SACW | April 1-14, 2009 / War Noise / Culture Police /

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | April-1-14, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2615 -  
Year 11 running
From: www.sacw.net

[1] Bangladesh: Celebrating the activists who organise women garment  
workers (Hana Shams Ahmed)
   + The banality of violence in Bangladesh (Bina D’Costa)
[2] Nepal: interview with Prime Minister Dahal (Katri Merikallio)
[3] Pakistan: Swat flogging & public outrage (Beena Sarwar)
[4] Sri Lanka: Who is Responsible for the Slaughter of Civilians in  
the Vanni? (Rohini Hensman)
     + IA-Forum Interview: Asoka Bandarage
[5] India Administered Kashmir: Ratify enforced disappearance  
convention: APDP to Govt. of India (Hakeem Irfan)
[6] India: Press Statement by Arundhati Roy at the Raipur Satyagraha  
for the Release of Dr Binayak Sen
[7] India's Coming Elections and the Hindu Right
  - Politics without ideas or issues (Mahesh Rangarajan)
  - Rally behind Mallika Sarabhai in her Fight against Communal Fascism
  - Mr Advani mixes religion and politics, BJP gives tickets to  
killers of Christians in Orissa
  - BJP's project of a Hinduised India gives heart to the politico- 
religious nuts in Pakistan (Jawed Naqvi)
[8] Tributes:
  - Remembering Victor Gordon Kiernan (Hassan N. Gardezi)
  - Janet Rosenberg Jagan (1920-2009)
  - Remembering Smitu Kothari: Adieu to an activist (Sadanand Menon)
[9] India: Continuing Erosion of Secular Space - The Hindu Far Right  
Keeps Up its Slow and Steady work
  - Report on cultural policing against women and minorities in  
Karnataka (PUCL- Karnataka)
  - Pink Undies Facebook Group vandalised and taken over by the Hindu  
Right (Nisha Susan)
- The Hinduised face of Bastar’s tribals (Aarti Dhar)
[10] International: Women Living Under Muslim Laws Demands the UN  
Resolution on Combating Defamation of Religions be revoked
[11] Miscellanea:
   - Talisma Nasreen : "Aucune religion ne prône l’égalité entre les  
hommes et les femmes" (Dominique Bari et Rosa Moussaoui)
   - Taliban v. Taliban (Graham Usher )
   - The Mysterious "Amar Singh": What Did Hillary Clinton Do? (Vijay  
Prashad)
[12] Announcements:
(i) Just Published: Violent Gods: Hindu Nationalism in India's  
Present - Narratives from Orissa (Angana P. Chatterji)
(ii) The Fourth Annual Arthur Miller Freedom to Write Lecture by  
Nawal El Saadawi (New York, May 3, 2009)

_____


[1] Bangladesh:

Celebrating Najma Akhtar, and her associates who built Bangladesh’s  
women garment workers trade union
by Hana Shams Ahmed
http://www.sacw.net/article820.html


THE BANALITY OF VIOLENCE IN BANGLADESH
by Bina D’Costa
http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/03/20/the-banality-of-violence-in- 
bangladesh/

_____


[2] Nepal:

"WE ARE COMMITTED TO MULTIPARTY DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM OF PRESS AND RULE  
OF LAW..."
In this interview with Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal printed in  
the Wednesday edition of the Finnish newsmagazine, Suomen Kuvalehti,  
Katri Merikallio asks him about his commitment to democracy, the free  
press and the future of the peace process.
http://www.nepalitimes.com.np/issue/2009/04/13/Interview/15847

_____


[3] Pakistan:

Dawn
12 April 2009

SWAT FLOGGING & PUBLIC OUTRAGE

by Beena Sarwar

In the ‘flogging video’ — undated footage shot with a cellphone in  
Swat (judging by the language and clothes) — a man whips a woman in  
red, her pinned face down on the ground and encircled by men. The  
leather strap strikes her back as she cries out in pain.

The video, circulated on the Internet before local television  
channels broadcast it, caused a furore both in Pakistan and  
internationally. What caused the outrage? The public punishment meted  
out to a woman — or the fact that it was broadcast?

Those who helped make the incident public, including the man who told  
a channel that he made the video, are under threat for their part in  
what many term a “drama” staged to give “a bad name” to Pakistan and  
to Islam. Political forces and local residents join this chorus,  
terming the video a bid to sabotage the peace deal. The Taliban say  
that the woman who was flogged was accused of illicit relations with  
her father-in-law and that the punishment was meted out by a small  
boy. The woman, whose face is not visible in the video, was accused  
of ‘adultery’ after allegedly being in the company of a na-mehram  
man. Her subsequent denial of the flogging before a magistrate  
reflects the intimidation she faces.

All this diverts from the real issue — that such punishments have  
been and legally can be meted out to women in Pakistan, thanks to Gen  
Ziaul Haq’s controversial Hudood laws. Political dissidents and  
journalists have felt the lash on their backs. So have some women — a  
few in prisons, and at least one publicly in Bahawalpur. Those  
terming the video ‘fake’ argue that no one who was really flogged  
would be able to sit up, then walk on her own feet as the girl in the  
video did when she was led away. However, psychiatrists say that in  
highly charged situations, the body functions at a higher metabolic  
level to overcome physical pain. “The need to escape from that  
situation takes precedence over the pain,” says eminent psychiatrist  
Dr Haroon Ahmed.

Nasir Zaidi, one of the four journalists who were whipped in 1979  
says, “It is entirely possible. We were whipped with a proper  
‘hunter’, not a leather strap, and walked away. So did a young boy  
who was flogged before us. We did not want them to see our weakness.”

Hadd punishments (amputation, flogging, stoning to death) in fact  
have witness requirements which are so strict that they can  
practically never be met. These laws made adultery a criminal offence  
and rape a private one, punishable by flogging or stoning to death.  
Earlier, under the Pakistan Penal Code, adultery was a private  
offence, compoundable and bailable, punishable by five years or a  
fine, or both. The state could not be a party to prosecuting adultery.

In 1981, the Federal Shariat Court pronounced that stoning to death  
was not even an Islamic punishment (PLD 1981 FSC 145 Hazoor Baksh).  
Gen Zia had the bench changed. The new bench upheld the punishment.  
Islamic scholars such as Dr Mohammad Farooq Khan of Mardan term the  
Hudood laws as “the biggest insult to Islam”. The Council of Islamic  
Ideology has found them to be flawed and inconsistent with the  
teachings of Islam (CII Report, 2006). Gen Zia’s use of Islam for  
political purposes was meant partly to drum up support for the  
Mujahideen in Afghanistan, and partly to create terror and render the  
populace incapable of protest against oppression. This is what the  
Taliban are also doing. They have in the past deliberately videotaped  
such punishments and circulated the footage.

In March 2007, Taliban in Khyber Agency publicly stoned and then shot  
dead a woman and two men on charges of adultery. They videotaped the  
shooting and circulated it — footage that even the most  
sensationalist of channels would think twice about broadcasting. The  
Swat flogging video is an aberration only in that the local media  
broadcast it. One reason for the broadcast (conspiracy theories  
aside) was that the footage, while horrific, involved no blood or  
limbs being lopped off. There have been other incidents of public  
executions of men and women in the region. In September 2007, the  
beheaded bodies of two women kidnapped in Bannu were found with a  
note in Pashto, warning that all women “involved in immoral  
activities” would meet the same fate — like Shabana, the dancer in  
Mingora who was shot dead.

It is socially acceptable (but not necessary) for family members to  
punish — but never in public — females who transgress their code of  
honour. The Taliban’s public violence goes against this code. It also  
overshadows ‘private’ gender violence, like swara, stove-burnings and  
beatings.

The first casualty of war may be the truth but the first casualty of  
any ‘religious militancy’ is women’s rights. During the Zia years,  
American and Pakistani intelligence agencies boosted this tendency  
when they re-invented the Afghan war of liberation against Soviet  
occupation as a religious war. The Mujahideen’s launching pads  
against the Soviets in Pakistan’s tribal areas are sanctuaries for  
their successors, the Taliban. The drug trade used to finance the war  
contributed to growing lawlessness, worsened by the influx of  
weapons. Sectarian violence escalated when the ‘jihad’ boomeranged  
after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan. The suicide bombing in  
Chakwal recently is just the latest such attack on imambargahs.

