SACW | Feb 20, 2007 | 5 years after Godhra, fire bombing of Samjhauta express raises many questions

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire  | February 20, 2007 | Dispatch No. 2362 - Year 9


[1]  Fire Bombing of Samjhauta Express: Reactions from Citizen Groups & Media
   - Statement by India Chapter of Pakistan India Peoples Forum
   - Terror Attack on Samjhauta Express Press Release by Concerned Citizens
   - Keep the peace process on track (Siddharth Varadarajan)
   - Editorial , The Telegraph
   - Peace and the burning train (Edit., The Hindu)
   -  Samjhota explosion (Edit., The News International)
   - Blast on Samjhauta - Put the joint mechanism 
to work (Editorial, Economic Times)
   - Helpline numbers for Samjhauta Express
[2]  Refuse to sit by and let the mass crimes go unpunished (Teesta Setalvad)
[3]  Public Hearing: Mothers, wives, sisters of 
the Disappeared from Kashmir Depose before the 
People (New Delhi, 22 February 2007)
[4]  India: Using hate as a weapon to gain power (Vidya Bhushan Rawat)
[5]  Book Review: Benchmarking Identities (Pratap Bhanu Mehta)

____


[1]  FIRE BOMBING OF THE SAMJHAUTA EXPRESS: FEBRUARY 2007
REACTIONS FROM CITIZENS GROUPS AND THE MEDIA

[Some five years after the train fire at Godhra 
that a sparked anti - muslim pogrom by Hindutva 
extremists, the fire bombing of the samjhauta 
express (the only train to ply between India and 
Pakistan) raises many questions as who was 
involved. Could it be Hindutva fundamentalists or 
their counterparts  who want to stall the 
official peace process between India and 
Pakistan. ]

A.      REACTIONS BY CITIZENS GROUPS

(i)

20 Feb 2007

PAKISTAN-INDIAN PEOPLES' FORUM FOR PEACE AND 
DEMOCRACY CONDEMNS THE FIRE BOMBING OF SAMJHAUTA 
EXPRESS

Pakistan-India Peoples' Forum for Peace and 
Democracy (PIPFPD)strongly condemns the vicious 
terrorist bombing of the Delhi-Lahore Samjhauta 
Express in which 67 people were killed and more 
than 50 injured. Indians and Pakistanis are 
united in their deep grief at this heinous crime 
that cannot be justified by any cause and we 
express our deep condolences to the families of 
the innocent victims of this act of terror.

The train symbolizes the deep desire of the 
peoples of India and Pakistan to have good 
neighbourly relations and it has served as a 
crucial lifeline to maintain people to people 
contacts across the border. The terror attack on 
the train and its timings indicates that its 
purpose was to derail the peace process and to 
undermine people to people contacts, which has 
been a significant component of the process of 
building peace between the two countries. PIPFPD 
urges that this tragic incident should not be 
allowed to disrupt the process of normalizing 
relations as had happened last July. In this 
context, PIPFPD is deeply appreciative of the 
efforts of the governments of India and Pakistan 
to continue with the peace process, and welcomes 
the move to continue without interruption the 
train service and other cross border links. Let 
this become an opportunity to affirm the urgency 
of normalising relations in recognition of the 
people of India and Pakistan's commitment to 
peace and friendship.   

Tapan Kumar Bose
General Secretary

o o o

Press Release

February 19, 2007

TERROR ATTACK ON SAMJHAUTA EXPRESS

As citizens of India committed strongly committed 
to peaceful and fruitful relations between India 
and Pakistan as also unequivocally to lasting 
justice and peace between all communities within 
India, our heart goes out to all the victims of 
the recent terror attack on board the Samjhauta 
Express. The attack reveals above all, that 
terror and terrorism has no religion and victims 
of all communities, Muslim and Hindu, rich and 
poor can easily become the victims of such an 
attack. We offer our deepest condolences to all 
the affected families in this moment of grief.

We unequivocally condemn this attack that is an 
attempt not only to de-rail peace talks but also 
to create schisms and rifts between communities. 
We thank the political leadership of both 
countries for using sombre and sensitive language 
at such a time and urge them -- specifically the 
intelligence and investigative authorities of 
India -- to go further and rigorously investigate 
and get to the bottom of such an attack.

Outfits of terror have no religion and should 
never be equated as such. The language and acts 
of terror can be perpetrated by fanatic outfits 
within any and all social, political and 
religious sections. Similarly victims of terror 
as today's brutal incident shows, can hail and do 
hail from all sections. Terror and terrorism can 
be home grown as well as imported; both equally 
are not just anti-national, they strike at the 
fabric of our nation because they create schisms 
between communities.

Vijay Tendulkar, President CJP
Dr Prabhat Patnaik, noted economist
Teesta Setalvad, Secretary, CJP and co-editor Communalism Combat
Arvind Krishnaswamy, Treasurer, CJP,
Javed Akhtar, CJP and Muslims for Secular Democracy (MSD),          
CP Chandraskehar, economist, JNU,
Javed Anand, CJP and MSD,           
Nandan Maluste, CJP,
Anil Dharker, CJP,
Rajendra Prasad, SAHMAT
Ram Rehman, SAHMAT,
MK Raina, SAHMAT,
Hasan Kamal, MSD,                         
Rahul Bose, CJP

___


B.   SELECTED COMMENTARY AND EDITORIALS IN THE INDIAN AND PAKISTANI PRESS:

(i)

The Hindu
Feb 20, 2007

KEEP THE PEACE PROCESS ON TRACK

by Siddharth Varadarajan

For the third time in less than a year, 
terrorists have attempted to derail the peace 
process between India and Pakistan. Handing them 
a victory is the last thing we should do.

IN TERMS of the choice of both target and timing, 
it is not difficult to surmise that Sunday 
night's bomb blast on board the link train of the 
Samjhauta Express was aimed primarily at stopping 
the peace process between India and Pakistan.

As the indigent, divided families who travel on 
it every week know so well, the time the train 
takes to run from Delhi to Lahore can hardly be 
justified by the laws of locomotion or the 
dictates of cartography. And yet, that journey is 
a symbol of the civilised neighbourliness 
ordinary Indians and Pakistanis so desperately 
yearn for, a hint of what the future might bring 
if only the understanding and compromise its name 
connotes were allowed to run to its final 
destination.

