SACW | Aug. 30-31, 2008 / Bury Patriarchy in Balochistan / Kashmir Media Blackout / Ku Klux Klan in Orissa

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | August 30-31, 2008 | Dispatch No. 2559 -  
Year 10 running

[1] Bangladesh: Democratise yourselves (G. M. Quader)
[2] Sri Lanka: Do we care for our own people? (Shanie's Column)
[3] Pakistan:
(i) Dark 'traditions'
(ii) The forgotten millions (Zainab Chughtai)
(iii) India's Pakistan stand betrays myopia (Praful Bidwai)
[3] India Administered Kashmir:
(i) Media Silenced (Rising Kashmir)
(ii) News blackout hits Srinagar (Iftikar Gilani)
(iii) One-sided coverage (Sevanti Ninan)
(iv) Kashmir: Hate in a Heaven (J. Sri Raman)
[4] India - Orissa Communal Violence
(i) Ku Klux Klan in Kandhamal
(ii) Who’s the real Hindu? (Karan Thapar)
(iii) Orissa Violence: Press Release by CPI(M) Delegation
[5] One India : Two Peoples - Holy cows & scapegoats (Subhash Gatade)
[6] India:  Beyond Art (Editorial, The Telegraph)

______


[1]

DEMOCRATISE YOURSELVES

by G. M. Quader (The Daily Star - 29 August 2008)

IN a democratic society, political parties (PPs) are formed for the  
purpose of representing the people's views and fulfilling their hopes  
and aspirations. Accountability of the PPs is to the people, and on  
the basis of the said purpose. Ownership of the PPs has to lie with  
the masses to ensure that.

In most developing countries, the behaviour of the PPs does not  
coincide with the expectations of the people. Most of the PPs are  
formed, or are transformed, into parties that play the power game.

Winning the election and capturing state authority by any means  
become the focal point of all their activities. Once in power, PPs  
tend to fulfill self and group interests, and also try to stay in  
power by manipulating the election process as a whole.

Weak state institutions, ineffective administration and law  
enforcement, pervasive corruption, and distorted political culture  
and understanding have allowed the PPs to stray from serving the  
interests of the people, and become profit making institutions run by  
self-seeking opportunists.

Efficient running of the party towards achieving that sort of  
distorted goal necessitates dictatorial leadership and secrecy in  
decision-making and financial transactions. Inter- party democracy  
becomes the casualty, along with transparency in decision-making and  
financial management. The top leaders assume the role of owners and  
the other members turn out to be subordinate employees.

PPs under the above category do not represent the people and their  
ambitions. Instead, they represent the top echelon and the members of  
respective PPs. Accountability of political parties, thus, becomes  
limited to its patrons, members and supporters, and not to the  
general mass.

In the context of Bangladesh, it may be said that not all political  
parties have come down to that stage. But there should be no doubt  
that most of them, including the important and bigger parties, may be  
considered similar and comparable.

Parties that fail to represent the people may not be considered  
democratic, even if they are elected.

Democracy was formally restored and parliamentary form of government  
introduced in 1991 by making necessary amendments to the constitution.

Subsequent governments under different PPs ran the country in an  
autocratic way without following any system of effective  
accountability. They concentrated on their own welfare, and on using  
manipulative means to perpetuate power. This created a reign of mal- 
governance, pervasive corruption and looting of public funds by  
ruling party people and their cronies.

The situation reached a climax during the period of the last  
government. The people were deprived of their dues in terms of  
material, rights or services from the government, and had to suffer  
harassment and miseries as a result. The election process was grossly  
manipulated. The election for the ninth parliament had to be  
abandoned in view of a nationwide protest.

The activities of the PPs are generally not considered to be "pro- 
people" all the time, instead they are "pro-party leadership" or at  
best "pro-party members." PPs do not seem to be accountable to the  
people, only to their leadership. Interestingly, the leadership in  
almost all cases does not need to be accountable to anybody.

The ownership of PPs must be given to the people to make them pro- 
people. All committees and leadership are to be elected through  
secret balloting, decisions are to be taken in open forums, and  
accounts of all financial transactions must be made transparent to  
the public.

The Election Commission (EC) recently enacted the amended  
Representation of People Ordinance 2008 (RPO, 2008), where it has  
been made mandatory for all the PPs to be registered with the EC.

As a precondition for obtaining registration, the constitution of the  
PPs are to be recast, ensuring certain aspects like practice of  
democracy in the party (all committees including the top most post  
will need to be periodically elected through secret balloting of the  
members), decisions are to be taken collectively after discussion in  
a open forum, financial transactions are to be done in a transparent  
way as per a prescribed guideline provided in the law, etc. PPs are  
to ensure compliance of all these activities after registration by  
providing periodical reports in prescribed way at the designated time  
to retain the registration.

Framing of the above provisions in the law is a welcome step. But,  
how much of those would be implemented in the real sense? Would it be  
pragmatic to expect the EC to effectively monitor those and ensure  
such a dramatic reversal of existing culture? Or would it be just a  
law with all the pious intentions, not to be followed in real life  
like many other reformatory laws?

The implementation of the law, its practice, and subsequent success  
of the reform agenda can be possible if people at large share the  
responsibility of monitoring the same. Here comes the role of the  
Right to Information ordinance, 2008 (RTI ordinance, 2008).

Until reforms are carried out in the existing political culture of  
the PPs, there is reason for at least some PPs to hesitate in  
accepting registration under the new RPO act or the enactment of RTI  
ordinance and its effective implementation.

The spirit of the RPO act and RTI is against the mentioned distorted  
objectives of many PPs as revealed in the past by their activities.  
The amended RPO and the proposed RTI ,when enacted, will create an  
effective barrier against corruption and other underhand activities.

Under the circumstances, PPs may display their commitment for  
effective reforms, and an improvement of political culture to achieve  
good and accountable governance, by registering the parties,  
maintaining all conditions as per the amended RPO act and putting the  
issue of RTI in their election manifesto. They may also consider  
declaring that they would do everything possible for proper and  
effective implementation of both the acts.



G.M. Quader is a former member of parliament

______


[2]   SRI LANKA:

DO WE CARE FOR OUR OWN PEOPLE?
Notebook Of A Nobody [Shanie's Column] The Island, 30 August 2008


 From all available independent reports, there is a huge humanitarian  
crisis in the Vanni. Reports speak of tens of thousands of internally  
displaced civilians undergoing immense hardship without proper  
shelter, inadequate sanitation and insufficient food, water, health  
and education facilities. All of them have fled from their homes  
because they do not want to be caught in the cross fire. They face a  
threat from all fronts in the ongoing war.

