SACW | February 14-18 , 2009 / Pakistani Taliban / India - Sri Lanka: Communalism / More Guns / Darwin / Vatican
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at gmail.com
Tue Feb 17 23:58:22 CST 2009
South Asia Citizens Wire | February 14-18, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2606 -
Year 11 running
From: www.sacw.net
[1] PAKISTAN OR TALIBAN?: Wake Up Pakistani liberals and progressives !
- Swat: Rescue or surrender? Local hero brings sharia law to
troubled region (Saeed Shah)
- Shariah in Swat (Editorial, The News)
- Sharia Nizam-i-Adl (Editorial, Dawn)
- Sharia “justice” comes to Swat again? (Editorial, Daily Times)
- A terrorised society (Zulfiqar Ali Khalid)
- From Pakistan, Taliban Threats Reach New York (Kirk Semple)
[2] BANGLADESH: "Go beyond Rhetoric" - Interview With Sultana Kamal
[3] SRI LANKA / INDIA: Two wrongs don’t make a right (Ramachandra Guha)
[4] Pakistan And India: Resume Peace Process Dont Give into Hawks !
- Editorial: India and Pakistan must resolve Sir Creek
- Taliban As Common Enemy (Beena Sarwar)
- India's raises defence budget outlay by 34%
- Mumbai Attack oils wheels of arms bazaar
[5] India Administered Kashmir: People's Tribunal Memo to Omar Adbullah
[6] India - communal danger: Ram Sene not fringe, it’s coloured
saffron (Inder Malhotra)
[7] Miscellanea:
- Dawkins on Darwin
- Nature Video: David Attenborough on Darwin
- Defying Darwin (in The Guardian)
- Catholics for Choice Statement on the 80th Anniversary of the
Lateran Treaty
[8] Announcements:
(i) Just Published: Rogue Agent: How India's Military Intelligence
Betrayed the Burmese Resistance by Nandita Haksar
(ii) Film Screening: DEGHAM (Bombay, 18 February2009)
_____
[5] India Administered Kashmir: Call for Justice
[5] India:
[6]
[7]
[8]
_____
[1] Pakistan or Taliban: Swat Today, Next Stop Islamabad - Wake Up
Pakistani liberals and progressives !
RESCUE OR SURRENDER? LOCAL HERO BRINGS SHARIA LAW TO TROUBLED REGION
• Taliban-dominated area wins religious concession
• Government accused of capitulation to Islamists
by Saeed Shah in Islamabad
The Guardian, Wednesday 18 February 2009
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/18/sufi-muhammad-pakistan
Editorials from three Prominent Dailies
The News
February 17, 2009
EDITORIAL: SHARIAH IN SWAT
We are all accustomed to strange political events. But some events
are stranger than others. Amongst these is the agreement reached to
once more enforce Shariah rule in Swat. Still odder is the fact that
the ANP, which still describes itself as a secular party, and the
'liberal' PPP should be behind the latest deal. We can only wish them
luck and hope the move does not backfire, as has happened in the
past, allowing militants time to regroup and wreak still further
havoc on a valley they have terrorized for months. The desperation of
the ANP, a delegation from which met Sufi Mohammad at Timergara for
talks that led to this latest accord, is understandable. The
horrendous situation in a region where people have suffered
tremendous brutality, where girls have been driven out of schools and
where people have been beheaded in public for defying the militants
is one that no elected government can stand by and calmly endure. The
perceptions in Swat that the military was not committed to quashing
the wild band of militants it confronted added to the helplessness of
the Peshawar government. Tens of thousands have fled Swat. Estimates
as to numbers vary, but it is believed by human rights monitors that
up to 800,000 of the valley's 1.8 million people may have left. In
the sense that the ten-day truce announced by militants and a longer-
term deal with the government may bring peace to the lives of
devastated people, it must be welcomed. Seen from other perspectives,
there is plenty of room for trepidation.
In 1995, the first attempt was made at striking a deal involving the
imposition of Shariah rule with the wily Sufi Mohammad of the Tehrik-
e-Nifaz-e-Shariah-e-Mohammadi (TNSM). The accord did not last. Today
things are still more complicated. The elderly Sufi Mohammad, who
remained in jail from 2002 to 2008 after being returned from
Afghanistan where he had led an army of fighters from tribal areas to
stage 'jihad', has been overtaken in terms of influence and power by
his son-in-law, Maulana Fazlullah. Indeed, compared to the wild-eyed
Fazlullah, Sufi Muhammad comes out as a moderate. Early in 2008, when
the ANP reached a deal similar to the one now agreed upon with Sufi
Muhammad Khan, Fazlullah violated it. The two men have, at best, an
uneasy relationship. This time too, the warning from Fazlullah's
militants that the 'intentions' of the government will be watched is
ominous. As has happened in the past, when a deal is not backed by
true intention, it can be broken on any pretext. Perhaps the only
positive that can be seen in the accord is that it may create a
defection among Fazlullah's ranks and move some of his supporters to
the now-state-certified Sufi Mohammad. Possibly this is what the
government may be banking on -- but it is hardly going to lead to
lasting peace in the region.
We are told the people of Swat wanted Shariah; that rallies demanding
this had been staged. It is hard to believe, given the environment
prevailing in Swat, that there was no element of coercion behind
these rallies. It is also true that what people want is an efficient,
reliable system of justice. The failure to offer them this with the
judicial system in disarray everywhere in the country is a key factor
in the demand for Shariah law and Qazi courts. While the militants
have capitalized on these feelings of people, the fact too is that
the frenzied men who have laid siege to Swat can, under no
circumstances, be described as being motivated by religion. Their
numerous acts of violence, their attempts to stifle learning and the
way in which they have targeted the most vulnerable citizens shows
that they indeed care nothing for Islam – a religion that advocates
kindness for the oppressed, emphasizes the significance of learning
and lays down rules of respect for women, for minorities and even for
enemies. It seems obvious the ignorant forces of Fazlullah seek only
power and are willing to use any means to obtain this. In the past
Fazlullah has been accused by the people of Swat of extorting money,
jewellery and other valuables from them. Today these people are too
terrified to speak out. It is a shame Swat has been lost to such
forces. The fact is that this deal shows that the Pakistan military
has in fact been defeated by the militants; that we are now incapable
of retaining control of vast tracts of our own territory. This has
implications for other parts of the country, where militants hold
sway. The day may come when a decision is made to strike deals there
too – and by doing so allow the militants to seize control of a
people whose government no longer seems able to protect them or
safeguard their rights as citizens.
Dawn, 17 February, 2009
EDITORIAL: SHARIA NIZAM-I-ADL
The latest Sharai Nizam-i-Adl regulation that is to be imposed in the
Malakand region will neither address the people’s demand for justice
nor help in defeating the militants. Informed debate on the issue has
been hampered by the complex legal and political history of the area
which is often not fully understood.
First, there is a constitutional diarchy in the area: the NWFP
government is in charge of law and order, but the authority to make
and promulgate laws, set out in Article 247 of the 1973 Constitution,
lies with the president and the governor. Hence, the need for the
presidency’s approval of the deal which was missing earlier.
On the other side of the deal is the Tehrik Nifaz-i-Sharia Mohammadi,
which was founded in 1992 with the express objective of having Sharia
enforced in the region.
The TNSM led by Maulana Sufi Mohammad has wrested concessions from
the state twice before, in 1994 and 1999, though it was unhappy with
both the earlier regulations because the changes to the legal system
were largely procedural.
Second, it is necessary to understand why the demand for a separate
legal system has found traction here. Consider the judicial system
under the ruler of Swat state (its status as a state was rescinded in
1969).
The system was not Islamic, rather it was based on traditional codes
and the acceptance of the final authority of the Swat ruler. It was
not perfect but held one great attraction: it was effective the
trials were quick and judgments properly enforced.
