SACW | Jan 9-13, 2009 / Sri Lanka: Dog's of War / Bangladesh: Take on the Fundo's / Pak-India: Peace Activists Signature campaign
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at gmail.com
Mon Jan 12 21:25:51 CST 2009
South Asia Citizens Wire | January 9-13, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2597 -
Year 11 running
From: www.sacw.net
[1] Sri Lanka: Dog's of War
(i) 'And Then They Came For Me' - The last editorial by Lasantha
Wickrematunge
(ii) Sri Lankan Tigers Facing Extinction? (J. Sri Raman)
(iii) Book Review: The Separatist Conflict in Sri Lanka, Terrorism
ethnicity, political economy (H.L.D. Mahindapala)
[2] India/Pakistan: Lowering Temperatures (Praful Bidwai)
+ Pakistan’s Ajoka theatre told not to come to India (Nirupama
Subramanian)
[3] Bangladesh: A Second Chance For Lady Luck (Taslima Nasreen)
[4] Peace Activists Launch of Joint Signature campaign in different
cities of Pakistan and India (Press releases)
[5] Zionism, exterminism, and the Times of India: Letter to the
Editor (Dilip Simeon)
[6] Publication Announcement: 'Beyond Counter-insurgency - Breaking
the Impasse in Northeast India' Edited by Sanjib Baruah
______
[1] Sri Lanka: Dog's of War:
(i) http://www.sacw.net/article491.html
[In the death of the Sunday Leader editor, Lasantha Wickrematunge ,
Sri Lanka lost a very courageous and visionary journalist who strived
to expose corruption, human rights abuses and supported the rights of
minorities in the face of great personal danger.
He had obviously anticipated his own demise and the manner of it as
is evident from his last editorial published in Sunday Leader.]
Sunday Leader
Editorial
AND THEN THEY CAME FOR ME
No other profession calls on its practitioners to lay down their
lives for their art save the armed forces and, in Sri Lanka ,
journalism. In the course of the past few years, the independent
media have increasingly come under attack. Electronic and print-media
institutions have been burnt, bombed, sealed and coerced. Countless
journalists have been harassed, threatened and killed. It has been my
honour to belong to all those categories and now especially the last.
I have been in the business of journalism a good long time. Indeed,
2009 will be The Sunday Leader's 15th year. Many things have changed
in Sri Lanka during that time, and it does not need me to tell you
that the greater part of that change has been for the worse. We find
ourselves in the midst of a civil war ruthlessly prosecuted by
protagonists whose bloodlust knows no bounds. Terror, whether
perpetrated by terrorists or the state, has become the order of the
day. Indeed, murder has become the primary tool whereby the state
seeks to control the organs of liberty. Today it is the journalists,
tomorrow it will be the judges. For neither group have the risks ever
been higher or the stakes lower.
Why then do we do it? I often wonder that. After all, I too am a
husband, and the father of three wonderful children. I too have
responsibilities and obligations that transcend my profession, be it
the law or journalism. Is it worth the risk? Many people tell me it
is not. Friends tell me to revert to the bar, and goodness knows it
offers a better and safer livelihood. Others, including political
leaders on both sides, have at various times sought to induce me to
take to politics, going so far as to offer me ministries of my
choice. Diplomats, recognising the risk journalists face in Sri
Lanka , have offered me safe passage and the right of residence in
their countries. Whatever else I may have been stuck for, I have not
been stuck for choice.
But there is a calling that is yet above high office, fame, lucre and
security. It is the call of conscience.
The Sunday Leader has been a controversial newspaper because we say
it like we see it: whether it be a spade, a thief or a murderer, we
call it by that name. We do not hide behind euphemism. The
investigative articles we print are supported by documentary evidence
thanks to the public-spiritedness of citizens who at great risk to
themselves pass on this material to us. We have exposed scandal after
scandal, and never once in these 15 years has anyone proved us wrong
or successfully prosecuted us.
The free media serve as a mirror in which the public can see itself
sans mascara and styling gel. From us you learn the state of your
nation, and especially its management by the people you elected to
give your children a better future. Sometimes the image you see in
that mirror is not a pleasant one. But while you may grumble in the
privacy of your armchair, the journalists who hold the mirror up to
you do so publicly and at great risk to themselves. That is our
calling, and we do not shirk it.
Every newspaper has its angle, and we do not hide the fact that we
have ours. Our commitment is to see Sri Lanka as a transparent,
secular, liberal democracy. Think about those words, for they each
has profound meaning. Transparent because government must be openly
accountable to the people and never abuse their trust. Secular
because in a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society such as ours,
secularism offers the only common ground by which we might all be
united. Liberal because we recognise that all human beings are
created different, and we need to accept others for what they are and
not what we would like them to be. And democratic.. . well, if you
need me to explain why that is important, you'd best stop buying this
paper.
The Sunday Leader has never sought safety by unquestioningly
articulating the majority view. Let's face it that is the way to sell
newspapers. On the contrary, as our opinion pieces over the years
amply demonstrate, we often voice ideas that many people find
distasteful. For example, we have consistently espoused the view that
while separatist terrorism must be eradicated, it is more important
to address the root causes of terrorism, and urged government to view
Sri Lanka's ethnic strife in the context of history and not through
the telescope of terrorism. We have also agitated against state
terrorism in the so-called war against terror, and made no secret of
our horror that Sri Lanka is the only country in the world routinely
to bomb its own citizens. For these views we have been labelled
traitors, and if this be treachery, we wear that label proudly.
Many people suspect that The Sunday Leader has a political agenda: it
does not. If we appear more critical of the government than of the
opposition it is only because we believe that - pray excuse
cricketing argot - there is no point in bowling to the fielding side.
Remember that for the few years of our existence in which the UNP was
in office, we proved to be the biggest thorn in its flesh, exposing
excess and corruption wherever it occurred. Indeed, the steady stream
of embarrassing expose’s we published may well have served to
precipitate the downfall of that government.
Neither should our distaste for the war be interpreted to mean that
we support the Tigers. The LTTE are among the most ruthless and
bloodthirsty organisations ever to have infested the planet. There is
no gainsaying that it must be eradicated. But to do so by violating
the rights of Tamil citizens, bombing and shooting them mercilessly,
is not only wrong but shames the Sinhalese, whose claim to be
custodians of the dhamma is forever called into question by this
savagery, much of which is unknown to the public because of censorship.
What is more, a military occupation of the country's north and east
will require the Tamil people of those regions to live eternally as
second-class citizens, deprived of all self respect. Do not imagine
that you can placate them by showering "development" and
"reconstruction" on them in the post-war era. The wounds of war will
scar them forever, and you will also have an even more bitter and
hateful Diaspora to contend with. A problem amenable to a political
solution will thus become a festering wound that will yield strife
for all eternity. If I seem angry and frustrated, it is only because
most of my countrymen - and all of the government - cannot see this
writing so plainly on the wall.
It is well known that I was on two occasions brutally assaulted,
while on another my house was sprayed with machine-gun fire. Despite
the government's sanctimonious assurances, there was never a serious
police inquiry into the perpetrators of these attacks, and the
attackers were never apprehended. In all these cases, I have reason
to believe the attacks were inspired by the government. When finally
I am killed, it will be the government that kills me.
