SACW | Sept. 30, 2006 | Pakistan rape laws; Secular Nepal; Bio Weapons; Afzal Guru, Chavez, Saheli

Harsh Kapoor aiindex at mnet.fr
Sat Sep 30 04:39:22 CDT 2006


South Asia Citizens Wire | September 30, 2006 | Dispatch No. 2295

[1]  Pakistan: The tyranny of Pak rape laws (Sherry Rehman)
[2]  Nepal: Secular Dasain (Editorial in Haank)
[3]  India:  India should not join race for 
biological weapons (Sujatha Byravan)
[4]  Kashmir - India:  Afzal Guroo's hanging will 
be counter-productive (Editorial, Kashmir Times)
       + From Ramzan good-will to belligerence (Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal)
[5] Comment: Chavez, Saint George and Silence (Mukul Dube)
[6]  India: Saheli Documents 25 Years History
     

_____

[1] 

Asian Age
September 29, 2006

THE TYRANNY OF PAK RAPE LAWS

by Sherry Rehman [9/28/2006 9:49:39 PM]

When the military regime in Pakistan introduced 
its draft of the women's bill in Parliament, many 
progressive forces that had been pushing for the 
repeal of the infamous Hudood Ordinances imposed 
by Zia-ul-Haq saw an opportunity to effect change 
for women in Pakistan.

The regime had a manipulated majority in 
Parliament, but one where its allies were 
supportive of such a change. No sane elements 
thought it would be right to stand in the way, 
and hence support for the bill was initially 
available.

This is because the Women's Protection Bill had 
initially made some tentative attempts to alter 
the balance in a society which is heavily biased 
against women. The injustices done to poor, 
resource-starved women through the man-made Zina 
and Qazf Ordinances had at least stood some 
chance of being removed from the system. Today 
the bill stands once again bogged down in 
political expediency because the regime that had 
proposed it was not actually backed by a 
political party but a group of individuals who 
had come together as political surrogates for the 
Army chief, and were, therefore, without any 
party manifesto or consistent policy on national 
issues.

Initially, the bill had sought to amend two of 
the four Hudood Ordinances, the Zina Ordinance 
and the Qazf Ordinance, through 30 amendments in 
the Protection of Women (Criminal and Family Laws 
Amendment) Act. The main thrust of the original 
bill was to remove zina (consenting sex) from the 
tazeer (general law and Pakistan Penal Code). If 
this was ever done, it would not have made 
Pakistan a "free-sex zone" as reactionary 
elements suggested, but would have taken it 
halfway back to the position before 1979.

Why is that important? Because the Hudood 
Ordinances were used to award punishments under 
the Pakistan Penal Code or Tazeerat-i-Pakistan, 
not under the strict conditions required for 
Islamic hadd, but on flimsy evidence trumped up 
by the assailant. What this did in effect was to 
convict a rape victim who had complained of a 
crime against her and acquit the rapist, or the 
accuser of any woman whom they sought to 
criminalise as an adulteress.

By allowing the lower courts and gender biased 
judges at that level to confuse zina with 
punishments for rape (zina bil jabr), these 
ordinances were responsible for placing thousands 
of underprivileged women in the lock-up. No 
convictions would ever be awarded under hadd when 
the case went in appeal to the superior courts or 
the Federal Shariat Court, but the victim's life 
would be over when she was acquitted or released, 
as her family would rarely take her back after 
her name had been "dishonoured."

Under the original draft of the Women's 
Protection Bill, many crimes against women were 
no longer cognisable. Charges like zina could no 
longer be registered at the police level, but 
would have been taken to a sessions court. The 
presiding officer of that court would have at 
once examined the complainant and at least four 
adult eye witnesses, upon oath, of the act of 
zina, necessary to the offence. This would have 
been difficult to prove, as indeed intended by 
Islam, and would have protected women. The fact 
that the Amendment also made the offence bailable 
provided a great deal of relief to the ordinary 
woman.