Credible reports have suggested the LTTE, on account of battle  
losses, is facing a shortage of fighting cadres. They are therefore  
conscripting young civilians. The older civilians are also being  
forcibly given military training ostensibly for defensive purposes –  
how to act in the face of aerial bombings and shelling. But the  
civilians are in no mood either for conscription or for undergoing  
any type of military training, defensive or otherwise.

At the same time, the civilians have to face aerial bombardment from  
the state forces. In the earlier stages, the Air Force was careful to  
avoid civilian targets, even though misinformation sometimes led to  
civilian deaths as in the case of the schoolchildren undergoing first  
aid and reportedly some basic military training as well. In that  
case, the innocent schoolchildren certainly did not voluntarily seek  
either first aid training or any form of military training. But on  
the whole, bombings were directed at selected targets which were  
mostly accurate, as in the case of the strike on the house where  
Thamilselvan was having a meeting. But with the intensification of  
the ground war, and the fighting moving to civilian areas, the aerial  
bombardment has not been as selective as before.

Faced with these twin dangers, it is not surprising that the  
civilians have sought to move to safe ground, away from the  
crossfire. But the movement has been of such proportions that it has  
caught the civil administration completely off guard. Reports suggest  
that there is inadequate shelter, food, water and sanitation for the  
massive movement of displaced refugees. This is a crisis which it is  
the duty of the Government to deal with in a humanitarian way. It is  
a pity to hear Government spokespersons denying that a crisis exists.  
The battle against the LTTE should not in any way mean that the  
Government abandons its duty by its people. The Government has to  
make arrangements for a safe corridor for these IDPs to move to more  
secure areas. If that is not possible in the current scenario, the  
Government must, if necessary with the assistance of aid agencies,  
provide adequate shelter, health and sanitation facilities for these  
IDPs and ensure that there is sufficient food and water for their needs.

Winning the battle, losing the war?

These people may be living in a region politically controlled by the  
LTTE, but that was not of their choosing. They are simple  
marginalised civilians who have no where else to move. Showing a lack  
of concern for their welfare and denying that they are suffering in  
any way will only drive these people into the arms of anti-democratic  
forces. With the military making advances on the war front, the  
Government seems totally unconcerned about winning over the Tamil  
people. President Rajapaksa has been talking of liberating the people  
of the North but the way the IDP issue is being handled is certainly  
not the way to do it. Here was an opportunity to show the Tamil  
people that they were considered as equal citizens entitled to equal  
protection. That opportunity is being squandered.

Indian National Security Advisor M K Narayan’s warning that the  
Government may win the battle and lose the war has provoked the  
expected response from Sinhala nationalists. But more thoughtful  
analysts like former diplomat Nanda Godage have urged the Government  
to re-think what Rajan Hoole has rightly called the failed strategy.  
Even Gotabaya Rajapakse has reacted on similar lines. The tragedy for  
both the Sinhala and Tamil people has been their political  
leadership’s short-sighted vision. They have sought to appease and  
remain prisoners either to Sinhala supremacism or to Tamil terrorism.  
They need to break out of this mindset that appeasement is the only  
way to stay in power. Chandrika Kumaratunge was perhaps the only  
leader in the recent few decades to have pursued a vision of a united  
Sri Lanka with justice for all the diverse groups that form our  
nation. She had the benefit of support of fellow visionaries among  
the minority politicians like Lakshman Kadirgamar, Neelan Tiruchelvam  
and Mohamed Ashraff. But sadly we seem to have lost that enlightened  
leadership. Petty personal agendas by the present parish pump  
politicians have replaced an enlightened vision for the communities  
and constituencies that form our nation.



______


[3] PAKISTAN:

(i)

DARK 'TRADITIONS'

Editorial, The News, August 31, 2008

The defence put up in the Senate of an incident in which five women,  
including three teenage girls who wished to marry by choice, were  
buried alive in Balochistan is appalling. The older women, shot and  
then buried with them, were presumably mothers or relatives who had  
sought mercy for the girls. A senator from the province, who should  
surely know better, defended the barbaric act as 'tribal custom'.  
Still more shockingly, the acting chairman of the Senate lashed out  
against the woman senator from the PML-Q who had raised the issue,  
advising her, rather sarcastically, to go and see the situation in  
Balochistan herself before raising such matters in the House.

A voice or two was raised against the practice, with another Baloch  
senator insisting it was not a traditional practice and such events  
did not routinely take place in his province. But this does not take  
away the fact that political representatives from Balochistan made an  
effort to justify the incident. The event took place almost a month  
ago in a remote village near Jaffarabad. What is extraordinary is  
that the matter has not been raised before more vocally. The senator  
who brought it up deserves credit; she has been quite unjustly  
attacked by others in the Upper House. It has been reported the PPP- 
led government in Balochistan tried to cover up the atrocity. This  
too of course signals a deeply flawed pattern of thinking. Surely the  
government should be seeking the murderers, who first used guns to  
ensure their victims were injured and could not escape, and then  
covered them with earth muffling forever their screams of terror are  
punished and exposed, not protected through some dark conspiracy of  
silence. The fact the act was 'kept quiet' in fact means the  
government sympathizes with such doings.

Not just in Balochistan, but elsewhere across the country too, a  
distorted belief seems to exist that 'traditions' are invariably good  
and need to be protected. We have seen such thinking used to defend  
practices that include 'honour killing', vani, swara, the marriage of  
small children, the beheading of people on orders of illegal  
'jirgas'. Other equally barbaric customs too are carried out from  
time to time, in many cases, despite laws which bar them. There is an  
urgent need for greater recognition of the fact that 'tradition' is  
not invariably good. All too often it has been used to oppress the  
most vulnerable. Women are the most frequent victims. While  
preserving what is good about our heritage is important, it is  
equally important to discard what is bad. This after all is what  
progress is all about. It is due to development, education, greater  
enlightenment, that much of the world has changed, broken with its  
past when the need to do so arises. This is why Chinese women, in a  
society as deeply traditional as our own, no longer have their feet  
bound at birth but can instead stride confidently into workplaces and  
educational institutions alongside men. The practice of tying up feet  
to keep women immobile, able only to shuffle feebly along in slippers  
in a manner that was thought to enhance their worth as docile wives  
and daughters, has been prevented by law, education and the active  
effort made over the decades to do away with evil elements of China's  
past while keeping intact the good. Traditions that inflict suffering  
and death on hapless victims in particular need to be done away with  
here too. There can be no excuse for living on in darkness.

