SACW | 24-26 Dec. 2005

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 24-26 Dec, 2005 | Dispatch No. 2191


[1] Bangladesh: Creeping fanaticism (Edit., Dawn)
[2] Bangladesh - India Border: People in enclaves (Edit, The New Nation)
[3] Pakistani, Indian peace caravans march to border
[4] India: ANHAD Consultation on Survival of Secular Democracy (26-27
Jan 2006)
[5] India: Renaming Bangalore and the road to Kannada chauvinism
(Ramachandra Guha)
[6] US/India: Challenge Hindutva assault on California School Textbooks
(Fosa)
[7]   Remembering Sajjad Zaheer - 2 articles

___


[1]

DAWN
December 25, 2005
Editorial

Creeping fanaticism


GREATER notice needs to be taken in the region of the creeping inroads
being made by fanaticism in Bangladesh. Some recent developments there
have an eerie resemblance to events in Pakistan. On Friday, police in
Dhaka thwarted a move by an organization called the Khatm-i-Nabuwat to
march on an Ahmadi mosque. The organization has been mounting pressure
for the Ahmadi community to be declared as non-Muslim — a demand raised
in Pakistan in the ’70s that was ultimately accepted by the then
government of Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. That decision was seen as marking
a major victory for the religious parties, which have been increasing
their influence in politics ever since, finding a great patron in Ziaul
Haq in the post-Bhutto period. Something like that may be happening now
in Bangladesh, where the government of Begum Khaleda Zia has a religious
party, the Jamaat-i-Islami, as one of its coalition partners and, if not
exactly appeasing extremism, feels politically inhibited in confronting
it headlong. Many shadowy groups have emerged like the Jamaatul
Mujahideen and the Harkatul Jihad that openly profess their faith in a
militant form of Islam. The former was blamed for a startlingly
synchronized wave of bomb attacks across Bangladesh in August and, last
month, for deadlier suicide bombings that killed at least 10 people.
There are other manifestations of revivalism — again paralleling similar
trends in Pakistan — such as the patronization of madressahs and reports
of ostensibly charitable organizations providing training to militants.

The problem governments in Muslim countries face, even where they might
believe in pluralism, is that they are often afraid and unwilling to
take actions that the orthodox would project as being anti-religion.
Electoral compulsions take their own toll in terms of secular values,
with liberal parties forced to make alliances with conservative forces.
The principle of give them an inch and they will take an ell then comes
into play: one concession leads to another. This has happened in
Pakistan and may well be happening in Bangladesh (Indonesia in that part
of the world is already coping with extremism). The chronic tussle
between the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Awami League has
driven both to shoddier compromises, and both have failed to formulate a
coherent strategy to tackle economic, social and political issues that
breed discontent and make it easier for fringe elements to gain support.

Friday’s frenzied demonstrations in Dhaka should be treated as a wake-up
call by politicians in that country, although such advice coming from
Pakistan will inevitably be seen as gratuitous in view of the unholy
mess here. But Bangla society has a long tradition of tolerance and
religious harmony, and it would be tragic for the entire region if this
rich fabric steeped in cultural diversity was damaged. The slide towards
an obscurantist religious point of view should be stoutly resisted.
There are other anxieties: the rise of extremism in Bangladesh may
create a backlash in West Bengal, which has a large Muslim population.
Communist rule there has ensured harmonious inter-religious relations
that could be disturbed if Hindu revivalist parties seek to take
advantage of the situation. Everyone interested in the evolution of
democratic politics in South Asia should be concerned at what is
happening in large swathes of the region and lower down.


____


[2]

The New Nation
23 Dec 2005

Editorial

People in enclaves

SINCE the partition of the subcontinent in 1947, lots of people migrated
to India and Pakistan. They have since been integrated to the society
where the migrants contributed to growth in the socio-economic fields.
They have been rehabilitated with necessary official support setting up
rehabilitation zones around cities and towns. Some migrants, who
exchanged their properties with their counterparts also settled in rural
areas beside major urban centres. But the life and living of the people
in enclaves for the past six decades remain quite hazardous. They are
surrounded by territories of the neighbouring country. The number of
people in 49 Bangladesh enclaves, has reached two and a half lakhs.

The inhabitants of the Bangladesh enclaves have been forced to live in
an environment of uncertainty. They have no access to the official
agencies, schools and colleges in the home country. They have not been
provided with electricity, health care facilities and even financial
support from banks and other agencies and that mainly due to the distant
locations of such institutions and agencies from the enclaves. As a
result, thousands of children have no scope for getting education and
training for skill development with which they could seek employment in
their own country. When they fall sick, children as well as their
parents fail to receive medical treatment. Beyond that the supply of
even food items remains quite uncertain. The sheds and shelters, which
they inherited from their forefathers, who might have set those up in
the past century, have also turned dilapidated and inadequate.

Reports on the life and living of people in the enclaves appear in the
press from time to time. Stories on them have also been written by
academics, but none in the official circles seems to have gone through
these writeups. The law and order problems in the enclaves remain also
beyond the spell of administration of the country. The people living in
enclaves remain totally disappointed. The relatively small areas of the
enclaves have remained virtually cut off from the administration of the
home country. Unfortunately for them, any inhabitant trying to go across
the territory of the neighbouring country is often embarrassed and
arrested by the law enforcing agencies at the border.

Problems faced by the two and half lakh Bangladeshis living in 49
enclaves, especially those living in Dahagram and Angarpota, are many
and varied. These problems can be resolved through bilateral deals. The
major problem—movement of people to their mainland—should be resolved by
earmarking routes across territories of India. It is unthinkable for the
people of the rest of Bangladesh that several lakhs of their fellow
citizens are deprieved of even the basic need for electricity and are
thus denied the amenities of modern life and care that are dependent on
the supply of this energy. The authorities concerned should take
initiatives to solve this and other problems of the enclave people on an
urgent basis.
	