The Taliban’s treatment of women, including their ban on female  
education while in power in Afghanistan (please note, before the  
American drone attacks) takes Zia’s obsession with controlling  
women’s morality and public behaviour further. They have destroyed  
hundreds of girls’ schools, besides targeting teachers and NGOs  
attempting to provide health and education. Such NGOs have been under  
attack since before 9/11. Remember the summer of 2001, when Taliban  
attacked NGO offices in the tribal areas; the tragic murder in  
Mansehra of three women and their driver working for an NGO focusing  
on education on April 6 comes barely a year after an armed attack,  
also in Mansehra, in February 2008, that killed four employees of an  
organisation focusing on children and rehabilitation work after the  
2005 earthquake.

One reason for the Pakistani state’s apparent paralysis is that the  
armed forces and large sections of the population think of this as  
America’s war, compared to the previous Afghan war with its religious  
trappings. In fact, that was less ‘our war’ than the current one,  
which threatens the very existence of the Pakistani state.


_____


[4] Sri Lanka:

(i)

SRI LANKA: WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SLAUGHTER OF CIVILIANS IN THE  
VANNI?

by Rohini Hensman, sacw.net, 8 April 2009
http://www.sacw.net/article807.html

With the military defeat of the LTTE imminent, the terrible plight of  
civilians in the Vanni has attracted worldwide concern and sympathy,  
and rightly so. While the circumstances are completely different, the  
civilian death toll in the Vanni over the past few months (over 2700)  
is already triple the number of civilians killed in the Gaza massacre  
of December-January, and is still mounting. The thousands who suffer  
serious injuries are further victimised by the delay or lack of  
medical attention, which means, for example, that injuries to limbs  
which could have been saved with prompt treatment, instead result in  
gangrene and amputations. Even those who have not lost lives, limbs  
or loved ones, have lost their homes and livelihoods, and live in  
appalling conditions which could well claim more lives through  
disease or even starvation.

Meanwhile, the LTTE and Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) trade charges,  
each accusing the other of being responsible for the slaughter. What  
truth is there in their respective allegations?

The LTTE

The LTTE and its supporters, especially in Tamil Nadu but also  
elsewhere, cry ‘Genocide!’ and accuse the government of being solely  
responsible for the carnage. They do not mention the appalling war  
crimes committed by the LTTE, which have been documented by several  
international and Sri Lankan human rights groups. The most obvious is  
their use of Tamil civilians as a human shield from behind which they  
can engage in offensive firing, and their shooting of those who try  
to escape. This means that the Tamil civilians over whom the LTTE  
sheds crocodile tears are effectively prisoners or hostages whom it  
deliberately keeps in the line of fire so that it can hide behind  
them. The relationship between Tamils and Tigers is the very opposite  
of what it claims: far from defending Tamils, the LTTE leaders are  
using Tamils for their physical and political survival, a violation  
defined as a war crime.

But it is doing worse. All the official reports mention forcible  
conscription of civilians, including children. This, too, is a war  
crime. Unofficial reports say that these unfortunate youngsters are  
not even being provided with cyanide capsules, because some have  
committed suicide rather than go into combat. It must be kept in mind  
that large numbers of the LTTE casualties actually consist of these  
frightened and ill-trained conscripts, who never chose to bear arms.  
Their presence in the LTTE forces also means that their families, who  
might otherwise flee, remain in LTTE territory because they do not  
want to abandon their children. Planting a suicide bomber among  
fleeing civilians was a cynical move, ensuring that all civilians  
would thenceforth be regarded as suspects.

Most cynical of all, refugees who have escaped report that the LTTE  
deliberately fires from areas where civilians have taken shelter, for  
example from the vicinity of hospitals and schools and from safe  
areas, knowing that government forces will respond by shelling. The  
fighters then vamoose, leaving the civilians to take all the  
casualties This is worse even than using civilians as a shield: this  
constitutes using civilian lives as propaganda, deliberately getting  
them killed in order to justify the allegation of genocide. The LTTE  
massacre of Sinhalese civilians in Inginiyagala on February 21 was  
probably also an attempt to provoke violent reprisals against Tamils.  
The suicide attack on Muslims celebrating the Milad festival at the  
Jumma Mosque in Akuressa on March 10 recalled the LTTE’s massacres  
and ethnic cleansing of Muslims in the past. Those who hurl charges  
of genocide and war crimes against the government alone are guilty of  
whitewashing the LTTE and covering up some of the most heinous war  
crimes being committed in the recent phase of fighting.

The LTTE leadership is undoubtedly in a tight spot, but they still  
have the option of behaving honourably. The most honourable and  
humane thing they could do now is to negotiate a surrender monitored  
by international organisations, which will ensure that the civilians  
are rehabilitated and their fighters receive humane treatment as  
prisoners of war. Or, if they insist on fighting to the finish, they  
could release all the civilians and conscripts, so that only those  
who wish to stay with them are subjected to the final assault. They  
will not, of course, do either of these things, because they have no  
concern whatsoever for the welfare of Tamils.

The Government

When evaluating the conduct of the government and the course of  
action open to it, it is important to keep in mind these actions of  
the LTTE. One of the demands, for example, has been for a ceasefire  
and peace talks with the LTTE. But Rajan Hoole and K.Sritharan of the  
award-winning University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna) report  
that Sri Lankan Tamils are wary of any peace talks that will give  
oxygen to the LTTE. This is not surprising if we look at the way in  
which the LTTE has treated the Tamils subjected to its rule. If  
Tamils who have suffered under the LTTE are anxious that it should  
not be rescued at this point, it is hardly surprising that Muslims  
who have been subjected to massacres and ethnic cleansing, and  
Sinhalese who never know when the next terrorist attack will strike  
them, cannot wait to see the last of it. In these circumstances, it  
would be unrealistic to expect the government to go back to anything  
like the Ceasefire Agreement of 2002, which allowed the LTTE to arm  
itself for Eelam War IV. Such a course of action would also be  
undesirable, simply preparing the way for renewed bloodshed in the  
future.

However, this doesn’t mean that the GOSL is as free of blame as it  
and its supporters claim. Observers are surprised that there has not  
been a mutiny or split in the ranks of the LTTE which would end the  
war, and one probable reason this has not happened so far is that the  
government has gone out of its way to support LTTE propaganda.  
Earlier, it sabotaged the APRC process when it had already arrived at  
a political solution which could have been fine-tuned to suit the  
democratic majority in all communities, thus reinforcing the LTTE’s  
message that Tamils will never get justice in a united Sri Lanka.  
This message was further reinforced when leading members of the armed  
forces and government, Sarath Fonseka and Champika Ranawaka,  
proclaimed that Sri Lanka belonged to the Sinhalese, and minorities  
would have to put up with less than equal rights, thus further  
assisting the LTTE’s recruitment drives. Yet more support was  
provided to LTTE propaganda by earlier government proposals to keep  
IDPs in camps for up to three years, fuelling suspicions that their  
original habitats would be occupied by Sinhalese, and that the war  
was being used as a cover for ethnic cleansing.

Government armed forces have responded to LTTE fire by shelling  
civilian concentrations, including safe areas and hospitals, killing  
and injuring thousands. Those who escape to government-controlled  
territory are kept in internment camps surrounded by barbed wire,  
prevented even from visiting injured family members in hospital or  
attending the funerals of loved ones. Recently senior citizens were  
released, but others remain prisoners. Reports of disappearances from  
these camps, coming on top of thousands of disappearances in the last  
few years, make this incarceration all the more fearsome. Not only  
would this prospect make civilians think twice before fleeing LTTE  
territory, it would also make LTTE conscripts think that surrender  
means death, and so they might as well die fighting.

All these policies of the government and its armed forces not only  
result in massive civilian casualties, they also prolong the  
fighting. Alongside concern for civilians, we should also spare a  
thought for combatants on both sides, who are being expended by their  
respective leaderships as though ther lives have no value, whereas a  
different strategy could ensure that a whole generation of young  
people is not killed and disabled. Moreover, the government’s  
strategy makes a peaceful outcome almost impossible. Even when the  
LTTE is defeated militarily, it – or another guerrilla group – is  
likely to rise up in the future to carry out terrorist attacks and  
restart the war, just as the Taliban has staged a comeback in  
Afghanistan. So what is the alternative?