However, the extra-parliamentary changes proposed 
by the regime's ulema consultants, not the 
Islamic Ideology Council, would have done two 
things: one, zina would be awarded under tazeer 
again, which had been initially changed. This 
would make a woman liable to zina punishments for 
five years, whereas the fig-leaf of two male 
witnesses to the charge could easily be 
circumvented by the rapist who could pay for the 
witnesses. Not only would a woman with a medical 
certificate for rape be sent to jail for 
"lewdness" but the rapist could go scot-free by 
implicating another innocent or missing man in 
the absence of DNA testing. Neither would this 
change have been Islamic, as Islam requires four 
witnesses not two, and nor would it be just by 
any universal standards.

The second change that the regime had proposed in 
a paper circulated outside the formal committee 
of Parliament, but inside the Parliament 
cafeteria, was even more dangerous. This change 
would have imposed a clause to make all judgments 
in accordance, supposedly, with the Quran and 
Sunnah in women's cases, without ever having 
resolved the great Islamic discourse on which 
injunction of Islamic jurisprudence or Quranic 
verse or action of the Prophet (PBUH) would 
constitute the basis for common law. Its 
proponents say that it is part of the 
Constitution, but if that is the case, why does 
it not stay there, forming a general framework 
for social protection?

What is the motive for it to be specifically 
inserted in a women's bill? In a utopian Islamic 
society, women would clearly have as much right 
as men to conduct their affairs freely and not be 
subjected to discrimination. Islam would never 
allow injustice to be done. But under the 
prevailing circumstances, in modern-day Pakistan, 
it would become an instrument for reversing all 
the positive judgments and case law that have 
accumulated over the years from the higher courts 
and the FSC, wiping out all progressive 
interpretations of the law as precedents that are 
so critical to any justice system.

Also, this clause could create a situation where 
the sessions judges would be loath to pass a 
verdict in women's cases unless they were advised 
by a religious scholar as amicus curiae, or 
assistants to the court. In other words, the 
option of awarding tazeer offences to victimised 
women under the Zina Ordinance would have been 
unimaginably magnified. No one would know who is 
the right scholar, from which sect or school of 
religious jurisprudence, and the justice system 
would not only become subject to a mind-boggling 
set of anomalies, it would provide a whole host 
of new opportunities for gender biases to come 
into play in a courtroom.

The third clause proposed by this informal body 
of ulema would also have taken us back to the 
original situation prevailing under the Hudood 
Ordinances. The punishment for rape would be 
available under both the hadd laws, as well as 
tazeer under the Pakistan Penal Code. Criminal 
lawyers agree that on appeal, the retraction of 
the confession alone would stop the court from 
imposing hadd. Nobody knows where this case would 
go, and if it would entail a re-trial. In the 
worst case scenario, the rapist could find 
shelter outside tazeer in the hadd law, and tire 
out the complainant, who would then not be able 
to use the protection provided to her in the PPC 
as a rape victim.

What has got lost in the political hype is a 
fundamental point. Such crimes occur because the 
rapist knows he has impunity under these laws, 
and he is usually more empowered than the woman 
he is subjecting to his violence. For 27 years 
the campaign against the Hudood Ordinances in 
Pakistan may have been fought by the progressive 
PPP, because it resisted all reactionary laws 
imposed on the country by a dictator, but outside 
the political mainstream these laws were also 
contested hotly by women's groups both in the 
tear-gassed streets of urban Pakistan as well as 
their offices.

For many commentaries to denigrate both this 
political and civil society struggle as a western 
or elitist formulation is unjust. The reality is 
that these laws have never hurt or criminalised 
women with resources or those with access to 
expensive defence attorneys. They only target the 
level of victimised women who get paraded naked 
in the streets of rural Pakistan, or women whose 
former husbands or assailants have a feudal 
mindset, leaving the assailant comfortable in the 
knowledge that his victim will probably be 
forsaken by her community for even naming her 
rapist, let alone mentioning the crime.

These laws victimise women in a social system 
where even saying the word rape implies a level 
of complicity in her own actions. The world 
witnesses this accusation of female complicity in 
even western societies. So what chance does a 
blind Safia Bibi have when a man attacks her, and 
the law in Pakistan accuses her automatically of 
zina just because she is pregnant after her 
ordeal?

