SACW Jan 22, 2011 | Taliban revisionism / Sri Lanka: ethnic nationalism / Fascism in Pakistan / India: RSS Fears Terror Tag ; Punish violence against women / US: Roe vs Wade anniversary

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire -  Dispatch No. 2702 - January 22, 2011
From: sacw.net

[1] Afghanistan: Afghan Women Bemoan Rights Pledges (Mina Habeeb)
    - Who benefits from Taliban revisionism? (Rachel Reid)
[2]  Rising ethnic nationalism in Sri Lanka targets minorities for abuse – new report
[3]  Pakistan awaiting the clerical tsunami: Pervez Hoodbhoy (interviewed by Farooq Sulehria)
[4]  India: RSS Wary of Terrorist Tag (Bharat Bhushan)
[5]  India: An eleven-year shadow (Syeda Hameed)
[6]  India: Amid threats, M.F. Husain's works removed, then remounted (Rana Siddiqui Zaman)
[7] USA: On Roe v. Wade's Anniversary: Reflect on the Consequences of Violent Rhetoric on Abortion Providers

---------

[1] Afghanistan:

Source: Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR)
Date: 19 Jan 2011

AFGHAN WOMEN BEMOAN RIGHTS PLEDGES
Women continue to face abuse at the hands of their husbands despite government promises to protect them.

by Mina Habeeb - Afghanistan

ARR Issue 387, 19 Jan 11

They sit patiently in the lobby of the directorate of women's rights at the women's ministry, their sad, bruised faces testimony to the years of ill-treatment and beatings they have been forced to endure.

One of the women, Marina, 20, told this IWPR reporter that her family married her off when she was 14 to a drug-addict twice her age. As she related her story, a large tear appeared in her eye and dropped down her bony cheek. She said that soon after her marriage, her husband started beating her, suspicious that she was having an affair with her brother- and father-in-law.

"Every day and night, I am beaten and there is no one to support me. That is why I have turned to the directorate, to try to help me get a divorce from my husband," she said.

But her hopes of getting help are fading, as she complains that she's been coming here on a daily basis and just gets passed from one office to another.

Since the fall of the Taleban, more and more women have been reclaiming the legal right to initiate divorce that they always had but were too afraid to exercise under the mujahedin and Taleban regimes.

That fear, however, remains, for despite domestic abuse being grounds for a separation, many wives who've been subjected to violence are reluctant to take their cases to the family courts because they're worried about retribution from their husband and his family or cannot contemplate the social ostracism and penury they will face.

After the collapse of the Taleban, there was much talk about the need to improve women's rights and various organisations and institutions were set up with the task of doing so, most notably the women's affairs ministry. But tens years on, there is not much to show for all these efforts, with violence against women still on an upward curve.

Late last year, President Hamid Karzai, addressing a meeting of tribal elders, urged them to do their utmost to eradicate the scourge.

"I hope that a young girl will not be married against her will. Let women have an education or at least learn to read and write, and take actions in every possible way against violence," he said, but his government shows little or no willingness to introduce legislation outlawing violence against women.

Over the last five years, efforts to safeguard women's rights have been strongly resisted by the male-dominated parliament.

Shin Karokhel, the representative of Ningrahar province in parliament, is highly critical of the discriminatory attitudes towards women among her male colleagues, "Whenever we tried to talk about women and their rights we would face harsh reactions from the male legislators. When there's such discrimination in the only legislative body in the country, where educated people come together, we cannot complain about the behaviour of ordinary people."

Mirwais Yassini, the deputy parliamentary speaker, agreed with Karokhel, saying, "It is very true that in the past five years, parliament has fallen short with regard to women in the country. I accept that with every passing day, the violence against women spreads ten-fold which has caused all of us to be worried. I promise that in the next parliament I will personally work on this issue."

The lack of progress comes despite support from some Islamic scholars for legislation that would punish the perpetrators of domestic violence.

Karamatullah Sediqi, the head of Islamic studies research at the ministry of religious affairs, told IWPR, "Some of our countrymen are committing violence against women because of their ignorance and lack of knowledge of Islam. Women are mothers, sisters and wives and have a special place in Islam and violence against them is prohibited by Islam."

Afghan human rights organisations say that violence against women has increased by 50 per cent over the last year.

Suraya SubhRang, from the Independent Commission of the Human Rights, told IWPR, that in the past 9 months, there have been 2000 cases of domestic abuse registered and documented across the country, with many of the victims setting themselves alight in desperation.

She said that four years ago, the commission put forward plans for the setting up of a network of mental health clinics, family consultancy centres and legal consultants in various parts of Afghanistan to help women experiencing domestic abuse, but the government has yet to make a decision on the proposal.

"Instead of committing suicide or setting themselves alight, women could be referred to these centres for help," she said.

Mohammad Fazil, an official in the burns unit of Istiqlal Hospital in Kabul, says that in the past 9 months, they've treated 16 women with severe burns caused by self-immolation – all of whom subsequently died of their wounds.

But according to the women's affairs ministry, there are many more cases of women setting fire to themselves than is actually documented by government or non-governmental organisations because the victims' relatives are reluctant to come forward, concerned that family honour will be tarnished.

Women's activists are angered by the government's attitude to the problem. They say that rather than doing anything, it hands important positions to people linked to human rights abuses, including violence towards women.

Selai Ghafar, the head of the NGO Humanitarian Assistance for the Women and Children of Afghanistan, which over the last year has helped 150 female victims of domestic violence, said, "In the government of Afghanistan, key posts have been given to those who have a record of discrimination and human rights violations."

