SACW | Oct 5-7, 2009 / Afghan election / Prachanda’s interview / Chittagong Hill Tracts Letter / Free Speech, Censorship / Depleted Uranium / Traditional Values / Women's Rights / Appeals Against Militarisation and Violence

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire | October 5-7, 2009 | Dispatch No. 2658 -  
Year 12 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]  Culmination of eight years of broken promises Afghanistan’s  
fouled election (Chris Sands)
[2]  Nepal: Excerpts from Maoist leader Prachanda’s interview to The  
Hindu (Prerana Marasini)
[3]  Bangladesh:  Letter to Chairman of Land Commission, Chittagong  
Hill Tracts (CHT Commission)
[4]  Freedom of Expression / Censorship: State and Non State . . .
       - Zia's long reach (Quddus Mirza)
       - No country for artistes (Editorial, New Indian Express)
       - Spooks want govt to block Skype (Mohua Chatterjee)
[5]  Pakistan - India:  Break the logjam - There is no alternative to  
talks (Kuldip Nayar)
[6]  India: Stop Militarisation and Violence - Appeals and Statements  
by Citizens Groups
        -  Appeal by concerned citizens for a ceasefire and peace  
talks between Govt. and maoists
        -  PUCL statement on the fight between state and Maoists
        -  ‘Victims of the Home Ministry’? (Anand Chakravarti ,  
Arundhati Roy , Asad Zaidi , K Seshachary , Nandini Sundar , and Others)
        - Condemn strongly the malicious media trial of Chhatradhar  
Mahato! (Committee For The Release of Political Prisoners)
[7] Afghan War's Blowback for India's Children? (J. Sri Raman)
[8] Traditional Values / Women's Rights:
      (i) UN: Russia's resolution on traditional values adopted by  
the human rights council
      (ii) Women who fight for freedom (Azar Nafisi)
[9] Announcements:
    - Seminar On Police Reforms (Bombay, 8 October, 2009)

_____


[1]  Afghanistan:

Le Monde Dipomatique
October 2009

CULMINATION OF EIGHT YEARS OF BROKEN PROMISES AFGHANISTAN’S FOULED  
ELECTION

Even without the problem of electoral fraud, now being independently  
investigated, Afghans did not believe in the validity of this  
summer’s election, or that its candidates offered any hope of a more  
secure and peaceful future

by Chris Sands

Kabul was in lockdown, and children flew kites over the deserted  
streets. The usual long queues of traffic and the US military convoys  
with their gunners yelling at civilian drivers to stay back had gone.  
Even the beggars lying lifeless in the dirt had disappeared for the  
day. All that were left were dozens of police checkpoints. “I came to  
vote because we need security,” said Gulha Khan as he exited a  
polling station in the west of the capital. He and his family had  
moved from neighbouring Maidan Wardak because of the Taliban’s  
growing strength there.

The sun had hardly set on the strange quiet of 20 August when the  
international community praised Afghanistan’s presidential election.  
Barack Obama announced that it appeared “successful” and UN secretary  
general Ban Ki-moon gave his congratulations. British prime minister  
Gordon Brown spoke of the “major sacrifices” by soldiers that had  
made it possible.

But amidst widespread allegations of fraud, the country is now in  
political turmoil and the election has come to represent all that has  
gone wrong with the Nato-led occupation. Subterfuge, violence,  
paranoia, corruption and intimidation plagued the entire process and  
had done so since campaigning began in the summer. Posters for more  
than 40 candidates first appeared one morning in June, hung in shop  
windows and plastered on walls throughout Kabul. Some showed the  
faces of unknown men and women who had chosen to stand without ever  
believing they would win. Others depicted ghosts from the past hungry  
for power in the country they had helped destroy.

Hamid Karzai, the incumbent, was the clear favourite in a nation  
traditionally ruled by Pashtuns like him from the south. Gul Agha  
Sherzai, the governor of Nangarhar, decided not to run. Zalmay  
Khalilzad, an Afghan-born US diplomat, was mentioned but didn’t  
stand. In the end, Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister and  
member of the Northern Alliance, was left as the president’s main  
rival. The pictures his team put up often showed him with his late  
friend Ahmad Shah Massoud, the mujahideen commander admired and hated  
in equal measure. Then the frontrunners gave free lunches to  
potential voters, displayed their faces on huge billboards and  
flooded the airwaves with ads explaining why they were Afghanistan’s  
great hope.
‘A crisis if he wins’

The first sign of trouble was in July, when Abdullah’s campaign  
chairman agreed to an interview. Abdul Sattar Murad said to a  
journalist about Karzai what his colleagues had until then only  
uttered between themselves. “He cannot win unless he resorts to large- 
scale corruption, so we will not accept that. The nation is not  
voting for him. He only gets votes through his governors and by  
corruption,” he told me. Murad spoke in a house near the old British  
cemetery in Kabul, which commemorates the dead of this and so many  
other wars. He accused the Independent Election Commission of being  
biased, described Karzai as “a thief” and said “the country will land  
in the middle of a crisis” if he retains his position. He warned  
there would be “street demonstrations”.

For a while, nothing happened. Then the government heard about his  
comments and considered arresting him for inciting violence. He  
denied saying those things or even giving the interview. But soon  
other people made similar predictions and once the election took  
place Abdullah was equally forthright.

Fraud lurked in the shadows before voting day. Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai,  
another candidate, tried to speak of it after a campaign rally in the  
eastern province of Paktia. The ex-World Bank official had been  
touted as a serious contender, though he never had a genuine chance.  
Members of his security detail wore US-style military fatigues and he  
had a number of Americans discreetly working for him, including a  
former adviser to Bill Clinton. “The person who is suffering worst  
from electoral fraud is Mr Karzai,” he said. “Should he win nobody in  
this country is going to believe it was legitimate. So actually by  
indulging in electoral fraud he has deprived himself of the most  
precious commodity that the politician needs: people’s trust.”

The focus of the West remained the Taliban, which had denounced the  
vote as a sham and promised to disrupt the process. They gave out  
letters at night and warned that anyone who went to a polling station  
would be a legitimate target. A statement released on the internet  
accused Washington of “trying to throw dust in the eyes of the  
Afghans once again”. This was extremely effective because it scared  
people and, like all good propaganda, contained some truth.  
Indirectly, it sucked Nato into new military operations in the south  
to provide security for voters. The troops had heavy casualties,  
causing fresh doubts about the war in the UK and US.

Violence has risen noticeably every year here since 2005, so this was  
not just a consequence of the election, but another sign that the  
insurgents were going from strength to strength. Waheed Mozhdah, a  
political analyst who had worked in the former Taliban government,  
warned that it did not really matter who was the next president. “The  
fighting will continue. The British have said they may need to be in  
Afghanistan for another 40 years. The Americans should also be ready  
for that.”

In the week before 20 August, a suicide attack on the Nato  
headquarters in Kabul killed at least seven and injured scores.  
Photographers hunted an ambulance while it prepared to leave the  
scene, shooting blindly with their cameras through the vehicle’s  
windows. A few days later a car exploded near a military convoy.
Waiting for the worst

The vote was fairly peaceful in the capital. At first, people waited  
for the worst to happen, then they gradually ventured out. Some were  
proud of taking part. Abdul Hakim Barak, an elderly Karzai supporter,  
claimed he had grown used to war and nothing could scare him now.  
“It’s important to choose someone who does not have connections with  
other countries, is a good and intelligent man, and a Muslim. The  
first thing we want from the next president is security.” Outside  
Kabul, especially in the south and east, security seemed further away  
than ever. There were rocket attacks in Khost, Paktia, Kandahar and  
Helmand. Rebels in the northern province of Baghlan stormed a town  
and fought with police, closing 14 polling stations in a part of the  
country considered safe. This was one of the most violent days  
witnessed in Afghanistan in the last eight years, according to Human  
Rights Watch.