____


[3]

Daily Times
December 25, 2005 	

Pakistani, Indian peace caravans march to border

KHOKHROPAR: Hundreds of people, including women, representatives of
NGOs, journalists, doctors, advocates, retired judges and notables, from
different parts of the country took a peace caravan to the
Pakistan-India Khokhrapar-Monabao border on Friday evening.

The caravan was organized under banner of the Pakistan-India Peoples’
Forum for Peace and Democracy (PIPFPD). Another peace caravan from the
Indian side also came to the border. The Pakistani peace caravan, led by
Anis Haroon, chief of the PIPFD, left Mirpurkhas in the morning. Shahid
Fayaz, general secretary of the PIPFD’s Sindh chapter, Rais Ahmad Khan,
Imtiaz Ali Phanwar from the Mirpurkhas chapter of the organization and
others carrying banners, placards and Pakistani flags and travelling in
buses and coaches arrived in Umerkot town where Umerkot district nazim
Faqeer Maghan Mangrio and hundreds of people of the town welcomed the
caravan.

The caravan reached their destination (zero point) at 5:30 in the
evening where Col Basharat, Commander 61 Wing Qasim Rangers Chhore base,
and other paramilitary forces welcomed the caravan. The Indian peace
caravan was led by Tapan Kumar Bose, chief of the India-Pakistan Peoples
Forum for Peace and Democracy. People from all states of India
participated in the peace caravan. Prominent among them were Mahesh
Bhat, film director/producer, singer Seema Ghazal, poet Shashi Mule and
singer Ms Rabia.

Both sides chanted friendship slogans and sang peace songs. Members of
the peace caravans also lighted candles. Newspaper columnist Madam Amar
Sindhu, Irfan Mallah, Justice Mirza Salahuddin, Arbab Naik Muhammad and
other participants of the peace caravan said it was a great moment.
Khemchand Singh Sodho from Rajasthan said peoples of Thar and Rajasthan
were eagerly waiting for the reopening of Monabao-Khokhrapar border.
hashim shar

____


[4]

ANHAD INVITES PARTICIPATION FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT
THE SURVIVAL OF SECULAR DEMOCRACY IN INDIA

   Dear friends,

   The communalisation of Indian society witnessed during the last two
decades has now entered a new phase.  After the election of 2004 the
Communal forces are regrouping and revising new modes to regain the lost
ground and to further their influence. Hate mobilisation against Muslims
and the attacks on Christians are being relentlessly pursued. The Sangh
schools continue to imbibe hate in young minds, through falsifying
history and demonizing minorities. Despite the schism within the
Parivar, the attempts at communalisation , undertaken by social-cultural
organisation is unabated.

   The election in the summer of 2004 was no ordinary election. The
people of India realised that its outcome would decisively influence in
many ways the destiny of the nation. This election could either return
and further legitimise, or else reject the band of determined, highly
motivated communal forces that had mounted an unprecedented assault on
and challenge to the secular democratic India.

   The Congress-led UPA alliance was catapulted to power by people who
had decisively rejected the politics of hate. The expectation was that
the new Government would recognize the significance of this moment in
our political and social history and that it would take immediate steps
to reinforce the secular democratic future of the country. Although some
steps have been taken particularly in the field of education, the
influence of communal ideology has not been effectively undermined.

   Gujarat still remains a blot on the secular image of India. Even
after four years, little has changed for the survivors of Gujarat.  The
legal justice is openly subverted and economic boycott and fear persists
for the victims of the carnage.  There is no rehabilitation package, no
measures to secure independent investigation, prosecution and trial.
Life has not improved in any way for the survivors of the carnage. More
than half of those displaced from their homes in 2002 are unable to
return, almost four years later.

   It was expected, as promised in the CMP, that the UPA government
would bring a legislation to prevent communal violence. The expectation
was that the law would strengthen the hands of citizens by codifying the
mandatory duties of the state to prevent and control communal violence,
and to secure compensation and legal justice. Instead, the proposed
legislation enhances the powers of the state which is likely to go
against the interest of the marginalized groups, particularly in states
where the communal forces control the governments.

   For the last few decades, people in different parts of the country
are fighting against great odds to defend the secular fabric of our
land. This battle continues despite changes in governments. Communal
parties like BJP may get defeated in elections, but the strength of
communal organisations like RSS is not affected. In this context it is
necessary to further – the secular forces and organisations.

   For this reason, it is proposed to bring together people who care
deeply  and are concerned about the survival of secular democracy in
India to meet in Delhi on 26, 27 Jan, 2006.

   This meeting is intended to take stock of the communal situation in
various parts of the country, particularly the steps adopted by communal
organisations during the last two years. Through such reporting we hope
to chalk out a future course of action to counter communal activities.
For that we would like you to focus on the following:


    Communal organisations working in your state, both new and old
    The nature of communal activities and their strategies
    Evidence of violence.
    Discrimination against minorities.
    Communalisation of Adivasis and Dalits.
    Communal influence in education.
    Govt support to communal organisations
    What are the secular interventions. are they successful? If not what
are the reasons
    What are the possible modes of secular activities

   This meeting would like to arrive at a possible future course of
action for secular interventions and bring into being a network of
communication among secular groups and activists. The meeting would also
explore the possibility of the formation of a monitoring group.

   Anhad is a small organization and is approaching a number of
organizations to support the boarding and lodging facilities in Delhi
from the evening of  January 25th to the morning of January 28th, 2006.
We would appreciate if you could arrange your travel through your
organizations.

   It would be absolutely necessary to reach Delhi on January 25th for
those traveling by train as all routes from the station are closed on
January 26th.

