SACW | 20-21 June 2005

[sacw]

South Asia Citizens Wire  | 20-21 June,  2005

[1]  Kashmiri Mission Proves Counterproductive (J. Sri Raman)
[2]  Social backwardness in Pakistan (M B Naqvi)
[3]  Pakistan - India: [Childrens] Dialogue On Friendship (Sanat Mohanty)
[4]  India: How The Patriarchs Speak - Why 
sex-workers should thank the RSS chief (Nivedita 
Menon)
[5]  India: Reading Between the Chinks in Parivar Armour (Aditya Nigam)
[6]  India: Press Statement by Women's Organizations Re: "Community Panchayats"
[7]  India - Orissa: Business As Usual - 
Repression continues in Kashipur (Debaranjan 
Sarangi)
[8] Announcements:
(i)  A Day Long Convention and an Evening -The 
Communal Harmony Day in Gujarat (Ahmedabad, July 
1, 2005)
(ii)  Monarchy Vs Democracy - The Epic Fight in Nepal by Baburam Bhattarai

______


[1]

truthout.org |  17 June 2005

KASHMIRI MISSION PROVES COUNTERPRODUCTIVE
by J. Sri Raman

     The mission of a team of Kashmiri liberation 
leaders from India-administered Kashmir to its 
Pakistan-controlled counterpart and thence to 
Pakistan is over. The total upshot of the 
mission, however, has proven ironical indeed.

     Much-hyped was the mission of the All-Party 
Hurriyat (Freedom) Conference, Hurriyat in 
popular parlance, and much hope came to be pinned 
on it. The two main results of the exercise, 
however, have been the virtual abandonment of 
long-standing demands for the right of 
self-determination and a sharply aggravated 
dissension in the camp of the Kashmiri liberation 
struggle.

     The initiative, expected earlier to give a 
place for Kashmiris in the Kashmir solution, may 
end up making their issue an entirely 
India-Pakistan one.

     The right of self-determination has been 
relegated to the sidelines, and the decades-long 
demand for a plebiscite or referendum has been 
given a quiet burial. It has been given out that 
the abandonment of the demand is one of the 
points agreed upon without fuss or formal 
announcement between the Hurriyat and the 
Pakistan regime.

     The background to the demand brings out the 
irony forcefully. The idea was originally a 
suggestion of the last British Viceroy of India, 
Lord Louis Mountbatten. Soon after the creation 
of independent India and Pakistan in 1947, when 
Pakistani leaders anxious to complete "the 
unfinished business of partition (of the 
undivided British India)" sent tribal marauders 
into Kashmir, the unpopular Maharaja of the 
Himalayan state asked for Indian help and offered 
Kashmir's accession to India.

     In his reply, Mountbatten said: "... it is my 
government's wish that as soon as law and order 
have been restored in Kashmir and its soil 
cleared of the invader, the question of the 
state's accession should be settled by a 
reference to the people." This meant, in modern 
parlance, a plebiscite or a popular referendum.

     For decades since then, the plebiscite has 
been an insistent Pakistani plea. At least three 
resolutions of the United Nations from 1949 
backed the demand with full Pakistani support. 
India always opposed the proposal on the grounds 
that Kashmir's soil was not cleared of 
cross-border insurgents.

     President Pervez Musharraf's Pakistan has 
left little doubt now about its resolve to 
renounce the demand on its behalf as well as the 
Kashmiri people's.

     This might be acceptable to moderate sections 
of the Hurriyat, or those that prefer a political 
campaign to an armed struggle. The Hurriyat 
delegation that represents these sections may not 
have defended the demand vehemently in Pakistan. 
The more uncompromising sections of the Hurriyat, 
however, have given an alarming notice of how 
they propose to respond to what they call "a 
betrayal" and "a conspiracy."

     Hurriyat hardliner Syed Shah Geelani, who 
refused to join the mission, has reiterated that 
there can be no Kashmir solution without a 
plebiscite. The Azad Jammu Kashmir People Party 
(AJKPP), based in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, 
has called the entire mission a "conspiracy" to 
make the India- Pakistan Line of Control (LoC) in 
Kashmir into a permanent border. This is entirely 
unacceptable to militants who have been fighting 
for a united Kashmir with its right to 
self-determination.

     The hardliners see a conspiracy also in the 
remarks of Yasin Malik of the Jammu and Kashmir 
Liberation front ((JKLF), a member of the team 
with a rebellious image. The first of these 
remarks was his admonition to the authorities of 
Pakistan-controlled Kashmir against 
"romanticizing militancy" regardless of tragic 
consequences. Malik created a greater furor when, 
in a public speech in Pakistan, he praised 
present information minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed 
for his past contribution to the "jehadi" 
struggle in Kashmir.