Insults began soon after. The teams of Karzai and Abdullah declared  
victory straight away. Then allegations of widespread ballot-box  
stuffing were made against the president. Turnout was often  
mysteriously high in areas wracked with violence and votes favouring  
the opposition were destroyed, it was claimed. Other candidates  
accused both front-runners of fraud and intimidation. The UN-backed  
Electoral Complaints Commission announced it was investigating more  
than 2,000 cases, roughly a third of them serious. The British and US  
were now concerned about possible corruption. Having built Karzai up  
when he first came became president, western media now knocked him down.

Yet the outrage seemed hypocritical and too little, too late. Many  
Afghans regard this election as the inevitable outcome of an  
occupation that has failed to deliver on its promises. If the result  
is seriously questionable, so was most of what came before. “I spoke  
with other women and told them that if a candidate took his wife with  
him on the campaign trail, then we could believe in him. But none of  
them did,” said Sheila Samimi, who works with an NGO. “It shows they  
are not accepting women’s rights and we are still second-class  
citizens.”

Rather than represent a bright future, the main contenders reminded  
Afghans of past horrors. Karzai’s campaign was based on deals with  
warlords, who could bring him crucial swing votes among the minority  
communities dominant in the north. His running mates, Mohammed Qasim  
Fahim and Abdul Karim Khalili, played key roles in the fighting that  
tore Kabul apart between 1992 and 1996. So did Abdul Rashid Dostum,  
who briefly returned from Turkey to throw his support behind the  
incumbent. Before and after the 2001 invasion, they had all been  
allies of the US.

The president approved a law for Afghanistan’s Shia community that  
allows a man to withhold food from his wife if she refuses his sexual  
demands and gives fathers and grandfathers exclusive custody of  
children. “He signed it just for votes. That is what is important to  
Hamid Karzai, not the women and children,” said Ruqia Naiel, an MP  
from Ghor province who is worried what will happen if he wins another  
term. “See the eight years we have just passed? Maybe the next five  
years will also be like this. All we will be trying to do is stay  
alive.”

Abdullah also used the influence of the mujahideen. He emphasised his  
role in the jihad against Soviet occupation and had the backing of  
Burhanuddin Rabbani, the president of Afghanistan during the  
disastrous civil war. Massoud, who featured so prominently on his  
campaign posters, had also been instrumental in that and the later  
struggle against the Taliban. Weeda Ahmed was convinced that neither  
candidate gave reason for hope. The director of a group seeking  
justice for the victims of conflicts since the late 1970s, she said:  
“I don’t think we will be able to take the people’s rights back from  
this new government. Still the criminals and warlords will be in  
power. A lot of families say they would not even be able to accept  
trying these men. They say, ‘that man killed my son, so I want to  
kill his son’.”

All the votes have now been counted and Karzai has 54.6%, Abdullah  
27.8%. Investigations into corruption are delaying a final result and  
a run-off might be still required. A victory for Karzai could  
destabilise sections of the north, where Abdullah has significant  
support. In the unlikely event that Abdullah wins, the Pashtun south  
and east will plunge deeper into chaos. At a crucial juncture in the  
occupation, Afghanistan will have a leader unable to unite the country.

Mohammed Nader, a Kabul resident who did not take part in the  
election, said: “There is nobody. We need change, a good person who  
can bring security for us, and I cannot find one.”

(Chris Sands is Afghanistan correspondent for The National in Abu  
Dhabi and a co-founder of Makoto Photographic Agency. He has lived in  
Kabul since 2005)

_____


[2] Nepal

The Hindu
October 6, 2009


‘We will lead a government soon’

by Prerana Marasini

Prachanda: We want to show that the relation between the Maoists and  
the people is intense.

The Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has been protesting  
since May against President Ram Baran Yadav (who had reinstated then  
Army Chief Rookmangud Katawal) with a demand for the restoration of  
civilian supremacy in Nepal. The major Opposition party’s continuous  
obstruction of the legislature parliament has affected the  
constitution-writing process but the Maoist Chairman, Pushpa Kamal  
Dahal ‘Prachanda’ , says his party will not be responsible if the  
constitution is not drafted on time. Excerpts from Mr. Prachanda’s  
interview to The Hindu:

How far have you reached in restoring civilian supremacy in the last  
couple of months?

In the initial phase, the major political parties of this government  
were very negative. At this juncture, I feel the parties have  
realised that moving forward without addressing the Maoists’ demands  
is not just not right but also impossible. They have started to  
realise that without the Maoists’ participation, neither can the  
constitution be prepared nor can the peace process be completed. They  
are, therefore, trying to forge a consensus.

Lately, there have been intense discussions among the parties to  
introduce a common proposal to address our demands. Although I don’t  
think this proposal would be finalised soon, the process is taking a  
positive direction
So how much do people know about civilian supremacy?

We had a host of nationwide programmes in these months. Thousands of  
people showed up and listened to us intently. What people have  
understood is that there is a conspiracy by those who lost in the  
elections to isolate the Maoists — the party that was voted the  
largest. This, they know, is not civilian supremacy. This is how they  
have understood it.
Were your protests, which involved showing black flags to the  
President, the Prime Minister and the Ministers and throwing stones  
at their vehicles, reflective of a creative opposition?

It is against our policy and programmes to throw stones, which  
happened at some places and we are sorry about it. Overall, we  
carried out peaceful protests. We don’t think the impact of these  
protests were negative.
You met President Ram Baran Yadav on Wednesday and you said the talks  
were positive. Can we say your protests were not effective enough and  
that is why you had to meet the President personally?

Quite the opposite. All our protests of boycotting their programmes  
and our mass assemblies had an effect on the political parties,  
organisations, and individuals which led to the belief that it was  
not right to isolate the Maoists. And in that atmosphere, I met the  
President. So our understanding is that as a result of our protests,  
that atmosphere was created.
What did you discuss with the President?

I used to have good interaction with him when I was leading the  
government. I had not met him after my resignation. [During the  
meeting] we exchanged our views on why things changed in the later  
stage. I said: “I hadn’t imagined that you would take a step against  
the norms of interim constitution and reinstate the Army Chief. Since  
you were not satisfied with the decision [to sack him], I rather  
thought you would send me a letter asking me to reconsider the  
decision. And in case I did not do that, you would probably ask the  
Court to look into the matter but you completely reversed the  
government’s decision.” I also told him that the maximum I expected  
from the political parties was a no-confidence motion and I was  
prepared to face it. I had not imagined that they would approach the  
President to fail the Maoists and request him to take an  
unconstitutional move.
What did the President say?

He said: “I did not take the step under pressure from anyone. The  
situation was becoming difficult, and as a way to stop it, I dodged  
your step. But my intention is not to go on like this forever. I am  
ready to do anything to have a consensus. Maoists are the major  
strength and that you yourself should come forward.” In conclusion,  
he said the present stagnation should be broken. I informed him that  
the parties were trying to forge a consensus and in case no consensus  
was gathered, I would meet him again.
Does the President want the Maoists to lead the next government then?

