The Tribune
28 March 2007
Editorial
23 years too late
- Will all ’84 riots victims ever get justice?
THE phrase “better late than never” becomes a meaningless jumble of words when the woman who saw her husband, son and son-in-law murdered brutally in the 1984 riots has to wait for 23 years to see three of the killers convicted. Harminder Kaur has relived the horror of that lynching all these years. The consolation that she has at least been alive to see this day is too meagre to be of much value. In this long long time, a whole generation has come and gone. Her daughter Harjinder had become a widow on that dark day during the holocaust at the age of 23. She had a daughter only two years old who became an orphan. The child has grown into a woman who has never known her father. We know that justice is not dispensed in a hurry in India. But this case went much further than that. After all, it took Harminder Kaur all of 12 years just to get an FIR registered. What a fight against the irresponsive system it has been for the traumatised widow!
It is not only a classic example of too late, but also of too little. Imagine nearly 3,000 persons being killed and conviction coming in only a handful of cases, like this one and the earlier life sentence passed on five persons in May 2005 for killing Baba Singh. And it is only the foot soldiers who are being served just desserts. Politicians who masterminded the horror have as good as escaped punishment. Everyone knows their role but they have managed to ensure that the trail goes cold and there is not “sufficient evidence” against them.
The 1984 riots were among the worst nightmares that Independent India has had to suffer, the others being the Babri mosque demolition and the Gujarat riots. Till all the guilty are accounted for, such incidents will continue fostering disillusionment, embarrassment and misgivings. The sooner the shame-faced country comes clean, the better.
|
March 27, 2007
Grim but true :Indian Christian testimony at People's Tribunal
Justice Rare for Victims of Christian Persecution in India
New Delhi, March 26 (International Christian Concern) - Victims of Christian persecution from across India shared their horrific stories and highlighted the denial of justice to them before an independent people’s jury.
The depositions were part of “The Independent People’s Tribunal against the Rise of Fascist Forces in India and the Attack on the Secular State,” a three-day program which concluded here on March 22.
The independent jury was organized by non-profit organizations Anhad and Human Rights Law Network, and supported and attended by a plethora of rights groups, including Christian organizations, like the All India Christian Council (AICC) and the Christian Legal Association. Of the 100 victims who submitted their statements, about 40 were Christian. The rest were mainly were from Gujarat state, which witnessed a wide-scale killing of members of the Muslim minority community in 2002.
Impunity of perpetrators of gang-rape
“I was gang-raped by my fellow tribal villagers, including the brother
and father of the local legislator in January 2004, and I named everyone in my police complaint, but no one has been arrested till today,” lamented Taramani, a school teacher from Madhya Pradesh state’s Jhabua district.
Taramani’s village, Alirajpur, was one of the worst affected villages during the spate of anti-Christian violence that followed the infamous January 11 incident, in which a young girl was found dead in the compound of a Catholic school in Jhabua district. Hindu fundamentalist Hindu Jagran Manch (Forum for Revival of Hindus) blamed the murder on the church, and instigated a series of attacks on Christian individuals and their institutions. This was despite the fact that a non-Christian admitted to the crime.
“A crowd of about 250 people first launched an attack on my house and set it on fire and then some of them took me to a jungle and outraged my modesty,” said, Taramani, a widow.
With tears in her eyes, she added that when she returned she found the house completely gutted. “Even the police initially refused to register my complaint which they did only later and reluctantly.”
“All that I have received from the government is Rs.30,000 ($700), but no arrests. The perpetrators still tell me that nothing will happen to them, as they are very powerful,” she said.
Attackers remain at large
Another victim, Shobha Onkar, also from Alirajpur, could not help crying as she narrated how she was attacked by a mob in the aftermath of the January 11 incident. “About 300 people surrounded our house in the presence of the local police inspector and started breaking in. I thought I should open the door before they vandalized my house, but when they entered into the house, one of them hit me with a stick on my head. I started bleeding profusely,” she said.
“My son ran to the police and bent on his knees to plead them to rescue me, saying, ‘They will kill my mother,’ but they did not budge,” she added.
Onkar also said that relatives of the local legislator belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were among the crowd.
Onkar’s house was badly damaged and completely looted. “The government gave me only Rs.6,000 ($140) as compensation. And justice, which matters the most, was denied, as the perpetrators were not brought to
justice,” she added.
There were also victims from the states of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Kerala and Jammu and Kashmir.
Lessons for the church
Dr. John Dayal, secretary general of the AICC who was one of the jury members, told ICC, “From the Christian perspective, the hearings were memorable and important. Christians of all denominations, and both men and women, came forward to depose for the first time in a major way.
In my experience this is also the first time that an all-India picture has emerged of anti-Christian violence from a people’s tribunal.”
The all-India pattern of violence has lessons for everyone, and particularly for the church whether it is Catholic, Protestant or Evangelical, he said, adding that urgent steps needed to be taken. “Clergy and church workers have to be trained in human rights and basic law.”
Another memorable witness, said Dayal, was the compilation by the Rev. Madhu Chandra of AICC to prove the massive activity of Hindu extremists in the north-eastern Hindu majority states of Manipur and
Assam.
“For me, the most heartening testimonies were of women - Muslim and Christian.”
Madhya Pradesh a daylight church
He also said it was obvious that “Hindutva pressure” was working. “The church in Madhya Pradesh is fast becoming a ‘daylight church’ with mission activity in the evening and after sun down - which is how outreach programmes can work in forest villages when people return home after sunset - has stopped. Only in full daylight can some work be done. And yet, the church hierarchy seems not too worried.”
In other areas, church activity is now confined to tribals alone, who constitute just a third of the population even in the so-called tribal belt of central India, he said. “This has serious ramifications.” Dayal thanked the civil society, including “well-meaning Hindu activists”, for their “unstinted support” to the Christian community.
No help from the State
Based on the statements of the victims and presentations by human rights activists, the tribunal noted that “demonization of minorities, both Muslims and Christians, and their consequent marginalization and physical attacks have been noticed all over the country, particularly in the states where the BJP is in power, like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Gujarat.”
In these cases, the victims have failed to get any help from the State. The role of the police is particularly dubious, as in most cases, the victims were not even able to file an FIR (first information report). It is often noticed that the victims are turned into perpetrators of crime. As a result, there is a sense of helplessness that the minorities feel.”
Rights activists also deplored the role of the media, mainly local newspapers in vernacular languages, in inciting anti-minority violence.
The tribunal was an initiative of Shabnam Hashmi of Anhad and attorney Colin Gonsalves of the Human Rights Law Network.
ENDS
Vishal Arora
New Delhi, March 26 (International Christian Concern) - Victims of Christian persecution from across India shared their horrific stories and highlighted the denial of justice to them before an independent people’s jury.
The depositions were part of “The Independent People’s Tribunal against the Rise of Fascist Forces in India and the Attack on the Secular State,” a three-day program which concluded here on March 22.
The independent jury was organized by non-profit organizations Anhad and Human Rights Law Network, and supported and attended by a plethora of rights groups, including Christian organizations, like the All India Christian Council (AICC) and the Christian Legal Association. Of the 100 victims who submitted their statements, about 40 were Christian. The rest were mainly were from Gujarat state, which witnessed a wide-scale killing of members of the Muslim minority community in 2002.
Impunity of perpetrators of gang-rape
“I was gang-raped by my fellow tribal villagers, including the brother
and father of the local legislator in January 2004, and I named everyone in my police complaint, but no one has been arrested till today,” lamented Taramani, a school teacher from Madhya Pradesh state’s Jhabua district.
Taramani’s village, Alirajpur, was one of the worst affected villages during the spate of anti-Christian violence that followed the infamous January 11 incident, in which a young girl was found dead in the compound of a Catholic school in Jhabua district. Hindu fundamentalist Hindu Jagran Manch (Forum for Revival of Hindus) blamed the murder on the church, and instigated a series of attacks on Christian individuals and their institutions. This was despite the fact that a non-Christian admitted to the crime.