     The minister was quick to deny any such 
contribution. New Delhi, however, was quicker to 
deplore the situation in which supporters of 
"terrorism" had come to occupy "high positions in 
Pakistan's public life."

     The hardliners' response has already found 
horrendous expression. On June 13, a car bomb 
blast killed 14 and injured over a hundred in the 
town of Pulwama. The victims included 
schoolchildren; the camp of a para-military 
force, located closeby, was the real target. The 
weeks before witnessed less serious militant 
strikes.

     The violence, if it snowballs, can have the 
effect of weaning away a section of the Hurriyat 
moderates from the path of dialogue. A few more 
strikes of the same kind, and the faith of the 
Kashmiri people in the peace process may be 
irreparably damaged. What dialogue are they 
taking about, Kashmiris are asking, when school 
kids can't return home safe?

     No details are available about the meeting 
between General Musharraf and the Hurriyat 
delegates. However, he is reported to have told 
them that he could not compel India to make them 
a party to the peace talks. In other words, 
participation in what diplomatic parlance calls 
"proximity" talks is all that the Hurriyat can 
hope for.

     General Musharraf has, subsequently, asserted 
that the Kashmir problem could be solved in "two 
weeks." The India-Pakistan process, however, 
cannot yield an enduring solution, even over a 
longer period, if the neighbors persist in their 
policy of keeping the Kashmiris out.

   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.


______


[2]

Deccan Herald
June 20, 2005

SOCIAL BACKWARDNESS IN PAKISTAN
Absence of land reform
By M B Naqvi

There is a hierarchical system of mutual favours 
between political leaders and local influentials 
in Pakistan

How panicky, ham-handed and boorish a government 
can become when faced with a challenge to its 
image in the US has been shown by Islamabad over 
the treatment of a humble village woman, Ms 
Mukhtaran Mai. Here was a woman who was 
gang-raped by four men who had been asked to do 
so by a jirga or village panchayat comprising 
village elders. The cause of the rape was that 
her brother had had some suspected relationship 
with a close female relative of an influential 
person in the village, who convened and 
complained in the jirga. The jirga in its 
traditionalist wisdom awarded the judgement: let 
four men gang-rape his sister for the fault of 
her brother. Accordingly, the horrendous crime 
was committed.

Her second agony began on June 10, when the 
Lahore High Court released all the persons who 
had been sentenced by a regular court earlier for 
the gang rape. There is no option but to think 
that their lordships had apparently agreed with 
the defence that these men were acting in good 
faith and were engaged in the pursuit of justice 
according to their time-honoured local 
traditions. And there had been no individual 
lust. Since the crime had been committed and the 
culprits were publicly known, there can be no 
other explanation for their lordships' decision 
to release the accused even on bail.

But the really sordid story begins now: since she 
had dared to question the jirga's wisdom and had 
gone to regular courts against local 
influentials, they were sure to take revenge. The 
exact sequence of events is not wholly clear. She 
was first put under house arrest with policemen 
guarding her house and preventing her movement. 
Earlier, as a result of a column in the 
Washington Post, she had been invited to the US 
and had accordingly applied for a US visa.

Then, she was whisked away by intelligence 
personnel to Islamabad where she was pressurised 
to withdraw the passport from the American 
Embassy. She was made to sign a letter to that 
effect. Here, at the time of writing, her 
whereabouts are not known. According to Asma 
Jahangir, the Chairperson of the Human Rights 
Commission of Pakistan, she is under government 
custody at an unknown place and the intention is 
to prevent her from going abroad.

In the meantime, the government had put her name 
on the 'Exit Control List', which prevents named 
persons from going abroad. There was an uproar in 
the National Assembly and the Prime Minister 
received Mukhtaran and graciously struck her name 
off the ECL. But what happened? Her passport was 
withheld. Back to square one.

It was a scandal. US Assistant Secretary for 
South Asian Affairs Christina Rocca recently 
spoke about the crime and the bureaucratic 
ham-handedness in Pakistan. She assured American 
law-makers that the US government would take up 
the issue, even while showering fulsome praises 
on President Pervez Musharraf on the same 
occasion.

But this scandal has focused attention on a 
long-festering problem. Outside of the urban 
centres, in the villages it is traditional 
justice that is administered through jirgas that 
comprise local elders. Since none of them knows 
any law, most of their judgements are cock-eyed 
and frequently vindictive; in many cases, they 
are quite inhuman too. Mukhtaran Mai's case has 
not been the first when a jirga has authorised 
the gang-rape of an innocent woman. There have 
been such cases earlier too, sometimes of even 
minor girls being thus violated. Everyone in the 
political class, the people who matter, is 
mortally afraid of banning this uncivilised 
parallel system of justice. Most grandees of the 
political class depend for their influence and 
re-election on these 'esteemable' elders.

