 
1980s in enriching uranium. That key success led 
to other successes and soon Pakistan was able to 
fabricate nuclear weapons, admitting only its 
major components in 1990. But it was able in 1986 
to threaten India with a nuclear riposte to the 
likely extension of India's exercise Brass Tacks 
into a thrust into Sindh, as was feared.

Once Pakistan became nuclear-capable, it decided 
to twist the Indian lion's tail in Kashmir, 
fearing no military response from it. It chose an 
undercover semi-war with India in Kashmir. Events 
in India-administered Kashmir late in the 1980s 
gave Pakistan an opportunity: it metamorphosed 
Kashmiris' non-violent secular political protest 
agitation -- against India's manipulation of 
elections in Kashmir -- and captured the 
movement's leadership, converting it into an 
Islamic jihad. It did so through jihadis, most of 
them veterans of Afghanistan's anti-Soviet war 
and many of whom had doubled as Taliban. This led 
to many consequences.

India chose to suppress the jihad by inflicting 
horrible human rights violations on Kashmiris. 
The Indians need to be blamed for these gross 
human rights violations. But Pakistan also shares 
some responsibility. Why? Because it did not 
think its options through. It should have 
foreseen what the Indian reaction would be. And 
whether the pressure Pakistan was putting on it 
was enough to make India cry "uncle." In the 
event, Indians fought on -- i.e., to kill as many 
Kashmiris as possible. The result is that 
Kashmiris have lost something like 80- to 85,000 
lives and many more limbs. Loss of property is 
astronomical in purely Kashmiri terms. Despite 
these sacrifices the Kashmiris are not an inch 
nearer their azadi. The outlook is more Indian 
atrocities, if jihad continues.

True, India might continue to inflict human 
rights violations even after Pakistan has stopped 
sending militants from outside. So long as there 
is an armed insurgency in Kashmir, the Kashmiri 
freedom fighters are offering India its chance: 
in a violent conflict, India would crush the puny 
violence by Kashmiris with its far greater 
violence-making machine. Adopting violent 
insurgency is a foolish game for Kashmiris.

Remember Pakistan's military thinkers, who 
controlled the nuclear programme throughout, wove 
strange strategic doctrines in the hubris created 
by nuclear weapons. On the one hand, they dreamed 
dreams of federating Iran, Afghanistan and 
Pakistan in order to confront India with this 
strategic depth. How unrealistic this foolish 
project was should be clear. On the other hand, a 
theory was evolved that keeping Indians engaged 
in a proxy war in the Kashmir Valley would free 
Pakistan from the worry of an Indian attack. So 
long as India was kept on the hop, Pakistan was 
safe. In retrospect, this can be seen as foolish 
ratiocination.

In 2002, the Indians called Pakistan's bluff. 
They brought forward their troops on the Pakistan 
border in staggering numbers. They made as if 
they would invade. The threat was credible for 
both friend and foe. The rest of the world 
thought that thanks to balance of power, Pakistan 
would be obliged to use its nuclear option first. 
A nuclear war will result. The rest of the world 
was not prepared to accept it. Everyone advised 
the two to make up.

Pakistanis too saw that the Indians meant 
business. Pakistan made a U-turn in the Kashmir 
policies by promising no more infiltration from 
this side. That firm promise by Pakistan's 
president resolved the crisis and Indian troops 
began withdrawing by October 2002. Normalcy took 
some time to return. India later offered 
negotiations and the hand of friendship (April 
2003). How genuine it was, or is, is hard to say. 
Anyhow, the long stalled Composite Dialogue, 
first agreed in 1997, was resumed. Although it 
has gone nowhere for over a year, it has not 
finally broken down. The talks are going on and 
more are scheduled.

Dispassionate assessment of the true utility of 
Pakistani nukes is urgent. There are two clear 
negative entries in the national ledger. One, 
nukes were of no use to Pakistan vis-ý-vis 
Kashmir and it had to promise it will not longer 
send jihadis. The promise was repeated several 
times to Indians and Americans. The second 
context was the 2002 war crisis. India was ready 
to attack if Pakistan had it not made those 
promises about Kashmir. That is to say, India was 
taking the risk of a war despite the presence of 
Pakistan's nuclear deterrent, probably not less 
effective than India's own. One calls for taking 
purposeful note of the mere fact that Indians 
made a credible move to attack Pakistan, ignoring 
the presence of the Pakistani nuclear deterrent. 
That simply shows that this Nuclear Deterrent did 
not deter India threatening war.