The system put in place by the Pakistan state was inefficient and
ineffective, leading to resistance from the people and allowing
Islamist forces to latch on to the unhappiness and present the demand
for change as a demand for Sharia.
What can we expect from the regulation? ‘All laws against Sharia will
be abolished and Sharia will be enforced under this justice system,’
NWFP Information Minister Iftikhar Hussain has said. But experience
tells us that such drives end up being superficial, making crimes out
of ‘sin’, targeting popular culture, purging society of ‘western’
influence, and leaving untouched the main issue of providing justice
to the common man.
The TSNM has campaigned on a platform of justice but there is little
doubt that its agenda is to remake the Malakand area in its own
likeness one that is not dissimilar to the Taliban in Afghanistan, of
whom Maulana Sufi is a great admirer. Moreover, it is clear that the
government has agreed to Sufi Mohammad’s demands because it hopes the
carrot of Islamisation will nudge Mohammad’s son-in-law, Maulana
Fazlullah, and his band of militants to lay down their arms.
What it does, however, is send a disastrous signal: fight the state
militarily and it will give you what you want and get nothing in
return.
Daily Times - 16 February 2009
EDITORIAL: SHARIA “JUSTICE” COMES TO SWAT AGAIN?
Shara’i Nizam-e-Adl Regulation is about to be applied to Swat once
again. This time, one hopes, it will stick and not become a ruse for
the Taliban behind which to gain reprieve from military attacks and
regroup. The last time the ANP government wrote up an accord on the
subject with the followers of Sufi Muhammad of the Tehreek Nifaz
Shariat Muhammadi, (TNSM) the son-in-law of the great sufi warrior,
Fazlullah, did not abide by it and the people of Swat, who are
propagated to be relentlessly “demanding sharia”, suffered untold
misery at the hands of his gunmen. The earlier agreement had the
authority of the Sufi’s word not to destroy girls’ schools, but the
schools had gone on being blown up.
This time, too, the NWFP government and the TNSM leader have agreed
to the implementation of sharia justice in Malakand division. Under
the agreement, Sufi Muhammad, through his public congregations in
Matta, will be expected to “build consensus among his people”; His
son-in-law, Fazlullah, will have to soon announce ceasefire in Swat;
all the girls’ schools in the area would have to be reopened; and the
great Sufi Muhammad would “help establish a strong administration in
the area”, although that job is normally expected to be performed by
the elected representatives of the people sitting in Peshawar.
The sharia bill will be finalised by the ANP government and subjected
to a political consensus in the NWFP Assembly on Monday and the
emerging document will be grandiosely called Shara’i Nizam-e-Adl
Regulations. Many who will sign on the dotted line will be those who
would sign anything if it remotely promised to bring a break in the
cycle of Taliban violence in the region. Some will be sceptical about
a blueprint of religious law that will stand only if it is not
different from the law being enforced in the Tribal Areas. For
instance, the blowing up of girls’ schools was a part of the
jurisprudence of the Taliban government in Kabul, which was accepted
as precedent in Pakistan’s Taliban-controlled Areas. The last time
Sufi Muhammad promised not to destroy the schools he couldn’t enforce
or abide by his pledge.
The people of Swat want quick justice, the kind enforced by the Wali
of Swat, as if in a city-state utopia, but they are bound to get more
than they have bargained for by rejecting the dilatory system
obtaining in the rest of Pakistan. They will get the
“munkir” (forbidden) part of the sharia dealing with forbidden acts
plus the “maruf” (approved) part dealing with acts of piety. The
“praiseworthy” acts of piety such as the saying of the nimaz five
times a day in the mosque will be greatly approved, but those who
don’t observe the ritual will suffer physical and financial pain. And
the list of the “maruf” stretches endlessly, which means that you can
be thrashed for a number of things you thought were not “penal”. It
is probable that the scared people of Swat simply don’t know what
they are in for.
The Sufi himself says he will help in setting up a judicial system.
What if he doesn’t like the way the ANP lays down the law of the
sharia? Will the ANP leaders get the Sufi to become a de facto
arbiter on how the sharia has to be enforced? A chilling feeling is
that the Sufi and his warlord son-in-law will preside over the
establishment of the sharia law and will also interfere in the day to
day implementation of it. The power of the Sufi will derive from the
gun of the Taliban and he will not for long allow a sharia which is
different from the one enforced by the Taliban elsewhere. This is
very important because sharia is the order that will ensure longevity
to the governance of the Taliban in the various territories they
hold. Finally, if the Taliban win the war in Afghanistan and the
Americans leave the region, it is the sharia that will ensure that
the territories conquered in Pakistan stay with them.
Clearly, the problem sits at the cross-section of the internal
dynamics and the politics of Sharia. While both are problematic in
and of themselves, their meshing makes the issue even more
troublesome. The state thinks it needs to ensure some semblance of
peace in the area and this is perhaps the best way to go about it in
the interim. But there are too many areas of friction here, not just
because there is no exegetical consensus on sharia and its
implementation but also because its politics, at this point, excludes
all but the literalist ultra-orthodoxy of Taliban. There is also bad
blood between Sufi Muhammad and his son-in-law and the former, so
far, has proved ineffective in the face of the rising power of the
latter. We fear that the terms of this agreement like the one before
it may be flouted even before the ink on it dries.
o o o
Business Recorder Weekend Magazine (February 14 2009)
A TERRORISED SOCIETY
by Zulfiqar Ali Khalid
Although our sixty years history is full of various types of crises
yet the latest one, ie religious terrorism, is quite weird. The
menace of terrorism, in the shape of suicide bombings, has engulfed
the entire country right from cities like Karachi and Quetta to far
flung tribal areas in NWFP. Almost all types of public places are
within the reach of terrorists.
Due to this culture of terror, Pakistan has become the nether world
for international travellers as various countries keep warning their
citizens, through travel advisories issued from time to time, not to
visit this country.
All these scary conditions and sense of insecurity have engendered
psychopathic anxiety at individual as well as national level. This
national anxiety is very much evident in our social and political
affairs. What to talk of the ordinary citizens even the public
figures and vocal media institutions like TV channels and newspapers
are very careful and reserve to openly discuss and analyse issues
related to religious terrorism in the country.
Notwithstanding some sane pieces of advice for adopting pragmatic and
realistic approach in resolving this crucial issue, majority of news,
views and statements are so ambiguous that they create much more
confusion among the minds of general public. Actually, all these
statements, comments, views and discussions are reflections of our
national trauma of terror.
To some people, the callous and indifferent attitude of our religious
lot, on the issue of terrorism in the name of Islam, may sound
surprising but those having historical background knowledge of these
elements describe it in consonance with their past traditions. A
rationale or positive attitude on this issue cannot be expected from
these religious leaders, including religious political leadership, as
from the day one their declared sympathies have remained with the
fundamentalist elements.
Some of them openly support religious terrorism under one plea or
another whereas others indirectly encourage such activities by
floating various conspiracy theories. Actually, religious elements in
Pakistan are still living in the utopia of the rule of General Zia
when, in the name of Islam, Mullahs, hand in hand with the
establishment, were de facto rulers of this country.
Our politicians, particularly those who always boast of being
pragmatic, moderate, and progressive, have also failed to face the
challenge of terrorism courageously. Their timid and wavering
approach to terrorism is reflected in their dubious statements after
each suicide bombing or act of terror. In these statements they
criticise every one, the federal and provincial governments, Pervez
Musharraf, America, Israel, India, but the known terrorist
organisations, like al Qaida, Taliban, and others, who take pride in
claiming the responsibility of such acts.