It is deeply saddening that political leaders find it so arduous to  
understand this reality. It is due to the views we heard expressed in  
the Senate that we still live in a society where human beings can be  
buried alive while representatives of people argue this is  
acceptable. It is true Balochistan has suffered over the decades from  
a lack of development. The federal government has a lot to answer for  
in this regard. But it is the province's leaders who must too play a  
part in guiding it towards a brighter future, not shoving it  
backwards and making an attempt to defend practices that are quite  
obviously indefensible.

o o o

(ii)


THE FORGOTTEN MILLIONS
As Pakistan's political leaders wrangle over the small print, the  
welfare of the country's people has dropped off the agenda

by Zainab Chughtai (guardian.co.uk, August 29 2008)

Last November, I lost a long-standing bet with a friend when General  
Pervez Musharraf finally relinquished his military role and then  
embarked on a new term as Pakistan's civilian president. Up to that  
point, the idea that he might give up his army uniform had always  
seemed ludicrous – thus leading me to enter into the bet so confidently.

The end of Benazir Bhutto's self-imposed exile from Pakistan last  
October was the turning point in the country's political rat race.  
The response by thousands of PPP supporters to her arrival was enough  
to drive Musharraf to impose a state of emergency.

August 18 this year, however, saw the end of Musharraf's regime. His  
haphazard constitutional changes, some of which include the  
suspension of the judiciary (which is still in turmoil today) and  
other actions such as the military operation against Red Mosque  
fundamentalists and the curtailing of high-profile media channels,  
ended up backfiring.

The ineffectual methods used to quell the uproar after Bhutto's  
assassination last December, when the authorities failed to solve the  
case, contributed to a further fall from grace in the public eye.  
Towards the end of his regime, the discontent reached its height,  
turning into an almost unanimous anti-Musharraf campaign in the  
national media, and exacerbating the civil war raging in the tribal  
areas.

What of Pakistan's future now? Since Asif Zardari, Bhutto's husband  
and co-chairperson of the Pakistan People's party (PPP), currently  
the largest party, has nominated himself for the presidential seat, a  
new debate has been sparked, with the opposition in uproar. Last  
Monday, Pakistan Muslim League-N leader Nawaz Sharif parted ways with  
the PPP, leading to the collapse of the five-month-old coalition  
government, on the grounds that Zardari had not kept his word  
regarding the restoration of the judiciary or democracy. An agreement  
signed on August 7 by the two leaders was also exposed to the public.  
It clearly stated the executive restoration of the judges would occur  
one day after the impeachment or resignation of President Musharraf.  
Zardari, however, employed every delaying tactic at hand to prevent  
this policy from going through. The accord also stated that once  
Musharraf was out of the picture, both leaders would put forward  
nonpartisan candidates for presidency. Asif Zardari went ahead and  
declared himself a candidate for president without informing or  
consulting Nawaz Sharif, and announced that the elections would take  
place on September 6.

The current stalemate between the former allies and the fractured  
coalition seem to loom larger in politics than the survival of  
Pakistanis who are unable to cope with massive food and fuel  
inflation. While the judges and the constitutional bills are lofty  
policy matters of grave significance, the politicians in the country  
seem to have lost sight of what image they are portraying both at  
home and abroad.

With nuclear neighbour India already licking its chops and the US  
circling, eager to launch an inevitable counter-terrorism campaign in  
Pakistan, it appears that the country stands closer to decline than  
ever before, democracy or no democracy. But there are those who dare  
to hope yet. Hope, even, that there might be a reformation on the  
horizon, or that after the resolution of conflicts, the country will  
return to the path of peaceful development. Hope that no foreign  
conflict lies ahead, and that the dire energy crisis will be resolved  
within the five to six-year timeline given, or even that there will  
not still be forces at loggerheads on policy technicalities, skirting  
the issue of the welfare of the nation. I, for one, am not willing to  
wager very much on that these hopes will be realised. Are you?


o o o

(iii)

INDIA'S PAKISTAN STAND BETRAYS MYOPIA

by Praful Bidwai (The News, August 30, 2008)

All South Asians will join the Pakistani public in rejoicing over  
Pervez Musharraf's decision to step down as president. After a show  
of bravado, followed by damage-limitation manoeuvres and bargaining  
over the terms of his departure, Musharraf finally threw in the  
towel, ending nine years of authoritarian rule.

The chain of events that led to the end appears pretty  
straightforward from across the border. Musharraf's options narrowed  
after his allies in the MQM and the PML-Q deserted him in significant  
numbers following the PPP's decision to join the PML-N in demanding  
that he quit or face impeachment.

The crunch came when the US let it be known that it wouldn't side  
with him, and President Bush stopped taking his calls. Saudi Arabia  
conveyed a similar message while helping to negotiate safe passage  
and asylum for him. Finally, the Pakistan army told Musharraf that it  
wouldn't support him in a confrontation over the impeachment move.

Although Musharraf's source of real power vanished after he shed the  
uniform, he remained a hated symbol of arbitrary rule with the army's  
implicit backing. His resignation shifts the civilian-military power  
balance in favour of the people's elected representatives.

Musharraf's resignation is not so much a victory of Pakistan's  
political parties, or a sign of sagacity of the army's leadership, as  
a triumph of civil society, organised in the lawyers' movement and  
joined by numerous social activists, and of the media. It marks a  
major step forward in Pakistan's democratisation and must be  
unreservedly welcomed.

Musharraf quit because like all dictators, he too became a victim of  
hubris and failed to understand that he had gradually lost all  
legitimacy. The first dents in his legitimacy appeared within a year  
of taking over in October 1999, when he betrayed his promise to  
cleanse the country's administrative system, make the rich pay taxes,  
and promote moderation. He mutilated the Constitution to consolidate  
his rule.

Another big blow came in December 2004 when he refused to shed his  
dual position as head of state and Chief of Army Staff. What finally  
destroyed his legitimacy was his sacking of the Chief Justice of  
Pakistan and the imposition of emergency rule in November--an  
enormously unpopular move that earned him the wrath of the  
increasingly assertive middle class and the growing civil society  
movement.

To be fair, not everything in the Musharraf legacy was negative. He  
increased the legislature seats reserved for women in 2002, and  
passed the Protection of Women Act to undo General Zia-ul Haq's  
Hudood laws. His decision to turn against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban  
after September 2001 brought Pakistan out of its isolation and helped  
revive its economy.