Why does one make such a sweeping claim? Because 
Pakistani nuclear devices were sold as giving 
Pakistan an impregnable defence against India; it 
was argued that given the nukes' presence, no one 
would dare attack. The fact that India dared 
makes those nukes less credible than they were 
thought to be. It is being argued that India did 
not finally attack because of those nukes. But 
that is a non sequitur and takes us nowhere. The 
decisive moment was when the Pakistan president 
made the premise of virtually ending the jihad in 
Kashmir. Obviously, nukes were no help to 
Musharraf; if the notional benefit of the nukes 
had to be sacrificed to keep peace, the nukes' 
value gets heavily diluted. The nukes are no 
longer vital for Pakistan's security because (a) 
Pakistan could not win Kashmir through the proxy 
war; and (b) these nukes could not defend 
Pakistan against India's threatened attack 
without Pakistan making vital political 
concessions.

Let's note that no outsider loves Pakistan 
because of these nukes. No outsider appears to 
dread Pakistan's nukes, not even India. No 
outsider is prepared to do as Pakistan wishes him 
to do because it has nukes. It is true the same 
is true of India. But India is out of context 
here.

There is another negative aspect of the nukes: 
there is Dr A. Q. Khan's underground bazaar of 
nuclear contraband. The story has not ended. The 
rest of the world is still interested. They all 
think that Pakistan is vulnerable to various 
threats from inside. They believe that there are 
anti-Musharraf and anti-Pakistan elements inside 
who can get hold of these weapons. They feel that 
extremist forces can, in conceivable 
eventualities, get control of these weapons. 
Pakistan is more vulnerable because of these 
nukes. Conceivable threats of external 
intervention exist.

Pakistanis have paid through their nose for these 
nukes. Pakistan's economy has been put under a 
pressure that it cannot really bear. The kind of 
inflationary pressures and the growth of poverty 
that has taken place are due to Islamabad not 
being able to invest enough in the social 
sectors. The economic price of the nukes is lost 
opportunities.


_______


[2]

Daily Times
May 26, 2005

BJP'S DIRGE ON 'DEMOCRACY'
by J Sri Raman


The far right has always preferred a holy cloak 
to hide its true intentions. This is not the 
first time the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has 
mounted an offensive on democracy in the name of 
defending it. Actually the party has done so 
twice in a single eventful year.
A year ago it raised a deafening cry of 
'democracy' as it responded with medieval 
savagery to a mandate given by the Indian people. 
The moment the Congress under Sonia Gandhi's 
leadership returned to power in New Delhi, the 
BJP was up in arms against the formation of the 
new government under a 'foreigner'. The norms and 
conventions of the national polity were flouted 
with contempt, as the defeated and disgraced 
party resorted to unabashedly reactionary devices 
to stop the elected leader of the triumphant 
Congress parliamentary party from taking over as 
prime minister.
A saffron-clad Uma Bharati set off on one of her 
numerous pilgrimages of political protest. Sushma 
Swaraj went several horrendous steps farther by 
threatening to shave off her tresses, start 
sleeping on the floor and to live on gram if the 
'vilayati' were to have her way. The symbols of 
holy widowhood were expected to evoke a 
'Hindutva' wave in the party's favour.
By refusing the repeatedly proffered crown, Sonia 
Gandhi had the better of the BJP. The subsequent 
far-right fiasco in the Maharashtra assembly 
election pointed further to the folly of 
Sonia-bashing. The BJP has never since been at 
its xenophobic best (worst?). This, however, has 
not deterred it from trying its deceptive 
'democracy' tag once again.
On May 22, the first anniversary of the 
Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) 
government, the BJP and its National Democratic 
Alliance (NDA) sounded the bugle of 'democracy' 
again in defence of an open mockery of democratic 
norms, launching an all-out agitation against an 
alleged betrayal of 'democracy' in Bihar.
The 'betrayal' consists of the dissolution of the 
Bihar state assembly elected three months ago - 
after the failure of all attempts to form a 
coalition government. The BJP's case now is that 
the front led by it was close to cobbling 
together such a government by splitting one of 
the parties.
The Dalit leader of the party in the question, 
Lok Janashakti Party (LJP), Ram Vilas Paswan, had 
repeatedly and emphatically declared its 
equidistance from the BJP and the Rashtriya 
Janata Dal (RJD) of Lalu Prasad (Yadav), the far 
right's bete noire.
The BJP has for days been gloating over its 
success in grabbing the support of several newly 
elected LJP legislators, disgruntled with the 
long delay in the formation of government. The 
party has taken this group of legislators on 
all-expenses-paid excursions to places in Bihar 
and neighbouring Jharkhand (under the party's own 
rule).
The BJP is now writing a dirge on 'democracy' 
claiming that it has been barred from tasting the 
fruits of the LJP factionalism that it has worked 
so hard to fuel. Strange but true, much of the 
mainstream media including the television 
channels and the holier-than-thou middle class 
see no trace of irony in this outrage and tirade 
against the 'murder of democracy'.
The current agitation may prove no bigger a 
success than the 'anti-foreigner' crusade. There, 
however, seems to be no end in sight to the 
paralysis of India's parliament resulting from 
the BJP-NDA's tactics on the issue of 'tainted 
ministers', the collective label that has come to 
refer above all to Lalu Prasad.
Whether a solution to the impasse will be found 
in the fresh Bihar elections (to be held within 
six months) remains to be seen. A win, say some 
Bihar watchers, may see Lalu's return to his 
state from the rough and tumble of his political 
journey as a union railway minister.
But for Bihar, the first anniversary of the UPA 
government has been a rather tame affair. The 
technocrat prime minister himself gave his 
government's performance six marks out of ten. 
Evaluations by others sounded more like 
economists' reports - the kind that make little 
or no sense to the layman. Buried amid all the 
balance sheets, which dealt with esoteric 
subjects like a double-digit growth, were more 
basic questions.
No one, not even the Left, bothered to assess the 
advance made in this one year towards peace, 
internal and regional, endangered more than 
anything else under the NDA regime. Pokharan II 
and the Gujarat carnage were the two events after 
all that drew the widest international attention 
during the Vajpayee government. The threats 
represented by the desert blasts and the Narendra 
Modi pogrom, however, have not engaged the UPA 
government's attention to any degree.
The India-Pakistan 'peace process' envisages no 
reversal of the post-Pokharan II process that 
makes South Asia one of the world's danger spots.
The government has come out with a draft 
comprehensive bill to deal with communal 
disturbances. The draft, however, only threatens 
to vest the federal government with formidable, 
draconian powers. Enactment of the bill can 
endanger communal peace even more in the event of 
the BJP returning to power in New Delhi.