He did not exactly say that but as Maoists constitute the largest  
party, he said it should join the government. He also suggested that  
he would not have problems if we led the next government.
You have been saying since you resigned from the government that  
Maoists will form a new government. When will that happen?

If you talk about the present government, it is accepted neither by  
the people nor by the Maoists, and actually it’s not functioning.
Why is it not functioning?

Because the public does not have faith in it. You see the majority of  
the leaders of the ruling CPN-UML are against the President’s move.  
It is an open secret. The government is functioning in a hypocritical  
manner.
But it is your party that is obstructing Parliament. If tomorrow, the  
Constitution is not delivered in time, wouldn’t your party be guilty?  
Will not the people’s faith be lost?

People know that Parliament is obstructed not because of the Maoists  
but because of the conspiracy of those who lost in the elections,  
those who maintain the status quo and the regressive elements  
together quashed the interim constitution. The Maoists have not  
resorted to vandalism, strikes and closures, and are still  
responsible. People rather question why the parties in the government  
don’t try to correct the move. So they won’t blame us. And I don’t  
think the Constitution will not be prepared on time as the parties  
are moving ahead with a consensus. However, if this situation  
persists — civilian supremacy is not restored, Maoists are compelled  
to launch a movement, and the constitution is not written, the  
Maoists would not be guilty.
How do you think the issue of civilian supremacy should be addressed  
as the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML don’t want to discuss the  
resolution?

The easiest option is to discuss the resolution and vote in the  
House. We will accept even if we are in a minority as our position  
will be clear. If sovereignty resides in Parliament, it will be very  
shameful and unfortunate on the part of the parties that claim to be  
democratic not to allow the discussions. We feel we’ll have a  
majority as a majority of UML leaders — its Chairman, Vice Chairman —  
are against the Presidential move. In case they issue a whip and we  
are in a minority, we’ll accept it. The Nepali Congress and the UML  
can also declare their position. So this would be the best option.

Secondly, we can consider a common resolution motion if it’s in a win- 
win situation.

Thirdly, there might come a situation where the President will have  
to clear the issue. If he puts his views across to the people, it  
could play a role in addressing this issue. And finally, the interim  
constitution could be amended so that the duties and authorities of  
the President and the Prime Minister are clearly defined.
You’ve been saying that your party would launch a third revolution  
that would be supported by the U.N. What kind of revolution is it?  
Would it be against the peace deal?

We’ve been suggesting a revolution. We haven’t declared the  
revolution yet.

What we want to do is to show the parties in the government that the  
relation between the Maoists and the people is intense, which would  
inspire them to arrive at a consensus. It’s true that if a consensus  
is not arrived at, we will declare a revolution.
With the U.N.’s support?

The U.N.’s support is wrongly interpreted. What we mean is that the  
U.N. does not go against people’s right to revolt. It recognises  
people’s right to rebel. If the Interim Constitution is trampled upon  
and the country is pushed towards confrontation, people will revolt  
in the form of a third revolution. Our party will also be involved in  
it and would try to take the lead. This wouldn’t be opposed by the  
United Nations.
Would it be an armed revolt?

No, no. We’re not talking about arms now. It will be peaceful.
When will it be launched?

If there is a consensus, it won’t be needed now but if the parties  
don’t give up their rigidity and try to move ahead isolating the  
Maoists, we won’t be isolated. We will have to prove that we have a  
sea of people, and we will declare the revolt.
Why not let the coalition government continue until a new  
Constitution is written and elections are held?

This coalition is not backed by the people, it is against the spirit  
of election and the Constitution, so we’ve been saying a new alliance  
— joint national government — is needed with the Maoists, the largest  
party, in the lead. If it’s not done, we’ll not accept.

The constitution-drafting process is associated with the peace  
process. The Maoists have a 50 per cent stake in the peace deal that  
was signed with the seven parties. Can there be peace, sidelining the  
50 per cent stakeholder?

Only when there is consensus to form a government in Maoists’  
leadership, can a Constitution be written and the peace process will  
end.
So, can we see the Maoists’ government next month?

I don’t want to give a date now but that situation is developing.
How is your relation with India after resignation? You met the Indian  
ambassador on Thursday?

We made it clear while resigning that we won’t bow down to any  
regressive, feudal elements of the country and foreign powers that  
try to dictate to us.

It’s true that India played a positive role in bringing a change in  
Nepal by helping us sign the 12-point agreement. But in the later  
stage, there were some confusions and gaps. At this point, what I  
feel is India wants a consensus built in Nepal so that the peace  
process successfully ends.

Through my meetings with the Indian ambassador and other Indian  
leaders, intellectuals, and journalists I see a large group of  
Indians who believe that the Maoists should not be isolated but  
should be in the government to actively contribute to the  
constitution drafting and peace process. I feel the government of  
India is also positive about seeing our peace process end successfully.
Is the Maoists’ relation with India — that had been cold earlier —  
improving?

Yes, I feel it’s improving slowly.
Does India want the Maoists to take the lead?

Our talks haven’t reached there but probably we will talk about it.  
At the moment, we are trying to forge a consensus in the country and  
we hope our foreign friends including India will support us.

_____


[3]  Bangladesh:


LETTER TO CHAIRMAN OF LAND COMMISSION, CHITTAGONG HILL TRACTS

Justice Khademul Islam Chowdhury,

Chairman of the CHT Land Commission

September 14, 2009

Honorable Chairman,

First of all, we would like to thank you for the interesting  
conversation we had about the proposed activities work of the Land  
Commission during the CHT Commission's mission to Bangladesh in  
August, 2009.

In view of current developments, the CHT Commission would like to  
enquire further about the operational procedure to be adopted by the  
Land Commission. Specifically, we would like to refer to a press  
report published in the bdnews24.com after the second meeting of the  
Land Commission in Rangamati on September 7, 2009 stating that:  
"*Decisions will be taken after careful scrutiny of any claim or  
dispute over land and its handover*".

In light of this statement, the CHT Commission has the following  
queries:

1.	Will the Land Commission invite claimants to submit details of the  
parcels of land that they claim along with the supporting evidence,  
inclusive of documentation of customary rights? If so, through which  
channels will the claimants be invited to submit the evidence, given  
that many of the Hill peoples, particularly in remote areas, do not  
access to either the print media or radio and television?
2.	In August, you had informed us that there were no plans yet to  
appoint legally qualified staff to the Land Commission. In that case,  
who will scrutinize the submitted claims in October, as proposed?
3.	There seems to be uncertainty in terms of how the Land Commission  
will deal with cases where there is conflict between (i) the  
customary rights of the Hill peoples and (ii) the formal documents  
given to in-migrating settlers for the same plots issued subsequently  
by the local land administration offices from 1979 onwards. Is the  
Land Commission going to decide on the merits of rival claims by  
applying a set of rules which are publicly announced and applied  
through transparent procedures? If not, then what criteria and  
procedures will be applied?
4.	Will all the concerned parties be legally represented and will  
they be able to call witnesses at the hearings of the Land  
Commission? Under what rules of procedure will these hearings be  
conducted?

We would be very grateful for your response to the above queries.