Ordinary women, meanwhile, say they are fed up with what they describe as the government's empty promises to protect them from abuse.

Nahid, 30, from Kabul, claims the authorities have spent a fortune on expensive initiatives aimed at tackling the problem, but there's little to show for it.

"Over the past 10 years, conferences, workshops, on which hundreds of millions of dollars were spent, have not shown any positive impact on the lives of the women. The rights of women became a business, so there's not much trust left. In ten years, we have not seen one person punished for violence against women or any law to stop it," she said.

Mina Habeeb is an IWPR trainee.

o o o

The Guardian, 21 January 2011

WHO BENEFITS FROM TALIBAN REVISIONISM?

The Afghan government is trying to whitewash the Taliban’s image by claiming it no longer opposes education for girls

by Rachel Reid

Farooq Wardmak, the Afghan education minister and a key ally of President Hamid Karzai, claims that the Taliban leadership no longer opposes education for girls. The question is not whether this claim is true – teachers and students who continue to be terrorised by Taliban attacks would find it laughable – but why a senior Afghan official would engage in such misinformation.

The education ministry’s own statistics show that 20 schools were bombed or burned down between March and October 2010. At least 126 students and teachers were killed in the same period – an increase from the previous year. It’s hard to know how many of these attacks were carried out by the Taliban, but the evidence in many cases points in their direction.

Attacks are often preceded by a threatening "night letter" like this one, sent last year to a school in Kunduz, in the north:

"You were already informed by us to close the school and not mislead the pure and innocent girls under this non-Muslim government … This is the last warning to close the school immediately … If you remain in the province, remember that you along with your family will be eliminated. Just wait for your death."

In another case, a female teacher received a letter that said:

"We Taliban warn you to stop working, otherwise we will take your life away. We will kill you in such a harsh way that no woman has so far been killed in that manner. This will be a good lesson for those women like you who are working."

Another teacher quit after receiving a letter with a Taliban insignia in October 2009:

"We warn you to leave your job as a teacher as soon as possible, otherwise we will cut the heads off your children and we shall set fire to your daughter."

When I showed some of these letters to Wardak last July, he passed his eyes over them briefly, then cast them aside, saying: "If we had time I could explain to you how I know that this is the handwriting of Pakistanis, not Afghans." He went on to question whether Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader, really exists. This was a startling lesson in revisionism about the Taliban.

Today, just as when the Taliban were in power pre-9/11, some rural communities are able to negotiate with them to stop attacks on education. Afghan parents want their children educated, including their daughters, and fight for it, even when it puts them at risk. But the Taliban usually draws the line at educating girls over about age 10, when puberty and demands to segregate the sexes take precedence. And not all attacks are about gender. Many schools and teachers are attacked as visible agents of the government in small rural communities or as symbols of western influence and teaching.

When in power the Taliban claimed that girls were being denied education only because of scant resources, a claim that Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, the Taliban’s former ambassador to Pakistan, recently repeated. However, when I interviewed Mullah Zaeef about attacks on education several years ago, he dismissed Human Rights Watch’s findings of systematic attacks as a fabrication.

Wardak plays down Taliban attacks on women and girls because he has become a leading government proponent of the need for reconciliation with the Taliban. It suits his agenda to whitewash continuing Taliban crimes. And, like many Afghan politicians, he prefers the conspiracy claims – that the Taliban are an entirely Pakistani creation, rather than confronting the messy reality of a home-grown movement that is as much a product of Afghan reality as of Pakistan’s intelligence agency.

There is a risk that some politicians in the UK, US and elsewhere, nervous about mounting casualties and dwindling public support for the war in Afghanistan, will seize on such claims. Governments seeking an exit strategy may also find it convenient to play down Taliban abuses against women and girls.

While most women in Afghanistan desperately want peace, they don’t want a peace deal that is blind to the price they may pay. That requires realism about the nature of the insurgency. Although a comprehensive peace deal seems distant for now, small local deals are already taking place under the name of "reintegration" of Taliban fighters, with the promise of jobs and other enticements. But there is no vetting system to stop a commander who is notorious for attacking girls’ education from becoming a local security chief, or even a district governor, with all the obvious risks to women and girls.

Instead of trying to soften the image of a group synonymous with the oppression of women and girls, the education minister should focus on increasing opportunities for their schooling, and on protecting girls’ education from attack. Attacking schools is a war crime and should never be glossed over. Those who threaten, bomb and burn down schools should instead be held to account.

____


[2]   RISING ETHNIC NATIONALISM IN SRI LANKA TARGETS MINORITIES FOR ABUSE – NEW REPORT

19 January 2011

Human rights violations in Sri Lanka continue unabated against ethnic Tamils and Muslims who fear an increasingly nationalist government, a new report by Minority Rights Group International says.

Nearly two years after the end of the war, minorities face daily repression and marginalisation in politics and development policies, particularly in the country's north and east, documents the report.

The report titled ‘No war, no peace: the denial of minority rights and justice in Sri Lanka’ includes groundbreaking first-hand research from the north and east of the country, including areas that international and national media and NGOs have limited access to.

‘Despite the end of the war, many Tamil and Muslim minorities in Sri Lanka continue to live in fear, ’ says Mark Lattimer, Executive Director of MRG.