Domestically, Musharraf first tried to contain extremist Islamic  
influences (although he soon made compromises with the mullahs). He  
abolished separate electorates for the religious minorities. He  
loosened the oppressive restrictions imposed during the Zia regime on  
cultural activities and musical performances. He allowed private TV  
channels to flourish. And he stuck to his promises to hold elections.

Musharraf, the architect of Kargil, executed a remarkable turn by  
agreeing to launch the peace process with India. He also made a bold  
departure from Pakistan's traditional position on Kashmir calling for  
a plebiscite, and proposed a solution which would not involve a  
redrawing of the existing borders.

However, many of these measures were soon diluted. Some failed to  
have the intended effect of curbing bigotry and promoting moderation.  
In conducting military operations against Al-Qaeda, Taliban along the  
Afghanistan border, Musharraf practised outright deception. He  
diverted a good chunk of the $12 billion assistance he got from the  
US. He shielded the Taliban, but managed to convince the Americans  
for years that he was their reliable, indeed indispensable, ally.

Pakistan's real challenge to stabilise democracy begins now. The  
ruling coalition confronts this daunting task without the anti- 
Musharraf glue that bound it earlier. Pakistan's economic situation  
is grim--inflation at 24 per cent, the rupee having dipped from 60 to  
the US dollar to 74, and foreign exchange reserves depleted from $16  
billion to barely $10 billion. Pakistan has had to accept an oil  
bailout from Saudi Arabia.

Politically, extremism is on the rise, with the Taliban resurgent in  
the tribal areas, and increasingly, in the heartland too. Both  
Balochistan and the North West Frontier Province seethe with  
discontent. Pakistan's volatile Western border poses an unprecedented  
challenge, aggravated by mounting US pressure to conduct effective  
operations against the Taliban which lack popular domestic support.

The ruling coalition is deeply divided. Four of its internal  
differences have come to the fore: the choice of a presidential  
candidate, reinstatement of the sacked 60 superior court judges,  
trying Musharraf on various charges (or giving him indemnity), and  
coping with pressure on the Western border.

Nawaz Sharif insists on the immediate reinstatement of the dismissed  
judges--in line with the Murree Declaration. But the PPP co-chairman  
Asif Ali Zardari is wavering because of his fear that if restored,  
deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Choudhry will rule against  
the ordinance that granted him amnesty against corruption charges as  
part of a US-brokered deal that allowed him to return to Pakistan.

Choosing a presidential candidate will also prove contentious. The  
PPP and the PML-N have divergent preferences and it's not clear how  
these will be reconciled. But even trickier is the question of  
prosecuting Musharraf on the charge sheet the coalition has drawn up.  
By all available indications, Zardari was party to the consultations  
that led to an "understanding" that Musharraf would get indemnity if  
he resigns, and would be allowed safe passage.

The two leaders have different positions on prosecuting the war  
against the Al-Qaeda, Taliban. Sharif is deeply suspicious of the US  
Global War on Terror Zardari has probably made various commitments to  
the Americans on fighting the Al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

As the PPP and the PML-N battle out these differences, the domestic  
economic agenda might be put on the backburner. This will only erode  
the ruling coalition's legitimacy. Eventually, Sharif may walk out,  
precipitating early elections in which he hopes to improve his  
party's position substantially.

India should be sympathetically disposed towards Pakistan. It should  
certainly have welcomed Musharraf's resignation as a step towards  
democratisation. Instead, it described it as Pakistan's "internal  
matter". This apparent neutrality masks New Delhi's preference for  
Musharraf, stated in so many terms by National Security Adviser MK  
Narayanan less than one week before Musharraf quit. He said  
Musharraf's departure would leave "a vacuum" in which extremist  
outfits will flourish.

This position betrays apathy towards the people of Pakistan. Worse,  
like much of the commentary on Pakistan on Indian TV channels, it  
shows a paternalistic attitude that believes Pakistan is destined to  
remain a quasi-dictatorship. Democracy is fine and well-deserved for  
India, but like the US, India prefers to deal with autocrats in its  
own neighbourhood. Such double standards speak poorly of Indian  
foreign policy.

India is taking a myopic view of the events in Pakistan and has  
failed to express any appreciation of and solidarity with its  
democratisation process. Unless it corrects course, India risks  
alienating public opinion in Pakistan. Worse, it stands to lose its  
credibility as a force for democracy in South Asia--even as it beats  
the democracy drum internationally.

The writer, a former newspaper editor, is a researcher and peace and  
human-rights activist based in Delhi. Email: prafulbidwai1 at yahoo.co.in


______


[4]  INDIA ADMINISTERED KASHMIR:

(i)

MEDIA SILENCED

Srinagar, August 30: The South Asian Free Media Association (SAFMA)  
has been exposed on the issue of censorship and restriction on media  
in Kashmir as it has adopted criminal silence over the recent  
developments in Kashmir.

The organization which claims to be the champion of cause of press  
freedom in South Asia has not issued a single statement condemning  
unprecedented restriction on media in Kashmir during past one week.  
At least 20 journalists were attacked by the para military Central  
Reserve Police Force while performing their professional duties, all  
the newspapers have been off the stands for past six days as  
unprecedented restrictions have prevented their publication. A number  
of journalists have been harassed and residence of a prominent  
journalist was raided.

Even as the Editor's Guild of India, Delhi Union of Journalists,  
International Federation of Journalists, Reporters Sans Frontiers and  
Committee to Protect Journalists expressed concern over this  
situation and urged the government to put an end to repressive  
measures SAFMA's criminal silence has made its credentials further  
doubtful. Its website www.southasianmedia.net is also silent over the  
happenings for the past six days and has been giving publicity to  
trivial issues.

Srinagar based journalists are enraged over the attitude of SAFMA  
which owes its existence to the tension between India and Pakistan  
for which the root cause is Kashmir. "They have been exploiting the  
tension in the region and making their own fortunes for the past  
several years" said a senior journalist adding that it has been  
harping on Kashmir issue which gave it an opening to become the so  
called champions of freedom of press in Kashmir. It is high time that  
these arm chair champions of press freedom are exposed and condemned  
for their attitude which is only aimed at appeasing the governments,  
said another journalist. "This time they are clearly siding with the  
Government of India and approving the repressive measures through  
this criminal silence" he added.