Despite their inherent dislike of the fundamentalist ideology, the
conduct of genuine liberal leaders and old left wing intellectuals is
very disappointing too. They have also proved themselves to be a
misfit lot to lead the nation at this critical moment of our history.
They perhaps had a wishful feeling that General Pervez Musharraf,
with his slogans of liberalism and enlightened moderation, would play
the role of a benefactor of liberal elements just like dictator Zia's
shameful role as godfather of Islamic fundamentalists. But, General
Musharraf disappointed these liberals as every dictator has his own
personal agenda and he uses religion or liberalism for perpetuation
of his personal dictatorship.
Another big mistake committed by the Pakistani liberals, including
the present ruling party, is that they failed to perceive today's
religious terrorism from the perspective of incessant gulf between
the mindsets of moderate and fundamentalist Muslims.
Due to this blunder on part of the progressive or liberal elements,
of not conceiving the religious terrorism in its historical
perspective, the fundamentalists succeeded in portraying the
international War on Terror as an American war against Muslims or Islam.
As a matter of fact, this perception is totally wrong and the targets
of terrorists, particularly in Islamic countries, themselves indicate
that all those Muslims who do not fit in the religious criteria of
these fundamentalists, whether they are CD shop owners, teachers of
modern education, worshipers in imambargahs, or employees of security
forces, are considered as kafirs or enemies against whom their so-
called Jihad is permissible.
Nevertheless, despite their edge in propaganda campaign and
terrorisation of entire society, the fundamentalists are still a
minority in this country. The results of February elections indicate
that the moderate and liberal forces enjoy popular support in the
country.
There is need to utilise this popular mandate for the good of general
public. This is what these leaders owe Pakistani nation in return for
their overwhelming support during elections. The liberal political
parties should utilise their party platforms to boost the low morale
of ordinary people who are confused with the divergent interpretation
of simple issues of terrorism in the country.
It is surprising that while the media is tough in criticising
government corruption, scandals in judiciary and establishment and
other juicy issues, it suddenly becomes impartial and objective vis-a-
vis religious terrorism. Rather, according to some analysts, under
the excuse of projecting "the other view point" it is tilted in
favour of religious elements. Here let's acknowledge the fact that
this is not something new as on Karachi unrest our media has been
following almost the same policy, due to some obvious reasons.
A race is going on among the private TV channels to break the news of
bomb blasts, live telecasting from the venues or crime scenes,
showing the mutilated bodies, without advising viewers' discretion.
Then this exercise is followed by holding discussion with important
personalities or experts.
All these discussions normally end up with criticism against the
government policies. No in-depth analysis of the trend of the suicide
bombings, no naming of groups or terrorist leaders behind such
incidents, and no investigative journalism as is seen in reports
against ministers and senior judges. If participants express some
critical views against the terrorists and their organisations, the
administration of TV channels telecast it with the disclaimer that
"the views expressed in this programme are those of the participants
and not of the TV channel."
No doubt self-protection is very important, but should it be done at
the cost of national interests. If not too much, our media can at
least provide basic information to the general public on matters
like: shape and design of jackets used for suicide bombing,
precautionary measures to go in public places, emergency contact
numbers of bomb disposal squad, crisis management departments, police
etc, and crisis management issues to counter any tragic situation.
Finally, the entire nation, including political parties and their
leaders, the government, oppositions and media, need to take the
issue of terrorism seriously. The general perception that the War on
Terror is a Western War against Muslims is totally wrong and facts
and figures negate it.
It is quite deplorable that whereas the fundamentalists are taking
this war very seriously, the Pakistani liberal or progressive
elements have not realised the gravity of the situation. They should
keep one thing in mind that if the international War on Terror is
stopped the liberal majority of this country is the next in line to
face the terrorists.
Not only because they are some easy targets but also for the reasons
that they have been labelled as American agents and above all they do
not fit in the definition of true Muslims of fundamentalist elements.
It has happened with Attaturk, Soekarno, ZAB and Benazir and now it
is happening with the innocent tribal Muslims of FATA. Blood hounds
are always thirsty and keep looking for fresh prays.
o o o
FROM PAKISTAN, TALIBAN THREATS REACH NEW YORK
by Kirk Semple
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/17/nyregion/17swat.html?_r=1&ref=asia
_____
[2] Bangladesh:
Star Weekend Magazine, February 13, 2009
THE NEED TO GO BEYOND RHETORIC - INTERVIEW WITH SULTANA KAMAL
On February 3, Bangladesh underwent its first Universal Periodic
Review (UPR) before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. During the
three-hour interactive dialogue, the Foreign Minister, Dipu Moni, her
first overseas representation of her country, presented a statement
and responded to questions and heard recommendations from various
states. Munira Khan, member of the newly formed National Human Rights
Commission and Attorney General Mahbubey Alam also attended the session.
The UN General Assembly (GA) on 15 March 2006 created the new Human
Rights Council (HRC). The HRC was created to replace and improve the
former UN human rights body (the Commission on Human Rights). Among
the many changes was the creation of a new mechanism through which UN
member states can be reviewed on their adherence to human rights
standards. The objective of the UPR is to review the fulfilments of
the human rights obligations and commitments by all 192 UN member-
states. The UN member states are reviewed every four years on
progress, challenges and needs for improvement. The review is
conducted by the 47 member states of the Human Rights Council as well
as observer states. The UPR was formed to act as an intergovernmental
process by which states review the fulfilment of human rights
obligations of other States. The UPR meets three times a year with 16
member-States being reviewed each session. Each country's situation
is examined during a three-hour dialogue, during which
recommendations are made. The first cycle runs from 2008-20111.
Sultana Kamal
A coalition of 17 human rights and development organisations from
Bangladesh (the UPR Forum), including Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK),
Nagorik Uddyog, Naripokkho and Steps, participated in the review
process. The Forum team was led by Advocate Sultana Kamal. Hana Shams
Ahmed caught up with Kamal after the review session in Geneva to ask
about what the expectations of the NGOs and civil society were from
this UPR session and the government and whether these expectations
were met.
How can Bangladesh benefit from the UPR?
This is a UN mechanism for monitoring the human rights situations of
member countries. It’s a mechanism for the civil society of
Bangladesh and citizens of other countries to act as watchdogs on the
human rights situations of the country and the member countries have
to submit their report every four years on their human rights
conditions. They make voluntary pledges and are then assessed on the
basis of those pledges. That’s why this time when there were no
concrete pledges made or any concrete commitments given by the
Foreign Minister in the UPR we were concerned about what basis either
the international community or the country could measure the human
rights condition of the country - whether there were violations or
not. This is not to put the government in a difficult situation but
rather to help the government really be aware of the violations
taking place either by the government itself or by non-government or
non-state agents, to see whether they can be remedied or immediately
stopped.
The Forum members have submitted an extensive report on human rights
violations in Bangladesh on various grounds including among others
violations by the state including extra-judicial killings, arbitrary
detention, torture, forced detention and restrictions on freedom of
expression. Do you think this works as a process of accountability
for the government on the state’s human rights violations?
I think it does because the state will then have to answer through
the reporting system what they have done, to see that violations do
not happen anymore. Human rights violations may happen for many
different reasons - advertently or inadvertently. The State, through
this mechanism, is made aware of the conditions in the area of human
rights and is given a chance to mend that.
But we saw the process at Bangladesh’s UPR session where there were
certain questions asked but the government representatives
sidestepped those questions…
In that case the government will be questioned again on the basis of
that and then they will be assessed on that particular performance
and marked low in the human rights protection responsibility. It is
always better to be able to face the challenge, be transparent in
responding to questions raised.
This was an opportunity for member-States to emphasise their
commitment to human rights issues around the world. Do you think the
other countries were critical of the government or do you think they
were happy to maintain a diplomatic relationship?
