SACW | 13 July 2006 | Sri Lanka's displaced; India: Reaction to July 11, Religion and Politics; Bangladesh and UK

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | 13 July, 2006 | Dispatch No. 2272


[1]  Sri Lanka: Renewed conflict displacing 
thousands (Kavita Shukla and Joel Charny)
[2]  India: Reactions to the July 11 Blasts in Bombay
    (i) We condemn the heinous crime in Mumbai - A 
Statement from Pakistani Peace Activists
    (ii) Dazed in Mumbai (Ammu Abraham)
[3]  India: Muslim Leaders Take Another Shot At 
Religion-Based Politics (Zafar Agha)
[4]  Bangladesh: No reason we cannot  - A Book 
Review of 'Can We Get Along? An Account of 
Communal Relationship in Bangladesh by Mohammad 
Rafi' (Syed Manzoorul Islam)
[5]  UK: 'Indian' wants to shed 'Asian' tag (Rashmee Roshan Lall)
+ Questions of Hindu faith run deeper than ticks 
and boxes (Letters to the Editor, The Times)

___


[1]

Refugees International Bulletin
July 10, 2006

Sri Lanka: Renewed conflict displacing thousands

- Kavita Shukla and Joel Charny

In Sri Lanka increasing violence between the Tamil militant group, the
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, and government soldiers and allied
militias has displaced 40,000 people in the north and east and driven
another 2,800 to seek safety in India. The violence is a bitter blow to
the 300,000 Sri Lankans, primarily Tamils, who have remained displaced
even after the 2002 ceasefire that brought an end of the 19-year civil
war. Additional hundreds of thousands are largely cut off from development
assistance in LTTE-controlled areas or live precariously in contested
zones in the north and east. The promise of the ceasefire and the tenuous
peace that resulted appears on the verge of shattering.

The December 2004 tsunami was indiscriminate in its impact, devastating
Tamil, Muslim, and Sinhalese villages from the northeast to the southern
coast. Unlike in Aceh, Indonesia, however, the shared suffering did not
encourage further political reconciliation that might have built on the
ceasefire. A period of bickering between the LTTE and the government over
the allocation of relief funds, and the failure of the government to abide
by commitments to share resources equitably, were followed by the November
2005 election of President Mahinda Rajapahse, who ran on a platform
rejecting the agreements on tsunami aid-sharing and committing to
reviewing the premises of the Norwegian-facilitated peace process. For its
part, the LTTE prevented Tamil citizens under its control from voting in
the Presidential election, in effect ensuring that the opposition
candidate, who had negotiated the original ceasefire agreement and
remained committed to its implementation, would lose the closely fought
contest. With the LTTE having pulled out of any further negotiations in
April, the escalating violence is leading to fears of a return to
full-blown civil war.

In response to the rising violence, more than 2,800 people have fled from
Sri Lanka to India since the beginning of 2006. In desperation, some
people are paying traffickers their lifetime savings to get on board
fishing vessels to India. The boats are packed with people and traveling
at night, with no radar or modern equipment, to avoid navy patrols. Those
on board face risks such as abandonment at sea and capsized vessels. In
May, ten people died when the boat carrying them to India capsized.

The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recently
released a statement urging those planning on making the journey to India
to consider the serious dangers they may face. Most of the Sri Lankan
asylum seekers head for the southern Indian state of Tamilnadu, an area
that has hosted Tamil refugees since 1983 when large-scale violence broke
out in their country between the majority Sinhalese and the minority
Tamils. Although many refugees returned to Sri Lanka during the ceasefire,
approximately 60,000 still live in about 100 government-run camps in
Tamilnadu. At least another 20,000 refugees live outside the camps.

The Sri Lankan asylum seekers arriving in Tamilnadu are processed
primarily at the Mandapam transit camp. They are interrogated by a special
branch of the state police, especially about any connections with the
LTTE, and after clearance they may either stay in the transit camp, or be
moved to one of the refugee camps. New arrivals receive ration cards and
small monthly stipends and can also take advantage of the health and
educational facilities at the camps.

Refugees International commends the Government of India for keeping its
borders open and for assisting and protecting Sri Lankan asylum seekers.
It is imperative that if more refugees come to India to escape the
violence and insecurity in Sri Lanka that India not turn them away. The
Government of India has not signed the 1951 Refugee Convention and takes
direct responsibility for Sri Lankan refugees, allowing UNHCR only to
become involved in facilitating and verifying the voluntariness of their
return. RI urges the Government of India to allow UNHCR and international
NGOs in addition to the Jesuit Refugee Service, which has been working in
the camps, to become involved with provision of services and protection
for the refugees. Sharing the responsibility of caring for the Sri Lankan
refugees would improve the overall support to them.

