SACW | May 19-21, 2009 / Sri Lanka: Peace and Justice / Bangladesh: Against sexual harassment / India: Elections ; Sexuality Education

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | May 19-21, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2626 - Year  
11 running
From: www.sacw.net

[ SACW Dispatches for 2009-2010 are dedicated to the memory of Dr.  
Sudarshan Punhani (1933-2009), husband of Professor Tamara Zakon and  
a comrade and friend of Daya Varma ]
____

[1]  Sri Lanka: Tiger by the Tail (James Ross)
   - Appeal to free Sri Lanka doctors
   - Nirmala Rajasingam: Sri Lanka's silenced dissenters still speak  
volumes
   - After the Tigers' defeat, the abuse of Tamils must stop  
(Jonathan Steele)
   - UN in plea for Tamil aid access
   - Sri Lanka: Thousands of New Arrivals Overwhelm Medical Facilities
   - Quarter of a million Sri Lankans face two years in camps (Gethin  
Chamberlain)
   - Death, Lobbyists and Sri Lanka (Ken Silverstein)
[2] Nepal: Blundering in Nepal (Praful Bidwai)
[3] Bangladesh:  One big hurdle down - A successful student campaign  
against sexual harassment (Hana Shams Ahmed)
[4] Pakistan:  War that can be easily lost (Farhan Bokhari)
   - Interview with Salima Hashmi 'Many Pakistanis question if this  
is their war'
   - Why the IDPs matter (Sherry Rehman)
   - Musharraf Fareed Zakaria interview 1, 2, 3
[5] India Routs the Far Right (J. Sri Raman)
   - Democracy at stake: The Prolonged and Unjustified Imprisonment  
of Dr Binayak Sen (Bharat Dogra)
   - Indian democracy has an ugly side (Gideon Rachman)
   - Humility in victory, introspection in defeat (Siddharth  
Varadarajan)
   - One Step Forward, One Step Back - The Indian Elections: a Game  
Changer? (Vijay Prashad)
[6] India: Womens Groups and Health Activists Appeal Against the  
Parliamentary Committee Report on Sex Education
   +  Shock Value (Editorial, The Telegraph)
[7] Announcements: Invitation from US congressman Cleaver to a forum  
on impact of Hindu nationalism (Washington, 21 May 2009)


_____


[1] Sri Lanka:

New York Times
May 20, 2009

TIGER BY THE TAIL

by James Ross

I met Neelan Tiruchelvam, a prominent activist who had entered Sri  
Lankan politics, on my first trip to the island nation 15 years ago.  
Over several cups of tea he patiently explained the complexities and  
risks for ethnic Tamils who were critical of both the government and  
the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. He believed that as  
a member of parliament, he could help bring peace to the country,  
mired in a brutal civil war since the mid-1980s. In 1999, a Tiger  
suicide bomber blew him up outside his Colombo home.

Peace may finally have come to Sri Lanka. This week government forces  
defeated the remaining Tamil Tiger forces in their northeastern  
stronghold. Ruthless to the end, the Tigers had forced the Tamil  
population under their control to join them every step of the way in  
their long retreat. Tiger forces used the very people they claimed to  
be fighting for as human shields, and shot at those desperately  
trying to flee the fighting.

The government has reported the deaths of the Tamil Tigers’ leader,  
the ruthless and reclusive Velupillai Prabhakaran, and his  
lieutenants, though the circumstances remain unclear. Despite their  
defeat on the battlefield, the Tigers may survive underground, doing  
what they do best — attacking civilians.

The Tigers were the first armed group to make suicide bombing their  
trademark. They assassinated numerous political leaders, including  
India’s former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi and hundreds of Tamil  
politicians, journalists, activists, academics and others deemed to  
be a threat. They engaged in wholesale acts of cold-blooded  
slaughter, such as the execution of several hundred Sinhalese and  
Muslim police officers in 1990 and the repeated bombings of crowded  
buses.

But the Tamil Tigers were never about nihilistic violence. They had a  
clear agenda: to create a Tamil state, “Tamil Eelam.” Their selling  
point was their claim that they were the “sole representative” of Sri  
Lanka’s Tamils. This guiding principle had been the group’s greatest  
strength and weakness.

Since the LTTE’s founding in 1976, the Tigers co-opted or crushed  
nearly all of the Tamil political groups that had emerged to protect  
Tamil rights in the face of discrimination and violence by Sri  
Lanka’s Sinhalese majority. As a result, only a handful of Tamil  
political factions opposed to the Tigers remain. Many in the Tamil  
diaspora, largely families who fled government abuses, have  
unquestionably supported the Tigers, viewing them as the only viable  
bulwark against further state repression.

But the Tigers’ totalitarian mind-set was also their undoing. Their  
use of Tamil children in military operations — including as suicide  
bombers — the mafia-like fund-raising tactics in Canada and Britain  
and their oppressive rule in the areas they controlled generated  
disgust among many Tamils within Sri Lanka and abroad. It also opened  
the door to a human rights-conscious Tamil opposition that can play a  
leading role in Sri Lanka’s future.

Unfortunately, the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa treated  
the Tigers’ atrocities as a license for its own abuses. Instead of  
taking the high ground — morally, politically, and militarily —  
Rajapaksa used the war to solidify his support among ultra- 
nationalist Sinhalese. The government appears to view all Tamils as  
presumptive Tiger supporters and has locked up in camps all who have  
fled the fighting but the elderly — now some 300,000 people. Sri  
Lankan army forces indiscriminately shelled and starved the Tamil  
civilians trapped by the Tigers, causing several thousand civilian  
deaths and massive suffering. And in its plans for the future, the  
administration has favored Tamil leaders with poor rights records and  
given short shrift to the Tamil population’s legitimate political  
concerns.

There are immediate concerns: caring for the wounded on the  
battlefield, ending unlawful restrictions on civilians who fled the  
fighting, and respecting the rights of captured combatants. For the  
longer term, the government needs to adopt a broad agenda designed to  
unite the war-torn nation in peace. This means an impartial  
investigation into abuses by all parties to the conflict. It entails  
revoking laws and state policies that have discriminated against the  
Tamil population. And it obliges the government undertake serious and  
broad consultations with Tamils and other minority groups on the  
country’s political future.

President Rajapaksa needs to realize that winning the war, no matter  
how important, is not the same as achieving peace. Alienating Tamil  
society will merely push the country’s problems down the road for the  
future. If that’s the case, the peace and justice that Neelan  
Tiruchelvam sought — and died for — will continue to elude the Sri  
Lankan people.

James Ross is the legal and policy director at Human Rights Watch.

o o o

BBC, 19 May 2009

APPEAL TO FREE SRI LANKA DOCTORS
An image from a doctor in Mullivaikal apparently showing damage to  
the makeshift hospital there
The Sri Lankan doctors had reported shelling in the conflict zone

International human rights groups have appealed for the release of  
three Sri Lankan doctors accused of giving false information to the  
media.

The doctors had been staffing makeshift hospitals on a shrinking  
patch of land where the Sri Lankan army isolated Tamil Tiger rebels.

With journalists banned from the conflict zone, they became an  
important source of news about the conflict.

Sri Lankan officials announced the arrest of the doctors on Monday.

One official told the Associated Press news agency that they had been  
detained for giving false information about civilian casualties to  
the media.

The doctors, who have been named as Thangamuttu Sathiyamoorthy,  
Thurairajah Varatharajah and V Shanmugarajah, treated some of the  
tens of thousands of civilians trapped in the conflict zone as the  
army closed in.

'Criminal acts'

They reported heavy bombardments and civilian casualties - some in  
the hospitals in which they were working - that were denied by the  
government.
	
Sri Lanka has now declared victory in the government's 26-year  
conflict against the Tamil Tigers.

Amnesty International said it was concerned for the safety of the  
doctors and that it had received reports that Dr Sathiyamoorthy and  
Dr Shanmugarajah may be detained at the Terrorist Investigation  
Division (TID) in the capital, Colombo.

Dr Varatharajah was reported to be undergoing medical treatment after  
being seriously injured.

Reporters Without Borders urged the Sri Lankan government to show  
clemency.

"The government will be held responsible if the army's military  
victory is accompanied by such criminal acts of revenge against those  
have who have described the humanitarian tragedy," the group said.

Physicians for Human Rights demanded that the doctors be given  
released and given access to legal aid.

On Monday, UN humanitarian chief John Holmes said his organisation  
had not had any contact with the doctors.

"I would certainly urge the government to treat them properly," he said.

