SACW | 3 August 2005
sacw
aiindex at mnet.fr
Tue Aug 2 19:41:00 CDT 2005
South Asia Citizens Wire | 3 August, 2005
[1] Bangladesh: Magsaysay for Matiur Rahman,
Editor of Prothom Alo (Editorial, The Daily Star)
[2] India sets a bad model (Praful Bidwai)
[3] 'Parivar' and the peace process (J Sri Raman)
[4] India: Children unprotected in Jammu and Kashmir (Amnesty International)
[5] India: History textbooks: the need to move forward (Sumit Sarkar)
[6] India: Hoisting flag against fatwas, women
march (Chandrima S. Bhattacharya)
[7] Call For Submission of Films: Met-Fest:
Masculinities in the City - festival on men and
masculinities!
[8] Publication: 'Jihad, Hindutva and the
Taliban - South Asia at the Crossroads
by Iftikhar H. Malik'
[9] "Presenting" the Past - Anxious History and
Ancient Future in Hindutva India
by S. P. Udayakumar
[10] Book Review: 'Communalism in Bengal: From
Famine to Noakhali, 1943-47 By Rakesh Batabyal'
______
[1]
The Daily Star
August 03, 2005
Editorial
MAGSAYSAY FOR MATIUR
WE ALL CAN BE JUSTIFIABLY PROUD
We are delighted at the Editor of Prothom Alo
Matiur Rahman winning the Magsaysay award. We are
sure we speak for the entire media in Bangladesh,
particularly the print media, when we say that it
is a matter of singular pride for us to see one
of our colleagues being honoured with the Asian
version of the Nobel Prize. We consider it a very
timely international recognition of the
independent and responsible press in Bangladesh.
He has made us all proud.
We rejoice in his honour and we revel in the
glory that it has brought to the nation in
general and to the journalist community in
particular. It has come at such a time when there
are concerted efforts by some of the very
powerful ministers of the government to denigrate
the press.
Matiur Rahman has to be congratulated for not
only winning the very prestigious award, but also
for his generous and extraordinary gesture of
donating the entire amount of the prize money, no
small amount by any definition, for the benefit
of those whose lot he strove to improve.
Along with Matiur Rahman, congratulations are in
order for all those that are associated with him
in his venture, in particular the members of his
team in the paper and his family, but for whose
help it might not have been possible to achieve
what he has.
Matiur has given a new meaning to the notion of
social responsibility. His achievement
underscores his demonstrated leadership, not only
in highlighting and projecting, through the pages
of his paper, the many social maladies that
afflict us, but also going even further and
taking on the responsibility of providing succor
and ameliorating the sufferings of the victims of
these social ills. He has set an example, worth
emulating, of the admirable use of the media to
do something tangible and of long-term
consequence to the society.
There is a lot that we can learn from the lead
that he has given in undertaking constructive
role in the society.
We all wish Matiur Rahman more success not only
in his professional career but also in the social
work that he is involved in.
______
[2]
The News International
July 23, 2005
INDIA SETS A BAD MODEL
Praful Bidwai
There is something unwholesome, indeed
distasteful, about the triumphalism in India over
the nuclear cooperation agreement signed between
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President
George W Bush. This ends India's characterisation
as a nuclear "pariah" after the first Pokharan
test of 1974. Following this, Washington had
walked out of its agreement to supply enriched
uranium fuel for the US-built Tarapur reactors.
There has always been a special feeling of
wounded pride among Indian policy-makers over the
"pariah" characterisation. Yet, the US wasn't the
only country to stage a strong protest against
Pokharan-I. Canada too protested. Their
embarrassment and anger weren't contrived. Both
had contributed substantially to designing,
building, and providing critical materials to,
the CIRUS "research" reactor commissioned in
1960. Its spent fuel was the source of the
plutonium used in the 1974 test.
Earlier, India had solemnly assured the US and
Canada through bilateral agreements that CIRUS
and its products would only be used for
"peaceful" purposes. The only way India could
still claim not to have violated this commitment
was to declare the explosion "peaceful". India,
one could argue, hadn't done anything that many
states with atomic ambitions wouldn't do: use all
kinds of devious means to fulfil those ambitions.
But Indian policy-makers were distinguished by
their uniquely self-righteous hurt over
Washington's reprimand.
They have ever since craved US approbation and
India's acceptance as a "responsible" nuclear
power even as they have, to their disgrace, given
up on the global disarmament agenda. The US now
terms India "a state with advanced nuclear
technology" (a bad euphemism considering how
primitive the Bomb technology is once you have
access to some special materials/equipment).