A Different Strategy

An alternative strategy would consist of the following: (1) Stop  
shelling safe areas and civilian targets within LTTE-controlled  
territory; this only results in propaganda gains for the LTTE. (2)  
Ensure adequate food, water and medicine supplies to civilians both  
inside LTTE territory and outside, making sure, however, that no arms  
or ammunition get through to the LTTE. (3) Ask the UN or ICRC to  
monitor the screening and registration of IDPs entering the camps so  
that an independent record is available, and disappearances cannot  
take place so easily. If LTTE suspects are separated out, they, along  
with LTTE cadre who surrender, should be kept in prisoner-of-war  
camps whose inmates are also registered with the UN or ICRC, and  
treated in accordance with international law. (4) If there is no  
evidence that IDPs are LTTE operatives, they should be given identity  
cards and allowed to move freely. These measures will encourage  
civilians to escape the LTTE if they can, and LTTE conscripts to  
surrender with some confidence that they will be treated humanely.

Simultaneously, the APRC proposal for constitutional change drafted  
by Tissa Vitharana on the basis of the Majority and Minority Reports  
of the Panel of Experts needs to be adopted by the government, which  
should also provide a solemn pledge that transfer of population  
(defined in international law as a crime against humanity) will not  
take place: all IDPs and refugees who wish to return to their  
original homes will be assisted to do so. This will not be easy,  
especially in the case of Muslim IDPs who have been languishing in  
camps for over eighteen years, but it must be done as part of a  
political solution to the crisis.

Is a political solution an immediate priority in the closing stages  
of this battle in the Vanni? Yes, it certainly is! If the ruling SLFP  
had not repeatedly sabotaged the APRC process from mid-2007 onwards,  
the war might have ended months ago, and thousands of lives might  
have been saved. It is now too late to save those who have been  
killed, but it is still possible to save lives and limbs that would  
be lost if a just political solution is not achieved. A purely  
military victory will merely push the war underground, and ensure  
that it will re-emerge as guerrilla and terrorist strikes in future.  
A constitution which is acceptable to democratic elements in all  
communities is the only way to end the war once and for all. If the  
current political leaders in the two major parties are reluctant to  
implement a just and democratic settlement, then the people of Sri  
Lanka must either push them into doing so, or dump them and create a  
new leadership.

As for international actors who wish to help civilians in the Vanni,  
they would do well to acquaint themselves first with the situation on  
the ground. Accusations of ‘genocide’ against the government, for  
example, do more harm than good. As an anxious Tamil in Sri Lanka put  
it, ‘When I hear Indians talking about genocide in Sri Lanka, I  
shudder, because I know it will merely make things worse for the  
trapped civilians. It is like crying ‘Wolf!’ If we cry ‘Genocide!’  
when it is not occurring, who will believe us and come to our aid if  
it really occurs? No one!’ Those who are really concerned about the  
appalling situation of people in the Vanni should not only demand of  
the government that they implement the measures listed above, but  
should also demand that the LTTE release the civilians and conscripts  
they are holding hostage. Otherwise they would merely be adding fuel  
to the fire that is consuming thousands of lives.

o o o

(ii)

IA-FORUM INTERVIEW: ASOKA BANDARAGE
10 April 2009
http://www.ia-forum.org/Content/ViewInternalDocument.cfm?ContentID=6821

International Affairs Forum: Aid organizations are calling the  
situation in the North of Sri Lanka a humanitarian disaster, while  
the Sri Lankan government is saying such claims are overblown. Do we  
know how bad the humanitarian situation really is?

Asoka Bandarage: It’s a very complex situation. On the one hand,  
there aren’t media sources out there, so one has to go by what the  
government is saying. On the other hand, the government is also in a  
very difficult situation. Successive Sri Lankan governments have  
tried to negotiate with the LTTE and it hasn’t worked, so the  
government had to take this military offensive. The government forces  
are on the verge of finally defeating the LTTE. Yes, there is a  
humanitarian crisis—there is no doubt about that—but the question is,  
would a ceasefire at this point really help the humanitarian  
situation given that the LTTE is holding a lot of Tamil people as  
human shields? Even if there is a ceasefire, would the LTTE allow  
these people to leave? Holding Tamil people as human shields is  
basically their last resort. Is a ceasefire the wise thing to do at  
this point, when the LTTE is almost finished with? The LTTE has been  
a ruthless terrorist organization—conscripting children, killing  
dissidents, so on and so forth.

Going back to your question about the humanitarian organizations,  
it’s not clear whether or not there is an exaggeration on their part.  
We would like to think that intervention and humanitarian aid is  
motivated simply by the desire to help the victims on the ground, but  
in the complicated world we live in that’s not always the case. These  
groups can be politically motivated. Are these organizations  
motivated by humanitarianism or other geopolitical interests? In Sri  
Lanka, there has been a history of international NGO’s being involved  
in the conflict and taking sides.

Also, why isn’t there more of an emphasis on the part of  
international organizations calling on the LTTE to let the civilians  
go? This would be the most important thing to do at this point—to put  
pressure on the LTTE to let people leave the conflict zone. A lot of  
people have left voluntarily because the government has erected a ‘no  
fire zone’ for people to move into. But the LTTE has been firing at  
people who are leaving. These are reports that I have read—I don’t  
know how accurate they are—but, I think that there should be a lot of  
international pressure on the LTTE to let people leave, rather than  
simply calling for a ceasefire which could prolong the war.


IA-Forum: You mentioned that we have to rely on the government for  
information about the military offensive. Do you see them allowing  
the media into the North anytime soon?

Asoka Bandarage: From what I understand, no. In terms of war and  
security, one can understand that. But, in terms of civil rights and  
freedom of the press, it is a problem. There is a certain abrogation  
of civil rights and democratic norms in this atmosphere of war. I  
think that is why most people are just hoping that this military  
offensive ends soon, because that doesn’t necessarily end the  
conflict, which is much more complicated than simply defeating the  
LTTE. There are a lot of other issues that have to be worked out.  
When the military offensive is over, the political issues can be  
dealt with.


IA-Forum: To ask a similar question to that which many have posed in  
the wake of the recent Israeli offensive in Gaza, does this military  
offensive help or hurt the LTTE in terms of public support among Tamils?

Asoka Bandarage: It’s a heart-wrenching situation. Anyone can feel  
for the suffering of the Tamil people in the north who are caught in  
this war and who have suffered the most. But the thing to remember is  
that the Sri Lankan Tamil people are not a free population. They are  
not able to freely express themselves. There are certain elements,  
certainly, that support the LTTE because they want to see a separate  
homeland, but then there are also others who are coerced into  
supporting it.

When the global media and others portray this conflict as a Sinhala  
government versus a victimized Tamil minority, they overlook the fact  
that the Tamils have been oppressed by the LTTE itself. Their use of  
Tamil people as human shields and human weapons is the most blatant  
expression of that. The situation calls for—and this is what I talk  
about in my book—moving beyond bipolar thinking—Sinhala versus Tamil— 
and looking at the intra-ethnic issues, in this case within the Tamil  
community, how the LTTE has engaged in censorship and internal  
oppression. There should be condemnation on the part of the Tamils of  
the LTTE for holding people hostage. The LTTE’s concern has always  
been themselves, not Tamil people. They have been using the Tamil  
people to advance their cause.


IA-Forum: Do you think that those within the Tamil diaspora have made  
sufficient efforts to condemn the LTTE?

Asoka Bandarage: No, because even those who are opposed to the LTTE— 
and there are quite a lot, including dissidents who have left the  
country because they were under threat from the LTTE—don’t speak  
openly because the LTTE is not just a local movement but an  
international network, so certainly that condemnation is not going to  
come. It is those who support…not necessarily the LTTE…but support a  
separate state who have been speaking up, and those who are opposed  
to the LTTE and do not support separatism are not really heard from.  
So in the world media there is this presentation of a unified  
position among Tamils, which is not actually the case. The LTTE  
presents itself as the sole representative of the Tamils but it is  
not a democratically elected regime or organization.


IA-Forum: So are you suggesting that even those in the Tamil diaspora  
are afraid to speak their minds because they feel threatened by the  
LTTE, or just that they are not being given a chance to do so by the  
global media?