[Rising Kashmir]

o o o

NEWS BLACKOUT HITS SRINAGAR

* Not one of over 40 English and Urdu newspapers has reached stands  
for seven days
* CPJ calls on Indian authorities to protect journalists, lift  
restrictions on media workers in J&K

By Iftikhar Gilani (Daily Times, August 31, 2008)

NEW DELHI: Not a single of more than 40 English and Urdu daily  
newspapers could reach stands for the seventh consecutive day in  
Srinagar on Saturday, while local cable operators have switched off  
all TV channels after being told to stop airing current affairs  
programmes.

Internet, Indian official TV Doordarshan and the radio are the only  
means of information in the city. Several media groups including the  
Editors Guild of India, Delhi Union of Journalists and international  
organisations, including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CJP),  
have expressed concern at curbs on the press. But media fraternity in  
Srinagar has expressed surprise at the silence of various South Asian  
groups propounding media freedom.

To matters worse, police detained 15 journalists and beat them  
mercilessly. Bilal Ahmed of Sahahra TV is recuperating in hospital  
suffering from a rib fracture. As distribution channels have also  
been affected by the most severe curfew in Kashmir history, no Indian  
national newspaper or magazine could hit the stands either. This has  
resulted in a complete media blackout in Srinagar.

Srinagar-based Greater Kashmir newspaper’s General Manager Abdul  
Rashid Mukhdoomi says despite assurances from the authorities  
security forces are not permitting distribution. He said authorities  
had provided five curfew passes to each newspaper. “I have 150  
employees and they (security forces) don’t even honour the curfew  
passes,” he said. Mukhdoomi’s technical staff and distributors were  
severely beaten by security forces. “The curbs are unprecedented. Our  
network was never affected even during the height of militancy when  
bullets were raining on Srinagar streets,” he recalled. Though  
Kashmir Times continued publishing its edition from Jammu, it had no  
means to distribute the newspaper. In the communally charged  
atmosphere, traders in Jammu have asked for an end to issuing  
advertisements to the newspaper, which a took stand against the Jammu  
Hindu agitation.

“Due to lack of advertisement backing, hostile atmosphere and a host  
of factors, we may also be forced to suspend publication in the  
coming days,” says Prabodh Jamwal, editor of Kashmir Times. Rising  
Kashmir writes that this was the first time in the past 15 years that  
a complete blockade of information had been enforced with authorities  
having banned news broadcasts from local cable-supported TV channels  
and SMS through mobile phones.

Local cable TV channels — Sen, J&K, Mauj Kashmir, TV 9, Take 1 and  
Wadi have been asked to restrict to entertainment and stop airing  
current affairs programmes. Retaliating against the curbs, cable  
operators took all Indian channels off air.

Representatives of Indian national news channels were already under  
tremendous pressure as agitators accused them of reporting too little  
from Kashmir. A cameraman was beaten so ruthlessly that he had to be  
hospitalised. “We are sending whatever we shoot and whatever we feel  
is news worthy but at the end of the day it is the headquarters in  
Delhi who decides,” said a journalist representing a prominent Indian  
channel.

The government says there are no restrictions on the media.

CPJ: Separately, a CPJ press release on Saturday called on Indian  
authorities to protect journalists and lift restrictions on media  
workers in the “curfew-bound” Jammu and Kashmir (J&K).

“The situation for the news media in Kashmir is dire,” said CPJ  
Executive Director Joel Simon. “We call on the Indian authorities to  
immediately allow broadcasters to return to air and to ensure that  
journalists can move about freely. It is vital that news gets out  
during such a chaotic time in the region.”

o o o

(iii)

ONE-SIDED COVERAGE

by Sevanti Ninan (Magazine Section / The Hindu, August 31, 2008)

In spite of the massive coverage in recent times, the point of view  
of the Kashmiris hasn’t found a voice in the media.

Arundhati Roy, who, like Arun Shourie, needs a lot of space to have  
her say, argues over seven pages in Outlook that the continued  
military occupation of Kashmir must stop, and that we have there a  
State whose younger generation ha s been “raised in a playground of  
army camps, checkposts and bunkers, with screams of torture chambers  
for a sound track”.

Vir Sanghvi and Swaminathan Aiyar assert in columns in the Hindustan  
Times and Times of India, after citing different sets of reasons,  
that the time has come to give Kashmiris the right to self- 
determination.

On Times Now, on prime time over two days, Arnab Goswami celebrates  
the patriotism of soldiers who have given their lives for Kashmir. On  
the day of his funeral, two children of an army officer are put on  
air to tell the channel’s viewers about their father, with Goswami  
goading them on. “Are you proud of your father, what would you like  
to tell people on our show today?” he asks the 11-year-old son. The  
next evening there is a special report, titled We love Kashmir Too,  
talking to the families of those officers who have lost their lives  
in Kashmir.
Voice of India

At the end, Sajjad Lone of the Peoples Conference is pitted against  
two elderly former officers. One of them voices the sentiment that  
India cannot leave Kashmir after it has been part of the country for  
60 years, extremism etc. is all wrong, and “we are all brothers”.  
Says Goswami: “Sajjad this is the voice of India, it is very easy to  
have a TV debate where you pit people against one another (Hinting at  
Barkha’s Dutt’s show, is he?). This is the voice, Sajjad. You have  
talked about the sentiments of the people of Kashmir, what about  
these two, Sajjad.”

Sajjad says, in Kupwara there is a village of 250 widows in a  
population of 5,000. That is also the voice of Kashmir. If these men  
have been killed, the question that should be asked is, how can we  
trust the people of India? Whereupon, one of the two other men on the  
show says he has been supporting an orphan girl in Kashmir. Lone says  
that is gracious of him, but people from all over the world are  
supporting orphans in Kashmir.

Later in the show, Goswami displays more sanctimonious nationalism.  
Accusing Lone of trusting Rawalapindi more than Delhi, saying at some  
point that this sort of intolerance happens only in Pakistan while  
referring to what happened to Mojahirs. To which the PC leader says,  
if you talk of Mojahirs, I can talk of Gujarat and hundreds of  
communal riots here in last 15 years. Arnab Goswami then gives the  
last word to Colonel Kanwar, who says to Lone, “We want to be living  
happily with you”, meaning Kashmiris. Off and on Times Now has been  
talking of winning hearts in Kashmir. They are certainly going about  
it the right way!

While all of this liberal, upper middle-class solution-mongering is  
going on, local TV stations in Kashmir are stopped from broadcasting  
news by a judge’s order. One day the local newspaper, Greater  
Kashmir, fails to come out on account of the curfew. Other newspapers  
are similarly affected. On a single day, 13 journalists and  
photographers are beaten by the police in Srinagar. Curfew passes  
given earlier, they discover, are no longer valid.