_______


[3]


The Telegraph
May 25, 2005 |	Editorial

SENSITIVE SOULS

The abuse of the word, "sensitive", has never 
been more lamentable in India. Religious 
enthusiasm is perhaps the most powerful factor 
behind turning one of the gentlest words in the 
English language into one of the most oppressive. 
It is certainly a very serious crisis in 
democracy when books and films bring out the most 
violent emotions in sensitive people. Such 
sensitivities place any society on the 
treacherous foundation of fears, resentments, 
unfreedoms and unreason. And the dangers are 
manifest. The two blasts that violently disrupted 
the screenings of Jo Bole So Nihaal in Delhi have 
spread panic all over the country. Cinema halls 
have stopped screening the film in most major 
cities and towns, Mumbai being a notable 
exception. West Bengal has gone a step further by 
having the withdrawal of the film from its halls 
governmentally endorsed. The blasts have been 
variously linked with Sikh as well as Kashmiri 
extremism. But the most lasting - and damaging - 
fallout of these reactions has been the stances 
taken by the highest body in the community, the 
Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, and by 
the national commission for minorities.

The former has objected to the use of a line from 
the Sikh daily prayers for the film's title and 
to the depiction of a Sikh man smoking. The 
latter has made the entirely outrageous 
recommendation to the censor board that any film 
that might offend religious sentiments should be 
referred to a panel of "religious leaders". This 
pre-emptive censorship is inimical to the most 
fundamental tenets of democracy. A critical 
spirit that can engage with debate, controversy, 
complexity and even caricature in a rational, 
open-minded and balanced and, if need be, 
humorous manner is essential to the functioning 
of a healthy and mature society. The power of 
critique that the arts are granted by any 
civilized society had been shamefully denied them 
recently in Britain when Ms Gurpreet Kaur 
Bhatti's play, Behzti, was taken off the boards 
in a reputed Birmingham theatre. The local Sikh 
community had demonstrated against it, and there 
were death threats against Ms Bhatti, for having 
depicted corruption, murder and rape in a 
gurdwara. Not a single British politician stood 
by her then. In India, such a reign of fear would 
be a far more unfortunate and dangerous thing.

______


[4]

Outlookindia.com
  Web | May 25, 2005

NO 'IF' OR 'BUT'...
...JUST KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT: A LETHAL MIX OF 
CENSORSHIP AND IDENTITY POLITICS WREAKS HAVOC IN 
INDIAN PUBLIC LIFE, YET AGAIN.

Ananya Vajpeyi

Whoever says this, is blessed:
"That One outside of Time
Is Truth."