If you want to get my reaction on the interaction [between the
Bangladesh government and other nations] then I would say that most
of the countries intervening were rather formal. They welcomed the
Foreign Minister, greeted her and made their presentations. But not
many fundamental or basic questions were raised by most of the
countries. There were 49 countries speaking. But most of these
countries also avoided questioning or commenting on issues like
implementation of the CHT Accord, the women’s advancement policy
strategies for poverty alleviation, ending the culture of impunity or
extra judicial killings, condition of the outcastes or the dalits and
also the migrant and garment workers were not spoken about. I will
therefore say that most of the countries were rather diplomatic.
It was also a very good opportunity for our government to prove its
human rights commitments. The previous democratically elected
government has been criticised heavily for creating a political
culture where the rights of minorities were heavily curtailed, where
there was no redress on extra-judicial killings and the press was
always under threat. It was also an opportunity for the new
government to bring faith in them.
[. . .]
http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2009/02/02/interview.htm
______
[3] Sri Lanka - India:
Hindustan Times
TWO WRONGS DON’T MAKE A RIGHT
by Ramachandra Guha
February 15, 2009
In a recent essay in the Economic and Political Weekly, the political
scientist Neil DeVotta quotes a Sri Lankan Government Minister as
saying: ‘The Sinhalese are the only organic race of Sri Lanka. Other
communities are all visitors to the country, whose arrival was never
challenged out of the compassion of the Buddhists. But they must not
take this compassion for granted. The Muslims are here because our
kings let them trade here and the Tamils because they were allowed to
take refuge when the Moguls were invading them in India. What is
happening today is pure ingratitude on the part of these visitors’.
Commenting on these and other such statements made down the years,
DeVotta says they form part of a ‘nationalist narrative that combines
jeremiad with chauvinism’. In this narrative, ‘the Sinhalese only
have Sri Lanka while the island’s other minorities have homelands
elsewhere; Sri Lanka is surrounded by envious enemies who loathe the
Sinhalese; those living across the Palk Straits in Tamil Nadu,
especially those who want to overtake the island; and NGOs, Christian
missionaries, human rights groups, and various Western powers and
their organisations conspire to tarnish the image of the Sinhalese
Buddhists and thereby assist the LTTE. Those who subscribe to this
narrative are patriots; the rest are traitors’.
Although DeVotta does not make the comparison himself, in reading the
sentences he quotes, as well as his own analysis, I was irresistibly
reminded of the rhetoric used by the majority chauvinists of my own
country. The main ideologues of the tendency known as Hindutva, such
as V. D. Savarkar and M.S. Golwalkar, have argued that Hindus, and
Hindus alone, were the true, original and rightful inhabitants of the
land known as Bharat. In their view, the other communities were late-
comers or interlopers, whose presence here was permitted only because
of the ‘tolerance’ of the Hindus. Regrettably, these minorities —
Muslims, Christians, etc — were often not grateful enough to the
majority. Hence the need to periodically issue them a warning.
In the perspective of the chauvinist, a proper, good and reliable Sri
Lankan must apparently be a Tamil-hating or at least Tamil-
distrusting Sinhala. Change a word or two, substituting ‘Indian’ for
‘Sri Lankan’, ‘Muslim’ for ‘Tamil’, and ‘Hindu’ for ‘Sinhala’, and
you arrive, more-or-less, at the core beliefs of Hindutva. The
parallels run further still. Consider the strong element of paranoia
that characterises the Hindu as much as the Sinhala chauvinist. Thus
the Sinhala bigot venerates the memory (or the myth) of a king named
Dutegemunu, who back in the 2nd century BC is believed — or alleged —
to have defeated a Tamil king. The exploits — real or imagined — of
Shivaji and Rana Pratap serve the same symbolic purpose for the Hindu
bigot, which is to invoke a militantly nationalistic past in which
the foreigner or invader was humbled or killed.
In India, as in Sri Lanka, the myths of the past inform the
poisonously practical politics of the present. Thus the Rashtriya
Swayamsewak Sangh also rants on about the various Western powers out
to demean and defeat Bharat Mata; it also reserves a particular
opprobrium for NGOs and human rights groups. But it goes further —
singling out, as particular enemies of the Hindu nation, those
independent-minded intellectuals whom they deem to be in thrall to
the unholy Western Trinity of Marx, Mill and Macaulay. (Since there
is no substantial intellectual class in Sri Lanka, the Sinhala bigots
can, fortunately for them, claim one enemy less.)
To be sure, similar forms of chauvinism can be found in other
countries as well. In South Asia itself, the Islamists in Bangladesh
and Pakistan consider their chief enemy within to be the Muslim
liberal who engages with the West; and their chief enemy without to
be the malign Hindus of India, here accused of conspiring to keep the
Islamic umma from claiming its rightful place. Looking further
afield, we have those Americans — such as the late political
scientist Samuel Huntington — who claim that only those who speak
English, celebrate the achievements of the West, and have an
allegiance to the Christian creed can count as wholly reliable
citizens of the United States of America.
Many years ago, the great Kannada writer Sivarama Karanth insisted
that it was impossible to talk of ‘Indian culture as if it is a
monolithic object’. ‘Indian culture today’, he pointed out, ‘is so
varied as to be called “cultures”. The roots of this culture go back
to ancient times: and it has developed through contact with many
races and peoples. Hence, among its many ingredients, it is
impossible to say surely what is native and what is alien, what is
borrowed out of love and what has been imposed by force. If we view
Indian culture thus, we realise that there is no place for chauvinism.’
These words need to be read afresh in India. But, as the civil war in
Sri Lanka nears its end, they need to be read and heeded across the
Palk Straits too. Far from being ‘the only organic race’ of their
island, the Sinhala almost certainly migrated there from eastern
India. In any case, in later centuries the culture of the island has
been influenced and enriched by many races and peoples, among them
Tamils, Arabs, the Dutch, the Portuguese, and the British, who in
religious terms were variously Hindu, Christian, Muslim, Parsi and
atheist as well as Buddhist. The LTTE is a terrorist organisation —
it is impossible to defend them. However, if their defeat at the
hands of the Sri Lankan army leads to a consolidation of Sinhala
chauvinism, it will be impossible to defend that, too.
Ramachandra Guha is a historian and the author of India After Gandhi
_____
[4] Pakistan And India: Resume Peace Process Dont Give into Hawks !
Daily Times, February 17, 2009
EDITORIAL: INDIA AND PAKISTAN MUST RESOLVE SIR CREEK
In June this year, the deadline for claiming exclusive economic zones
(EEZ) and the continental shelf under the United Nations Convention
on the Law of Seas (UNCLOS) will run out for India and Pakistan. If
the two countries agree on the maritime boundaries and submit a
consensual statement at the UN, they can exploit the nearly 200
nautical miles of economic zone in the Indian Ocean; but if they
don’t agree, the UN will embargo their doing so till they reach an
agreement. Consequently, India and Pakistan are expected to submit
conflicting claims in May. They are deadlocked over their differing
positions on Sir Creek that determines the maritime boundary between
them.
The Indo-Pak composite dialogue, which discussed the Sir Creek
dispute with some success, is on hold after the Mumbai attacks in
November last year. India is in no mood to restart the talks, which
means the two countries could well submit clashing claims and once
again put the world on notice about their recalcitrance. The two
countries might do other things too that would shock the world.
Because of the absence of an agreed line on the waters of the Indian
Ocean stretching from the Sir Creek boundary, their navies have been
pouncing upon each other’s fishermen and keeping them in jail to give
rise to another story of inhuman treatment that citizens of India and
Pakistan have to endure.