The irony in this is that, unknown to most of the public, Mahinda and
I have been friends for more than a quarter century. Indeed, I
suspect that I am one of the few people remaining who routinely
addresses him by his first name and uses the familiar Sinhala address
oya when talking to him. Although I do not attend the meetings he
periodically holds for newspaper editors, hardly a month passes when
we do not meet, privately or with a few close friends present, late
at night at President's House. There we swap yarns, discuss politics
and joke about the good old days. A few remarks to him would
therefore be in order here.
Mahinda, when you finally fought your way to the SLFP presidential
nomination in 2005, nowhere were you welcomed more warmly than in
this column. Indeed, we broke with a decade of tradition by referring
to you throughout by your first name. So well known were your
commitments to human rights and liberal values that we ushered you in
like a breath of fresh air. Then, through an act of folly, you got
yourself involved in the Helping Hambantota scandal. It was after a
lot of soul-searching that we broke the story, at the same time
urging you to return the money. By the time you did so several weeks
later, a great blow had been struck to your reputation. It is one you
are still trying to live down.
You have told me yourself that you were not greedy for the
presidency. You did not have to hanker after it: it fell into your
lap. You have told me that your sons are your greatest joy, and that
you love spending time with them, leaving your brothers to operate
the machinery of state. Now, it is clear to all who will see that
that machinery has operated so well that my sons and daughter do not
themselves have a father.
In the wake of my death I know you will make all the usual
sanctimonious noises and call upon the police to hold a swift and
thorough inquiry. But like all the inquiries you have ordered in the
past, nothing will come of this one, too. For truth be told, we both
know who will be behind my death, but dare not call his name. Not
just my life, but yours too, depends on it.
Sadly, for all the dreams you had for our country in your younger
days, in just three years you have reduced it to rubble. In the name
of patriotism you have trampled on human rights, nurtured unbridled
corruption and squandered public money like no other President before
you. Indeed, your conduct has been like a small child suddenly let
loose in a toyshop. That analogy is perhaps inapt because no child
could have caused so much blood to be spilled on this land as you
have, or trampled on the rights of its citizens as you do. Although
you are now so drunk with power that you cannot see it, you will come
to regret your sons having so rich an inheritance of blood. It can
only bring tragedy. As for me, it is with a clear conscience that I
go to meet my Maker. I wish, when your time finally comes, you could
do the same. I wish.
As for me, I have the satisfaction of knowing that I walked tall and
bowed to no man. And I have not travelled this journey alone. Fellow
journalists in other branches of the media walked with me: most of
them are now dead, imprisoned without trial or exiled in far-off
lands. Others walk in the shadow of death that your Presidency has
cast on the freedoms for which you once fought so hard. You will
never be allowed to forget that my death took place under your watch.
As anguished as I know you will be, I also know that you will have no
choice but to protect my killers: you will see to it that the guilty
one is never convicted. You have no choice. I feel sorry for you, and
Shiranthi will have a long time to spend on her knees when next she
goes for Confession for it is not just her owns sins which she must
confess, but those of her extended family that keeps you in office.
As for the readers of The Sunday Leader, what can I say but Thank You
for supporting our mission. We have espoused unpopular causes, stood
up for those too feeble to stand up for themselves, locked horns with
the high and mighty so swollen with power that they have forgotten
their roots, exposed corruption and the waste of your hard-earned tax
rupees, and made sure that whatever the propaganda of the day, you
were allowed to hear a contrary view. For this I - and my family -
have now paid the price that I have long known I will one day have to
pay. I am - and have always been - ready for that. I have done
nothing to prevent this outcome: no security, no precautions. I want
my murderer to know that I am not a coward like he is, hiding behind
human shields while condemning thousands of innocents to death. What
am I among so many? It has long been written that my life would be
taken, and by whom. All that remains to be written is when.
That The Sunday Leader will continue fighting the good fight, too, is
written. For I did not fight this fight alone. Many more of us have
to be - and will be - killed before The Leader is laid to rest. I
hope my assassination will be seen not as a defeat of freedom but an
inspiration for those who survive to step up their efforts. Indeed, I
hope that it will help galvanise forces that will usher in a new era
of human liberty in our beloved motherland. I also hope it will open
the eyes of your President to the fact that however many are
slaughtered in the name of patriotism, the human spirit will endure
and flourish. Not all the Rajapakses combined can kill that.
People often ask me why I take such risks and tell me it is a matter
of time before I am bumped off. Of course I know that: it is
inevitable. But if we do not speak out now, there will be no one left
to speak for those who cannot, whether they be ethnic minorities, the
disadvantaged or the persecuted. An example that has inspired me
throughout my career in journalism has been that of the German
theologian, Martin Niemller. In his youth he was an anti-Semite and
an admirer of Hitler. As Nazism took hold in Germany , however, he
saw Nazism for what it was: it was not just the Jews Hitler sought to
extirpate, it was just about anyone with an alternate point of view.
Niemller spoke out, and for his trouble was incarcerated in the
Sachsenhausen and Dachau concentration camps from 1937 to 1945, and
very nearly executed. While incarcerated, Niemller wrote a poem that,
from the first time I read it in my teenage years, stuck hauntingly
in my mind:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
If you remember nothing else, remember this: The Leader is there for
you, be you Sinhalese, Tamil, Muslim, low-caste, homosexual,
dissident or disabled. Its staff will fight on, unbowed and unafraid,
with the courage to which you have become accustomed. Do not take
that commitment for granted. Let there be no doubt that whatever
sacrifices we journalists make, they are not made for our own glory
or enrichment: they are made for you. Whether you deserve their
sacrifice is another matter.
As for me, God knows I tried.
o o o
(ii)
Truthout.org
09 January 2009
SRI LANKAN TIGERS FACING EXTINCTION?
by J. Sri Raman
"The Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka are facing extinction. Like the
great beasts they named themselves after, they were fighting tooth
and claw this week against the ... soldiers sent to disarm them, but
it was a losing fight. They were outnumbered, outgunned, running out
of supplies and, with the [soldiers] blocking every exit, had no
place to retreat to. Guerrillas are no match for orthodox battalions
in a pitched battle, the sort that was taking place in the Tigers
stronghold ..."
This sounds like an excerpt from one of the many reports in the
newspapers of Sri Lanka and India over the past few days. But it is not.
"... From a tactical point of view, Prabhakaran's actions were
baffling. The peace plan had promised the Tamils local rule in the
regions where they predominate. The rebel leader had extracted a
further concession that would have allowed his group to control the
interim administration. Why had he sacrificed such tangible political
gains and provoked a military confrontation that could only lead to
his destruction?"
This, too, could pass for a very recent comment on the hubris
and nemesis of the supremo of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
(LTTE). Wrong, again, if you thought so.
The first was part of a report captioned "Requiem for the
Tigers" in the London-based Economist of October 17, 1987. The second
was part of an analysis in Time Magazine of October 26, 1987.
Both journals were covering the war that had broken out between
the LTTE and an Indian Peace-Keeping Force (IPKF). And both were
writing off the LTTE and its leader, who had already become a living
legend to many and a loathed monster to many others.
Similar reports can be gleaned from publications of about a
decade later. The LTTE and Prabhakaran again seemed to face
formidable odds in 1996 as Sri Lankan armed forces captured
significant swathes of Tiger territory. The fortunes of the civil war
were again seen as foreshadowing an end of the road for the rebels
and their redoubtable chief.