The report quotes minority political leaders and activists who express serious fear of a state based on Sinhala hegemony. It documents cases of land in traditional Tamil and Muslim areas being seized by military and civilian authorities and used for the construction of everything from military encampments and a power plant to hotels and leisure facilities. The report also expresses concerns by minority activists at the sudden proliferation of Buddhist temples and religious symbols in Tamil and Muslim areas, which they argue is politically sponsored.

In 2009 the Sri Lankan government declared that the country’s 30 year conflict was over after it successfully defeated the Tamil Tiger rebels who had been fighting for a separate homeland for ethnic Tamils. In the immediate aftermath of the war the country faced a huge humanitarian crisis with more than 250,000 people displaced and interned in camps for months.

The report says that while many of those displaced in the last stages of fighting have been moved out of the camps, the resettlement process has not taken place according to international standards. It also stresses the need for the government to provide for the return and resettlement of over 200,000 ‘old displaced’, who lost their homes in earlier stages of fighting. This includes a substantial number of Muslims who were forcibly displaced by the Tigers from the north in 1990.

‘The situation in the resettlement areas in the north and east is very worrying, particularly as international and national media and NGOs have restricted access. There is a high level of militarisation and state control over freedom of movement and association, with local women vulnerable to sexual abuse and harassment,’ says Lattimer.

The report argues that the government is doing little to resolve some of the original minority grievances that led to the conflict, such as violations of physical integrity including torture and enforced disappearances, lack of political autonomy and denial of language rights.

‘The government has made little mention of greater political autonomy for minorities which has always been a key demand of Tamils and Muslims. In fact, the government is now proposing legislation to change the electoral system in a way that threatens to decrease their political representation,’ Lattimer adds.

The report makes a series of recommendations to the Sri Lankan government including asking for a published policy to address minority rights issues, the resumption of all-party negotiations aimed at reaching an agreement on political representation and governance for minorities, and the development of an impartial and credible mechanism for justice and reconciliation in the country.

‘We urge the Sri Lankan government not to lose the opportunity to bring in a lasting peace that can be enjoyed by all communities in Sri Lanka. Justice, reconciliation and human rights protection are essential for peace to become a reality for all,’ Lattimer says.
Notes to the editor

    * The full report ‘No war, no peace: the denial of minority rights and justice in Sri Lanka’ will be made available on www.minorityrights.org/?lid=10458 on 19 January 2011.
    * Minority Rights Group International (MRG) is a non-governmental organisation working to secure the rights of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and indigenous peoples worldwide.
    * Interview opportunities are available with Mark Lattimer and other MRG Sri Lanka experts.


For further information or to arrange interviews please contact:

MRG Press Office in London
T: +44 207 4224205

M: +44 7870596863

____


[3]  Pakistan :

Viewpoint, January 21, 2011

PAKISTAN - AWAITING THE CLERICAL TSUNAMI 

Pervez Hoodbhoy interviewed by Farooq Sulehria

Taseer’s assassin is a Barelvi Muslim belonging to the Dawat-e-Islami, and 500 clerics of this faith supported his action. Most of these mullahs are part of the Sunni Tehreek and are supposedly anti-Taliban moderates. Those who claim that Pakistan’s silent majority is fundamentally secular and tolerant may be clutching at straws

On January 4, Salman Taseer, governor of Pakistan’s largest province, was gunned down by his own security guard, Mumtaz Qadri. Salman Taseer was campaigning to reform country’s blasphemy laws. His advocacy to repeal these laws, seen as a threat to religious minorities, invited clerical wrath. Mullahs issued fatwas and announced prize money on his head. Mumtaz Qadri, a religious fanatic declared unsuitable by police department for VIP duties, was deputed along Taseer’s security details. A lapse? Given the influence of extremist in country’s security apparatus, such a slip would indeed be intriguing. In his confession, the assassin said he was inspired by a mullah but did it on his own. Incidentally, his fellow guards on duty did not react until he had finished Taseer off. He peacefully surrendered. Ever since the media, mullahs and the Right have made a hero out of him. The clergy has bestowed upon him the religious honorific of Ghazi (Conqueror). The government has announced not to touch the controversial blasphemy laws. In an interview with Viewpoint, Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy discusses the situation in Pakistan. Hoodbhoy received his undergraduate and PhD degrees from MIT and has been teaching nuclear and high-energy physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad for 37 years. He also lectures at US universities and laboratories, and is a frequent commentator, on Pakistani TV channels as well as international media outlets, on various social and political issues. Excerpts:

The murder of Governor Salman Taseer, who opposed Pakistan’s blasphemy law, has shocked the world. But in Pakistan the killer has become a hero for a sizeable section of society. Why?

In a society dominated by traditional religious values, heroism often means committing some violent and self-destructive act for preserving honor. Although Governor Taseer was not accused of blasphemy, his crime was to seek presidential pardon for an illiterate peasant Christian woman accused of blasphemy by some Muslim neighbours. Taseer’s intervention clearly crossed the current limits of toleration. With no party support, he went at it alone.

Malik Mumtaz Qadri – the official security guard who pumped 22 bullets into the man he was deputed to protect – is not the first such hero. The 19-year old illiterate who killed the author of the book “Rangeela Rasool” in the 1920’s, and was then executed by the British, was held in the highest esteem by the founders of Pakistan, Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Ali Jinnah. It is reported that Iqbal, regarded as Islam’s pre-eminent 20th century philosopher, placed the body in the grave with tears in his eyes and said: "This young man left us, the educated men, behind." Ghazi Ilm-e-Deen is venerated by a mausoleum over his grave in Lahore.