   Kindly confirm your participation as soon as possible by e-mail/
ordinary post or telephone. If you want to invite someone who is working
on this issue please feel free to do so and ask him/ her to confirm with
us their participation.

   Looking forward to two days of very serious and intense discussion.

   Sincerely

   Prof. KN Panikkar
   Harsh Mander
   Shabnam Hashmi

   December 25, 2005

   ANHAD
   4, WINDSOR PLACE, NEW DELHI-110001
   TEL-23327366/ 67
   e-mail: anhad_delhi at yahoo.co.in
   website: www.anhadindia.org

____


[5]


The Telegraph
December 24, 2005

A DIVIDED CITY
- Kannada pride should not lead to Kannada chauvinism
by Ramachandra Guha


Call it Bengaluru

The city I live in has two names, these captured in the title of the
first chapter of Janaki Nair’s fine recent book on the city’s history:
Bengaluru/Bangalore. As Nair explains, the first name refers to the
older part of the city, which has had a more-or-less continuous
existence since the 16th century; the second to the ‘cantonment’
established by the British 300 years later. Both names have long been in
use, one preferred by the Kannada speakers of the old town, the other by
the more polyglot communities of the cantonment.

Now, however, the mother of all rows has broken out over the state
government’s decision to make ‘Bengaluru’ the city’s formal, official
name — to be used in government correspondence, in office and
residential addresses, by the press, by commercial organizations, and by
airlines and airports too. The criticisms of the renaming are various.
Some say that since ‘Bangalore’ is now an international city,
internationally known by this name, any change will adversely affect its
character, image and economic prospects. Others say that while
‘Bangalore’ trips easily off the tongue, the new name is clumsy and hard
to pronounce. Still others worry that this will initiate a wider process
of cultural chauvinism, beginning with streets being renamed after local
Kannada heroes, and ending with a call for all non-Kannadigas to leave
the city.

The critics are, almost to the last man, residents of the cosmopolitan
part of the city. They see the renaming as a shameless act of populism,
whereby the state government seeks to deflect attention from the urgent
problems it seems incapable of addressing — such as the appalling
condition of the roads, the scarcities of water and power, and the
hazards posed by poor sanitation and uncollected garbage.

It is undoubtedly the case that Indian politicians find it far easier to
appeal to cultural pride than to effect substantive economic or social
change. The Ram Mandir campaign helped no one and hurt many, yet for
years on end the politics of one of India’s leading parties was
determined by it. As chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, Mayavati built
Ambedkar’s statues and consecrated Ambedkar parks; this when the Dalits
in whose name these actions were taken would have been better served by
decent schools and hospitals, and by employment-generating economic growth.

It is also undoubtedly the case that the coalition government now in
power in Karnataka has had a rather undistinguished record. Forget
Bangalore and its problems, this government has done precious little for
the rural sector either. The government brings together MLAs from the
Congress and the Janata Dal (Secular). The chief minister, Dharam Singh,
is a Congressman, but it is pretty clear that the coalition’s eminence
grise, and the power behind the throne, is the former prime minister,
H.D. Deve Gowda. Deve Gowda has recently re-positioned himself as a
champion of the interests of the common man, as distinct from the
‘elitist’ IT sector which drives much of Bangalore’s economy. These
claims would have carried more conviction if the government which he
remote-controls had built roads, brought water, or provided reliable
electricity to the urban poor in Bangalore, or indeed to the rural
communities who still constitute the bulk of the state’s population.

Unable or unwilling to bring about meaningful rural or urban
development, the Karnataka government has taken recourse to this
symbolic act of renaming Bangalore. The decision was made now, rather
than earlier or later, because this happens to be the 50th anniversary
of the founding of the state. Karnataka was formed on November 1, 1956,
by bringing together, in one territorial and administrative unit,
Kannada-speaking areas which in colonial times were distributed among
four distinct political regimes — the Madras and Bombay Presidencies,
and the princely states of Mysore and Hyderabad. It was at a meeting
convened by the chief minister to discuss how the jubilee might be
celebrated, that some Kannada writers made the suggestion that the
state’s capital should henceforth be known by its proper, that is
Kannada, name.

The renaming of Bangalore as Bengaluru may thus be viewed as part of the
unfinished business of linguistic nationalism. The act draws upon a deep
well of cultural sentiment, or one should perhaps say resentment. For
while Bangalore is the capital of a state created for and by Kannada
speakers, in the city as a whole, Kannada speakers are a minority — less
than 30 per cent, according to some estimates. Furthermore, the city’s
new wealth has been created (and enjoyed) chiefly by people who speak
not Kannada but Tamil, Gujarati, Hindi and (perhaps especially) English.
This is a city divided as much by culture as by class. In Bangalore, the
Kannada speaker feels beleaguered, demographically; and he feels left
out, economically.

Those who have supported the city’s renaming point to precedent. When we
have gotten used to ‘Kolkata’ and ‘Chennai’, even to
‘Thiruvananthapuram’, how long will it take us to unselfconsciously
refer to this place as ‘Bengaluru’? Those examples are all valid, but
the one that most closely approximates the present case is the renaming
of ‘Bombay” as ‘Mumbai’, for even had their cities not been
rechristened, Tamilians would have still been dominant in Madras,
Bengalis in Calcutta, and Malyalis in Trivandrum. However, in Bombay, as
in Bangalore, the speakers of the local language, in a city that is the
capital of a state formed expressly to protect speakers of that
language, are in a minority as well as in a position of relative
disadvantage (from the point of view of wealth creation). It was this
twin marginalization of the Marathi-speaker that once provided the
impetus for the Shiv Sena movement. The question that confronts us is
this — will Bengaluru/Bangalore also now witness a popular social
movement aimed at, if not driving away the ‘outsider’, at least at
putting him in his place?