The point is that requiems have been sung for the Tigers
repeatedly before and they have proven more than a bit premature.
Experience should exhort many in the region against rejoicing too
soon over the reported imminence of the rebels' fall along with their
larger-than-life leader.
The conclusion may not appear unwarranted if one goes by the
logic of conventional warfare alone. The LTTE has lost much of the
northern part of Sri Lanka earlier under its control and the town of
Killinochi that once harbored its headquarters. It has been driven
into Mullaitivu, a narrow, heavily forested strip of 40 square
kilometers.
The Tigers, however, have engaged in conventional warfare only
for a short, recent phase of their 32-year-long armed struggle. They
have relied on guerrilla tactics and spectacular terror strikes for
decades, including suicide attacks, in which they are considered
pioneers of sorts, before building up an army along with a
rudimentary navy and air force.
Some experts argue that the LTTE cannot easily return to its
older fighting ways. Even Prabhakaran is quoted as conceding "new
weaponry from India, Pakistan, China and elsewhere" has given Colombo
a temporary advantage. Web sites and other mouthpieces of the Tigers,
however, make it quite clear that the rebels are working for a
regrouping and the return to methods of resistance that made them a
menace in the first place. The recent reverses, in fact, have already
led to at least two suicide missions in the vicinity of Colombo.
Frenetic speculation rages about the fate of Prabhakaran
himself. Colombo claims that its forces will try to capture him
alive. India's ruling Congress party takes the claim so seriously as
to demand his extradition in that event, since he is wanted in the
case of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's assassination, of which
the LTTE has been convicted in Indian courts.
Despite this, some expect an endangered Prabhakaran to escape to
India. At least one security analyst thinks he may disappear into a
South Indian forest controlled by ultra-leftists, whom the Tigers had
assisted in the past. Some others see him seeking refuge in a Western
state, probably Norway, which had played the broker between Colombo
and the LTTE.
Still others wager that he will stay put in Sri Lanka, as he has
all through these years, without encountering any serious bodily
harm. His admirers swear that he would sooner bite the cyanide pill
he carries like other LTTE combatants than be captured alive.
Whatever his fate, the difference it would make is an
indisputable fact. The end of the Che Guevera of the Eelam, idolized
as the champion of ethnic rights by large sections of Tamils in Sri
Lanka and India's State of Tamilnadu, as well as the worldwide Tamil
diaspora, can deal a heavy blow to the movement by demoralizing it.
The end of Prabhakaran, however, may not necessarily mean the
Tiger's extinction. We have no word on a second-line leadership in
the LTTE. It is hard to trust the testimony of former Tigers, who are
now among its implacable foes, to the effect that the hordes of
Prabhakaran will not survive their hero.
All this may sound like a tribute to the Tigers. It is not meant
to be one. It may be too early to sing their requiem, but Prabhakaran
and the LTTE do not exactly deserve a panegyric, certainly not from a
peace activist.
We have talked in these columns before of the neglected cause of
peace amidst the clash of ethnic nationalities. Speaking of a
"silenced constituency" of the island-state on December 4, 2006, we
pointed to a section of the people who do not figure in the flood of
war stories: "Sri Lankans who prefer and pride themselves on a
composite Sri Lankan identity." This constituency has continued to
face "cruelly formidable odds, especially in the Sinhala-majority
south of Sri Lanka from anti-minority forces."
The situation has always been similar, though not identical to,
that of far-right creation in India, with reference to Hindu-Muslim
relations. It is hard to plead for inter-religious harmony here
without the holy right calling one a "traitor" and a friend of
"terrorism," particularly after the Mumbai outrage, For years, in Sri
Lanka, the far right has violently frustrated even attempts at
antiwar rallies on the ground that these were designed to demoralize
the armed forces.
It is the anti-minority far right that, in the final analysis,
has made the Tigers and Prabhakaran the force they are.
The short-term illusion, which stories of a round-the-corner end
for Eelam extremism encourage, is evident. Less obvious, perhaps, is
the larger illusion that the premature celebrations promote.
The illusion finds one of its many illustrations in the
editorial of Sri Lankan daily The Island of January 3, 2008. "The
capture of Kilinochchi," said the editorial, "is not a blow to the
LTTE alone. It has sent a strong message to others of its ilk all
over the world that the civilized world is capable of eliminating the
scourge of terrorism."
It is not only a small island-state in South Asia that nurses
the dangerously misleading delusion that terrorism can be defeated
and ended by the might of the state alone.
--
Also see
Sri Lankan President Makes Conspiracy Claims
Friday 09 January 2009
by Iqbal Athas, CNN
http://www.truthout.org/010909B#1
(iii)
Daily Mirror
January 10, 2009
THE SEPARATIST CONFLICT IN SRI LANKA, TERRORISM ETHNICITY, POLITICAL
ECONOMY
The indispensable book for our confused times
by H.L.D. Mahindapala
Prof. Asoka Bandarage’s latest book, The Separatist Conflict in Sri
Lanka, Terrorism ethnicity, political economy, is a new academic
evaluation of the diverse and salient issues that had bedevilled the
Sri Lankan conflict. It challenges the orthodox views and presents
new insights that had missed the attention of the “ethnic
entrepreneurs” who filled the public space with the monotonous drum
beat of blaming only one side – the majority Sinhala-Buddhists.
In any intellectual/academic enterprise, it is unrealistic and
illogical to conclude that the complex forces, interacting and
influencing each other, can be reduced to the sound of a clap with
one hand. Yet a whole school of “ethnic entrepreneurs”, mostly from
America, led by Prof. S.J. Tambiah of Harvard University, thrived by
“manufacturing consensus” (Noam Chomsky) on this mono-causal thesis
of blaming only the Sinhala-Buddhists. Rushing in from various
angles, the Sri Lankans in American academia ran down this mono-
causal narrow seam as if they were a herd chivvied by a “Rhinocerian”
goad (Eugene Ionesco). Prof. Bandarage’s new study, on the contrary,
explores the multi-factorial forces intertwining into the entangled
and matted mess of the Sri Lankan conflict. It goes beyond the
limited confines of the prevailing academic orthodoxy which has been
dominated by some of the leading “ethnic entrepreneurs”.
In the absence of formidable and competitive perspectives
penetrating the unfolding events, this orthodox view gained the upper
hand. The “American school” was aided and abetted by the Sri Lankan
academics – particularly those from the Colombo University – who
gathered their forces to buttress and propagate this mono-causal
view. There are nearly 4,000 academics in the 14 universities and
only the voices of those linked to this American network of academics
(who were also allied to cash-flushed NGOs funding their “research”)
were heard in local and international fora.
Proponents of this orthodox view also gained ascendancy because the
opposite points of view were silenced by the overwhelming power of
resources thrown by the privatized research centres that were popping
up inside the walls of proliferating NGOs. They constructed the
political vocabulary and the theoretical framework. They handpicked
the narrow field of ground-work that confirmed their political
biases. And they craftily selected the evidence to fit into the
politicized re-writing of history. Points of view that did not fit
into their political agenda were dismissed as “unscientific”
“chauvinism” and “racism”. Exclusion rather than inclusion was the
norm in their intellectual exercises.