The film Jo bole so nihal opens with these words 
appearing on the screen: "This is not a religious 
film". My companion in the theatre leans over to 
me, and says, "We never thought it was. Why the 
disclaimer?" I whisper to him in the silent hall, 
"It's the way things are, now, in this country. 
You can never be too careful." Seconds later, the 
audience erupts into laughter. For the next three 
hours, we can't stop laughing. At some points, 
spectators clap their hands, they whistle, they 
stand up and applaud - the lines are so funny, 
the situations so absurd.

Before property was damaged, people got injured, 
and lives were lost in a fresh spate of the 
intolerance that has become a permanent threat to 
creative freedom in India, Jo bole was just 
another comedy. In a film industry that is always 
low on comic relief, a movie that actually 
manages to amuse ought to get a special prize. 
Instead, inevitably, the producers have had to 
withdraw it from circulation in the face of 
censorship that can, at any moment, turn violent, 
endangering the life and safety of actors and 
viewers alike.

Growing up with a Sikh mother and a Hindu father, 
I got to see the famous clash of civilizations 
between Punjabis and UP-wallahs from both sides 
of the imaginary fence. From Lahore and from 
Lucknow, driven by forces of history larger than 
us all, my parents came to Delhi more than half a 
century ago.

Like so many of my generation in this city, my 
experience of the linguistic environment was a 
grating, head-on collision of Punjabi and Urdu; 
depending on the season's fashion, the 
bottom-half of a kurta suit invariably alternated 
between a salwar and a churidar pajama, and the 
seasoning in the food, while always tasty, kept 
switching between the wholesome tadka and the 
spicy chhaunk. Passing by the mandir one folded 
one's hands and raised them to one's brows, 
closing one's eyes and bowing one's head 
momentarily; passing by the gurudwara one 
muttered, quickly, under one's breath: "Jo bole 
so nihal, Sat Sri Akal". It wasn't necessary to 
actually stop and go into either house of worship 
- gods and gurus are easily appeased by gestures 
of respect made from a safe distance.

In Delhi's social gatherings, the rule for jokes 
was that they were always about sardars, but the 
other rule was that it was usually sardars who 
told them with the greatest glee. Everybody could 
laugh at these jokes, because they never rose 
above the lowest common denominator of silliness 
- the real trick, however, was to tell them with 
the right Punjabi accent. Even at the height of 
the militancy in Punjab, sardar jokes 
proliferated, only then they were fine-tuned for 
a while to take pot shots at the idea of 
Khalistan.

In 1984, my mother and the entire family on my 
mother's side suddenly became the targets of the 
most gruesome anti-Sikh violence; for days of 
curfew that horrible November, we stood on our 
rooftop, my parents and I, watching fires burn in 
all directions on the near horizon.

We knew - even I, as a child, could tell - that a 
composite way of life had ended forever, charred 
to a handful of ashes along with the turbans, 
beards, holy books, homes and dreams of thousands 
of innocents. But immigrant and refugee cultures 
are the most resilient. Despite the slaughter of 
Sikhs in the aftermath of Indira Gandhi's 
assassination, in the following two decades, 
Delhi's dominant temper became more aggressively 
Punjabi than ever before.

Justice may not have come to the Sikhs, but 
Punjabis have had their revenge all right.

______


[5]  [BOOK REVIEWS]


(i)

The Christian Science Monitor
May 17, 2005

EMPIRE WRITES BACK
South Asian emigrants put today's spins on 
stories like Kipling's tales about people far 
from home
By Ben Arnoldy
More than a century ago, a young reporter named 
Rudyard Kipling began to publish a series of 
short fiction works in an Indian newspaper. These 
enormously popular "plain tales," as he called 
them, chronicled the exploits of British 
colonists in India. A recurring character was the 
Englishman who had "gone native" - often lured by 
love of an Indian girl. Without fail, a cultural 
misunderstanding would doom these men. After all, 
for Kipling, East was East....

In a phenomenon cleverly known as "the empire 
writes back," the genre has been turned on its 
head by emigrants from former European colonies - 
particularly British India. A new collection of 
short fiction entitled "Story-Wallah" gathers 
these modern plain tales from the South Asian 
diaspora. They show that being a stranger in a 
strange land holds psychological perils even in a 
world free of the imperial politics of Kipling's 
day.

STORY-WALLAH: Short Fiction From South Asian Writers
Edited by Shyam Selvadurai
Houghton Mifflin
438 pp., $14

Some of the writers are well known: Salman 
Rushdie of fatwa fame; Michael Ondaatje ("The 
English Patient"); and Jhumpa Lahiri ("The 
Interpreter of Maladies"). All the writers or 
their ancestors hail originally from India, 
Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Sri Lanka, but they also 
have a dual identity, living in locations as 
diverse as Trinidad, the United States, and 
Tanzania. The editor, Shyam Selvadurai, calls 
himself Canadian-Sri Lankan, writing novels from 
the hyphen space between.