The line between cultural assertion and chauvinism is a very thin one. I
myself feel that the demand for renaming Bangalore is legitimate, and
should be honoured. Calling the city ‘Bengaluru’ is consistent with
history and custom, and it hurts no one. And, as with Mumbai/ Bombay,
while the official name will now be Bengaluru, the other and equally
legitimate name, Bangalore, will continue to be used in popular
discourse. However, Kannada activists have at times made demands that
are less legitimate. One such was the attempt to place restrictions on
theatres in Bangalore showing films in languages other than Kannada.
Another is the push for job reservation in private companies for ‘sons
of the soil’. These demands are violative of individual rights as well
as of the federal principle; they undermine both democracy and national
unity.

Curiously enough, in the years since they successfully renamed Bombay
‘Mumbai’, the Shiv Sena has itself experienced a decline in political
influence. Did the renaming then take the sting out of Marathi
chauvinism? The interpretation is perhaps plausible, and certainly
reassuring. With luck, my city’s new old name will successfully satisfy
Kannada pride, and act as a brake on its close cousin, Kannada chauvinism.

____


[6]

 From FOSA  - PLEASE ACT!
(for info: mail at friendsofsouthasia.org)

Dear all,

As many of you already know, we in California are facing a Hindutva
assault on school textbooks of the kind that went on a few years ago
in India.  This is an issue of rising concern in the Californian
community, and something that progressive South Asian organizations
have been very quiet on, so far.  This email has TWO parts—a brief
background, followed by an ALERT

Background:  Very briefly, this is the story so far:

* CA state textbooks come up for review every six years. This year,
the sixth class texts relating to Ancient Indian history are under
review.  We recognize that most of these textbooks are inadequate for
a number of reasons and have many errors on Indian history.

Taking advantage of this inadequacy, two groups --Vedic Foundation and
Hindu Education Foundation (VF and HEF), backed by the Hindu American
Foundation (HAF)—all with demonstrable links to Hindu rightwing
organizations have managed a strong mobilization in order to insert
some changes in the depiction of ancient Indian history and Hinduism
in CA text books. But instead of just making corrections to erroneous
texts, their proposed changes also reflect their supremacist political
agendas.  For instance, a large number of their changes are about
Aryans being native to India and not migrating from central Asia, and
thus the depiction of Hinduism as a religion *truly* indigenous to
India—as opposed to all the other foreign religions (for those of you
familiar with the issue—this is the whole manufactured debate about
the Aryan Migration theory versus the Indigenous Aryan theory), and
also a complete white-washing of Hinduism especially concerning caste
and gender issues.

* As things stand now, these groups have managed to get the Curriculum
Commission to agree to most of their changes. The only opposition they
faced was a last minute organizing by the Indologists (M. Witzel from
Harvard, S. Wolpert from UCLA and J. Heitzman from UCDavis with around
50 other indologists supporting them,
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/witzelletter.pdf ) and a
faculty letter from over 100 South Asianists and South Asian profs at
universities.  However, both these interventions were less than
successful, and many of the really problematic Hindutva changes got
accepted by the Curriculum Commission on Dec 2.

Some examples of ridiculous edits that got accepted by the CC are:

1. According to HEF, Sudras did not "perform services for members of
the three higher castes" but merely "performed services for all
classes and did more labor-intensive work."

2. The word "Dalit" has been removed from the text and the students
are merely told that treating someone as untouchable is against the
law in modern India.  Sentences such as "The caste system is just one
example of how Hinduism was woven into the fabric of daily life in
India" and
"Hinduism…has affected how people worship, what jobs they do,… And it
has helped to determine the status of people in Indian society" have
been deleted.  At one point, the Vedic Foundation insists that caste
only be spoken of in the past tense since it is no longer a reality
and "According to the Indian Constitution, under the section,
Fundamental Rights, the Right to Equality is guaranteed to all
citizens."  This edit was also accepted.

3. References to patriarchy within Hinduism have been deleted.
Sentences such as  "However, Hinduism also taught that women were
inferior to men."  have been completely removed, while another, "Men
had many more rights than women" has been replaced with, "Men had
different duties (dharma) as well as rights than women. Many women
were among the sages to whom the Vedas were revealed."  Not only does
"unequal" become "different", but note that Vedas are now *revealed*
texts.  Hinduism-- like all other major religions of the world --has a
patriarchal basis, that must first be acknowledged in order to be
corrected.  Also, Hinduism, unlike other major religions of the world,
has NO revealed text and one wonders at the intent of these groups in
removing this point of uniqueness.

4. Again, in their zeal to make Hinduism like another monotheistic,
revealed religion, the sentence,"Modern day Hinduism is very complex.
Many beliefs, many forms of worship, and many gods exist side by side"
was removed.

5.The sentence "Sanskrit is no longer spoken today" has been replaced
with "Sanskrit is no longer widely spoken today". The RSS shakhas
still propagate Sanskrit, we suppose?  In another place, the edits
that got approved suggest that Sanskrit "to some extent" is the
language of India "even today".

6. That chariots and other similar technology was developed in India
(as opposed to being brought in from Central Asia).  "People speaking
Indo-Aryan language" has been replaced merely by "Indians", so that
the differentiation between Harappans and those who spoke the
Indo-Aryan language has been reduced to that between Indians from
Harappa and "Indians from elsewhere or from the countryside."  The
construct of India predates history itself!