“A crowd of about 250 people first launched an attack on my house and set it on fire and then some of them took me to a jungle and outraged my modesty,” said, Taramani, a widow.
With tears in her eyes, she added that when she returned she found the house completely gutted. “Even the police initially refused to register my complaint which they did only later and reluctantly.”
“All that I have received from the government is Rs.30,000 ($700), but no arrests. The perpetrators still tell me that nothing will happen to them, as they are very powerful,” she said.
Attackers remain at large
Another victim, Shobha Onkar, also from Alirajpur, could not help crying as she narrated how she was attacked by a mob in the aftermath of the January 11 incident. “About 300 people surrounded our house in the presence of the local police inspector and started breaking in. I thought I should open the door before they vandalized my house, but when they entered into the house, one of them hit me with a stick on my head. I started bleeding profusely,” she said.
“My son ran to the police and bent on his knees to plead them to rescue me, saying, ‘They will kill my mother,’ but they did not budge,” she added.
Onkar also said that relatives of the local legislator belonging to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) were among the crowd.
Onkar’s house was badly damaged and completely looted. “The government gave me only Rs.6,000 ($140) as compensation. And justice, which matters the most, was denied, as the perpetrators were not brought to
justice,” she added.
There were also victims from the states of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Kerala and Jammu and Kashmir.
Lessons for the church
Dr. John Dayal, secretary general of the AICC who was one of the jury members, told ICC, “From the Christian perspective, the hearings were memorable and important. Christians of all denominations, and both men and women, came forward to depose for the first time in a major way.
In my experience this is also the first time that an all-India picture has emerged of anti-Christian violence from a people’s tribunal.”
The all-India pattern of violence has lessons for everyone, and particularly for the church whether it is Catholic, Protestant or Evangelical, he said, adding that urgent steps needed to be taken. “Clergy and church workers have to be trained in human rights and basic law.”
Another memorable witness, said Dayal, was the compilation by the Rev. Madhu Chandra of AICC to prove the massive activity of Hindu extremists in the north-eastern Hindu majority states of Manipur and
Assam.
“For me, the most heartening testimonies were of women - Muslim and Christian.”
Madhya Pradesh a daylight church
He also said it was obvious that “Hindutva pressure” was working. “The church in Madhya Pradesh is fast becoming a ‘daylight church’ with mission activity in the evening and after sun down - which is how outreach programmes can work in forest villages when people return home after sunset - has stopped. Only in full daylight can some work be done. And yet, the church hierarchy seems not too worried.”
In other areas, church activity is now confined to tribals alone, who constitute just a third of the population even in the so-called tribal belt of central India, he said. “This has serious ramifications.” Dayal thanked the civil society, including “well-meaning Hindu activists”, for their “unstinted support” to the Christian community.
No help from the State
Based on the statements of the victims and presentations by human rights activists, the tribunal noted that “demonization of minorities, both Muslims and Christians, and their consequent marginalization and physical attacks have been noticed all over the country, particularly in the states where the BJP is in power, like Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Gujarat.”
In these cases, the victims have failed to get any help from the State. The role of the police is particularly dubious, as in most cases, the victims were not even able to file an FIR (first information report). It is often noticed that the victims are turned into perpetrators of crime. As a result, there is a sense of helplessness that the minorities feel.”
Rights activists also deplored the role of the media, mainly local newspapers in vernacular languages, in inciting anti-minority violence.
The tribunal was an initiative of Shabnam Hashmi of Anhad and attorney Colin Gonsalves of the Human Rights Law Network.
ENDS
Vishal Arora
Report on Peoples Tribunal on rise of fascist forces and attack on secular state
Independent People's Tribunal on Rise of Fascist Forces and the Attack on the Secular State
New Delhi: March 20-22, 2007
About three hundred women and men from different states of India who had confronted communal campaigns and experienced its brutality had assembled in Delhi from 20-23 March to give their testimony to an independent people's tribunal organized by a Delhi based voluntary organization, ANHAD and Human Rights Law Network. They consisted of people who have suffered mental and physical torture, driven out of their homes and have lost their dear and near ones. The testimonies rendered by them before the tribunal have clearly demonstrated that communalization is on a fast track in the country and a take over of the state by fascist forces is a distinct possibility. They shared their pain and anguish the myriad ways in which communal forces are expanding their sphere of influence, both through propaganda and coercion.
Those who deposed before the tribunal came from 16 states. These included: Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Manipur, West Bengal, Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir. Their depositions were supported by affidavits and documents. These depositions clearly brought out the strategies employed by the communal forces to further their influence both in the rural and urban areas.
Most of these activities led to serious violations of human rights and dignity of women. Although, these atrocities are locally specific, there are certain uniform, discernible tendencies. The deionization of minorities, both Muslims and Christians, and their consequent marginalization and physical attack has been noticed all over the country. It is particularly important that the states in which the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) is in power like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, this has been quite widespread. The victims of communal aggression have failed to get any help form the state. The role of the police is particularly dubious, as in most cases, the victims were not even able to file FIR. Often it is noticed that the victims are turned into perpetrators of crime. As a result the minorities feel a sense of helplessness. In most states the testimonies indicate that a situation akin to that of Gujarat is developing.
Another unfortunate trend is the ghettoization of the minorities since they feel that they are not safe in the mixed localities they tend to seek safety in the company of co-religionists. This actually increases a fear psychosis. Moreover, it tends to destroy the secular character of social life.
Several other disturbing trends were noticed across the states. Some of these are:
Systematic clearing or dispossession of lands belonging to the minority communities.
Communalisation of bureaucracy, especially lower level officials, police and district administration and the injustice faced by the minority communities at their hands.
The emergence of a clear pattern of activities by Hindutva forces to ferment troubles where there may have been none.
Inroads being made by Hindutva forces among the oppressed, i.e. the Dalits and the Tribals and the hinduisation of their cultural practices.
The hurdles faced in advocating justice for the minority communities.
The criminal justice system in several states appears to be under the influence of Hindutva forces. Consequently we see clear initiatives of false cases being foisted against innocent Muslims and they are being forced to undergo repression behind bars. Also no or inadequate compensation was provided to the victims and medical assistance to the injured was denied.
Saffronisation is increasingly impacting on economic activity. Ghettoisation through socio-economic boycott renders these communities further vulnerable to other forms of violence.
The criminal justice system has failed to protect the rights of minorities and has failed to punish the perpetrators.
The textbooks are saffronsiationed.
Testimonies underlined an increasing role of religious leaders in communal mobilization.
Several pamphlets with anti-minority propaganda were circulated in different states.
The Jury of the Tribunal consisted of the following: Prof. K.N. Panikkar, Justice Suresh, Justice S.N. Bhargava, Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer, Ali Asghar, Syeeda Hameed, Prof. Akoijam Bimol, Prof. Subhranjan Dasgupta, Nikhil Wagle, Kumar Ketkar, Dr. Sandeep Pandey, Annie Raja, Gagan Sethi, John Dayal, Justice Hosbet Suresh, Vincent Manoharan, Dr. Angana Chatterjee, Dr. K. M. Shrimali, Dr. Ram Puniyani, Henri Tiphagne, Prof. Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Jaya Mehta, Dr., Prof. Purshottam Agarwal, S. Irfan Habib, Sheetla Singh, Uma Chakravarty, Dr. R Vashum, Lalit Surjan.
Tribunal Organized by: ANHAD and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN).
Supported by: Aman Samudaya, AVHRS, Insaaf, Janvikas, Peace, People Research Society, PUCL Rajasthan, Sandarbh, Vikas Adhyayan Kendra.