Why did the government panic in the case of 
Mukhtaran Mai's proposed US visit? Why was she 
put under house arrest and later taken away 
incommunicado? Above all, putting her name on the 
Exit Control List shows the extreme panic of the 
bureaucracy. Why was her name put on the ECL? 
Obviously, her travel to the US on the invitation 
of expatriate Pakistanis was not in the national 
interest of Pakistan. Don't ask who interprets 
the national interest? It is of course the 
bureaucracy. What would have happened if 
Mukhtaran Mai had been allowed to go to the US? 
She would have spilled the beans about the 
parallel system of justice in the villages. That 
would have, according to governmental eggheads, 
given negative publicity for Pakistan.

What these wonderful whizz-kids do not know is 
that this kind of boorish action does more harm 
to Pakistan's image than what Mukhtaran Mai could 
have done by speaking out and giving her part of 
the story. Frequently, the hoary local 
traditionalism has been mixed up here with 
beautiful verbiage of preserving Islamic values. 
This sort of thing has nothing to do with Islam 
or with any other religion. It is pure and simple 
ancient village traditions of a largely 
illiterate population.

That a government supposedly committed to 
promoting 'enlightened moderation' should have 
behaved in this manner, against the normal law of 
the land, shows its insecurities. How one wishes 
the government to realise that what they are 
trying to hide from international attention is 
something worth exposing and fighting against. If 
enlightened moderation is really desired, one has 
to begin at home, not simply make statements 
before the international media.

The reason it is more difficult in Pakistan to 
fight social backwardness is because of the power 
structures in the villages. Village elders are 
important people and ambitious politicians 
cultivate them. And these gentlemen do deliver 
many votes to the candidates who oblige them. 
There is a hierarchical system of mutual favours 
between political top leaders and local 
influentials. That is how conservative politics 
survives. The absence of any land reform has been 
the key factor. Rural grandees still control and 
profit from huge areas under what is an elaborate 
system of benamis, using bogus names.



_______


[3]

The Independent - June 20, 2005

DIALOGUE ON FRIENDSHIP

Sanat Mohanty

Early afternoon on June 17, 2005, about 10 
children from Hyderabad (Pakistan) and as many 
from Lucknow (India) talked with each other about 
the need for peace between the two nations, 
inviting the other to come spend time with them 
as well as singing songs together.

Despite technical difficulties with unstable 
Internet and video networking through a web-cam 
as well as disturbances over the phone line that 
was finally used to teleconference the children 
in, the enthusiasm and sheer joy of speaking to 
each other was perceptible. Some children 
participating in the workshop from Lucknow had 
tickets for a film later in the day but decided 
to forego that to find out about their 
counterparts in Hyderabad.

Before the call-in that eventually occurred at 
about 5:00 pm India time and 4:30 Pakistan time, 
these groups of children had separately 
participated in workshops. These workshops 
included discussions, singing songs, watching 
parts of a film on 50 years of hostilities 
between India and Pakistan and so on.

During the call, the children were very 
forthcoming, telling each other across over a 
thousand kilometres of space that we needed 
peace, and we needed to work for it. Starting a 
bit bashfully -- talking about the weather, and 
each other's health -- the children opened up as 
the session proceeded. They talked about 
themselves -- what they liked to read, sports 
that they enjoyed.

"What picture do you see when you think about 
India," one of the children from Lucknow asked. 
"We see a place with friends," came the answer 
across the phone line. "Can we be friends?' 
another voice from Lucknow queries. "Of course," 
comes a confident reply.

"We have been trying to talk to you for so long," 
one of the children from Lucknow said -- perhaps 
articulating her frustration at the technical 
difficulties. She might as well have been talking 
about the feelings of various Indians and 
Pakistanis who have been looking forward to 
better relationships and greater interaction that 
has been constrained by the insularity of 
domestic and international politics.

Sajjad, from Hyderabad, who had come to India 
with a group of young children travelling through 
and playing cricket with (not against) kids from 
various parts of India, described his trips to 
his counterparts from Lucknow, talking about his 
experiences in Mumbai, Delhi and Kolkata. "But 
you did not come to Lucknow?" some one asked.

Shweta wanted to know more about Hyderabad, 
besides describing Lucknow and what she liked 
about the city. Pooja in Lucknow wanted to know 
more about the lives of the children in 
Hyderabad, wanting to perhaps find out the 
similarities they shared and if anything was 
different.

Areeba Javed read out a poem on peace, among 
other poems and songs sung by a number of the 
children in Hyderabad. The children in Lucknow 
also sang a song from 'Veer Zaara'. Then everyone 
joined in and sang a song from another Bollywood 
film 'Kal ho na ho'.

The effort was organized by various members of 
the recently concluded Delhi to Multan Peace 
march, some of whom were able to participate in 
the march and others who could not join the march 
but played important roles in supporting the 
march and making it a success. Another call with 
the same group of participants is planned within 
the next month.