The US has now stepped out of the box and agreed
to accommodate India's nuclear ambitions by
treating it as an "exception" to the requirements
of the global non-proliferation order. Under
Monday's agreement, Bush has promised to sell
nuclear materials and equipment to India and
involve it in an experimental nuclear fission
project, etc. He has also pledged to "adjust US
laws and policies" and "work with friends and
allies to adjust international regimes" to enable
full civil nuclear transactions with India.
The flip side is that India would "assume the
same responsibilities" and "acquire the same
benefits" as the recognised nuclear
weapons-states. This involves numerous steps:
"identifying and separating civilian and military
nuclear facilities and programmes"; declaring
"civilians facilities" to the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)" and "voluntarily"
placing them under its safeguards; continuing the
"unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing"; and
"working with the US" for a multilateral "Fissile
Material Cut-Off Treaty".
India would also "secure nuclear materials and
technology through comprehensive export control
legislation" and through "adherence to Missile
Technology Control Regime (MTCR) and Nuclear
Suppliers' Group (NSG) guidelines", although it's
a member of neither.
The fact that Bush has treated India as an
"exception" may impress many in the Pakistani
elite. There will certainly be a clamour that
identical treatment be accorded to Pakistan. But
Islamabad would be ill advised to demand such
parity.
There are several problems with the India-US
agreement. One is asymmetry. Washington laid down
the overall agenda. India signed on the dotted
line -- except for bargaining over some words.
The deal imposes no new obligations on the US.
(Indeed, Washington is planning to conduct
further nuclear tests.) But India agreed to
extend its testing moratorium.
The US has only placed just four of its 250
civilian facilities under IAEA safeguards. India
will probably have to subject many more
installations to these. If the guidelines of the
NSG, comprised of 44 states, are applied, the
bulk of India's civilian facilities, including
its 15 operating reactors, will come under
safeguards. True, safeguards are a matter of
negotiation. But there, India and the US wield
unequal power.
No time frame is specified for the fulfilment of
obligations/commitments by either side. This
doesn't exclude pressure to rush through, say,
separation of military nuclear
facilities/activities from civilian ones. This is
practically difficult and expensive. Often, the
two activities occur in the same location.
Besides, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE)
scientists loathe "external" safeguards and
inspections. They were not consulted in advance
about the deal, and are largely sullen about its
execution.
The bitterest opposition to the agreement is
likely to arise from within the US and the NSG.
Influential politicians like Congressman Ed
Markey threaten to block it because it will open
the door to other "exceptions".
The US establishment is divided on the issue.
While some security analysts (e.g. Ashley Tellis,
formerly of the Right-wing RAND Corp.) favour the
agreement, others like George Perkovich argue
that the US "should not adjust the nuclear
non-proliferation regime to accommodate India's
desire Š to nuclear technology Š The costs of
breaking faith with non-nuclear weapons states
such as Japan, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina,
Sweden and others who forswore nuclear weapons
[are] too highŠ"
Without broad consensus, Bush might not be able
to sell the deal domestically. It will be even
more difficult to get it approved by the NSG.
Many NSG members will stoutly oppose any dilution
of the group's tough guidelines.
It would be a near-miracle if the agreement were
implemented within a reasonable period of time.
Even if it were, the benefits to India would at
best be marginal. Nuclear power accounts for
under three percent of India's electricity
generation. It cannot be the key to anyone's
energy security. It poses grave hazards both
through serious accidents like Chernobyl, and
through high-level wastes which remain active for
thousands of years. Nobody has found a solution
to the waste storage-and-disposal problem.
Nuclear power is 30 to 50 percent more expensive
than electricity from other sources -- even
without accounting for the (high) cost of
decommissioning old plants.
Contrary to myths, pursuit of nuclear power won't
lower aggregate carbon emissions. Nuclear plants
are extremely capital- and materials-intensive.
Each step in the "nuclear fuel cycle", from
uranium mining to reprocessing, emits greenhouse
gases. As energy expert M. V. Ramana argues,
"There is no empirical evidence that increased
use of nuclear power has contributed to reducing
a country's carbon dioxide emissions".
Take Japan. From 1965 to 1995, its nuclear
capacity went from zero to over 40,000 MW. But
carbon dioxide emissions tripled to 1200 million
tonnes!
It would be foolhardy for Pakistan to demand
parity with India in this regard. In fact, some
extremely cynical US leaders would only be too
glad to offer an identical deal to Pakistan so
that its nuclear facilities are subjected to
Iraq-style intrusive inspections. These could be
justified in Pakistan's case, unlike India's,
thanks to the history of Dr A Q Khan's shady
enterprise.
At its present level of nuclear technology
development, which is probably lower than
India's, Pakistan will find it even more
difficult to separate civilian and military
facilities and prevent interference in the former.