In his court testimony, Taseer’s assassin proudly declared that he was executing Allah’s will. Hundreds of lawyers – made famous by the Black Coat Revolution that restored Pakistan’s Chief Justice – showered him with rose petals while he was in police custody. Two hundred lawyers signed a pledge vowing to defend him for free. Significantly, Qadri is a Barelvi Muslim belonging to the Dawat-e-Islami, and 500 clerics of this faith supported his action in a joint declaration. They said that those who sympathized with Taseer deserved similar punishment.

Significantly most of these mullahs are part of the Sunni Tehreek and are supposedly anti-Taliban moderates. Indeed, one of their leaders, Maulana Sarfaraz Naeemi, was blown up by a Taliban suicide bomber in June 2009 after he spoke out against suicide bombings. But now these “moderates” have joined hands with their attackers. Jointly they rule Pakistan’s streets today, while a cowardly and morally bankrupt government cringes and caves in to their every demand.

Pakistani voters have always voted for secular-leaning parties but it appears that today the religious parties actually represent popular discourse. Do you concur?

Yes, I do. Those who claim that Pakistan’s silent majority is fundamentally secular and tolerant may be clutching at straws. They argue that the religious parties don’t get the popular vote and so cannot really be popular. But this is wishful thinking. The mullah parties are unsuccessful only because they are geared for street politics, not electoral politics. They also lack charismatic leadership and have bitter internal rivalries. However the victory of the MMA after 911 shows that they are capable of closing ranks. It is also perfectly possible that a natural leader will emerge and cause an electoral landslide in the not too distant future.

But even without winning elections, the mullah parties are immensely more powerful in determining how you and I live than election-winning parties like the PPP and ANP. For a long time the religious right has dictated what we can or cannot teach in our public and private schools. No government ever had the guts to dilute the hate materials being forced down young throats. They also dictate what you and I can wear, eat, or drink. Their unchallenged power has led to Pakistan’s cultural desertification because they violently oppose music, dance, theatre, art, and intellectual inquiry.

To be sure there are scattered islands of normality in urban Pakistan. But these are shrinking. Yes, the Baluch nationalists are secular, and so is the ethnically-driven MQM in Karachi. But these constitute a tiny fraction of the population.

The government has capitulated. The prime minister has announced not to touch the blasphemy laws. Does this mean that religious fanatics can dictate their terms even without any parliamentary representation?

It is indeed a complete abdication. When the bearded ones brought out 50,000 charged people onto the streets of Karachi, a terrified government instantly sought negotiations with them. Even before that happened, the current interior minister – Rahman Malik, a venal hack and as crooked as they come – promptly declared that he’d personally gun down a blasphemer.

The government’s pants are soaking wet. In fact, so wet that the ruling party dumped Taseer – who was their own high-ranking member – after the murder. There’s talk now of getting American guards for Zardari since his own guards may be untrustworthy. Sherry Rahman, the brave parliamentarian who dared to table a bill to reform the blasphemy law, is now bunkered down. She is said to be receiving two death threats an hour. Significantly, the Army high command has made no public statement on the assassination, although it is vocal on much else.

Pakistan’s media is often described as independent and vibrant. But this media had painted Taseer negatively almost a month before he was killed. Your comments?

The media’s so-called independence and vibrancy is reserved for attacking a manifestly corrupt, but nominally secular, government. On other issues – such as a rational discussion of religion and the army’s role in society – it is conspicuously silent. Few sane people are brought on to shows, or are too scared to speak.

Let me recount some personal experiences. The day after Taseer’s assassination, FM-99 (Urdu) called me for an interview. The producer tearfully told me (offline) that she could not find a single religious scholar ready to condemn his murder. She said even ordinary people like me are in short supply.

The next day a TV program on blasphemy (Samaa TV, hosted by Asma Shirazi) was broadcast. Asma had pleaded that I participate. So I did – knowing full well
what was up ahead. My opponents were Farid Paracha (spokesman, Jamaat-e-Islami) and Maulana Sialvi (Sunni Tehreek, a Barelvi and supposed moderate). There were around 100 students in the audience, drawn from colleges across Pindi and Islamabad.

Even as the mullahs frothed and screamed around me (and at me), I managed to say the obvious: that the culture of religious extremism was resulting in a bloodbath in which the majority of victims were Muslims; that non-Muslims were fleeing Pakistan; that the self-appointed “thaikaydars” of Islam in Pakistan were deliberately ignoring the case of other Muslim countries like Indonesia which do not have the death penalty for blasphemy; that debating the details of Blasphemy Law 295-C did not constitute blasphemy; that American Muslims were very far from being the objects of persecution; that harping on drone attacks was an irrelevancy to the present discussion on blasphemy.

The response? Not a single clap for me. Thunderous applause whenever my opponents called for death for blasphemers. And loud cheers for Qadri. When I directly addressed Sialvi and said he had Salman Taseer's blood on his hand, he exclaimed “How I wish I had done it!” (kaash ke main nay khud kiya hota!). You can find all this on YouTube if you like.

One can debate whether this particular episode (and probably many similar ones) should be blamed on the media, whether it genuinely reflects the public mood, and whether those students fairly represented the general Pakistani youth. But there is little doubt which side the Pakistani media took. This was apparent from the unwillingness of anchors to condemn the assassination, as well as from images of the smiling murderer being feted all around. Mullah guests filled the screens of most channels. Some journalists and TV-show participants favorably compared Qadri with Ilm-e-Deen. Others sought to prove that Taseer somehow brought his death upon himself.