The recent arrivals in India cite fear of being caught in the crossfire
between the army and the LTTE as a major reason for fleeing. They also
mention the rapidly deteriorating security situation and the lack of
protection within Sri Lanka. Many of the refugees arriving in India are
from Sri Lanka’s eastern area of Trincomalee where there has been a sharp
rise in violence in recent months. There have also been reports of
increased child abduction in Trincomalee and Batticaloa. Clashes between
LTTE and the military and naval forces in Mannar in the northwest have
also led to reports of violence against civilians, with rape of women
prevalent.

The intensified fighting between the military and the LTTE in recent weeks
has led to the displacement of nearly 40,000 people in the north and east
of the country. The newly displaced are in addition to the 300,000 who
have remained displaced for years due to the conflict. Humanitarian
agencies began to scale back assistance to people displaced by the
conflict during the ceasefire and there has been little funding available
for those currently displaced. The decision announced on July 4 by the
European Commission to allocate seven million euros to humanitarian relief
for conflict-displaced people is welcome and timely, but even greater
commitments from the EC and other donors will be required. Since the 2004
tsunami, humanitarian assistance funding has been devoted to tsunami
relief and reconstruction, leaving many people displaced by the war
without support. While millions of people sent money to assist in the
reconstruction of Sri Lanka after the deadly 2004 tsunami, agencies and
donors have struggled with how to extend that generosity to the Sri
Lankans that fled man-made violence. As the political situation in Sri
Lanka deteriorates, it is critical that international humanitarian
agencies communicate with their donors about the need to loosen
restrictions on funds to allow response to those who have been displaced
due to conflict.

Refugees International therefore recommends that:

     * The Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE make every effort to adhere
to the ceasefire and resume peace talks immediately.
     * The Government of India allow UNHCR to become involved with
protection and assistance of Sri Lankan refugees.
     * UNHCR increase its presence in northern and eastern Sri Lanka.
     * International donors increase funding to UNHCR both in India and Sri
Lanka in anticipation of further displacement.
     * International agencies working on tsunami reconstruction in Sri
Lanka seek permission from their donors to allocate funds to meet the
emergency needs of internally displaced persons fleeing conflict.

Advocate Kavita Shukla and Vice President for Policy Joel Charny have
conducted assessment missions to India and Sri Lanka focusing on
conflict-affected refugees and internally displaced people.

_____


[2]   [ Reactions to the July 11 Blasts in Bombay ]

(i) A Statement from Pakistani Peace Activists

July 12, 2006

WE CONDEMN THE HEINOUS CRIME IN MUMBAI

The bomb blasts on local trains and at railway 
stations in Mumbai, in which over 160 people have 
been killed and many more are on the verge of 
dying, are perhaps the most shocking of all such 
killings that have occurred in the subcontinent 
of late. The reason is that this massacre has 
targeted thousands of office and factory going 
men and women returning home to be with their 
children and parents after a whole day's hard 
work. Those who committed this great crime cannot 
even be called animals because animals do not 
commit such crimes. Only human beings do.

It is time for the governments of Pakistan and 
India to re-assess their priorities and be on a 
state of high alert. As long as they fail to 
resolve their mostly man-made disputes and allow 
free and unfettered people-to-people interaction 
between the two countries, all sorts of 
extremists and terrorists would find it easy to 
indulge in and get away with such insane 
barbarities. What has happened in Mumbai is 
indicative of a widening of the dimensions of 
terrorist outreach. It calls for united effort by 
not only the governments of Pakistan and India 
but the people at large to identify and wipe out 
this cancer that is spreading far and wide at a 
frightening pace.

Pakistan needs to take stern measures to put down 
all kinds of demonstrations and displays of 
religious extremism in the country, which 
directly or indirectly encourages terrorist 
activities in the name of religion and undermines 
the peace process between Pakistan and India. 
Similarly, India needs to curb the activities of 
religious fanatics using the umbrella of India's 
pluralist democratic political system, to spawn 
communal conflicts and derail the peace process. 
In order to avert a possible collapse of the 
peace process as a result of such tragic 
incidents, it is necessary that the two 
governments put their heads together and take 
immediate steps to create a relaxed political 
atmosphere in the subcontinent by removing all 
outlandish restrictions on the movement of people 
between the two countries, thus making it 
impossible for the terrorists to operate.

We would also ask all the sane, secular forces 
among the Muslims of the world to rise above 
their petty sectarian positions and help launch 
an international movement against terrorist 
activities in the name of Islam.

We extend our heartfelt condolences to the 
members of the families who have lost their near 
and dear ones in the bomb blasts and assure them 
that we will strive, along with those in Pakistan 
and India and the world who abhor religious 
extremism and terrorism, to fight this evil till 
it is eliminated for good.