This is not an argument for nuclear proliferation
or clandestine activities, but a warning against
the US arrogating to itself a nuclear gendarme's
role. India and Pakistan committed a huge blunder
by crossing the nuclear threshold. They would be
wiser to put the nuclear genie back in the bottle
than to use it to drive dubious bargains
involving bankrupt super-hazardous technologies
like nuclear power, or even worse, to recover
national "honour" and "prestige".
______
[3]
Daily Times
22 July 2005
'PARIVAR' AND THE PEACE PROCESS
J Sri Raman
The follies of the minority fundamentalism are
not inspiring a 'jihad' on Muslims. Domestic
communalism appears to be losing its appeal in
proportion to the growth in the popularity of the
sub-continental peace process. The danger, of
course, is that frustration can force the far
right to adopt a harder line on 'Hindutva'
"Islamabad must realise the change in the
geo-strategic situation in the region and in the
world...though India will adhere to its
no-first-strike principle."
"Let Pakistan now come to a war with us, at a place and time of its choosing."
The first quotation is from the now-much-in-news
Lal Krishna Advani. He made the statement during
a speech on Kashmir in May 18, 1998, exactly a
week after the first round of India's
nuclear-weapons tests in Pokharan.
The second quotation is from the now-also-in-news
Madan Lal Khurana. His call to arms also came
around the same time.
The two leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP) are currently engaged in a mortal factional
combat. Khurana has called upon Advani to resign
both as BJP president and leader of the
opposition. The long-time joker in the BJP pack
has made it clear that he is dead serious about
the demand.
As we all know, Advani has been in trouble with
the parivar (the far right 'family') ever since
his journey to Pakistan and his tributes there to
Quaid-e-Azam Mohammed Ali Jinnah. It is against
this ideological transgression that Khurana and
his camp have raised a shrill voice of revolt.
The point to note, however, is that both Advani
and Khurana were making very similar
post-Pokharan pronouncements. Both were strident
in calling for an end to South Asian peace at
that propitious moment. Advani might have used
more high-sounding words and Khurana might have
sounded more like a wrestler in an the
traditional akhada, but beyond all mistake, both
were saying the same thing.
The recapitulation serves to reinforce a point
made earlier in this column. It is the
people-driven part of the India-Pakistan peace
process that has caused all the recent trouble
between the parivar and the BJP. It is the
promise of progress towards South Asian peace,
despite the pitfalls in the official part of the
process, that has made the parivar despair of the
lack of BJP opposition to the process under the
Atal Bihari Vajpayee-Advani leadership. This has
prompted the parivar patriarch, the Rahstriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), to push so forcibly and
fiercely for leadership change in the BJP.
The July 5 attack by unknown assailants at the
disputed site in Ayodhya has reinforced the call
for change. The incident appeared to offer a
timely opportunity to Advani. He was extremely
quick to seize it and to switch back from his
newfound 'secular' mode to his pristine political
persona that had presided over the Babri Masjid
demolition in 1992.
Many a pundit saw in this an impending end to the
bickering in the BJP - and indeed in the parivar.
It was supposed to have revived the Ayodhya
issue, brought it back to centre stage, and
reunited the far-right as little else could have
done. From the viewpoint of the BJP's friends,
the assessment has proved grossly over-optimistic.
Within a fortnight, the attack has been all but
forgotten. There is no sign of Ayodhya's revival
as an issue promising the BJP's return to
political effectiveness, if not to power. Nor is
there any indication that any other communal
issue can do the trick in the hallowed name of
'Hindutva'.
The BJP, in fact, has been clutching at every
straw of this kind. For its part, the minority
fundamentalism has not stopped supplying Advani
and his party with a series of such straws. They
saw an opportunity in the case of Imrana of Uttar
Pradesh, where religious leaders had sought to
punish a rape victim rather than the criminal. It
was offered yet another opportunity on a platter
when the UP Wakf Board claimed the Taj Mahal - a
national heritage - as its property, like any
other tomb. The party is currently trying to make
political capital out of an allegation of
underworld links against matinee idol Salman Khan.
It must have been taken aback, however, by the
lack of popular response. The follies of the
minority fundamentalism are not inspiring a jihad
on Muslims. Domestic communalism appears to be
losing its appeal in proportion to the growth in
the popularity of the sub-continental peace
process. The danger, of course, is that
frustration can force the far right to adopt a
harder line on 'Hindutva'.
Also, none of the developments will neutralise
the RSS and its flock, to whom opposition to
South Asian peace is an article of faith. They
know that the peace process cannot be preserved
without promoting inter-faith harmony in India as
well. Given the knowledge, what forgiveness can
there be for 'Atalji', Advani and others of less
than total commitment to the tenet of akhand
Bharat (indivisible India)'?