Many in Pakistan like Imran Khan, a cricket star turned politician, blame the recent rise of extremism on the US occupation of Afghanistan. Is that the root cause in your opinion?

If the US had never come to Afghanistan, Pakistan would not be the violent mess that it is today. So there is an element of truth in this claim, but no more than an element. Let me give you an analogy: imagine lots of dry wood and a lighted match. The US-led anti-Soviet war was that match. But the combustible material is that dangerous conservatism which accumulated over time. The strength of the Islamist parties vastly increased after Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto kow-towed to them after 1973-4. This was 5-6 years before the Soviet invasion so one can scarcely blame America for that.

Yes, the West did set dry wood on fire. But the staggering quantity of wood comes from the rotting mass of Pakistan’s state and society. Ours is an apartheid society where the rich treat the poor like dirt, the justice system does not work, education is as rotten as it can be, and visible corruption goes unpunished. Add to all this a million mullahs in a million mosques who exploit people’s frustrations. You then have the explanation for today’s catastrophic situation.

Of course I would love to see the Americans out of Afghanistan. The sooner they can withdraw – without precipitating a 1996 style Taliban massacre – the better. But let’s realize that US withdrawal will not end Pakistan’s problems. Those fighting the Americans aren’t exactly Vietnamese-type socialists or nationalists. The Taliban-types want a full cultural revolution: beards, burqas, 5 daily prayers, no music, no art, no entertainment, and no contact with modernity except for getting its weapons.

In Tunis, a dictator has been humbled by peaceful mass mobilisation instead of al-Qaida affiliates. In Bangladesh, superior courts have re-instated the basic secular constitution of the country and religion in politics has been banned in recent months. Do you see the tide turning in Muslim world. Does it offer a hope in Pakistan?

The grievances in Tunisia are similar in some ways to those in Pakistan: raging unemployment, grotesque corruption, and the opulent lifestyles of the elite. Like Zardari, who fills Pakistani cities with pictures of the Bhutto clan and renames streets and airports, Ben Ali also promoted his family. Both plundered national wealth, and both got the West’s support because they claimed to be bulwarks against extremism. Today Ben Ali is gone, and tomorrow Zardari will be gone.

But the differences are profound: Tunisia’s population of 10 million is miniscule compared to Pakistan’s 180 million. Young Tunisians do not suffer from a toxic overdose of hard-line religion. So they came out bravely into the streets to fight for real social change. One can therefore hope that Ben Ali’s departure will lead to a flowering of Arab democracy rather than invite the dark forces of religious extremism. Yet one can be absolutely sure that Zardari’s departure, which may happen sooner rather than later, is not likely to lead to a more secular or more peaceful Pakistan.

As for Bangladesh: let us recall that it emerged from the collapse of Jinnah’s Two-Nation theory. Nationalism triumphed over religion in 1971. Hence the positive new developments in Bangladesh are not difficult to understand.

What do you think is the way to stem the rising tide of religious extremism in Pakistan?

If you want the truth: the answer is, nothing. Our goose is cooked. Sometimes there is no way to extinguish a forest fire until it burns itself out. Ultimately there will be nothing left to burn. But well before the last liberal is shot or silenced, the mullahs will be gunning for each other in a big way. Mullah-inspired bombers have already started blowing up shrines and mosques of the opposing sect. The internet is flooded with gory photographs of chopped-up body parts belonging to their rivals. Qadri, the assassin, admitted his inspiration to murder came from a cleric. So you can also expect that Muslim clerics will enthusiastically kill other Muslim clerics. Eventually we could have the situation that prevailed during Europe’s 30-Year War.

To save Pakistan, what miracles shall we ask of Allah? Here’s my personal list: First, that the Pakistan army stops seeing India as enemy number one and starts seeing extremism as a mortal threat. Second, that Zardari’s government is replaced by one that is less corrupt, more capable of governance, and equipped with both the will and legitimacy to challenge religious fascism. And, third, that peace somehow comes to Afghanistan.
	

____


[4]  India: Khakhi Shorts and Saffron Flags 


Mail Today, 22 January 2011

RSS WARY OF TERRORIST TAG

by Bharat Bhushan

With the revelations about the involvement of its past and present cadre in terrorist activities, the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) has suddenly sharpened its attack on the Congress. As the mother organisation of the main Opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), this would normally not be considered exceptional.

However the virulently personal attack on Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her son, Rahul, is unusual. The political resolution drafted by the BJP at its national executive meeting at Guwahati earlier this month, played it down, but that does not explain why the RSS wants the BJP to go on the front foot against Sonia and Rahul.

Ban

In the eyes of the RSS, Rahul Gandhi is guilty of comparing its brand of Hindu radicalism with terrorism. He has publicly equated the RSS with the banned Students Islamic Movement of India, calling both fanatical. According to the Wikileaks cables from the US embassy in New Delhi, he told the US Ambassador to India that while there was some support for the Lashkar- e- Tayyeba among Indian Muslims the bigger threat to the nation could be “ the growth of radicalised Hindu groups, which create religious tensions and political confrontations with the Muslim community.” The statements of Congress general secretary Digvijaya Singh about Hindu terror are seen by the RSS as emanating directly from Sonia and Rahul Gandhi.

The RSS is increasingly convinced that there is a move afoot to ban it. RSS ideologue M G Vaidya wrote in a recent article: “ The present Congress, under the leadership of the new Mrs. Gandhi, needs a ban on the RSS — not to finish the RSS but to placate its Muslim vote bank.