In Rushdie's "The Courter," the narrator attends 
an English boarding school. Over the summers, he 
lives in a cultural no man's land between India 
and England: a "seedy mansion" rented by his 
Indian family "which lurked furtively in a 
nothing street" of London. In adjacent apartments 
live two maharajas, who have been cashiered into 
a life halfway between royalty and oblivion. The 
mansion's Eastern European doorman is a mentally 
handicapped former chess Grand Master.

The narrator is the least conflicted: He clearly 
prefers an English life - singing Beatles tunes 
and aspiring for a British passport. He dislikes 
his father, a distant and capricious drunk. When 
his father is slapped by a shopgirl after mixing 
up words, the narrator feels schadenfreude as 
well as fear that he would have made the same 
faux pas.

Ultimately the gambling and philandering of the 
two maharajas bring doom to the house. In the 
end, each character leaves the "seedy mansion" 
and, in an echo of Kipling, chooses either 
England or India - not both.

Other stories hold out more hope for 
cross-cultural understanding. Anita Desai's 
"Winterscape" begins with a fight between Rakesh 
and his pregnant American wife, Beth. Rakesh has 
booked tickets for both his mother and his aunt 
to fly from India to California to help after the 
baby arrives.

Beth was annoyed. "It had seemed an outlandish, 
archaic idea even when it was first suggested; 
now it was positively bizarre. 'Why both of them? 
We only asked your mother,' she insisted."

South Asian identity within an extended family 
versus Western individualism is a common conflict 
throughout this collection of stories. Beth comes 
to understand this difference through a parable 
of sorts about Rakesh's upbringing. She learns he 
had been raised by both women - he had "two 
mothers."

For Beth, the concept was not only foreign but 
frightening. Why wasn't Rakesh's mother jealous 
about sharing her role? After all, Beth could not 
imagine entrusting her baby to her own, 
irresponsible, sister. Beth begins to understand 
the depth of the relationship between Rakesh's 
two moms when she catches sight of them standing 
at a window, looking out for the first time at 
snow. "Their white cotton saris were wrapped 
about them like shawls, their two heads leaned 
against each other as they peered out, 
speechlessly."

For all the cultural friction present in these 
works, there shines in all of them a universal 
humanity. The reader will see in Michael 
Ondaatje's Lalla that one crazy relative in 
anybody's family. "She stole flowers 
compulsively, even in the owner's presence."

Meanwhile, at a time of deep divisions between 
the West and Islam, Zulfikar Ghose's "The Marble 
Dome" comes as the reassuring voice of moderate 
Muslims. A few other stories break the general 
tone with explicit sexual scenes and vulgarity.

Beyond this collection, other works of the South 
Asian diaspora are well worth checking out. "The 
Unknown Errors of Our Lives," a collection of 
short stories by Chitra Banerjee Divakaruni, 
explores the contemporary struggles of Indian- 
Americans trying to bridge the cultural divide. 
And the film "East Is East," a British dark 
comedy, tackles the tribulations of raising 
children in a mixed English-Pakistani marriage.

* Ben Arnoldy is on the Monitor staff.


(ii)

Village Voice
May 10th, 2005

Anatomy of Hate: South Asia's Hindu-Muslim Hostility
Amitava Kumar's Husband of a Fanatic

by Uday Benegal


Husband of a Fanatic
by Amitava Kumar
The New Press, 296 pp., $24.95
  Buy this book "Isn't that a bit like a Catholic 
marrying a Protestant back where I'm from?" asks 
the Irish officer at the Canadian office as 
Amitava Kumar, a Hindu writer from India, and his 
soon-to-be wife, Mona, a Pakistani Muslim, submit 
their marriage application. It's much worse, 
according to Kumar's Husband of a Fanatic, the 
reciprocity of hate between South Asia's Hindu 
and Muslim communities having reached new levels 
of hostility over the last decade or so. Inspired 
by Underground, Haruki Murakami's book on Tokyo's 
1995 sarin gas attack, Kumar tries to get to the 
root of this animosity via the personal 
experiences of victims. He visits scenes of 
carnage and sites of remand and retribution, and 
attempts to discourse with casualties and 
aggressors in places as distant as India, South 
Africa, and Queens.