The writer is a journalist and peace activist based in Chennai, India
______
[4]
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
Public Statement
AI Index: ASA 20/027/2005 (Public)
News Service No: 201
26 July 2005
INDIA: CHILDREN UNPROTECTED IN JAMMU AND KASHMIR
The unlawful killing of three teenaged boys and the
serious injuries to a fourth boy during last weekend
in a village in Jammu and Kashmir throws into sharp
focus the lack of protection for children's right to
life and safety in the state. Children are at risk of
human rights violations from both state agents and
abuses from armed groups.
Amnesty International urges both the state government
and armed groups to respect the rights of children.
The government of Jammu and Kashmir is under an
international obligation to promote and protect child
rights in line with India's ratification of the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Armed
groups are under an obligation to abide by the
standards of humanitarian law which strictly forbid
the torture, killing and hostage taking of all
civilians, including children.
An army spokesperson stated that the four juveniles,
all between 11 and 15 years of age, were shot on 24
July 2005 in Bangargund village in Kupwara district
when troops of the 6th battalion of the Rashtriya
Rifles opened fire on the four teenagers, whom they
mistook for armed fighters. The boys had started to
run away when an army patrol called on them to stop in
an area close to the Line of Control, which is the de
facto border with Pakistan. Villagers claimed that the
juveniles were part of a marriage party and had gone
for a stroll in the village in the early hours of
Sunday when soldiers opened fire before the boys could
reply to their commands. According to reports, there
was no curfew in the area. Local villagers claim that
the village elders had informed the army of the
marriage party and that people were likely to move
about late at night.
An army spokesperson termed the incident "unfortunate"
and announced that the army would fully cooperate with
a magisterial inquiry set up by State Chief Minister
Mufti Mohammad Sayeed. The army also ordered an
internal inquiry. Police have registered a case
against the army.
On dozens of occasions, armed groups have perpetrated
indiscriminate attacks which have affected children.
They have exploded bombs close to schools resulting in
the deaths of several children and causing parents to
fear for the safety of their wards.
On 12 May 2005, armed fighters threw a grenade just as
schoolchildren were leaving a Christian missionary
school in Srinagar, killing two women who had come to
pick up their children and injuring some 50 people,
including 20 pupils. No group has claimed
responsibility for the attack.
On 13 June 2005, a truck bomb explosion near a school
in Pulwama killed 15 people and injured almost 100
others. The car blew up as pupils revised for an exam
in the sunshine on the school grounds. Two students
were among the dead and 10 were injured.
Yet another bomb blast outside a school occurred on 20
July 2005 in Srinagar when a suicide bomber apparently
drove his car into an army jeep killing four soldiers
and wounding 17 civilians. The Hizbul Mujahideen later
claimed responsibility for the bomb blast.
In December 2004, a school bus was set on fire to
prevent schoolchildren from attending army schools in
Anantnag district.
Children are also often amongst the victims during
indiscriminate attacks on civilians. On 22 June 2005,
two children were amongst 17 people injured when a
grenade was thrown into a crowd of pedestrians in
Gorivan Bijbehara.
Children are also at risk from discarded explosive
materials. On 24 July 2005, three children aged six to
nine years in village Ajir in Bandipore district were
injured when they played with an explosive device left
behind after troops ended an operation.
Children are deeply affected by witnessing abuses
inflicted on their elders, on fathers, mothers and
sisters humiliated, harassed, injured or killed by law
enforcement personnel or armed groups. A large number
of children have also had to take on the burdens of
child labour after the "disappearance" of the main
bread earners of their families. While the state
government in June 2003 cited the figure of 3,184
"disappeared" persons in the Legislative Assembly,
local human rights activists state that between 8,000
and 10,000 persons have "disappeared" in the state.
Psychologists have spoken of the high level of
disturbance, including sleep disturbance and fears
amongst children in Jammu and Kashmir.
______
[5]
The Hindu
July 05, 2005
HISTORY TEXTBOOKS: THE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD
Sumit Sarkar
The biggest problem concerns not political costs
or the need to upgrade content, but questions of
accessibility and appropriateness for young
people.
THE MEASURES taken or being considered concerning
school education are among the more promising of
the initiatives of the United Progressive
Alliance Government during its 13 months in
office. The necessary weeding-out from key posts
of academic nonentities, distinguished only by
loyalty to the Sangh Parivar, is being followed
up by moves towards far-reaching reform. Crucial
here is the new National Curriculum Framework
designed to replace the retrograde and
undemocratically enforced Framework of 2000 and
recently placed before the Central Advisory Board
of Education with its State Government
representatives. In sharp contrast to the BJP
style, every step is being taken through wide and
open academic discussion. The National Curriculum
Framework is based on the work of 21 National
Focus Groups, five regional seminars, and a
national conference of rural teachers.