  * A more complete list of edits can be obtained from
http://friendsofsouthasia.org/textbook/CommissionAction12_2_05.doc .
We must also point out that similar changes to history texts were
tried in India by the nationalist BJP government, which are now being
undone.  Read more about it at
http://friendsofsouthasia.org/textbook/NCERTdocs.doc

* While the acceptance of these "edits" by the Curriculum Commission
is really tragic, the State Board has yet to accept these changes.
What is equally alarming is the way in which the Indian-American press
has been covering this issue in its usual wishy-washy style,
presenting this as a debate between the faculty (some of them white,
all of them "anti-Hindu") and a monolithic, aggrieved Hindu community.
  India Post, India West and India Abroad have given a whole lot of
play to this debate, but "our" side (secular Hindus/ Indians/ South
Asians) has been very poorly represented.

***ALERT***

India Abroad has run 3 stories on this in the recent issue:

(a) India Abroad, Dec 16 Cover story, giving an overview:  California
Textbooks Spark  Hinduism Row
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad1.pdf
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad1a.pdf

(b) India Abroad, Dec 16, Interview with Michael Witzel:
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad_MW_a.pdf
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad_MW_b.pdf

(c) India Abroad, Dec 16, Interview with Suhag Shukla, legal counsel
of the Hindu American Foundation:
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad_SS_a.pdf
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/IndiaAbroad_SS_b.pdf

India West ran 2 stories on this issue and one letter:

(d) India West, Dec 2 story:  Hindus and Sikhs Protest Curriculum
Changes in Calif. Textbooks
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=1b63d3d5a0a0b090f2681949b840f93f

(e) India West, Dec 9 story: Calif. state panel Agrees to make changes
in history course.

http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/Textbook%20Row--India%20west.doc

(f) India West:  Dec 22nd (?) Yvette Rosser's letter to the Editor:
Stereotypes, Errors In Calif. Textbooks
http://www.friendsofsouthasia.org/Press_Coverage/Indiawest_YRletter.htm

PLEASE WRITE TO THESE NEWSPAPERS EXPRESSING YOUR VIEWS ON THIS ISSUE:
We really need to make diverse voices heard on this issue.

The letters should be addressed to:
India Abroad: editorial at indiaabroad.com, Fax: 212-727-9730
India West: news at indiawest.com , Fax: (510) 383-1155 24

Please copy mail at friendsofsouthasia.org on these letters and also
write us if you have any questions or need more info.

Thanks,
-Friends of South Asia
____

[7] REMEMBERING SAJJAD ZAHEER (2 articles below)


The News on Sunday - The News International
December 25, 2005

Like father, like daughter

What makes Sajjad Zaheer an abiding icon for the leftist movement not
only in India but Pakistan as well. A personal view

By Zaman Khan

Sajjad Zaheer is a big name, not only in the leftist politics but also
in Urdu literature. He was a fiction writer, a poet and a critic but his
biggest contribution to the world of Urdu letters was the creation of
the Progressive Writers' Association in Allahabad in 1936.

Sajjad Zaheer was born in August 1905, literary with a golden spoon in
his mouth. He was the scion of an elite family of Lucknow.

Sajjad Zaheer had four daughters -- Nasim, Najma, Nadera and Noor. The
youngest of them, Noor Sajjad Zaheer, has written a book, Mairay Hissay
Ki Roshnai, on her father.

Noor was born in Lucknow on January 22, 1958. She studied in Lucknow and
Delhi. As a child, she remembers her family environment in Lucknow being
very literary rather than being political.

Like her father, Noor is committed to the Marxist ideals. She is a
member of the Communist Party of India and also works for the
Progressive Writers' Association of India as well as Indian People's
Theatres Association. She is married with three children.

Following are the excerpts of her interview, conducted some weeks ago in
India:


The News on Sunday: You have written a book on your father in Hindi. How
and why did it come about?

Noor Sajjad Zaheer: The book consists of my memories of our Delhi house,
where we shifted in 1964 and lived there till 1973, when my father died.
In the book, I have tried to merge my personal life with my experience
of him as an organiser, as a good communist, as a writer, as a person,
as a human being and, most importantly, as an honest person. Even in his
writing, he would give credit if he borrowed a small line from someone
else. Sometimes the credit would be longer than the borrowed line.

Also, after failing to identify with either India or Pakistan, he
started identifying with every human effort to find democracy and
freedom anywhere in the world. He was so ecstatic when Algiers won
independence that he stayed at the party office till unusually late. He
was dancing with joy even when he came back home.

Once, we bought a new refrigerator. A few days afterwards some people,
including Josh Malihabadi, were discussing the future of communism in
South Asia. Suddenly one gentleman got up and said what future there can
be of communism if we have communists like Sajjad Zaheer who wear velvet
coats and have new refrigerators in their houses. Everyone was shocked.

This was the kind of atmosphere in our home.

TNS: After the partition, your father went to Pakistan and became the
founding secretary general of Communist Party of Pakistan. Then he was
arrested and jailed. Did your mother oppose all this? What was your
mother's reaction when your father came back to India? Did your parents
ever discuss the issue?

NSZ: I was born after he came back from Pakistan. He was for four years
in jail and for another four years practically underground. But he was a
very forward-looking man. He always thought that if his venture in
Pakistan had not succeeded, there were other things to look after. So we
never really discussed it. As far as my mother is concerned, she never
resented any of the decisions my father made. She fully supported him.

In fact, even when the news came that he would be hanged in Pakistan,
she took it very stoically.

TNS: What were your father's view about his mission in Pakistan? Was he
satisfied?

NSZ: He certainly felt that there should have been more preparations
before the founding of the party in Pakistan. A K Hangal once told me
about an encounter with my father at the gate of a Pakistani jail. He
was being taken out of the prison for appearance in the court while
Hangal was being taken in. He told Hangal not to stay in Pakistan. He
advised him to go to India where there were more opportunities to work.