It is, therefore, pleasantly surprising to find a fresh academic
voice challenging this mono-causal view. Prof. Asoka Bandarage’s
latest book, The Separatist Conflict in Sri Lanka, Terrorism
ethnicity, political economy, comes into this enclosed space like a
breath of fresh air, easing the suffocation inside the closed
ideological box. The book gains an added significance and value when
it is read in the context of the “ethnic entrepreneurs” who hid
behind the ubiquitous “cadjan curtains” of Jaffna. It opens up vistas
that were never considered valid for analyzing the Sri Lankan
conflict. In this respect her book not only breaks new ground but
also presents a panoramic view of the conflict. Her decision to break
away from the pack and go off the beaten track is a daring move that
is rare in Sri Lankan studies.
Before going any further into the book, it is necessary to
emphasize that her study reaches a new scholarly peak from which it
is possible to look down on the prevailing mono-causal ideology that
distorted the realities of the Sri Lankan conflict. The recurring
question that runs through the mind when reading her book is: why did
academia and think-tanks exploring the Sri Lankan conflict accept
this narrow, mono-causal view when all the available evidence and
reasoning ran against it? Conventional wisdom has categorized the Sri
Lankan conflict as a product of culturally based violence where the
majority Sinhala-Buddhists not only discriminated against the
minority Tamils but also refused to accommodate their “grievances”
which incrementally led to the exacerbation of inter-ethnic relations
until the northern Tamils were forced to pass the Vadukoddai
Resolution in May 1976 declaring war on the majority Sinhalese.
Incidentally, this was also the view that was held by a segment of
the Sinhala intelligentsia, coming initially from the left-wing,
based on misplaced ideological sympathies and from the right-wing of
late based on opportunistic politics to grab the Tamil vote. It
became fashionable among those at these two ends of the political
spectrum to view the conflict in simplistic terms of a clash of
ethnic identities.
Though this view has been contested it has not gained acceptance at
the same level as theory of the culture-driven violence of the
Sinhala-Buddhists against the Tamils. The opposition to this thesis
has come out sporadically, in an ad hoc fashion, without collating
the anti-thesis into a solid, cohesive argument.
Finger-pointing at the Sinhala Buddhists was a subtle means of
providing ideological incentives and justifications for Tamil
violence. The distorted presentation of a mono-causal theory was the
primary source that justified Jaffna Tamil violence endorsed in the
Vadukoddai Resolution of 1976. In fact, the mono-causal theory was a
carbon copy of the Vadukoddai Resolution. Every theorist who argued
for separatism in one form or other – from Eelam to confederalism to
federalism to power-sharing – hardly ever deviated from the concocted
geography and the manufactured history laid down in the Vaddukoddai
Resolution. It was the bedrock on which Tamil separatism was based.
The main theses of the Vadukoddai Resolution, demanding a separate
state and urging violence in pursuance of this political goal were
given respectability and legitimacy by the “ethnic entrepreneurs” in
privatized research centres run by foreign-funded NGOs. The new
ideological foot soldiers that fanned out globally to fire the
ammunition manufactured by NGOs and partisan academics were content
to wage their ideological war wearing these tinted monocles.
Denigrating the Sinhala-Buddhist was a part of their strategy to
promote the image of the northern Jaffna Tamils as the pristine,
innocent and the vulnerable underdog that faced the brunt of Sinhala-
Buddhist discrimination and violence in the post-independence phase.
As the northern violence gathered momentum a whole new industry
developed inside academia and NGO think-tanks to rationalize the
separatist political agenda prescribed in the Vadukoddai Resolution.
The only difference was in the sophistication of the arguments
presented by partisan academics in support of the main political
agenda, outlined rather crudely, in the Resolution. In every other
respect they ran on parallel lines. Norman Uphoff of Cornell
University, a political scientist “who did many years of extensive
field research in conflict areas in Lanka,” confirms this when he
says: “Sinhalese politicians were blinded by their own ethnic
prejudices and perceptions, themselves seeing the conflict much as
LTTE has defined it, as an ethnic struggle rather than a blatant
attempt by a minority to seize political power and territory.”
The major thrust of the academic enterprise was to force the public
to see the “conflict much as the LTTE has defined it.” As Uphoff has
pointed out, it is the LTTE that defined the political agenda after
it took over from the old guard that steered peninsular politics in
feudal, colonial times and pre-1976 period. But the LTTErs were
essentially the children of the Vadukoddai Resolution. They were
merely the young agents recruited ideologically by the elders of
Jaffna to implement the Vadukoddai Resolution which was drafted,
endorsed and politically packaged for the specific objective of
unleashing political violence.
She points out that the separatist agenda was drawn not only on
“erroneous premises” but also on falsified historical statements. She
states: “The Vadukoddai Resolution was taken almost verbatim from the
erroneous Cleghorn Minute….”(p.71) She also cites K. M. de Silva, Sri
Lanka’s foremost historian, as the authority that had investigated
and debunked the Cleghorn Minute. Hugh Cleghorn was the first
Colonial Secretary under Gov. North and he left the country in
disgrace after it was found that some of the pearls that were in his
custody had gone missing. It is not his questionable character that
is at stake. It is his ill-informed knowledge of history that casts
doubt on the validity of his minute. In the same minute he states
that the Sinhalese came from Siam. K. M. de Silva shreds Cleghorn’s
minute to strips in his monograph, “Separatist Ideology in Sri Lanka:
A historical appraisal”. K.M. de Silva’s monograph is a critical
study that explodes the foundations of the “traditional homelands”
myths on which the Vaddukoddai Resolution was based.
____
[2]
Inter Press Service
January 10, 2009
INDIA/PAKISTAN: LOWERING TEMPERATURES
by Praful Bidwai
NEW DELHI, Jan 10 (IPS) - Six weeks after the Mumbai terrorist
attacks precipitated a grave new crisis in their mutual relations,
the danger of a military conflict breaking out between India and
Pakistan has receded.
The two "distant neighbours" seem to be heading towards less hostile
diplomatic exchanges, but are still wary of being seen to be weak and
yielding to pressure.
Meanwhile, civil society organisations in both countries have raised
their voices in favour of renouncing military options to deal with
the crisis, and asked the two governments to "redouble their efforts"
to devise an "effective strategy" against terrorism and religious
militancy and "quickly compose their differences over ways of dealing
with terrorism".
A significant change has come about since the Indian government
presented a detailed dossier to Pakistan's ambassador in New Delhi on
Jan. 6, containing evidence that the attacks were planned and
executed by the Pakistan-based extremist group Lashkar-e-Toiba,
itself related to the Jamaat-ud-Dawa organisation banned recently by
Pakistan following the United Nations Security Council resolution.
A day later, the Pakistan government officially admitted for the
first time that the sole surviving assailant, Amir Ajmal Kasab, who
has been in the custody of the Mumbai police, is a Pakistani national.
In the process, however, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani sacked
National Security Adviser Mahmud Ali Durrani for confirming Kasab's
identity to the media without his authorisation.
Until now, the Pakistan government had maintained, in the face of
media reports identifying Kasab and his father and verifying their
address in a village in the Pakistani Punjab, that there was no proof
that Kasab is a Pakistani.
"Now that the government has confirmed Kasab's identity as a
Pakistani, it is incumbent upon it to investigate how LeT came to
play the role that it did, probe into its various official and sub-
state connections and swiftly bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai
attacks to justice," says Karamat Ali, a Karachi-based social
activist and a founder-member of the Pakistan Peace Coalition, an
umbrella group set up in 1999.