Predictably, the BJP is unhappy, and its
Ministers recently staged a walkout from the
CABE, forcing a two-month delay in adoption of
the NCF, to give more time to States. As always,
history courses and textbooks are given central
place in this attack. Given the total
discrediting of the previous educational regime,
this at present is not much cause for worry. But
sadly, there are signs of a most unfortunate
intra-secular rift. Two prominent secular
historians have criticised plans for new middle
and high school textbooks. They suggest instead a
simple return to the old NCERT history texts
(`old' meaning here 30-40 years or more), with at
most the insertion of one or two new themes,
gender for instance.
Demands for retention or restoration of the old
books had been natural in the polemics over the
BJP texts, for nothing better was possible under
that regime. But in today's utterly changed
situation, a simple restoration would be
disastrous both academically and politically. It
would feed into the sense, cynical but quite
widespread even among many secular people, that
each regime brings in its train its own entourage
of academics, and so the labels of `secular' and
`communal' become no more than the pursuit of
factional interests. It is surely significant
that the recent BJP walkout from the CABE meeting
was partly on the ground that old books were
being restored, displaying a wilful ignorance
about the ongoing discussions about new syllabi
and texts: They no doubt realised that here was
an argument with some appeal, pitting the `new'
against the old.
Actually the BJP books had been far more
outdated, for the 1970s texts had tried to
incorporate, for the first time in school
education, something of the shifts in Indian
historical thinking over the 1950s and 1960s. But
today many more changes have been happening, and
their part-inclusion cannot be purely additive.
The dominant narratives would need to be modified
to recognise complications and cross-currents. It
is no longer helpful, for instance, to look upon
modern Indian history simply in terms of colonial
versus anti-colonial.
The biggest problem, however, concerns not
political costs or the need to upgrade content,
but questions of pedagogy, accessibility,
appropriateness for young people. Even when the
secular books were very much in place, there was
a growing disquiet, often particularly among
teachers with secular sympathies, that humanities
and social sciences, and history in particular,
had become the least popular options, for the
books were often excessively heavy and sometimes
frankly dull. In that context, the most promising
of the recent developments has been the new and
sophisticated attention given to pedagogical
methods throughout the New Curriculum Framework.
Chapter 2, `Learning and Knowledge,' calls for a
"child-centred pedagogy," the fostering of the
"active and creative capabilities" of children,
moving away from insistence on acceptance of the
teacher's words as authoritative knowledge
towards more interactive and dialogic methods, a
rejection of "rote methods" of teaching and
assessment. At this level, secular and BJP
textbooks had not really differed all that much.
Such problems have been most acute in history and
the other social sciences and humanities. Unlike
the natural sciences, where children in
laboratories can test with their own hands the
validity of many relationships or predictions,
history-teaching perpetually runs the danger of
forcing children to learn a mass of `facts,'
without explaining why and to what degree of
certainty these are `facts' worth remembering. At
best, an initial listing of `sources' is
attempted, and maybe some discussion of different
interpretations: detached from the rest of the
narrative, these become just more things to
memorise. And rote-learning has been vastly
enhanced by the adoption of objective-type or
short-answer formats at the two crucial rites of
passage for aspirants to higher education or to
jobs, the school-leaving CBSE examinations, and
then the utterly ridiculous NET. For good marks
in the CBSE, often not just the points but their
precise order need to be reproduced. The method
might just do for the less advanced levels of
mathematics or natural sciences, but is
disastrously inappropriate for subjects like
literature or history, for what gets squeezed out
is the awareness, indispensable here, of the need
often for multi-sidedness and ambiguity, the
understanding that simple yes/no, right/wrong
answers are often not possible, as in life itself.
The biggest problem of all is the assumed
obligation to be `comprehensive,' to `cover' as
much as can be packed in, never mind the burden
and the boredom. In history, particularly, many
facts come to acquire a peculiar aura or
mystique. Leaving any of them out opens one to
charges of being insufficiently patriotic, maybe
even `anti-national.' The assumption is that the
main `purpose' of history in schools is to
inculcate `correct' values, stimulate national
unity, integration, pride: a special burden
imposed on no other subject.
Imaginative effort
We do have some examples already of the
possibility of much more imaginative textbooks,
once the logic of trying to be `comprehensive' is
abandoned. I am thinking of two sets of books:
the Ekalavya ones, now unfortunately withdrawn,
and the recent Delhi Government texts, both
formulated after intense discussion with
school-teachers. The Delhi Ancient India book
(Class VI), for instance, begins with drawings of
different kinds of stone tools, some of them on
display at the National Museum. A class
discussion would then be initiated about what
could (or could not) be inferred from them,
leading children up to more general formulations
about the kind of society possible at that level
of technology in a manner much more meaningful
than any abstract definition of social formation.