M.B.Naqvi, Senior Columnist & Founder Member PIPFPD
Dr. A.H.Nayyar, President, Pakistan Peace Coalition
Karamat Ali, Director PILER
Muhammad Tahseen, South Asia Partnership-Pakistan
Ms. Ayesha Yahqub, Takhleeq Foundation
B.M.Kutty, Secretary, Pakistan Peace Coalition
Dr. Aly Ercelan, Economist
Ms. Sheen Farrukh, Journalist
Ms. Sheema Kermani, Director, Tehreek-e-Niswan

Released by: B.M.Kutty

o o o

(ii)

12 July 2006

DAZED IN MUMBAI

That is the only word to describe the mental 
state of ordinary people in Mumbai.
We are the daily suburban commuters of this city.
The backbone of Mumbai, who above all else gives 
this city its essential character.
Representing its jealously guarded separate 
cultures of all corners of the Indian 
subcontinent; and even beyond.
The barely managed tensions of the 
juxtaposition of different languages, religions, 
castes, communities, classes, genders. All come 
to life day after day on these overlong, 
overcrowded metro trains.  600,000 separate bits 
of humanity move back and forth on these 
monstrous centipedes, crawling all day and well 
into the night, from North to South and back. 
600,000, on average days.
They are The People; the famous People. They are 
from all parts of the nation; and they make these 
trains a metaphor for India.
Gujaratis, Marathis, Malayalees, Uttar Pradeshis, 
Rajputs, Biharis, Punjabis, Bengalis, Tamils, 
Kannadigas . . .
Traders, Hawkers, Office staff and CEOs, school 
children and University lecturers, Fisherwomen 
and vegetable vendors..
Hindus and Muslims and Christians and 
Neo-Buddhists and the odd Nigerian, Kenyan or 
resettled Chinese. . . .
Men, women, Hijras...Disputing, shouting; SMSing, 
blocking the ears with music; just 'blocking' 
sometimes, blocking Andheriwallis in Borivli 
trains, Borivliwallis in Virar trains... Women 
cribbing about the men...Men smirking at the 
women..Youngsters cuddling at times...Trying to 
measure out gender equality, class conflicts, 
community pride, critiques of ageism; Disputing 
and laughing, struggling and solidarising, while 
leaping on and leaping off; rushing up and 
rushing down.
They feel bad when one of them falls under the 
trains; but have not the time to stay too long. 
Tomorrow it could be you.
Yes, barely keeping the tensions in hand...but 
conscious always, that they are the living, 
struggling, dynamic Microcosm of India; and that 
together they stand or fall.
Yesterday, was one too many of their load of miseries.
They coped with the odd blasts earlier; they 
walked the tracks on Deluge Day on 26/7. Or 
rather, on 27/7, after sitting cooped up in 
trains or standing around dripping water on the 
platforms all night on 26th.
They knew they must cope; because They were 
Mumbai now, for a long while; They were the 
legendary, never-say-die spirit of Bombay turned 
Mumbai.
But yesterday night, a  young woman reporter of 
NDTV, called on at Matunga station at night, had 
to be coaxed by her seniors before she could 
prattle into the microphone; her lips quivered a 
little; her eyes shone with barely suppressed 
tears.
She looked dazed. Like the rest of us. Who were 
lucky enough to get home somehow to watch TV in a 
daze.
She was the face of Mumbai last night; along with 
another, a poor man whose voice cracked 
repeatedly describing his experience of clearing 
human limbs after the blasts.
The people around him tried to stroke his head 
spasmodically, to calm him down; to help him not 
to break down completely.
Reporter and impromptu rescue worker.
Worried about their city and its survival.
They were the faces of Mumbai last night.

To kill the spirit of Mumbai, one has to kill the 
spirit of the suburban commuters of Mumbai.
Yesterday, on the 11th day of the month of July 
in the year 2006, they have managed to daze the 
spirit of Mumbai.
We are dazed; let's hope that the death toll of 
yesterday does not count our collective spirit 
among its casualties, in the long run..
Let's hope that we shall recover our faith in 
ourselves and our endurance, by next week.

Ammu Abraham, Mumbai


_____


[3]

Communalism Combat
June 2006

POLITICS OF FAITH -
MUSLIM LEADERS TAKE ANOTHER SHOT AT RELIGION-BASED POLITICS

by Zafar Agha

Who or which social group in this country does 
not have a political party? The Hindus have it. 
The
Yadavs have it. The Dalits have it. The Kurmis 
have it. The Tamils have it. The Maharashtrians 
have it. The Assamese have it. Name a social 
group, a region or a caste and you have a 
political party bearing their tag. The era of 
Gandhi, Nehru and Indira is an old story wherein 
a national leader worked for the country and 
promoted the interests of Indians without 'caste, 
colour or creed' discrimination. Those were times 
when leaders of stature, with a single national 
political party called the Congress, ruled the 
roost - both at the national and the provincial 
level. Those were times when Indians thought of 
and for India and not for caste, community or 
creed. It was an era of the politics of service 
for the nation.

We now live in different times. We live in an age 
when politics is largely the game of pygmies who 
win elections promoting a caste interest or a 
community interest and no national interest 
whatsoever. They indulge in less people service 
and more self-service. Politics is now like any 
other trade or commerce where politicians jump 
onto one political bandwagon or other political 
front and make hundreds and thousands of crores 
as people are left waiting for the next election 
so as to punish them.