Asoka Bandarage: I think it’s both. There are a few voices here and  
there but mostly there is a fear of speaking out against this  
organization, which is one of the most sophisticated terrorist  
organizations in the world.

Also, this issue must be looked at in a broader way than a domestic  
issue between two ethnic groups—a primordial conflict. In my book I  
show that although there is a domestic aspect to it, it is really a  
much broader regional and international issue. For example, the  
Tamils are a majority in the regional, South Indian context—there are  
some 60 million or more Tamils there—and the demand for a separate  
Tamil state called Dravidistan, which was primarily for the Tamils,  
began during British colonial period in South India because there was  
a fear that with independence, the northern Indian—the non-Dravidian,  
so-called Aryan groups—would dominate. So even before the British  
left there was a very strong movement in southern India calling for a  
separate state. That became quite vociferous—in fact, it became one  
of the most activist movements in the post-independence era—until a  
draconian anti-secessionist amendment to the Indian constitution was  
passed in 1963. The Dravidian separatist movement was squashed at  
that point, and very heavy penalties were imposed on anyone calling  
for a separate state.

It was at that time that the movement for Tamil separatism shifted to  
Sri Lanka because they are the Tamil minority, many of whom were in  
the North and East of the island. And then in conjunction with  
developments within Sri Lanka, the separatist movement evolved in Sri  
Lanka. The Tamil community in South India is an important and sizable  
community, and at a time in the world when every ethnic community  
seems to be gaining its own nation-state, the Tamils, who have an  
advanced cosmopolitan elite, feel that they don’t have a nation-state  
of their own.

There is a world Tamil movement which says that there is a Tamil in  
every state of the world but no state for the Tamils. The Tamils are  
a transnational community. So the movement for separatism is not  
something that is peculiar to Sri Lankan Tamils. Rather it is  
something for which there is support from certain political parties  
in South India which have always been involved in Sri Lankan  
political issues, and also from other groups in Malaysia and the  
diaspora. So it is must bigger than just a Sri Lankan issue, which is  
one of the reasons why it has been so difficult to resolve,  
especially because of the very influential role played by South  
Indian political parties. So, support for separatism has a broad base.


IA-Forum: But isn’t there a danger in conflating the identity of the  
Sri Lankan Tamils—who have lived in Sri Lanka for about 2,000 years— 
and the Indian Tamils? Aren’t those two very separate identities?

Asoka Bandarage: Yes, they are separate identities—there is the Sri  
Lankan identity and there are the Indian identity and Malaysian  
identity, etc.—but they are also co-ethnics who share a wider Tamil  
culture and close links. At this point Eelam is not being  
conceptualized as a part of South India, but there have been talks  
throughout of a Greater Eelam, which includes parts of South India  
and Sri Lanka. So there are separate identities but there are also a  
lot of links and commonalities. The separatist movement is not just a  
Sri Lankan movement—it is regional and it is international.


IA-Forum: So wouldn’t this idea of a Greater Eelam make India want to  
oppose any type of Tamil separatism?

Asoka Bandarage: Yes, and that is a very important point. India is  
opposed to the creation of a separate state within Sri Lanka because  
it would pose a threat to India’s own unity and territorial  
integrity. But because of pressure from the South Indian political  
parties on the central government, India has also had to take up the  
cause of the Tamils in Sri Lanka. That’s the nature of the political  
system in India—coalition politics, where the Congress Party, for  
example, needs the support of the South Indian parties in order to  
stay in power. So the issue is not simply that India is so concerned  
with the Tamil cause, but also the interest of the Indian political  
parties in their own survival.

The proximity to India has been a very key factor in the origin and  
evolution of the conflict. From the beginning, the terrorist  
organizations were able to find refuge in South India because it is  
so close to Sri Lanka. There is even evidence which shows that the  
Indian government was involved in arming and training the guerilla  
groups, including the LTTE, from the beginning. During Indira  
Gandhi’s time, India’s policy was to destabilize Sri Lanka because  
there was the fear that Sri Lanka was moving into the Western sphere  
of influence through its economic policies and alleged alignment with  
the United States and so on. So India was very much involved in the  
Sri Lankan conflict.

Later, the arrival of the Indian Peacekeeping Forces (IPKF) came into  
Sri Lanka (in 1987), led to one of the worst periods of political  
anarchy in Sri Lanka. The Indian peacekeeping operation was a  
disastrous experiment, ending in a war between the IPKF and the LTTE.  
And after the IPKF left, [Former Prime Minister of India] Rajiv  
Gandhi was assassinated by the LTTE. After that, India proscribed the  
LTTE as a terrorist organization and Vellupillai Prabhakaran, its  
leader, has been a wanted man in India.


IA-Forum: What kind of role has India played during this most recent  
military offensive?

Asoka Bandarage: India has not played a direct role, but at the same  
time India is very concerned and is a key player. It is a very tricky  
situation because India doesn’t want to get directly involved—there  
have even been calls for India to come in and evacuate some of the  
civilians, but India didn’t want to do that. India is not trying to  
stop the military offensive and it doesn’t support a separate state,  
but at the same time it is also calling for devolution and for  
support for the Tamils in Sri Lanka.


IA-Forum: How close is the Sri Lankan military to actually  
eliminating the LTTE?

Asoka Bandarage: They say that the amount of land that is under LTTE  
control now is some 20 square miles or something like that, and they  
claim that this could have been finished much earlier if it wasn’t  
for the civilian population that is caught up in the conflict. There  
are different estimates that are given by the government and by other  
organizations. I think that the real issue is the civilian  
population. How can they be protected and brought to safety? I’m  
going by what I hear in the press myself.


IA-Forum: Hypothetically, if the military offensive is successful in  
completely dismantling the LTTE, what happens next? Who represents  
the Tamils? Will there be new efforts at political reconciliation or  
will the government try to maintain a sort of status quo with the  
Tamils in a very weak state?

Asoka Bandarage: What needs to be recognized is that although the  
LTTE claims to be the sole representative of the Tamil people, there  
are Tamil political parties and politicians who are part of the  
democratic system, so it’s not like there is no representation at  
all. There have been calls for the LTTE itself to join the democratic  
process, which they refused to do. It is really about strengthening  
the democratic process and making sure that all groups are really  
participating in that process, which is something that the LTTE tried  
to stop the Tamils from doing.

It’s a very complicated situation because the majority of Tamils are  
not in the North and the East anymore—they are outside of the North  
and the East, and also there is a large number outside of the  
country. As I say in my book, devolution is not a magic formula. It  
is often presented like “okay, once the military offensive is  
finished there should be devolution,” but there should be a more  
integrated approach incorporating a lot of different issues,  
especially the concerns of the people on the ground who have suffered  
the most. Their needs for land, education, livelihood, employment,  
rehabitation, infrastructure—the development of the North and the East 
—should be the priorities rather than simply assuming that devolution  
will solve everything. Devolution is more the concern of politicians  
seeking power than people on the ground. Conflict resolution needs to  
incorporate the interests of the people not just Tamils but also  
Sinhalese and Muslims, who are a very important third community in  
Sri Lanka, particularly in the North and the East. For example, there  
are over 100,000 Muslims and Sinhalese who were ethnically cleansed  
out of the Northern and Eastern province by the LTTE. So there are  
all these other issues that need to be dealt with, and the sooner the  
country is able to deal with them, the better it is since it is going  
to be a long-term process of reconciliation, rebuilding and development.


IA Forum: Is Tamil separatism a dead idea at this point? What about  
regional autonomy?

Asoka Bandarage: There are some groups that are diehard. Many in both  
groups—the Sinhalese and the Tamils—approach this conflict in an  
ideological way—either for or against separatism. I think the  
important thing is to look at the realities on the ground—the  
demographic and socioeconomic realities. There may be certain  
situations in which devolution, autonomy, or even separatism is the  
right solution. But in Sri Lanka separatism cannot be justified on  
the basis of demographic and socioeconomic realities.