Its Modern India counterpart (Class VIII) does
not begin with a definition of colonial
modernity, but foregrounds the theme of
many-sided transformation by asking students to
imagine what they think could have been the
school experiences of children like them in 1720,
and how a merchant's journey from Surat to Delhi
would have been different then. At a later stage,
they are asked to imagine themselves in Kashmiri
Gate during the 1857 siege. Included also are
some details about the coming of the numerous
physical components of today's everyday life: not
just railways, but print, newspapers, clocks,
post offices, public hospitals, electric lights,
underground water supply, gramophones, films,
radio. Surely it is facts like these that can
make history come alive for children, far more
than musty masses of information about forgotten
kings, wars, or even each and every detail of
anti-British struggle.
Such books develop some new ways of making
history come alive for children, and also
introduce what to my mind is the most important
potential of the subject. This is a sense that
everything changes, nothing is eternal, sacred,
or `natural' since the social world is made by
human beings and therefore open to
transformation. The past in many ways was a
different country (the best answer, really, for
countering the charge that `sentiments' are
getting hurt, much heard in BJP times but not
confined to them). Religious communities,
nations, etc., do not have absolutely continuous
histories, and so blaming the present generation
for the misdeeds of some of their forefathers is
no more than racism.
(The writer is Retired Professor of History, Delhi University.)
______
[6]
The Telegraph
July 25, 2005
HOISTING FLAG AGAINST FATWAS, WOMEN MARCH
- Mumbai streets resonate to daring slogans of protest thrown at clerics
Chandrima S. Bhattacharya
Mumbai, July 24: Some of the women do not even enjoy the right to have tea
at a restaurant.
The streets of Bhendi Bazaar, the old Muslim district in south Mumbai weary
with aged buildings, heavy traffic, unregulated, crowded shops and the
reputation of being home to the most conservative opinion in the community,
saw a startling sight yesterday.
About a hundred women, many of them wearing burqas, came marching down,
carrying roughly-made cut-outs of maulanas with their faces crossed out.
They did not mince words.
"Shaadi hamari, jashn hamara, aap ke baap ka kya jaata hai (it's our
marriage, our celebration, what business is it of yours)?" the women shouted
before the bewildered faces that had gathered on both sides of the streets.
This was the first time the community's religious heads in the city were
being asked such a question openly, from the streets, by women.
The demonstration was against the fatwas issued by maulanas, especially
against the community's women.
"In Cheetah Camp (a new Muslim settlement on the Central Line), women under
four mosques that are under maulanas from the conservative Tablighi Jamaat
are not even allowed to have tea at restaurants," said Sandhya Gokhale of
the Forum Against Oppression of Women, one of the women's groups that
organised the march.
"But we took one group of women out to tea in a restaurant. Their excitement
was amazing."
Women are also banned from watching television and wearing certain clothes.
There is a fatwa against playing music during marriages.
The demonstration was to "express our discontent and anger with
extra-judicial forces like the shariat jamaats, as in the recent Imrana case
in Muzaffarnagar, and the increase in the number of anti-women fatwas issued
by local panchayats and self-styled religious leaders," said the press
release from the women's groups. Imrana's marriage was annulled by a fatwa
after she was allegedly raped by her father-in-law at her home in Uttar
Pradesh.
The protesters' slogans articulated what they have to go through. The
not-so-polite reference to the father figure (baap) was a refrain in most of
the slogans.
"TV hamari, cable hamara (the TV is ours, the cable ours), aap ke baap ka
kya jaata hai?" they asked. "Shareer hamara, kapde hamare (It's our body,
our clothes), aap ke baap ka kya jaata hai?"
The onlookers - shopkeepers and vendors, passers-by, men and women craning
their necks from windows -looked stunned, often asking what the noise was
about. Some fumbled with the Urdu pamphlets distributed generously. But the
women didn't care.
"Haldi hamari, mehndi hamari, aap ke baap ka kya jaata hai?" they demanded,
grinning at each other conspiratorially.
"The maulanas are also against drinking. In Cheetah Camp, three men were
forced to divorce their wives because the men got drunk on occasion, not
because they were alcoholics," said Gokhale.
Divorce is often more damaging to the women, especially in the less
privileged sections of society.
In Cheetah Camp, people who indulge in festivities are issued no nikaahnama,
the legal proof of marriage. They are even told there will be no burial
after death. In Mumbra, Vikroli, women are asked not to go in for
sterilisation.