In India, right-wing Hindu nationalists consider 
liberals and intellectuals as blinkered, 
consistently siding with an undeservedly pampered 
Muslim minority even as Hindus continue to remain 
oppressed. Kumar transcends this typecasting, 
finding a perch of objectivity as a university 
professor in faraway Pennsylvania. But while 
Kumar's search for the motives driving this 
intractable enmity is sincere, he tends to lapse 
into trite sentimentalism, as when asking a 
distraught Indian war widow if she would like to 
write a letter to a Pakistani counterpart (she 
refuses). Sadly for Kumar, as for the 
billion-plus people on the conflict-ridden 
subcontinent, the reasons flow disparately and 
the solutions remain unfound; individual tales of 
grief only serve to reveal a greater failure. As 
Kumar himself puts it, "All the truth and the 
pity of the world, instead of finding its way to 
a larger politics, gets reduced to a personal 
soap opera of the self."

______


[6] [ANNOUNCEMENTS]

(i)

mumbai study group / gkss 26.05.05 Mill Lands : The final chance 
   

date : May 26, 2005,
time: 5.30 pm
venue Rachana Sansad, behind Ravindra Natya 
Mandir, Off Sayani Rd, Prabhadevi, Mumbai

Update on the mill land issue

The meeting, on February 16, 2005, at Rachana 
Sansad, was attended by about 50 organisations -- 
environmental, human rights and women's 
organisations, workers' unions and students' 
groups - and media persons. Concerns about the 
redevelopment of mill lands were expressed in a 
set of resolutions looking at the interests of 
mill workers and the city as a whole.

As the Bombay Environmental Action Group had 
already filed a PIL in the High Court, 
challenging the revised DCR 58, Girni Kamgar 
Sangarsh Samiti also intervened. On hearing all 
parties in April 2005, the High Court ordered a 
stay on the new permission for land development, 
and demanded a list of documents (such as lease 
details and redevelopment permissions) from state 
authorities. This order was crucial to monitor 
the legality of mill land development.

The respondents and the intervenors in the 
petition which included five mill owners, the 
government and RMMS, BMC, MHADA, and others filed 
a petition in the Supreme Court against the High 
Court stay. The Supreme Court finally disposed of 
the petition on May 11, 2005, and sent the matter 
back to the High Court, to be heard and 
preferably decided upon before July 30, 2005.

Although the Supreme Court has allowed 
construction to be continued on the land of those 
mills which have already received permissions, it 
has highlighted that these permissions will be at 
their own risk subject to the final decision of 
the Bombay High Court division bench.
The Supreme Court has stayed all fresh 
construction on the mill land while allowing the 
authorities to process applications for 
permission. Needless to say, the creation of 
third-party rights and sale will be subject to 
the final decision of the Bombay high court.

Mill owners have also been directed to issue 
advertisements in newspapers and introduce 
warning clauses in agreements for any new 
transaction concerning mill land.

On May 18, 2005 the Mumbai Study Group and Girni 
Kamgar Sangarsh Samiti organised another meeting 
at Rachana Sansad to discuss the Supreme Court 
order and to plan the future strategy to reclaim 
public spaces and public housing. The 
participants felt that a broad joint forum needed 
to be formed at the city level to pursue the 
issue on the legal, direct action and campaign 
fronts.

The May 26 2005 meeting is the last chance for 
the city efforts to re organise and get 200 acres 
for use in low-income housing, amenities and 
other public uses. 

Your presence will be crucial to the success of 
this meeting. Please inform other like-minded 
organisations and invite them to participate.


Pankaj Joshi                    Datta Iswalkar
Mumbai Study Group                Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti



(ii)

CERAS (South Asia Research and Resource Center) 
and SAWACC (South Asia Women's Community Center

Invite you to a Public Lecture
On
Women and Genocide:
A feminist view of the 2002 Gujarat Genocide

By Vahida Nainar


Place: South Asian Women's Community Centre
1035 Rachel est  -3rd floor (Montreal)
Between Christophe-Colomb and Boyer, Metro Mont-Royal

Time: Saturday May 28 @ 11.00 am

Vahida Nainar, author and feminist has been 
involved in a number of international initiatives 
centered around gender issues and the law, and 
was part of a panel who authored 'THREATENED 
EXISTENCE -- A FEMINIST ANALYSIS OF THE GENOCIDE 
IN GUJARAT' (December 2003).

______


[7]

The Hindu, May 22, 2005

HINDU [AND HINDUTVA] GROUPS AMONG THOSE RECEIVING MCDONALD'S SETTLEMENT MONEY

Silicon Valley, May. 22 (PTI): Fast food giant 
McDonald's will pay USD 10 millions to 24 groups, 
including International American Gita Society, as 
part of a settlement of lawsuits charging that it 
had misled Hindu and vegetarian consumers by 
"wrongly describing" its French fries, containing 
beef additive for flavouring, as vegetarian.

McDonald's has informed in a recent letter to the 
International Gita Society, a Bay Area-based 
non-profit organisation, that it is among the 
groups receiving the settlement money, its 
spokesman Ramananda Prasad said.