The terrorists who bombed the train are clearly 
not interested in that final destination. By 
murdering at least 67 passengers on the eve of a 
visit to India by Khurshid Ahmed Kasuri, the 
Foreign Minister of Pakistan, their intention is 
to provoke another bout of tension and 
finger-pointing between Islamabad and New Delhi. 
At the very least, their aim is to make the 
process of travel between the two countries so 
fraught with danger that few will want to take on 
the risk and inconvenience of the journey by 
train, bus or even plane.

In the wake of the coordinated bombing of several 
commuter trains in Mumbai on July 7, 2006, the 
terrorists were temporarily able to seize the 
initiative but that mistake must not be repeated 
again. Then, India postponed a scheduled meeting 
of Foreign Secretaries and within days the 
atmospherics began to degenerate. Policemen in 
Mumbai and Delhi spoke loosely about the "pretty 
good evidence" they had of the Pakistani 
establishment's involvement and it seemed as if 
the peace process was going into free-fall. In 
the end, however, the evidence turned out to be 
less than clinching. The realisation also dawned 
that dialogue and people-to-people contact help 
rather than hurt the country's interests.

After some deft pre-negotiation involving the 
creation of a joint anti-terror mechanism, India 
finally felt comfortable talking to Pakistan 
again.

Though India was right to criticise Pakistan for 
the latter's failure to act against terrorist 
organisations and training facilities on its 
territory, it erred in linking the future of the 
peace process to an incident for which 
Islamabad's complicity could only be inferred but 
not established. Indeed, nearly seven months 
after the blasts, evidence of Pakistan's official 
complicity continues to elude Indian 
investigators. Unfortunately, this failure to 
follow through with the specific allegation will 
no doubt be used by Pakistan to question the 
validity of India's general case that terrorist 
groups continue to operate from its territory.

Fundamental question

At the heart of the Indian policy dilemma lies a 
fundamental question: is the government of Pervez 
Musharraf involved in the instigation, planning 
or execution of terrorist acts such as the blasts 
in Mumbai and Malegaon and on the Samjhauta 
Express? There is no doubt the Pakistani 
establishment has the capability to mount these 
kinds of covert operations but it is not clear 
what its motive would be, or what it would stand 
to gain from a termination of the peace process 
because there can no longer be any doubt over 
what the underlying logic of these blasts is.

But if the answer to the question of General 
Musharraf's involvement is `No', then does this 
mean there are terrorist groups on the soil of 
Pakistan that are able to operate independently 
of, and in opposition to, the Pakistani state? It 
is obvious that this is so. The numerous bombings 
that have taken place inside Pakistan such as in 
Karachi last year on the birthday of Prophet 
Muhammad, the suicide attacks on Pakistani 
soldiers, and the attempts that have been made on 
General Musharraf's own life all suggest such 
"independent" terrorist groups not only exist but 
are flourishing.

What is not clear, however, is the extent of 
connectivity between Pakistan's "independent" and 
"dependent" terrorist outfits such as the 
Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad.

Islamabad and Washington may like to pretend a 
Chinese Wall separates the two; in reality, there 
is mixing and osmosis of men and materiel. That 
is why the Pakistani establishment is at once 
both a sponsor and a victim of terrorism.

Three years after promising to act, the Pakistani 
government remains indifferent to the existence 
of terrorist groups on its territory. Prominent 
individuals such as Masood Azhar go in and out of 
house arrest but the activities of their 
organisations continue more or less unchecked.

At the same time, the overall scale of 
cross-border violence and infiltration in Jammu 
and Kashmir has fallen, though the scale and 
audacity of terrorist strikes elsewhere in India 
has gone up.

In assessing its general policy to Pakistan, 
India knows there is no viable military option or 
compellance strategy to deal with this problem. 
The massive military mobilisation during 
Operation Parakram proved conclusively that India 
has no option other than diplomacy in dealing 
with Pakistan.

This does not mean ending terrorism should not be 
the top-most priority for India. The Government 
should continue to insist that Pakistan fulfil 
its January 2004 commitment of not allowing its 
territory to be used for terrorism directed 
against India. Shutting down existing and new 
groups as and when they come up and arresting 
their leaderships is a verifiable demand that 
India should make. And for evidence of 
compliance, it need rely merely on the ample 
reports that the Pakistani press itself publishes 
from time to time, rather than on 
"narco-analysis" and "brain mapping" of terrorist 
suspects on this side.

Before using the continuation of the peace 
process as a lever to try and stop terror again, 
however, India needs to ask whether the peace 
process has in any way compromised its national 
security.

Today, many more visas are being issued to 
Pakistanis than in 2004. Trade is up, both direct 
and indirect. New transportation routes have 
opened up in Kashmir, Punjab and Rajasthan. 
Business delegations visit each other far more 
frequently. If any of this has led to national 
security being compromised on the margins - for 
example, some 30-odd Pakistanis who applied for 
visas to watch cricket two years ago have yet to 
return home - surely our agencies can devise a 
better system of address verification, 
information-sharing, and so on so as to minimise 
the risks involved in encouraging closer 
people-to-people contact and travel. In the long 
run, greater travel, tourism, and trade will 
enlarge the constituency of people inside 
Pakistan who support the normalisation of 
relations with India. This, in turn, could 
eventually alter the political dynamics within 
Pakistan.

It is also largely thanks to the ongoing peace 
process that India and Pakistan have established 
a common vocabulary on Kashmir, something that 
would have been unthinkable a few years ago. 
Today, both sides agree that the solution lies in 
transcending the Line of Control dividing Jammu 
and Kashmir. This shift in thinking can hardly 
have endeared General Musharraf to the extremists 
who regard Kashmir's territory as their own 
sacred battleground.