As I already mentioned, most Tamils now live outside of the North and  
the East. The North and the East are also pluralistic. The whole  
island is pluralistic, that has been the case historically. In [the  
capital city of] Colombo, minorities constitute the majority of the  
population, and that is the case even in some of the districts in the  
Central Province. So given the increasing pluralism in the entire  
country, the creation of separate regions for ethnic groups is only  
going to perpetuate the conflict because not only the Sinhalese but  
also the Muslims are opposed to that. If there is an attempt to have  
ethno-regions, then the Muslims who consider themselves to be a  
distinct ethno-religious group are going to demand separate  
autonomous areas for themselves in the Eastern Province, which they  
have already done. So regional autonomy does not make sense in this  
particular case. It might make sense in different places, but because  
of the pluralism of the island, ethnic regions would have to be  
artificially created, and if that happens, we could see ethnic  
cleansing—population transfers—and that which is unlikely to create  
peace and harmony.


IA-Forum: What does the government have to do in order to convince  
the Tamils that they are not second-class citizens? Might it be  
necessary to put aside the idea of Sri Lanka as a Sinhala-Buddhist  
state?

Asoka Bandarage: I go into the history in my book. There were  
policies in the 1950’s and 60’s which were attempts to redress some  
of the inequities of the colonial era. The Tamil elite was highly  
privileged and had proportionately greater access to education and  
professional jobs during that era. Some of the policies that were  
introduced in the post-independence period were attempting not just  
to support Sinhalese Buddhists, who had been victimized during the  
colonial period, but also to take away some of the privileges of the  
English speaking elites of all ethnic groups. The sense of  
discrimination resulting from legislation during the 50’s and 60’s  
was not something that was experienced just by the Tamil elite but by  
the cosmopolitan elite of the other groups, including the Sinhalese.  
For example, quota systems introduced for entrance into the  
universities gave preference to so-called “backward rural areas,”  
undermining the privileges of the elite Colombo schools attended by  
children of the elite of all of ethnic groups.

But many of these language laws, university entrance quotas have long  
been changed, and, in fact, Tamil was made an equal official language  
in Sri Lanka in 1978. Even prior to that it was given the same  
status. This is not something that is available to Tamil speakers  
anywhere in the world, including India, which has over 60 million  
Tamils.

Legally, Tamils are not second-class citizens. They have the same  
rights. This is not to say that there weren’t people who experienced  
violence, especially in riots of 1983, and people with legitimate  
fears and grievances and distrust of the state. So there must be work  
done to reconcile and make the Tamils and all groups feel that they  
are part of society and have equal access. In terms of the law they  
have equal rights, but, things like a bill of rights upholding  
minority rights needs to be introduced and enforced.

Yes, I do think that there have to be compromises on all sides. Yes,  
in the Constitution it says that Buddhism has a special place, but  
there is much greater religious freedom in Sri Lanka than in many  
other countries including the freedom to convert. If you were to  
travel to Sri Lanka, you would see that there are Muslims,  
Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists all living side by side. Pluralism  
exists, but it can be deepened and trust has to be built. But in  
terms of daily life, there is just so much interaction and mutual  
coexistence and harmony.

Yet there is this tendency to use the argument of primordial enmity  
and exaggerate charges of Buddhist dominance to make up a case for  
separatism. The inter-ethnic animosity has also increased over the  
course of the conflict itself. For example, there are checkpoints  
where they tend to check Tamils more because of fear that they could  
be suicide bombers, and of course people experiencing that feel that  
they are being targeted, but the reality is that there are suicide  
bombers and the state needs to protect all its citizens.


IA-Forum: What changes, if any, do you see—or hope to see—the Obama  
administration making in terms of American policy toward Sri Lanka?

Asoka Bandarage: They have to see the real threat that is posed by  
the LTTE, what a ruthless terrorist organization it is and what it  
has done to the country. It’s considered the prototype of global  
terrorism—they were the first group to acquire airpower, they have  
had a navy, they have been involved in narcotics trading, they have  
very sophisticated fundraising mechanisms. They even infiltrate  
political campaigns of politicians here in the United States. The  
threat that this poses—not just to Sri Lanka and to the region, but  
to the world at large—cannot be overlooked. There needs to be greater  
recognition that, while democratic norms, civil rights, and human  
rights need to be upheld, they need to be addressed in the context of  
terrorism. It cannot be either/or.

The Obama administration is not naïve about the world. There is a  
recognition that you have to address the human rights and democracy  
in the context of the very difficult realities of global terrorism  
and the complexities that go along with that.

Asoka Bandarage is a professor in the Public Policy Institute at  
Georgetown University. Her latest book is entitled “The Separatist  
Conflict in Sri Lanka: Terrorism, Ethnicity, Political Economy  
(Routledge,2009)


_____


[5] India:

Rising Kashmir, April 11 2009

RATIFY ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE CONVENTION: APDP TO GOI

by Hakeem Irfan

Srinagar, April 10: Families of the disappeared persons on Friday  
demanded that India should ratify the Enforced Disappearance  
Convention to which it is a signatory.

In its monthly sit-in, Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons  
(APDP) urged the government of India to follow countries like France,  
Senegal, Argentina, Mexico, Hundura and Cuba, and ratify the convention.
Speaking on the occasion, legal advisor of APDP, Advocate Hafizullah  
Mir said, “India should also ratify the convention. The  
disappearances that took place in Kashmir, Punjab and North East  
should be probed by independent and credible commission.”
The convention is an international human rights instrument of the  
United Nations intended to prevent forced disappearance. It was  
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 20, 2006.  
As of March 2009, 81 states have signed, and ten have ratified. It  
will come into force when ratified by 20 states-parties.
Speaking on the occasion, APDP President, Parveena Ahanger said, “We  
don’t want any compensation from the government. If our sons are  
alive, allow us to meet them and if they are dead, handover their  
bodies. Our demand is plain and simple.”
Family members of several missing persons, mostly elderly men and  
women, participated in the peaceful protest holding placards  
demanding whereabouts of their dear ones.
One of the victims, Begum Bakti whose son was arrested one month  
after his marriage from Tragpora Rafiabad and later went missing,  
said, “I am still hopeful of my son’s return. His wife has married  
again only six years after his disappearance and is demanding  
compensation in the name of my son which adds to my miseries.”
Nineteen-year-old Abrar was too small to recollect his father’s  
disappearance after his arrest in 1993 from Narkara Budgam.
“I don’t know what happened then. But now I know that my father was  
arrested from home. I want to know if he is alive or dead,” he said.
On the occasion, APDP chairman Parveena Ahanger said, “We don’t want  
any compensation from the government. If our sons are alive, allow us  
to meet them and if they are dead, handover their bodies. Our demand  
is plain and simple.”
The parties to the convention are bound to investigate acts of  
enforced disappearance and bring those responsible to justice, ensure  
that it constitutes an offence under its criminal law, and to assist  
the victims of enforced disappearance or locate and return their  
remains. It also envisages establishing a register of those currently  
imprisoned, and allow it to be inspected by relatives and counsel,  
and also to ensure that victims have a right to obtain reparation and  
compensation.

_____


[6] INDIA: PRESS STATEMENT BY ARUNDHATI ROY

Issued at the Raipur Satyagraha for the Release of Dr Binayak Sen
  April 6, 2009 / Raipur, Chattisgarh

Dr Binayak Sen has been in prison for 22 months, arrested under one  
of India’s most draconian laws, the Chattisgarh Special Public  
Security Act. This Act has such a vague, diffused definition of  
’Unlawful Activity’ that it renders every person guilty unless he or  
she can prove their innocence. Dr Sen’s bail application was  
dismissed twice, both times at the very outset, by the High Court of  
Chattisgarh and by the Supreme Court of India. On neither occasion  
was there a discussion on the merits of the case. On the 2nd of  
December 2008 the High Court of Chattisgarh once again turned down  
his bail application, without a discussion on the merits of the case,  
saying that there had been no change in circumstances.

But there has been a change in circumstances. To begin with, the  
charge-sheet has been filed. 64 witnesses have been examined by the  
prosecution. Not one of them has provided legally admissible evidence  
to support the accusations in the charge-sheet. Even the jail  
officials, the Superintendent and the Jailer, who were called as  
witnesses by the Prosecution, have ruled out the possibility of Dr  
Sen being a carrier of letters given to him by Narayan Sanyal (said  
to be a senior Maoist leader) who is a high security prisoner in  
Raipur Jail. (It should be mentioned here that Narayan Sanyal has a  
medical condition which requires surgical intervention from time to  
time, which is why the jail authorities permitted Dr Sen to visit him  
regularly.)