On television there are many, many shots of mass turnouts in the  
Valley for rallies and protests, but curiously no vox populi  
soundbites from those crowds. When Kuldip Nayyar says on Times Now,  
“What do they mean by azadi we should talk to them and find out. To  
whom do we give? On that side there is no stable government,” you are  
reminded that for all the coverage we are not hearing at all from the  
people milling on the streets of Srinagar.
Slanted view

Why not? An Outlook reporter in Kashmir says OB vans are not taken to  
cover the large protests because the crowd attacks Indian TV crews,  
and the Kashmiri journalists working for them. Syed Ali Shah Geelani  
describes them in his speeches as being part of the Indian war  
machinery. He told the magazine for good measure, “it is pointless  
talking to Indian journalists… they have their national interest and  
a Hindu point of view.” On Doordarshan meanwhile there is little  
coverage of the protests which the other channels are showing. On the  
day of the march to the U.N. office, DD simply blacked out the event.

If the media in India reflects the country’s exasperation with  
Kashmir, they are freer to do so than the media, Indian or Kashmiri,  
are in Kashmir to reflect what people there are thinking. The  
exception is a few blogs. On http://kashmir-truth-be- 
told.blogspot.com/ scroll down and read a series of posts in which a  
young person who describes himself (herself?) as being from rural  
Kashmir, agonises over the pros and cons of the options a referendum  
would present.

Behind the sloganeering Kashmiris do as a reflex action whenever  
there are TV cameras around, there are a people crying to be  
understood. Ignoring that does not help.

o o o

(iv)

KASHMIR: HATE IN A HEAVEN

by J. Sri Raman, (truthout.org 29 August 2008)

photo
Arundhati Roy, the articulate activist, was the first to say the  
unsayable by endorsing the call for "azadi (freedom)," that had been  
emanating from Kashmir militants for years. (Photo: Getty Images)

     Many Indians have said many things about Kashmir and the  
intractable problem it poses. Until the other day, however, none had  
said that the nation had to let go of the region as a liability.  
Within about a week, two prominent commentators have said it, drawing  
the same startling conclusion from very different premises.

     That provides a measure of the change in the India-administered  
State of Jammu and Kashmir, especially over the past two months. It  
is a qualitative change illustrated by the massive protests churning  
the state, ever since the eruption of a conflict between its major  
communities.

     Arundhati Roy, the articulate activist, was the first to say the  
unsayable. In a newspaper article August 22, titled "Land and  
hunger," she endorsed the call for "azadi (freedom)", that had been  
emanating from Kashmir militants for years. She declared, "India  
needs azadi from Kashmir just as much as - if not more than - Kashmir  
needs azadi from India."

     Now, Roy never enjoyed a high popularity rating with India's  
ultranationalists. They have considered her a traitor ever since she  
threatened figuratively to "secede" from India in protest at the  
country's nuclear-weapon tests in 1998. But she has got a better  
hearing from her countrymen who do not quite accept the nuclear  
hawks' definition of nationalism. It was, however, different this time.

     Even some of her friends in the pro-peace camp found her  
formulation unacceptable. Earlier, they might have occasionally  
faulted her on some issues, but now she seemed to them to be going a  
bit too far. She, thus, had almost no defender as her long-time  
detractors mounted a fresh offensive, with the two major parties -  
the ruling Congress and the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) -  
uniting more openly against her than on the US-India nuclear deal.

     Even as she was getting a bad press, however, the top editor of  
a national daily got away with a similar prescription on the Kashmir  
problem. In an article captioned "Think the Unthinkable," Vir Singhvi  
did not advocate "azadi" directly. But he asked for a referendum in  
Kashmir, almost assuming that the Kashmiris would vote for leaving  
India. In that case, argued Singhvi, "surely we will be better off  
being rid of this constant, painful strain on our resources, our  
lives, and our honor as a nation?"

     If he did not draw the flak Roy did, the reason lay in the  
apparently different routes they took to the same destination. Hers  
was an expression of exasperation at the turn the situation has taken  
the long-troubled state, at the brutalization of both sides, Muslim  
and Hindu. "The Indian military occupation of Kashmir makes monsters  
of us all," she wrote. Singhvi's argument. on the other hands, can  
appeal to the ultranationalist as well, up to a point.

     Talking of the extravagant largesse from New Delhi to the state,  
besides an extra degree of autonomy, Singhvi said: "As the current  
agitation demonstrates, far from gratitude, there is active hatred of  
India. Pakistan, a small, second-rate country that has been left far  
behind by India, suddenly acts as though it is on par with us,  
lecturing India in human rights and threatening to further  
internationalize the present crisis."

     The difference between the lines of Roy and Singhvi is more  
apparent than real. Both are offering remedies of despair, and the  
despair stems from the same factor - a dangerously deepened religious- 
communal divide in the state. The unholy conflict began when a pro- 
BJP Governor of Jammu and Kashmir pushed through a governmental grant  
of 99 acres of land to a body managing an annual Hindu pilgrimage to  
a cave shrine at Amaranth in southern Kashmir.

     The militants seized the opportunity presented on a platter and  
launched an agitation demanding withdrawal of the decision. They won  
the demand on July 2, but this was the cue that Hindu-chauvinist  
groups in Jammu were waiting for. Cries of communal war have  
resounded across the state ever since. The show of military force has  
not stopped the flames from spreading further.

     People with long memories recall the subcontinent's Partition of  
1947, a bloody parting gift of British colonialism, when Kashmir  
stood out as an oasis of intercommunal peace. The state, of course,  
was never to return to that past. The record was smudged with a  
forced mass exodus of Hindu Pandits from the Muslim-majority Valley  
in 1990. The reputation was shattered beyond repair, with the  
inevitable consequences of army occupation. The interminable series  
of cruel violations of human rights in the valley have not helped to  
counter the growth of religion-based communalism.

     This does not mean that the paradise lost can be regained,  
merely if New Delhi appears to listen to the proposal of letting  
Kashmir go. The BJP and the "parivar" (the far-right "family") can be  
counted upon, in that case, to upscale their offensive - especially  
in view of the upcoming elections to some State Assemblies and, of  
course, to the parliamentary polls due in early 2009. The Kashmiri  
jihadis and the Pakistani jingoists can also be expected to  
contribute their mite to further vitiation of the communal situation  
in the Valley.

     The most important argument against an abrupt announcement of  
"azadi," which Roy seems to have momentarily forgotten, is what it  
can do to Indian Muslims in the rest of the country. The "parivar"  
can be expected to preach from its many pulpits that they must leave  
the country, too, in pursuit of the Kashmir logic.