It is precisely the prospect of a peaceful 
solution that has got the authors of the 
Samjhauta Express and Mumbai train blasts so 
worked up. Rather than allowing terrorists to 
dictate the pace and content of the peace 
process, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and 
President Musharraf must insist on keeping the 
initiative in their own hands. There can be no 
turning back now. The Samjhauta Express martyrs 
must not have died in vain.


  o o o

(ii)

The Telegraph
February 20, 2007

EDITORIAL

For a relationship that so routinely uses buses 
and trains as vehicles of expression, the message 
sent out by bombed train compartments is expected 
to be poignant. The gutted Samjhauta Express is 
supposed to derail the India-Pakistan peace 
process. The threat the attack conveys is no 
different from that which was borne out by the 
carnage that immediately preceded the first 
journey of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus two 
years ago. Any step to normalize relations 
between the two countries is seen by hardliners 
as an attempt by the establishment to soft-pedal 
the Kashmir issue. Bus or train diplomacy thus 
takes the first beating each time the nations are 
close to ending the hiatus in bilateral ties. 
Like the much-hyped bus service, the Samjhauta 
Express in 2004 signalled a rapprochement between 
the feuding neighbours. That the train managed to 
escape the wrath of militants so far, and even to 
expand its network, was perhaps owing to its 
utility to thousands of passengers who found it a 
convenient way to mend broken ties and carry out 
business. Unfortunately, such mundane affairs 
have never been the concern of troublemakers. An 
ominous message had to be sent out before the 
visit of the Pakistan foreign minister, Mr 
Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri, could take the dialogue 
to its next logical step. A success like the 
Samjhauta Express was an obvious target.

There is no reason to suspect that the bomb 
attack will permanently impair Indo-Pakistan 
relations, nor suspend train operations between 
the countries forever. Despite the initial 
hitches, the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus has taken 
off. The bomb attack on the train, too, is 
unlikely to keep determined travellers away for 
long. However, it is the commitment of the two 
governments to carrying on the peace process that 
will decide the severity of the immediate 
repercussions of the bombing. This is the first 
incident in which the majority of victims are of 
Pakistani origin. The fact that the bombs could 
have been planted in an unguarded railway station 
in India itself has also caused much 
consternation in the Pakistani establishment. It 
has accused the Indian administration of a 
security lapse with the same vehemence with which 
India often blames its neighbour in similar 
situations. Yet both the countries should be 
ashamed at this evident failure of their joint 
mechanism to combat terrorism.

o o o


(iii)

The Hindu
Feb 20, 2007

Editorial

PEACE AND THE BURNING TRAIN

The heart-rending scenes of charred bodies and 
twisted metal in two coaches of the 
Pakistan-bound Samjhauta Express are gory 
testimony to yet another major terrorist strike 
in India. The horrifying twin bomb explosions 
when the train was near Panipat in Haryana, 
killing at least 67 people, unite Pakistan and 
India in deep grief. They are a chilling reminder 
that terrorism in this day and age has 
international linkages in more ways than one. The 
identity of those responsible for the carnage is 
not yet known but the object and timing of the 
attack provide strong clues to the motives. 
Started in 1976 following the Shimla accord, the 
Samjhauta (`Understanding') Express has 
symbolised good neighbourliness between India and 
Pakistan. The train, which has run almost 
uninterruptedly for more than three decades - 
suspended only for short periods in the wake of 
Operation Bluestar, the Babri Masjid demolition, 
and the terrorist attack on Parliament - has been 
a lifeline for people-to-people contact between 
the two countries. Millions of people on either 
side of the border, most of them poor folk, have 
used the train to visit relatives and places of 
pilgrimage.

The attack on the train (technically a special 
train from which the passengers are transferred 
at Attari to the India-Pakistan service) has 
taken place a day before Pakistan's Foreign 
Minister Khursheed Kasuri arrives in New Delhi 
for talks on the ongoing peace process. In a bid 
to signal their strength, terrorists sometimes 
choose to time their attacks to coincide with the 
visit of dignitaries. In 2002, Hurriyat leader 
Abdul Ghani Lone was shot dead in Srinagar a day 
ahead of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's 
visit to Kashmir. Two years earlier, 35 Sikhs 
were massacred in Chattisinghpora in Kashmir on 
the eve of President Bill Clinton's visit to 
India. It is more than likely that those who 
perceive the India-Pakistan peace process as a 
threat to their survival have perpetrated the 
Samjhauta Express carnage. The attack may revive 
memories of the Mumbai train blasts last year, 
but there is an important difference. The 
Samjhauta Express is a highly protected train and 
the attack on it raises serious questions about 
gaps in railway security. How did the incendiary 
material used to set the coaches ablaze get past 
the security checks at Old Delhi railway station? 
The decision to allow the unaffected coaches to 
resume their journey to Attari on the Indian side 
of the border must be commended. Terrorists aim 
at disrupting normal life. The best way to honour 
the victims of terrorism is to ensure that life 
goes on in the midst of heart-rending grief. And 
the best way to defeat terrorist designs is to 
ensure that the peace process remains on track.


o o o

(iv)

The News International
February 20, 2007

Editorial

  SAMJHOTA EXPLOSION

The loss of as many as 65 precious lives on the 
Samjhota Express linking Pakistan and India is 
tragic and must be the work of the elements 
opposed to the ongoing peace process between the 
two countries. It is worth noting that the deadly 
explosion took place a day before Pakistani 
Foreign Minister Khursheed Kasuri's three-day 
trip to India, where according to various 
reports, there may well be a breakthrough 
agreement signed on liberalising the stringent 
visa regime currently existing between the two 
countries. The Samjhota Express was on its way to 
Attari and eventually Lahore from Delhi when, 
according to eyewitnesses, it was rocked by two 
explosions as it was traveling through Panipat 
district in the Indian state of Haryana. At least 
65 people are reported to have been killed and 
the Indian authorities believe that some of these 
may well be Pakistani nationals returning to 
Pakistan after visiting relatives in India. In 
fact, a spokesperson of the Pakistan Foreign 
Office said on Monday morning that "preliminary 
investigations" showed that most of the victims 
were Pakistani.

According to India's railways minister, Laloo 
Prasad Yadav, the blasts were caused by crude 
explosives and struck two coaches of the train. 
Pakistan has rightly condemned the blasts and has 
asked India to conduct a thorough investigation 
into the act of terrorism. One would have to 
unequivocally agree with Mr Yadav's remarks to 
the press that the blasts were "aimed at 
derailing peace talks" between the two countries. 
One hopes that both sides will swiftly and 
publicly express their determination to carry on 
with the peace process. Also, both countries- and 
India particularly- should understand that 
dilly-dallying or perceived lack of progress only 
serves to strengthen the hawks and opponents of 
peace on both sides. As far as motive is 
concerned, the attackers could be from an array 
of opponents to the peace process; from the 
militants in Indian-administered Jammu and 
Kashmir who have opposed the ongoing dialogue and 
taken a hard line on the four-point plan put 
forward by President Pervez Musharraf to the Shiv 
Sena/VHP/Bajrang Dal combine which has time and 
again expressed opposition to the peace talks. 
(Incidentally, the bombing comes almost a week 
before the fifth anniversary of the infamous 
Godhra train incident that ignited the Gujarat 
communal riots of 2002.)