The organizers view this as a follow up action 
from the march, using available technology to 
increase people to people interaction. Based on 
feedback and learning from these calls, the 
organizers plan to start similar interactions 
between other groups.

The writer is a scientist based in Minneapolis, 
USA, who participated in the India-Pakistan peace 
march and co-organised the youth teleconference


_______


[4]

The Telegraph
June 21, 2005

HOW THE PATRIARCHS SPEAK
- Why sex-workers should thank the RSS chief
Nivedita Menon
(The author is reader in political science, Delhi University)

Not surprisingly, dramatic dialogues in any 
episode of the long-running sangh parivar soap 
draw heavily from the Ramayana, the Mahabharata 
and our rich heritage of Sanskrit shlokas. The 
patriarchs of the parivar cast themselves 
inevitably in the roles of steadfast Arjun and 
noble Ram, while opponents are sexualized and 
emasculated as prostitutes and shikhandis. For an 
organization that prides itself on the celibacy 
of its activists, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh 
certainly wallows in sexual imagery. The current 
Advani kahani too, has had its share. Up popped 
RSS chief, K.S. Sudarshan, the other day, quoting 
an appropriate Sanskrit shloka, comparing 
politics to prostitution. The reason why the RSS 
stays away from politics, he said.

He may have a point. What does a "prostitute" do? 
She offers a specific service, for which she 
charges a specific sum, and collects payment upon 
delivering the service. An open and honest 
transaction. Quite unlike politics, then. And 
certainly the very opposite of the RSS, whose 
dishonesty and subterfuge are legendary. By 
claiming to be a cultural rather than political 
organization, it controls a political party 
without ever having to prove its credentials by 
democratic means. Would the RSS dare to test 
itself and what it stands for in an election - 
even an election restricted to Hindus by birth? 
But then, why should it, when it can hide behind 
the Bharatiya Janata Party?

Shikhandi, the transgendered charioteer, is 
invoked often, to suggest an emasculated figure 
from behind whom the opponent strikes. When 
Yashwant Sinha, one of the few non-RSS BJP 
leaders, attacked Manmohan Singh thus, an 
editorial in Organizer was effusive about the 
phrase. What a lovely turn of events in our 
modern day Mahabharata that the "real" man is 
termed the eunuch and the "real" woman, Sonia 
Gandhi, the warrior, and both are expected to be 
insulted. Not that these delicious ironies strike 
any of the political players in the field.

The recent overwrought discussion over Advani's 
comments in Pakistan is an indication that 
finally the Hindu Right is in the throes of its 
long-deferred nervous breakdown after the 
election results. Isn't it called the phantom 
limb syndrome, where the amputee continues for a 
long time to feel itching and pain and other 
sensations in her limb which is no longer there? 
One year down the line, it's just begun to strike 
them that it's actually happened. The limb has 
gone. There was the Sonia itch and the threats by 
various BJP women leaders to shave heads and 
retreat into kopagrihas. There was the 
shankaracharya ache, and no one except the BJP 
cared. (For a party that claims to represent 
"Hindus", it really doesn't seem to get it at 
all. Anyone from the South could have told them 
that the Shankaracharya matters only to the 
Iyers, and the Iyengars don't really give a damn. 
Not to mention North Indians, for whom the 
shenanigans of Madrasis offer mild amusement, at 
best.)

The BJP-RSS link is fraying, and whether it will 
be patched up or not, is something we can only 
speculate about at this point. The tension is at 
the question of Indian nationhood. The RSS is 
more clearly the Hindu Right we recognize, the 
fascist organization with the agenda of a Hindu 
nation created by eliminating minorities. The BJP 
has tried in the past, and continues to hope to 
be a moderate right-of-centre party. This, by the 
way, is not a hope limited to the party itself. 
Post-general election, some of the mainstream 
English press and senior journalists can be seen 
urging the BJP in this direction - to shed the 
Togadias and Modis, and to concentrate on 
becoming the Republicans of India. To make 
themselves worthy of a new globalized world, 
build alliances with the United States of 
America, and to disown their embarrassing 
relatives, the RSS.