     A referendum today is not the sure remedy that it may have once  
seemed. A situation charged with feverish communalism does not  
provide conditions for a free and fair referendum. It cannot be  
unlike the election held in Gujarat after the pogrom of 2002, over  
which Narendra Modi (who needs no introduction), presided before  
wading to the throne through blood.

     "If there is heaven on this earth, it is here, it is here, it is  
here" - thus spoke Moghul emperor Jehangir (1605-1627) on seeing the  
verdant Kashmir Valley. Hate has turned Jammu and Kashmir into a hell  
today, by all accounts. Determined efforts to restore peace in the  
region are the need of the hour, if Kashmir is not to become again  
"the most dangerous place on earth," as former US President Bill  
Clinton described it in 2002 as nuclear-armed India and Pakistan  
massed a million troops along the state's international border.

     The happenings in Kashmir have dealt a heavy blow to the much- 
hyped India-Pakistan peace process. But was it realistic to expect  
more enduring results from a process initiated by India's former  
prime minister and BJP leader, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and carried  
forward by former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf? The lesson of  
the Kashmir turbulence is also about the severe limits to the success  
of a peace process pushed by the far right on one side and a military  
dictatorship on the other.


______


[4] ORISSA COMMUNAL VIOLENCE: A BIG SHAME ON INDIA

(i)
http://tinyurl.com/6czgaw
hardnews - September 2008

KU KLUX KLAN IN KANDHAMAL

So, what was her crime? Rajani Majhi cared for children in an  
orphanage in the interiors of backward Orissa, where every big Indian  
and MNC wants to dig for the treasures buried deep beneath the tribal  
forests, home to several of India's indigenous tribes for thousands  
of years. Was it a crime to protect the children when the mob,  
inspired by the VHP bandh, attacked the orphanage and set it on fire?  
Did Rajani murder Swami Lakshmananda Saraswati, the undisputed guru  
of the VHP? Was she a Maoist? Was she a Christian fanatic? Did she  
participate in hate campaigns? Was she a proselytising zealot?

Now, reports are coming from this hazy twilight zone of burnt houses  
and churches, of terror unleashed and exile and condemnation in their  
own imagined homeland, that Rajani Majhi was a Hindu.

So, why did they murder her? Was it revenge? Was it divine  
retribution, sanctioned by the gods?

It was for the law enforcement agencies to find and punish the  
killers of the swami. Is the VHP/Bajrang Dal/RSS a constitutional  
authority to punish, with quick and bloody retribution? If the  
Maoists were behind the killing, let the Indian State tackle it. Why  
let loose criminals on the innocent, make a public spectacle of  
xenophobic enactments?

Go back to Gujarat 2002. Did the people of Naroda Patiya, Juhapura  
and Gulberga attack coach S-6 at Godhra? Did Ehsan Jaffrey burn the  
coach? Why were innocent people hacked and burned; and hapless women  
raped? The persecution continues to this day, after what was clearly  
a State-sponsored massacre like the November 1984 organised massacre  
of Sikhs in Delhi and elsewhere.

This is because this hate machine has neither rationality nor  
humanity nor religion. It neither believes in the Constitution nor  
democracy nor civilised codes of conduct. It has no social or  
political agenda except to indulge and wallow in organised hate  
campaigns against Muslims and Christians. In that sense, they are  
outside the pale of the Indian justice system, outside all  
accountability. Blinded by vicious madness, these little men are  
caricatures of Hindutva's perverse distortion of both Hinduism and  
humanism. Like the fundamentalist Islamic jihadis who kill   
innocents, these Hindutva jihadis share the same barbarian instinct,  
and their  place is either the mental asylum, or the prison.

Why should the VHP and Bajrang Dal be let off if the Simi can be  
termed terrorist and banned? And, how is the BJP a mainstream party  
when it patronises and pampers this hydra-headed monster? In fact,  
all the members of the sangh parivar are intrinsically linked - the  
RSS-VHP-Bajrang Dal-BJP, a diabolical symphony of several fronts,  
using mainstream and underground spaces,  terrorism and communal  
violence to further its ends. Trace most of the ‘landmark communal  
riots' in India, and enquiry commission reports, and you will find  
their sinister shadow.

Remember Geetabehn? Rajani Majhi brings the old narrative back,  
however stunningly tragic and barbaric it all seems. And there is a  
lesson and message in it.

Wrote Siddharth Varadarajan in The Times of India on April 18, 2002  
(The Mask is Off - A Tale of Two Hindus, edit page): "Two weeks ago,  
the resident editor of The Times of India in Ahmedabad sent our  
office in Delhi a photograph so shocking it made my stomach churn.  
Shocking not just for what it depicted but because, to paraphrase  
Roland Barthes, "one was looking at it from inside our freedom." This  
was my India. This is my India....

"On a hot and dusty patch of asphalt lies the naked body of a woman,  
Geetaben, her clothes stripped off and thrown carelessly near her.  
One piece of her underclothing lies a foot away from her body, the  
other is clutched desperately in her left hand. Her left arm is  
bloodied, as is her torso, which appears to have deep gashes. Her  
left thigh is covered in blood and she is wearing a small anklet. Her  
plastic chappals sit sadly alongside her lifeless body and in the  
middle of the photo frame is a gnarled, red, hate-filled remnant of a  
brick, perhaps the one her assailants used to deliver
their final blow...

"Geetaben was killed in Ahmedabad on March 25, in broad daylight,  
near a bus stop close to her home. She was a Hindu who in the eyes of  
the Hindu separatists currently ruling Gujarat had committed the  
cardinal sin of falling in love with a Muslim man..."

The question returns: Why was Rajani burnt alive, like Graham Staines  
and his two little sons? And let us not forget his wife, Gladys, who  
chose forgiveness for the killers, continuing to work in the leprosy  
camp in the forsaken interiors of Orissa.

o o o

(ii)
http://tinyurl.com/5qlqpn

WHO’S THE REAL HINDU?

by Karan Thapar (Hindustan Times August 30, 2008)


Does the VHP have the right to speak for you or I? Do they reflect  
our views? Do we endorse their behaviour? They call themselves the  
Vishwa Hindu Parishad, but who says they represent all of us? This  
Sunday morning, I want to draw a clear line of distinction between  
them and everyone else. My hunch is many of you will agree.