The latter in fact has an explicit agenda of 
ridding India of its Muslims so that their ideal 
of a true (read pure) Hindu nation can be 
realised -- and they make no effort really to 
even hide it. In that context, attacking a train 
carrying Pakistani passengers, and which is a 
symbolic link between the two countries, serves 
many purposes and drives home a message to the 
Indian government that there are some people who 
oppose the peace talks. Of course, these aren't 
the only opponents to peace between the two 
countries. Several statements made in recent 
months by the top Indian military brass -- 
particularly with regard to the settling of the 
Siachen dispute -- have shown that institution to 
be bitterly opposed to peace -- at least for now. 
One hopes that in this case there will at least 
be no finger-pointing by the Indian authorities 
without a thorough investigation into the causes 
of the blasts.


o o o


(v)

Economic Times
February 20, 2007
Editorial

PUT THE JOINT MECHANISM TO WORK

Blast on Samjhauta

The bombing of the Samjhauta Express, which has 
claimed 66 lives and grievously injured scores of 
others, is, without doubt, a cold-blooded attempt 
by purveyors of terror to blow the fragile 
Indo-Pakistan peace process apart.

Given the train is a symbol of dialogue, it's 
particularly vulnerable. Special measures to 
secure the train from the nefarious designs of 
groups, whose political and ideological existence 
is inversely linked to the increasing proximity 
between India and Pakistan, were certainly needed.

It's time the Indian security-intelligence 
establishment insisted passengers taking the 
train go through rigorous security and 
immigration clearances at the Delhi station 
itself. Trans-national trains the world over 
follow such procedures. Most importantly, 
however, it would do well not to give in to its 
anti-Pakistan reflex and point accusatory fingers 
at Islamabad.

The Indian state should ensure that a rigorous 
probe is conducted. All possibilities, even those 
that appear implausible, must be explored. 
Dubious arrests, and forced confessions, which 
usually follow terror attacks, do little to 
enhance the credibility of the Indian state.

Seen as part of a continuum of recent terror 
strikes in Pakistan, the Samjhauta explosion 
indicates that Manmohan Singh was,after all, 
right in asserting that Pakistan, too, is a 
victim of terror.

The train explosion now provides New Delhi the 
opportunity to put its instinctive distrust for 
Islamabad aside and try and make the joint 
anti-terror mechanism truly functional. New Delhi 
should realise that Pervez Musharraf does not 
have complete control over Pakistan-based 
terrorist groups.

Large sections of Pakistani society, which view 
secular modernity with suspicion, are in the 
thrall of political Islam. Communal carnages in 
India, like the 2002 post-Godhra pogrom, together 
with the Indian state's failure to deliver 
substantive justice to victims of communal riots, 
have only legitimised the specious two-nation 
theory that has been its ideological ballast.

New Delhi, even as it continues to engage 
Islamabad vigorously, must deliver on its 
constitutionally-ordained promise of secularism. 
That is important if it is to be seen as a 
trustworthy partner in peace by all of Pakistan.

o o o


HELPLINE NUMBERS FOR SAMJHAUTA EXPRESS

Northern Railway has started the following help line numbers:-

New Delhi Railway Station 1072, 011-23342954, 23341074
Head Quarter 011-23389319, 23389853, 23385106
Hazrat Nizamuddin Station 011-24355954
Ambala Station 1072, 0171-2610329, 2611072
Amritsar Station 0183-2564485, 2223171
Ludhiana 0161-2760006
Jalandhar 0181-2223504
At site 0180-3297823, 6450342


______


[2]

www.sacw.net > Communalism Repository | February 20, 2007

http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ArticlesArchive/teesFeb152007.html

Acceptance Speech, Nani A Palkhivala Civil Liberties Award, 2006

REFUSE TO SIT BY AND LET THE MASS CRIMES GO UNPUNISHED
by Teesta Setalvad

[On January 15, 2007 Teesta Setalvad was honoured 
with the Nani A Palkhivala Civil Liberties Award, 
2006. Here is the full text of her acceptance 
speech.]
Friends,

As I stand here to accept this award given in 
memory of a man who has been described 
alternately as a passionate democrat, a patriot 
and above a good human being I cannot but recall 
how this one man institution associated with us, 
Communalism Combat, in its nascent years. In 
response to one of the darkest moment this great 
metropolis, Mumbai (then Bombay) has lived 
through, December 1992 and January 1993, he sat 
alongside the inimitable and unique, the late Mr 
HM Seervai to speak to the then President of 
India to 'call in the army'. When a subsequent 
government in the state reaped the benefits of 
hate politics and in a stroke of executive 
arrogance scrapped the Justice Srikrishna 
commission of inquiry investigating the mass 
murder and police complicity behind the violence, 
Mr Palkhivala stepped down from Bombay House and 
along with another captain of industry Mr SP 
Godrej joined us in the nationwide protest that 
was one of the citizens actions that eventually 
led to the reinstatement of the commission. That 
was January 30, 1996. A year earlier, two 
judicial decisions one of the Bombay High Court 
and the other by the Supreme Court had shaken the 
common man's faith in the judiciary. Citizens had 
challenged the hate writing in the Saamna, and 
through a writ petition urged for a judicial 
directive to compel the state government to 
prosecute the author of these speeches a man who 
went unchallenged by the law and order machinery 
in this great city, Mr Bal Thackeray. Mr 
Palkhiwala said the future of India was at stake 
if the court did not compel the state to 
intervene and take action against this kind of 
journalism.

Today, in 2007 we see a glittering and glamorous 
India everyday, through the media and parts of 
our large cities ; an India that suggests growth 
and wealth and prosperity yes, but only for a 
section of our population. A third of Indians 
reel under rural hunger where the lack of access 
to nutrients in their diet should be a matter of 
national shame. Narrow and aggressive definitions 
of patriotism coupled with rank unprofessional, 
if not biased conduct in the intelligence 
services and the law and order machinery, have 
'othered' many sections of Indians, reducing them 
to irritants, trouble makers or rank 
anti-nationals.