"Indeed, the government must go further and crack down on all jehadi
groups with violent and fundamentalist agendas and smash the
infrastructure that supports them. These groups have become a menace
not just to distant and neighbouring countries, but to Pakistan
itself,’’ Ali said.
‘’It is unfortunate that Durrani was sacked at this particular point
of time because of internal differences between President Asif Ali
Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani. But that shouldn't prevent the
government from acting seriously against the terrorist groups,’’ Ali
added.
If Pakistan takes some real action, which goes beyond the token house
arrests made after JuD was banned, then India is likely to be
persuaded to take a more cooperative approach towards Islamabad and
work out the steps through which the two governments could work
together against extremist groups.
India and Pakistan set up a Joint Anti-Terrorism Mechanism in March
2007, and this has met a number of times. But no meeting was convened
after the attacks in November.
The two countries are also members of the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC), which adopted a comprehensive
convention against terrorism in 1987, and also fall and followed it
up with an additional protocol. This makes it mandatory for the
regional governments to share information and investigate and act
against terrorist crimes jointly.
SAARC includes India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, the
Maldives, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan. The absence of cooperation
between India and Pakistan after Mumbai is explained by a lack of
mutual trust. India claims to have clinching evidence of LeT's
involvement in the attacks and suspects that the group was backed
covertly by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency or by the
army.
The evidence collected by India in the dossier includes transcripts
of telephone conversations purportedly between the assailants and
their handlers in Pakistan during the period Nov. 20 - 29, GPS
(global positioning system) and satellite telephone signatures;
transcripts of conversations between the attackers and their
handlers; photographs of arms with Pakistani markings; use of virtual
telephone numbers generated over the Internet; and the associated
money trails.
On the other hand, Pakistan has been in denial but only of the role
played by LeT and other Pakistan-based groups, but also of its own
state's responsibility for the security of its neighbourhood.
"Mercifully, India and Pakistan have given a break to the sabre-
rattling in which they engaged just after the Mumbai attacks," says
Kamal Mitra Chenoy, a professor at the School of International
Studies of Jawaharlal Nehru University here. "This is welcome because
any military conflict between the two countries is liable to escalate
into a Nuclear Armageddon."
But, adds Chenoy: "Neither government has so far fashioned a coherent
non-military alternative approach to the crisis. Pakistan is yet to
move away decisively from denial and stonewalling to cooperation. And
India has been giving out contradictory signals."
Thus, a day after India presented the Mumbai dossier to Pakistan,
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh accused Pakistan of using "terrorism as
an instrument of state policy". He charged it with "whipping up war
hysteria" and blamed its "fragile" government, including the civilian
government, for the neighbourhood's "uncertain security environment":
the "more fragile a government, the more it act[s] in an
irresponsible fashion".
Says political scientist Achin Vanaik: "This runs counter to the
logic and rationale of the India-Pakistan peace process launched in
2004. It sits ill with India's considered view that Pakistan's
civilian government is friendly towards India and keen to act against
terrorists, and must be supported."
Singh cited no evidence to prove the Pakistan government's
involvement in the attacks. His charges were based on a general
assessment, surmise or inference, similar to that drawn by Home
Minister P Chidambaram -- namely, "in a crime of this size and scale,
I will presume that it was state-assisted until the contrary is
proved. I will draw an adverse inference..."
Adds Vanaik: "Such inference fits past patterns of 'plausible
deniability' in which the ISI diabolically instigated terrorist
violence. It may well apply to Mumbai, although other persuasive
hypotheses suggest the ISI may only have given logistical support.
However, the assessment must be specifically proved in Mumbai's case. ‘’
If India's objective, as Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon put it,
is to get Pakistan to further investigate LeT's role in the
operation, then it is counterproductive to accuse Pakistan in ways
which embarrass even the civilian government. If the goal is to
discredit Pakistan, then it is pointless to share the dossier with it.
However, the Indian government seems to be relying primarily on the
United States to exert pressure on Pakistan to act on India's Mumbai
dossier. According to the outgoing U.S. ambassador to India, David
Mulford, this dossier was prepared with the assistance of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) which is examining the deaths of six
U.S. citizens in the Mumbai attack.
"When Americans are killed anywhere, we pursue those people and that
is what we are up to in Pakistan. We will press ahead and we will do
it non-stop, as long as it takes," Mulford said, at a luncheon on
Friday organised by the Confederation of Indian Industries.
‘’The U.S. has been pressing for deeper understanding in Pakistan of
the roots of the problem of terrorism, Mulford said. "Like India, we
have a common agenda... we want to see Pakistan succeed, not fail,
not become a serious problem, not become a failed state.
The FBI was reportedly allowed to interrogate Kasab over a number of
sessions and has corroborated the intercepts by Indian agencies with
its own records. The Indian government expects Washington, and in
particular the FBI, to mount pressure on Pakistan to act.
"This may not be a wise strategy," argues Vanaik. "The U.S. has its
own agendas in South Asia. Imbalance and myopia are integral to U.S.
policy towards the region. And there is a huge risk in greater U.S.
involvement here. President-elect Barrack Obama plans to intensify
the Afghanistan war. This will increase U.S. dependence on the
Pakistan army, and downgrade India's anti-terrorist concerns."
o o o
The Hindu
12 January 2009
PAKISTAN’S AJOKA THEATRE TOLD NOT TO COME TO INDIA
by Nirupama Subramanian
National School of Drama festival had received threats
Ajoka’s play is about the havoc extremism wreaks on society
Its director said she had appealed to the NSD not to cancel the show
ISLAMABAD: On both sides of the border, eminent personalities are
making fervent appeals on the importance of keeping up intellectual,
cultural and people-to-people contacts between India and Pakistan in
these troubled times, but the idea is under assault.
After a successful outing of its ‘Bullah’ at the Thrissur
International Drama Festival last month, the Lahore-based Ajoka
theatre was all set to return to India this week for the National
School of Drama festival with another of its popular plays, only to
be asked by the organisers not to come.
Madeeha Gauhar, director of Ajoka, said she received a call from NSD
director Anuradha Kapoor, on Sunday afternoon asking her to cancel
the group’s trip to New Delhi as the festival had received threats
against putting up Pakistani plays.
“Ready to face”
“I told her that we receive many threats here in Pakistan too. We
face them, and we are ready to face such threats in India. We cannot
be deterred by them,” said Ms. Gauhar.
Another group from Pakistan already in New Delhi was scheduled to
perform on Sunday. The NSD administration is said to have received
threats on Sunday morning against going ahead with the show.
Extraordinary security measures were reported to have been taken
against possible attempts at disruption.
Ironically enough, the play Ajoka was taking to New Delhi, titled
‘Hotel Mohenjo Daro,’ is about the havoc extremism wreaks on society.
The context is Pakistan – the play, written by Ghulam Abbas in the
1960s about an imaginary scenario in his country in the 21st century,
is chillingly prophetic – but the message is universal.
Ms. Gauhar said she had appealed to the NSD not to cancel their show,
scheduled on January 16.
“To do that would be to give them what they [extremists] want. This
is what those behind the Mumbai attacks wanted,” she said, “to derail
the whole peace process and all the good things that were happening
between the two countries.”