Gone is the era of Big Dads in politics. And the 
time for national parties is over. We live in an 
era of alliances when politics is no longer 
national. It is not even provincial any more. 
Indian politics is fragmented and is increasingly 
becoming caste and community oriented. So in this 
competitive era of caste and communal politics 
even Muslims have begun to think of forming their 
own political party. The logic being, if Dalits 
can have it and Yadavs can have it, why can't 
Muslims have it too? After all, in terms of the 
population ratio Muslims are the second largest 
group in the country. They played a crucial role 
in unseating the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) 
from power in 2004, after the Gujarat massacre, 
and threw out the Congress party in 1996, after 
Narasimha Rao failed to protect the Babri Masjid 
in 1992. No political party can govern India for 
long unless it enjoys Muslim support. Muslims 
have emerged as kingmakers of a sort in Indian 
politics.

But even 57 years after independence their time 
in Indian politics is yet to come. They have very 
genuine grievances. Muslims complain that they 
are used as a 'vote bank' by various political 
formations and once an election is over, no one 
cares for them. They are left with the sole 
option of voting out a party in self-defence. 
Muslim politics does not move beyond the game of 
survival wherein you vote out one party only to 
protect your very identity. This is indeed 
shocking and frustrating for the Muslim 
community. Not only are Muslims in India victims 
of the worst kind of communal violence but they 
are also at the lowest rung of development in the 
country. Their literacy rate is abysmal. Their 
job representation in both the public and private 
sector is shockingly low. Their representation in 
legislative bodies is also dwindling. They have 
genuine complaints against Indian politicians who 
have taken them for a royal ride a little too 
long. They are no longer willing to vote for 
their security alone. They now want growth and 
development as well.

The post-partition Muslim generation is impatient 
to catch up with others in terms of development. 
It does not suffer from the partition complex. It 
has contributed no less than any other community 
or caste to the national development index - in 
every walk of life. Yet it suffers from all 
manner of problems ranging from security to 
unemployment. This generation of Muslims wants 
empowerment and is rightly disappointed with all 
political parties. After all, it has been two 
years since they came to power and even the 
Manmohan Singh government has done little to 
solve Muslim problems.

Taking advantage of the general Muslim 
disenchantment with traditional secular parties 
and the growing political fad for communal and 
caste parties in the country, a group of Muslim 
politicians thought of starting Muslim parties at 
the provincial level. The first man who sensed 
the Muslim mood and cashed in on their growing 
disappointment with secular politics was 
Badruddin Ajmal of Assam where Muslims living in 
different pockets amount to more than 30 per cent 
of the population. Ajmal along with the Jamiat 
Ulama-e-Hind had backed the Congress party in the 
last assembly and the last parliamentary 
elections. But the Gogoi-led Congress government 
did exactly what other governments have done with 
Muslims in the past. Once the elections were 
behind them, they did nothing to tackle the 
problems facing the Muslim community.

Ajmal is a successful post-partition merchant who 
has made it big in the perfume business. This 
apart, he was backed by the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind, 
which has considerable influence among Assamese 
Muslims. With the Jamiat's backing, Ajmal took 
the plunge and formed an ostensibly secular party 
(the Assam United Democratic Front - AUDF) for 
the Muslims of Assam, managing to win 12 seats in 
the legislature, two of these being won by 
non-Muslims. He has been gloating over his 
success and claims to have made it big for the 
Muslims of Assam. A dubious claim indeed as his 
bête noire, Gogoi, is in fact back as Assam's 
Congress chief minister and Muslim representation 
both in the state legislature and in the new 
government is lower than the last time. Besides, 
both the Assamese Hindus as well as the tribals 
feel threatened by a Muslim party. This may 
generate a backlash against the state's Muslims 
and may revive both the BJP and the Asom Gana 
Parishad, (AGP), which have so far played the 
anti-Muslim card in Assam.

The success of Ajmal's political experiment in 
Assam though dubious in real terms has generated 
a ripple effect in Muslim politics, especially 
amongst the Muslims of Uttar Pradesh. Muslims 
constitute a large chunk of the votes in numerous 
assembly segments in Uttar Pradesh. If they vote 
as a united bloc, they can be the deciding factor 
in many elections. Encouraged by the Assam 
experiment, two Muslim outfits have been formed 
in Uttar Pradesh recently. Maulana Kalbe Jawwad 
of Lucknow leads one, the People's Democratic 
Front (PDF), and Imam Ahmed Bukhari of Jama 
Masjid, Delhi, heads the other, the Uttar Pradesh 
United Democratic Front (UPUDF). The PDF brings 
together the All India Muslim Forum, National 
Loktantrik Party, Momin Conference of India, All 
India Muslim Majlis, Parcham Party of India and 
the All India Muslim Mushawarat among others. 
According to newspaper reports, soon after both 
fronts were announced, they merged under the PDF 
banner. Both Jawwad and Bukhari swear by the 
Muslim cause. Both blame secular parties for the 
ills befalling Indian Muslims and both come from 
a religious background.