It is the responsibility of all parliamentarians 
to study these laws and support any positive 
change that brings relief to women. To cynics who 
say that the PPP allowed the regime to split the 
Opposition by supporting the regime's proposed 
bill, the answer is then by that logic, when the 
ulema brought in heavy amendments, should the PPP 
have looked the other way and not opposed those 
laws? If that opposition had not been vocal and 
strong, the regime may well have buckled under 
neo-Islamist pressure and allowed those 
anti-women amendments to go through.

The message of this whole sorry saga is that the 
regime has caved in even with a parliamentary 
majority and allowed the national agenda to be 
dictated by forces that could take Pakistan back 
into the Dark Ages. The other message the regime 
gave by succumbing to its own internal dissent is 
that it cannot effect change on any real issues. 
This constitutes a serious lack of confidence in 
its abilities to govern. It also put the seal on 
the pointlessness of this Parliament, or the 
value of standing up for one's beliefs. If no 
change comes about in the near future, then no 
one should be charged with cynicism if they see 
the women's bill as a ploy to divide the 
Opposition, or a ticket for Musharraf's warmer 
reception to the White House. In either case, the 
regime stands more divided than the Opposition 
and also exposed, naked and shivering in front of 
the world for what it is: a military dictatorship 
that has played out all its cards.

Sherry Rehman is a member of Pakistan's National Assembly


_____


[2] 


Nepali Times
No. 317
29 September 06 - 05 October 06

Section: From the Nepali Press

SECULAR DASAIN
Editorial in Haank, 27 September [2006]

Nepal is a multi-religious, multi-lingual, 
multi-cultural, and multi-ethnic country. 
Parliament proclaimed Nepal a secular state 
[earlier this year], while the 1990 constitution 
had defined Nepal as a Hindu country.

There are more tribal and indigenous communities 
in Nepal than Hindus, and they have their own 
distinct languages, religions, and cultures. 
Besides them, Nepal also has Muslims and 
Buddhists. The tribal and indigenous communities 
who form the majority of the population are 
non-Hindus.

But Prithbi Narayan Shah wanted to create a 'true 
Hindu land' in Nepal and started converting the 
indigenous peoples to Hinduism by expanding the 
borders of Gorkha. The Shah dynasty forced 
indigenous communities to accept Brahmanistic 
Hinduism, backed with the slogan of 'one 
language, one religion, one people'. Due to 
pressure from the power centre, indigenous 
communities have also been forced to accept Hindu 
culture and norms, and festivals like Dasain are 
national celebrations.

Indigenous communities and leftists have long 
demanded that Nepal be declared a secular state. 
Parliament's proclamation earlier this year 
announcing a secular Nepal has been welcomed by 
political parties, indigenous communities, and 
social welfare organisations. In a secular 
country all religions and cultures are treated 
equally by the state.

Puritans oppose the secularisation of Nepal. The 
biggest loser from secularism is the monarchy, 
which declares itself an incarnation of Vishnu 
and has ruled Nepal for over 200 years with the 
backup of Hindu religion. This is why puritans, 
regressionists, and royalists oppose the 
proclamation. They have even tried to create 
caste wars in the name of religion. However, 
their attempts will prove fruitless in the face 
of people power. After the reinstallation of 
democracy in Nepal it is essential that 
secularism be implemented correctly.

Dasain is now used to promote consumerism and 
force indigenous communities to accept a Hindu 
identity. The festival is a burden to the poor, 
subsistence farmers, and daily wage earners. The 
government should now treat all religions, 
cultures and languages equally

_____


[3]


The Hindu
September 30, 2006

INDIA SHOULD NOT JOIN RACE FOR BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

Sujatha Byravan

New Delhi has the opportunity to step up as the 
global leader it aspires to be by taking a 
practical approach and the moral high road on the 
subject.

AS INDIANS celebrate Mahatma Gandhi's birthday 
this October 2, it is worth interpreting his 
message of peace and non-violence in today's 
context, especially in the area of biological 
weapons.

The Biological Weapons Convention, signed by 147 
countries, including the United States and India, 
went into force in 1975. Regarded as one of the 
major achievements in the history of arms 
control, it is meant to "exclude completely the 
possibility of bacteriological agents and toxins 
being used as weapons" by prohibiting the 
development, production, stockpiling, 
acquisition, and retention of such weapons.