India has a coastline 7,417 km long out of which the Gujarat state
has 1,663 km, which is one-third of the entire coastline, making
Gujarat the principal maritime state of India. Because of a rich
delta, Gujarat has the best fishing, and the Gulf of Kutch has the
best fish known in India. Next to Gujarat is Pakistan and there are
no agreed maritime frontiers between the two. The Maritime Zones Act
of India 1976 and 1981 under which the fishermen are caught and
punished doesn’t conform to UNCLOS which India has signed. Pakistan
is guilty of the same non-conformity.
Sir Creek no longer flows and has shifted westwards, to Pakistan’s
disadvantage. Pakistan wants the boundary established according to
the historical maps; India wants that too but according to thalweg
(mid-channel line). As both the countries have been deadlocked after
9 rounds of discussions till 2006, the fishermen suffer at the hands
of the police and intelligence agencies. These poor original owners
of the coast are doomed because both countries have killed the
world’s biggest mangroves and fish reserve through pollution and are
now simply focused on oil and gas that might or might not be there on
the continental shelf. Let’s hope that there is no secret discovery
of oil or gas in the uncharted waters or the two could start spoiling
for war.
In January last year, India and Pakistan raised hopes of those
concerned about the suffering of the fishermen. (A recent documentary
by a TV channel shot among the families who have lost their men to
Indian jails was almost impossible to watch because of its depiction
of pain.) A 20-day joint survey of the Creek as well as the adjacent
sea was undertaken by hydrographers from both sides so that a
mutually agreed map at least could be drawn up. That advance sadly is
rolled back and India is disinclined now to get into talks again.
India also keeps fishermen from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh in its
various jails because of lack of agreement on maritime boundaries
with the two neighbours.
Can we hope that matters will improve for the better? The UNCLOS
deadline and the economic loss that non-agreement will inflict after
the deadline is past should persuade India and Pakistan to sit down
and resolve the dispute quickly. *
o o o
Inter Press Service
PAKISTAN/INDIA: TALIBAN AS COMMON ENEMY
Analysis by Beena Sarwar
Taliban cloud moves to Pakistan.
Credit:Muhammad Zahoor, 'Daily Times', Peshawar
KARACHI, Feb 17 (IPS) - Since being elected to office five months
ago, Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari has often declared that
Pakistan’s single biggest challenge stems from ‘religious’ militants.
These include the Taliban, the international al-Qaeda and Pakistan’s
own home-grown ‘holy warriors’, cultivated during the 1980s Afghan
war against the occupying Soviets.
The approach taken by Zardari, Pakistan’s first popularly elected
president in over a decade, differs markedly from the Pakistani
establishment’s long-held stand that the country’s real enemy is India.
Since gaining independence from colonial rule and partition on
religious grounds, in 1947, India and Pakistan have fought four wars,
counting the Kargil ‘war-like situation’ of 1999 - a year after both
countries tested nuclear weapons.
"India," Zardari has said categorically, "is not our enemy."
Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik recently took many by
surprise with his belated public acknowledgement that the Mumbai
attacks of Nov. 2008 in which 180 people died were partly plotted in
Pakistan. He also announced criminal proceedings against eight
suspects, including three alleged ringleaders.
"I want to assure the international community, I want to assure all
those who have been victims of terrorism, that we mean business,"
said Malik said at a news conference on Feb. 12 in Islamabad, showing
journalists a copy of Pakistan’s findings that were later handed over
to India.
This was, as Indian journalist Siddharth Varadarajan wrote, "the
first time the Pakistani state has ever publicly acknowledged that
specific individuals and organisations based on its territory were
actively involved in staging a terrorist attack on India" (‘Time for
India to think of carrots too, not just sticks’, The Hindu, Feb. 13,
2009).
Pakistan’s admission appears to have confounded critics in India who
had been certain that Pakistan would never admit to India’s
allegations that the conspiracy was hatched in Pakistan or that the
attackers were Pakistani nationals.
The admission "raised suspicion in New Delhi's paranoid security
establishment," commented Sanjay Kapoor in the ‘Hardnew’s magazine,
New Delhi, "The obvious questions that are being asked are: why did
Pakistan do a volte-face and where will this new trajectory of their
probe lead to?"
There is a widespread perception that Pakistan’s admission was due to
pressure from Washington, which has repeatedly voiced concern that
tensions between the two countries would distract Pakistan from the
‘war on terror’ against the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Both Washington and New Delhi have welcomed the move. So have peace
activists.
"They should have made this admission much earlier," said Musarrat
Hilali, a former (and first woman) advocate general of the North West
Frontier Province (NWFP) that borders Pakistan’s tribal areas next to
Afghanistan, and chairperson of the NWFP chapter of the independent
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
"Everyone knew that the attackers came from Pakistan," she added.
"What was the point of denying it for so long? It would have built up
confidence if they had said it earlier. Perhaps the rift between the
two countries will decrease if Pakistan takes an honest stance to
what is an international level problem, so that we stop being seen as
liars around the world."
Even so, the "dramatic reversal of Islamabad’s long-standing policy
of denial and its significance ought not to be minimised in any
way... The international political cost to the establishment of
turning back from here has risen dramatically," said Varadarajan,
writing that this was possibly the main reason behind the delay in
Pakistan’s admission.
The Indian government must now "resist the temptation to gloat or to
pick quick holes in what the Pakistani investigation into Mumbai has
revealed", and it must take "a constructive approach" to sharing
information and evidence, he urged.
Analysts hope that such information sharing can lead to the
possibility of starting a joint-terror mechanism or reviving one that
exists under the largely toothless South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC).
Varadarajan wisely suggests communicating responses "directly to
Pakistan rather than through piecemeal, or even misleading, leaks to
the media" and an urgent "moratorium on hostile rhetoric and
accusatory statements".
However, nothing will really change as long as Pakistan continues to
invest heavily in Afghanistan in a bid to develop what policy makers
term as ‘strategic depth’ and counter the growing Indian influence
across Pakistan’s western border, says lawyer Kamran Arif, speaking
to IPS over the phone from Peshawar, capital of the North-West
Frontier Province NWFP, where he is based.
"If Pakistan continues this policy, things will just continue as they
are," Arif said. "Afghanistan, India and Pakistan - it’s all linked."
The United States includes itself in this loop, as special envoy to
Pakistan and Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke acknowledged during his
recent visit to India.
"For the first time in 60 years, your country, Pakistan and the U.S.
all face an enemy (the Taliban) that poses direct threats to our
leaderships, our capitals and our people," Holbrooke told reporters
in New Delhi after meeting with top-level Indian ministers.
Hilali and Arif were both among the high-profile 24-member delegation
that recently visited India under the aegis of South Asians for Human
Rights (SAHR), a non-government organization started, among others,
by the prominent lawyer and HRCP Chairperson Asma Jahangir.
"Everyone we talked to agreed that war is not an option," said Arif.
"But there was great anger among ordinary people who saw continuous
coverage of the Mumbai attacks on numerous television channels for
three days straight. There was also anger about how the Pakistan
government and some journalists handled matters."
Arif noted two positive aspects. One was that in the state elections
just after the Mumbai attacks, people did not vote for the right-wing
parties which tried to whip up war hysteria.
Secondly, public anger was not directed against India’s sizeable
Muslim minority (150 million) as has happened in previous cases of
tension between India and Pakistan.
Pakistan and India have also maintained diplomatic ties - although
the composite dialogue process remains on hold - despite pressure
from the hawks.
Still, either due to disorganisation or reluctance to give Pakistan a
face other than the stereotypes popularized in the media, the Indian
media largely ignored the delegation, according to Jawed Naqvi, a
senior Indian journalist who works as New Delhi-correspondent for the
Pakistani daily Dawn.
Naqvi criticised the Indian media for its self-absorbed, blinkered
view of Pakistan, "happy to show repeated looped shots of a mullah on
a Pakistani channel ranting that India be destroyed, if necessary
with nuclear weapons" (‘Peace activists are great folks, so why are
we still in trouble?’, Dawn, Jan. 26, 2009).