Incredible response
But, said Ms. Gauhar, the “links do not evaporate, just like that.”
She spoke about being the first cultural group to venture into India
after the Mumbai attacks for the drama festival in Kerala last month
and described the response to their play about the 18th century Sufi
poet Bulleh Shah as “incredible.”
Protesters from the Bharatiya Janata Party arrived at the venue on
the morning the play was to be staged demanding from her that
Pakistan must hand over those behind the Mumbai attacks.
But the protest leader returned to watch the play in the evening, Ms.
Gauhar said, calling it the “magic of Bullah.”
Meanwhile, the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and
the South Asian Free Media Association have made a joint appeal
asking the two countries “not to allow the terrorists to hijack the
peace agenda” and “to go back to the Composite Dialogue process,”
which has provided the framework for the peace process since 2004.
Peace conference
HRCP chairperson Asma Jahangir and SAFMA secretary-general Imtiaz
Alam were in Amritsar on Sunday for a peace conference, where they
also stressed the need for a joint India-Pakistan investigation into
Mumbai and “a judicious prosecution” of the culprits.
“After passing through a denial mode, Pakistan has accepted the truth
that those who attacked Mumbai were from Pakistan.”
“Following this admission, which should have come earlier, India must
eschew its anger and get Pakistan to engage in negotiations on the
basis of what has been revealed about Pakistanis’ involvement in the
Mumbai attack,” they said in a joint statement.
They called upon Pakistan to “do the needful” since terrorism was the
common enemy of both the countries and urged India and the media in
both countries to show restraint.
“If there is cooperation and mutual understanding, the onus would be
on Pakistan side to clean up its act; and if there is a threat of war
from India then [Pakistan] would be under pressure [not to],” they said.
______
[3]
Tehelka Magazine, Vol 6, Issue 2, Dated Jan 17, 2009
A SECOND CHANCE FOR LADY LUCK
The exiled author hopes that this time, Sheikh Hasina would form the
bulwark against Islamic extremism
by Taslima Nasreen
Sweet Victory PM Sheikh Hasina waves after her win
Photo: Reuters
WE ARE passing through such a mess that barring hope there is little
that the people in Bangladesh can do, actually. I mean it.
Fundamentalism is rearing its ugly head in India and I often wonder
when it will actually spread its tentacles across the subcontinent. I
feel sad because the dream with which Bangladesh was born is almost
dead. Islamic fundamentalism that was in the backyards of millions of
homes is now a reality in our living rooms. It has almost made me
believe that we are a nation of no hope. And then, almost like the
proverbial phoenix, Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League — a party that once
was a beacon of hope for many, after the liberation war — rose with a
stupendous majority. For millions of Bangladeshis, it was like
finding a ship when your raft is sinking in the swirling waters of
the river Padma.
Bangladesh wants to live like its trailblazer days. There are
millions of commoners like me who are living with hope, and nothing
but hope. There are, of course, fears. I will not deny that because
in the past, the Awami League had forged alliances with
fundamentalist organisations and gone back on its promises to book
those who nearly destroyed the nation.
But my belief is that from dust rises hope. See the way Sheikh Hasina
won her battle? It was made possible with the help of those very men
and women who fought with their backs virtually to the wall. Support
was forthcoming because the majority in Bangladesh felt the Awami
League was a lesser evil. I think the party also won because the
nation was tired of relentless crimes perpetuated by the insane —
there is no other way to describe them. They had almost pushed the
nation to the brink of anarchy. In Hasina’s win, I also see the
glimmer of a dream that the nation saw many, many moons ago, in a
December that created Bangladesh. Hopefully, this victory will
recreate that hope once again.
I am hopeful because I can only hope. The absence of progressive
forces has always been a bane for my nation. As a result of such
vacuum, many actually started believing that the Awami League was the
only party that could deliver justice in Bangladesh. But then, in
1996, the party came to power yet did little to further the agenda of
progress.
Consider this. In 2006, when Islamic fundamentalists virtually took
charge of the country and the lives of its millions, many felt only
Sheikh Hasina had the power to change the ballgame and counter
divisive forces. I, for one, kept my fingers crossed because of what
she did in the past: that she would give complete powers to the
Maulvis to issue fatwas, grant university status to all madrasas,
push the blasphemy law and actually work towards making Bangladesh an
Islamic nation. I was aghast at the way she joined hands with such
fundamentalist forces. Was she buying time? Was she buying peace for
herself? I do not know that. But I could feel— sitting miles away
from home — the pains of those trying to fight such divisive forces.
And it was depressing for me because I, and likeminded people in
Bangladesh, always felt that the Awami League was the party of
progress. And we sunk further into depression when we saw our single
ray of hope, fading in the darkness of Islamic fundamentalism. Hasina
maintained little distance from all those who harboured hatred
against the handful of secular forces in Bangladesh. At times, I
would tell my friends that Jamat-e-Islami need not come to power in
our country and that the BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) and the
Awami League are perfectly placed to fulfill the Jamat dream.
Did Hasina actually raise her voice against such fundamentalist
forces? The answer is a big no. She did not, for reasons known best
to her. The nation — as a result of such stoic silence — went further
into the back alleys of hope and we felt our country was a helpless
state. No one — you must believe me when I write this — actually
paused to think what religious fanaticism could do to destroy a
nation. Politicians would enjoy their seats of power. But the ones
who actually get into trouble — when the nation is mired in such
religious fundamentalism — are women. Religious ignorance is the
worst enemy of women: child marriage, multiple marriages for men and
biased behaviour towards women (stoning a woman to death because of
her alleged illicit behaviour). The list is endless.
ONCE HASINA, I must confess, was a part of this mayhem in Bangladesh.
I do not know what prompted her to do such covert handholding. Maybe
she had reasons to do it – to paint the larger canvas. Hence, I had
reasons to be worried. I actually wondered whether Hasina would go
back to her old ways. Thankfully, I have been proved wrong. I see a
ray of hope in the way she has formed her cabinet. She has shunned
the fundamentalists and picked up women in the crucial ministries of
home, external affairs, agriculture, human resources and labour. This
is her journey of hope, of a dream for a sane, progressive Bangladesh.
But then, this is her most crucial hour. She is in the hot seat of
hope and fire. She has to deliver, quash the fanatical forces, rise
above the ordinary, and help the nation get rid of its image of a
poverty-stricken, backward thinking nation. If she can deliver the
lethal blow, she will also help the secular forces to rise, rise and
rise in Bangladesh. This will be the biggest signal a nation — that
once almost sank in anarchy because of a bunch of religious bigots —
would give to antisecular forces. It would be a strong message that
would permeate all levels and travel across the sub-continent and
perhaps, reach those corners of the world where similar
fundamentalist forces reside.
Bangladesh, actually, would set an example for the rest of the world.
I am hoping against hope that those numerous madarsas spewing venom
would down their shutters and close their minds of hatred.
I am wondering whether all this will happen. I cannot dismiss this
party; I am pinning my last hopes of a secular government on the
Awami League. Will it act like the forces that banned my Amar
Meyebela (My Childhood) and prevented me from returning home to meet
my ailing mother and father? Will it all change? Will they allow me
to return home? I doubt that.