The Congress party has come to the conclusion that its very existence is in jeopardy. And only en bloc Muslim vote can enliven it.

So they have carefully calibrated a policy to target Hindus. And to do so, condemning the RSS is the easiest thing” ( Open magazine, January 24).

Although some political parties have demanded a ban, the Congress apparently is divided over the issue. There is a fear of alienating “ Hindu voters” and apprehension that the RSS could emerge stronger as some believe it did from past instances of ban.

The RSS was first banned on February 4, 1948 after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.

Although it was not charged directly as a party to the conspiracy, the then home minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel acted against the RSS because he believed that its activities contributed to the atmosphere in the country which made the assassination of Gandhi possible.

The ban was only lifted on July 11, 1949 after M S Golwalkar, the RSS head, wrote letters to Prime Minister Nehru and Home Minister Patel swearing allegiance to the Constitution of India, secularism, the national flag and promising that the organisation would abjure violence and secrecy. The RSS was banned a second time on July 4, 1975, nine days after the state of Emergency was declared and its chief, Balasaheb Deoras, was arrested earlier on June 30.

Deoras immediately wrote cringing letters to India Gandhi.

He first congratulated her in a letter dated August 25, on her Independence Day speech describing it as level- headed and befitting the occasion. In another letter on November 10, Deoras made an abject surrender proposing that the RSS could be used for the development being undertaken by the government. He also appealed to the Home Minister S B Chavan to release him on parole so that he could clarify certain issues personally to him.

Fear

The third ban came after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992 which was lifted in June 1993. The banning of the organisation itself is not the issue today. Past experience has shown that it can propagate itself amoeba- like into different organisations that share the same DNA. What worries the RSS much more is the prospect of being declared a terrorist organisation in the changed international environment.

It is mortally afraid that the confessions, statements and trials in the Malegaon, Mecca Masjid, Ajmer Sharif and Samjhauta Express terrorist attacks could lead to its door.

Indeed this could happen with the exposure of RSS links with those it has ostensibly disowned — such as former functionary Devender Gupta, the murdered terrorist leader Sunil Joshi, Pragya Singh Thakur and the seven or eight unnamed full time functionaries that the RSS claims it has sacked for their extremism. The same danger emanates from those it still claims as its own, like Indresh Kumar, one of the eleven band of brothers who run the RSS. Should the investigating agencies be able to prove that the RSS was involved in sponsoring terrorism either ideologically or directly, the Indian state does not need to do much else. Such outfits get listed as terrorist organisations by various countries including the US, UK and France. That would mean seizure of bank accounts and an inability to collect donations abroad and at home. In short, the organisation would be economically choked and publicly blacklisted.

The RSS can ill afford this given its present organisational disarray.

The membership of the RSS is dwindling and the average age of its members going up. The success of the RSS lay in attracting youngsters at the fringes of middle class society who felt threatened by western mores and handicapped by their inability to engage with the world which conversed in English, the language of upward mobility.

If a youngster today has to go to coaching class to be competitive, learn computing, be on the internet and an ever burgeoning social media network, listen to music on cheap digital devices or cell phones, or spend an evening SMSing the girl he is wooing, where would he have time to go to a “ shakha” ( branch meeting) of the RSS and follow drill instructions in Sanskrit like “ Dakshah” ( Attention!), “ Vishramah” ( At ease!) or “ Uttishtha” ( Stand up!)? The youth of today sees no point in being part of a private flash militia which is part of someone else’s millennial dream. The world- wide web and the legitimate aspiration for upward mobility will eventually finish the RSS as a somewhat mainstream organisation of small town and urbanising India.

Option

Under these circumstances, a terrorist tag would be extremely damaging. Already graying, the marginalisation of the RSS would be accelerated. Funds from abroad will dry up, and domestic accounts of all associated organisations would be frozen. People would be wary of associating with it. Parents would advise their children to keep away from it. This is what the RSS is really worried about.

What is curious is that for preventing this predicament, its leaders do not blame their poisonous ideology which is essentially militaristic, demonises people of other religions and takes it upon itself to protect an exclusivist Indian nationalism. If the gray eminences of the RSS had any sense, they would distance themselves from the likes of Indresh Kumar. However, if the fire has already engulfed the outhouses and reached their door- step, they may find that there is no escape route left.

They will blame their favourite hate figures, the Nehru- Gandhi family for their predicament.

The RSS needs to dissolve itself. India needs no protection from self- styled militias. It has a state structure and judiciary capable of handling criminals and terrorists of various hues. It does not need religious vigilante groups to take revenge for jihadi terror or to save Hinduism, which has thrived for centuries without knobbly- kneed men in khaki shorts and black caps, bamboo staff in hand, taking part in an elaborate costume drama.

____


[5]  Patriarchy Rules India's Diplomatic Circles

Indian Express, 21 January 2011

AN ELEVEN-YEAR SHADOW

Syeda Hameed 

Neighbours woke up one morning to find a woman with a bloodied face, the wife of the diplomat Amit Verma, running out of her house. This incident, which occurred last month in Golders Green, a residential area in London, has unleashed a debate across the globe on whether an individual should be protected against the law of the land simply because he happens to be a diplomat, no matter how heinous his crime.