On the face of things, in this age of caste and 
communal politics, a Muslims-only party sounds 
both logical and appealing. After all, even 
nearly 60 years after independence, no secular 
party is willing to work towards the uplift of 
Muslims. So what do Muslims do? But the problem 
with Indian Muslims is that they are not Yadavs 
or Dalits. They are a community that carries the 
baggage of history. It is a community that has in 
the past played the communal card and carved 
Pakistan out of the Indian subcontinent. Indeed, 
Muslims who live in India have nothing to do with 
Pakistan. They played no role during partition 
nor do they have any lingering sympathy for 
Pakistan.

But history, as TS Eliot wrote, has 'cunning 
passages and contrived corridors'. Those cunning 
passages and contrived corridors of history are 
essentially the collective neurotic memory of a 
tragic past that generates a false sense of siege 
amongst a large group even long after the actual 
threat has disappeared. Hindu communal forces led 
by the RSS and the BJP take advantage of those 
'contrived and cunning passages' of history to 
transform Indian Muslims into the 'Hindu enemy' 
working to carve out another Pakistan.

Over the past two decades all of us have seen how 
successfully the sangh parivar worked on this 
Hindu siege mentality and managed to build a 
Hindu vote bank as also to marginalise Indian 
Muslims in Indian politics. So deep-rooted is the 
post-partition Hindu sense of siege that Narendra 
Modi could successfully paint Gujarati Muslims as 
'Mian Musharraf', managing even to win an 
election on hate politics in December 2002. No 
amount of secular cajoling, even by liberal 
Hindus, could persuade the Gujarati majority to 
shed their sense of siege and defeat Modi who 
masterminded the most cynical and worst ever 
massacre of Muslims in independent India. 
Gujaratis saw Modi as their defender and voted 
overwhelmingly to bring him to power to defend 
them from the 'terrorist Pakistani Muslims' 
living in their midst.

Among Hindus this false sense of siege is based 
on the collective memory of the formation of 
Pakistan. Once tickled, it revives the partition 
trauma when some Muslims led by Muhammad Ali 
Jinnah had 'worked against the Hindus' and 
partitioned their motherland - the ultimate 
refuge for the security of a nation. This 
neurotic memory is revived only when Hindus 
perceive Muslims as coming together to promote 
'their cause' much as Jinnah had done for them 
once before. At once, the Muslims among them 
become the enemy within and those who stand up 
against the Muslims become Hindu heroes.

These tactics surface only when Muslims come 
together on a common platform and start indulging 
in the politics of cacophony. It has happened in 
recent times between 1986 and 1992 when India's 
Muslims first came together under the All India 
Muslim Personal Law Board to protect their 
personal law after the Shah Bano judgement. Soon 
after, once the gates to the Babri Masjid were 
unlocked in 1986, the All India Babri Masjid 
Action Committee was formed to protect the 
mosque. Both the Muslim Personal Law Board and 
the Babri Masjid Action Committee ostensibly 
worked to defend the Muslim cause but in actual 
terms they only indulged in the politics of 
cacophony using high decibel Muslim rhetoric. 
This tickled the Hindu sense of siege and it was 
the BJP that soon became the Hindu hero.

The rest is recent history. We have been witness 
to how one-time political outcasts, the BJP, 
turned overnight into a party of Hindu heroes and 
grabbed power, leading eventually to the massacre 
in Gujarat. If there had been no Muslim platform, 
there may well have been no Hindu platform 
either. This is a crude historic and psychotic 
factor that Indian Muslims have had to live with 
it.

Now let us put aside the debate about the pros 
and cons of a Muslims-only party and take a look 
at the current political scenario. The BJP lost 
power in 2004 and has since been undergoing the 
worst kind of crisis; it is divided down the 
middle and its credibility is at its lowest. The 
average Hindu priority is growth and development, 
not identity. There seems to be little chance of 
the BJP coming to power or its leadership sinking 
its differences to revive the party in the near 
future.

Amidst this politically hopeless scenario for the 
BJP, if Muslims start indulging in the politics 
of cacophony as they did in the 1980s and 1990s, 
there are bright chances of the Hindu sense of 
siege being revived. The formation of not one but 
many Muslim political parties under a traditional 
conservative leadership with demands such as 
reservations for Muslims in legislative bodies, 
etc. is bound to reawaken the Hindu fear. It will 
undoubtedly encourage the RSS parivar to use 
every trick in its kitty to revive the BJP as an 
alternative to a Muslim platform. Besides, 
various Muslim formations in different states 
will undoubtedly split a united Muslim vote bank, 
much to the advantage of the BJP, which then, 
even with minority Hindu backing, would manage to 
corner power for itself as it did until recently 
- by splitting the secular and the Muslim voters. 
So forming a Muslim political party today means 
serving the BJP and its actors like LK Advani and 
Narendra Modi.