However, in biodefence research, there is little 
difference between research, development, testing 
and evaluation for defensive reasons and for 
developing weapons. This dual use dilemma may be 
addressed by enabling multiparty inspection of 
biodefence research facilities, but in 2001 the 
U.S. Administration derailed efforts to create a 
Protocol for enforcement and verification of 
biological weapons, a decision that upset many 
countries. Following the U.S.' disruption of the 
Protocol, The New York Times published a report 
on secret and highly provocative U.S. biological 
weapons related activities, including the 
construction of an anthrax production plant in 
Nevada, the genetic engineering of anthrax for 
which there is no protection from existing 
vaccines, and the manufacture of biological 
submunition (bomblet) prototypes. While the 
experiments were described as defensive, a number 
of experts in biological weapons control, as well 
as former government officials, believe that such 
programmes might violate the Convention and could 
provoke increased biological weapons production 
by other countries unsettled by apparent U.S. 
aggression.

Between 2001 and 2007, according to a recent 
report from the Center for Arms Control and 
Non-Proliferation, the U.S. Government has spent 
$36 billion among 11 different federal 
departments and agencies to address the threat of 
biological weapons. Less than half of this amount 
(41 per cent) is meant for research, development, 
testing, and evaluation. A portion has gone 
towards building at least 20 new high containment 
research facilities across the country. These 
facilities are Biosafety Levels 3 and 4, the two 
highest levels of containment, where increasingly 
dangerous agents are studied and safety and 
security measures are the most stringent. While 
national security is the stated reason for this 
expansion by the U.S., the proliferation of these 
labs greatly increases the likelihood of 
accidental and intentional releases that could 
threaten public safety and security. The 
knowledge of, and access to, resources these 
facilities create can also be misused. In 2001 
there were numerous anthrax mailings suspected to 
have come from a laboratory within the U.S. These 
mailings showed that biodefence laboratories 
could become a source of home-grown terrorism.

The increase in spending in biological weapons 
research has understandably made other countries 
nervous and there are reports of the possibility 
of increased spending by India and China in this 
area. While some biotech companies, India's 
pharmaceutical industry, and other scientists in 
India might salivate at the prospect of 
capitalising on such research, participating in a 
biological weapons arms race and justifying this 
as "threat assessment" and "defensive measures" 
certainly does not make India safer.

The current situation provides India the 
opportunity to step up as the global leader we 
aspire to be by taking a practical approach and 
the moral high road on this matter.

One option is for India to request a formal 
investigation through the U.N. if we believe that 
another country has violated the Convention. 
Further, emphasising that a verification strategy 
is the only way for everyone to be secure from 
such weapons, India should raise its concerns at 
the international level and further address this 
global challenge by calling upon the Bush 
administration and other countries to comply 
with, and to agree on, a protocol for 
international verification. Participating in a 
global race for biological weapons is not the 
answer if we want the country and the world to 
indeed be safe from biological and chemical 
weapons in the medium term and in the long run.

Somehow, I don't think the Mahatma would support this arms race either.

(The writer is President, Council for Responsible 
Genetics, Cambridge, Massachusetts.)

_____


[4]