On behalf of the CHT Commission

Eric Avebury (Co-chair of the CHT Commission)
Sultana Kamal (Co-chair of the CHT Commission)
Ida Nicolaisen (Co-chair of the CHT Commission)


CHT Commission (http://chtcommission.org/)
Bangladesh Secretariat
10/11 Iqbal Road
Mohammadpur-1207

_____


[4] Freedom of Expression and Self Censorship : State and Non State

Himal South Asian, September 2009

ZIA'S LONG REACH
The Pakistani state no longer forces the country’s artists to comply  
with stringent political or moral diktats – but it doesn’t have to.

by Quddus Mirza

“We live in a postmodern age, everything is simulation, everything is  
reference, even dictatorships.”  – Dubravka Ugresic

A young man writes a love letter to his fiancé, and adds a line or  
two about the government of his country. He posts the letter, but  
soon after dispatching he realises that if it is opened in the censor  
office, he is going to suffer because of the casual negative remark  
he made. In order to avoid such consequences, he decides to apply for  
a job in the censor department, so he can try to get hold of his  
letter. To his surprise, he does indeed get a position, and thus  
starts learning his new tasks. Several months later, during the  
course of normal post-checking, he finally comes across his letter.  
He opens it and reads the content. But instead of hiding it or  
throwing it away, he writes a note that the sender of the letter has  
committed a crime against the state and must be punished.

This short story by Luisa Valenzuela, the Argentine author,  
illustrates how the system of censorship seeps into the very souls of  
those it affects. The ultimate grip and success of censorship occurs  
when it becomes part of one’s internal system; and, like termites, it  
corrodes the insides, till one day it destroys the body it has  
occupied. Subsequently, censorship becomes the normal, natural state,  
such that one is no longer aware of its presence, as one’s thoughts,  
words, art and acts are perpetually filtered through a new sense of  
carefulness.

Pakistani society has faced multiple forms of censorship during its  
short period as a nation-state. In fact, censorship has been a  
constant characteristic and tool of successive Pakistani regimes. But  
during the second last military rule, from 1977 to 1988, this became  
a particularly prominent presence. The regime of that time, headed by  
Zia ul-Haq, was known for monopolising religion and manipulating  
ethics in order to justify its existence. As such, censorship, the  
control over information and knowledge, was considered an essential  
weapon in order to maintain order and keep power.

Floral patterns

It is important to recall how an autocratic regime such as Zia’s  
related to matters of morality. After all, the censorship during  
Zia’s period was primarily focused on moral issues –the  
representation of human figures, particularly of women, and the  
depiction of nude bodies, both male and female. This emphasis on  
morality – or, alternatively, on sexuality – was hardly surprising,  
given that the regime sought legitimacy in Islam, and common belief  
was subsequently used as a stick with which to curb ‘immoral’  
behaviour and expression. Hence, religion was interpreted in such a  
way that, for an ordinary citizen, faith was reduced to decrees  
relating to the representation of the female body, for which state- 
enforced conditions were in effect for the female presence in print  
media, film, theatre, television (which at that time was only the  
state-run channel) and in the visual arts. Indeed, there seemed to  
grow something of an official obsession with the female body, or at  
least with certain parts of it. If during a television play, for  
instance, a woman was depicted as drowning, it was essential that she  
must be shown in dry clothes the moment she was rescued and emerged  
from the water. Similarly, if a girl was sleeping on a bed, she  
needed to have a properly folded dupatta on her chest at all times.

That kind of fascination (in the guise of prohibition) manifested in  
another form for the print media. Film advertisements illustrating  
the exposed parts of legs, arms, the navel or some cleavage would be  
officially covered with cross-hatched black-pen lines – often  
resulting in some interesting floral patterns, clearly the outcome of  
whatever bored individual was tasked with checking and censoring all  
the newspapers and magazines. Likewise, cinema was censored in such a  
manner that, in foreign movies, two mouths coming close to each other  
to kiss would suddenly begin to drift away, since the film censor  
board had clipped the shots of the actual kiss in the movies but  
provided enough time for the audience to guess at the lost presence  
of a kiss.

These policies led to some perverse solutions. For instance, movies  
were made about the ‘purity of love’ between a brother and sister,  
yet the song sequences and other movements betrayed the clear  
undercurrent of romantic and even amorous passion. Similarly, during  
the heyday of overt censorship, a few theatres specialised in showing  
specifically the censored portions of foreign films. This became such  
a normal practice that, in a single week in the early 1980s, two  
cinemas in Lahore were running the same movie (Naked Fist) but in two  
different versions – the censored portions in one and the uncensored  
parts in the other.

For the visual arts, the practice of censorship spread to  
unprecedented levels. It was not possible to display female nudes in  
public spaces, so artists relied on private galleries or simply  
showed in their studios or homes. Yet even this was considered  
offensive, and when the Karachi-born Colin David exhibited nude  
paintings at his house in Lahore in 1990, members of the student wing  
of a religious political party invaded the event and destroyed  
several works. In another notable incident, in 1984, Iqbal Hussain  
was not allowed to exhibit his canvases, depicting the prostitutes of  
Lahore , at Alhamra, the state-run gallery; in protest, he put his  
paintings on the roadside near the Alhamra Art Gallery .

The other component of state censorship was, of course, connected to  
political matters. During the late 1970s, after Zulfikar Ali Bhutto  
had been hanged and his Pakistan People’s Party and other political  
groupings had been banned, any reference to political issues – in the  
arts, literature, theatre or media – was considered a criminal  
offence. Thus, paintings that were suspected of having references to  
Bhutto’s hanging or political executions in general were labelled  
objectionable and disallowed from public showings. Likewise, the  
politically minded works of A R Nagori, Ijaz ul Hassan and Salima  
Hashmi were banned from state-sponsored exhibitions, because these  
addressed issues such as military dictatorship, political oppression,  
religious fundamentalism and suppression of women; problems that were  
present in the society, but were not often mentioned in the media or  
on public forums. For example, Nagori made reference to the alliance  
between the mullahs and the military in his painting “Junkies  
2” (1985), and portrayed army oppression in his “Tamgha” (medal) from  
the same period. Likewise, Hashmi’s work “In Spite of Wrath,  
2” (1987), which depicted faceless females, indicated the situation  
of women in the country. Both of these were officially censored.

The earliest incident of censoring visual art in Pakistan , however,  
was probably the rejection of Hassan’s painting titled “ My Lai ”, on  
the well-known Vietnam War massacre, from the national exhibition  
held in 1971 during the reign of another military dictator, General  
Yahya Khan. Ostensibly, the painting was not permitted in the  
exhibition because it was feared that the US government could be  
offended. In reaction, all of the other artists scheduled to take  
part in the exhibition threatened to withdraw their own works, thus  
forcing the authorities to allow “ My Lai ” in the show. Likewise,  
the paintings of Hashmi and Jamila Masood were refused entry in the  
national exhibition of 1981, on the reasoning that the former’s work  
had ‘political content’, while the latter’s canvas had a face  
resembling that of the recently executed Bhutto.