"These are people who performed absolutely heroically in the last few  
weeks and months, and deserve every praise and care."

o o o

The Independent
18 May 2009

NIRMALA RAJASINGAM: SRI LANKA'S SILENCED DISSENTERS STILL SPEAK VOLUMES

"What has happened to this country? Will the rivers of blood stop?  
Will not the long shadow of the guns leave us? Life is much more  
worth than to be snuffed out like a candle."

My sister, Dr Rajani Thiranagama, a prominent human rights activist  
in Sri Lanka, wrote this. A year later, in September 1989, she was  
gunned down by an LTTE assassin. This year is the 20th anniversary of  
her death.

For that reason, the news of the demise of the LTTE's top leadership  
– which ordered her killing and the killings of many other Tamil  
dissenters – brings overwhelming relief. The war and carnage has at  
last stopped and the insistent bloodletting of Tamil dissent is now  
over.

Rajani's questions trigger many others in the minds of those who have  
campaigned for peace, democracy, and justice for the minorities in  
Sri Lanka, as Colombo begins its victory celebrations. It is not  
enough for the guns to fall silent. The question looms large whether  
the Colombo government will seize this watershed moment to heal  
wounds, to bring together polarised communities. Will they be  
prepared to share power? Will they institute meaningful  
constitutional reforms of democratisation and demilitarisation? Will  
the Colombo government show true political leadership to kick-start a  
national debate on ethnic relations and political power sharing, and  
will this process be inclusive and transparent?

The government, despite being overwhelmed by the humanitarian crisis,  
has not accepted the full assistance of the international community.  
The "Internally Displaced Persons" have a new home surrounded by  
armed guards, barbed-wire fences and squalor: such conditions are  
going to deepen and prolong their trauma.

The continued refusal of full access to humanitarian agencies does  
not allay suspicions about the government's intentions toward the  
refugees and the LTTE cadres who have surrendered. The last three  
years have seen a large number of abductions, extrajudicial killings  
and disappearances, almost exclusively targeting the Tamil community  
as the government of Sri Lanka relentlessly pursued its military  
campaign. The militarisation of state and society has been able to  
suppress dissent in the south, even mounting attacks on journalists.  
We wait to see whether the government will reverse this downward  
spiral in democratic governance.

At this moment I remember Rajani, and a long line of courageous  
dissenters who fell victim to the LTTE and government assassins  
alike. Now their courage and vision speak to us, the people of Sri  
Lanka, once more.

Nirmala Rajasingam is a former LTTE member in exile in London. She  
and her sister were the subject of a film, No More Tears Sister


o o o

The Guardian
18 May 2009

AFTER THE TIGERS' DEFEAT, THE ABUSE OF TAMILS MUST STOP

If Sri Lanka's president treats the civil war's losers as a conquered  
enemy he will sow the seeds of a new militancy

by Jonathan Steele

History is littered with the ruined reputations of national leaders  
who thought they had won a great military victory only to squander it  
by self-congratulation and stupidity. Whether Sri Lanka's president,  
Mahinda Rajapakse, joins their number has yet to be seen, but the  
triumphant speech he will shortly make to his fellow citizens will be  
an important signal of the path he is choosing.

There has to be relief that the worst suffering of the quarter of a  
million Tamils who were trapped on the island's northern beaches is  
over. Cowering under government artillery fire, and shot by Tamil  
Tiger troops if they tried to flee, they have lived for four months  
in infinitely worse conditions than the people of Gaza during  
Israel's invasion in December. Palestinians were at least in their  
own homes, with supplies of food and water, however inadequate. The  
shelterless masses huddled along the lagoons and sand banks of Sri  
Lanka's Mullaitivu coastline had nothing except panic, grief and the  
sight and sound of the dying. The prolonged hell they have been  
through far outweighs the sudden horror of the tsunami which swept  
over this same coast four years ago.

The priority now is to ensure that the camps which the government has  
set up for the surviving refugees are properly stocked with food and  
medicine. Rajapakse has described the last stages of the campaign as  
an "unprecedented humanitarian operation". As a euphemism for war his  
phrase is hard to beat. But if he wants to ensure he is really  
"rescuing hostages", as his officials claim, he has to give them  
facilities that respect their dignity.

If these are transit camps to help people recover while they trace  
missing relatives and gather some strength after seeing their  
families shattered, well and good. But if they become concentration  
camps, it is another story. Government officials are already saying  
it will take a long time for people to be "re-educated" after years  
of relentless Tiger propaganda. The phrase is ominous. Why can't  
refugees be allowed to go back to the villages they fled when the  
army offensive began last year? The Tigers' leaders are dead and have  
no more sway over them. No one has taken the Tamils' land or settled  
in their areas, as often happens in civil wars. Those who wish to go  
home should be permitted to do so at once.


Senior officials recently told John Holmes, the UN's emergency relief  
co-ordinator that they hope 80% of the displaced can leave the camps  
by the end of this year. Foreign donor governments must hold  
Rajapakse to that pledge. They should also insist that the camps are  
quickly transferred from military to civilian control with unfettered  
access by UN humanitarian agencies and aid organisations like the  
International Committee of the Red Cross and Medecins Sans Frontiers.

The Sri Lankan government is asking for international help. The donor  
community should be tough in its response. India, in particular, has  
a powerful role to play, now that the Congress party has strengthened  
its mandate. Along with other foreign governments, it must make aid  
strictly conditional on a clear vision from the government of its  
intentions towards the island's Tamils. Is it planning to send  
Sinhalese settlers into the traditional Tamil homeland with the aim  
of "diluting the Tamil threat"? Is it going to pepper the area with  
army camps and checkpoints, like the occupied West Bank?

Above all, what political changes is the government prepared to make?  
It is 22 years since the 13th amendment to Sri Lanka's constitution  
provided for power to be devolved to the provinces. The Tamil Tigers'  
war gained popular support and lasted for so long in part because  
Sinhalese-dominated governments in Colombo never implemented that  
reform. Will it do so now? Rajapakse's recent record in the east is  
not encouraging. Since defeating the Tigers there two years ago, the  
central government has continued to take most decisions while failing  
to flood the area with the development aid it needs. Worse still, it  
has allowed two dissident Tiger commanders who split from the main  
organisation and joined the government side to carry on gang warfare.  
If the fruits of peace in the east have been so meagre, it will  
require a major shift of culture in Colombo to improve on them now  
that the Tigers have lost control of their heartland in the north.

A long succession of Colombo governments has failed to address the  
Tamil minority's legitimate complaints. To write the Tigers off as  
terrorists or see the war against them as "just" distorts the facts.  
While also resorting to frequent acts of terror against civilians as  
well as assassinations of politicians, they twice fought the  
government army to a standstill in conventional war because they had  
a case which many (not all) Tamils agreed with.

With the Tigers' defeat a fresh opportunity emerges. If Rajapakse  
treats Tamils as a conquered enemy, who have to be corralled in camps  
and whose land has to be split up and occupied, he will sow the seeds  
for new militancy in the generation to come.

o o o

SEE ALSO:

UN in plea for Tamil aid access
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8060232.stm

Sri Lanka: Thousands of New Arrivals Overwhelm Medical Facilities
http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm? 
id=3631&cat=field-news

Quarter of a million Sri Lankans face two years in camps
by Gethin Chamberlain
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/20/refugees-face-two-years- 
in-srilanka-camps

Death, Lobbyists and Sri Lanka
by Ken Silverstein
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/05/hbc-90004956

____


[2]  Nepal:

Frontline
May 23 - June 5, 2009

BLUNDERING IN NEPAL

by Praful Bidwai

India’s heavy-handed interference in Nepal, which aggravated its  
political crisis, speaks of a colossal foreign policy failure.

Is India about to lose the huge fund of popular goodwill that it  
earned in Nepal over the past four years by encouraging  
reconciliation between the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M)  
and other parties, by facilitating a Comprehensive Peace Agreement  
(CPA), by helping to bring the Maoists into the political mainstream,  
and by facilitating the country’s transition from a despotic monarchy  
to a constitutional republic?

All credible reports on recent events leading to the resignation of  
Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda – and to a first- 
rate political impasse in Nepal – suggest that India is losing that  
goodwill, if it has not already lost it, because it is supporting  
discredited and reactionary forces that can only impede that  
transition. In the past few months, Indian policy has slid back into  
a deeply conservative mould, which encourages blatant interference in  
Nepal’s internal affairs and supports its army even as it defies  
civilian authority.