Kashmir Times
September 29, 2006

Editorial

Retrace suicidal step
Afzal Guroo's hanging will be counter-productive

The black warrant issued by a Delhi court for 
hanging of Afzal Guroo In Tihar jail on October 
20 has naturally hurt the Kashmiri psyche with 
spontaneous protests rocking the Valley for the 
last three days. The announcement has not only 
caused widespread anger in the troubled Valley 
but has also contributed in bringing the peace 
process in reverse gear. S.A.S Geelani, who was 
falsely implicated in the Parliament attack case 
articulated the feelings of an average Kashmiri 
when he accused New Delhi of "going ahead with 
the hanging of another innocent Kashmiri". 
Whether Guroo was innocent or not is not very 
material. What makes the decision to hang him at 
this juncture is indeed most unfortunate. In no 
case it is in tune with the ongoing peace 
offensive and is bound to heighten the tension 
instead of bringing peace and a conducive climate 
for pursuing the dialogue process. The 
announcement has only added fuel to the fire. 
Apart from the announcement it is the timing of 
the hanging of Guroo, which comes not only during 
the holy month of Ramzan but also on the 
auspicious day of the last Friday of the holy 
month, that has been the cause of provocation. 
Paradoxically, when the common people were 
looking for ceasefire during the month they 
received the shocking news of the hanging of one 
of their compatriots. Not only the very judgement 
and capital punishment awarded to the accused in 
the Parliament case have been questioned what 
makes it more unfortunate is its very timing and 
the manner in which it is being done. Instead of 
healing the wounds and providing a healing touch 
to the hurt Kashmiri psyche the announcement has 
caused further wounds with the entire Valley on 
the verge of a massive explosion of anger.
Around four hundred years ago Shakespeare spoke 
through Portia, in his famous drama, The Merchant 
of Venice, that it is "twice blessed when mercy 
seasons justice". One is naturally reminded of 
this Shakespearean saying when the judicial 
verdict is pronounced in the case of Mohammed 
Afzal. A death sentence, as Gandhiji wrote to the 
Viceroy, Lord Irwin on the eve of Bhagat Singh's 
hanging, is not an irrevocable punishment. 
Without going into the fairness of the judicial 
pronouncement convicting the accused, one will 
question the decision -- if it is so decided -- 
to implement the judicial decision. What larger 
political and social good will his hanging result 
in? A few have been already killed and one more 
may be killed on the 20th. Then, what? Many, in 
the past, have been so killed in lawful 
reprisals, but have these succeeded is bringing 
down the number of those killed annually? 
Besides, how can one ignore the political 
backdrop against which this hanging may be 
carried out. Government of India is in the midst 
of talks with Pakistan and Kashmiri separatists 
for a satisfactory settlement of the dispute. It 
will, indeed, be a great day for both Kashmir and 
the rest of the region when the Kashmir dispute 
is settled and real peace dawns in the valley. 
Will this hanging accelerate or retard the 
on-going peace process? Both the separatist 
leaders and the agitations in the valley against 
this judicial sentence make it amply clear that 
the hanging will have a disastrous effect on the 
peace process. Then, why go ahead with it, 
mainly, to demonstrate Indian machismo? Over two 
decade ago New Delhi carried out a similar 
punishment in the case of Maqbul Bhat. What was 
the result? India behaved as if they had killed a 
murderer, but the Kashmiris received a martyr. By 
hanging Afzal India shall be only handing over to 
them another inspiring martyr, virtually, on a 
silver platter. Is it what it wants? New Delhi is 
imploring the Pak government to have mercy on 
Sarabjit Singh, in the interest of Indo-Pak peace 
and Musharraf has wisely reserved his power of 
pardon, so far. Then, why should India 
demonstrate its efficiency and determination by 
going ahead with another killing.
Let New Delhi pause and think over the social and 
political consequences of the step that the 
judiciary has allowed it to take. None has forced 
the ultimate authority to go according to the 
dotted lines. This indeed, is the time when the 
President can and should exercise his own 
judgement and decide in the best interest of the 
country. In January 1946 the trial court at Red 
Fort sentenced the three I.N.A. heroes, Shanawaz, 
Saigal and Dhillon to death. Seeing the mood of 
the nation and of the Indian army Gen. Auchinlek 
recommended mercy for them and within a couple of 
days the King pardoned all the three and released 
them into full freedom. It is for such use that 
the head of almost every state is equipped with 
the power of pardon and we believe that this is 
an occasion when it should be used. The state 
Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad has also 
reportedly asked the President to accept the 
mercy petition of Guroo's family. PDP and CPI-M 
too have urged for a review saying that Afzal's 
hanging it will only add to the people's 
alienation. Even the opposition National 
Conference has urged New Delhi to review the 
decision to hang Guroo. In a statement Omar 
Abdullah pointed out that many people have been 
killed or hanged "but the Kashmir issue has 
remained unresolved so far". He said that the 
situation in the Valley has determinated with 
every death and the steps of making peace process 
would turn out to be futile in such a situation. 
New Delhi must take note of the popular 
sentiments in Kashmir and listen to the voice of 
reason.