"We are such a small organisation, and nobody 
supports us, the temples are busy with their own 
activities," Prasad, who founded the Society in 
1984, told India-West.

The money has to be used for developing a website 
for the Gita, especially 'Gita for children,' he 
said.

The 24 groups were approved by a US court, after 
a Seattle Lawyer Harish Bharti, filed a class 
lawsuit against the company, accusing the chain 
of deception in its claims of cooking fries in 
100 per cent vegetable oil.

The maximum compensation of $1.4 millions, or 14 
per cent of the award, was for Vegetarian 
Resource Group, followed by $1 million for North 
American Vegetarian Society.

Other groups include Muslim Consumer Group for 
Food Products ($100,000), International American 
Gita Society ($50,000), Hindu Heritage Endowment 
($250,000), Council of Hindu Temples of North 
America ($200,000), Guru Harkrishan Institute of 
Sikh Studies ($50,000), Hindu Students Council 
($500,000), Jewish Community Centres Association 
($200,000) and Tufts University ($850,000).


______


[8]

TAJ-PETITION
HC dismisses PIL on Taj Mahal
LUCKNOW, MAY 23 (PTI)

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court 
today summarily dismissed a public interest 
litigation (PIL) which claimed that the Taj Mahal 
was a Hindu temple and sought a directive to the 
Union Government to conduct survey to ascertain 
the monument's age.

A Division Bench comprising justices Jagadish 
Bhalla and M A Khan while dismissing the PIL 
allowed the petitioner to approach an appropriate 
forum on the request of his counsel.

The Bench, in its oral observation, said the 
issue of title could not be decided in this court.

The Taj Mahal is a national monument and without 
going into any controversy we summarily dismiss 
the PIL, the court said.

The petitioner one Amar Nath Mishra, a social 
worker and religious preacher, had claimed that 
the Taj Mahal had been built by a Hindu King 
Parmar Dev in 1195-1196.

_____

[9]

[23 May 2005]

Self-Respect Marriage Proposal Provokes Hindutva Ire

Yoginder Sikand

The irony cannot be more striking. Known for 
their fierce opposition to reforms in Hindu law 
that sought to ameliorate the conditions of Hindu 
women, Hindutva groups present themselves as 
ardent champions of Muslim women. The image of 
Muslim women as oppressed by their men and their 
religion is central to Hindutva discourse, 
buttressing the Hidutva-walas' claim of Islam and 
Muslims being inherently and unrepentantly 
'obscurantist' and 'barbaric'. This explains the 
hypocritical defence by Hindutva ideologues of 
Muslim womenís rights, while at the same time the 
pogroms they unleash lead to the death and rape 
of Muslim women in their thousands.

While Hindutva ideologues present themselves as 
saviours of Muslim women from what they describe 
as the 'tyranny' of Islam, they are fiercely 
opposed to any measures that might threaten 
Brahminical Hindu patriarchy. Thus, the cover 
story of the latest issue of Organiser, the RSS 
official English weekly, protesting against a 
move to reform Hindu marriage, should come as no 
surprise. Titled, 'A Mischievous Proposal to 
Tinker With Hindu Faith', and written by a 
certain R. Balashankar, the article furiously 
denounces the proposal put forward by the Tamil 
politician, M. Karunanidhi,  leader of the 
anti-Brahmin Dravida Munnetra Kazhagham, to allow 
for 'self-respect' marriages that do without a 
mandatory priest, who is generally a Brahmin.

The article refers to a letter sent recently by 
Karunanidhi to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh 
demanding an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 
1955 in order legalise at the all-India level 
marriages without a priest. Presently, such 
marriages are recognized only in Tamil Nadu. This 
demand has been a long-standing one, and was 
first put forward by E.V.Periyar Ramaswamy 
Naicker, the pioneer of the anti-Brahmin movement 
in Tamil Nadu. Periyar was a bitter critic of 
Brahminical Hinduism, seeing it as a 
thinly-veiled guise for Aryan, North Indian, 
'upper' caste Hindu hegemony. He regarded 
Hinduism as a creation of wily Brahmins to assert 
their control over the 'low' caste majority whom 
they had reduced to servitude. He believed that 
the non-Brahmins could effectively challenge 
Brahmin hegemony only if they developed a sense 
of self-respect and refused to consider the 
Brahmins as 'gods on earth', a status that the 
Brahmins claimed for themselves. As part of the 
comprehensive plan for cultural revolution that 
Periyar laid out, non-Brahmins would dispense 
completely with Brahmins to officiate over their 
religious and social functions. In particular, 
the use of Brahmins to conduct the marriage of 
Hindu couples was to be strictly avoided. In this 
way, non-Brahmins would be able to assert their 
equality with the Brahmins and would, at the same 
time, be saved from paying the Brahmins the hefty 
fees that they charged as ritual specialists. In 
place of Brahmin-officiated marriage ceremonies, 
Periyar launched what he called 'self-respect' 
marriages, which were conducted without any 
priest at all. Unlike the Brahminical marriage, 
in which the bride is explicitly recognized as 
subordinate to the husband and is given away as a 
commodity to him,  the 'self-respect' marriage 
was an egalitarian one. In contrast to the 
Brahminical marriage, the 'self-respect' marriage 
did not entail any dowry.