But for how long should Muslims put off working 
towards the interests of their own community, and 
this merely out of fear for the BJP? Well, a 
sensible and mature community would or should 
first like to finish off its principal enemy to 
ensure permanent security. If Muslims vote 
unitedly in yet another election and the BJP 
loses power for another term, Hindu communal 
forces could well be marginalised for a long, 
long time to come. But if the Muslims are divided 
as they were in Assam, with their own parties 
working for them in most states, the BJP may soon 
be back with a bang. It is for Muslims to decide 
whether or not they should first work for their 
security, which must, ultimately, lead to their 
progress and development as well. Or whether they 
should, as in the 1980s, commit the blunder of 
forming their own platforms and lose both 
security as well as the little progress that 
security necessarily brings.

Backing Muslim parties in the prevailing scenario 
could only mean hara-kiri for the Muslim 
community. One hopes and prays that better sense 
will prevail amongst Muslims, who have committed 
too many mistakes in the past and have had paid 
dearly whenever their leaders have indulged in 
the politics of emotional hyperbole rather than 
the mature politics of good sense. Communal 
Muslim players are once again hawking 
aggressively for a Muslim party. Such a move will 
only help revive Hindu communalists. It is time 
for ordinary Muslims to be cautious of such 
Muslim players. Else every Indian province could 
produce at least one Modi to 'teach Muslims a 
lesson' as indeed happened so tragically in 
Gujarat.

(Zafar Agha is a regular columnist for several newspapers.)



_____


[4] 

The Daily Star
July 13, 2006

Book Review

No reason we cannot
Syed Manzoorul Islam


CAN WE GET ALONG?
AN ACCOUNT OF COMMUNAL RELATIONSHIP IN BANGLADESH
by Mohammad Rafi

DEMOCRACY in Bangladesh, everyone likes to 
believe, is still in a nascent state: it is 
scarcely a decade and a half ago that the country 
began to practice a democratic way of governance. 
But fifteen years, and three full-fledged 
elections, are a long enough time and experience 
to come out of the nascent state.

Indeed, democracy in the country, by that 
reckoning, should be somewhere in its early 
youth. It should be steaming ahead, growing from 
strength to strength each passing year. But 
reality shows a picture which is quite the 
opposite: democracy, if anything, is floundering. 
It is floundering because it is continuously 
under attack from the very forces and 
institutions that are supposed to nurture and 
strengthen it.

The country has a government riddled with 
corruption and inefficiency; a dysfunctional 
parliament and an Election Commission that finds 
more pleasure in problematising the electoral 
process than in making it smooth. Add to this the 
endemic violence, religious extremism and 
persecution of religious minorities. This last is 
particularly worrisome, since respect for other 
religions is a fundamental principle of a 
democratic society.

What compounds the problem is the 
administration's tolerance of -- and in many 
instances, active support to -- the persecution 
of religious and ethnic minorities in the 
country. The saga of the Hill people is a long 
and tragic one. The Ahmadiyas are fighting a 
losing battle just to keep their heads above 
water. And other minorities fare no better.

After the BNP-Jamaat coalition won the general 
election in 2001, the country witnessed a vicious 
persecution of Hindus throughout the country, 
particularly in the southern districts. Throngs 
of BNP-Jamaat activists swooped down on Hindu 
households and business concerns, looting and 
plundering. Hindu men were physically assaulted, 
and in some cases, killed, and the women raped.

The administration failed to come to the aid of 
the victims since the perpetrators were from the 
ruling coalition. The media gave wide coverage to 
the violence, but hardly anyone was ever brought 
to justice. And, as is the tradition with the 
media, their interest gradually waned as new 
stories kept emerging. And with a new government 
in place there was no shortage of hard news. 
Soon, the violence against the Hindus was 
forgotten as "yesterday's news."

The fact that we have decided to forget the 
incidents shows what is seriously wrong with our 
practice of democracy, as indeed with our whole 
mindset. The persecution of the Hindus was not 
simply an act of political vendetta -- which 
would be reprehensible by any standard of 
judgement -- but was something more deep rooted 
and pernicious. It was a revival of the brand of 
communalism that was practiced in Pakistan times, 
and is still practiced in that country and in 
India. Its roots lie in sectarian prejudices and 
ignorance.

Acts of political revenge are not concentrated 
against a particular minority community, as are 
hate campaigns fuelled by religious fanaticism. 
The persecution of Hindus was also symptomatic of 
a "get-rich-quick" mindset that saw looting and 
the expropriating of others' properties as a sure 
way of getting there. The looting of Hindus' 
property in 2001 was an early warning that the 
perpetrators would move out to greener pastures 
once they were through with the first round. 
Today, there is absolutely no sector in 
Bangladesh that is safe from the looters' hands.

If a detailed investigation into the sociology, 
psychology, politics and economy of the 2001 
persecution of Hindus was missing so far, a book 
by Mohammad Rafi has substantially filled the 
gap. Rhetorically titled Can We Get Along the 
book proposes to be "An Account of Communal 
Relationship in Bangladesh," but is actually more 
than that.