o o o

Kashmir Times
September 30, 2006

FROM RAMZAN GOOD-WILL TO BELLIGERENCE
by Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal

For the last several weeks, there was a feeling 
that this Ramazan may prove to be a turning point 
in the Kashmir conflict. Three days after the 
fasting month began, there were no doubts about 
this prediction. The only difference is that 
prior to the beginning of Ramazan, it was 
optimism and a positive change that one was 
expecting. A Delhi high court, in the Delhi 
parliament attack case, has decided that the 
prime accused Afzal Guroo be hanged to death on 
October 20. The verdict throws up an unexpected 
situation that is not just shocking but 
outrageously dangerous, mostly for the simple 
reason that it transforms a purely optimistic 
atmosphere, that could have paved way for 
friendship and flexibility, into one of absolute 
despair, where everything is closing down to this 
new found rigidity.
An indication is the massive protests in the 
Valley and renewal of violence in a month that 
was expected to scale down the level of violence. 
The spontaneous protests reflect the anger, shock 
and frustration. The reasons are not only the 
execution, which itself is unjustified, whatever 
the nature of accusations against Afzal. While 
capital punishment itself is something that 
cannot be justified, it is strange that a country 
that pleads the case of Sarbajeet Singh in 
Pakistan would take pleasures in sending Afzal to 
gallows. Whether one sees the case in the light 
of 'one man's terrorist being another man's 
freedom fighter' or outside it, there can be no 
means to justify the death penalty since evidence 
does not point to Afzal's direct involvementÿin 
the parliament attack case itself.
But more important is the timing of announcing 
the date of execution. The execution verdict was 
already clear some months back. It is the 
fixation of date of sending Afzal to gallows that 
raises eye-brows. The announcement comes at a 
time when Kashmiris had been eagerly waiting for 
the much speculated cease-fire. After months of a 
disillusioning peace offensive that had begun to 
break the optimism of the people in a dialogue 
which never really took off and confidence 
building measures, which never saw the light of 
the day but for the rolling of buses between 
Muzaffarabad and Srinagar, an atmosphere of high 
hopes was once again being built up. Obviously 
the last few months of a peace offensive between 
India and Pakistan failed to bring any kind of 
official response on the major demands like 
demilitarization, withdrawal of troops, release 
of prisoners and repeal of Armed Forces Special 
Powers Act that legitimises violence in the 
state. Yet, despite all the inaction, growing 
disillusionment and alienation of the people, 
reports of a probable announcement of ceasefire 
during this holy month of Ramazan had once again 
inspired hope. Though there was no commitment 
from the official side, barring chief minister 
Ghulam Nabi Azad's sole hint dropped a fortnight 
ago, story after another, quoting official 
sources had begun to appear in the print media. 
This was first met by the kind of skepticism that 
should naturally come as part of a process of 
disillusionment to the so-called peace offensive. 
But gradually it began to renew hopes, a sign 
that was doubly positive, not because it 
reflected the people's faith in a peace process 
but also because ceasefire, of not any kind of 
withdrawal of troops, was a long desired 
component of confidence building measures. What 
strengthened the faith was also the flexibility 
of the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen coinciding with these 
reports about Ramazan ceasefire and HM's reported 
decision to consider any offer of ceasefire, if 
made by New Delhi. It manifested that back 
channel diplomacy had been at work for sometime 
on the issue, thus inspiring hope and optimism 
once again, and breathing back some life into the 
peace offensive.
However, on the third day of the holy month of 
fasting, the anxious wait for the moment was over 
with the court decision on announcing Afzal's 
hanging on October 20, which incidentally does 
not only happen to fall during this month of 
Ramazan but specifically on Jumait-ul-Vida (last 
Friday before Eid), considered one of the most 
auspicious days during this fasting period. The 
date invokes not just surprise but shock, rather 
horror. Neither the Indian state, nor the 
judiciary could have been so naÐve as not to 
understand the dynamics of the importance of 
religious sentiments, which if added to 
sentiments of an already hurt pride and dignity 
can simply spell disaster. Besides, they are a 
horrendous example of the double standards of 
play, of balancing out a ceasefire attack with a 
death verdict. What is the message being sent to 
the Kashmiris? Not simply one of belligerence and 
rigidity.
One needs to understand this new development in 
the backdrop of dynamics of a wounded psyche and 
an atmosphere of skepticism. The peace offensive 
between India and Pakistan that started over two 
years ago renewed hopes of the people in Kashmir 
but ever since with not much systematic effort 
having been made on the ground, the stray moves 
coupled with beautiful sounding rhetoric has 
turned out to be the case of one step forward, 
two steps back, with any gesture or even words of 
benevolence being followed by unprecedented 
rigidity. Every time this happens, the level of 
skepticism increases and this particular incident 
has shot it up once again. This is particularly 
dangerous in Kashmir scenario where any bout of 
disillusionment and skepticism is gradually not 
just becoming irreversible but also matched by an 
equally potent process of radicalization, also in 
keeping with a globalised process. When India's 
belligerence matches the global belligerence, the 
shift of the once secular Sufi Kashmir to the 
other side is but natural.
This process is dangerously, gradually becoming 
irreversible and the perils thereof, need to be 
taken into account fully for a more sincere 
approach to the Kashmir case. Still, everything 
is not lost; Guroo is likely to file for a mercy 
petition. While this can be accepted and his 
sentence commuted to something less severe, the 
government can also begin spelling out the 
ceasefire that it has so successfully hyped 
through the media. These steps for starters, 
alone can undo the harms and dangers of the 
suicidal blunder that New Delhi seems to have 
embarked on vis-a-vis Kashmir.