Eleven years ago in 1999, I spent many agonised days and nights over this very issue. It was a case of another Indian diplomat in Paris, who in this case had sexually abused a 17-year-old tribal girl from Ranchi. As a member of the National Commission for Women, I investigated this case. The story was broken by The Indian Express on September 15, 1999. Two of us NCW members arrived in Ranchi on October 1, 1999. The Indian Express had reported the story about Lalita Oraon, which began in Serum Tola near Ranchi and ended in Paris. The girl had allegedly been assaulted by her diplomat employer, who was the first secretary for economic affairs at the Indian embassy in France. She fled from his house and was found on September 5 by the French police. The police took her to the Convent of St Joseph of Cluny. There, in a state of terror and mental trauma, she leapt over the six-ft-high wall of the Convent. The police then moved her to Cochin Hospital, in a Paris suburb. The report added that “Lalita’s age has been put at 17 by the French doctors who examined her on September 6, as opposed to the 19 years stated on her passport.”

Ads by Google Winter colllection online  Order current designer fashion  Top Fashion & Top Stylewww.dress-for-less.cExecutive Jobs  Senior Jobs From 60.000 €.  Access over 7,000 Headhunters!www.Experteer.comCall India - EUR 0.01/min  750 minutes for EUR 9.20  15 free text messages on topwww.vopium.com

In Ranchi, we met Lalita’s mother Karmi and her brother Alvis. Meticulously we gathered facts of the case from the distraught mother and brother. Our visit was triggered by media reports, and by a letter received from four women activists of Ranchi with whom I had worked in the past. Two of the older women were academics, Professor Malanchu Ghosh and Dr Rose Kirketta; the other two were young journalists, Vasavi Kiro and Dayamani Burla. The day before we arrived, 27 organisations, acting together, staged a dharna outside the district commissioner’s office. We received a charter of demands from them at a town-hall meeting, which, among other things, stated that Lalita’s case should be tried in Paris under international law so that it did not become a casualty of political pressure, and that Lalita should be repatriated and rehabilitated. Another petition came to us from the Kendriya Sarna Samiti on the larger issue of Nari Dasta. They demanded that all police stations, especially in rural areas, should maintain records of all girls who in the garb of employment are forced to migrate.

During the two days at Ranchi we heard testimony after testimony from civil society, human-rights and tribal-rights activists, all seething with anger at this heinous assault. Besides Karmi and Alvis, we spoke to her employer’s family, police officers, district administrators, tribal NGOs and the media.

In Delhi, it took me 10 days to write my report. We were then tasked, under the NCW Act, to release the findings and ask for an Action Taken Report from government. I was anxious to begin taking action; but no matter how hard I tried, I could not get the report released. It fell between procedure and protocol and never saw the light of day.

For months after that I hid my face from my Ranchi friends and stopped taking their calls and answering letters. I was ashamed of my inability to live up to their hopes — and in a larger context, the hopes pinned on the commission by women’s groups who had struggled post-Beijing to create the National Commission for Women.

The French government too did not pursue the case, although many rights groups agitated in both countries. The story of Lalita Oraon was forgotten. I lived with a sense of guilt and sorrow for a few years. Then I did what writers have done from times immemorial. I wrote the story of Lalita along with stories of 11 other women, victims of violence, the landmark cases of my three-year tenure.

The case of the two diplomats, straddling 11 years, brought to the forefront the issue of violence against women compounded with diplomatic immunity, which needs to be placed and debated in the public domain.

Recently we passed the Domestic Violence Act, a landmark legislation for India where most people still consider wife-beating to be a private matter to be settled “amicably” between partners. The act requires that institutional mechanisms be created to ensure that its benefits percolate to women all over the country. Similar legislation protects women from brutalisation by husbands, partners, etc, in many countries, including Britain. It is clear to any right-minded individual that there should be no immunity whatsoever for any one who indulges in violence against women. To throw the blanket of immunity over the perpetrator is to make a mockery of the law.

Unfortunately, this mindset prevails among top people in every field of public life, which forces victims to seek redress in countries which have far better record of protecting gender rights.

Eleven years after I wrote that report, I know why it disappeared. During these years we have progressed on many gender-related concerns, including creating a gender lens through which we try to view our polity. We need to now have the moral courage to acknowledge the ugly truth about gender abuse, and offer redress to the victim. I write today in the hope that gender violence will never again be hidden, condoned or glossed over under any false cover, not even of diplomatic immunity.

The writer, a member of the Planning Commission, was formerly in the National Commission for Women

_____


[6] India - Freedom of Expression:


The Hindu -Jan 22, 2011

AMID THREATS, M.F. HUSAIN'S WORKS REMOVED, THEN REMOUNTED

Rana Siddiqui Zaman

The email threats were seen as a risk to the security of other art works and to visitors at the India Art Summit in New Delhi

The works, two untitled and one titled ‘Karachi 5,' are worth Rs. 8 crores

This is the second time Husain's works are being removed following threats

— PHOTOS: Special Arrangement

These works of M.F. Husain were brought to the India Art Summit at Pragati Maidan by the Delhi Art Gallery. Following email threats of possible vandalism, the paintings were removed on Thursday, and later remounted by the organisers.

NEW DELHI: After a momentary bout of threat-induced panic, which saw the India Art Summit at Pragati Maidan remove three works of the legendary painter M.F. Husain, event organisers finally decided to stand their ground and remount them.

The paintings, brought to the Summit by the Delhi Art Gallery, were taken down on Thursday after email threats of possible vandalism were received from anonymous individuals who claimed the celebrated artist “hurts the sentiments of Hindus.” The emails were seen as a risk to the security of other art works and to visitors.