It is a moment of profound test for all our 
institutions. The paradigms of fair play, equal 
rights to life and ownership of private property, 
make both the shock of farmers being shot dead in 
communist West Bengal and the shame of the mass 
victim survivors of the Gujarat carnage of 2002 a 
living reality. Closer home, in Maharashtra, 
protests following the brutalization and murder 
of a Dalit family in Khairlanji allowed the 
Nagpur police to pull out 55 year old women and 
other protestors from their homes and thrash them 
into silence. In Amravati a rickshaw driver 
protesting was shot point blank in the head by 
the police.

Does the Indian state need to answer, any more, to the largest number?
Does the executive initiate and take decisions of 
economic and social policy after due 
consultation, through the vote, in a democratic 
manner?

Have our Courts shown due and democratic concern 
to issues of economic and social access, equity 
and non-discrimination?
Does our media, television and print reflect news 
at all, leave aside news and views of the 
majority of Indians?
Do institutions of Indian democracy adhere to the 
word and spirit of the Indian Constitution?
Is India a living and breathing democracy?

Be it West Bengal, Gujarat, Maharashtra or Orissa 
lands belonging to voiceless Indians are being 
seized, without adequate debate, transparency or 
Constitutional accountability. 'Globalisation' 
has come here in partnership with vengeful and 
vindictive state terror and repression. State 
force at its most brutal is being used to stifle 
democratic protest and dissent. As I look forward 
to the memorial lecture by an icon of modern 
India, a captain of industry, I urge this 
prestigious audience here to ask some of these 
difficult questions. Of themselves.

Friends, next month is the fifth anniversary of 
the Godhra mass arson and the post Godhra 
genocidal killing. Justices VR Krishna Iyer and 
PB Sawant both retired judges of the Supreme 
Court- who headed a citizens tribunal into the 
Gujarat carnage, have observed that "the post 
Godhra carnage was an organized crime perpetuated 
by the state's chief minister and his government" 
and held Gujarat's CM Modi to be "the chief 
Author and Architect of all that happened in 
Gujarat after the arson of February 27, 2002.". 
The National Human Rights Commission and the 
Supreme Court of India have drawn similar 
conclusions about the head of the state of 
Gujarat.
Today for the same captains of industry who see 
the vision of a glittering India exemplified in 
the 'strong political leadership of Mr Narendra 
Modi'. I refer to the recent investments promises 
to the state. I would like to place this reminder 
on record. All and each of us, especially those 
who hail from Gujarat would like to see Gujarat 
vibrant, and prosper. The community that Mr 
Palkhivala hailed from was first given refuge 
within what is today known as Gujarat when the 
Parsis migrated to India, from Persia. Strength, 
cohesion and prosperity can be built through an 
enlightened administration and polity that 
respects the rights of all, harbours dissent and 
respects the struggle for rights and justice, a 
state of affairs that supports the natural order 
of things.

However, when 'normalization' and strength' are 
equated with a vindictive administration and 
political repression, when brute compromise is 
thrust, when acknowledgement of the horrors of 
mass crime are denied hundreds of thousands of 
victims, when villages, cities and mohallas are 
divided by borders, when the victim survivors and 
human rights defenders who stand up for justice 
are threatened arrest and torture, it is 
repressive strength and state power that we are 
talking about. Civil liberties, the struggle for 
the defence of which I am being honoured here 
today, are severely trampled upon.

Friends, even what actually happened at Godhra 
railway station on February 27, 2002 is hotly 
contested today. There is absolutely no proof of 
the theory perpetuated shrilly by Mr Modi to 
justify state sponsored mass rape, killings and 
murder. As we approach the fifth anniversary of a 
truly bleak period in Indian post-Independence 
history, I request each one of you present here, 
to remember. The struggle of man against power is 
the struggle of memory against forgetting.

As I acknowledge the huge contribution of my 
family to my work, I would like to laud the joint 
vision of my comrade in arms, Javed Anand that 
launched us into this collective battle since 
1993. Colleagues at Sabrang and the board of 
trustees of Citizens for Justice and Peace and 
its myriad supporters (even from captains of 
industry) who have the vision to support the 
dissenting voice, Raisbhai and Suhel, my tribute. 
Top lawyers of the Supreme Court and the High 
Courts, masters in their field, continue to offer 
pro bono services for the causes that we plead.

Our work of a decade and a half has made us 
experience the relentless attempts of the system 
to tire out the protestor, the dissenter, the 
victim. Therefore today's award, I dedicate to 
one man within the Indian system, who stood (and 
still stands) mighty in the face of a murderous 
and vindictive Gujarat administration. Mass 
murder, mass rape and mass arson were allowed in 
Gujarat by a complicit and participatory 
administration and police force. Many police 
officers stood out. But only one man has remained 
a stoic and principled dissenter until today, 
refusing to cave in even as weeks lapsed into 
months and months into years. This man that I 
dedicate today's honour to not a victim, he did 
not loose a dear family member. He does not hail 
from the victim community. His only quality- that 
many but his co-travellers have seen as a fault- 
is that he refused to sit by and let the mass 
crimes planned at the highest level go 
unchallenged. He documented the illegal and 
unconstitutional orders spat out by Mr Modi in a 
meticulously maintained personal diary. He filed 
well-documented affidavits before the ongoing 
Nanavaty-Shah Commission. He suffered for these 
acts by being denied due promotion to the post of 
Director General of Police, Gujarat, the highest 
post in his field that as a policeman and thrice 
Presidential Award winner for bravery, he would 
and should aspire to. He faced attempts to 
browbeat him in and out of the courts. He and his 
wife live socially and politically ostracized in 
a state that captains of industry tell us is 
vibrant and shining due to (quote) 'a strong and 
political leadership favouring rapid growth' ..Mr 
RB Sreekumar, Additional Director General of 
Police, the state of Gujarat, I salute you.


______


[3]

Public Hearing

MOTHERS, WIVES, SISTERS OF THE DISAPPEARED FROM 
KASHMIR DEPOSE BEFORE THE PEOPLE

Jantar Mantar [New Delhi]

February 22, 2007

10am-4pm

PRESS CONFERENCE: 4PM

In the last few weeks investigations by the J & K 
police on the demand of the people of Kashmir 
have established that several innocent Kashmiris 
were kidnapped and murdered by sections of J & K 
police and Indian security forces. The disfigured 
dead bodies of the murdered persons were buried 
as "Pakistani militants killed in encounter". 
Now, it has  been established that the government 
policy of giving financial reward and promotions 
to police and security personnel who produced a 
better kill list of militants/terrorists has 
encouraged these kidnappings and murders. 
Moreover, the fact that Jammu and Kashmir has 
been declared a 'Disturbed Area' and the Armed 
Forces Special Powers Act is in force there (thus 
empowering the personnel of the armed forces "to 
shoot to kill on suspicion") has produced a 
culture of impunity that has further encouraged 
these murders.