_____


[5]


CHAVEZ, SAINT GEORGE AND SILENCE

by Mukul Dube

[To appear in *Mainstream*, 7 October 2006]

After he had made his recent Bush-bashing speech 
at the UN, Hugo Chavez got a thunderous 8-minute 
ovation: but, as might have been expected, the 
news channels blanked that. Civil,respectful and 
trembling corporations understandably could not 
countenance Chavez' associating of George W. 
Bush, Jr., with Lucifer. Has Bush Himself not 
confessed modestly to having been sent down to 
Earth by god himself to serve as his right and 
left hands and feet and, for all I know, as both 
his forked tails too? Lese majeste is bad enough, 
but lese divinite is going altogether too far. 
George of England is a saint whose time is past: 
today we have Saint George of the Whole Wide 
World.

Some have said that Chavez was grandstanding. 
Others have called his performance that of a 
buffoon. I do not know what else they could have 
said, given that the man had pulled from beneath 
their feet the ground on which they stood and 
lopped off those feet to boot. If only there had 
been a way of locking up this Venezuelan heretic 
in his aircraft along with his physician and his 
security people, later purifying the tarmac with 
a mixture of Holy Water (India would happily have 
sent gangajal) and Coca Cola...

The important thing is that the leader of a 
nation, a person who could make himself heard at 
the conclave of nations, spoke up against Bush 
and his Empire, knowing that nothing could stop 
at least part of the world from hearing what he 
had to say. It is just as certain that he would 
have known also that the Empire can and possibly 
will strike back. Truth and courage have always 
gone hand in hand.
The important thing is that, of the many across 
the globe who think in much the same way as 
Chavez does, he was the first to break the 
ghastly silence in an effective manner.

There could have been a parallel in our own Hon. 
Prime Minister's presence at the meeting of 
non-aligned nations.
The leader of a large country which has nuclear 
weapons and which, historically and at least 
nominally, was non-aligned, might legitimately 
have been expected to raise his voice against the 
global bully. Dr. Manmohan Singh did no such 
thing, of course, and the possible parallel fell 
on its face. If non-alignment has to have any 
meaning at all, the only meaning it can have is 
that the leader of India is not aligned with 
India.  I shall not repeat what so many have said 
about India's alignment with the U.S. Great India 
was silent but tiny Venezuela roared. Goliath has 
been confronted by his David, and Chavez' voice 
is certain to reverberate, to be echoed by other 
voices. This will not happen soon, and it will 
make no material difference for a long while; but 
in the end, hubris must meet its fate. Every 
important event in history has begun with voices, 
and only fools pay no attention to what those 
voices say. The biggest have usually been the 
biggest fools as well.
Let us not forget Viet Nam. What happened to the 
hundreds of billions of dollars which successive 
U.S. administrations lavished on that bloody, and 
bloody idiotic, spectacle? Was the war won by the 
most advanced weaponry on the planet? No, it was 
not. Bamboo won that war. Bamboo and morality in 
the form of the truth. Who became the laughing 
stock of the world?