However much the Ministry of External Affairs pretends that the  
causes and effects of Prachanda’s resignation are purely “an internal  
affair” of Nepal, the truth is that India has been a major and  
partisan political player in Nepal and contributed in a big way to  
inflaming the confrontation between Army Chief General Rukmangad  
Katuwal and Prachanda’s civilian government. India used its influence  
with Nepal’s political parties to isolate the Maoists and negate the  
Prachanda Cabinet’s decision to dismiss Katuwal for gross  
insubordination, which was entirely the civilian government’s  
democratic prerogative.

In the process, India has opened up and threatened to undermine the  
CPA of November 2006, which it rightly – and proudly – claimed was a  
breakthrough and a result of its own facilitation.

New Delhi may have to regret its role in Nepal – not only because it  
has created a political crisis by ejecting from power a party that  
holds 40 per cent of the seats in the Constituent Assembly but also  
because it has ended up backing political forces that are  
untrustworthy, predominantly conservative and largely discredited in  
the eyes of the people. Worse, India risks losing its credibility as  
a state that had executed a welcome shift in 2005-08 from being an  
overwhelming and overweening status-quoist power bent on preserving  
the monarchy to a force friendly towards democracy and popular  
empowerment.

Contrary to the arguments of many apologists of New Delhi’s position,  
India’s Ambassador Rakesh Sood joined hands with his United States  
counterpart in lobbying for the continuation of Katuwal as the Army  
Chief and against the integration of the Maoists People’s Liberation  
Army (PLA) into the regular Nepal Army (N.A.). This was in clear  
violation of the CPA, which mandates such integration, the N.A.’s  
“democratisation”, and a reduction of its overgrown size: a 95,000- 
strong force in a country of 25 million people.

India, the U.S. and other important powers also condoned the grave  
impropriety committed by the N.A. in recently briefing foreign  
defence attaches on Nepal’s domestic situation. In these, it rejected  
the CPA and said that “the stated aim of the Maoist party still  
appears to be to establish a totalitarian regime, which could prove a  
firm base for revolutionaries with regional implications”. The N.A.  
accused the CPN-M of “dictatorial intent” and contended that a  
“united democratic alliance-led resistance from all sectors combined  
with international pressure is required to counter CPN-M’s hegemonic  
advance”.

Sood met Prachanda four times in the critical few weeks preceding his  
resignation. According to reliable information, he delivered an  
ultimatum to the elected Prime Minister that he not dismiss Katuwal  
or face grave consequences. Hours after the dismissal order was  
served upon Katuwal, President Ram Baran Yadav overturned it and  
asked Katuwal to continue. This made a mockery of the established  
convention that a non-executive president in a parliamentary  
democracy is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces only in  
titular terms, not substantive ones. He must not interfere with the  
Cabinet’s decisions on the appointment or dismissal of armed forces  
personnel.

It might be argued that Prachanda did not do enough to carry his  
alliance partners with him – in particular the Communist Party of  
Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist), or the UML, the Nepal Sadbhavna  
Party and the Madhesi Janadhikar Forum – and allowed the  
confrontation with the N.A. to build up to a breaking point.

The CPN-M may have made tactical mistakes, but it is hard to argue  
that its allies were independent players who are invulnerable to  
pressure or inducements. They have a long history of succumbing to  
pressure and the loaves and fishes of office. The UML even joined a  
government handpicked by King Gyanendra just when his authority was  
in crisis.

At any rate, the principle of civilian supremacy over defence forces  
is unquestionable and paramount in democracy. The Prachanda Cabinet  
was perfectly within its rights to dismiss Katuwal. Indeed, it had no  
choice but to do so after he failed to provide a satisfactory  
explanation for at least three acts of defiance of civilian  
authority: the recruitment in February of 2,000 soldiers against the  
government’s wishes, the extension granted to eight brigadiers in  
March, and his decision in April to pull the army out of the National  
Games because the Maoists too would participate in them.
The General’s politics

Katuwal is no ordinary General. He was adopted as a son by Queen  
Ratna and former King Mahendra and raised with royal princes in  
Narayanhiti Palace. He has played politics in a brazen and divisive  
manner much of his adult life as an agent of the monarchy. For years,  
he wrote articles under a pseudonym, singing paeans to the monarchy  
and viciously attacking party after political party.

In 2002, just before King Gyanendra dismissed the elected government  
of Sher Bahadur Deuba, Katuwal argued that “enlightened despotism is  
preferable to chaotic democracy; the masses require protection from  
themselves”. A fortnight before the king usurped all executive powers  
in 2005, Katuwal wrote an article entitled “Support for King’s  
initiative”.

Katuwal was not a neutral player when the April Uprising of 2006, or  
Jana Andolan-II, broke out, supported by waves and waves of people.  
This was one of the most remarkable mass movements for democracy  
anywhere in the world. Katuwal advocated confrontation and the use of  
force. The official Raymajhi Commission investigating excesses  
against civilians recommended action against him.

That moment was allowed to pass by the Nepali Congress government led  
by Girija Prasad Koirala. The wages of inaction soon became apparent  
in the increasingly belligerent postures adopted by Katuwal after the  
CPN-M won an absolute majority of directly elected seats in the 2008  
Constituent Assembly elections.

It is this man whom India decided to back against civilian authority,  
completely oblivious of the imperative of asserting civilian control  
over an army, which was the monarchy’s principal instrument of  
repression. Evidently, Indian policymakers have learnt no lessons  
from Pakistan and Bangladesh, where armies acquired larger-than-life  
roles in the early years after state formation, with disastrous long- 
run consequences.
Unconventional response

Apologists for India’s decision to back Katuwal at a critical point  
in Nepal’s democratisation rationalised it as an unconventional  
response to an unconventional situation: the only way to prevent a  
Maoist takeover. Their argument is twofold. The Maoists were about to  
“capture” the army. Second, they wanted to play the “China card” by  
using Beijing as a countervailing power vis-a-vis India.

In support of the first premise, the apologists – including some of  
Nepal’s discredited political parties, especially the Nepali  
Congress, now in the throes of a succession struggle – cite videos  
that have mysteriously surfaced in Kathmandu. These show Prachanda  
addressing Maoist cadres. He boasts that the CPN-M greatly inflated  
the numbers of armed guerrillas in order to increase the scope for  
their integration into the N.A. and says the Maoists have not  
abandoned their earlier goal of taking over the Nepalese state.

Theses tapes are one and a half years old and precede the April 2008  
elections. The CPN-M has not disowned them but only urged that their  
content be reinterpreted. One plausible explanation for Prachanda’s  
statements is that he was trying to placate his party’s vocal  
hardliners. They are close to the PLA and conditioned by the nine- 
year-long civil war. This is true of many militant underground  
movements, which undergo a transformation into parliamentary  
organisations committed to multi-party democracy.

Whatever the intentions of the PLA leadership, three propositions  
hold. First, the best way to neutralise the hardliners is to push  
through the PLA’s integration so that the CPN-M becomes a  
parliamentary entity free of the PLA’s militant pressure. Second, the  
actual process of integration is being discussed in a parliamentary  
committee of eight members, in which the Maoists are a minority of  
two. And third, the CPN-M has done nothing in practice that shows  
that it rejects or suspects the multi-party system. It is reconciled  
to a slow process of full democratisation and the CPA’s implementation.

It makes no sense to cast aspersions on the Maoists on the basis of  
presumed guilt, past political practice or the army’s prejudices. By  
all indications, the CPN-M has embarked on a remarkable self- 
transformation and must be encouraged to complete it within a  
cooperative climate. Ultraconservatives such as Katuwal and the  
army’s hardened royalists, who are loath to lose their traditional  
privileges or see the force downsized, are the biggest obstacle to  
this process. Deplorably, India has chosen to be on the side of the  
obstacle after having been a facilitator.

The “China card” is another bogey. The sovereign government of Nepal  
has every right to rework its relations with its neighbours. In the  
past, India paid a heavy price for rejecting that right and behaving  
in a paranoid way. In the late 1980s, for instance, Nepal wanted to  
negotiate a trade and transit treaty with India and sought to import  
armaments from China. India imposed a crippling blockade on the  
landlocked country and incurred tremendous unpopularity.

The CPN-M has never been close to the Communist Party of China (CPC).  
There is little ideological affinity between the two. During its rosy- 
eyed period, the CPN-M tried to enlist China’s support and was  
rebuffed. The CPC has long been hostile to the CPN-M, and during  
critical periods it sided with the king.