That the RSS, and the Hindutva brigade as a 
whole, are simply a new face of Brahminism is 
well-known. Little wonder, then, that the 
Organiser spies in Karunanidhi's proposal for 
state recognition of ëself-respectí marriages 
throughout India a conspiracy to 'meddle with 
Hindu religion', going so far as to denounce it 
as 'promot[ing] atheism by deritualising and 
de-Hinduising Hindu marriages'. Clearly, it 
recognizes that marriages that dispense with 
Hindu priests, mostly Brahmins, are a potent 
challenge to Brahminism.  It is, however, careful 
not to register its protest in a way that reveals 
its own Brahminical agenda. Instead, it denounces 
such marriages as 'anti-Hindu', as 'intimidation 
of Hindu religion', and as calculate to 'to spite 
the religious sentiments of the Hindu majority'. 
The fact that the vast majority of 'Hindus' are 
non-Brahmins, who might well believe that they 
are equally capable as Brahmins to conduct their 
own marriages, is, of course, ignored. So, too, 
is the fact that many Dalit castes and Tribals, 
whom the RSS seeks to include within the 'Hindu' 
fold in order to augment 'Hindu' numbers, 
continue to conduct their marriage ceremonies 
without Brahmin priests and dispensing with 
Brahminical ceremonies.

Any critique of Brahminism, therefore, is 
interpreted as an attack on Hinduism as such by 
the RSS. Any move that might challenge the 
hegemony of the Brahmin minority or make a dent 
in the citadel of Brahminism is presented as an 
attack on the 'Hindu majority' and 'Hinduism', 
even if such moves as 'self respect' marriages 
might work in favour of the non-Brahmin majority. 
As defenders of Brahminical or 'upper' caste 
privilege, Hindutva ideologues see every issue 
from the point of view of the Brahminical elites. 
Hence, the reasonableness of Karunanidhi's demand 
is completely dismissed, without any recognition 
of the fact that it might well help the majority 
of the 'Hindus', who are from the oppressed 
castes, victims of Brahminism. The Organiser sees 
no merit in the proposal at all, and, instead, 
makes the ridiculous suggestion that it might be 
a communist-inspired conspiracy to 'wean away 
Hindu youth from the fold of family and religion 
and make them tools of atheist, anti-Hindu 
tirade'.

The Organiser ends its vehement denunciation of 
Karunanidhi's proposal with by insisting that, 
'as a declared non-believer, Karunanidhi and the 
[sic.] likes have no right to talk on Hindu 
religious affairs'. 'It is for Hindu religious 
leaders and social reformers to talk on the 
religion', it insists. If that is the case, then 
why, one must ask, do the Hindutva-walas appear 
to take such an inordinate interest in the 
'plight' of Muslim women? If non-Hindus and 
self-declared non-believers have no right to talk 
about Hindu religious matters, what gives the RSS 
and its affiliates in the Hindutva camp the right 
to talk about Islam and shed crocodile tears over 
the 'oppression' of Muslim women?

It is striking how, despite their visceral hatred 
of each other, Muslim and Hindu fundamentalists 
think alike on a range of issues. Both speak of 
religious identity as a monolith, conveniently 
ignoring the obvious fact that the interests of 
the elites they champion have little in common 
with those of the poor. On the issue of gender, 
too, both are firm upholders of patriarchal 
privilege. Like their counterparts among the 
Muslim clerics, the Hindutva-walas see 
patriarchal control as essential to their vision 
of religion, and hence any step that threatens to 
challenge it is regarded as a sinister 
anti-religious plot, as the Orgniser's furious 
reaction to Karunanidhi's sensible and very 
welcome proposal  makes amply clear.

[Related Material]

Chennai Online - May 11, 2005
DMK wants Hindu Marriage Act amended

URL: 
www.chennaionline.com/colnews/newsitem.asp?NEWSID=%7B508BC33F-7E48-4C7E-8015-2F3FF08B7A77%7D&CATEGORYNAME=Tamil+Nadu

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

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.




More information about the Sacw mailing list