Let me start with the question of conversion — an issue that greatly  
exercises the VHP. I imagine there are hundreds of millions of Hindus  
who are peaceful, tolerant, devoted to their faith, but above all,  
happy to live alongside Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains  
and Jews. If any one of us were to change our faith how does it  
affect the next man or woman? And even if that happens with  
inducements, it can only prove that the forsaken faith had a tenuous  
and shallow hold. So why do the VHP and its unruly storm troopers,  
the Bajrang Dal, froth at the mouth if you, I or our neighbours  
convert? What is it to do with them?

Let me put it bluntly, even crudely. If I want to sell my soul — and  
trade in my present gods for a new lot — why shouldn’t I? Even if the  
act diminishes me in your eyes, it’s my right to do so. So if  
thousands or even millions of Dalits, who have been despised and  
ostracised for generations, choose to become Christian, Buddhist or  
Muslim, either to escape the discrimination of their Hindu faith or  
because some other has lured them with food and cash, it’s their right.

Arguably you may believe you should ask them to reconsider, although  
I would call that interference, but you certainly have no duty or  
right to stop them. In fact, I doubt if you are morally correct in  
even seeking to place obstacles in their way. The so-called Freedom  
of Religion Acts, which aim to do just that, are, in fact, tantamount  
to obstruction of conversion laws and therefore, at the very least,  
questionable.

However, what’s even worse is how the VHP responds to this matter.  
Periodically they resort to violence including outright murder. What  
happened to Graham Staines in Orissa was not unique. Last week it  
happened again. Apart from the utter and contemptible criminality of  
such behaviour, is this how we Hindus wish to behave? Is this how we  
want our faith defended? Is this how we want to be seen? I have no  
doubt the answer is no. An unequivocal, unchanging and ever-lasting NO!

The only problem is it can’t be heard. And it needs to be. I  
therefore believe the time has come for the silent majority of Hindus  
— both those who ardently practice their faith as well as those who  
were born into it but may not be overtly religious or devout — to  
speak out. We cannot accept the desecration of churches, the burning  
to death of innocent caretakers of orphanages, the storming of  
Christian and Muslim hamlets even if these acts are allegedly done in  
defence of our faith. Indeed, they do not defend but shame Hinduism.  
That’s my central point.

I’m sorry but when I read that the VHP has ransacked and killed I’m  
not just embarrassed, I feel ashamed. Never of being hindu but of  
what some Hindus do in our shared faith’s name.

This is why its incumbent on Naveen Patnaik, Orissa’s Chief Minister,  
to take tough, unremitting action against the VHP and its junior  
wing, the Bajrang Dal. This is a test not just of his governance, but  
of his character. And I know and accept this could affect his  
political survival. But when it’s a struggle between your commitment  
to your principles and your political convenience is there room for  
choice? For ordinary politicians, possibly, but for the Naveen I  
know, very definitely not.

  So let me end by saying: I’m waiting, Naveen. In fact, I want to  
say I’m not alone. There are hundreds of millions of Hindus, like you  
and me, waiting silently — but increasingly impatiently. Please act  
for all of us.

o o o

(iii) ORISSA VIOLENCE: PRESS RELEASE BY CPI(M) DELEGATION
Communist Party of India (Marxist)

August 30, 2008

http://communalism.blogspot.com/2008/08/orissa-violence-press-release- 
by-cpim.html

______


[5]

www.sacw.net - 29  August 2008
http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ArticlesArchive/ 
gatade29aug08.html

ONE INDIA : TWO PEOPLES
Holy cows & scapegoats

by Subhash Gatade

[....It is difficult to say what will happen next !

Whether the police and security forces would understand their folly  
and would release Tariq Ahmad Batloo unconditionally or whether Delhi  
police who have branded two of their earlier contacts Irshad Ali and  
Mohammad Marouf Qamar  as 'Al Badr Terrorists' would make amends to  
their steps ? Whether media would engage in a deep soul-searching  
about its complicity to join the powers that be in making  
'terrorists' out of innocent people ? Neither it is possible to  
predict when would the process of 'terrorisation' and  
'stigmatisation' of particular communities would end nor it is  
possible to  predict when would the division of peoples in Holy  
Cowsand Scapegoats would end.

It would not be an exaggeration to say that the future of India as a  
republic is at stake here.]

[. . .]

http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ArticlesArchive/ 
gatade29aug08.html

_____


[6]

The Telegraph, August 29, 2008

Editorial
BEYOND ART

Between fair-weather secularists and brazen fanatics, it is often  
difficult to decide who is the more deplorable. The India Art Summit,  
which opened last week in New Delhi, was supposed to be the biggest- 
ever art trade fair in the country. What could have been a platform  
for modern Indian art to assert itself in a major way has suddenly  
turned into a source of acute embarrassment. Among the 400 names that  
feature on this grand show, put up by Hanmer and Partner with the  
support of the ministry of culture and tourism, the most striking  
absence was Maqbool Fida Husain. This omission remains unpardonable  
for several reasons. It is audacious even to conceive of an  
exhibition of Indian art that leaves out works by Mr Husain from it.  
The very idea not only reveals a pitiful ignorance of art history but  
also expresses disrespect towards one of the most universally  
acclaimed of Indian artists. It is not without reason that Mr Husain  
is considered to be a modern master. He made his mark for the first  
time in the late Forties with a distinctly original idiom — a  
cosmopolitan blend of Western and indigenous influences. This  
pluralism has turned him into one of the highest-selling Indian  
artists worldwide.

For this reason alone, it is unforgivable that the United Progressive  
Alliance government, with its avowedly secularist agenda, chose not  
to rally for the inclusion of works by Mr Husain for fear of a  
backlash from religious fundamentalists. Since 2006, Mr Husain, now  
in his nineties, is on a self-imposed exile. The Hindu Right  
continues to bay for his blood for painting some of its holy pantheon  
in the nude. Mr Husain was unceremoniously left out of the art summit  
as the organizers refused to risk an attack by a bigoted mob. It did  
not matter even if the so-called controversial works were not shown:  
Mr Husain has ceased to be the symptom of a malaise in Indian  
democracy, he has become the disease itself. When Sahmat, an NGO,  
protested by putting up an exhibition of prints by him, 10 members of  
Ram Sena, a pro-Hindutva outfit, disrupted the show violently. The  
fiasco has not only exposed the tensions within the secular ideals of  
the UPA, but has also revealed a deeper fissure in the polity. Beyond  
the murky politics and shifting ideologies, it is the ideals  
enshrined in the Constitution that have been threatened by this  
incident.


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

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: http://sacw.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

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