That Dr Sen should continue to be in prison when the case against him  
has almost completely fallen through says a great deal about the very  
grave situation in Chattisgarh today. There is a civil war in this  
state. Hundreds are being killed and imprisoned. Hundreds of  
thousands of the poorest of the poor are hiding in the forests,  
fearing for their lives. They have no access to food, to markets, to  
schools or healthcare. The thousands who have been moved into the  
camps of the government-backed peoples’ militia, the Salwa Judum, are  
also trapped in sordid encampments, which have to be guarded by armed  
police. Hatred, violence and brutality is being cynically spread,  
pitting the poor against the poorest.

There is very little doubt that Dr Sen is in prison because he spoke  
out against this policy of the State Government, because he opposed  
the formation of the Salwa Judum. His incarceration is meant to  
silence dissent, and criminalize democratic space. It is meant to  
create a wall of silence around the civil war in Chattisgarh. It is  
meant to absorb all our attention so that the stories of the hundreds  
of other nameless, faceless people - those without lawyers, without  
the attention of journalists - who are starving and dying in the  
forests, go unnoticed and unrecorded.

Tomorrow is World Health Day. Dr Binayak Sen spent the best part of  
his life working among the poorest people in India, who live far away  
from the government’s attentions, with no access to clinics,  
hospitals, doctors or medicines. He has saved thousands from certain  
death from malaria, diarrhea, and other easily treatable illnesses.  
And yet, he is the one in jail, while those who boast openly about  
mass murder are free to go about their business, and even stand for  
elections.

What does this say about us? About who we are and where we’re going?

Arundhati Roy

_____


[7] INDIA'S COMING ELECTIONS AND THE HINDU RIGHT

Mail Today
April 13, 2009

POLITICS WITHOUT IDEAS OR ISSUES
by Mahesh Rangarajan

THERE are ample signs now that we edge towards the first phase of  
polling that the elections may throw up a far more uncertain outcome  
than in 2004. A major reason for this is the absence of a central  
election issue. At first sight this has to do with strategies of  
parties. More than that, it indicates a growing gap in the political  
system between those at the apex and those at the base of society.
Five years ago, when Vajpayee went to the country for early elections  
the issue was clear. The economy was on the rebound and the slogan of  
India Shining energised the ruling alliance, though it hardly struck  
a chord in the minds and hearts of the voters.
But it was the key Opposition party that stole the thunder. As Ram  
Vilas Paswan has indicated in a recent interview, the Congress took  
the initiative to forge alliances even with parties and leaders who  
had long been its opponents. This paid off handsomely as did the idea  
of simply focusing on the common man and woman.

In 2009, it is difficult to identify any such key issue. Congress  
could well have gone on the offensive. India still has the second  
fastest growing economy on earth. Agriculture has indeed been a net  
gainer as capital formation has recovered and investment increased.  
There is much going in favour of the ruling alliance: increased  
outlay in rural credit, the jobs programme and higher prices for crops.
More than that, in the Prime Minister, Congress has a rare  
combination of economic expertise and personal integrity perhaps  
unequalled in any other country. By not fielding him for a Lok Sabha  
seat, and there is no dearth of ‘ safe’ seats in the country,  
Congress has scored an own goal. His appeal is not because he is a  
mass leader or a technocrat. It is in his specific knowledge of the  
economy at a time when it is central to politics.
Issues

His government is also not tainted by scams the way the two previous  
Congress governments were. Rajiv Gandhi fought hard to keep his head  
above the water in the winter of 1989, on the Bofors issue. The  
Narasimha Rao government was the most scam tainted in India’s  
history. The PM is the embodiment of high standards in public life  
but is not in the fray for the polls.
In 1999, when his party was in far greater disarray and the beat of  
war drums during the Kargil conflict tilted the game in favour of the  
BJP, Manmohan Singh had stepped into the fray.
Even though he lost, it must have added to the confidence and élan of  
the Congress rank and file. Ten years on, it is inexplicable why he  
is not in the field.

This remains so despite a serious economic slowdown.

The premier opposition party is on record that it will give 35  
kilogrammes of grain to each Below Poverty Line family per month. But  
this is not as yet a central plank of the election campaign.
The issue matters and could well be a major vote winner. When a  
ruling party makes a similar pledge, it is open to the charge of  
inaction for five years. At a time of high food prices and the threat  
of joblessness, the grain issue could well help the BJP both in the  
rural and urban seats. But it has not made it a central plank in its  
election work except in select states like Chhatisgarh.
It is possible Advani feels more at ease on issues of security and  
identity politics where he made his mark. Critical as these are,  
successive state level elections have shown that bread matters most.  
All the more so, as the slowdown takes effect across small town  
India, and for the labouring poor, with jobs in construction simply  
drying up.

But the BJP has so far been unable to define a central plank for its  
platform.

More than the medium, the message is unclear. If the party is to  
improve the lot of the people, it is still short on detail of how it  
will do so.
While campaigns are a poor indicator of how well a party will  
actually do at the hustings, they are a far better indicator of how,  
where and in which direction the political mind is evolving. In the  
past, mass contact was standard fare for Indian political leaders.
Mobilisation
Chandra Shekhar’s padayatra from Kanyakumari to Rajghat broke the  
sense of crisis in the centrist Opposition. VP Singh traveled across  
the country extensively after his ouster from the Congress, rallying  
support for his cause of a change of government.
Advani’s rath yatra changed the grammar of politics in 1990. Even  
earlier, the cycle yatras of Kanshi Ram laid the foundations of the  
Bahujan Samaj Party as he traversed 25,000 kilometres of north India.
At a state level, men like YS Rajasekhara Reddy in Andhra and  
Narendra Modi in Gujarat are virtually always on the move.
Uddhav Thackeray has been in the rural districts virtually on a  
weekly basis, taking up farmers’ issues.
These are of course recent variants of techniques central to mass  
nationalism in India, where journeys among the people were more than  
merely symbolic.
These were a means to enable a jan sunvai , or people’s hearing.  
These were all the more crucial in areas that were marred by poverty  
or exclusion. The tradition was taken forward not only by politicians  
but also by social activists.
Sunil Dutt who was part of both worlds went on a famous foot march to  
Punjab at a time it was in the grip of terror. He continued on the  
journey even when local party units did not cooperate with him.
It is unclear if such traditions appeal at all to today’s leaders.  
But there is a dearth of even the usual kind of public meeting in the  
interim between polls. A kind of atrophy sets in except at poll time.  
This became true of the Congress in its long spell in power at the  
Centre but is increasingly true of other parties as well now.
Perhaps there is a pattern in all this. Many leaders with deep  
regional roots are able to keep in touch with the common voter  
through travel, mass contact and outreach programmes. This has become  
much rarer with those who are on the national stage.
Mediation
This sense of distance from the grass roots is a serious matter for  
reasons beyond electoral politics. It is also closely linked to the  
inability of parties to articulate economic and social issues in an  
idiom that all can relate to. This might also explain the excessive  
even obsessive preoccupation with caste and community.
Parties are not mere vehicles to capture power or to focus energies  
against the government when not in office. Their central function is  
to mediate between the state system and the people.
No other institution, not the media, nor the corporate world nor  
civil society can be a substitute for their role.
Yet, the party system especially among the larger national formations  
is in crisis.
The dearth of ideas in the campaign is an indicator of a deeper  
malaise within. The vacuum at the top is sign of the need for renewal  
at the base.

The writer teaches history at Delhi University by Mahesh Rangarajan

o o o

RALLY BEHIND MALLIKA SARABHAI IN HER FIGHT AGAINST COMMUNAL FASCISM
http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article1267.html

o o o

MR ADVANI MIXES RELIGION AND POLITICS, BJP GIVES TICKETS TO KILLERS  
OF CHRISTIANS IN ORISSA

All India Christian Council
President: Dr Joseph D Souza Secretary General Dr John Dayal

PRESS STATEMENT

NEW DELHI 12 April 2009

Mr Advani’s mixing Religion and Politics is dangerous for secular  
India BJP wants to reopen debate on Minority Rights, negate Statuary  
rights given after long debate in Constituent Assembly after  
Independence

The All India Christian Council has refrained from commenting on the  
Manifestos of various political parties in General Elections 2009, or  
on statements of their leaders. The Council however can no longer  
maintain its silence after reading newspaper reports of former Deputy  
Prime Minister and BJP leader Mr Lal Krishan Advani’s mixing of  
religion in politics, first in the Election manifesto of the party,  
and then in his letter to heads of various Mutts, or abbeys of Hindu  
sects, and arch communal advisors of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. These  
twin acts are fraught with dangerous consequences for peace and  
harmony in secular India.