That apart, there are obvious limits to how close China will move to  
Nepal given India’s sensitivity on the issue. Nepal is no Pakistan,  
with which India has a fraught relationship, and which China will do  
its utmost to court. China cannot aspire to rival India in economic,  
political, military or cultural influence in Nepal.
Close neighbours

Nepal and India are extremely close and special neighbours, with an  
open border and with freedom of transit, travel, work and residency  
without visas or work permits. The Nepali rupee has for years been  
tied to the Indian rupee at a fixed rate. Such close links are  
inconceivable with China. India would be extraordinarily foolhardy to  
be taken in by luridly exaggerated propaganda about “the China card”.

There is a larger point here. India has contributed to the present  
impasse in Nepal and must rectify its mistakes. Even if the UML, the  
Nepali Congress and others form a government with India’s backing, it  
will lack real authority and a democratic mandate. No Constitution- 
writing will be possible without two-thirds majority support for each  
article, which cannot be secured without the CPN-M’s support. India  
should therefore logically support the Maoists’ demand for Katuwal’s  
removal as a precondition for their joining the government and  
lending it stability.

However, Indian policymakers tend to be myopic about Nepal. They  
supported Nepal’s democratisation and last year’s Constituent  
Assembly elections on the assumption that the Maoists would be  
marginalised. In fact, National Security Adviser M.K. Narayanan  
declared India’s preference for G.P. Koirala’s Nepali Congress. This  
extraordinary maladroit expression of partisan support showed total  
incomprehension of Nepali realities.

It was rightly seen as interference in Nepal’s internal affairs and  
added to the resentment many Nepalis feel at India’s supercilious and  
imperious attitude towards their country. Similarly, India refused to  
accept the CPN-M-led government’s nominee, Ram Karki, as Ambassador  
to New Delhi. (In 2001, Indian authorities had arrested Karki and  
handed him over to the Royal Nepal Army.)

Policymakers such as Narayanan operate with a Curzonian mindset,  
which regards India as the inheritor of the British empire at its  
apogee and hence as the “naturally” dominant power in the entire  
South Asian region to which all other nations must kowtow. They do  
not understand that the people of Nepal do not want their country to  
be the 29th state of India. The Nepalis are so proud of their  
autonomy that they set the official clock 15 minutes ahead of Indian  
Standard Time.

Nor do Indian policymakers appreciate that Nepal holds the key to  
India’s water security. India’s greatest rivers, including the Ganga,  
the Indus and the Brahmaputra, originate in the Himalayas. The India- 
Nepal border region holds the key to controlling the floods of the  
Kosi and the Brahmaputra. The development of India’s hydroelectricity  
potential in the north-eastern region, an important component of  
renewable energy – in which India has a high stake in the context of  
reversing climate change – is conditional upon Nepal’s cooperation.

By taking an arrogant stand towards Nepal, India will only cut its  
nose to spite its face. Imperial- or vice-regal-style interference in  
Nepal’s affairs will damage India’s interests and create new  
insecurities in Nepal, including a return to civil war if the Maoists  
are cornered and victimised. The sooner Indian policymakers realise  
and correct their blunder, the better.


____


[3] Bangladesh:


The Daily Star
May 19, 2008

ONE BIG HURDLE DOWN
A successful student campaign against sexual harassment

by Hana Shams Ahmed

JUST like it took the rape of three women students at Jahangirnagar  
University (JU) to recognise what an extreme form sexual harassment  
had taken at the universities it took the suicide of Art College  
student Simi Banu to bring to mass consciousness the extreme forms  
"eve teasing" has now taken in this country. And until the defiant JU  
students took to the streets in 1998, the mere concept of "sexual  
harassment" in educational institutions was only spoken about in  
hushed tones among girl students at the university halls.

But now it's finally here -- institutional recognition of sexual  
harassment. 11 years after the JU case, and many hundreds of silenced  
and vocal cases in between, the High Court has directed the  
government to make a sexual harassment law based on the guidelines  
drawn up by lawyers and human rights activists.

The effort by BNWLA lawyers to fight this case was very commendable.  
The news got even better when the High Court made another positive  
ruling in another case being fought by human rights organisations and  
eminent citizens -- directing neutral authorities to re-open the  
sexual harassment case concerning a teacher of the drama department  
of JU.

Many of us never accepted the absurd reasons given by the JU  
university authorities for exonerating the teacher in the first  
place. The charges of sexual harassment filed against him by four  
girl students (and many others corroborating), the authorities found  
to be not "beyond reasonable doubt." There were no eyewitnesses, they  
claimed. Those who were placed in mediating positions by the  
university authorities actually expected a teacher to carry out a  
sexually intimidating act in front of eyewitnesses!

Formal, written complaints from four girls who were putting their  
academic career on the line in such an unreceptive university  
environment should be substantial enough evidence against a person in  
authority to carry out an investigation. After the student campaign  
to get justice in the JU case failed, one of the girls who was very  
actively involved attempted suicide, but the authorities continued to  
show indifference.

Thankfully, the High Court decision negates the university  
authority's wall of silence and non-cooperation. The court recognised  
that in cases of sexual harassment it is not always required to prove  
allegations. Although a group of JU teachers in collaboration with  
human rights activists had drawn up a set of guidelines against  
sexual harassment, they were never adopted by the authorities. Now,  
the guidelines accepted by the High Court will be applicable to all  
educational institutions, workplaces and even public places until a  
formal law is passed. There will also be a five-member harassment  
complaint committee headed by a woman at every workplace and  
institution to investigate allegations of harassment of women.

In Bangladesh more women are visible in the public sphere than ever  
before. And it is not just men who preach obscurantism under the veil  
of religion who are uncomfortable with this visibility. Supposedly  
progressive men who have gone through the mainstream education system  
and worked in supposedly progressive institutions too get  
uncomfortable and uncooperative at women's presence in places  
formerly dominated by men.

This was recently illustrated in a meeting which discussed what  
problems are faced by women in work environments. These women  
complained that men who work with them form groups to bully them.  
 From making sexually suggestive comments, to watching pornography in  
the women's presence, it has all been experienced. One woman  
complained that she would often arrive at work and turn on her  
computer to find that someone had replaced her wallpaper with a nude  
woman's photo.

Drishtipat recently organised an event, Ey Poth Amadero, to raise  
awareness about eve teasing in public places. The JU students and a  
section of the progressive teachers have been writing and campaigning  
against sexual harassment for years. The two High Court judgements  
are just a first step against a form of exploitation that has been  
put up with for too long.

Now come the challenges of next steps. How quickly will the  
government pass the comprehensive laws required by these court  
decisions? How many educational institutions and workplaces will  
abide by these guidelines? Will employers and administrative  
authorities be open to recognise this abuse that is all-pervasive?  
The acid test of the success of this HC directive will only come in  
its actual implementation.

Hana Shams Ahmed is Assistant Editor, Forum.

_____



[4] Pakistan


Gulf News

WAR THAT CAN BE EASILY LOST

by Farhan Bokhari, Special to Gulf News
Published: May 16, 2009, 23:35

More than a week into the most aggressive phase of Pakistan's  
military offensive against Taliban militants in the northern Swat  
valley, an apparent military victory remains within sight.

And yet, it is a war that can be easily lost, not so much on the  
battlefield of Swat where the Taliban are retreating, but in the  
refugee camps which have mushroomed across the North West Frontier  
Province (NWFP).

Pakistani official estimates suggest that at least 1.5 million people  
from Swat could be forced to become internally displaced, heading to  
one of the many refugee camps.

Already, the stress on the Pakistani government is obvious. For days  
after the fighting began, the government showed little inclination to  
push itself into a crisis mode, fit to deal with a crisis.

The wake up call came in the end but only after a volley of demands  
from a diverse range of groups within and outside Pakistan called for  
emergency action. High profile politicians from the ruling party  
structure took their time in heading out to personally visit the  
large community of those who were displaced and forced to flee Swat.

With the civilian government failing to take charge, the  
responsibility finally fell on a widely respected army general to  
take charge of the relief efforts.

Lieutenant General Nadeem Ahmad, the top army general who led the  
rescue and relief effort following the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan,  
is now heading the effort to provide emergency relief to the victims  
of the Swat fighting.

And yet, General Ahmad's own credibility notwithstanding, the  
Pakistani government remains locked in a growing controversy. Prime  
Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has summoned tomorrow a so-called 'All  
Parties Conference' (APC) of leaders of Pakistan's mainstream parties  
to evolve a national consensus on tackling the fallout from Swat.