New Delhi: March 20-22, 2007
About three hundred women and men from different states of India who had confronted communal campaigns and experienced its brutality had assembled in Delhi from 20-23 March to give their testimony to an independent people's tribunal organized by a Delhi based voluntary organization, ANHAD and Human Rights Law Network. They consisted of people who have suffered mental and physical torture, driven out of their homes and have lost their dear and near ones. The testimonies rendered by them before the tribunal have clearly demonstrated that communalization is on a fast track in the country and a take over of the state by fascist forces is a distinct possibility. They shared their pain and anguish the myriad ways in which communal forces are expanding their sphere of influence, both through propaganda and coercion.
Those who deposed before the tribunal came from 16 states. These included: Gujarat, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Goa, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Manipur, West Bengal, Nagaland, Jammu & Kashmir. Their depositions were supported by affidavits and documents. These depositions clearly brought out the strategies employed by the communal forces to further their influence both in the rural and urban areas.
Most of these activities led to serious violations of human rights and dignity of women. Although, these atrocities are locally specific, there are certain uniform, discernible tendencies. The deionization of minorities, both Muslims and Christians, and their consequent marginalization and physical attack has been noticed all over the country. It is particularly important that the states in which the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) is in power like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, this has been quite widespread. The victims of communal aggression have failed to get any help form the state. The role of the police is particularly dubious, as in most cases, the victims were not even able to file FIR. Often it is noticed that the victims are turned into perpetrators of crime. As a result the minorities feel a sense of helplessness. In most states the testimonies indicate that a situation akin to that of Gujarat is developing.
Another unfortunate trend is the ghettoization of the minorities since they feel that they are not safe in the mixed localities they tend to seek safety in the company of co-religionists. This actually increases a fear psychosis. Moreover, it tends to destroy the secular character of social life.
Several other disturbing trends were noticed across the states. Some of these are:
Systematic clearing or dispossession of lands belonging to the minority communities.
Communalisation of bureaucracy, especially lower level officials, police and district administration and the injustice faced by the minority communities at their hands.
The emergence of a clear pattern of activities by Hindutva forces to ferment troubles where there may have been none.
Inroads being made by Hindutva forces among the oppressed, i.e. the Dalits and the Tribals and the hinduisation of their cultural practices.
The hurdles faced in advocating justice for the minority communities.
The criminal justice system in several states appears to be under the influence of Hindutva forces. Consequently we see clear initiatives of false cases being foisted against innocent Muslims and they are being forced to undergo repression behind bars. Also no or inadequate compensation was provided to the victims and medical assistance to the injured was denied.
Saffronisation is increasingly impacting on economic activity. Ghettoisation through socio-economic boycott renders these communities further vulnerable to other forms of violence.
The criminal justice system has failed to protect the rights of minorities and has failed to punish the perpetrators.
The textbooks are saffronsiationed.
Testimonies underlined an increasing role of religious leaders in communal mobilization.
Several pamphlets with anti-minority propaganda were circulated in different states.
The Jury of the Tribunal consisted of the following: Prof. K.N. Panikkar, Justice Suresh, Justice S.N. Bhargava, Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer, Ali Asghar, Syeeda Hameed, Prof. Akoijam Bimol, Prof. Subhranjan Dasgupta, Nikhil Wagle, Kumar Ketkar, Dr. Sandeep Pandey, Annie Raja, Gagan Sethi, John Dayal, Justice Hosbet Suresh, Vincent Manoharan, Dr. Angana Chatterjee, Dr. K. M. Shrimali, Dr. Ram Puniyani, Henri Tiphagne, Prof. Kamal Mitra Chenoy, Jaya Mehta, Dr., Prof. Purshottam Agarwal, S. Irfan Habib, Sheetla Singh, Uma Chakravarty, Dr. R Vashum, Lalit Surjan.
Tribunal Organized by: ANHAD and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN).
Supported by: Aman Samudaya, AVHRS, Insaaf, Janvikas, Peace, People Research Society, PUCL Rajasthan, Sandarbh, Vikas Adhyayan Kendra.
The Politics Behind Anti-Christian Violence
The Politics Behind Anti-Christian Violence
Ram Puniyani (Editor) ram.puniyani@gmail.com
Foreword- Prof. K.N.Panikkar
Last decade and a half has seen gradual intensification of violence against Christians. The worst of this was the burning alive of Pastor Graham Stains. The propaganda doing rounds against them is very vicious and ill founded. In the face of this violence the state machinery has not acted firmly and the suitable protective action is missing.
Various human rights groups have investigated these violations of democratic rights. This book is a compilation of most of the (12) citizen's inquiry reports. It also includes the report of Wadhva Commission. This commission was appointed by NDA in the aftermath of the ghastly murder of Pastor Stains. It also has reports from Gujarat. MP and Mahrashtra. Some these reports take an all Indian view and have investigated anti Christian violence cutting across different states.
It has some analytical articles on the theme. The contributors to these articles are Rudolf Heredia, Vinay Lal, K.N.Panikkar, Ram Puniyani, Rowena Robinson, M. Prakash Singh, Rowena Robinson and Virginius Xaxa.
Pages 864, HB, Rs 495
Publisher
Media House
375-A, Pocket-2, Mayur Vihar Phase 1, Delhi 110091
(mediahousedelhi@gmail.com , www.mediahousedelhi.org)
Ram Puniyani (Editor) ram.puniyani@gmail.com
Foreword- Prof. K.N.Panikkar
Last decade and a half has seen gradual intensification of violence against Christians. The worst of this was the burning alive of Pastor Graham Stains. The propaganda doing rounds against them is very vicious and ill founded. In the face of this violence the state machinery has not acted firmly and the suitable protective action is missing.
Various human rights groups have investigated these violations of democratic rights. This book is a compilation of most of the (12) citizen's inquiry reports. It also includes the report of Wadhva Commission. This commission was appointed by NDA in the aftermath of the ghastly murder of Pastor Stains. It also has reports from Gujarat. MP and Mahrashtra. Some these reports take an all Indian view and have investigated anti Christian violence cutting across different states.
It has some analytical articles on the theme. The contributors to these articles are Rudolf Heredia, Vinay Lal, K.N.Panikkar, Ram Puniyani, Rowena Robinson, M. Prakash Singh, Rowena Robinson and Virginius Xaxa.
Pages 864, HB, Rs 495
Publisher
Media House
375-A, Pocket-2, Mayur Vihar Phase 1, Delhi 110091
(mediahousedelhi@gmail.com , www.mediahousedelhi.org)
Book Review: of KN Panikkar's 'Colonialism, Culture and Resistance'
(Book Review / The Hindu
March 27, 2007)
Culture and colonialism
NALINI TANEJA
This collection of essays discusses various forms of resistance to colonial rule
COLONIALISM, CULTURE AND RESISTANCE: K. N. Panikkar; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 595.
This book is a part of the series of collections of essays of eminent scholars that OUP has been bringing out from time to time. K.N. Panikkar is among the foremost historians of modern India, and has written extensively on intellectual and cultural history. As the preface to this book states, and its title suggests, "the common thread which binds together the essays in this volume is the idea of resistance to colonialism as a source of alternative modernity."
While the volume is a book of history, and covers the colonial period — barring one essay on the changes in history textbooks during the NDA regime — the concerns of the present reverberate throughout the book. It is clear that as a historian he is deeply disturbed by the "the failure of [an] alternative modernity" in India, which, in his opinion has "led the way to the uncritical acceptance of globalisation and to sympathetic response to cultural revivalism" during the last two decades. Therefore, from the large body of his work, he has chosen for this volume those essays which reflect the different forms of resistance to colonial rule and which analyse the vicissitudes and the incompleteness of the efforts of independent cultural expression, free from the constraints of both colonial hegemony and the shackles of tradition.
The essays cover three broad categories: armed resistance, intellectual preparation, and cultural practice. Culture as reflected in this book is not some apolitical space; it is inextricably connected with the colonial reality, and notions of nation that arise from a differentiated cultural expression of the intelligentsia during the 19th century, which is in turn strongly influenced by colonialism and the social matrix in which they emerged.