Habitual editing

This kind of censorship ended in August 1988, as Zia’s regime crashed  
along with his Hercules aircraft. But today, his policies have two  
lasting, visible impacts on the art and culture of Pakistan . First,  
they have generated the creation of a small number of private  
galleries (initially one in Lahore, two in Karachi and one in  
Islamabad), because some artists were unable to exhibit their works  
in state-run venues. (A similar phenomenon was witnessed in theatre,  
as a parallel theatre scene flourished in private spaces.) If on the  
one hand these were venues for artists who could not be shown in  
state-controlled spaces, these and other private galleries  
(established later) also encouraged a sense of commercialism in  
Pakistani art. Hence, freedom of expression and freedom of the market  
evolved side by side.

As Zia’s regime continued for 11 years, several groups of artists  
tried to protest the state policies. The last generation of  
politically conscious and active artists has included Jamal Shah and  
Akram Dost Baloch, who, along with a number of others, expressed  
their anger against atrocities through images of tortured individuals  
and contorted, often naked figures. Interestingly, these artists and  
those of the subsequent generation (such as Jamil Baloch and Rashid  
Rana) did not have to face serious problems of censorship or refusal  
to show their works. From the mid-1990s, after all, art had acquired  
a particular status – as precious items that could be collected,  
which also bestowed a power that proved stronger than the state  
intervention. Due to the rising price of works of art, the activity  
of art is today perceived as an important practice in the elitist  
world. Paradoxically, this limitation has provided a freedom from  
censorship, much like the serving of alcohol and watching banned  
movies are possible at Pakistan ’s high-class parties. This new-found  
liberty has reduced art into an exclusive pursuit, however, often  
removing it from the public arena and interest.

Yet one can conclude that the long decade of Zia’s regime, which  
manipulated the concepts of morality and politics, ultimately has had  
a devastating effect on art in Pakistan which impacts to this day.  
The state no longer imposes strict rules regarding political  
subjects, nor is it particularly harsh on issues of morality; but  
many artists have imbibed the habit of self-censorship. Before  
putting their works to the test of official censorship, they start to  
scrutinise and edit their own content, imagery and intention. Hence,  
many artists begin their creative process with an already deep-set  
notion that nudes or overtly political themes might not be allowed  
for display, or that these could cause public anger and state wrath.  
Indeed, these ideas are embedded so strongly in the minds of today’s  
artists in Pakistan that the state’s reaction of tolerating ‘immoral’  
subjects or politically motivated works at times comes as something  
of a surprise – rather than being seen as part and parcel to the  
creative person’s freedom of expression.

Similar to the story by Valenzuela referred to at the beginning, self- 
censorship in post-Zia Pakistan has captured the imagination and  
psyche of too many artists. Today, the state in Pakistan no longer  
demands that artists follow strict orders – the artists are already  
habitually complying with the spirit that would be behind such orders.

(Quddus Mirza is an artist, art teacher, critic and independent  
curator based in Lahore .)

o o o

The New Indian Express, 5 October 2009

Editorial

NO COUNTRY FOR ARTISTES

The censor board is not the only institution which decides on the  
selection and screening of films in India these days. As the  
contretemps over the release of Karan Johar’s new film, Wake up Sid,  
in Mumbai shows, street hoods also play the arbiter in these matters.  
Thankfully, the problem over it was quickly resolved after Johar  
tendered an unqualified apology to Raj Thackeray. Besides, all that  
was needed to restore calm was the deletion of the offensive word,  
Bombay, and the use of Mumbai instead. The incident demonstrated,  
however, the kind of stranglehold which the musclemen of politicians  
continue to exercise over the cultural world. Their depredations are  
not confined to films alone. As M F Husain’s virtually perpetual  
banishment into exile shows, all artistes have to secure their  
permission before exhibiting their works.

The hurdle faced by Wake up Sid cannot but recall a similar incident  
involving Mani Ratnam’s Bombay. Since the film was about the Bombay  
riots of 1992-93, Ratnam not only had to arrange for a special  
screening for Bal Thackeray before the release, but also accepted his  
order to change a scene where the leader of the Hindu mob was shown  
in an apologetic mood after the deaths of innocent people. It wasn’t  
a sentiment which had the Shiv Sena chief’s approval.

It isn’t only in Mumbai that the filmmakers have to be extra careful.  
The filming of Deepa Mehta’s Water on the plight of widows ran into  
trouble in Varanasi following protests by supporters of the BJP and  
the VHP, who claimed that they did not want India to be depicted in  
an unfavourable light before foreign audiences. Saffronites are not  
the only ones, however, who are on the lookout for lapses from what  
they consider to be politically correct. The film, Jo Bole So Nihaal,  
attracted the ire of Sikh extremists in Punjab and adjoining areas  
while the Marxists were deeply unhappy over the filming of City of  
Joy in Kolkata.

Nor is it any use blaming only the parochial regional politicians.  
The Centre, too, did not allow the BBC to film a serial based on  
Salman Rushdie’s Midnight’s Children so as not to offend the Muslims.  
After its ban on The Satanic Verses, the step was not unexpected.  
Surprisingly, even Sri Lanka withdrew its permission to the BBC crew  
to work in the island after an initial agreement. Clearly, artistic  
freedom has no place in the vocabulary of the political class.

o o o

SPOOKS WANT GOVT TO BLOCK SKYPE

by Mohua Chatterjee, TNN 3 October 2009 (The Times of India)

New Delhi: Intelligence agencies have asked the government to  
consider blocking Skype as operators of the popular global VoIP  
(Voice over Internet Protocol) engine are refusing to share the  
encryption code that prevents Indian investigators from intercepting  
conversations of suspected terrorists.

The Cabinet Committee on Security has accepted the recommendation in  
principle but has not set a date for initiating action. The urgency  
to track Skype calls stems from the fact that terrorists -- as the  
26/11 attacks in Mumbai showed -- are increasingly using VoIP  
services. The shift to VoIP has been prompted by the growing ability  
of intelligence agencies to intercept mobile and other calls.

Like the BlackBerry service, VoIP operators send their signals under  
a specific code which makes it difficult for others to decipher.  
Sources said Skype has shared its encryption code with the US, China  
and other governments but is refusing to accept similar Indian requests.

Since Skype is not registered here, Indian authorities have been  
forced to mull the drastic option of blocking its gateways here.  
This, however, may not be entirely effective as Skype can route  
traffic through other service providers. The agencies feel blocking  
the gateways will at least serve as a signal to local service  
providers against carrying traffic from Skype or any other similar  
service provider which does not share the encryption code with the  
government.

Sections 4 and 5 of the Telegraph Act gives government the right to  
grant licence for any kind of telephony and also the right to  
intercept. Last year, government amended Section 69 of the  
Information Technology Act to empower itself to take over servers of  
Net and telecom service providers and demand the encryption code.  
This may still be no remedy against recalcitrant overseas service  
providers who usually have their servers abroad. Last year, the  
government had a similar run-in with Canada's Research in Motion,  
BlackBerry makers and service providers, and the UAE-based satphone  
operator Thuraya.

Indian agencies are also keeping their fingers crossed, not sure  
whether the department of telecom -- with a stake in sectoral growth  
-- would like to lean on VoIP service providers on the issue of  
sharing encryption code. Besides, there's also a feeling that the  
government would be wary of people's response to the snapping of  
Skype. The free service is used by a vast majority of urban middle  
class Indians for communicating with families and friends spread  
across the world.