The prime minister hardly deserves credit for belatedly stepping into  
the picture. His belated attempt to summon an APC is at least a week  
old if not a fortnight behind schedule. At a time when Pakistanis are  
losing their lives on a daily basis, Gilani's gesture is no more than  
a show for the growing community of his fellow citizens who are  
deeply sceptical about the ability of their leaders to take charge of  
the situation.

At best, the Pakistani government may succeed in overseeing the flow  
of badly needed emergency assistance from international sources.  
Given the global concern over fighting the menace of Taliban  
militants in Pakistan, there is a more than even chance that  
countries beyond Pakistan's frontiers as well as multilateral  
agencies will respond at least for meeting the short-term needs.

However, the danger for Pakistan's ruling structure is essentially  
that of the failure of its elite in appreciating the scale of the  
challenge ahead. The fallout from the fighting in Swat will likely  
need a long-term response for dealing with the humanitarian fallout.  
This involves not just the matter of tackling the immediate  
humanitarian crisis.

This also requires a medium- to long-term plan for facilitating the  
return of the people of Swat to their homeland, once the fighting  
ends between the military and the Taliban. The experience from  
Pakistan's management of the fallout after the 2005 earthquake  
adequately demonstrates an obvious downside to dealing with such  
challenges.

In the short term, there is often much enthusiasm to support such  
causes with supporters, both from within and outside the country,  
coming forward. But in the long run, such enthusiasm dries up and  
gets replaced by pessimism. The Pakistani government would therefore  
need to retain a clear focus on the humanitarian challenge for the  
long term, ensuring not just reconstruction of infrastructure but  
also sustained rehabilitation.

Coming out of the situation in Swat, the Pakistani government must  
also remember some vital lessons to be applied if indeed such a  
situation re-emerges in future. Politicians who now claim to be the  
champions of Pakistan's democracy will need to keep charge of the  
situation, avoiding even a remote possibility of complacency.

Repeating the most fundamental mistakes such as complacency and  
failure to immediately grasp the depth of any crisis will inevitably  
not just tarnish the government's image, but also reinforce the  
public's already strong scepticism about the ability of their elected  
leaders to deal with crisis situations in Pakistan's best interest.


- Farhan Bokhari is a Pakistan-based commentator who writes on  
political and economic matters.

o o o

The Times of India

Q&A | 'MANY PAKISTANIS QUESTION IF THIS IS THEIR WAR'
18 May 2009

Salima Hashmi, the daughter of legendary Urdu poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz,  
is a patron of arts and one of the best-known rights activists in
Pakistan. Sameer Arshad spoke to Hashmi about the Taliban threat and  
the role of Pakistan's civil society in countering extremism:

How real is the threat of Taliban spilling over into other parts of  
Pakistan?

The Taliban are more than one group. I consider Lashkar-e-Taiba and  
Jaish-e Mohammad to be an equal threat and they aren't restricted to  
one part of the country. They are firmly entrenched in areas like  
Muridke in Punjab. The Binori Masjid in Karachi is another centre of  
militancy.

Why has Pakistan's famed civil society failed to stand up to the  
Taliban?

Civil society is responding and demonstrations are taking place at  
various places. A signature campaign is in operation. But i think the  
drone attacks and the US's Afghan policy have made some people  
ambivalent towards the Taliban. Many people question whether this is  
'our war'. At the same time, i think the recent events like the  
takeover in Swat and radical cleric Sufi Mohammad's statements are  
galvanising more people against the Taliban. However, the large  
number of civilian casualties in the army action is causing a lot of  
concern.

If Pakistan's civil society could oust military ruler General Pervez  
Musharraf and force President Asif Ali Zardari to restore the deposed  
judges, why can't it do the same vis-a-vis the Taliban?

The lawyers movement took an immense toll on the peoples lives. It  
led to loss of livelihood for so many young lawyers and civil society  
activists. It has exhausted the populace.

What keeps the civil society going?

The savagery of military ruler Zia-ul Haq decimated the political  
process, parties, labour, students, intellectual, artists, writers  
and media and civil rights groups. His legacy lives on through the  
laws enacted in that time. You can hardly understand the implications  
of Zia's 11-year rule. He transformed Pakistan in every way. It's  
there in the way textbooks were written, procedures altered and this  
continues till today. But it also strengthened the independence of  
the spirit of society and media in ways that surprise our friends  
from India. Our media is unlike that of India. I find Indian media to  
be more conformist and often eager to swallow the 'official' line as  
though it would be unpatriotic if they didn't do so.

Do you think India has a role to play in strengthening Pakistan's  
civilian dispensation?

Certainly one expects India to be supportive of a civil dispensation  
and give up eulogising Musharraf. He represented himself and the  
army, with great aplomb and we have to live with the consequences,  
the most frightening of which are the Taliban and the Lashkars of  
various kinds.

o o o

The News, May 21, 2009

WHY THE IDPS MATTER

by Sherry Rehman

There is nothing more tragic than being a refugee in ones' own  
homeland. Exile is no longer an imagined place or ambiguous choice.  
It is a reality forced on by the trauma of a natural or man-made  
crisis, sharpening the pain and loss of leaving home, of facing the  
unsaid horror of becoming a third-class citizen in one's own country.

Yet, despite the outpouring of public grief at the human deprivation  
distilled on television without interruption, and national discourse  
forcing many graphic realities out in the open, a few issues remain  
un-addressed, while others bear reiteration. While Pakistani families  
have opened up their homes in the NWFP, given that 80 per cent of  
refugees are guests in people's homes, the collective expression of  
support, both in terms of services and resources that we witnessed in  
the 2005 earthquake effort is missing. Instead of apportioning blame  
on the media, which is the inevitable whipping-boy, or surrendering  
to public apathy about assistance, the reasons for that need to be  
examined without delay. This is not to minimize or discount the  
heroic effort put in by NGOs or individuals even today all over the  
country, but simply to identify a macro trend. The exceptional work  
being done by Sungi, Sarhad Rural Support Programme, SPO, SPARC,  
Sarhad PMA and many individuals and expatriates almost round the  
clock is testimony to the support offered by citizens in every  
crisis. However, the element of national collective mobilisation as  
witnessed in the earthquake is sorely missing from the ongoing efforts.

One of the problems stemming out of this tragedy is a crisis of  
management and credibility, not just that of governance. The bulk of  
the public appears to be either removed from the reality of the  
crisis, or in a mild state of shock, slowing effective reaction. Many  
insist that they want to help, as there is an increased stake by  
citizens in the state, but see no consistent or credible point of  
entry for themselves. Corporations that have experience with previous  
disaster assistance are sending out their own needs-assessment teams,  
or simply sending in a minimum committed contribution mostly in terms  
of goods, not services. For anyone who has been out there in the  
field, it is clear that the challenge of displacement of the Malakand  
and Buner residents and those from other terrorism-hit areas is not a  
managed process. This too cannot be just thrown away as a classic  
government incompetence issue. There can be no dispute that this  
exodus was expected. Yet just one look at the sheer scale and  
magnitude of the exodus of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs)  
explains why even the most rigorous action based on existing models  
of planning would still have fallen to the wayside. So while the  
government is indeed slow and unwieldy, it is absolutely clear that,  
like the earthquake in 2005, which displaced smaller numbers, given  
existing templates for crisis-management, the government alone cannot  
handle the tidal wave of humanity that outstrips the largest  
migration of refugees since partition alone. While the government  
should certainly resort to better multiple-track planning, as the  
primary engine and capacity for coordination can only be resourced by  
official agency, it should use the space and opportunity to build  
trust with citizens and launch a public-private participation drive.

Now that an All Parties Conference is out of the way, and cabinet can  
work with the useful imprimatur of public consensus behind its  
military operation, there is no excuse for an IDP war room not up and  
running in the PM's Secretariat. This is needed for two reasons: the  
National Disaster Management apparatus does not exist in the  
provinces except on paper; secondly, the public can only rally around  
a coordinated national effort if it sees credible evidence of  
executive action from the top. If the Special Support Group created  
for this purpose expects public buy-in, it will have to inspire  
broader confidence in its leadership, as a record of transparency and  
accountability by key members in past projects like ERRA left much to  
be desired. Without transparency, no effort will be seen as either  
legitimate or effective.