At a juncture when many other historians of modern India are prone to wish away the overarching reality of colonialism and its hegemonic presence in the lives of the Indian people, he is emphatic that "colonial domination and resistance occupied the centre of historical experience" during the period described by him. The consciousness about an alternative formed very slowly, he says, primarily because the intelligentsia, to begin with, tended to identify colonial rule as an agency of liberal dispensation, and when they did seek to transgress it their political perspective remained circumscribed by liberalism, and then increasingly came to accommodate tradition in the same way that colonialism did: this created a cultural crisis for the intelligentsia. This trajectory is explored in some depth through the studies on different forms of cultural articulation of the 19th century and to an extent early 20th.
Themes
He describes the plurality of forms of resistance, analyses many of them, and shows how these were an aspect of challenging and transgressing the limits of colonial modernity, yet "influenced partly by the way power was exercised by the colonizer", as much as by what came to be seen as tradition under colonial rule.
The themes covered range from the formation of cultural consciousness to questions of cultural pasts and national identity; matters of dress and manners and social reform in the context of tradition, power and concern for legitimacy; literature, literacy and educational initiatives, the expansion of print media and creation of new cultural tastes and notions of nation; indigenous medicine and coming to terms with new knowledge and colonial hegemony; and the early armed revolts and peasant resistance in the backdrop of agrarian laws of the time, specifically as reflected in the revolts of Velu Tampi and of the Malabar peasantry.
Implications
The essays explore the implications these forms of resistance had for the formation of political and cultural consciousness, and how these forms of resistance constituted what he calls "the proto history of political and cultural nationalism."
In a short review it would be fruitful to simply encapsulate some of his propositions and conclusions on the varied themes covered in the book: both renaissance and revivalism were integral to the search for identity, neither being overtly against colonialism; colonial cultural interventions did not mean a departure from the traditional pattern of life, even to those directly exposed to the influence of the colonial, social and cultural engineering; the lack of integration between political and cultural struggles had important implications; a critique of religion is essential for the battle over transformation of consciousness for a social revolution; and unlike in Africa or South America, the colonialists hegemonised Indian society by both expropriating and appropriating many traditional cultural symbols.
His analyses of the Malayalam novel Indulekha and the `Great Shoe Question' reveal the complexities of contestations over cultural symbols and self-perceptions of individual identities in the social matrix of colonial hegemony and need for traditional legitimacy. The dynamics of the peasant revolts discussed reveal the vital interconnections within popular struggles between traditional religious ideology and `the hidden transcripts' of a challenge to the dominance of the landowning classes and the agrarian laws of the colonial state.
Alternative
He strongly argues that the vital force that could have emerged from a creative dialogue between the spirit of rationality and universalism derived from the Renaissance and the Enlightenment on the one hand and an equally enlightened choice from within the tradition, remained split into two distinct tendencies. In the event, he says, the void has been filled either by the culture of the capitalist West or the obscurantism of tradition, currently being advocated by the Hindutva forces.
He concludes even more emphatically that "the cultural alternative contemporary India is seeking is therefore located in a choice between the elements inherited from the renaissance and those promoted by revivalism. At a time when there are attempts to redefine the identity of the nation, the choice is imbued with a meaning not purely cultural but also political."
To this we may add that in an era of `cultural nationalism', when the field of culture and its centrality to politics and transformation of Indian society has suffered great neglect from secular, left-liberal historians, and when the Hindu right wing seems to have hijacked the entire discourse on culture, this book is a timely warning to take culture seriously, and to evolve an effective agenda for cultural action.
March 27, 2007)
Culture and colonialism
NALINI TANEJA
This collection of essays discusses various forms of resistance to colonial rule
COLONIALISM, CULTURE AND RESISTANCE: K. N. Panikkar; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 595.
This book is a part of the series of collections of essays of eminent scholars that OUP has been bringing out from time to time. K.N. Panikkar is among the foremost historians of modern India, and has written extensively on intellectual and cultural history. As the preface to this book states, and its title suggests, "the common thread which binds together the essays in this volume is the idea of resistance to colonialism as a source of alternative modernity."
While the volume is a book of history, and covers the colonial period — barring one essay on the changes in history textbooks during the NDA regime — the concerns of the present reverberate throughout the book. It is clear that as a historian he is deeply disturbed by the "the failure of [an] alternative modernity" in India, which, in his opinion has "led the way to the uncritical acceptance of globalisation and to sympathetic response to cultural revivalism" during the last two decades. Therefore, from the large body of his work, he has chosen for this volume those essays which reflect the different forms of resistance to colonial rule and which analyse the vicissitudes and the incompleteness of the efforts of independent cultural expression, free from the constraints of both colonial hegemony and the shackles of tradition.
The essays cover three broad categories: armed resistance, intellectual preparation, and cultural practice. Culture as reflected in this book is not some apolitical space; it is inextricably connected with the colonial reality, and notions of nation that arise from a differentiated cultural expression of the intelligentsia during the 19th century, which is in turn strongly influenced by colonialism and the social matrix in which they emerged.
At a juncture when many other historians of modern India are prone to wish away the overarching reality of colonialism and its hegemonic presence in the lives of the Indian people, he is emphatic that "colonial domination and resistance occupied the centre of historical experience" during the period described by him. The consciousness about an alternative formed very slowly, he says, primarily because the intelligentsia, to begin with, tended to identify colonial rule as an agency of liberal dispensation, and when they did seek to transgress it their political perspective remained circumscribed by liberalism, and then increasingly came to accommodate tradition in the same way that colonialism did: this created a cultural crisis for the intelligentsia. This trajectory is explored in some depth through the studies on different forms of cultural articulation of the 19th century and to an extent early 20th.
Themes
He describes the plurality of forms of resistance, analyses many of them, and shows how these were an aspect of challenging and transgressing the limits of colonial modernity, yet "influenced partly by the way power was exercised by the colonizer", as much as by what came to be seen as tradition under colonial rule.
The themes covered range from the formation of cultural consciousness to questions of cultural pasts and national identity; matters of dress and manners and social reform in the context of tradition, power and concern for legitimacy; literature, literacy and educational initiatives, the expansion of print media and creation of new cultural tastes and notions of nation; indigenous medicine and coming to terms with new knowledge and colonial hegemony; and the early armed revolts and peasant resistance in the backdrop of agrarian laws of the time, specifically as reflected in the revolts of Velu Tampi and of the Malabar peasantry.
Implications
The essays explore the implications these forms of resistance had for the formation of political and cultural consciousness, and how these forms of resistance constituted what he calls "the proto history of political and cultural nationalism."
In a short review it would be fruitful to simply encapsulate some of his propositions and conclusions on the varied themes covered in the book: both renaissance and revivalism were integral to the search for identity, neither being overtly against colonialism; colonial cultural interventions did not mean a departure from the traditional pattern of life, even to those directly exposed to the influence of the colonial, social and cultural engineering; the lack of integration between political and cultural struggles had important implications; a critique of religion is essential for the battle over transformation of consciousness for a social revolution; and unlike in Africa or South America, the colonialists hegemonised Indian society by both expropriating and appropriating many traditional cultural symbols.
His analyses of the Malayalam novel Indulekha and the `Great Shoe Question' reveal the complexities of contestations over cultural symbols and self-perceptions of individual identities in the social matrix of colonial hegemony and need for traditional legitimacy. The dynamics of the peasant revolts discussed reveal the vital interconnections within popular struggles between traditional religious ideology and `the hidden transcripts' of a challenge to the dominance of the landowning classes and the agrarian laws of the colonial state.
Alternative
He strongly argues that the vital force that could have emerged from a creative dialogue between the spirit of rationality and universalism derived from the Renaissance and the Enlightenment on the one hand and an equally enlightened choice from within the tradition, remained split into two distinct tendencies. In the event, he says, the void has been filled either by the culture of the capitalist West or the obscurantism of tradition, currently being advocated by the Hindutva forces.
He concludes even more emphatically that "the cultural alternative contemporary India is seeking is therefore located in a choice between the elements inherited from the renaissance and those promoted by revivalism. At a time when there are attempts to redefine the identity of the nation, the choice is imbued with a meaning not purely cultural but also political."