Last year, TRAI had sent a recommendation (with data from 2007), that  
Skype and Goggle should be asked to pay a licence fee, after being  
brought within the licence regime. However, government turned it down  
saying they were not based in India.

o o o

What steps has Indian govt taken to enable MF Husain to return home?
http://tt.ly/2

_____


[5]  India - Pakistan:

The Tribune
7 October 2009

BREAK THE LOGJAM: THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE TO TALKS
by Kuldip Nayar

As expected, the talks between the Foreign Ministers of India and  
Pakistan have turned out to be a fizzle. One could foresee this when  
the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries did not go beyond the  
26/11 terrorist attacks on Mumbai. Exasperated Pakistan Foreign  
Secretary Salman Bashir was not wrong when he said that the  
relationship could not be brought to “a standstill because of a trial  
or one investigation”.

Yet, public opinion in India is so irritated that any resilience by  
Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna from the stand that the 26/11 culprits  
must be brought to book before any dialogue would have evoked uproar  
and a feeling of let-down. Even otherwise, the Congress-led Manmohan  
Singh government could not afford to face any understanding that  
would have even remotely concurred with the delay in the 26/11 case,  
when the Assembly elections are due in Maharashtra and Haryana.

At the back of Krishna’s mind must also have been the stringent  
criticism over the interpretation of a joint statement at Sharm-el- 
Sheikh. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, a signatory to the statement  
along with Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Reza Gilani, had to explain  
to Parliament what he meant by separating terrorism from the talks  
was that the 26/11 terrorists should be prosecuted before the  
resumption of a composite dialogue. Pakistan was disappointed because  
it believed that the talks would no more be dependent on other  
differences between the two countries.

Anyone who has followed the India-Pakistan relationship knows how  
domestic compulsions on both sides are so strong that the rulers  
cannot move forward without treading on somebody’s toes in their  
respective country. And the Sharm-el-Sheikh statement has become a  
casualty because of that. In fact, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood  
Qureshi may have, unwittingly, closed the back channel by offering it  
before he met Krishna. These are delicate matters which become a  
prestige issue if they have the glare of publicity.

The situation has become more intractable because India’s litmus test  
is the extent to which Pakistan is willing to take action against  
Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, head of Lashkar-e-Toiba/Jamaat-ud Dawa, who is  
considered an arch planner and executer of the 26/11 attacks. Yet,  
the dossier against Hafiz Saeed, as Pakistan has said repeatedly, is  
not strong enough to get him punished at the court of law. New Delhi,  
which sent six dossiers, has reportedly said that it has forwarded  
Pakistan enough material to book Hafiz Saeed. Since Islamabad has its  
reservations why not make the dossiers public? There is no secrecy  
about them. New Delhi has shared them with 16 countries apart from  
Pakistan. The people would themselves judge how far Hafiz Saeed is  
involved in the charges levelled against him.

The deadlock once again indicates the loss of confidence in each  
other. But this is the story of last 62 years. The two countries have  
stuck to their positions which feed the ego of their government and  
all those who believe that there is no harm in “ignoring an  
impossible neighbour”. Such situations, as has been seen in the past,  
have only helped the terrorists. They thrive in the atmosphere of non- 
rapprochement. And, it is a pity that because of mistrust against  
each other, they find local help to sustain their nefarious  
activities. Since the patience is exhausted on both sides, one fears  
that even a small incident of terrorism may be blown up beyond  
proportions to exacerbate the situation still further.

A book, entitled The Clinton Tapes, has rightly pointed out the  
casual manner in which Indians and Pakistanis spoke of a nuclear war  
scenario. According to the author, “a doomsday nuclear volley would  
kill 300 to 500 million Indians while annihilating all 120 million  
Pakistanis”.

There is no alternative to the talks. They may well begin with the  
26/11 attacks on top of the agenda and go on to other subjects, but  
the meeting should be attended by the top military brass and the  
intelligence chiefs in both the countries.

They are as much partners to the situation that obtains as  
bureaucrats and political leaders. Without Pakistan army’s  
participation, the talks would be like Hamlet without the Prince of  
Denmark. No doubt, this does dilute the importance of elected  
government at Islamabad, but such is the reality in Pakistan. Despite  
the numerous acts of omission and commission, the army is fully  
rehabilitated in the minds of Pakistanis and they have forgotten the  
hard days of General Pervez Musharraf.

New Delhi must realise that the fear of India is one of the big  
factors which give shape to Pakistan’s policies. In fact, from day  
one, I have heard even in top quarters at Islamabad that India has  
not reconciled to the creation of Pakistan. We can argue that there  
should be no such fears till the cows come home, but we cannot  
completely eliminate that fear.

Foreign Minister Qureshi has claimed after his meeting with the  
Indian Foreign Minister that they had discussed Kashmir, water and  
other related matters. Although the Indian media has ignored  
Qureshi’s press conference, the two-hour meeting would not have been  
confined to the 26/11 and Hafiz Saeed, even if the two Foreign  
Ministers were discussing the subject threadbare. Even a cursory  
discussion on Kashmir or the water issue must have taken place,  
giving an insight into the thinking at New Delhi and Islamabad.  
Krishna’s observation that the talks had been “candid and useful”  
says a lot.

The point to consider for Islamabad is that Prime Minister Manmohan  
Singh, a staunch supporter of the process to normalise relations with  
Pakistan, has said: “The only obstacle is that Pakistan should give  
up its old attitude regarding the use of terror as an instrument of  
state policy.” How does Pakistan disabuse Manmohan Singh on this  
subject?

In the meanwhile, Islamabad would do well to invite an all-party  
delegation of Indian MPs to visit the country to see for themselves  
that Pakistan was not conspiring against its neighbour. Even  
otherwise, the meeting of Indian MPs with their counterparts and  
others may provide a key to the lock which does not look like opening.


_____


[6]   India: Stop Militarisation and Violence - Appeals and  
Statements by Citizens Groups

APPEAL BY CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR A CEASEFIRE AND PEACE TALKS BETWEEN  
GOVT. AND MAOISTS
http://www.sacw.net/article1165.html

2nd October 2009, Gandhi Jayanti

We are deeply concerned that the Government of India might use air  
power against its own citizens. We condemn violence in all its forms,  
and by all parties, and are of the strong opinion that no resolution  
of any issue can be achieved through military means. There must be  
dialogue so that the basic issues that affect citizens such as food,  
health, education, and employment can be addressed. Above all, there  
can be no peace without justice.

We demand a ceasefire between the Government of India, the respective  
state governments and the CPI (Maoist), and peace talks. The  
Government must initiate talks. The Maoists must respond. We, as  
citizens and concerned people are willing to help in whatever way  
possible.

Justice Rajendra Sachar, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL)

Medha Patkar, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM)

Chittaranjan Singh, PUCL Uttar Pradesh

Kavita Srivastava, PUCL Rajasthan

Anil Chaudhury, Peace and Insaf

Bhupinder Singh Rawat, Jan Sangharsh Vahini

Gabrielle Dietrich, NAPM

Nandini Sundar, Campaign for Peace and Justice in Chhattisgarh (CPJC)

Sukla Sen, Ekta (Committee for Communal Amity)

Dr S P Udayakumar, anti-nuclear activist

o o o

http://www.sacw.net/article1166.html

6 October 2009

PUCL STATEMENT ON THE FIGHT BETWEEN STATE AND MAOISTS

PUCL watches with pain the fight between security forces and Maoists  
in some parts of Chattissgarh.  While it is a clear case of war  
against one’s own people by the state, Maoists too with adoption of  
violent means of struggle has undermined the liberal and democratic  
spirit of the Indian Constitution.  While innocent civilian are  
losing lives, the ongoing mindless fight between the two parties is a  
clear case of impasse in which there is and will be no winner.