Over the years, much noise has been made about 
"the death of the godless communist system" and 
the inherent superiority of "democratic," 
god-fearing, etc., capitalism. Today's capitalism 
is much different from that of the middle of the 
19th century, but it has reached this stage 
through a logical historical process which Marx 
had explicated then.
However, Marx could not have visualised the world 
order which accompanies today's capitalism and 
keeps it afloat.  Specifically, it keeps some 
countries afloat; and it keeps some in all 
countries riding the high waves - but only some. 
Specifically, it features a country which 
believes itself to be omnipotent and which, when 
others do not drown of their accord, pushes them 
in. Only its lap dogs are spared and are given 
juicy bones to gnaw.

What this capitalism has given to the world are 
glaring disparities of income between and within 
countries, the US being no exception in either 
way. Here is one example of the result. In India 
and most other poor countries, with the State 
having abdicated its responsibility and drugs 
companies out to make a killing, like all 
companies, billions are without essential medical 
care and essential drugs (and without that most 
essential of all essentials, clean drinking 
water). Even the middle class is terrified of 
falling ill, so expensive are the implications.

Another example. The media - specially 
television, watched by all - are busily promoting 
all manner of luxuries. There are billions who 
know that they cannot afford the fine things 
dangled before them, and they keep their peace: 
but the young are so drawn to them that they are 
prepared to do literally anything to attain the 
"life style" that is idealised.  Thus we have 
impatient young men and women throwing all 
civilised values to the winds and growing 
increasingly distant from morality, howsoever 
that may be defined.
No tyranny can survive for long. The people can 
take a great deal of exploitation and they can 
bear many lashes: but the point always comes when 
they say, Enough Is Enough. Sooner or later, that 
point will come. This, as we know, is something 
that Marx had said.
Again, I take heart from the example of Viet Nam. 
Again, I think of the fate of hubris.
__________

[The writer is an atheist and thinks he knows why.]


_____


[6] 

SAHELI DOCUMENTS 25 YEARS HISTORY

Dear friend,

Saheli has published a document encapsulating its 25-year history:
Twenty-five years of continuity and change. Of 
hope, action, protest, song, togetherness, 
laughter, tears, dance, strength and feminist 
struggle. Through the work of Saheli since 1981, 
the document provides an insightful perspective 
of some of the major campaigns of the autonomous 
women’s movement: the campaign against violence; 
resisting coercive population control and 
hazardous contraceptives; combating communalism. 
The flavour of the politics of organising in a 
non-funded collective, with all its ups and downs 
is encapsulated through quotations, interviews, 
conversations and incisive analysis. Through 
notations from the organisational "daily diary", 
minutes books, correspondence, priceless 
photographs, posters and pamphlets in an 
attractive easy-to-read layout, the book is of 
immense interest to activists, students of 
women’s studies and anyone interested in the 
history of the women’s movement in India.

Pages: 116
Size: A4 , Paperback
Colour: Purple, Red, Black and White
Language: English
Contribution: Rs. 100 per copy [US$ 10 for out of India]
Postage: Rs. 50 per copy within India and on actual charges for outside India
Payments: Please make DD’s or cheques in favour 
of "Saheli Women's Resource Centre". Please add 
Rs. 25 for out-station cheque payments.

Discounts available for bulk orders (depending on the number).

Please place orders through 
saheliwomen at hotmail.com or by post. Also, please 
feel free to forward/share this information with 
anyone who you think may be interested.

In solidarity,
All of us at Saheli

Saheli Women's Resource Centre
Above Shop Nos. 105-108
Under Defence Colony Flyover Market (South Side)
New Delhi 110 024
Phone: +91 (011) 2461 6485
E-mail: saheliwomen at hotmail.com



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

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.



More information about the Sacw mailing list