To this we may add that in an era of `cultural nationalism', when the field of culture and its centrality to politics and transformation of Indian society has suffered great neglect from secular, left-liberal historians, and when the Hindu right wing seems to have hijacked the entire discourse on culture, this book is a timely warning to take culture seriously, and to evolve an effective agenda for cultural action.
‘Screen Parzania’ chorus gets louder in Gujarat
(Ahmedabad Newsline
March 27, 2007)
‘Screen Parzania’ chorus gets louder
People speak out against unofficial ban on film in contest held by NGO
Express News Service
Vadodara, March 26: AFTER a Delhi-based NGO ANHAD recently carried out an SMS/E-mail contest on 'Screen Parzania in Gujarat', the chorus against the 'unofficial' ban on the film in the state, is getting clearer and louder. ANHAD's contest had 99.5% respondents demanding that the film be screened in the state, and those who sent the 10 best entries condemning the 'unofficial' ban on Parzania, had a chance to meet the film’s cast. Seven of 10 winners from across the state met Parzania lead actors Naseeruddin Shah and Sarika in Mumbai on March 25 and interacted with them at length.
The 'Screen Parzania…' contest received a total 437 responses from across the state, of which two were in support of the ban. The contest was declared open for 15 days after advertisements in local newspapers.
Shabnam Hasmi from ANHAD said, "Gujarat is showing signs of growing dictatorship, which is taking away citizens' basic rights of expression." A contest winner, Nayan Patel, a Jan Vikas activist, said, "It is not just an issue of freedom of speech but there is much more at stake and we need to fight it out before it gets too late." He said Parzania is a movie which will make sensitive people realise their guilt.
He said, "Who are they to decide what I should watch or not? Gujarat is a part of democratic India and it is the Censor Board that decides." He said it was sad that the Modi establishment did not make a single statement publicly on providing security cover to those who wanted to watch the movie.
Another winner, Sanita Xalxo, a second-year LLB student at Gujarat University, said, "When films related to riots and other communal issues can be screened in Mumbai then why not Gujarat.”
Govind Desai from Rajkot, again a contest winner, said, "We had enriching interaction with Sarika and Shah. It was all about how the 2002 riots affected one community and how basic human rights are being violated on a day-to-day basis across the nation." He said politicians should not use muscle power against any film, which are a strong medium to take any issue to the peoples. He said that Parzania has the capability of shaking Gujarat's conscience.
Another winner from Vadodara, Szar, said, "It was good to see that youngsters really went out of their way to try to get the film screend. We live in a democratic state and cannot see fascism coming back." He questioned as to why people should obey a ban which was called by Babu Bajrangi, an expelled member of a political group. However, Szar said while he had lost some friends when he wrote against the ban.
March 27, 2007)
‘Screen Parzania’ chorus gets louder
People speak out against unofficial ban on film in contest held by NGO
Express News Service
Vadodara, March 26: AFTER a Delhi-based NGO ANHAD recently carried out an SMS/E-mail contest on 'Screen Parzania in Gujarat', the chorus against the 'unofficial' ban on the film in the state, is getting clearer and louder. ANHAD's contest had 99.5% respondents demanding that the film be screened in the state, and those who sent the 10 best entries condemning the 'unofficial' ban on Parzania, had a chance to meet the film’s cast. Seven of 10 winners from across the state met Parzania lead actors Naseeruddin Shah and Sarika in Mumbai on March 25 and interacted with them at length.
The 'Screen Parzania…' contest received a total 437 responses from across the state, of which two were in support of the ban. The contest was declared open for 15 days after advertisements in local newspapers.
Shabnam Hasmi from ANHAD said, "Gujarat is showing signs of growing dictatorship, which is taking away citizens' basic rights of expression." A contest winner, Nayan Patel, a Jan Vikas activist, said, "It is not just an issue of freedom of speech but there is much more at stake and we need to fight it out before it gets too late." He said Parzania is a movie which will make sensitive people realise their guilt.
He said, "Who are they to decide what I should watch or not? Gujarat is a part of democratic India and it is the Censor Board that decides." He said it was sad that the Modi establishment did not make a single statement publicly on providing security cover to those who wanted to watch the movie.
Another winner, Sanita Xalxo, a second-year LLB student at Gujarat University, said, "When films related to riots and other communal issues can be screened in Mumbai then why not Gujarat.”
Govind Desai from Rajkot, again a contest winner, said, "We had enriching interaction with Sarika and Shah. It was all about how the 2002 riots affected one community and how basic human rights are being violated on a day-to-day basis across the nation." He said politicians should not use muscle power against any film, which are a strong medium to take any issue to the peoples. He said that Parzania has the capability of shaking Gujarat's conscience.
Another winner from Vadodara, Szar, said, "It was good to see that youngsters really went out of their way to try to get the film screend. We live in a democratic state and cannot see fascism coming back." He questioned as to why people should obey a ban which was called by Babu Bajrangi, an expelled member of a political group. However, Szar said while he had lost some friends when he wrote against the ban.
March 26, 2007
Gujarat's theatre of the absurd
(The Asian Age
26 March 2007)
Gujarat's theatre of the absurd
By Pawan Khera
Another move by Bajrang Dal to assert themselves, another meek acceptance by the people of Gujarat. And yet another, hopefully the last, question mark added to Narendra Modi's much-touted Gujarat ka gaurav.
The ban on the screening of Parzania by the multiplex association of the state, reportedly under pressure from the Bajrang Dal, raises serious doubts about the fragility of the gaurav of the state - especially so when this pride seems to be under threat from every free expression of speech or opinion in various forms of popular culture.
Parzania is an emotionally powerful film with a potential to shake if not stir and thus depolarise the Gujarati society ahead of elections this year. That is the worst fear of the Bajrang parivar.
The bullies of the Bajrang Dal shall do what is their wont, only some have the suicidal courage to fly in the face of history asking it to repeat itself. But the docile acceptance of the decision by the people may not be healthy for the people themselves in the long run. It is bound to further embolden such elements in our society that use fear to suspend the fundamental right to choose.
Fear as an instrument to get institutional legitimacy is not new to Gujarat, or to any part of the country where submission to such tactics has been found easy. But Gujarat has the gaurav of being one of the states with the largest number of NGOs and activists. Then why does its civil society repeatedly fails, and only sporadically succeeds, in showing the way how to win these crucial conflicts?
On the face of it, the villains of the piece are the Bajrang Dal and the Multiplex Association of Gujarat. Not on the face of it, however, not in the same order. By now, even the most uninitiated would not be surprised at the Bajrang Dal and its various country cousins following their brief. As theatres are meant to be vehicles of expression, outfits like the Bajrang Dal must find it irksome to let them do their job unhindered. The fact that they hinder the job so often, and so successfully, should worry everyone interested in freedom as a concept. We must believe that democracy as a dream is close to being lost when fear, coercion and perhaps even political pressure take precedence over free voice. The threat to democracy appears fatal when one finds the elected chief minister of Gujarat totally helpless to the diktat of the Bajrang Dal et al.
Surely this isn't good news for the kind of no-nonsense image the CM has so carefully cultivated, nor also for the kind of confidence he would want investors to have in the institutional stability of the state. Not many interpretations are possible for his silence over the matter. The only one which is evident does a serious damage to the pride of the state he heads. His silence certainly lends sanctity to the bullies.
There have, however, been other silences which are more difficult to fathom. For instance, the silence of the other stakeholders of the system, particularly the media, on this issue is deafening. Those loud votaries of "freedom of expression" ought to know there is buried somewhere in this entire din, the right of people to be able to see cinematic expressions that have been duly cleared by the Censor Board. Will any of these so-called "fearless" television channels show the courage to air the film across the state? This would be the most befitting riposte to both the Bajrang Dal and the Multiplex Association. At best the channel would be forced off the air from the state for a while. Imagine what such a ban can do to the TRP of the daring channel!