It is not simply a question of degree, of "hard" 
and "soft" Hindutva, but of two substantively 
different strands within the ideology. Within the 
world-view of the BJP it is entirely possible to 
be a party of the Hindus while simultaneously 
espousing the language of abstract citizenship. 
The Hindu Right is usually understood to be 
asserting religious identity in place of abstract 
citizenship, but at least one strand of it, 
represented by the dominant voice in the BJP, 
makes a contrary claim. That Indian secularism in 
practice has not in fact, protected the abstract 
unmarked citizen. Hence the label of 
"pseudo-secularists" for those who affirm the 
need for protection for minorities - hence the 
charge that provisions like separate personal 
laws, special status for Kashmir and minority 
status for educational institutions are 
"anti-secular." The fact remains unnoticed by all 
proponents of abstract citizenship, even its 
impeccably anti-Hindu Right ones, that its 
apparent neutrality is already marked by the 
values of the majority or dominant community. If 
"Indianness" is coloured by a Hindu upper-caste 
tinge, only malcontents and anti-nationals 
recognize this. This is why Vande Mataram can be 
claimed as a merely nationalist song, ignoring 
its embeddedness in Hindu religious iconography. 
Quite simply, it means "Hail to thee, O Mother!" 
- which child of India could refuse to sing this 
song? By a similar logic one should be able to 
claim that any believer in God should be able to 
utter the words "God is Great" - in the form of 
"Allah-o-Akbar". The point, of course, is that 
this latter claim is too absurd to be made - 
minorities asserting "their" culture can never 
claim universality, whether it is Muslims in 
India or Indians in the US.

Within a framework of abstract citizenship, in 
other words, it becomes possible to claim that it 
is "communal" to raise the issue of religious 
identity at all, and casteist to assert caste 
identity. It is Ambedkar then, whom Arun Shourie 
can label casteist and anti-nationalist for 
insisting on prioritizing caste oppression. 
Within this framework again, the BJP leader, 
Harsh Vardhan, can quite logically claim as he 
did recently, that the Delhi government's 
decision to conduct a separate census of Muslims 
is "insulting to Muslims", because the PMO's 
letter, on the basis of which this census will be 
conducted, states that Muslims are "less 
educated, less earning and their employment is 
irregular". Harsh Vardhan's protest holds that 
when the president of the country is Muslim, and 
Muslims have served the nation in various 
important positions, the PMO "has no right to say 
that Indian Muslims are backward, uneducated and 
living in filthy conditions".

This is only an absurd version of an 
understanding not limited to the Hindu Right. A 
large part of the opposition to it - ranging from 
left to liberal voices - shares this critique of 
"identity politics". Witness their discomfort 
with, and complete incomprehension of, the 
politics of Mayawati and the Bahujan Samaj Party. 
It is crucial now to recognize that the assertion 
of identities is not necessarily counter to the 
spirit of democratic politics.

Advani's comments in Pakistan mark an attempt to 
move away from the RSS mohalla and into a more 
posh neighbourhood. It would be a mistake to 
assume a homogeneous camp where such differences 
are mere theatrics. This struggle for the soul of 
the Hindu Right is worth watching.

Meanwhile, sex-workers, celebrate! To be cleared 
by the sarsanghchalak himself, of any possible 
charge of being anything like the immoral and 
corrupt RSS - what a relief!


_______


[5]

Tehelka.com
	 
Reading Between the Chinks in Parivar Armour

Advani's Jinnah remark pits Savarkar against Golwalkar

By Aditya Nigam

Aditya NigamThat Lal Krishna Advani withdrew his 
resignation was not the real surprise - only the 
politically naïve would have expected any other 
outcome. However, already the wrong conclusions 
are being drawn from Advani's apparent 
compromise: that the parameters of how far you 
can go in the bjp - even if you are an Advani - 
are determined by the RSS. While this is 
partially true, it is the most uninteresting part 
of the truth. The interesting parts always lie in 
the unexpected; in what appears but fleetingly in 
the flow of the ordinary. In that sense, the fact 
is that for the first time ever, somebody did go 
this far - and it was the RSS that had to stomach 
it and reach out for a compromise!

Long after this episode is forgotten, a future 
historian may find that it was sending out a 
coded signal, calling for a more long-term 
realignment of forces within the Hindu Right. It 
is not the immediate realpolitik calculations 
that interest us here. Advani played a calculated 
gamble. He then waited to see the line-up and 
assess who would stand where if matters came to a 
head. It only made sense to withdraw after it 
became clear that he would have to stand 
practically alone in this battle with the fascist 
machine of the RSS. Does that make Advani an 
anti-fascist fighter? Certainly not. But any 
division in a seemingly monolithic set-up always 
begins with such small, almost imperceptible 
changes.

What then is the battle about? Is it about 
'secularism'? Is Advani, by claiming Jinnah as 
(fellow?) secularist, really turning over a new 
leaf? What is really at stake in insisting on 
Jinnah's secularity, to the point of annoying not 
merely the RSS, but also many of his camp in the 
bjp?