Since 1989, an estimated 150,000 Kashmiris have 
been killed in Jammu and Kashmir. An overwhelming 
majority of these people were killed by the 
Indian forces in Kashmir. Since 1990 and the 
imposition of AFSPA, the Indian Armed forces 
intensified the practice of killing of people 
immediately after their arrest. Under various 
operations - "Operation Tiger", "Operation Eagle" 
and "Operation Shiva", the members of the army 
and paramilitary forces cordoned a village or a 
town and extra judiciously shot and killed or 
made 'disappear' unarmed civilians - in the 
name of crack-down operations against the 
"terrorists". As dead "terrorists" could not talk 
back - all the dead were declared "terrorists". 
According to human rights activists and the 
Association of the Parents of the Disappeared 
Persons (APDP) about 5000 to 7000 persons remain 
missing in Kashmir today. Thousands of habeas 
corpus petitions are pending before the J&K Court 
but the Security Forces have declined to respond 
to the Court's summons, leaving Kashmiri citizens 
without the protection of law and justice.

The Indian media has exposed the shocking crimes 
of the security forces in Kashmir but a section 
of the news media has suggested that these are 
"aberrations" committed by a few "bad elements" 
in the police and armed forces. Some columnists 
have warned against the practice of exaggerated 
claims of human rights abuses and disappearances 
by so-called human rights activists. However, the 
cumulative reports of civil and democratic rights 
groups who have been visiting Jammu and Kashmir 
during these years, testify to the widespread 
practice of such killings and disappearances. The 
fact that the state rewards its soldiers 
according the number of 'terrorists' they kill, 
betrays the level of cynicism with which the 
Indian state regards the ordinary people of Jammu 
and Kashmir whom it calls its 'citizens'.

In Jammu and Kashmir, the recent Ganderbal 
killings have galvanized a peoples democratic 
protest and a determination to seek justice and 
an end to this shameful and heinous practice of 
'kill lists' and large scale disappearances. They 
have reached out to civil society groups in the 
rest of India for solidarity and support in the 
campaign for truth and justice. 

Ashok Aggarwal
Kamal Mitra Chenoy
Kamla Bhasin
Nirmala Deshpande
Shabnam Hashmi
Sonia Jabbar
Tapan Bose
Uma Chakravarti
& others

For

Kashmir Solidarity Committee
e-mail: kashmirsolidarity at gmail.com

______


[4] 


www.sacw.net > Communalism Repository | February 12, 2007
http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ArticlesArchive/vbrFeb07.html

USING HATE AS A WEAPON TO GAIN POWER
by Vidya Bhushan Rawat           

BJP's manifesto for Uttarakhand reflects the 
bankruptcy of its ideology. That Sanskrit will be 
the state language and the government would pass 
anti conversion laws shows that BJP has not 
learnt the methods of governance at all. It also 
shows how the saffron party does not talk of 
governance but only hate formula to win an 
election.

Nobody knows it better than the saffron outfit 
how to claim the legacy of an entire movements, 
which has dominated the dreams of a common man in 
Uttarkhand. Neither the BJP nor the Congress 
party ever contested on the plank of a separate 
hill state. Major political leaders of both the 
parties in Uttar-Pradesh came from the powerful 
Brahmin communities of the hills. In fact, Uttar 
Pradesh, due to its geographical and influential 
Brahmin population always remains the hunting 
ground for the 'national' leaders of Uttarakhand. 
The tiny Indian state remained useless for their 
grand Indian vision. But one decision of Mulayam 
Singh government to implement Mandal Commission 
Report in the hills created so much of blood bath 
and later the unfortunate incident of the Rampur 
ka tiraha, that the entire history of the state 
changed.

More than five years of Uttarakhand with two 
different governments, things have not changed in 
the hills. The only thing that is changed is that 
the bureaucracy has increased its head. While the 
Congress party does not have credible face. It 
imposed upon the state a chief minister who might 
have been a heavyweight and so-called father of 
'industrialization' of Uttar-Pradesh, it really 
betrayed the popular sentiments of the hill 
state. Congress never contested the election 
under the leadership of N.D.Tiwari. Similarly, 
when the BJP created Uttaranchal State, clearly 
it betrayed the popular sentiments by changing 
the name of the state. Secondly, it also imposed 
on the state a leader Nityanand Swami who does 
not have any standing in the hills, neither is he 
considered to be a sympathizer of the hill state. 
Finally, buckling under the pressure of the party 
cadres, the high command made Bhagat Singh 
Koshiari, an obedient follower of the Sangh, 
Chief Minister of the state. The things did not 
work. Being a state where popular aspirations 
were rising high, BJP could not fulfill those and 
lost the poll to Congress.

Congress as usual did nothing to assuage the 
feelings of those who sacrificed their lives for 
the creation of the new state. Growing 
discontents in the party forced ND Tiwari, a 
veteran from Uttar-Pradesh to spend huge sum of 
money on his discretionary quota. Therefore, 
every MLA had a list to support people from 
his/her constituency. Governance was nowhere 
except that the government was very keen to 
invite 'foreign' investment which many of the 
resident Uttarakhandi's are proudly claiming 
would make Uttarakhand a Switzerland. Without 
going into the merits of these nonsensical 
debates, it is shocking that the non resident 
Uttarakhandis' do not seem to be worried about 
the growing discontent in Uttarakhand on the 
current module of development. The environmental 
hazards of mining near Dehradun once destroyed 
the beauty of the city, the big damns that are 
being constructed on the lines of Narmada, the 
rivers which are being sold to the multinational 
and above all the dangers of global warming on 
the Himalayan glaciers will devastate the hill 
culture and geography. But in the din of money, 
we want to claim that the Uttarakhand has become 
Switzerland, though many of them may not even 
know how democratic is the Swiss system of 
governance. Governance in Uttarakhand means a 
heavy police system with red beacon vehicles 
followed by the chums of political leaders.