The second broad theme that emerges in the dynamics of this refugee  
crisis is related to its political dimension. While a lot of the  
families streaming in on foot or borrowed transport from Buner, Swat  
and Dir are in a state of shock at the trial they are going through,  
nobody should expect them to give ringing condemnations of the  
Taliban that held them in thrall. Many speak privately of the fear  
they lived in, but equally many speak of the possibility of social  
justice under the Taliban. This is completely understandable for any  
population left in a social and governance vacuum. However, in no  
sense does it mean that the Robin-Hoodism of an early Taliban  
encounter with locals is either acceptable in the long-term, or  
sustainable even for the conservative inhabitants of this area simply  
because they did not vote for anything close to the Taliban. In fact,  
the people of these areas did not even vote for the mainstream  
religious parties who have a problem with the military operation per  
se, not just its dynamics or tactics. The votes from these areas came  
for the ANP and the PPP, both progressive if not secular parties.  
Women from the most oppressive domestic and social environments in  
areas like Lower Dir can only be expected to be indifferent to the  
prospects of a Taliban regime where female mobility is restricted in  
public spaces. However, families that traded on tourism see their  
livelihoods destroyed and their social fabric damaged. They may not  
endorse the rain of shrapnel on their rooftops, as military force is  
always heavy, often indiscriminate, but this should not drain public  
resolve to stand up to the advance of militants who criminalize  
society, mis-use religion and challenge the laws of the state.

A recent visit to the IDP camps in Mardan was as harrowing as  
educational. Even in brief conversations with the women, men,  
children and elders of the displaced population, nobody suggested  
that they wanted to stay on or take the side of the Taliban as the  
military moved in to encircle the hide-outs. Many women spoke in  
hushed tones about the prostitution that had been introduced in Swat  
society by the Taliban, while just as many didn't seem to care if  
anyone was flogged or trafficked. The scorching heat of their tents,  
coupled with zero supply of electricity and clean drinking water and  
mixed latrines was enough incentive for them to welcome any militants  
who would restore them to the familiar domestic sanctuary of their  
homes.

The point here is as political as it is social. The country has made  
a collective choice that it rejects non-state actors that use the  
symbols and language of religious extremism to advance a non- 
mainstream agenda through the use of force. If we remain unclear  
about our resolve, or allow it to be confused with disagreements on  
military tactics, or are slow to mitigate the misery of the new IDPs,  
then we will lose the larger battle against extremism. As we move  
past the figure of 2.2 million refugees (United Nations Report, May  
19, 2009) their growing numbers is a reminder of the collective  
responsibility that rests with us as a state and society fighting  
against religious militancy. This is certainly not the problem of the  
NWFP or even the federal government alone. Nor is it a partisan  
political issue. Infusing an ethnic or political narrative to the  
ongoing developments will only aggravate existing social fault lines.  
Instead of protesting the ingress of refugees into all provinces we  
should all be worrying about ensuring food security, potable water,  
clothes, power for fans, medical care, utensils and basic bedding.

The fight for re-installing the flag of Pakistan in lost territories  
will not just be fought in military gains against the jihadist  
outsiders, or in limiting collateral damage. It will be fought in the  
heat and dust of the refugee camps. Success will only be construed as  
real if we are able to give them their dignity and their lives back.


The writer is a former federal information minister and Member  
National Assembly from Pakistan Peoples Party.

o o o

Musharraf Fareed Zakaria interview 1 (May 17, 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d50_lr3x2SM

Musharraf Fareed Zakaria interview 2 (May 17, 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0UF2Hplsp4

Musharraf Fareed Zakaria interview 3 (May 17, 2009)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYPt-wZvXu8


_____


[5] India:


truthout.org
18 May 2009

INDIA ROUTS THE FAR RIGHT

by J. Sri Raman

A collective sigh of relief went up as a Sunday of scorching Indian  
summer drew to a close. The votes had been counted after a month- 
long, five-phase general election, and the people had won. What had  
seemed a real and dire threat to peace in the world's most populous  
democracy and the region had receded.

     The far right had been firmly rejected. The Bharatiya Janata  
Party (BJP) had lost the battle, after an aggressive campaign that  
combined up-to-date communication methods with utterly outdated ideas  
and issues. The National Democratic Alliance (NDA), headed by the  
party, lay in a shambles, with more of its constituents ready to  
leave the sinking ship.

     The BJP's and the NDA's prime-minister-in-waiting, Lal Krishna  
Advani, had ended up the prime-minister-in-indefinite-waiting. On the  
morrow of the announcement of the results, he declared his resolve to  
step down as the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha (India's Lower  
House of Parliament). It, however, took only hours for the far-right  
"family" ("parivar") to persuade him to stay on.

     The BJP and the NDA lost the previous general election in 2004  
too. But, in terms of numbers, it was a more decisive "no" that the  
people said to the party this time. Five years ago, even after the  
defeat, the party could play petty games. It could attempt  
permutations and combinations of parties to present an alternative,  
though without success. It could prevent Congress Party president  
Sonia Gandhi from becoming the prime minister - despite her meeting  
the constitutional requirement of being chosen for the post by her  
party's elected members of Parliament - on the very far-right ground  
of her "foreign origin."

     With its 116 members against the 205 of the Congress Party and  
the 262 of the winning United Progressive Alliance (UPA), the BJP can  
now watch and sulk as outgoing Prime Minister Manmohan Singh prepares  
to assume office for a second term. It also claims to be engaged in  
investigation of the causes behind its political calamity.

     Many in the party and the NDA are unofficially wondering whether  
the other prime ministers-in-waiting were the reason for the rout.  
The party had let it be known, for example, that Narendra Modi, the  
Chief Minister of Gujarat and the author of its gory pogrom of 2002,  
would be the BJP's next candidate for the nation's highest political  
office. Unlike in the past, the redoubtable rabble-rouser was  
unleashed on many states. Predictably, the party has done  
particularly badly in such states (like Maharashtra) while performing  
better in states that would have none of him (like Bihar).

     Yet another aspirant for the apex office, who has announced his  
ambition, without either the endorsement or explicit disapproval of  
the party, is Varun Gandhi, who added considerable virulence to the  
BJP campaign in his videotaped and widely circulated speeches. A  
senior party leader and a former federal minister, Murli Manohar  
Joshi, has now publicly stressed the need to assess the damage done  
by the dangerous Varun-speak.

     The party may take time to complete its postmortem on the  
election, but there is no mystery about the most important meaning of  
the mandate against the BJP. It is a vote against the rabid minority- 
bashing and religious communalism promoted by the party across the  
country even while Advani was attempting an image makeover and  
seeking to appear a much-misunderstood secularist. It is a vote  
against the party's plank of "anti-terrorism" that really aimed to  
reverse and destroy the India-Pakistan peace process. It is a vote  
against relentless efforts to vitiate and disrupt peace within the  
nation and the neighborhood. The silent majority has spoken up again  
against the politics of hate and militarism, which even the Congress  
and other foes of the far right have stopped short of confronting  
squarely.

     The results, however, do not call for unreserved rejoicing.  
Along with the far right, the left has fared poorly, too. From a  
strength of 60 members in the Lok Sabha, it has now been reduced to a  
tiny, 25-member rump in the House. Particularly shocking to the left  
and its well-wishers have been its reverses in the State of West  
Bengal, where it has ruled for 32 years, and in Kerala, which gave  
itself the world's first elected Communist government in the fifties.

     The left's losses have been ascribed to the unpopularity that  
comes with years in office. A more important reason, perhaps, was its  
attempt to form a "Third Front" of non-Congress and non-BJP parties.  
To the common people, however, the country's fate seemed to depend on  
the outcome of the two major fronts led by the Congress and the BJP.  
In practice, the Third Front only threatened to profit the far-right- 
led phalanx by splitting the ballot against the BJP.

     The left extended outside support to the outgoing UPA government  
for most of its five-year term, and this mattered more than in  
numerical terms. Sustained left pressure made possible such popular  
measures of the UPA regime as the National Rural Employment Guarantee  
Act (NREGA), assuring a minimum 100 days' employment in a financial  
year, and a massive waiver of agricultural loans that were driving  
tens of thousands of farmers to despair and suicide. The Congress and  
the UPA benefited considerably by these steps, with the left  
ironically left out.

     The losses of the left, too, will matter in more than numerical  
terms. Alarm bells should ring, after the drama in Mumbai's financial  
district on Monday morning. "Powered by the UPA's astonishing  
victory," says one report, "bulls went on the rampage in the stock  
markets.... Trading had to be stopped for the day as market  
benchmarks hit the upper circuit (the higher limit prescribed for  
scrips) twice within a period of two hours." The report adds: "Market  
analysts said that investors are upbeat due to the election results  
as they portend a stable government, which is likely to be more  
business friendly and reform oriented as interference by the left is  
not likely to take place."