PUCL believes that the Indian state must address the root causes of  
the social and economic conditions that breed insurgency like  
situation where in a group of people is compelled to take arms  
against the state.  Clearly this kind of insurgency breeds because of  
violation of basic human rights of the people. The mindless vested  
class centric development and consequent displacement and  
impoverishment of tribals must stop. The tribals must get adequate  
opportunities for means livelihood, education and health.  On the  
other hand the Maoist must desist from using violent means of  
struggle that causes severe misery and deaths of the tribals on whose  
name they unleash the violence in turn harming the hapless innocent  
people.  One must bear in mind that in a democratic country the ends  
achieved through the violence means are neither desirable nor  
lasting.  The only way for a harmonious solution of the present  
deadlock is negotiations between the two parties. The Indian  
government must reverse its stand of crushing Maoist through military  
means and must engage them in a dialogue.

Now that Indian state has captured one of the senior ideologue of the  
insurgent groups, PUCL appeals to the government of India that  
channels of negations between the two parties must be explored and an  
honourable solution to the ongoing violent struggle be sought to the  
mutual satisfaction of the both parties. Maoist must also come  
forward and negotiate with the government for legitimate rights of  
the downtrodden people for whom they supposedly are fighting.

Pushkar Raj
General Secretary, PUCL

o o o

Letter to the Editor, Economic and Political Weekly

‘VICTIMS OF THE HOME MINISTRY’?
  by Anand Chakravarti , Arundhati Roy , Asad Zaidi , K Seshachary ,  
Nandini Sundar , and Others
http://www.epw.in/epw/uploads/articles/14029.pdf

o o o

CONDEMN STRONGLY THE MALICIOUS MEDIA TRIAL OF CHHATRADHAR MAHATO!
by Committee For The Release of Political Prisoners
http://www.sacw.net/article1164.html

____


[7] AFGHAN WAR'S BLOWBACK FOR INDIA'S CHILDREN?

by J. Sri Raman (truthout.org,  27 August 2009)

     Children born with abnormally enlarged or small heads,  
disproportionately short arms and legs, cerebral palsy, Down  
syndrome, and other complications. Increasing instances of  
infertility among women. A spurt in cases of lung cancer and  
intestinal ulcer.

     Punjab, a state in India bordering Pakistan, has reason to be  
concerned about this scary picture emerging from surveys recently  
carried out in some of its areas. Not only Punjab, however.

     According to a section of the researchers particularly concerned  
with the cases of birth deformities, Punjab may be paying with the  
health of its people for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

     More precisely, depleted uranium reportedly used in wars in  
these countries may be the cause of the deformities and disorders on  
the rise in India's northwestern state, according to a team based in  
the city of Faridkot.

     Winds from Afghanistan may have carried to the state a large  
quantity of highly toxic uranium, which has contaminated water and  
increased uranium in bodies to dangerous levels. This apprehension  
was raised at least five months ago by the team of the Baba Farid  
Center for Special Children, a nongovernmental organization (NGO),  
where some of the affected kids have been undergoing treatment.

     In what would appear to be a scandalously successful cover-up,  
the question raised by the team has been kept away from major  
headlines in the Indian and international media, with New Delhi  
seeing no need even to take cognizance of it.

     In a downplayed report, which the most prominent media did not  
consider deserving of better display, Dr. Pritpal Singh, in charge of  
the Faridkot clinic, said the number of affected children had risen  
"dramatically in the past six or seven years." Operation Enduring  
Freedom in Afghanistan was launched on October 7, 2001.

     The use of DU weapons in the Iraq war, started on March 20,  
2003, may also have contributed to the tragic drama in Punjab,  
according to the team. The radioactive uranium, released in such  
cases, gets mixed in soil, air and water within a large radius. Areas  
within 1,000 miles from the place where the uranium is released can  
get affected. Parts of Iraq close to Iran fall within that distance.  
Afghanistan is just over 330 miles away from India's Punjab.

     Evidently, children of Pakistan, which occupies this distance,  
have also been exposed to the same danger. So are their counterparts  
in areas India adjoining Punjab.

     DU - defined as uranium containing a smaller percentage of  
uranium-235 than the 0.7 percent found in natural uranium - has found  
several military uses. Because of its high density, it is used in  
tank armor, sandwiched between sheets of steel armor plate. It is  
also used in armor-piercing, incendiary ammunition. It has also been  
used, above all, to destroy bunkers and tanks.

     According to US radiation specialist Leuren Moret, "DU weaponry  
largely meets the definition of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD)."  
In a newspaper article in 2005, she wrote: "Since 1991, the US has  
released the radioactive atomicity (through DU weapons) equivalent of  
at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere. That is  
10 times the amount released during atmospheric testing which was the  
equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs. The US has permanently  
contaminated the global atmosphere with radioactive pollution having  
a half-life of 2.5 billion years." She also described DU weapons as  
"dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets."

     Experts estimate that 1,000 tonnes of uranium is already present  
in the Iraq-Iran region and Afghanistan. People from these areas have  
been found to have 100 times more uranium in their urine compared to  
those from other areas.

     The Faridkot center sent hair samples of 149 children - 116  
below the age of 12 - to the laboratory of the Micro Trace Minerals  
in Germany in June 2008. The results came back in February 2009. The  
samples of children below 12 years revealed 82 percent of uranium and  
those of the rest, 87 percent. Singh found the results "astonishing  
as there is no atomic plant near Punjab."

     An investigation team of the Observer (London) has just days ago  
confirmed the "dramatic rise in birth defects, physical and mental  
abnormalities, and cancers" in the state. The team, however, has  
linked the uranium contamination to ash from the region's coal-fired  
power stations.

     In a phone call with Truthout, Singh stressed that the matter  
called for a "scientific inquiry," which the Observer investigation  
was not claimed to be. He pointed out that there were complaints of  
such consequences from the DU weapons in other places.

     On May 1, 2008, the One Planet program of the BBC World Service  
quoted doctors in Kabul and Kandahar saying that the incidence of  
birth defects, including premature births and malformations, had  
doubled in under two years. Among the malformations were "neural tube  
defects and malformation of limbs; for example, the head is smaller  
than normal, or the head is larger than normal, or there is a big  
mass on the back of the baby."

     Though the George Bush regime protested innocence, the program  
cited the Canada-based Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) as  
saying that the cause might be depleted uranium. In 2002 and 2003,  
the center carried out analyses of urine from Afghans. In some, it  
found levels of uranium hundreds of times greater than in Gulf War  
veterans.

     As for Iraq, shockwaves were sent across the world by  
disclosures of a large-scale rise in children's deformities and  
deaths in Fallujah after two massive bombing campaigns in 2004. In  
November 2005, the Pentagon was forced to admit the use of white  
phosphorous and DU ammunition during these campaigns.

     Deafening is the silence of New Delhi on the possible  
consequences of the use of DU weapons in a war at India's doorstep.  
Does the Bush-built "strategic partnership" on South Asia demand  
callous indifference to the plight of deformed and dying children in  
Punjab?

A freelance journalist and a peace activist in India, J. Sri Raman is  
the author of "Flashpoint" (Common Courage Press, USA). He is a  
regular contributor to Truthout.