The security establishments of both India and Pakistan rely on
stereotypes about each other, reinforced through the school
curricula, popular media and entertainment industries of both
countries, to build up an image of ‘the enemy’ populated by ‘the
other’ to buttress nationalism.
Peace activists in both countries reject these stereotypes at the
risk of being labeled ‘traitors’ and ‘anti-national agents’.
Hilali told IPS that an Indian delegation is due to arrive in the
near future in a bid to continue the "people to people links between
the two countries, which is so important".
Only two Indians attended the recently concluded Kara Film Festival
in Karachi, the prominent director Mahesh Bhatt and the actor Nandita
Das whose directorial debut ‘Firaaq’ (Separation) made its Pakistan
premiere at the international festival.
Das, the only Indian on the flight to Karachi she took, told the
audience that people were surprised she was making the trip. "It is
when times are difficult that there is more of a need to speak out,"
she said.
o o o
SEE ALSO:
INTERIM BUDGET RAISES DEFENCE OUTLAY BY 34% (16 Feb 2009, 1402 hrs
IST, Timesofindia.com)
"Mumbai attacks have given a new dimension to cross-border terrorism.
In this context, I propose to raise defence allocation to Rs.1,41,703
crore," said Mukherjee.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Interim-Budget-raises-defence-
outlay-by-34/articleshow/4135219.cms
26/11 OILS WHEELS OF ARMS BAZAAR
by Sujan Dutta (The Telegraph - 12 Feb 2009)
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090212/jsp/frontpage/story_10522780.jsp
_____
[5] India Administered Kashmir: Call for Justice
http://www.sacw.net/article647.html
To: Mr. Omar Abdullah
Chief Minister
Jammu and Kashmir
From: The International People's Tribunal on Human Rights and Justice
in Kashmir
Conveners:
Dr. Angana Chatterji, Associate Professor, Anthropology, California
Institute of Integral Studies
Advocate Parvez Imroz, Founder, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil
Society
Gautam Navlakha, Editorial Consultant, Economic and Political Weekly
Zahir-Ud-Din, Vice-President, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil
Society
Legal Counsel:
Advocate Mihir Desai, Mumbai High Court, Supreme Court of India, Co-
founder, Indian People's Tribunal
Liaison:
Khurram Parvez, Programme Coordinator, Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of
Civil Society
February 11, 2009
RE.: MEMORANDUM ON HUMAN RIGHTS, PEACE, AND SOCIAL JUSTICE
Dear Mr. Omar Abdullah:
We write you today on behalf of the International People's Tribunal
on Human Rights and Justice in Indian-administered Kashmir. [A brief
on the Tribunal's premise and objectives may be found at: http://
www.kashmirprocess.org/premise.html.]
We write, mindful that you have promised attentiveness and
accountability to human rights issues in Kashmir, to bring to your
attention the need for appropriate action with regard to the following:
1. Disappearances: You have raised issues of enforced disappearances
in Kashmir in the past. We ask that you order a full-scale
investigation under provisions of the Commissions of Inquiry Act,
1952, and/or other relevant laws, within a stipulated and reasonable
timeframe.
We ask as well that all laws of Jammu and Kashmir incorporate the
premise of the United Nations Declaration on the Protection of All
Persons From Enforced Disappearance, the International Convention for
the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and the
Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment.
2. Killing by Police Firings, Fake Encounter Killings, and
Extrajudicial Killings: We ask that you use all authority granted you
by law to take strong and effective preventive measures to ensure
that these are not repeated. As well, we urge that the cases that
have been pending in courts, and those that have not been filed, be
expeditiously dealt with and the perpetrators be brought to justice.
We ask that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir follow the cases
pending for sanctions before the Government of India's Home Ministry
under Section 7 of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958, (AFSPA). We
ask that the state make public the number of cases in which sanctions
have been sought from the Government of India, and the number of
cases in which the same have been granted.
3. Mass Graves: We note the existence of mass graves in Kashmir, as
verified by the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons and the
International People's Tribunal for Human Rights and Justice in
Kashmir in 2008. We note that there are connections between the
number of persons disappeared and these unmarked, unidentified,
nameless, and unknown graves. We also note that various international
institutions and bodies, such as the European Parliament, have
referred to this issue and made recommendations for action. We ask
that your government offer protection to the sites to not permit
their desecration or destruction, enable independent and transparent
investigations drawing upon varied, credible, and international
expertise, and institute an independent and transparent judicial
commission of inquiry.
4. Torture: It has been acknowledged by international human rights
organizations that the use of torture by military and paramilitary
forces is widespread in Kashmir. [See documentations available at
http://www.kashmirprocess.org/resources.html.] As well, the
Government of India is yet to ratify the Convention Against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
although it has been a signatory since October 1997. In this context,
we ask that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir institute a
comprehensive ban on practises of torture as defined by international
law and humanitarian ethics.
5. Detention and Torture Centres: We ask that unlawful detention and
torture centres, including in army camps, be identified, made public,
and banned. Further, we ask that appropriate reparations be
determined and undertaken with regard to unlawful and
unconstitutional practises undertaken in these camps and centres. We
ask that international institutions, such as the International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), be permitted to visit the above
places to assess the situation independently.
6. Gendered and Sexualized Violences: We note the severity of
gendered and sexualized violences that have been perpetrated in
Kashmir in the last two decades. Women and children, and others, have
been victimized by horrific forms of brutality, including rape, gang
and collective rape, perpetrated on women. Other categories of
victimization include women whose male partners are missing, labelled
‘half-widows’. Women and children, and others, have been subjected to
physical and psychological torture and trauma, and social and literal
displacements. We note the urgency of undertaking ethical,
transparent, and independent assessments of the above in conditions
that ensure the safety and security of the survivors/victims, and
undertaking requisite reparations and rehabilitation.
7. Prisoners Rights: We ask that prisoners’ rights not be violated,
and that medical aid be readily made available, and that the right to
legal counsel, due process, fair and speedy trials be upheld.
8. Rights of Former Militants: We ask that the civil liberties of
former militants and their families be respected. We note that the
civic and political rights of former militants, who are now living
different and committed lives, continue to be violated by personnel
of the military and paramilitary forces. We note that some of them
have been subjected to torture after serving sentences and deemed
'rehabilitated' by the justice system. We note that many still have
to report to local camps of the security forces on a weekly basis. We
note as well that former militants and their families continue to be
subjected to maltreatment and denied access to social life, such as
to institutions, employment, and pensions.
9. Juvenile Justice: We ask that youth not be taken into custody,
held, or tried as adults, and that their rights to legal counsel, due
process, and fair and speedy trials be upheld. We ask that a law be
enacted that guarantees juvenile justice, that safeguards the rights
of juveniles in conflict with law, and neglected and destitute
juveniles.
We note that young people in general, particularly girls and young
women, must be guaranteed an environment free of sexual harassment
and violence.
We note that young people need to be guaranteed freedom from forms of
harassment that undermine their right to education. Impediment to
livelihood of adults creates economic insecurity that impacts youth.
Family livelihood insecurity compels youth to earn income rather than
foreground education and development. Proximity to systemic violence
produces severe emotional trauma that manifests as depression,
suicidal behaviours, self-medication through drugs, as well as
retreat and isolation as coping strategies. There are inadequate
provisions to address these issues and respond to these needs. We
urge recognition of this reality and the allocation of resources to
address these issues.
10. Access to Justice: We ask that all persons seeking to access
institutions of law and justice be retreated with respect and non-
violence by law enforcement agencies. We note that, in countless
instances, complaints are disregarded by the police, false first
information reports (FIRs) filed, and people's request to file FIRS
are met with disrespect, even force.