But after having removed the paintings for the better part of a day, the canvases were remounted, Kishore Singh of the Delhi Art Gallery confirmed to The Hindu.


Says a relieved Aashish Anand, Director of DAG: “We have resolved the issue with the organisers. They are confident again that nothing untoward will happen at the venue and that these were mere threats.” Husain's works, two untitled and one titled ‘Karachi 5,' are valued at nearly Rs. 8 crores, he says.

Art lovers pouring in from different parts of the globe for the signature event — this year's summit is the third — had been witness to a similar entire drama last year too. This is the second time Husain's works are being removed following threats.


“The works were mounted for almost the whole first day of the summit,” said Mr. Anand. “But towards late evening, the organisers and I started getting email threats from Mumbai and different individuals. Since the organisers were concerned about the security of the other works and visitors, we were asked to remove the works. Its is extremely disappointing because I feel the whole summit is happening because of Husain as it is because of him that India is on the global art map today.”

After removing the works, the organisers issued a statement saying: “…We were pleased to see that on the preview day galleries had shown works of M.F. Husain. However, due to several threats and security reasons, the works unfortunately cannot continue to be on display on the public days of the fair. We are very disappointed at these developments, but our first priority will always be the safety interests of artworks and people visiting the art fair from around the world. This art fair is contributing towards the future of Indian art and we hope that in the future the government can guarantee us a safer environment for the free showcase of all our legendary artists. This fair is about the larger future of Indian art and all the hundreds of artists being represented; we need to see the bigger picture in terms of its grand success in making a contribution to the artistic landscape of this country.”

With security now tightened, artists and art lovers are hoping Husain's paintings will stay up until the summit concludes on January 23.

_____


[7] USA:

Source: Women's Media Center, January 21, 2011 =

ON ROE V. WADE'S ANNIVERSARY: LET'S REFLECT ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF VIOLENT RHETORIC, WHICH ABORTION PROVIDERS KNOW ALL TOO WELL
With the anniversary of Roe v. Wade upon us, it's our national responsibility to push for a civil dialogue.

by Vicki Saporta
 
With the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court ruling that affirms women’s right to choose abortion, approaching tomorrow, National Abortion Federation President Vicki Saporta calls civil dialogue a national responsibility.

I was saddened and disturbed on January 8th when I heard the news about the shooting in Tucson that left six people dead and 14 others injured, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. As the coverage began to focus on possible political motivations for the attack and the influence of violent rhetoric, I couldn’t help but think about the parallels between this tragic event in Arizona and the senseless murders of eight abortion providers and clinic staff, including my friend Dr. George Tiller.

Both Congresswoman Giffords and Dr. Tiller were gunned down in public. Congresswoman Giffords was interacting with her constituents at a “Congress on Your Corner” event and Dr. Tiller was ushering at the church where he and his wife had been active members for more than 20 years. Both of them were shot in the head at point-blank range, and both incidents caused our nation to examine the prevalence and effect of violent political and ideological rhetoric.

Unfortunately, this discussion is not new to the abortion provider community. Since 1993, there have been eight murders and 17 attempted murders of physicians and clinic staff.

Abortion opponents have a long history of using violent rhetoric to attempt to justify their crimes and incite others to violence. They regularly refer to abortion providers as “murderers” in interviews and articles and utilize imagery associated with murder such as “wanted” posters and “hit lists” in their campaigns to end legal abortion. Unfortunately, instead of marginalizing these extremists, other opponents of abortion have picked up on this dangerous rhetoric to advance their political agenda.

The devastation this rhetoric can cause has been keenly experienced by the abortion provider community. In late 1992, Michael Griffin, who had no history in the anti-abortion movement, became involved with a local anti-abortion leader who took him under his wing and mentored him by showing him graphic anti-abortion videos and involving him in efforts to target a local clinic where Dr. David Gunn worked. Earlier that year abortion opponents had distributed western-style "wanted" posters featuring a picture of Dr. Gunn, his home phone number, and other identifying information. In 1993, Dr. Gunn became the first abortion provider to be murdered; shot to death by Griffin in Pensacola, Florida.

Following the murder of Dr. Gunn, anti-abortion extremists publicly advanced the idea that the murder of abortion providers was “justifiable.” Paul Hill appeared in media outlets, including the nationally televised Donahue show, calling for the execution of abortion providers. In fact, he was so well-known for making such inflammatory statements that reporters often asked him, “If you believe so strongly in killing doctors, why don’t you do it yourself?” One year later, Hill acted on the violent words he had been preaching when he shot and killed Dr. John Bayard Britton and volunteer escort Lt. Col. James Barrett, and injured June Barrett, in the driveway of a Pensacola, Florida, abortion clinic. Hill’s ideas were carried forward by others including James Kopp, who unsuccessfully attempted to use a “justifiable homicide” defense during his trial for the 1998 murder of Dr. Barnett Slepian in Buffalo, New York.

Scott Roeder, convicted last year for the murder of Dr. Tiller, also testified in court that his actions were justified and made repeated unsuccessful attempts to use a so-called “necessity defense.” Prior to murdering Dr. Tiller, Roeder had been in contact with others who advocated using violence against abortion providers, and was influenced by the media and what he watched on TV. He testified in court that he converted to Christianity as an adult after watching conservative programs like “The 700 Club.” Roeder stated that he believed Dr. Tiller was a murderer, a belief advanced by Bill O’Reilly, who repeatedly referred to Dr. Tiller on national TV as “Tiller the Killer.”



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

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.