We cannot even begin to understand the meaning of 
this conflict until we realise that, unlike most 
secularists believe, "secularism" is not 
antithetical to "communalism" - indeed, you can 
be both at the same time. For communalism in 
India, as scholars have been at pains to point 
out, has rarely been about religion. Its concerns 
have been entirely political: power-sharing, 
representation, community rights, citizenship. 
Neither Jinnah nor Advani's spiritual father VD 
Savarkar would have had any problem with 
individual citizens holding on to their religious 
belief. It was precisely this point that was 
underlined by Advani when he cited Jinnah's 
speech to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. 
Their fundamental quest was for a nation that 
would be internally homogeneous, such that the 
State would recognise only the individual citizen 
as the legitimate bearer of rights. An 
unexceptionable liberal position, this. It is 
unthinkable within either Jinnah's or Savarkar's 
frame that the State should recognise any 
community's right to follow its separate 
practices, as for instance in the case of 
"personal laws" in contemporary India. This 
strict insistence on the formal equality of all 
individuals is the basis of the Hindu Right's 
claim to secularism: those who demand safeguards 
for minorities then become "pseudo-secular".
Partition's Children: Advani with Musharraf

Needless to say, only a minority community need 
fear this insistence on individual - as opposed 
to group - rights. The norms of the majority 
culture never need to be separately articulated. 
They function by default as the template for the 
formulation of legal norms. Take for instance, 
the fact that Sunday continues to be the weekly 
holiday in secular England or Europe, not to 
mention the rest of the 'not-yet-secular' world. 
This is despite the fact that Saturday is the 
Jewish Sabbath and Friday the Islamic day of 
prayer. The Christian origins of Sunday are all 
but lost in secular memory. Right from the days 
of the French Revolution, this impulse towards 
the creation of a homogeneous national culture 
and the individual citizen as the only legal 
entity the State would recognise, has been 
central to the project of the modern 
nation-state. And everywhere, it was the majority 
culture that was made the basis of the secular 
norms of the nation-state.

In a way, this is what the most sophisticated 
representatives of the Hindu and Muslim 
nationalists, namely Savarkar and Jinnah, wanted. 
The main contention between them, as we know, was 
not over religious practices but over the 
definition of "nationhood". Religion was present 
but simply as a marker of national identity; its 
ritual or theological matters were irrelevant. 
Theirs was not the vision of a theocratic State 
but of an eminently secular one. It is the 
secularity of this vision that makes it 
suspicious of minority rights. Advani is the 
spiritual descendant of this legacy inherited 
from Savarkar.

However, this is certainly not what animates the 
likes of Togadia, Ashok Singhal or the RSS, who 
draw their inspiration more directly from MS 
Golwalkar, who advocated second-class citizenship 
and a subordinate status for Muslims. The 
difference is quite significant since the 
inspiration here is more clearly a fascist rather 
than a 'liberal' idea of citizenship. This is the 
battle within the Hindu Right. A close reading of 
the debate during this episode reveals a 
significant body of opinion that desires a 
moderate right-wing party with a concern for 
Hindu identity, rather like the Christian 
Democrats in parts of Europe. This public opinion 
outside the Sangh Parivar has its counterpart 
within. Instead of attributing to it the strength 
of an impenetrable monolith, secular forces would 
do better to recognise and utilise every chink in 
the armour of the Hindu Right.

The writer is Fellow, Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi
June 25 ,2005

_______


[6]

SACW |  21 June 2005
http://www.sacw.net/Wmov/statement21062005.html


PRESS STATEMENT BY WOMEN'S ORGANIZATIONS RE: "COMMUNITY PANCHAYATS"
June 20th, 2005

We the undersigned women's organizations are 
horrified by media reports regarding
totally unjust and inhuman decisions by "community panchayats". These were
in terms of incidents that took place in a village in Muzaffarnagar district
in Uttar Pradesh, and the case of an inter-caste 
marriage in a village of Haryana.

These 'decisions' involved in one case, forcing a 
woman, Imrana, to separate from her husband and 
marry her father-in-law who had raped her, a 
decision apparently supported by local clerics; 
in the second case, fines were imposed on 
families due to a marriage that took place 
against the will of the Panchayat in Haryana. 
Both these need to be severely condemned.
Two issues arise here -- the nature of the powers vested in panchayats and
the warped attitude of religious authorities to gender issues. What are
these 'community panchayats'? What sanction do they have to exercise
virtually life-and-death powers? They do not appear to be the same as the
village panchayats constituted by the state. How can a system exist parallel
to the judicial and executive bodies constituted by the state, manned (they
appear to be exclusively run by men) by persons who are ignorant and
insensitive and whose judgments are irrational and inhuman? How can their
authority supersede that of the state?
Secondly, how can men who claim to be of religious persuasion further
victimize those who have already been brutally wronged while the wrongdoer
escapes and even claims the support of religion?