When all other institutions, including the worst critics of political institutions, fail to deliver, the onus of restoring the rights of the people comes back on a political party. Recently, the Gujarat unit of the Congress party has decided to hold special screenings across the state. For those of us who can afford the commonplace luxury of cynicism, we may dismiss it as a political stunt. But what else is a political party there for, if not to lend legitimate political muscle to those who are held to ransom by anti-Constitutional and anti-social ideologies and organisations? Unlike other institutions, including the otherwise vocal civil society, that abdicated their responsibility in this case, the Congress showed the sensitivity towards the cause of the people.
And what are the MPs from the film industry doing? Will Ms Hema Malini, Mr Dharmendra, Mr Navjot Sidhu, Ms Jaya Bachchan, Mr Vinod Khanna, Mr Govinda, Ms Jaya Prada and Mr Shatrughan Sinha rise up to the occasion and speak for the industry which has given them all that they deserve, and much more?
It was the same multiplex association of the same Gujarat which had refused to screen Fanaa last year fearing attacks by angry groups reacting to Aamir Khan's support to Medha Patkar on the Narmada issue. By failing to protect the freedom of speech and expression, the state government has supported the culture of intolerance towards voices of dissent.
Even the most illiberal societies like Saudi Arabia do not disallow broadcast of the Radio Sawa or the Al-Hurra TV - both supposed to be vehicles of American propaganda targeted towards Arab youth.
The aggressive media campaign by the United States in West Asia in the form of the Hi magazine in response to the anti-American sentiment following its Armageddon in Afghanistan and Iraq, has not been blocked by local governments, even if it is offensive to the cultural and also political sensibilities of West Asian societies. The Hi Magazine is sponsored by the US state department.
There have been powerful depictions of emotive issues. Fearing their disruptive potential the state often banned them. Sergei Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin, although banned in Nazi Germany for fear of evoking revolutionary zeal, was considered by Joseph Goebbels as "a marvellous film without equal in the cinema… Anyone who had no firm political conviction could become a Bolshevik after seeing the film."
At the end of this debate, unlike other such similar ends and similar debates, one needs to look for the reason for the insecurity that forces films like Parzania off the screens. It must be to make sure that the issues the film raises, the emotions it kindles, the humanity it questions are kept beyond the realm of a common Gujarati, so that he or she can continue to feel the gaurav they have been promised.
An entire state's political thought, manoeuvred into position of power after an infamous bloodbath, cannot be allowed to delve into the cinematic expression of a true story of pathos of a Parsi family that lost its child in the riots. For those who deal in numbers, what is one missing child? Parsis are a dwindling race in any case. After all, the rioters did not have time to find out whether Azhar was a Parsi or a Muslim. Will be more careful next time around, with the religious census in place now…
Until then it is Bajrang bully ki jai in Gujarat: Victory to the bullies of Bajrang Dal.
Pawan Khera is political secretary to the chief minister of Delhi
26 March 2007)
Gujarat's theatre of the absurd
By Pawan Khera
Another move by Bajrang Dal to assert themselves, another meek acceptance by the people of Gujarat. And yet another, hopefully the last, question mark added to Narendra Modi's much-touted Gujarat ka gaurav.
The ban on the screening of Parzania by the multiplex association of the state, reportedly under pressure from the Bajrang Dal, raises serious doubts about the fragility of the gaurav of the state - especially so when this pride seems to be under threat from every free expression of speech or opinion in various forms of popular culture.
Parzania is an emotionally powerful film with a potential to shake if not stir and thus depolarise the Gujarati society ahead of elections this year. That is the worst fear of the Bajrang parivar.
The bullies of the Bajrang Dal shall do what is their wont, only some have the suicidal courage to fly in the face of history asking it to repeat itself. But the docile acceptance of the decision by the people may not be healthy for the people themselves in the long run. It is bound to further embolden such elements in our society that use fear to suspend the fundamental right to choose.
Fear as an instrument to get institutional legitimacy is not new to Gujarat, or to any part of the country where submission to such tactics has been found easy. But Gujarat has the gaurav of being one of the states with the largest number of NGOs and activists. Then why does its civil society repeatedly fails, and only sporadically succeeds, in showing the way how to win these crucial conflicts?
On the face of it, the villains of the piece are the Bajrang Dal and the Multiplex Association of Gujarat. Not on the face of it, however, not in the same order. By now, even the most uninitiated would not be surprised at the Bajrang Dal and its various country cousins following their brief. As theatres are meant to be vehicles of expression, outfits like the Bajrang Dal must find it irksome to let them do their job unhindered. The fact that they hinder the job so often, and so successfully, should worry everyone interested in freedom as a concept. We must believe that democracy as a dream is close to being lost when fear, coercion and perhaps even political pressure take precedence over free voice. The threat to democracy appears fatal when one finds the elected chief minister of Gujarat totally helpless to the diktat of the Bajrang Dal et al.
Surely this isn't good news for the kind of no-nonsense image the CM has so carefully cultivated, nor also for the kind of confidence he would want investors to have in the institutional stability of the state. Not many interpretations are possible for his silence over the matter. The only one which is evident does a serious damage to the pride of the state he heads. His silence certainly lends sanctity to the bullies.
There have, however, been other silences which are more difficult to fathom. For instance, the silence of the other stakeholders of the system, particularly the media, on this issue is deafening. Those loud votaries of "freedom of expression" ought to know there is buried somewhere in this entire din, the right of people to be able to see cinematic expressions that have been duly cleared by the Censor Board. Will any of these so-called "fearless" television channels show the courage to air the film across the state? This would be the most befitting riposte to both the Bajrang Dal and the Multiplex Association. At best the channel would be forced off the air from the state for a while. Imagine what such a ban can do to the TRP of the daring channel!
When all other institutions, including the worst critics of political institutions, fail to deliver, the onus of restoring the rights of the people comes back on a political party. Recently, the Gujarat unit of the Congress party has decided to hold special screenings across the state. For those of us who can afford the commonplace luxury of cynicism, we may dismiss it as a political stunt. But what else is a political party there for, if not to lend legitimate political muscle to those who are held to ransom by anti-Constitutional and anti-social ideologies and organisations? Unlike other institutions, including the otherwise vocal civil society, that abdicated their responsibility in this case, the Congress showed the sensitivity towards the cause of the people.
And what are the MPs from the film industry doing? Will Ms Hema Malini, Mr Dharmendra, Mr Navjot Sidhu, Ms Jaya Bachchan, Mr Vinod Khanna, Mr Govinda, Ms Jaya Prada and Mr Shatrughan Sinha rise up to the occasion and speak for the industry which has given them all that they deserve, and much more?
It was the same multiplex association of the same Gujarat which had refused to screen Fanaa last year fearing attacks by angry groups reacting to Aamir Khan's support to Medha Patkar on the Narmada issue. By failing to protect the freedom of speech and expression, the state government has supported the culture of intolerance towards voices of dissent.
Even the most illiberal societies like Saudi Arabia do not disallow broadcast of the Radio Sawa or the Al-Hurra TV - both supposed to be vehicles of American propaganda targeted towards Arab youth.
The aggressive media campaign by the United States in West Asia in the form of the Hi magazine in response to the anti-American sentiment following its Armageddon in Afghanistan and Iraq, has not been blocked by local governments, even if it is offensive to the cultural and also political sensibilities of West Asian societies. The Hi Magazine is sponsored by the US state department.
There have been powerful depictions of emotive issues. Fearing their disruptive potential the state often banned them. Sergei Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin, although banned in Nazi Germany for fear of evoking revolutionary zeal, was considered by Joseph Goebbels as "a marvellous film without equal in the cinema… Anyone who had no firm political conviction could become a Bolshevik after seeing the film."
At the end of this debate, unlike other such similar ends and similar debates, one needs to look for the reason for the insecurity that forces films like Parzania off the screens. It must be to make sure that the issues the film raises, the emotions it kindles, the humanity it questions are kept beyond the realm of a common Gujarati, so that he or she can continue to feel the gaurav they have been promised.