     From the moment the results were declared, the corporate bodies  
have been claiming a victory, and a vote for their demand for  
economic "reforms" without such exasperating restraints as what the  
process may spell for the impoverished majority of India. The BJP's  
slogan of "Shining India," coined by representatives of the same  
corporate interests, sounded like cruel mockery to these millions and  
spelled the far right's electoral undoing five years ago. The tycoons  
won't shed any tears if a similar fate overtakes the far right's  
opponents in 2014.

o o o

The Statesman, May 19, 2009
DEMOCRACY AT STAKE: THE PROLONGED AND UNJUSTIFIED IMPRISONMENT OF DR  
BINAYAK SEN

by Bharat Dogra

There is much in Indian democracy that we can justifiably be proud  
of. Yet on occasion, the authorities betray an obstinate tendency  
towards ruthless and revengeful injustice against social activists  
and movements. This undermines, even stigmatises, democracy. Quite  
often this is the outcome of intense prejudice, poor investigation  
and failure of governance. The crisis gets prolonged as justice is  
denied because the government refuses to acknowledge that its initial  
decision was distorted. That initial blunder is compounded when the  
administration makes it an issue of false prestige. This intensifies  
the agony of the victims, and makes a mockery of the basic tenets of  
democracy. There ought to be a system of checks and balances before  
it is too late.
http://www.freebinayaksen.org/?p=290


o o o

Financial Times
May 18 2009

INDIAN DEMOCRACY HAS AN UGLY SIDE

by Gideon Rachman

http://media.ft.com/cms/f8b3727c-43d2-11de-a9be-00144feabdc0.gif
Pinn llustration

“A billion people, in a functioning democracy. Ain’t that something.”  
George W. Bush’s awestruck musings on the wonders of Indian democracy  
will be echoed all around the world this week.

Despite a sharp economic slowdown and a series of destabilising  
terrorist attacks, India’s 420m voters have just calmly voted the  
Congress party back into government, with a much increased majority.

In western capitals, admiration for the maturity of Indian democracy  
will be mixed with relief. There were fears that a government led by  
the rightwing BJP would take a more confrontational line with  
Pakistan – widening the conflict in south Asia in new and dangerous  
ways. Investors also seem to be impressed. The stock market shot up  
17 per cent in the wake of Congress’s victory.

Political scientists have spent years demonstrating that democracy  
rarely survives in poor countries. India is a triumphant exception to  
this rule. Despite the fact that a quarter of its population live  
below the poverty line, the country has been a functioning democracy  
for almost the entire period since independence in 1947.

Indian democracy is indeed a wonder to behold. But this fact can lead  
to some unwarranted starry-eyed conclusions about the country. At  
this moment of euphoria, four common notions about Indian democracy  
deserve to be doused with a little scepticism.

First, it should be remembered that the country’s democracy is not  
always a beautiful sight. Manmohan Singh, the 76-year-old prime  
minister who has just won re-election, is a charmingly intellectual  
and courtly figure. But while Mr Singh is an impeccable frontman, the  
country’s politics has a much sleazier and more disreputable side.

In most countries when politicians are slammed as “criminals” this is  
simply vulgar abuse. In India, it is often the literal truth. The  
British public, currently hyperventilating about expenses fiddles in  
the UK parliament, might be interested to know that 128 of the 543  
members of the last Indian parliament had faced criminal charges or  
investigations, including 83 cases of murder. In a poor society,  
gangsters can and do use muscle and money to force their way into  
parliament.

Second, just because India is a democracy, it does not follow that it  
will automatically side with fellow-democracies around the world. Mr  
Bush’s interest in Indian democracy was more than purely  
intellectual. The former president made a conscious decision to form  
a strategic alliance with India – and to cut the country a special  
deal over nuclear weapons – because he felt that democracies should  
be natural allies.

The Americans are carefully building a new special relationship with  
democratic India, partly to counterbalance authoritarian China. It is  
certainly true that relations between the US and India have been  
getting steadily warmer, driven by commerce, Indian immigration to  
America, the English language and – to a degree – common values.

But India is a major power with its own interests and its own  
distinct take on the world. It will not automatically fall into line  
with western policy, whether on sanctions against Iran or a world  
trade deal. And if realpolitik dictates, India is perfectly capable  
of cosying up to a dictatorship, such as the Burmese military junta.

The sleazy side of Indian democracy has led to a third common notion  
– popular in the authoritarian parts of Asia: the idea that democracy  
imposes a sort of tax on India. For many years, it was held that  
India suffered from a “Hindu rate of growth” because of its  
inefficient government. Growth in recent years, which has increased  
to an average of 9 per cent, should have put paid to that idea. But  
it is still true that, for all the virtues of its political system,  
Indian governance has failed hundreds of millions of people. Rates of  
poverty and illiteracy are much higher in democratic India than in  
authoritarian China.

Euphoria about modern India has led to a fourth mistaken idea: the  
notion that democracy has given the country a deep and unshakable  
stability. It is certainly true that the political future of China  
looks more uncertain and alarming than that of India, Asia’s other  
great subcontinental nation. But India still faces serious threats to  
its internal stability. The Indian Premier League is a new cricket  
tournament that has demonstrated the country’s growing wealth and  
cultural power by drawing in the best players from all over the  
world. However, the threat of terrorism is now so severe that this  
month’s tournament had to be relocated to South Africa. The country’s  
parliament and most prestigious hotels have come under attack in  
recent years.

While terrorism can be blamed on outsiders, India is also facing a  
serious internal insurrection. The notion of Maoist guerrillas  
roaming the countryside sounds like it belongs to another age – and  
is certainly at odds with the image of a modern India of commuter  
airlines and high technology. But over the past five years the Naxal  
insurgency has grown in strength – attacks on trains, mines and  
industrial sites are on the rise.

It is indeed marvellous that a country that is so large and so  
relatively poor can manage a peaceful, democratic transition. The new  
Indian government should also be able to use its stronger majority to  
renew the process of economic reform. But there are still some  
unappealing realities just behind the beautiful facade of Indian  
democracy.

gideon.rachman at ft.com

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009


o o o

The Hindu, 19 May 2009

HUMILITY IN VICTORY, INTROSPECTION IN DEFEAT

by Siddharth Varadarajan

If the Congress party needs to guard against the triumphalist revival  
of ‘Congress culture’, both the Left and the Bharatiya Janata Party  
must also re-evaluate their political strategy.
http://www.hindu.com/2009/05/19/stories/2009051955280800.htm

o o o

counterpunch.org, May 19, 2009

ONE STEP FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK - THE INDIAN ELECTIONS: A GAME CHANGER?

by Vijay Prashad
http://www.counterpunch.org/prashad05192009.html


_____


[6]  India: Conservative Parliamentarians Fear importance of  
Sexuality education

sacw.net, 9 May 2009
http://www.sacw.net/article905.html

INDIA: WOMENS GROUPS AND HEALTH ACTIVISTS APPEAL AGAINST THE  
PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE REPORT ON SEX EDUCATION

We, the youth groups, women’s groups, groups working on sexuality as  
well as disability rights and educationists wish to register our  
strong protest against the stand taken by the Parliamentary Committee  
led by Venkaiah Naidu vis a vis sex education [1]. We genuinely  
believe that education is a process that enables learners to access  
information, analyze their life experiences and understand principles  
of equality, equity, non-discrimination and justice. Since sexuality  
is an important dimension of the lives and experiences of  
individuals, a dimension that starts manifesting itself in ways that  
are positive and negative during childhood and is a significant  
aspect of adolescence, we firmly believe that sexuality education  
needs to be included in the school curriculum so as to inform and  
empower young people.

There are several myths and irrational notions about sexuality  
education in minds of many. It is appalling to see the learned  
committee of Parliamentarians (who people have empowered to take  
decisions on their behalf) also subscribing to them.

The need for Sexuality Education and NOT Sex-Education:

First and foremost, we wish to underline the importance of Sexuality  
education and not ‘sex’ education as understood by many.

Sexuality education is a process of acquiring information, building a  
critical understanding and forming attitudes about the self,  
relationships, sexual behaviour and diversity, reproductive health  
and gender roles. It is also about developing young people’s skills  
so that they make informed choices about their behaviour, and feel  
confident and competent about acting on these choices. Sexuality  
education addresses the biological, socio-cultural, psychological,  
and spiritual dimensions of sexuality from the cognitive, affective  
and behavioral domain.