"Such rigidity is more dominant in the newer Muslim areas in the city like
Cheetah Camp, Mumbra, Jogeshwari and Malwani," said Sameera Khan of Pukar,
another NGO that organised the event with the Forum, Awaaz-e-Niswaan, India
Centre For Human Rights and Akshara.
The demonstrators were mostly from nearby Behrampada, Dongri and Nagpada
areas, as the women from Cheetah Camp or Mumbra could not reach. Which was a
pity, said one of the organisers.
But from Nagpada police station, where the march started, through Bhendi
Bazaar to Azad maidan, the meeting ground where it ended, it had come a long
way.
______
[7]
Met-Fest: Masculinities in the City
India's first ever festival on men and masculinities!
CALL FOR SUBMISSION OF FILMS
(Please circulate widely)
Red Earth is organising a festival titled
Met-Fest: Masculinities in the City in Mumbai in
October 2005 (dates to be confirmed soon).
Met-Fest aims to be an inter-disciplinary,
cross-cultural insight into some varying aspects
of contemporary urban masculinity, promising to
be an exciting, first of its kind exploration of
masculinity in the city, also known dubiously as
metro-sexuality.
Metro-sexuality and its worldwide, widespread
popularity has bought about a radical paradigm
shift in masculinity. The spotlight is on men
like never before. This then, is a good time to
talk about men and masculinities, and that's what
the festival sets out to do. Not just talk, but
to celebrate men and masculinities in varied art
forms – visual art, music, dance, theatre and
more
(For details of the festival, log on to
http://www.redearthindia.com/events/met_fest.html)
The festival is linked to 'The Pamphlet Project'
of Red Earth which aims to revive the pamphlet, a
literary genre with immense potentialities
(Details at
http://www.redearthindia.com/pamphlet/pamphlet.html).
One major component of the festival will be a
film festival 'Reel Men' Real Men', which will
feature some films on the theme of masculinities.
The film component of the festival is being
organised in partnership with Two Plus
Productions and Gallery Beyond
(www.gallerybeyond.com).
We already have a body of films for the festival,
but are also interested in including more films
on the broad theme of masculinity in the city,
preferably, but not limited to contemporary urban
masculinity / metrosexuality. Films may be
feature films, documentaries, videos or any other
genre.
If you have a film that fits in with the theme of
the festival, and would like to submit it for
consideration, please send 2 copies of the film,
on DVD format, latest by 1st September 2005. The
earlier, the better!
Please make sure to include a letter addressed to
The Director, Red Earth, stating that you are the
rightful copyright owner of the film, and that if
selected, it may be screened at Met-Fest for a
ticketed / invited audience, or a statement from
the copyright owner to the same effect. The films
may be supported by additional material like
synopsis, credits, reviews etc.
Copies of the films will not be returned. If
desired, you may provide us details of the films
for feedback, before actually sending in copies
of the films. All communication may be addressed
to himanshu at redearthindia.com with a CC to
filmclub at iqara.net
Send the material to:
Himanshu Verma
Director, Red Earth
A 39/3, SFS, Saket
New Delhi 110017, India
______
[8]
JIHAD, HINDUTVA AND THE TALIBAN
SOUTH ASIA AT THE CROSSROADS
by Iftikhar H. Malik
Description:
Tracing the historical origins of the ideology of
Jihad since the classical Islamic era, the book
deliberates the more recent typologies of
resistance during colonial and contemporary
times. The intricate relationship in Afghanistan
between the erstwhile Mujahideen and Western
powers during the Cold War and its break-up
following 9/11 has been examined in detail. The
salience of Hindutva in India and demands for a
Sunni state in Pakistan, simultaneous with
similar espousals in Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan
and Sri Lanka, reveal unique regional congruities
on ideological issues. Issues of contested
statehood and national identity have assumed an
added significance, which this book addresses
within a changed regional and global political
context. Other than ideology and pluralism, the
book also investigates problems of governance.
Other Details:
ISBN: 0195977904
Format: 216x138 mm, 336 pages, Hardback
Year of Publication: 2005
Oxford University Press
______
[9]
"Presenting" the Past
Anxious History and Ancient Future in Hindutva India
S. P. Udayakumar
Book Code: C7209
ISBN: 0-275-97209-7
DOI: 10.1336/0275972097
232 pages
Praeger Publishers
Publication Date: 8/30/2005
List Price: $119.95 (UK Sterling Price: £68.00)
Availability: Not yet published. (Estimated publication date,
8/30/2005)
Media Type: Hardcover
Dedicated to
The memory of Harry J. Friedman
Endorsement From Joseph E. Schwartzberg
Professor Emeritus
University of Minnesota:
"Rewriting the history of India to promote the fundamentalist Hindu
nationalist agenda has been a major project of the so-called Sangh
Parivar, a still potent collectivity of exclusivist political, social
and cultural entities that flourished under the aegis of India's
recently deposed BJP-led government. In this trenchant and salutary
work, S.P. Udayakumar exposes the methods employed by the
revisionists and demonstrates their remarkable similarity to those
developed so effectively under the European Fascist and Nazi regimes
more than half a century ago."