My mother was also the main instrument in his return to India. She
practically sat down in Nehru's office. K C Panth had become the home
minister by then, after Sardar Patel's death. Panth was a very secular
man. He loved the Muslims but he hated the communists. But he also
believed that if you were a Muslim and a communist at the same time, you
were a lethal. He, therefore, would not allow my father's return.
Instead it was suggested that he should be sent to Moscow or London but
my mother saw to it that he came back to India which was a great thing
because I think at any other place my father would have really died.

TNS: How come three of Sajjad Zaheer's daughters married Hindus?

NSZ: My sister Nasim got married when my father was alive. But he was no
more living when my other sister Nadera married. The way my parents
looked at the issue was very different. There were three basic questions
that my father would ask from anyone proposing to marry any of us. The
first question was, "Are you educated, working and able to support the
girl?" The second question was even more important, "Do you want the
girl to change her religion or you would change your religion?" This was
a way to see whether the boy was going to take an easy way out of the
situation. If the boy said the change of religion didn't matter, then he
would instantly get 80 per cent marks. And the final question was, "When
do you want to get married? If you want to get married right now, good.
But if you don't want to get married now, don't enter into a long
engagement, be friends with the girl and decide about the marriage
afterwards".

TNS: How do you describe your own experience of marrying a person coming
from a different religious background?

NSZ: My experience has been successful to the extent that we have been
doing lot of work together. But to be very honest, it's a daily struggle
for a wife and husband come from two different cultures to co-exist. But
then who wanted an easy life?

My children are human beings. They don't follow any religion because we
don't follow any religion at home. But we have done an effort to
introduce them to all the religions, not just Islam and Hinduism.


o o o

People's Democracy
December 18, 2005
http://pd.cpim.org/2005/1218/12182005_sajjad%20zaheer.htm

Sajjad Zaheer: A Life of Struggle & Creativity

Naresh Nadeem

TODAY, when we are in the midst of the Sajjad Zaheer birth centenary,
some of the attempts at a re-evaluation of the late comrade’s life and
work seem to have an ulterior motive. Though these attempts are still
quite feeble, it appears that their real aim is to discredit the
Progressive Writers Association (PWA), formed in 1936, and question its
very role in our independence struggle.

At the same time, on the other side of our western borders, interested
quarters are seeking to malign the communist movement in the
subcontinent. Their contention is that, immediately after the partition,
the Communist Party of India deliberately "planted" Sajjad Zaheer in
Pakistan in an ominous bid to overthrow the Liyaqat Khan government.
Needless to say, however, the late Comrade Sajjad Zaheer’s life and work
is in itself a strong rebuff to all such attempts and insinuations.

THE PERIOD OF RADICALISATION

Born at Golaganj, Lucknow, on November 5, 1905, Sajjad Zaheer grew in an
atmosphere when the Moderate politics of petitions and memorandums was
on a decline and India’s struggle for independence was gradually taking
a radical turn under the Bal-Lal-Pal leadership. Yet another feature of
this period was the rise of small groups of national revolutionaries
("terrorists" in British parlance) in Bengal (in the wake of the
province’s partition) and in some other parts of the country. But this
was also the period when the British intensified their divide and rule
politics, the Muslim League came into existence in Dacca in 1906, and
the Morley-Minto reforms of 1909 accepted the idea of separate
electorates based on religion.

The dual British policy of reform on the one hand and repression on the
other reached a further height after the First World War. While the
British refused to honour their promise of granting the Indian demand of
Dominion Status after the war, they tried to pacify the agitated Indian
psyche by doling out the Montague-Chelmsford reforms. But to these
limited and defective reforms too, they cunningly tagged the draconian
recommendations of the Sedition Committee (Rowlatt) Report which, if
fully implemented, would have transformed India into a prison house of
immense proportions. How this led to the Jallianwala Bagh massacre on
April 13, 1919, is now public knowledge.

This period also witnessed some other important events which had a
profound impact on the impressionable minds of Sajjad Zaheer and his
contemporaries. These included the following: (1) the heroic saga of the
Ghadar Party and the first Lahore conspiracy case launched to kill this
movement; (2) the coming together of the Moderates and Extremists at
Lucknow in 1916 and the simultaneous Lucknow Pact between the Indian
National Congress and Muslim League; (3) the non-cooperation and
Khilafat movements, and the emigration (hijrat) of a large number of
Muslim youth for Turkey; (4) birth of the Communist Party of India in
October 1920 and its incessant attempts to radicalise the Congress
politics and freedom struggle; and (5) the Kakori case whose hearings
took place in Comrade Sajjad’s own city; leading to the execution of Ram
Prasad Bismil, Ashfaqullah Hasrat Warsi, Roshan Singh and Rajendra
Lahiri and heavy jail sentences for many.

It was in such a political milieu that Comrade Sajjad Zaheer did his
matriculation from the Government Jubilee High School in Lucknow and
graduation from Lucknow University, before proceeding for Oxford. One
may well recall that it was the same city where a respected Urdu poet
like Pandit Braj Narain Chakbast, a lawyer by profession, had worked as
an untiring volunteer at the historic unity session of the Congress in
1916. It was therefore no surprise that the city’s political milieu
played a significant role in radicalising a large number of the middle
class youth. Of these, Asrarul-Haq Majaz, Ali Sardar Jaffri and Kaifi
Azmi, to name a few, emerged to join the first rankers in the PWA.

TURNING POINT

As for Comrade Sajjad, he began to take part in the freedom struggle in
1919 when he was not even 14 years old. But his 8-years sojourn in
England, where he did his MA and LLB at Oxford, followed by a diploma in
journalism from London University, proved a turning point in his life.