It examines the whole spectrum of pre and post 
election violence in Bangladesh, detailing the 
nature and incidents of violence -- on families, 
on communities, on individuals. It looks into the 
history, sociology and other such issues related 
to the violence; raising questions of complicity 
not only of political parties but of 
non-political entities such as rural communities; 
and finally posing the question: "Can we get 
along?"

Mohammad Rafi, an active and contributing member 
of the Research and Development Wing of BRAC, has 
put into place, what appears to be a dependable 
and extremely effective methodology. The 
information on the violence against Hindus was 
collected, he informs us: "from BRAC staff 
working at field offices Š BRAC has 1,150 field 
offices covering 89 per cent (60,000) of the 
villages in 99 per cent (460) of subdistricts in 
the country."

A network of checks and balances was in place to 
ensure that the information was authentic before 
the writer could use it. The writer also provides 
case studies, mentioning the place and time of 
each interview. Contrary to the practices usually 
followed by writers of such sociological accounts 
of current events, Mohammad Rafi has added an 
entire chapter on "Concept [of violence], 
Theoretical Framework and Methodology." One 
wishes that the book began with this chapter (it 
is placed rather uncomfortably between the 
chapters "Communal Relationship" and "Composition 
of Religious Minorities"), since it establishes 
the authenticity of both the theoretical and 
applied aspects of the book.

Mohammad Rafi's book has three broad areas of 
focus: (a) the pre-and post-election violence 
(2001), (b) the often problematic nature and 
history of communal relationship in the country 
and the need for getting along, in spite of 
setbacks. The first area of focus is a very 
urgent one. By starting with an investigation 
into the 2001 violence, Rafi has revisited some 
of the most shameful and alarming events of our 
recent history, and alerted the readers to the 
possibility of their recurrence, unless of 
course, corrective measures are taken immediately.

The second area of focus is largely an academic 
one that sets the communal relationships in a 
Bangladesh perspective. As one reads through the 
history of such relationships, one sees clearly 
how politics, material greed and deep-seated 
sectarian hatred had contributed to the widening 
gulf between the minority and majority 
communities.

The academic nature of this particular 
investigation means that concepts and 
terminologies are often laboriously explained, 
but one sees that this is necessary if only to 
arrive at a historical and sociological 
understanding of the problems leading to communal 
violence. Once this understanding has been 
achieved, it is easy for the reader to see the 
2001 violence not simply as an act of "political 
revenge," as a section of the media had put it, 
but the result of an interconnected web of causes 
-- from a revival of Pakistani-style communalism 
to a growing frustration against India in certain 
quarters for which the Hindus are made scapegoats.

In the larger historical and other contexts that 
the book sets for the 2001 violence, some 
questions become pertinent. If the political 
system, particularly our decade and a half old 
democratic system, has failed to protect the 
minorities and if our administrative system has 
increasingly imposed exclusionary policies on 
them, have the minority-majority relations any 
real chance of returning to pre-1975 levels? How 
will the government respond to the minority 
communities' sense of exclusion and alienation? 
How will the state fulfil its constitutional 
obligation of protecting them? What alliance can 
the civil society and the minority communities 
forge to safeguard their interest? And, very 
importantly, how do we instill a sense of 
belonging in the minority community?

Mohammad Rafi seems to believe that the majority 
and minority communities can indeed get along. 
But for that to happen there should be a paradigm 
shift in the way both sides look at the problem. 
He places a great deal of emphasis on a 
rethinking of the concept of nationalism which 
should have a secular, rather than an Islamic, 
basis.

He also suggests that efforts should be initiated 
by the Muslims for greater integration of the 
minorities, and frustration against India should 
be neutralised. Mohammad Rafi stresses on a 
greater role of the government in preventing 
violence against the minorities. He also sees a 
greater role for the donors and NGOs in 
safeguarding minority interests. And above all, 
he wants the minorities to be more vocal and more 
assertive about their roles.

Mohammad Rafi's research has been painstaking. 
The large number of tables and appendices point 
to exhaustive field work and a scientific base of 
the research. It is a courageous work that has 
focused on an area where not many researchers 
like to venture.

But the book's virtue is that it has brought out 
all the facts (including many that the media 
looking only for "news value" might not find or 
ignore) and laid them out front for us to face.

Mohammad Rafi's study has been an unbiased one, 
aimed only at bringing home some disturbing 
truths. It will be to our, and the nation's peril 
to ignore them. Can We Get Along expects us to be 
aware of them and also to act on them. Only by 
collective action based on the principles of 
democracy, ethics and common humanity can the 
communal relationships improve in Bangladesh.

Dr Syed Manzoorul Islam is Professor of English, University of Dhaka.

_____


[5]

The Times of India
12 July 2006

UK 'INDIAN' WANTS TO SHED 'ASIAN' TAG
by Rashmee Roshan Lall

LONDON: Britain's Hindu community is on the cusp of getting its government
to junk the omnibus identity tag of 'Asian' in favour of 'Indian' or
'Hindu', but it remains torn about the final tagline to embrace.