We strongly condemn the primitive attitude that a woman who has been
sexually assaulted is herself rendered 'impure' and unfit for marriage, fit
only to be the sexual partner of the rapist. Even the courts have recently
ordered rapists to marry their victims and thought that they were being humane.
The woman's wishes are never an issue; she is never allowed a choice. In
the case of Imrana from Muzaffarnagar, her existing marriage has been
declared 'null and void'; she must observe a period of seven months to
purify herself and then marry, not her husband but the man who raped her,
her father-in-law. Surely Islam does not advocate such inhumane and absurd
prescriptions!

These trends are not confined to the Muslim community. Newspaper reports of
late have shown an increasingly disturbing trend of the gross misuse of
powers by community panchayats to tyrannize not only over women, who are
victims of brutality, but also over young couples.
It was only recently for instance that a young couple, again in a village,
had to flee for their lives, since they seemed to infringe some 'gotra'
principle of the caste system of the Hindu religion. Even their parents
were punished and compelled to pay a daily fine of a hundred rupees.

It is high time that the citizens of our country took note of these
occurrences and mobilized support for individuals who are otherwise helpless
and isolated.
Extra-judicial powers, especially under the guise of religion, have often
discriminated against women and young people. Imposing dress codes, imposing
inhuman and humanly unacceptable types of sanctions on relationships, as well
as crimes make women even more vulnerable.
We need to insist that a crime is a crime, whether it is rape or
discriminatory treatment of citizens of the country. The perpetrators of
such crimes need to be brought to book urgently.

We welcome the decision of  the National 
Commission of Women to intervene and issue 
directives to the State Women's Commission to 
carry out further investigations within seven 
days. 

Akshara, Bombay
Aman Samuday , Gujarat
Awaaz-e-Niswan, Bombay
Criminal Justice Initiative, (India Centre for Human Rights and Law, Bombay)
CASH, Bombay
CEHAT, Bombay
Dilasa, Bombay
Disha, U.P.
EKTA, Madurai
Forum Against Oppression of Women, Bombay
Jagori, New Delhi
Sahiyar, Gujarat
Swayam, Calcutta
Saheen , Hydrabad
Saheli, Delhi
SAFAR, Gujarat
Stree Adhikar Sanghatan, New Delhi
Sama, New Delhi
SANGRAM, Maharashtra
Stree Mukti Sanghatana, Bombay
RAHI, New Delhi
Research Centre for Women's Studies, S.N.D.T. Bombay
LABIA, Bombay
Maati, Uttarachal
Nirantar, New Delhi
Olakh, Gujarat
Point of View, Bombay
VACHA, Bombay
WRAG, Bombay
Women's Centre, Bombay
Tamil Nadu Women's Forum
Tamil Nadu Dalit Women's Movement
Zubaan, New Delhi



Address for correspondence:
Awaaz-E-Niswaan 
CVOD Jain High School,
84, Hazarat Abbas Street (Samuel St.)
1st Floor, Dongri, Mumbai - 400 009


_______


[7]

SACW | 21 June 2005

India: Tragic Kashipur - Horrible Government
by Debaranjan Sarangi
[18 June 2005]

Kashipur struggle again came under the wrath of 
Naveen Govt. in Orissa when battalions of police 
went to village Guguput near Kucheipadar on 15th 
June at evening hour and indiscriminately lathi 
charged and tear gased the villagers gathered 
there. PSSP who is spearheading the struggle 
against the aluminium giants UAIL (joint venture 
of Hindalco and Alcan Co.) was conducting its 
area meeting and villagers of 15 villages mostly 
from the plant area of UAIL were there. Eleven 
villagers also were declared criminals and sent 
to jail.

This is second time in few months when the 
struggling tribals and dalit people faced the 
wrath of the Orissaís sold out Naveen govt. This 
is in the best interest of few corporate houses. 
In December, 2004 heavy police with district 
collector went to near Kucheipadar to set up a 
police barrack and police out post to protect 
modern Bhagya Bidhatas. People objected and faced 
gas firing and lathi charge. Many of the 
activists were sent to jail and were recently 
returned from jail after spending nearly four 
months.

This struggle has faced once firing in 2000 and 
lost three lives and injuring several others.
[ . . . ] .
http://www.sacw.net/Nation/sarangi21062005.html


_______


[8]

  [Announcements]

(i)
Human Rights Law Network, Janvikas,
Action Aid  and Anhad invite you to
  A DAY LONG CONVENTION AND AN EVENING OF
POETRY, DANCE AND SUFI BHAKTI MUSIC
IN MEMORY OF VASANT AND RAJAB
ON THE OCCASION OF
THE COMMUNAL HARMONY
  DAY IN GUJARAT

Venue: Town Hall, Ahmedabad
July 1, 2005

Gujarat : In Search of Justice and Amity

Note: Most of the speakers would speak in Gujarat or Hindi
All presentations are for 10 mnts duration accept 
the Keynote addresses (20 mnts each)

Plenary- 9am-10am

Welcome Introduction- Stalin K.