When Comrade Sajjad Zaheer reached England for higher study, a number of
revolutionaries from India and other colonial countries were already
active there, challenging the imperialist lion in its own den. London,
the capital of the biggest colonial power of the day, was the city where
figures like Shyamji Krishna Varma, V D Savarkar (of the 1908 vintage)
and Madame Bhikaji Cama had been more or less openly canvassing for the
colonies’ liberation in the first decade of the 20th century. Some of
the Indians living in London were the motive force behind the genesis of
Ghadar Party though its actual formation took place in San Francisco. A
number of Indians studying in England later turned towards the Communist
Party and played a memorable role in its growth.

One thing is amply clear from the reminiscences such Indians living in
London, New York, Vancouver or San Francisco have left: that in those
foreign lands they felt to an extreme degree the pinch of their
country’s subjugation. That they were being humiliated at every step
simply because they were from a colonial country. It was therefore no
wonder that a number of such students, most of whom were from affluent
families, turned towards the communist and socialist ideologies, with
several of them having to face intense opposition from their families.
Sajjad Zaheer was one of these very youths.

Comrade Sajjad Zaheer went to England in 1927 and stayed in that country
till 1935. Soon after reaching England, he became active in London
branch of the Indian National Congress, mobilised Indian youths and
organised protests against British imperialism. While at Oxford, he was
chosen editor of Bharat, which was being brought out by Indian students
there. But the university authorities soon moved into action and forced
the journal’s closure as a reward of its radical stance on various
issues under Sajjad Zaheer.

In 1929, Comrade Sajjad formed the first group of Indian communist
students in England. In this period he remained in close contact with
the Communist Party of Great Britain.

FROM LONDON TO LUCKNOW

On his return to India in November 1935, Comrade Sajjad began to
practice in the Allahabad High Court, simultaneously working actively in
political field. Soon he was elected secretary of Allahabad branch of
the Indian National Congress and acted in close contact with Jawaharlal
Nahru. After his election to the All India Congress Committee, he was
given specific responsibilities for foreign affairs and Muslim mass
contact. He was in close touch with many CSP leaders as well as
underground communist leaders like P C Joshi and R D Bhardwaj. Later, he
was elected secretary of United Provinces unit of the then underground
Communist Party. In this period, he also edited Chingari (Spark),
monthly Urdu organ of the party.

In this period, he suffered two years of imprisonment in the Lucknow
Central Jail for his radical speeches. While in jail, he continued to
secretly send his writings to various papers under several pseudonyms.

After the ban on the party was lifted in 1942, he worked as chief editor
of its Urdu organs Qaumi Jang (National War) and Naya Zamana (New Age).
He was also active in formation of the All India Kisan Sabha and of the
Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) later.

But the biggest contribution made by Comrade Sajjad Zaheer was in the
formation of the Progressive Writers Association (PWA), for which he had
been striving since 1930. In this period, he made many trips from London
to Lucknow for the purpose, formed a nucleus of the PWA in London in
1935 before its actual formation in India, and drafted its manifesto
which became the rallying point for poets and writers in India. Among
others, Mulk Raj Anand, Jyoti Ghosh and Mohammed Din Taseer were closely
associated with the project.

CHALLENGE & RESPONSE

The PWA came up in a period when fascism posed an extremely ominous
threat for the very future of humankind, and it looked like the world
was going to enter a new, "thousand years long" Dark Age. While the
Dimitrov thesis called for a united front to kill this menace, Maxim
Gorki posed a pointed question before the makers of culture --- writers
and artistes --- of the whole world as to where they stood. There was no
place for an ambivalent attitude: one had to either stand up to the
menace of fascism or objectively help the latter, willingly or unwillingly.

It was to this challenge that Indian writers creditably responded
through the formation of the Progressive Writers Association in April
1936. The PWA was one of the trio of organisations formed at the same
time, the other two being the All India Kisan Sabha and Students
Congress that later became Students Federation. Another meaningful
aspect of the development was that the birth of these organisations
coincided with the annual session of Indian National Congress, in the
same city where the historic Congress-League pact had taken place 20
years ago.

The PWA was, in a very real sense, a united front in the field of
literature though interested quarters always dubbed it as a communist
body. Apart from communists, Congressmen, Congress socialists and even
non-party people also joined its ranks. Led by Sajjad Zaheer, a big
contingent of Urdu writers took an active part in its work, and many of
these attained an international stature for their writings. These
included Majaz, Sardar Jaffri, Saahir, Majrooh, Jan Nisar Akhtar, Kaif
Bhopali, Kaifi Azmi, Makhdoom Mohiuddin, Krishna Chander, Rajendra Singh
Bedi, Shankar Shailendra, Gurbakhsh Singh Makhmoor Jalandhari and a host
of others.

As for presiding over the PWA’s foundation conference, all his
colleagues happily accepted the name which Comrade Sajjad (whom others
now lovingly called "Banne Bhai") suggested. It was Premchand, the doyen
of Urdu-Hindi writers, whose presidential address is still remembered
for its gist as well as simplicity.

CLEARING THE MUCK

But fascism was not the only challenge before the Indian writers. A no
less grave task was at hand in the domestic arena --- of clearing our
society of the muck that had accumulated over thousands of years. In
this regard, the tone was set by Angarey (Embers), published in 1933.
The collection included five short stories by Sajjad Zaheer, two by
Ahmad Ali, one by Mehmood-uz-Zafar and one short story and one play by
his wife Rashid Jahan.

The publication created a big furore in North India as it ruthlessly
shook the Muslim psyche. The Urdu press of the day was full of writings
condemning the book, and the lunatic fringe among the conservatives
began to bay for the authors’ blood. Threats of physical violence were
also doled out. As a result, the British soon moved into action and
proscribed the book. On the other hand, several came forward to defend
the book. Premchand said though the older people like him might not
agree with what the Angarey team wanted to say, yet these youngsters
must be given an opportunity to express their feelings and be heard.