11. Landmines: We note that the placement of landmines along the
border and other sensitive areas in Jammu and Kashmir continues to
endanger lives, including those of children. While the Government of
India is not a signatory to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and
on their Destruction, and has continued to justify landmine use in
Jammu and Kashmir, we ask that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir
institute a comprehensive ban on the use of landmines. We ask that an
audit be conducted to ascertain the impact of landmines on local
communities, to determine the extent of casualties, devastation, and
displacement, and undertake rehabilitation of those affected and de-
mining.
12. Transparency: We urge that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir
ensure that international organizations and institutions, that have
access to other places, are allowed to visit Jammu and Kashmir. We
note that the ability of international institutions to work with
local civil society institutions in Jammu and Kashmir is crucial to
interrupting isolation and producing accountability.
We ask that thousands of families who have been denied passports,
including human rights defenders and journalists, be provided the same.
We ask that, prior to contractual agreements and implementation, all
development projects be assessed for their human rights implications.
13. Laws and States of Exception: We note your commitment to the
revocation and withdrawal of security related legislation that has
been in contravention of international humanitarian laws and norms,
such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958, (AFSPA), enacted
in Jammu and Kashmir in 1990, the Disturbed Areas Act, 1976, enacted
in Jammu and Kashmir in 1992, and the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety
Act of 1978. We reiterate the urgent need for the revocation of the
Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958, the Disturbed Areas Act, 1976,
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, and the Jammu and
Kashmir Public Safety Act of 1978. We also note that continued
criminal proceedings using the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002, and
the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985, 1987,
must be stopped.
While the safety and security of citizens must remain of paramount
concern, we ask that you remain vigilant to the problematic
parameters and consequences of certain national security laws used to
proscribe political dissent and deny freedom of expression, freedom
of speech, and freedom of assembly, and deny the democratic right to
peaceful mobilization and dissent. We note that certain national
security laws, in name of retributive justice, have been/may be used
to perpetrate state violence, subvert due process of law, undermine
civil liberties, and freedom of the press, eroding rule of law,
permitting torture and sexualized violence on those in state custody,
criminalizing innocent persons, and, in effect, undermining the
safety and security of citizens.
14. Commissions of Inquiry: We ask that the reports and/or findings
of various Commissions of Inquiry that have been instituted to
inquire into instances of gross violations of human rights, law, and
social justice be made public and that these commissions be ordered
to complete their charge. Further, from available information, we
register our concern that between 2000-2007 only three statutory
inquiries have been commissioned and that other inquiries instituted
have been magisterial and administrative probes. We ask that, based
on ethical assessments of gross violations of human rights, law, and
social justice, relevant statutory inquiries be ordered, as
appropriate, to investigate these crimes. We ask that various
agencies, including military and paramilitary institutions, be
required to cooperate with instituted commissions in order that they
may carry out their investigations. We ask that the recommendations
of the commissions be enacted.
15. Minorities: We note that peace and reconciliation requires
commitment to minority rights and issues, and the ethical and
transparent resolution of injustices. We ask that an audit be
conducted to ascertain the status of minorities in Kashmir, and
related to the displacement, dislocation, and rehabilitation of
minorities in Jammu and Kashmir, to propose mechanisms for reparation
and reconciliation.
16. Truth and Reconciliation Commission: We note your public
commitment to instituting a 'Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC)'. We are hopeful that you will appreciate that such a process
must facilitate the implementation of justice as a precondition to
reconciliation. We further note that the viability and success of a
TRC is only possible in a context where demilitarization has taken
place, enabling a social context in which the will and freedom of the
people of Kashmir can be exercised.
17. In conclusion, we write you today mindful of how the conditions
for peace and prosperity are linked to the possibility and necessity
of justice in Kashmir. We understand the work of the International
People's Tribunal for Human Rights and Justice in Kashmir as enabling
the work of justice. Toward that, we hope and expect that the
Tribunal will continue to undertake its work in conditions that are
not impeded.
Yours Sincerely,
Angana Chatterji, Parvez Imroz, Gautam Navlakha, Zahir-Ud-Din, Mihir
Desai, Khurram Parvez
_____
[6] India: Dont be deaf and dumb to communal danger
The Asian Age
February 18, 2009
RAM SENE NOT FRINGE, IT’S COLOURED SAFFRON
by Inder Malhotra
WHAT began at a Mangalore pub last month and manifested itself
menacingly on Valentine’s Day in a number of states — from Karnataka
to Haryana, from Madhya Pradesh to Maharashtra — cannot be dismissed
as a mere aberration by a small lunatic fringe. It is a dangerous
trend which, if unchecked immediately, could talibanise a religion
that has been most tolerant for millennia and a country whose
legitimate pride lies in its secular traditions and respect for
people’s Fundamental Rights.
In the first place, the number of goons and thugs who go on a rampage
at will is not as small as it is made out to be. Secondly, the
perpetrators of unacceptable barbarity get away easily. Either they
are not arrested or, if taken into custody, are let off on bail. No
wonder more and more goons are joining their ranks in a milieu in
which violence on any pretext is routine. Thirdly, and most gravely,
the likes of Pramod Muthalik, who are self-appointed custodians of
Hindu culture as well as morals and morality, have the tacit support
of the votaries of Hindutva who dominate the principal Opposition
party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). There can be no other
explanation for the fact that L.K. Advani, the BJP’s prime
ministerial candidate, hasn’t uttered a word of condemnation so far
about Valentine’s Day incidents.
In fact, after the Mangalore outrage, BJP leaders did condemn it and
declared emphatically that it was the handiwork of "anti-social
elements" with whom their party had nothing whatsoever to do. This
pretence could not hold water. The antecedents of Mr Muthalik and his
associates showed how close their links were with the saffron party
before personal differences drove them to organise a new outfit
called Sri Ram Sene. In any case, whatever the names of various
senas, all of them are members of the extended Sangh Parivar,
presided over by the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS). Bajrang Dal
members, who were hyperactive on Valentine’s Day, have been the
Hindtuva camp’s storm-troopers since before Mr Advani’s rath yatra
and the demolition of the Babri Masjid. In the circumstances, those
who say that parcels of pink knickers should have been sent not to Mr
Muthalik but to Mr Advani, Rajnath Singh and the chief minister of
Karnataka, B.S. Yeddyurappa, have a point.
It would, of course, be wrong to condemn the BJP governments alone
though it is hair-raising that the "saviours" of Hinduism should have
attacked a brother and sister duo in Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, where
the saffron party has been returned to power in the recent Assembly
elections. In the wake of Mangalore incidents, the newly-appointed
Congress chief minister of Rajasthan spoke of "pub culture" in a
language indistinguishable from that of the Karnataka chief minister,
who pontificated that it was wrong for people to take the law into
their hands, but he wouldn’t allow the "pub culture" to grow. The
Rajasthan chief minister backtracked only after top Congress leaders
frowned on him. On Valentine’s Day, in Maharashtra, ruled by a
Congress-led coalition, vandalism by the Hindutva goons was as
widespread as in Madhya Pradesh.
And to Congress-ruled Haryana goes the dubious and shameful
distinction that one of its assistant sub-inspectors of police,
instead of protecting victims of violence, dragged a girl by her hair
and treated her in a beastly manner. His suspension means nothing.
He’ll be back in his job soon, if past practice is any guide. The
Karnataka government’s action in the case of the teenaged girl who
committed suicide because she was humiliated and brutalised by the
Hindutva hoodlums is nothing short of monstrous. The state police
arrested the Muslim boy she was accompanying in a bus but not her
assailants. The district superintendent of police’s explanation was
that if he had arrested the "real culprits", there would have been a
communal riot!