Eventually, like earlier times, Hasina might still try to please the
divisive forces to stay in power. After all, she has to retain her
power, right? If that happens, hope will die a million deaths in my
homeland. Freedom will be at a premium, and progress will actually
take a flight out of the nation.
will wait and watch, thousands of miles away from my home, my land,
my country.
Translated from Bangla by Shantanu Guha Ray
______
[4] PEACE ACTIVISTS LAUNCH OF JOINT SIGNATURE CAMPAIGN IN DIFFERENT
CITIES OF PAKISTAN AND INDIA (PRESS RELEASES)
Dear All,
The information regarding the Joint Signature campaign in different
cities of Sindh along side other Cities of Pakistan and India.
In Karachi the launch was announced by Senior Activist B.M Kutti,
veteran intellectual M.B Naqvi, former Governor of Sindh Barrister
Kamal Azfar, HRCP Secretary General Syed Iqbal Haider, Women Rights
Activist Saleha Athar, Senior Journalist Abdul Hameed Chhapra,
Paksiatn Peace Coalition members Anushe Alam, Sharafat Ali, Adam
Malik, Awami Party Leader Mirza Maqsood, Pakistan Fisher Folk
Secretary Saeed Baloch and others in a Press conference
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=156386
In Hyderabad the launch was announced by prominent activists
including Punhal Sario president Sindh Hari Porhyat Council, Awami
Party Pakistan leaders Comrade Ramzan Memon, Dost Muhammad Channa,
senior activists Hussain Bux Thebo, Zain Daudpoto, Zahid Messo and
others in a press conference at office of Indus Development
Organization, Hyderabad.
In Shahdadkot the the launch was announced by Pakistan Peace
Coalition members Murad Pandrani, Rubina Chandio, Parveen Magsi and
others.
http://regionaltimes.com/10jan2009/jpg/5.jpg
Signatire camapign also launched in Umerkot, Johi, Khairpur, Ghotki
and other towns of Sindh.
Further it is stated that to support the campaign and get signature
Pakistan Peace Coalition Commitee headed by Anushe Alam will visit
schools, colleges and universities of Karachi to inform students and
teachers about the campaign and will get signatures from students and
teachers.
Sindh Hari Porhyat Council president Punhal Sario and Awami Party
Leader Comrade Ramzan Memon will visit different towns and villages
of Sindh and will participate corner meetings, demonstrations, public
walks, dialogues and discussion forums in support of the campaign as
well as to get signatures from common citizens. Their visit will
start from January 12 to February 10 to different towns and villages
of Sindh.
Regards
Adam Malik
Pakistan Peace Coalition
o o o
Joint Signature Campaign by Citizens of India and Pakistan Launched
Swami Agnivesh of Arya Samaj and Mr Karamat Ali of Pakistan Peace
Coalition launched an Indo-Pak Joint Signature Campaign by Citizens
of India and Pakistan in Delhi today at 3 pm against terrorism and
war posturing and to promote cooperation and peace between the two
neighboring countries. The Campaign will be carried out from 9th
January 2009 to 8th February 2009.
In Hyderabad, the Joint Signature Campaign has been launched at the
same time by Admiral L.Ramdas and Dr P.M.Bhargava at Lumbini Park.
Across India, the Campaign has been launched today at 3 pm IST in the
following cities: Amritsar, Belgaum, Bikaner, Chandigarh, Kurnool,
Dehradun, Delhi, Guwahati, Jaipur, Kolkotta, Lucknow, Madurai,
Mumbai, Panjim, Pune, Raipur, Saharanpur, Warangal, and and Wardha.
Simultaneously, the Campaign has been launched across Pakistan at
2.30 pm PST in the following cities: Faisalabad, Hyderabad- Sindh,
Hub, Islamabad, Karachi, Khairpur, Khuzdar, Larhana, Lahore, Multan,
Peshawar, Quetta, Sadikabad, Sakrand, Shadad Kot, Shikarpur, Sukkur
Many eminent personalities and peace activists were involved in the
Launch Programs in different cities and towns of both the countries,
including Admiral L. Ramdas, Kuldip Nayar, Kamla Bhasin, P.M.
Bhargava, Swami Agnivesh and other from India and Brig (Retd) Rao
Abid Hamid, B.M.Kutty, Dr. A. H. Nayyar I.A.Rehman, Karamat Ali,
M.B. Naqvi , Muhammad Tahseen Syed Iqbal Haider, Senator Dr. Abdul
Malik and others from Pakistan.
The Signature Campaign will be carried out in both the countries for
one month till 8th February 2009 and the signatures collected will be
submitted to the Prime Minister of India and the President of
Pakistan with copies to important political functionaries and media
houses of both countries.
The objective of this Campaign is to facilitate assertion by the
people of both the countries in favor of resolving the present crises
through dialogue, cooperation and appropriate actions by both the
governments to address terrorism and all other outstanding issues.
The collective will of the people could certainly compel the
establishments to adopt peaceful and appropriate processes to address
all the issues and bring back normalcy.
You can view the petition on the Website: http://
www.indopakcampaignagainstwarnterror.org
For online signatures, please visit: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/
indopak/petition.html
Mazher Hussain,
Executive Director, COVA
Mobile: 9849178111
For Indo-Pak Joint Signature Campaign
o o o
From: Amit Chakraborty
Sent: Friday, January 9, 2009 11:18:06 PM
Subject: [PIPFPD] Press Report on Joint Signature Campaign launched
in Kolkata
Press Note
Launch of Joint Signature Campaign by Citizens of India and Pakistan
Civil society organisations and concerned citizens of India and
Pakistan have come together to launch an Indo-Pak Joint Signature
Campaign against terrorism and war posturing and to promote
cooperation and peace between the two neighboring countries From 9th
January 2009 to 8th February 2009
The Joint Signature Campaign was launched in over 50 cities and towns
of India and over 25 cities and towns of Pakistan on 9th January 2009
from 3.pm IST in India and 2.30 pm PST in Pakistan to maintain
simultaneity of the launch time in both the countries.
Here in Kolkata it was launched by Pakistan India Peoples’ Forum for
Peace and Democracy, West Bengal Chapter at Muslim Institute. Many
eminent personalities and peace activists were involved in the Launch
Program. In the day as many as 150 signatories signed the petition in
Muslim Institute and from its vicinity. The campaign will continue in
days to come within next 30days in various public places and street
corners.
The Signature Campaign will be carried out in both the countries for
one month till 8th February 2009 and the signatures collected will be
submitted to the Prime Minister of India and the President of
Pakistan with copies to important political functionaries and media
houses of both countries.
The objective of this Campaign is to facilitate assertion by the
people of both the countries in favour of resolving the present
crises through dialogue, cooperation and appropriate actions by both
the governments to address terrorism and all other outstanding
issues. The collective will of the people could certainly compel the
establishments to adopt peaceful and appropriate processes to address
all the issues and bring back normalcy.
The contents of the Petition for the Joint Signature Campaign are as
follows:
We the Citizens of Pakistan and India demand that:
· The Government of Pakistan and the Government of India
should practice zero tolerance for religious extremism and terrorism
in the interest of the very sustenance and prosperity of both the
countries..
· Recognising that the problem of terrorism in both the
countries are qualitatively different, we urge both the governments
to take all appropriate initiates to contain and root out the
activities of all fanatic and terrorist groups and catch and punish
perpetrators of any acts of terror in their respective countries to
make the subcontinent safe and secure for all.