Moreover, to become Switzerland, one needs values 
of impartiality, a system where individual 
dignity is restored. Where mind is free from 
racial and caste prejudices. Uttarakhhand has not 
really got rid of them. Who will it blame if the 
women continue to face the brunt of male 
chauvinism. Who will we blame if the Dalits face 
threatened in the entire state and rarely 
consider them part of the mainstream.

Now, we see the manifesto of the Hindutva party 
which is worried about cow protection while give 
a damn to people's aspiration. It talks of a 
Sanskriti but keep quiet on the issue of 
sanskriti. Will it be the hegimonistic 
brahmanical values, which the Brahmin bosses of 
the Sangh always preach us? Why is a party so 
much bothered about conversion in the hills? Why 
the hell it want to go on an agenda, which has 
nothing to do in the hills. Even if there are 
Christians or Muslims in the hills propagating 
their faith, the Hindutva people have equal 
rights to propagate their faith. Clear enough, 
the brahmanical religion of Hindus has never been 
missionary in zeal and practice and therefore 
this superfluous threat perception from the 
minorities. Can they deny me right to convert if 
I wish to do so? And who has given them the 
authority to decide about an individual's freedom 
and choice of religion to be followed.

The fact of the matter is that state like 
Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Gujarat give no 
option to people. They make people look similar 
though mask may change in one form or the others 
but 'identity' business work. Hence, in all these 
states, the parties have been dominated by the 
Hindutva ideology whether it is BJP or Congress 
or even the so-called third front. That has been 
the hallmark of the Hindutva agenda to Hinduise 
the political parties and bureaucracy. Hence, 
when BJP comes out with an agenda of cow 
protection and a law against conversion in 
Uttarakhand state, it clearly reflect the mindset 
of its upper caste leadership which has no 
constructive thing to offer to the people of the 
hill state. Congress leadership of Himachal 
Pradesh has already brought anti conversion laws. 
The fact is that the tears of those who lost 
their nears and dear ones have not dried and the 
party is playing ultra-national politics in the 
hills. A calculation of the number of dead 
soldiers in the Kargil war gives clear report how 
a majority of hill soldiers lost their lives 
while BJP went offensive in other part of the 
country to get votes. This ultranationalism helps 
the Hindutva to warm up the state for its own 
dubious purposes and befool the masses into the 
national framework. While the needs and issues of 
the Uttarakhand are entirely regional the 
Hindutva want to turn it into a National 
referendum against minorities.

It is more than ironical since there are not much 
issues related to minorities in the Uttarakhand. 
Unlike UP where Muslims are a major chunk to 
influence the votes, Uttarakhand does not have 
such a religious diversity. But then, as I have 
always mention that if India were a totally upper 
caste state, the Sangh Parivar and its Brahmin 
bosses would become totally redundant since in a 
Hindu upper caste state, the Brahmin would become 
a minority and therefore may not get the power. 
Even in the Uttarakhand state, where the Brahmins 
and Thakurs come together to hate the Dalits and 
minorities but do   not like each other despite 
all public pretence.

BJP's fad reflect from the fact that it has not 
stated anything on the migration of the 
Uttarakhand people to other state converting it 
to mere money order economy. Rather, it has used 
an idiotic issue of Sanskrit as a state language. 
Whose interest the Hindutva want to serve? Clear 
enough, the Sanskrit language, which has no value 
except for those who wish their children to 
capture the huge temples in the hills and do the 
social work of performing wedding and dying 
rituals; there is virtually nothing in the 
language. Where was the need to rake up this 
issue of Sanskrit? Do all the hill people speak 
Sanskrit? Why did the BJP not raise the issue in 
Uttar-Pradesh or Gujarat, which is its laboratory?

Uttarakhand people have to be careful by such 
destructive agendas of the Hindutva outfits. They 
must reject the caste notion and identity 
politics of the Hindutva based on hatred against 
the minorities. Where was the need to rake up 
this issue in Uttarakhand. Does it have any 
constructive programme for the hills? One must 
not ignore the fact that the Hindutva laboratory 
function well in the upper caste dominated 
states. Even leaders like ND Tiwari who remained 
a Brahmin first and secular later, the Hindutva's 
mascot Ashok Singhal gave him certificate of the 
best chief minister of India. Tiwari deliberately 
gave support to Swami Ramdev against whom lot of 
complaints were lodged with the health ministry.

It would be unfortunate, if the people of 
Uttarakhand allow themselves to be swallowed by 
the narrow casteist political leaders 
masquerading as the champion of Hindutva or 
nationalist leaders, who do not have any agenda 
for the hill state and its people. Five years 
have gone and people of the state feel betrayed 
by both the nationalist parties.