On the other hand, testimonies left by Ismat Chughtai, Sa’adat Hasan
Manto, Kaifi and others do testify how Angarey moulded the psyche of a
whole generation of the Urdu speaking youth. In Shia seminary
Sultanul-Madaaris, Kaifi wrote, the teachers used to violently condemn
the book but, nevertheless, read it slyly, away from the gaze of their
students.

This is not the place to analyse the collection or its individual
contributions, but one thing is certain --- that many of the charges
labelled against the book would appear meaningless today. One such
charge, for instance, was of obscene language, but the book contains no
such thing. Sajjad Zaheer’s story "Jannat ki Bashaarat" (A Feel of
Heaven) was the most maligned piece in the collection, but it says not
an iota more than what the Muslim mass knows and says about their
Maulanas today. Similarly, Rashid Jahan’s very short (two-page) story
"Dilli Ki Sair" is about how a Muslim woman of Faridabad describes her
trip to Delhi and seeks to overawe her neighbourhood women. And what is
the fact? After her husband brings her to Delhi, he leaves her at the
railway station where for hours she keeps waiting, till her husband
finally comes back and takes her home.

The real cause of the furore was the fact that the book questioned many
values and practices, and exposed the vested interests among the
Muslims, who felt threatened and roused the people against the Angarey
team. And we must not forget that the clergy and the ashraaf (elite)
then had an overbearing influence over the Muslim mass. If that
influence has considerably tapered during these seven decades, a part of
the credit certainly goes to a publication like Angarey and to Sajjad
Zaheer who was the guiding spirit of the team, as of the PWA later.

MANUFACTURED CONSPIRACY

In 1948, after the partition of the country, Comrade Sajjad Zaheer
migrated to Pakistan where he was elected (first) general secretary of
the newly reconstituted Communist Party of Pakistan. There was nothing
extraordinary about it; he migrated to the newly formed country just
like lakhs of others had done. But those who accuse the Indian
communists of "planting" him in Pakistan, do they mean to say that a
communist should not have remained a communist after coming there?

Marxism, in any case, does not teach its adherents to remain unconcerned
with the toiling people’s struggles in other countries.

Be that as it may, from the day he reached Pakistan, Comrade Sajjad
Zaheer remained a thorn in the Liyaqat government’s flesh. The result
was that as soon as the latter launched the Rawalpindi conspiracy case
in 1951, it arrested Comrade Sajjad Zaheer too and implicated him in the
case. Revolutionary Urdu poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz was another notable
personality to be implicated.

But what was the reality of the Rawalpindi case? Today, Captain
Zafarullah Poshni is the only surviving accused of the case, and came to
meet the Indian communist delegation at Karachi on March 3 this year.
Some one and a half decades back, his book laid bare the whole story of
the Rawalpindi case, showing how it contained a grain of truth and a lot
of falsehood.

The account given by Captain Poshni may be summarised like this. After
the fiasco of Pakistan’s misadventure in Kashmir, Brigadier Akbar Khan
got quite frustrated with the Liyaqat government, more so when the prime
minister spurned his (anti-India) ideas. Then the brigadier thought of
overthrowing the government and began to look left and right for
prospective supporters. It was in this process that he contacted the
Communist Party and promised that if the party welcomed his coup after
it took place, the ban imposed on the party and the organisations led by
it would be lifted. For mobilising support in the media, he spotted Faiz
who was then the chief editor of Pakistan Times, a widely read and
highly influential daily. And so on. However, when Brigadier Akbar Khan
convened a secret meeting for the purpose, those who came there
overwhelmingly rejected his plan after some 8 hours of discussion and
dispersed.

But this was as if enough for the Pakistan intelligence that had got the
scent of the Brigadier’s plan, courtesy his wife Mrs Naseem Jahan. She
was a talkative lady and had boasted to a few ladies of her acquaintance
that her husband was soon to become the country’s president. The result
was that soon after the said meeting, the establishment moved into
action, arrested a number of persons from all over the country, and
foisted upon them the infamous Rawalpindi conspiracy case.

According to Captain Poshni, the law in Pakistan said that if two
persons said yes to a conspiracy plan, it was enough to launch a case
against them, even if no actual act of conspiracy had taken place. Here
the situation was different, as the gathering had rejected Brigadier
Akbar Khan’s plan. But, under threat, the CID and police got some
participants to depose in the court that a conspiracy had indeed been
hatched. The Rawalpindi case was, thus, a manufactured one --- from end
to end.

LIFE OF STRUGGLE & CREATIVITY

Comrade Sajjad Zaheer spent four and a half years in the jails in
Hyderabad Sindh, Lahore, Machh and Quetta, before his release and return
to India in 1955. It was in this period that he wrote Roshanai, the
first authentic account of the PWA, and Zikr-e-Haafiz, an evaluation of
the 13th century Persian poet Haafiz Shirazi. His return to India was a
part of the conditions for his release.

Comrade Sajjad now resumed his activities in the undivided Communist
Party here. He revived the PWA, was elected secretary of the India
chapter of Afro-Asian Writers Association, and was the chief editor of
party weekly Awami Daur (People’s Era) that was to later become Hayat
(Life). His popularity soon grew all around and writers of various
countries invited him. He was among the key figures who mobilised
writers against US atrocities in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.

While in Alma Ata, Comrade Sajjad Zaheer breathed his last after
suffering a heart attack on September 13, 1973. He was buried in the
Jamia Millia cemetery in Okhla.

Apart from his pieces in Angarey and the two works mentioned above,
Comrade Sajjad has to his credit Beemar (drama), Pighla Neelam
(collection of blank verses), and Naqoosh-e-Zindan (collection of
letters to his wife, from jail). But his most important work is his only
novel London ki Ek Raat (A Night in London) in which, through his
characters Bhuwan and others, he portrayed what humiliations the Indians
had had to suffer in the imperialist metropolis.


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

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/

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.