Keynote Addresses

Chair-  Achyut Yagnik
Gujarat-Communalization of Society and State: 
Socio economic Roots – Dr. Ghanshyam Shah
Communalization: The National Scene-Dr. Ram Puniyani


10-11.00

Session I

State, Judiciary and Bureaucracy
Chair- Girish Patel

State of State Judiciary-Subversion of Justice--Justice Rawani
State Machinary-Fate of the Administrative Norms, 
Accountability--Vibhuti Narayan Rai
POTA: State Repression- Colin Gonsalves


11.00-11.30- tea break


Session II

1130-12.30

Communalism, Violence and Weaker Sections of Society

Chair: Prakash Shah
Gendered Violence: Justice -- Ila Pathak 
Mobilising Dalits and Adivasis for Hindutva Agenda-- Raju Solanki
Communalisation of Tribal Areas in Gujarat- Cedric Prakash


Lunch
12.30-1.15


Session III

1.15-2.15

Chair: Indubhai Jani

Building Bridges

Restoration of Harmony- Vidyut Joshi
Learning and Unlearning from the Past: Dr. Raj Kumar Hans
Reparation and Rehabilitation: Zakia Jowher
Intercommunity Relations- Hanif Lakdawala


Session IV

2.15-4.00
Gujarat Today -Vibrant or Intimidating?
Chair-Gagan Sethi
State of Economy – Indira Hirway
State of Dalits-Martin Macwan
State of Adivasis –Bimalaben Karadi
State of Minorities- Darshini Mahadevia-- to be confirmed
State of Women- Trupti Shah
State of Education- Sonal Mehta and Sukhdev Patel
Sate of Institutions of Higher Learning- Iftikhar – to be confirmed


4.00-4.30- Tea Break

Session V

4.30-6.00

Unfinished Tasks: Agenda Ahead
Chair- Prof. DN Pathak
Struggle for Plural Democracy: Resisting Communalism: Digant Ozha
Tasks for the Future: Rohit Prajapati

An Evening of Poetry, Dance and Sufi Bhakti Music
Town Hall, Ahmedabad

7.30pm onwards

o o o o

(ii)

MONARCHY vs DEMOCRACY
The Epic Fight in Nepal
by
Baburam Bhattarai

Foreword by
(Prof.) Randhir Singh

The democratic movement of the Nepalese people 
against absolute monarchy, going on for more than 
half a century, is now heading towards a climax. 
The nine-year long People’s War led by the CPN 
(Maoist) for a people’s republic has virtually 
wiped out the feudal socio-economic and cultural 
roots of the Monarchy from the vast rural areas. 
This historical struggle between monarchy and 
democracy has drawn the attention of the whole 
world in recent years. It has made the 
imperialist nations led by US very restless 
whereas it has ignited a ray of hope among the 
people opposed to imperialism, feudalism and 
those who stand for democratic institutions. 
However, there is considerable lack of 
understanding about the real nature of this 
struggle even among the close observers of the 
Nepalese politics.

The book Monarchy vs Democracy: The Epic Fight in 
Nepal deals with the period after the infamous 
palace massacre of June 2001. The chain of events 
since then viz. declaration of national emergency 
and deployment of royal army since November 2001, 
dissolution of parliament in May 2002, dismissal 
of elected Prime Minister and assumption of 
executive powers by the King in October 2002 
which culminated in the imposition of absolute 
monarchy on February 1, 2005, amply testifies the 
regressive intentions of the Monarchy. The main 
demand of Maoists, today, is that a Constituent 
Assembly should be elected for the new 
constitution. The process of polarisation in 
favour of this demand has intensified since the 
autocratic step taken by the King on February 1. 
But, surprisingly, the ruling elite of India and 
the US still consider Monarchy essential for the 
stability of Nepal.

Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, 50, a Ph.D. from Jawahar 
Lal Nehru University, New Delhi (1986), is a rare 
combination of an outstanding intellectual and a 
top revolutionary of Nepal.

He is the senior Standing Committee Member of the 
Politburo of the Communist Party of Nepal 
(Maoist), which is leading a revolutionary 
People’s War in Nepal since 1996. He is also the 
Head of the International Department of the 
Party, and Convener of United Revolutionary 
People’s Council, Nepal, an embryonic Central 
People’s Government Organising Committee.

He has a number of publications to his credit, 
including The Nature of Underdevelopment and 
Regional Structure of Nepal: A Marxist Analysis, 
Politico-Economic Rationale of People’s War in 
Nepal, Nepal Krantika Adharharu (in Nepali), 
among others.

Published by

Samkaleen Teesari Duniya,
Q-63, Sector 12, Noida 201 301 (India)
Ph: 09810720714
e mail :nepalbulletin at rediffmail.com

2005 * 196 pages * Rs. 250 / $15 (paper)


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

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.