Let there be no mistake that the looming peril is great and the
stakes in defeating it are high. The message of the "custodians" of
Hindu religion and culture amounts to a wail that Hinduism would be
destroyed if some girls drink beer at a pub or if a boy and girl walk
hand-in-hand or if a young man presents roses or chocolates to his
wife or girlfriend on February 14. What is the remedy prescribed by
these paranoid backwoodsmen? To "semitise" the Hindu religion, in the
words of historian Romila Thapar, by imposing a strict and uniform
code on every Hindu, just as the Wahabbis did in Saudi Arabia in the
past and the Taliban are doing in Afghanistan and Pakistan now.
Not only does the Hindu religion have no book and no Pope, but it
also doesn’t impose any compulsion on its followers. It is not at all
compulsory to go to a temple or to pray. Hundreds of millions worship
at temples regularly, and an equal number don’t. Moreover, the notion
of a monolithic Hindu culture is ridiculous in such a vast and hugely
diverse country. Different patterns prevail in different regions. To
give only one example, in Tamil Nadu, for a Hindu to marry his
sister’s daughter is not just permitted but is considered the right
thing to do. In north India this would be reprehensible incest.
The Indian state and civil society must learn from what has happened
in Pakistan. President Asif Ali Zardari has candidly admitted that
the Taliban could "take over" the country. Earlier, in an article in
Newsline titled "The Saudi-isation of Pakistan", the highly respected
Pakistani academic Pervez Hoodbhoy had warned: "It is a matter of
time before the fighting (in the wild areas…) shifts to Peshawar and
Islamabad (which has already been a witness to the Lal Masjid
episode) and engulfs Lahore and Karachi as well". He also explained
why. Instead of resisting the religious extremism, "the (Pakistani)
state used religion as an instrument of policy". A stage has now been
reached where "every
incumbent government (is) fearful of taking on powerful religious
forces". Let this country not say later that it wasn’t forewarned.
_____
[7] MISCELLANEA:
DAWKINS ON DARWIN
Why we really do need to know the amazing truth about evolution, and
the equally amazing intellectual dishonesty of its enemies
Richard Dawkins (The Times Literary Supplement - February 11, 2009)
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/
the_tls/article5707143.ece
NATURE VIDEO: DAVID ATTENBOROUGH ON DARWIN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&hl=en-GB&v=uz7U4k522Pg
DEFYING DARWIN (The Guardian, Tuesday 17 February 2009)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/17/evolution-versus-
creationism-science
o o o
Catholics for Choice
For Immediate Release
10 February 2009
CATHOLICS FOR CHOICE STATEMENT ON THE 80TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE LATERAN
TREATY
Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice, issued the following
statement to mark the 80th Anniversary of the Lateran treaty between
the Vatican and Italy on February 11.
"Eighty years ago, the Holy See and the Italian government signed an
agreement that gave legal status to the area we know as Vatican City.
Since that time, various popes have expanded the political reach of
this tiny area, gaining recognition and influence at the United
Nations and other international bodies. The anniversary gives us an
opportunity to reconsider the role that the Vatican, or Holy See,
plays in the world today, particularly at the UN.
"The Holy See is a Non-member State Permanent Observer at the United
Nations. It is the only entity to hold such status since Switzerland
became a full member in 2002. This status allows the Holy See to have
some state privileges at the UN, such as being able to speak and vote
at UN conferences. No other religious body is granted this elevated
status; instead other religious bodies participate at the UN as
nongovernmental organizations. Worse, the Holy See is represented at
these meetings by the hierarchy, whose views are in no way reflective
of the views of the one billion-plus Catholics the world over. And
when others object to the hierarchy's policies, the Vatican's
representatives denounce such objections as anti-Catholic or anti-
religious.
"It is worth noting that the Holy See's claims to statehood change
depending on the circumstances. In recent years the Holy See has,
when convenient, both asserted and renounced its statehood. Recently,
and nearly simultaneously, the Holy See claimed statehood to ask for
diplomatic immunity from sex abuse cases in the United States while
denying statehood to refuse cooperation with the International
Criminal Court. Often, when denying its state status, the Holy See
instead claims to be a religious institution, accompanied by demands
that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution protect
the actions of the church after claims that members of the hierarchy
mismanaged allegations of sexual abuse.
"There is no doubt that the Roman Catholic church has made
significant contributions to the well-being of Catholics and non-
Catholics throughout the world through the provision of many much-
needed social services. However, if the UN and other bodies were to
review its status as a "state," there is no suggestion that the
unquestioned good works of the Catholic church would stop. In fact,
there is the possibility that they would increase, as so many of its
officials would be freed from the diplomatic duties they currently
perform.
"The Holy See's opposition to policies that promote reproductive
health, including especially its opposition to the use of condoms to
prevent the spread of HIV, overshadows the good work that many
members of the church do. The impact of these policies is enhanced by
the political role that the Holy See plays in the world. When the
Holy See participates as a state in the international system,
religious freedom is endangered, women's lives are placed at risk and
public health efforts are hampered. The time has now come to allow
the Holy See's contradictory position on its own statehood to speak
for itself, and for the United Nations and other bodies to start
treating the Vatican for what it is: the government of a religious
institution."
_____
[8] ANNOUNCEMENTS:
(i) Just Published
ROGUE AGENT: HOW INDIA'S MILITARY INTELLIGENCE BETRAYED THE BURMESE
RESISTANCE
by Nandita Haksar
Penguin Books India
February 2009 / 256pp
ISBN: 9780143064893
• An undercover operation involving Burmese rebels and Indian
Intelligence agencies set amidst the palm trees and beaches of the
Andaman Islands.
• It all went horribly wrong. Were the Burmese betrayed by Indian
Intelligence? If so, why?
• Haksar‘s investigation unfolds like a thriller set against the
background of the geo-politics of the Indian Ocean.
Why is democratic India silent about the struggle for liberty in Burma?
When Nandita Haksar took up the case of thirty-six Burmese prisoners
in Port Blair’s jail, she thought it was a simple case of illegal
detention.
But as she painstakingly pieced her clients’ stories together, the
case took on a markedly more complex colour. The Burmese claimed they
had been double-crossed by an Indian military intelligence agent
during an undercover operation in the Andaman Islands. The operation
had the support of India’s intelligence agencies; in return the
Burmese were to receive assistance in their struggle against
Myanmar’s military Junta. Yet it all went horribly wrong: during the
operation some Burmese freedom fighters were shot dead and
subsequently the thirty six survivors were held without charges. The
agent disappeared.
Haksar‘s investigation unfolds like a thriller set against the
background of the geo-politics of the Indian Ocean. The rivalries
between India and China, the growing importance of Myanmar’s gas
reserves and the insurgencies in India’s north-east are all critical
factors in the chain of events. Rogue Agent exposes not only the
injustice meted to the thirty-six Burmese prisoners and the
extraordinary silence of the state on the circumstances surrounding
the agent’s disappearance but it also argues that by keeping patriots
from the Burmese resistance in jail in order to placate the Myanmar
military junta, India has broken its own laws and has violated the
spirit of its own Constitution.
- - -
(ii) FILM SCREENING:
Research Centre for Women's Studies
SNDT Women's University
Juhu Campus invites you to the screening of
DEGHAM
Tamil/English Subtitled/156 Mins/Colour
A film on the transgender experience with Revathi, Narthaki Nataraj,
Priya babu, Aasha Bharathi & Kalki talking about the complexities of
the body
18 February
4 p.m.
Mini Auditorium
SNDT Women's University, Juhu Campus
Credits: Camera: R V Ramani, Editing: Swarnima Sinha, Sound: Jayanth
Pradhan,
Direction: Vishnu Mathur
Produced by: C S Lakshmi, SPARROW
All are welcome.
Dr. Veena Poonacha
Director, RCWS, SNDT
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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