The electoral environment has already been vitiated by hate speeches  
and communal propaganda. Mr Advani may have made his moves as an  
electoral strategy. But coming from an important party and its prime- 
ministerial candidate, they collectively expose the BJP’s appeasing  
an extreme section of the community, as well as those organisations  
which have been directly involved in violence against religious  
minorities in Punjab, Gujarat, Maharashtra and other states in the  
past, and Karnataka and Orissa in the present.

This is coupled with the fact that Mr Advani’s BJP, which pilloried  
the Congress for backing politicians suspected of fomenting violence  
against Sikhs in 1984, has in 2009 given tickets to people such as  
persons in Kandhamal, Orissa, as M Pradhan who is in jail in on  
charges of mass murder of Christians. The Election Commission’s  
notice to BJP Lok Sabha candidate Ashok Sahu, and an Rs 50 Crore  
criminal suit against him for spouting hate against Christians which  
could again trigger mass mob violence against the micro minority, is  
proof of the party’s playing the communal card in the elections. It  
is not surprising that neither Mr Advani nor his party manifesto even  
make a passing reference to Kandhamal carnage and to the trauma  
suffered by the Christian community. Neither does he offer any hope  
to Dalit Christians in their long struggle for their just rights.
Mr Advani’s ‘Shashtang pranam” or greetings from a prostrate position  
of humility and reverence, may be a figure of speech, but is  
symptomatic of his party’s capitulating absolutely to the Rashtriya  
Swayamsewak Sangh and its daughter organisations. As a leader of  
national stature, a former deputy premier and with hopes of leading  
secular nation at a future date, he should have maintained a distance  
from groups of people whose “advice” and active participation in  
Dharam sansads, or religious parliaments in the past were major  
contributory factors to the demolition of the Babri Masjid and  
subsequent national tragedy of long drawn communal bloodshed.

Once again, in his letter, Mr Advani wants to set up mechanisms to be  
guided by their advice. As a secular democratic republic and not a  
theocracy, India has a separation of religion and State, if not in  
the western sense then certainly in neither government nor religion  
meddling in each other’s affairs. Mr Advani promises to reverse this  
trend. Religion has its place not at the levers of power, in State  
mechanisms or as political engine, but as a conscience keeper on  
civilisational issues and ethics. The Christian community certainly,  
even through its own Canon laws and other denominational mechanisms,  
gives religious heads powers to guide the flock on issues of faith,  
morality, dogma and doctrine, but leaves it categorically to the lay  
citizens, the community at large, to take part in national life,  
ideological issues and political affairs guided by their own reason  
on matters of security and the welfare of their brothers and sisters.  
This is why the Christian community does not believe in floating  
political parties of its own, but banks on democratic processes and  
forces to protect its rights and Constitutional guarantees.

The All India Christian Council has no comments to offer on the BJP’s  
right to pack its manifesto’s preamble with its own construct of  
India’s past. We are also familiar with the thesis of Hindutva. But  
the Council reads into the BJP’s so called offer of a dialogue with  
the Christian community nothing short of reopening issues settled in  
the long and learned debates of the Founding Fathers of modern India  
in the Constituent Assembly after which they enshrined in the  
Constitution the fundamental rights of Freedom of Religion, to  
profess, practice and propagate one’s faith. That is a sacred right,  
and cannot be negotiated if India is to retain its plural culture and  
its secular and democratic integrity.

The party’s pillorying of State mechanisms for minority security,  
including the Ministry for Minority Affairs and national commissions,  
howsoever impotent they may have been in the past, cannot but beget  
apprehensions in the community. The party’s own record in subverting  
Human rights and minority commissions in States that it governs shows  
the scant respect it has for such institutions.

Released for publication by Dr John Dayal.

o o o

BJP'S PROJECT OF A HINDUISED INDIA GIVES HEART TO THE POLITICO- 
RELIGIOUS NUTS IN PAKISTAN
by Jawed Naqvi
http://www.sacw.net/article819.html

_____


[8] Tributes and Rememberances:

Remembering Victor Gordon Kiernan
by Hassan N. Gardezi
http://www.sacw.net/article804.html

Janet Rosenberg Jagan (1920-2009)
http://www.flonnet.com/stories/20090424260811900.htm
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi- 
jagan_obit_sub_5smar29,0,324648.story

Remembering Smitu Kothari: Adieu to an activist
by Sadanand Menon
http://www.sacw.net/article821.html

_____


[9] India: Continuing Erosion of Secular Space - The Hindu Far Right  
Keeps Up its Slow and and Steady work

INDIA: PUCL REPORT ON CULTURAL VIGILANTISM AGAINST WOMEN AND  
MINORITIES IN KARNATAKA
by People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Karnataka Chapter

The below PUCL report was written by a fact-finding team consisting of:
  Ramdas Rao: PUCL—Karnataka, Shakun Mohini: Vimochana, B.N.Usha:  
Hengasara Hakkina Sangha and Arvind Narain: Alternative Law Forum

Excerpts from the Introduction:

It was only after the continuous telecast of the images of the women  
who were subjected to a horrific assault by cadres of the Sri Ram  
Sene in a pub in Mangalore on January 24, 2009, that public attention  
gravitated towards what was happening in Mangalore. Even prior to  
this incident, The Hindu and many other newspapers had for many  
months reported various incidents of cultural policing where boys and  
girls from different religious communities were attacked merely for  
being together. The sense we got from discussions with social  
activists based in Dakshina Kannada was that there was a lot more to  
what was happening there than was apparent in the sporadic incidents  
which made it to the national press. We felt that the kind of  
incidents that were coming to the surface, be it the attack on women  
in the pub or attacks on anyone who dared to cross religious  
boundaries and interact, pointed to a new phase of communal politics.
  [. . .]
  Despite the Sangh Parivar’s disclaimer to the contrary, Sri Rama  
Sene has very close connections with the Sangh Parivar, ideologically  
and organizationally. Prasad Attavar, convener of Sri Rama Sene, has  
admitted that the pub attack was carried out jointly by the cadres of  
Sri Rama Sene and Bajrang Dal who are working towards a common goal.  
The leaders of these organizations are different, but the cadres  
staging such attacks see themselves as part of the same programme.  
The Sene is part of a long-standing Hindutva project of restructuring  
and redefining the ideal Hindu woman, and, in the current context, of  
confronting what the Sangh Parivar calls “the love jehad”, i.e., a  
perceived Muslim strategy to defile the Indian woman. The rise of Sri  
Rama Sene and other outfits, such as Hindu Jagran Vedike, Hindu  
Jannajagriti Samithi, Sanathan Sanstha, and so on, points to the  
emergence of a radical project of the Sangh Parivar to move towards  
the stage of an armed offensive to realize its fascist objectives.

Full Text at: http://www.sacw.net/DC/CommunalismCollection/ 
ArticlesArchive/CulturalPolicing-Karnataka.pdf

o o o

From: Nisha Susan
Date: Sat, Apr 11, 2009
SUBJECT: PINK CHADDI VANDALISED AND TAKEN OVER

Dear All,

Some of you know that the Pink Chaddi facebook group has been hacked  
over and over again over the last month. We have written to FB about  
the violent messages, the defacing and the threats. Despite all over  
security measures the hacks have continued. Facebook has essentially  
fobbed us off with some form mail. As of this evening my account has  
been disabled. The trolls have taken over. Rather specific 'grin' and  
anatomically correct messages have been left for me on the group. I  
can't get in to see what is happening but friends report that members  
are being deleted off the group.

FB continues to stay silent. As my friend says, the first rule of  
Facebook activism seems to be dont use Facebook.

Oh by the way the trolls have renamed the group 'A good bong is a  
dead bong'. Over the month there choices have been Nathuram Godse  
Appreciation Society, Dara Singh Appreciation group and other as I  
said, anatomically specific ones.

Just wanted to let you know that this is what is happening. I am  
lobbying online and would appreciate it if you spread the word.