An entire state's political thought, manoeuvred into position of power after an infamous bloodbath, cannot be allowed to delve into the cinematic expression of a true story of pathos of a Parsi family that lost its child in the riots. For those who deal in numbers, what is one missing child? Parsis are a dwindling race in any case. After all, the rioters did not have time to find out whether Azhar was a Parsi or a Muslim. Will be more careful next time around, with the religious census in place now…
Until then it is Bajrang bully ki jai in Gujarat: Victory to the bullies of Bajrang Dal.
Pawan Khera is political secretary to the chief minister of Delhi
March 24, 2007
Response to the Gujarat Relief Package Announced by Central Government
Press Note
March 23, 2007
Response to the Gujarat Relief Package Announced by Central Government
As recognition of the continued suffering of the survivors of the Gujarat carnage in 2002, and as a statement of reparation, the Central Government's announcement of a relief and rehabilitation package of 106.57 crores, though modest, is long overdue and welcome. Regrettably the package focuses on ex-gratia payments for those who died, on injury compensation, and to a lesser extent on compensation for damage to residential and some commercial properties. We urge the Central Government to expand the scope of the package to bring into its framework the rights to relief, rehabilitation, and reparation for the thousands who still remain internally displaced due to the violence in 2002, and who have really been in the forefront of this latest chapter in the struggle for recognition.
In recent months, the survivors of the Gujarat carnage have been bringing to public attention the continued internal displacement of over 25,000 Gujarati Muslims, who still live scattered across 7 districts in Gujarat in approximately 69 shabby colonies entirely constructed by NGOs. They live without any amenities or livelihood opportunities because they cannot return to their homes. Yet, their existence continues to be denied by the State Government.
A complaint seeking relief and reparations for these 5,000 families was filed with the National Commission for Minorities (NCM) in August 2006. In October 2006 the NCM visited 17 of these colonies. The NCM's report finding the State Government guilty of blatant neglect was a welcome sign that at least at the Centre there was some recognition of the rights of this internally displaced population. The NCM report had made the following key recommendations:
The NCM would like to make three sets of recommendations to the State Government and Central Government to improve the lot of the residents of the make-shift camps. These include (1) Basic amenities and livelihood issues (2) Central Government Economic Package (3) National Policy on Rehabilitation and Internally Displaced due to violence.
1 Basic Amenities and Livelihood in Rehabilitation Colonies
Basic amenities must be provided in the camps of displaced victims. These would cover provisions of safe drinking water, street lights, approach roads etc. This should be done by the State Government.
Government of India should agree for a period of five years until they continue to live in the camps, whichever is earlier, all the inhabitants of such camps should be given BPL ration cards without going through the formalities laid down by the Government for the issue of such cards. Similarly, widows should be allowed to claim their pension even if they have not applied within two years or even if they have sons above the age of 18 years.
The State Government should prepare a special economic package for those displaced by the violence with special focus on livelihood issues. For the self employed special efforts should be made to provide inputs like easy credits, raw material and marketing assistance. We strongly believe that this is a vital element in the rehabilitation scenario and that for it to be successfully implemented, NGOs should be involved in it.
Wherever possible the State should take advantage of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme to cover able bodied people in these camps and give them employment.
Government of India should return the amount of Rs. 19.10 crores given back by the Government of Gujarat. The State Government should be asked to cover more beneficiaries under the schemes in an attempt to utilise the entire sum.
There should be a monitoring committee consisting of representatives of State Government and Civil Society, which will be charged with the responsibility of ensuring that the schemes described above are properly implemented.
2 A Special Economic Package for Rehabilitation of Internally Displaced Muslim families in Gujarat
There is an urgent need for the Central Government to design and implement an immediate special economic package for rehabilitation of internally displaced Muslim families in Gujarat. The package must include a set of inputs that would address the totality of livelihood concerns. In particular attention must be paid to availability of credit, raw material and marketing support, where necessary, with the help of NGOs.
3 National Policy on Internal Displaced due to Violence
There is a need to design a national policy on internal displacement due to the violence. Populations displaced due to sectarian, ethnic or communal violence should not be left to suffer for years together due to the lack of a policy and absence of justiciable frame-work of entitlements.
The preamble of the new Draft National Rehabilitation Policy 2006, (NRP 2006) which incorporates recommendations made by the National Advisory Council, provides a precedent and sensitive understanding of how displacement due to any reason affects people. It describes displacement in the following terms, “… displacement of people, depriving them of their land, livelihood and shelter, restricting their access to traditional resource basis and uprooting them from their socio-cultural environment. These have traumatic psychological and socio-cultural consequences on the displaced population…” However, NRP 2006 pertains only to land displacement due to development imperatives. When displacement takes place due to mass violence, entailing loss of life, property, family and loved ones and the total destruction of the fabric of a socio-economic and cultural community, then the rehabilitation of the internally displaced populations calls for a new framework of understanding.
When displacement takes place under conditions of fear and under constant direct threat of violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, the trauma and conditions under which survivors face the future is considerably worsened. Further, when the threat of violence is perceived to be continuing (as it currently is in the State of Gujarat), in the absence of justice and in a situation of discrimination and exclusion, the protection of people’s constitutional rights can only be sought through a national policy which clearly lays out a non-negotiable framework of entitlements. Any national policy on internal displacement due to violence must be designed to include provisions for immediate compensation and rehabilitation. A national policy on internal displacement due to violence must further take into account the displaced population’s aspirations of ‘return to their home’ and make provisions to facilitate the return, if it is possible under conditions of safety and security, and to restore the displaced families to their original conditions of living.
A national policy on internal displacement due to violence must also lay down specified time frames for implementation of a rehabilitation plan, as well as include an effective grievance redresal and monitoring mechanism.
In addition, activists also made representations to the Prime Minister seeking a package of rehabilitation for the internally displaced. Further, in the last six months internally displaced people from the 69 colonies have organised themselves into the Antarik Visthapit Hak Rakshak Samiti (Committee of the Internally Displaced) to press for their demands. The Central's Government's package comes in response to all these efforts. As such we urge the Government to fully implement the recommendations of the NCM's report.
Yusuf Shaikh - 09898990823
(Convenor, Antarik Visthapit Hak Rakshak Samiti, Gujarat)
Gagan Sethi, Janvikas, Ahmedabad- 09824023209
Shabnam Hashmi, Anhad, Delhi- 9811807558
Farah Naqvi, Writer & Activist, Delhi- 9811105521
The Myth of Early Savarkar: His “Nationalist”1857 Book
(People's Democracy
March 25, 2007)
The Myth of Early Savarkar: His “Nationalist”1857 Book
Nalini Taneja
IT has now become a truism of modern secular historiography on India that there was an ‘early’ Savarkar and a ‘late’ Savarkar (much in the same way as intellectuals refer to early and late Marx!), and that the early Savarkar was secular, humanist, and a nationalist revolutionary who, only in his later years became the theoretician of Hindutva. His nationalist, secular credentials are based on his activities in Europe and his escape from a ship mid-sea, and more and more frequently now on his book, First War of National Independence, 1857’, written by him in 1907. That we happen to be celebrating the 150th anniversary of 1857 will doubtless add to Savarkar’s glory, particularly as it is easy to prove that the Indian National Congress to begin with, did not uphold 1857.
This distinction between an early and a late Savarkar is clearly misplaced in so far as his secular credentials are concerned, or even his espousal of modern nationalism. A careful reading of the very text so often cited for his secularism brings out clear continuities in his communalist, parochial and elitist stance; between what he wrote in this text and in his Hindutva text written in 1924 after he became a leader of Hindu Mahasabha. His vision of an independent India was less forward looking in 1907 than that of many of his contemporaries, and certainly also as compared with many of the participants themselves in the 1857 rebellions.