Thus the concept of Sexuality Education is very different from the  
term “Sex Education” (as understood by the Committee) which is often  
conceptually understood to mean education about human sexual anatomy,  
sexual reproduction, sexual intercourse, and other aspects of human  
sexual behaviour. In sex education, the emphasis is on biological,  
rather than social aspects.

We think Sexuality Education is important at school level as it  
enables adolescents to understand the changes that they are  
undergoing. Also programmes have to be designed for out-of school  
youth and youth in vulnerable circumstances. It addresses their fears  
and anxieties and makes them aware of their rights and how these can  
be protected and promoted. This helps them to take decisions and  
negotiate with others, based on both recognition of their own  
interests and the rights of others.

It helps them recognize sexual abuse, violence and discrimination and  
break the silence related to these violations and seek appropriate  
support from families and schools.

Fears & Myths about sex education

One of the fears is that young people are being provided with  
information that is “too explicit at too young an age”.

As pointed out earlier, the scope of sexuality education is much  
wider than information about sexual activities. More specifically,  
this fear can be easily addressed by an educational system that  
ensures that the sexuality education curricula are age appropriate.  
The content, style and images used would be informed by the specific  
needs and contexts of different age groups. Adequate training and  
skill building of teachers would be crucial to satisfactory  
implementation.

There is a myth that the introduction of sex education will lead to  
young people becoming sexually active.

There is no evidence to demonstrate that the introduction of sex  
education leads to increased sexual activity among young people.  
Studies conducted in other countries, including developing countries,  
in fact show that as a result of the introduction of sexuality  
education, there is an increase in the age at which sexual activity  
among adolescents begins.

Secondly, there is overwhelming evidence which demonstrates that  
young people are already sexually active in India. The National  
Family Health Survey III reveals that among young people, who form  
30% of the population, 51% women and 27% men in the age of 15-24 have  
ever had sex. In the age group 15-24, 10% women and 2% men had first  
sexual intercourse by the age of 15. In the age group 18-24, 40%  
women and 12% men had sex for the first time before reaching 18. Also  
one in six women age 15-19 has begun childbearing. Significantly, 35  
per cent of all reported HIV infections are among those in the 15 to  
24 age group.

Other data also indicates that more than 53% children in India are  
subjected to sexual abuse and over a third of all rape victims are  
below 16 years.

In contexts where young people are not just sexually active, but face  
sexual abuse, contract HIV and become mothers during their teens, how  
can we withhold information about sexuality from them? Let us also  
understand that young people are already seeking and gaining  
information from a variety of sources - from each other, popular  
material such as magazines, pulp novels, pornography etc. However,  
there are no sources available to them at the moment that gives them  
accurate, relevant and meaningful information.

Given the aforementioned arguments, we as a group feel that the  
Government must re-look at the need of the hour and address the  
problems of growing incidence of sexual assaults and subjugation of  
young girls and women. These problems can only be addressed through  
SENSITIZED YOUTH and thus the need for age appropriate, non  
moralistic and fact based Sexuality Education of adolescents and  
youth at the school level. As a signatory to PoA that emerged at the  
International Conference on Population & Development in Cairo in  
1994, the government is committed to encourage reproductive health  
education amongst adolescents. We appeal to the government to take  
the appropriate action that will befit the 15th anniversary of ICPD.

In Solidarity,

Gains & gaps- ICPD+15: a Civil Society Review in India

Aneka, Centre for Health and Social Justice (CHSJ), Centre for  
Health, Education, Training and Nutrition Awareness (CHETNA), Jagori,  
Jan Swasthya Abhiyaan (JSA), National Campaign for Dalit Human Rights  
(NCDHR), Naz Foundation (India) Trust, Nirantar, North - East  
Network, Partners for Law in Development, Population Foundation of  
India (PFI), Positive Women’s Network, Rural Women Social Education  
Centre (RUWSEC), SAHAYOG, Sampada Grameen Mahila Sanstha (SANGRAM),  
Social Upliftment through Rural Action (SUTRA), Society for Health  
Alternatives (SAHAJ), CommonHealth, Swayam, Youth Coalition for  
Sexual & Reproductive Rights
Footnotes

[1] Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions, Hundred and Thirty Fifth  
Report on Petition praying for national debate and evolving consensus  
on the implementation of policy for introduction of sex education in  
the Schools and holding back its introduction until then, presented  
to Hon’ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha, on 2nd April, 2009.


o o o

The Telegraph
April 21, 2009

Editorial

SHOCK VALUE

It is alarming that crucial decisions regarding something as  
fundamental to human health and happiness as sexuality are taken by  
leaders of the nation whose thinking on the matter is a dangerous mix  
of bigotry and ignorance. The Committee on Petitions has recommended  
that there should be no sex education in schools since this promotes  
promiscuity and since India’s “social and cultural ethos are (sic)  
such that sex education has absolutely no place in it”. Headed by the  
Bharatiya Janata Party’s Venkaiah Naidu, the committee comprises nine  
Rajya Sabha members from the entire party-political spectrum, and has  
only one woman in it. The committee’s outrage is directed against the  
human resource development ministry’s Adult Education Programme.  
Launched in 2005 and backed by the National AIDS Control  
Organization, the AEP had focused on safer sex, together with  
adolescent physical and mental development, for the 14-18 age group.  
Not only was the committee “highly embarrassed” by the HRD ministry’s  
PowerPoint presentation on this curriculum, but it has also  
recommended for this age group an alternative curriculum based on the  
lives and teachings of saints, spiritual leaders, freedom fighters  
and national heroes. This would endorse “national ideals and values”  
and “neutralize the impact of cultural invasion from various sources”  
with the help of naturopathy, Ayurveda, Unani, yoga and, of course,  
moral education.

Such a combination of conservatism, chauvinism and sheer  
irrationality is disconcerting for several reasons. First, emanating  
from the highest levels of the polity and uniting a diversity of  
political positions, it shows the extent to which the lives and  
bodies of some of the most vulnerable members of society remain in  
the control of the limited understanding and unlimited powers of a  
few. A blinkered and almost mythological understanding of the lives  
and sexuality of growing children, generalized to the point of  
absurdity, underpins such a mindset. The children themselves, as well  
as the adults who are responsible for their well-being, remain  
entirely deprived of agency in the making of these decisions and  
policies.

Finally, the assumptions on which this mindset is founded, and the  
terms in which they are publicly expressed, are equally frightening.  
The committee upholds that pre-marital sexual exploration, together  
with sex outside marriage, is “immoral, unethical and unhealthy”;  
consensual sex before the age of 16 “amounts to rape”; sex education  
promotes abusive behaviour in school, among students as well as  
between teacher and student, and is detrimental to the stability of  
the family. Perhaps the only hope lies in the fact that these are  
just nine shockingly regressive individuals trying to control the  
robustness of millions of sensible Indians.

_____


[7]  Announcements:


From: The Honorable Emanuel Cleaver
Sent By: kristen.handley at mail.house.gov
Date: 5/19/2009


Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Invites you to a forum featuring
Angana P. Chatterji, Author of
Violent Gods: Hindu Nationalism in India's Present; Narratives from  
Orissa
THURSDAY, MAY 21ST, 5-6 PM IN 122 CANNON


Dear Colleague,

Please join me for a forum with Angana Chatterji, author of the  
recently released book, Violent Gods: Hindu Nationalism in India's  
Present; Narratives from Orissa. This event will take place Thursday,  
May 21st from 5-6 p.m. in 122 Cannon House Office Building. India's  
national elections ended this week, making this an excellent  
opportunity to explore the impact of Hindu nationalism and the future  
of India's democracy in light of the recent spate of communal  
violence and terrorist attacks.

This book provides an insightful analysis of Hindu nationalism in  
India today, including a revealing account of Hindu militant  
mobilizations as an authoritarian movement manifested throughout  
several dimensions of Indian society. 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. Chatterji asks  
critical questions that address the threat Hindu nationalism poses to  
India's tradition of religious tolerance and democracy.

Chatterji is associate professor of Social and Cultural Anthropology  
at the California Institute of Integral Studies in San Francisco. She  
has traveled numerous times into Orissa to chronicle the conflict  
there, and has also served on human rights commissions and tribunals,  
conducted workshops and lectured at various universities and  
organizations in the United States, and internationally. Presently  
Chatterji is co-convener of the International People's Tribunal on  
Human Rights and Justice in Indian-administered Kashmir.

For more information or to RSVP, please contact Kristen Handley of my  
staff at 5-4535 or Kristen.handley at mail.house.gov. Signed copies of  
the book will be available for interested Members at this event.


Warmest regards,


Emanuel Cleaver
Member of Congress


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

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.