· Both the governments should immediately set up a Joint
Action and Investigative Agency for total cooperation and mutual
assistance to address and overcome the problem of terrorism
effectively and without any further delay.
· War can never be a solution but the beginning of
insurmountable problems for both the countries. Hence both the
governments should desist from war posturing and immediately engage
in meaningful and effective dialogue and actions to address the issue
of terrorism and to resolve all other outstanding problems.
· Both the Governments should follow in letter and spirit all
the Conventions and Resolutions of UN and SAARC against terrorism and
for cooperation to secure an atmosphere of mutual trust and holistic
cooperation that alone could ensure security of all citizens and
prosperity of the entire region.
· We appeal to the media of both India and Pakistan to play a
constructive role in this hour of crisis to propagate and strengthen
positive attitudes for the resolution of all the outstanding problems
and discourage escalation of conflict and adventurism that could
jeopardize peace and prosperity of both the countries.
Website: http://www.indopakcampaignagainstwarnterror.org
For online signatures Please Visits: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/
indopak/petition.html
Dated: 9th January 2009
(Amit Chakraborty)
Secretary,
Pakistan India Peoples’ Forum for Peace and Democracy
West Bengal Chapter.
______
[5] ZIONISM, EXTERMINISM, AND THE TIMES OF INDIA - A LETTER TO THE
EDITOR
http://www.sacw.net/article485.html
The Editor, The Times of India
Sir,
On January 8, 2009, you published the result of a poll in answer to
your question "Should India follow Israel's lead in its own war
against terror?" The answer, predictably, was 84% in favour. I submit
that this was a disingeneous way of conducting Israeli propaganda, a
means of misleading the public and a violation of journalistic norms
of fairness. Your newspaper prides itself on educating your
readership. You have the right to publicise your views on current
affairs, but do you not recognise that that there may be views at
variance with your own? And that they need an airing in a responsible
newspaper? Are you not aware that the Israel-Palestine conflict has
aspects to it that may not be wished away by catch-phrases such as
"war against terror"?
Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru were not anti-Israel, but had a
deep sympathy with the Palestinian refugees struggle for a homeland.
Indian policy towards the Middle East was informed by knowledge of
the gross injustice manifested in the evacuation of seven lakh
Christian and Muslim Arabs from their homes and villages in Palestine
in 1948, an evacuation enforced by massacres. Since then there have
been five major wars, and several well-documented atrocities against
Palestinian refugees - I need only refer to the Sabra and Chatila
massacres of September 1982, where between 2000 to 3000 Palestinian
refugees were killed by a pro-Israeli militia. Ariel Sharon, the
Israeli defence minister was found responsible for this and had to
resign. Had Europeans been the targets of such an atrocity would the
'civilised' West permitted the man responsible to ascend to the
position of Prime MInister?
Yes, Hamas has an extremist ideology. So does Israel, which has
illegally occupied and settled the West Bank with over 2 lakh Jewish
settlers, and subjected the Palestinian population to racist
discrimination. There is ample material to bear this out, some of it
written by democratic-minded Jews, including Israeli citizens. Israel
is the only country in the world that believes in expanding its own
recognised frontiers by sheer force, and with utter contempt for UN
resoutions. It is Israel that breached the current truce, in order to
launch its latest massacre. It is the Palestinian refugees who are
the victims of terror.
The Israel-Palestine conflict is a dangerous flashpoint and needs
serious discussion. But the editors of the Times of India refuse to
allow it. By implicitly aligning Indian public opinion with the
latest Israeli outrage you are reneging on your responsibility as an
organ of public information. You are also endangering the norms of
Indian democracy by suggesting that India emulate Israel in its
brutal and racist attitude towards innocent civilians. Please avoid
such facile and tendentious 'polls' as the one reported on January 8,
and allow a real debate on this burning issue.
yours,
Dilip Simeon
New Delhi
______
[8] Publication Announcement:
BEYOND COUNTER-INSURGENCY
BREAKING THE IMPASSE IN NORTHEAST INDIA
Edited by
Sanjib Baruah
About the Book
Northeast India has endured decades of conflicts that have kept much
of the region militarized, subject to restrictions on civil rights,
and economically underdeveloped. In this volume, contributors from
diverse fields ranging from the social sciences, philosophy, and
cultural studies, to journalism and the civil services reflect on new
ways of approaching and resolving these conflicts.
Dissatisfaction with conditions on the ground and with standard
policy prescriptions is the common thread that runs through the book.
The
essays provide analyses of the conflicts at three levels: structural
determinants like poverty and underdevelopment; the nature and
politics of the postcolonial state; and the agency of multiple actors
with diverse motives. The authors argue that neither a development
nor a military fix can achieve peace in the region. Only concerted
efforts to establish the rule of law, a system of accountability, and
faith in the institutions of government can break the cycle of violence.
Contributors
* Sanjib Baruah * Subir Bhaumik * Samir Kumar Das * Nandana Dutta *
M. Sajjad Hassan * Rakhee Kalita * Bodhisattva Kar * Dolly Kikon *
Makiko Kimura * Bethany Lacina * Bhagat Oinam * Pradip Phanjoubam *
H. Kham Khan Suan * Betsy Taylor * Ananya Vajpeyi
9780195698763 2009 Hardback
About the Editor
Sanjib Baruah is Professor of Political Studies at Bard College, New
York, and Honorary Professor at Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.
Readership
Conveying a sense of Northeast India's rich and vibrant public
discourse, this book will be useful to all those interested in armed
conflicts, the state of Indian democracy, civil liberties, and
Northeast India.
'Sanjib Baruah has compiled an exceptionally diverse anthology.
Including voices from social science, history, literature, cultural
studies, and government, it reveals the region?s vibrant public
discourse and provides an antidote to security-centric
proclamations. Beyond Counter-insurgency is a model of creatively
engaged and academically astute public intellectual work.'
DAVID LUDDEN
Professor of History, New York University
'Baruah and his contributors paint a rich, vital picture of the
spatial disorder that has unfolded within Northeast India's multiple
'inner lines'. This complex and unvarnished story is told without
romanticism or cynicism. Between the apparent impossibility of peace
through reconciliation and victory through repression or terror, the
book envisions the possibility of an open, more inclusive future.'
SIDDHARTH VARADARAJAN
Strategic Affairs Editor, The Hindu
'This rich volume opens up a crucial space for re-imagining this
highly complex yet remarkably poorly understood region. Shunning
facile remedies, its proposals for a better future include
redistributing key resources, restoring public trust in the rule of
law, and harnessing the region's exceptional ecological diversity.'
WILLEM VAN SCHENDEL
Professor of Modern Asian History, University of Amsterdam
**
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research,
scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide.
* INDIA: YMCA Library Building, 1st Floor, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi
110001; Tel: 011 43600300; Fax: 011 23360897
* UK & EUROPE: Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP; Tel: 44 1865
556767; Fax: 44 1865 556646
* USA: 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016; Tel: 212 726 6000; Fax:
212 726 6440
Note: The specifications in this flyer including without limitation
price, territorial restrictions, and terms are subject to alteration
without notice.www.oup.co.in
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
S o u t h A s i a C i t i z e n s W i r e
Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. An offshoot of South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
More information about the SACW
mailing list