Thanks,

Nisha

o o o

THE HINDUISED FACE OF BASTAR’S TRIBALS
by Aarti Dhar
http://tinyurl.com/cqc838

_____


[10] WOMEN LIVING UNDER MUSLIM LAWS DEMANDS THE UN RESOLUTION ON  
COMBATING DEFAMATION OF RELIGIONS BE REVOKED

Sunday 12 April 2009

For immediate release – 07 April 2009

The Women Living Under Muslim Laws (WLUML) international solidarity  
network is deeply concerned about the United Nations Resolution on  
‘Combating defamation of religions’. On 18 December 2007, the UN  
General Assembly adopted this resolution recommended by its Third  
Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural), and long campaigned  
for by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which has a  
permanent delegation to the United Nations. In March 2009, the UN  
Human Rights Council once again passed the Resolution, which urges  
the creation of laws in member states to prevent criticism of  
religion; while it makes specific mention of Islam, the laws could be  
applied to all religions and forms of belief. Members of the Human  
Rights Council voted 23 in favour of the Resolution, 11 nations  
opposed the Resolution and 13 countries abstained.

Ahead of the vote, hundreds of secular, religious, media, women’s and  
other groups from around the world appealed to the Council in Geneva  
to reject the proposals, which were introduced by the 56-nation of  
the OIC. Civil society groups have expressed that the ‘combating  
defamation of religion’ Resolution may be used in certain countries  
to silence and intimidate human rights defenders, religious  
minorities and dissenters, and other independent voices. In effect  
this resolution has the potential to dramatically restrict the  
freedoms of expression, speech, religion and belief. Item 12, which  
“Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions by  
strategizing and harmonizing actions at local, national, regional and  
international levels through education and awareness-raising”, can be  
used to silence progressive voices who criticize laws and customs  
said to be based on religious texts and precepts. Furthermore, this  
Resolution will have a disastrous effect on national laws in several  
countries that already stipulate they will comply with international  
treaties on human rightsonly if they do not prejudice laws said to  
derive from Islam.

Women Living Under Muslim Laws maintains that this Resolution has no  
place in international law because only individuals – not concepts or  
beliefs – can be defamed. After meeting on 9 December 2008 in Athens,  
the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, Frank  
LaRue, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Miklos  
Haraszti, the OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression,  
Catalina Botero, and the ACHPR (African Commission on Human and  
Peoples’ Rights) Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression and  
Access to Information, Faith Pansy Tlakula, released a joint  
declaration on defamation of religions, and anti-terrorism and anti- 
extremism legislation, in which they stated: “The concept of  
‘defamation of religions’ does not accord with international  
standards regarding defamation, which refer to the protection of  
reputation of individuals, while religions, like all beliefs, cannot  
be said to have a reputation of their own.”

Human rights are inalienable and indivisible. A resolution which in  
effect could be used to prevent constructive debate, criticism, and  
creative expression has the potential to severely curtail the rights  
of the most vulnerable members of society, including women and/or  
members of religious, sexual, ethnic minority communities. This  
Resolution will do nothing to counter the racism towards and singling  
out of Muslims. Those supporting this Resolution are using the very  
real discrimination faced by minorities due to their religious and  
ethnic identities to gravely jeopardize the rights of minority and  
majority communities alike to the freedoms of expression and belief  
or non-belief, the right to reinterpretation of religious texts and  
laws, and the freedom to express their sexuality, which they are  
entitled to under national and international laws, without fear of  
repression and punishment.

The International Coalition of Women Human Rights Defenders, of which  
WLUML is a part, proclaimed in their statement on the occasion of  
International Women’s Day 2009: “We stress the importance of the work  
done by women human rights defenders to document, monitor and provide  
protection for those under attack for their religion or belief as  
well as for exercising their right to freedom of expression. We hold  
these two rights to be inter-dependent and mutually reinforcing and  
note that attempts to limit them on grounds of ‘defamation of  
religion’ will undermine existing standards, and hinder the work of  
defenders by legitimizing targeted attacks on them.”

To adopt this Resolution would effectively place the tenets of  
religion in a hierarchy above the rights of the individual. As the  
protection of fundamental human rights is at the forefront of the  
United Nations stated mission and mandate, we demand that the  
Resolution on ‘Combating defamation of religions’ be revoked and that  
the rights to freedom of expression and belief are upheld and  
championed by policy-makers and national governments.

_____


[11]  MISCELLANEA:

Talisma Nasreen : "Aucune religion ne prône l’égalité entre les  
hommes et les femmes"
Entretien réalisé par Dominique Bari et Rosa Moussaoui
http://www.siawi.org/article700.html

Taliban v. Taliban
by Graham Usher
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n07/ushe01_.html

The Mysterious "Amar Singh": What Did Hillary Clinton Do?
By Vijay Prashad
http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad03102009.html


_____


[12]  Announcements:

(i) New Publication Announcement

VIOLENT GODS: HINDU NATIONALISM IN INDIA'S PRESENT; NARRATIVES FROM  
ORISSA
Angana P. Chatterji

This book is an erudite and elegiac exploration of Hindu nationalism  
in India today. It offers a revealing account of Hindu militant  
mobilizations as an authoritarian movement manifest throughout  
culture, polity, and economy, religion and law, class and caste, on  
gender, body, land, and memory. Tracing the continuities between  
Hindutva and Hindu cultural dominance, this book maps the  
architectures of civic and despotic governmentalities contouring  
Hindu nationalism in public, domestic, and everyday life. In  
chronicling concerted action against Christians and Muslims, Adivasis  
and Dalits, through spectacles, events, public executions, the riots  
in Kandhamal of December 2007 and August-September 2008, the planned,  
methodical politics of terror unfolds in its multiple registers. At  
the intersections of Anthropology, Postcolonial, Subaltern, and South  
Asia Studies, Angana P. Chatterji asks critical questions of nation  
making, cultural nationalism, and subaltern disenfranchisement. As a  
Foucauldian history of the present, this text asserts the role of  
ethical knowledge production as counter-memory.

ANGANA P. CHATTERJI is associate professor of Social and Cultural  
Anthropology at the California Institute of Integral Studies in San  
Francisco. Her work spans issues of cultural survival, nation/ 
nationalisms, gendered violence, and postcolonial critique. Her  
recent writings include two forthcoming books, Land and Justice: The  
Struggle for Cultural Survival, and a co-edited volume, Contesting  
Nation: Gendered Violence in South Asia; Notes on the Postcolonial  
Present.

Cover: Arpana Caur. in the name of god. 2008.

©Three Essays Collective, March 2009
xvi, 470 pages
Hard Cover: India Rs. 800; Elsewhere $ 35; ISBN 81-88789-45-3
Paper back: India Rs. 500; Elsewhere $ 25; ISBN 81-88789-67-4

The book can be purchased from various dealerships and directly from  
http://www.threeessays.com/titles.php?id=40

Three Essays Collective
B-957 Palam Vihar, GURGAON (Haryana) 122 017 India
Phone: 91-124 2369023, +91 98681 26587, +91 98683 44843
info at threeessays.com    Website: www.threeessays.com


---

[2]

May 3, 2009 | The Fourth Annual Arthur Miller Freedom to Write  
Lecture by Nawal El Saadawi

The fourth annual PEN World Voices Arthur Miller Freedom to Write  
Lecture will be presented by Egyptian novelist, psychiatrist, and  
activist Nawal El Saadawi. For more than 50 years, Dr. Saadawi has  
written books that focus on identity, sexuality and the legal status  
of women—particularly Arab women—and has continued her work despite  
the fact that these activities cost her her position as Egypt’s  
Director of Public Health and led to imprisonment, threats to her  
life, and, ultimately, exile. One of the leading literary, cultural,  
and political voices of our times, Saadawi once noted, “Danger has  
been a part of my life ever since I picked up a pen and wrote.  
Nothing is more perilous than truth in a world that lies.” It is  
PEN’s great honor to welcome Dr. Saadawi to deliver this lecture. PEN  
President and acclaimed author Kwame Anthony Appiah will join Dr.  
Saadawi on stage after her lecture for a far-reaching conversation  
about her life and work.

When: Sunday, May 3, 2009: 6:30–8 p.m.
Where: The Great Hall, Cooper Union, 7 East 7th Street, New York City

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

South  Asia  Citizens  Wire
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.