On Tuesday, in a landmark move that signals the British government is
finally willing to hear the British Hindu's long-standing complaint about
being 'lumped together' with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, cabinet minister
Ruth Kelly released a significant report in the British parliament.

The report is funded by the British government. The report, commissioned by
the admittedly-partisan Hindu umbrella organization, the Hindu Forum and
executed by the decidedly non-partisan Runnymede Trust, found that Britain's
estimated 600,000 Hindus fiercely oppose the omnibus description of
themselves as 'Asian'.

Instead, Hindu Forum secretary general Ramesh Kallidai told TOI, British
Hindus want to be known by their religion or their national origins, ie
'Hindu' or 'Indian'.

When challenged about the implacable reality that many British Indians are
not Hindu and many British Hindus are not Indian (because they may belong to
the Caribbean or East Africa instead), Kallidai admitted that his community
remained unsure about what tagline finally to choose.

"Sometimes we can use the word Hindu to describe ourselves, sometimes we can
use the word Indian. After all, 90% of Britain's Hindus are of Indian
origin," Kallidai said.

He insisted, in what many regard as something of a climbdown for a newly
resurgent, politically aware, British Hindu movement desperate to clock its
presence alongside Muslim and Sikh political movements, that the Hindu Forum
did not want "the word Hindu to include only Indians or the word Indian to
include only Hindus".

Tuesday's seminal event came after a long campaign by the British Hindu
community to shed its catch-all description as Asian and thus officially
de-link from the reprehensible activities, achievement levels and bad karma
of the UK's Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.

Commentators said it represented bespoke identity politics in western Europe
while still at the design-stage. But the tangled semantics of 21st-century
religio-racial-identity politics is complicated by the reality that a
sizeable proportion of British Indians belong to faiths other than Hindu,
notably Islam, Sikhism and Jainism.

Till now, British census surveys and suchlike record race as Asian which may
be sub-divided into Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or other categories. The
survey also records religion to include Hindu, which is the third-largest
faith-based community in Britain today.

o o o

Letters to the Editor

The Times	July 13, 2006

QUESTIONS OF HINDU FAITH RUN DEEPER THAN TICKS AND BOXES

Sir, I am the daughter of Indian immigrants, one 
Hindu, one Muslim, who came to Britain in 1956. I 
was raised as a Muslim, sent to private schools 
and supported through university and a civil 
service career. I am proud to be called a British 
Asian and am deeply saddened by the comments of 
British Hindus in your report (July 11 - 
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,171-2264215,00.html 
) who appear to think that they are in some way 
better than British Muslims. As a former student 
of Lord Parekh I am also very sorry that he too 
has been drawn into this debate. Perhaps he might 
recall that in the 1980s, when he and I were at 
the University of Hull, many Indian citizens died 
as a result of communalism and hate. It would be 
tragic if this were to be replicated in Britain.

NARGIS WALKER
London E17

Sir, The "Faith Facts" that accompanied your 
report stated that Hindus practise yoga to 
"commune with God". This is is nonsense. I am a 
Hindu from Nepal, living in America, and of the 
hundreds of Nepalese I know, no a single Hindu 
among them has taken the trouble to master the 
yoga "asanas" (body positions or stances) in 
order to "commune with God"; they do yoga simply 
as an exercise that will contribute toward mental 
and physical fitness.

I practice this ancient form of exercise to 
alleviate arthritic pain, not in the hope that I 
(or my atma) shall fuse with the Omniscient One.

Indeed, to assert that Hindus practise yoga "to 
commune with God" is like saying that once upon a 
time Catholics ate fish on Friday in order to 
commune with God.

RAJENDRA S. KHADKA
Atlanta, Georgia

Sir, I can well understand the wish of Hindus to 
bet set apart from other "Asians" but you do 
their cause no good by talking of 18th-century 
immigration to the UK and including Parses.

We of that descent, though largely tolerant, 
might wish likewise to be set apart, being of 
Persian origin and not some subset of Hinduism. 
If you are an ethnic pot-pourri it can be fun 
ticking boxes on forms. I can legitimately be 
British, White and Asian, White (other), Any 
other, Any other (mixed) or Any other (Asian), 
though I passed the Tebbit test years before it 
was so described and usually pick the first. But 
it indicates how silly this ethnic thing can be, 
not least because I might prefer to be English.

DR ANDREW BAMJI
Sevenoaks, Kent

Sir, Not all Indians are Hindus and not all 
Hindus are Brahmins. So how long before we hear 
Jains, Zoroastrians, Buddhists and their numerous 
sects stating their special needs? Are the Hindus 
in question the only Indians? What about the rest 
who are quite happy to be British and Indian? 
Racial and religious divides can go too far and 
lead us away from the good community relations 
which we all desire.

KUSOOM VAGDAMA
London NW11

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

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.