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
womens 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
womens studies and anyone interested in the
history of the womens 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 DDs 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