_____



[8]  Traditional Values / Women's Rights:

(i)  A resolution tabled by Russia seeking to promote “traditional  
values” as a basis for human rights passes at the current session of  
the UN Human Rights Council

"… Many speakers expressed their opposition to the draft resolution  
on traditional values, which was being presented under this agenda  
item, saying it was ironic since the Vienna Declaration and Programme  
of Action actually imposed upon States a positive obligation to work  
towards the elimination of the harmful effects of certain traditional  
or customary practices, cultural prejudices and religious extremism?  
It was said that the draft resolution did nothing to enhance respect  
for human rights, but achieved quite the opposite. It was divisive;  
it was polarising; and it sought to affirm a concept often used to  
justify human rights violations. This draft resolution did not  
acknowledge that many harmful practices, which constituted human  
rights violations, were justified by invoking traditional values. It  
was feared that this draft resolution would be the start of an  
initiative that would undermine international human rights standards."

http://www.siawi.org/article965.html

o o o

(ii)

The Guardian
6 October 2009

WOMEN WHO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

In their struggle, Iranian women share the same quest for truth that  
has driven recipients of the Anna Politkovskaya award

by Azar Nafisi

When I first read Anna Politkovskaya, I was almost startled by her no- 
nonsense prose, her preoccupation with facts, whether they were about  
Russia's crimes in Chechnya or Vladimir Putin and corruption in the  
prime minister's regime, brutality and boorishness against Russian  
citizens or even the shortcomings of the Russian people whose rights  
she so ardently defended. She spared no one, not even her allies. The  
poetry of her prose was matched by her passion for truth. Her facts  
were lovingly gathered and made to march, leading us to the terrible  
truth of the realities she revealed. And it was that single-minded  
commitment to truth, and her demand for justice, that made her so  
dangerous to the tyrants in her country and inconvenient to leaders  
of western democracies.

This love for truth links her to the former recipients of the Raw in  
War Anna Politkovskaya award, Natalia Estermirova, and Malalai Joya,  
and this year's recipient – to be announced this evening – they come  
from different backgrounds and nationalities and speak different  
languages, yet they share a universal language that is the basis of  
both freedom and justice. Once we know of atrocities we cannot remain  
silent, and knowledge inevitably leads to an urge to protect the  
innocent. These women have recognised that their own fight for  
freedom would be meaningless without empathy for others and that the  
best guarantee of their security and freedom lies in a guarantee of  
security and freedom of others.

The award is given each year in the spirit of that common humanity,  
one for which Politkovskaya and the first recipient of the award in  
her name, Estermirova, gave their lives, and in celebrating those  
lives while mourning their untimely deaths we have to acknowledge  
both their love of truth and their empathy for others.

Women in the country of my birth, Iran, are great examples of the  
universality of this urge. For more than 30 years the Islamic regime  
and its apologists have tried to dismiss women's struggle in Iran as  
part of a western ploy. They claim that the repressive laws against  
Iranian women are part of their Islamic and Iranian heritage. Thus  
the regime has deprived Iranian women not just of their present  
rights, but also of their history and their past. The regime's  
victims are not only atheists, secularists, or people of other  
religions and faiths, but also Muslims, those whose interpretation of  
their religion is based on different principles, those who disagree  
with the Islamic Republic's views have been punished and deprived of  
their most basic rights.

Those in the west who dismiss the repressiveness of laws against  
women in countries like Iran, no matter how benign their intentions,  
present a condescending view not just of the religion but also of  
women living in Muslim majority countries, as if the desire for  
choice and happiness is the monopoly of women in the west. After all,  
at the start of the last century in no western democracy did women  
have the right to vote. In the US and Europe women were told that  
according to the Bible women's place should be at home, blue  
stockings were mocked and called unfeminine and women had to throw  
themselves in front of king's horses to attract attention to their  
plight. Around the same time, women in Egypt, Iran, Turkey and other  
Muslim countries were fighting for essentially the same rights. At  
the heart of all those struggles then as well as now was the right of  
a woman to choose. For Iranian women the issue is not religion, but  
the fact that no power, no state should dictate to its citizens how  
to worship and connect to their God. Islam, like all other religions,  
has many interpretations and it should not be used – in this case  
abused – as a political ideology. Women in Iran are proving once more  
that human rights recognise no boundaries and are not exclusive to  
certain societies. We should be reminded of the Noble laureate Shirin  
Ebadi, when she said that she was a Muslim and she believed in human  
rights.

Iranian women today have many models from their own past to learn  
from. At the start of 20th century an American, Morgan Shuster, in  
his book The Strangling of Persia (1912) claimed that Iranian women  
in a matter of years had made leaps of centuries and that in some  
ways they had been far ahead of their western sisters. At the time of  
the Islamic revolution, women had been active in all walks of life,  
there were two women ministers, one a minister of women's affairs.  
What made Iranian women join the protests against the shah was not a  
desire to abdicate the rights they had fought for over a century but  
to gain the right to political freedom. Their rights were not  
something that a shah had granted to them to be taken away by an  
ayatollah. And that is why from the very start Iranian women  
protested at the repressive laws imposed by the Islamic regime,  
pouring out in hundreds of thousands into the streets shouting that  
freedom is neither eastern nor western but global.

The recent events in Iran negate the regime's claims that women in  
Iran approve of its repressive laws. For more than 30 years, female  
activists have fought to change these laws. Perhaps the best example  
of this struggle and its centrality to the fight for pluralism and  
democracy in Iran is that of the women working for the One Million  
Signatures campaign against Iran's repressive laws. These women,  
without using violence or rhetoric, have been struggling for years to  
change the laws oppressing women. They have proved that Iranian women  
no matter what their beliefs and views share the same plight, that  
the laws are as effective against the traditional as they are against  
the modern secular women, creating a sense of kinship and solidarity  
between women. Iranian women have become canaries in the mines, the  
standard against which we can measure the degree of freedom in that  
society. The recent demonstrations broke the Islamic regime's  
mythology surrounding Iranian women, and forced the world to see them  
as they are: vital, various, strong and courageous. It also  
demonstrated how central their aspirations are to the democratic  
movement in Iran. Now a vibrant and beautiful young girl, Neda Agha- 
Soltan, and not the men who rule over Iran has become a symbol of  
Iranian people's fight for democracy and pluralism. Her murder, like  
those of Politkovskaya and Estermirova, gives the lie to the claims  
of those who vainly tried to silence them, and reminds the rest of us  
that we neither should or can evade the truth and its consequences.


_____

[9] Announcements:

(i)  Seminar On Police Reforms

A seminar on Police Reforms and Submit citizen letters to the CJI/CM
on Thursday is being organized on 8th October 2009 at 5:00 PM
at Press Club, Mahapalika Marg, Azaad Maidan [Bombay]

Speakers

Y.P. Singh, Ex IPS officer
and Mihir Desai, High Court Advocate & Member Governing Council of ICHRL
and Ms Navaz Kotwal, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.
will enlighten us with their knowledge.

Seminar will begin on Schedule and we desire interactive session soon  
after.

You all are earnestly invited to participate in this seminar along  
with your interested friends.

Debi Goenka
Salil Rameshchandra

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

S o u t h      A s i a      C i t i z e n s      W i r e
Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. An offshoot of South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/

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