Endorsement From Johan Galtung
Professor of Peace Studies
Director, TRANSCEND Rector, TRANSCEND Peacre University:
"Presenting the Past has two very basic ramifications. The BJP-led
government in Delhi was substituting Nehruvian secularism with its
virulent Hindutva, a fundamentalist ideology that put Muslims and
other minorities in India on a coalition course with the "Hindus." It
also sought to replace another Nehruvian principle, Non-alignment,
and create a sort of Asian NATO with the United States against China.
If the reader wants to know the background, this is the best book."
Book Description:
The interface of identity construction practices and the role of
knowledge of the past in that continual process manifests itself in
contemporary Hindu-Muslim relations and political governance.
Presenting' the Past studies the religious, cultural, sociological,
and ideological dimensions of the Hindutva historiographical project
going back and forth into the realms of history, myth, socialization,
and governance. Taking Ram' and the division of the Indian society
into Rambhakts (Ram devotees) and non-Rambhakts as the core,
Udayakumar proceeds by reading the closely related set of texts: the
Ramayana, Ramarajya (State of Ram) imageries in political discourses,
the Babri Masjid/Ramjanmabhumi controversy in Ayhodhya and the
Ramraksha governance of the BJP-led government in New Delhi.
With analysis of events dating to the 1920s and the establishment of
Muslim separatism and Hindu fundamentalism, extending to the 1990s
when the Sangh Parivar's narrative of national history' reached its
pinnacle with the demolition of the Babri Masjid and the attainment
of state power, and terminating in 2004 when the BJP lost power and
prominence at the center, this illuminating discourse is readily
accessible to students and scholars of contemporary Indian politics
and society.
Table of Contents:
Preface
Abbreviations
Introduction
Rambhakts: Defining 'Us' and Depicting "Our Story"
Ramayana: Historicizing Myth and Mythologizing History
Ramarajya: Envisioning the Future and Entrenching the Past
Ramjanmabhumi: Hinduizing Politics and Militarizing Hindudom
Ramraksha: Ram-ifying the Society and Modi-fying the State
Conclusions
Glossary
Selected Bibliography
About the Author
LC Card Number: 2005000450
LCC Class: DS435
Dewey Class: 954
______
[10]
The Telegraph
July 22, 2005
REAPING A BITTER HARVEST
Communalism in Bengal: From Famine to Noakhali,
1943-47 By Rakesh Batabyal, Sage, Rs 750
Rakesh Batabyal points out that Bengal was the
region where colonial rule first entrenched
itself and where it had a deeper impact than in
any other region of the subcontinent. Communalism
was a product of the period of Indian history
which witnessed colonialism as a political
reality. Batabyal argues that communalism grew as
a reaction to the politics and ideology of
nationalism and soon captured the imagination of
a large section of the people of the subcontinent.
Education and employment were two crucial
elements in the growth of the consciousness of
communalism in Bengal. Batabyal says that the
colonial state had linked the two so closely that
social mobility came to depend on both. These two
thus became the sites of contest between the
communities.
Many researchers assume that separatism was the
only way by which the socio-economically and
politically disadvantaged Muslims could
articulate their aspirations. Others, however,
emphasize that Muslim separatism was a product,
among other things, of Muslim backwardness in the
economic, social and educational fields.
Talking about the causes of the Bengal famine of
1943, Batabyal cites Amartya Sen's argument about
there being no substantial difference in food
availability between 1941 and 1943. The problem
lay in its procurement. But the reasons for the
drastic fall in people's purchasing power remain
contested, adds Batabyal. "And here the critical
role of colonialism stares us in our (sic) face,
despite serious attempts to dilute its
exploitative character."
Batabyal appears to be in his element while
chronicling the great Calcutta killings and the
Noakhali violence. The infamous Direct Action Day
was August 16, 1946, not October 26 as stated by
Batabyal. The Calcutta riots may be seen as the
culmination of the political process ushered in
by the communal politics. The Noakhali-Tippera
riots of 1946-47, according to Batabyal, marks
the climax of the pre-independence communal
violence in Bengal and was a direct sequel to the
Calcutta killing of August 1946.
This reviewer would not put the blame for
communalism in Bengal entirely on colonialism.
For communalism thrived in Bengal even before
British rule.
PIYUS GANGULY
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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