The mountains of Uttarakhand remain unparallel. 
So are the people. They are simple and have been 
truly nationalists. But the ultra nationalist 
forces who have contributed very little for the 
development of the state have exploited this 
nationalism. Uttarakhand need a government where 
every one can own the government and where 
sarkari babus are not to suck the blood of the 
innocent people, where the MLAs are not your 
bosses but your companions and where every 
community remains in peace with other. Let the 
Hindutva work for social cohesion in Uttarkhand 
rather than raking up useless issues. Let 
Hindutva's managers work for a combine strength 
of upper caste with out any façade of Hindu 
Unity. There cannot be any Hindu Unity by abusing 
the Muslims and Christians. It would be better 
for them to start a movement to eliminate the 
castes? The Hindutva talks of Samarasta by 
organizing joint meals but it has never worked on 
inter caste marriages. At least, if it wants to 
make Uttarakhand a laboratory of Hindutva first, 
start this from the upper castes? Let the Thakurs 
and Brahmins of Uttarkhand organize marriages 
together and give lessons to the people of other 
parts of the country. The Sangh Parivar knows it 
well that it is an impossible task and hence hate 
against Muslim and Christian is the biggest 
agenda for them to come back to power. Hope the 
people will realize this and reject such forcees. 
Uttarakhand need a coalition government of all 
communities so that the Hindutva's experiment is 
defeated in the very beginning.   It is important 
to have leaders of quality and not just with one 
point programme to capture power. Smaller states 
are turning dangerous these days. It is easier 
for the international financial institutions to 
pressurize them under the pretext of investment. 
The people of Uttarakhand may not know the 
dangers of privatization of water but they have 
more worry about Muslims and Christians. They may 
not know much about the plight of the Tehri Dam 
evacuees as they have got the issue of Sanskrit 
language, which will give them employment as 
suggested by the Sangh Parivar. Smaller state may 
be good for governance but easy to implement the 
agenda of the Hindutva. The experiment of 
Hindutva continues in Chhatishgarh where they 
made Raman Singh, a non Chhatisgarhi, a Thakur, 
Chief Minister, in Jharkhand, they wanted to 
change and impose a leadership, which backfired, 
and in Uttarkhand, they brought a man called 
Nitya Nand Swami whose track record is well known 
to be mentioned here. The hate formula worked in 
all the other states. In Chhatishgarh, we have 
everything for the Babas, Thugs and international 
corporate houses but nothing for the poor 
tribals. The economic interest of the powerful 
non Chhatishgarhi elite are being persevered by 
the government. In Jharkhand, while tribal die of 
hunger, Ramdev become state guest to preach Yoga 
to the MLAs, in Uttarkhand, ND Tiwari was the 
best person to protect the interest of Hindutva 
and therefore there was not much needed. Since 
Twiariji is on his way out, the BJP and its 
various leaders are ready to capture the space. 
Ofcourse, the Thakurs and the Brahmins will 
always fight with each other as their interest 
clash with each other. But who care for ideology, 
caste will rule Supreme in Uttarakhand, except 
from the fact, public posturing unity among 
people would always be there. For a better 
Uttarakhand, let the people raise local issues 
and leave these national issues to national 
politicians. The more some body focuses on 
so-called national issues, the bigger the chances 
of betrayal of popular sentiments in the 
'national interest'. Uttarkhand's voters have 
always paid the price of being nationalist, now 
time has come that they shed this stigma of 
nationalism and question every politicians and 
throw them to garbage who are giving them useless 
slogans and destructive ideas. Let Bijli Sadak 
paani aur rojgar (Electricity, water and 
employment) dominate the political discourse 
there. If hate agenda wins in Uttarakhand, it 
will the upper castes only who will have to pay 
heavy price and not any one else. We all know how 
politicians thrive on hate propaganda for their 
own dubious purposes. Beware with such hate 
politics and defeat their agendas.

______


[5]

Business Standard
February 15, 2007
   
BENCHMARKING IDENTITIES
Pratap Bhanu Mehta / New Delhi
This interesting and wide-ranging volume fills 
two gaps in the Indian literature on secularism. 
Most of the debates in India tend to be very 
insular. Although they will occasionally make 
references to Europe and America, there are few 
attempts to situate the process of secularisation 
in India in a comparative perspective, in 
relation to countries more comparable, like 
Indonesia. Second, much of the literature tends 
to focus on immediate political exigencies like 
Hindu nationalism, rather than take a look at the 
longer trajectory of secularism. This volume 
attempts to do both. But the results are, as with 
many conference volumes, mixed.

The essays explicitly on India are useful but 
predictable. Rajeev Bhargava gives a 
characteristically lucid defence of the project 
of a contextual secularism that is both rooted in 
the Indian context, but makes reference to values 
that are universal. Romila Thapar engages in the 
usual quest for proto-secularism in pre-modern 
India, while Lamin Sanneh usefully links the 
question of secularism with the question of 
diversity. The only provocative essay is by Dilip 
Menon, who argues that communalism is the 
deflection of the central, unaddressed issue of 
violence and non-egalitarianism within Hinduism, 
what he calls the "highest stage of casteism". 
The essay works well as a piece of provocation. 
But its central thesis is largely refuted by the 
comparative history of secularism provided in 
this volume itself. Almost all national 
identities have been premised upon benchmarking 
identities which include some groups and exclude 
others. In that sense there is nothing peculiar 
about the Indian experience that can be related 
to caste. Indeed, as Faisal Devji's brilliant 
comment in the book points out, the real question 
is not the relationship between the secular and 
the religious. The real question is how 
nationalism puts both secularism and religion at 
risk. Hence there are two paradoxes that 
characterise the debate on secularism. First, 
religion itself becomes a form of ethnicity 
rather than a form of piety, its function as 
identity becomes more important than its function 
as theology. Second, as Ashis Nandy pointed out 
long ago, secularism in Indian has two antonyms: 
religion and communalism. But communalism is more 
a step-child of nationalism than it is of 
religion. What needs to be interrogated in this 
context is not religion but nationalism. The 
minute we attempt to benchmark identities, we run 
the risk of creating boundaries and exclusions.

This claim is largely borne out by the 
comparative essays: Aijazuddin on Pakistan; Ben 
Kiernan and Sayfi Anwar on Indonesia; Nur Yalman 
on Islam; or Amila Butrovic on Serbia. Almost all 
these essays are concerned with one question that 
seems odd when juxtaposed with the Indian 
material. This is the question: Is Islam 
compatible with modernity and secularism? At one 
level such questions are odd: what a religion is 
is what its adherents make of it. But it is odd 
in the sense that in the Indian context, the 
analogous question,"Is Hinduism compatible with 
modernity and secularism?", does not now quite 
have the same urgency or resonance. But the 
question: "Can Hindu nationalists, or Hindus, 
target Muslims?" still does. In other words, the 
theological debate over secularism and modernity 
is not a live intellectual issue, the political 
debate over targeting minorities is. In fact you 
could argue that we talk about secularism so 
much, not because we see religion as a threat, 
but because we do not wish to interrogate 
nationalism.

The main essays in the volume are also 
accompanied by short comments, and some 
discursive observations by Bhagwati and 
Srinivasan on the threats to secularism. Both lay 
great stress on the fact that Hindu identity is 
allegedly more pronounced amongst the Diaspora. 
This claim is true in one obvious sense that 
sections of the Diaspora are visible in Hindu 
movements. But statistically is the Diaspora more 
likely to peddle in identity politics than 
natives? Much of the survey data on this suggest 
that this is not the case; rather than the 
Diaspora being more prone to these temptations, 
it basically mirrors patterns in India.

But the debate over the future of secularism is 
likely to continue. We should be grateful to this 
volume for reminding us that while India's 
history is peculiar, this is a global debate and 
will now be played out increasingly in an 
international context. And as the process of 
secularisation gains ground, the question of 
religious identity becomes more complicated. As 
is said, "We put ourselves under God's yoke most, 
when we feel his presence the least."

The future of secularism

T N Srinivasan
Oxford University Press
Price: Rs 595; Pages: 321

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

Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), 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.