The break with the tradition of a composite, lived unity spontaneously acted upon in 1857, came with the consolidation of communalist tendencies in the late 19th century, after which it had to be consciously campaigned for by secular nationalists. Savarkar was very much a child of this communal consolidation and its reliance on revivalism, which colours his view of 1857 even when he defends the rebellions and marks the unity of Hindus and Muslims against the British.
We also need to look at what else Savarkar was doing around the same years, and what else he was writing around that time, and we need to explain first of all his conversion to secularism itself from an even earlier adolescent hostility towards Muslims. Not only does Dhananjay Keer, his biographer, describe an incident in which a twelve year old Savarkar leads a march of his school mates to stone a village mosque, but Savarkar himself in his later recounting, uncritically and with pride recounts the same incident. “We vandalized the mosque to our heart’s content and raised the flag of our bravery on it. We followed the war strategy of Shivaji completely and ran away from the site after accomplishing the task.” (VD Savarkar, Savarkar Samagra, Vol. I, Prabhat Prakashan, pp. 152-153. It was seen by him as a victory of the Hindus in their dharm yudh (holy war) against the Muslims. More important than the period when he recounted this incident is the fact that he never once regretted it: certainly not in his author’s introduction to the 1857 book.
He does make some other statements, however, which are telling: his espousal of Hindu-Muslim unity has little to do with his conviction of equal rights to citizenship or an appreciation of shared living or composite culture. “In 1857 the Hindus and Muslims set aside their centuries old religious war to fight the Christians.” (Savarkar Samagra, Vol. 5, p. 29). He has no doubt even in his so called secular-nationalist phase that Hindus and Muslims are ‘warring nations’. He recognizes that Hindus and Muslims had to unite in 1857 if they had to present an effective challenge to the British, but that necessity does not seem to extend to the period when he is writing that text. He nowhere talks of the necessity of a unified struggle in the present or in the future: 1857 is a special episode, which he is describing as it happened, rather than learning from it to prescribe for the future.
In 1909 communal historiography had still not gained hegemony, 1857 was not that far away-- just about 50 years—and many people of that generation would still have been alive: it was simply not possible to have given a version of 1857 in those days which did not recognize the role of the Muslims in the 1857 rebellions, to give a communal version that could vilify or negate their role in 1857. Savarkar could hardly have done otherwise, once he decided to defend 1857—unlike many who just maintained a silence or opposed it.
The areas of most intense rebellions—Delhi, Meerut, Bareilly, Lucknow, Kanpur, Gwalior, Jhansi, North-west Frontier—had sizeable Muslim populations and 1857 could not have assumed the form of civil rebellions without participation of both Hindus and Muslims. All armies, without exception, at that time were mixed, including that of Rani of Jhansi and Nana Saheb, and all armies, of the British as well as the states continued to be so in 1909 as well; so not even a sepoy Mutiny was conceivable without participation of all sections of the population in the country. Every family in the regions affected would have had a member—parents, grandparents—either for or against 1857. 1857 was a live, not distant memory in 1909. Even the British revenge against Muslims, their policy of marking out enemies and weeding them out of administration was part of ‘current affairs’ of that time. Folk songs abounded all over the country, personifying their heroes who came from all castes and regions, not to speak of religions. Just as today, it is just not possible for even the most rabid among RSS to be able to say about 1947 that killings were not on both sides, even as they may blame Muslims for partition, it was not possible to present in 1909 the communalist version of 1857 current in the shishu mandir texts and RSS shakhas, which completely erase the role of Muslims in any struggle against the Muslims. Mass media did not exist in the form that it does today when even contemporary events can be easily falsified by the might of a hegemonic media.
Therefore let us see what else he wrote in his book on 1857, which throws a closer light on his world view at the time of writing and publishing the book (1909). This book is reproduced in Savarkar Samagra, Vol. 5, published by Prabhat Prakashan from which we will quote.
We must remember that the early twentieth century, when he wrote 1857, was a period of both secular awakening and communal consolidation, and ‘revolutionaries’ could well be revivalist, while other, more ‘moderate’ people (moderate that is in terms of demands from British rule or in their advocacy of methods employed) could be far more radical and democratic in their views on society. Early twentieth century churnings were influenced by anti-caste movements, by the social reform zeal initiated by the Bengal renaissance and the ‘moderates’, the Arya Samaj and the backlash of Sanatan Dharma, by Tilak, the drain of wealth critiques by Dadabhai Naoroji, the census politics and divide and rule politics of the British, the stirrings of revolution in 1905 in the Russian empire and the swadeshi movement following partition of Bengal in 1905, nationalism of both the liberation variety and the chauvinist expansionist variety and much else. What did Savarkar adopt from this wide spectrum of influences to make his own intellectual personality?
Although his writings of that period are replete with references to ‘learning from history’ to build a ‘future’ nowhere in this book or in other writings of the period does he emphasize a secular unity or a secular nation. Rather his sources of inspiration, as they come out in the 1857 text, are Shivaji and the Maratha movement, Guru Gobind Singh, the ‘centuries old struggle of the Hindus’ against ‘Muslim tyranny’, and the cultural nationalism of Tilak rather than the anti-Brahman movements and organizations inspired by Jyotirao Phule. While in London he translated the life of Mazzini, and what he emphasized about him was that the nation can be built only by reaching back to the ‘roots’ of its ‘civilization’. Therefore he may have spoken of Hindus and Muslims as “blood brothers” in 1857, who loved the motherland equally, but throughout his 1857 text it is clear that for him the roots of India’s civilization lay in Hinduism, Hindus and Hinduism constituted the core of India and that his vision of a future India was a Hindu India even then. For him the inspiration essentially came not from the unity of Hindus and Muslims that he saw as true in 1857, but from the great Hindu past and the invented struggles of Hindus against Muslims.
Even as early as 1909 his was a world inhabited by opposing religions and unity was a pragmatic necessity. Mazzini had written in his On Nationality: Whichever people by its superiority of strength, and by its geographical position, can do us injury, is our natural enemy; whichever cannot do us injury, but can by the amount of its force and by its position injure our enemy, is our natural ally. Savarkar, who was greatly inspired by Mazzini and wrote on him, agreed with him on this. The English were guilty of the very sins attributed to the Muslims. They were the target in 1857, not the Muslims, because they were in power and not the Muslims. Given the percentage of Muslim population in pre-independence India and its spread all over the country it was inconceivable in 1909, or at any point till today, even by communalists, that independence could have been won without the contribution of Muslims. The criteria of a secular outlook for the beginning of the 20th century (when he wrote the book) should not be whether one sees Hindu-Muslim unity operating in the past, but whether one sees in it the seeds of a nation free of religious prejudice and religious inequalities.
Whatever may have been the basis of Hindu-Muslim unity in 1857, and however many pages he may have devoted to describing the role of the many Muslim leaders and of the unity exhibited in 1857, for Savarkar in 1909 it was not something to uphold as heritage for a secular unity in the future.
In 1909 too religion formed the very basis of politics for him. In the 1857 book too he politicized the references to religion and introduced religious metaphors to make political points. The epigraph for the book on 1857 is taken from Swami Ravidas. It says: Die for the sake of dharma and while dieing kill all; in killing is your victory, the establishment of your own rule.” (Savarkar Samagra, 5, p.19). Swadharma and swarajya are inextricably linked, he says, and this forms the title of his first chapter. The principal causes of 1857 revolution, its divine force, were swadharma and swarajya (p. 25). And lest we think that by dharma is meant some nebulous ‘way of life’, he goes on to elaborate that “as soon as the terrible, fatal and treacherous assault on our dearer- than-life religion was realized, the thunder of ‘deen-deen’ (our religion- our religion) reverberated in defense of religion, and when this thunder was joined with the realization that the independence provided to us by nature was treacherously taken away from us, and that we are shackled in political slavery, a holy desire arose to gain self rule swarajya, and this sacred desire dealt a blow to the chains of freedom, and it is here the roots of this revolutionary war lie…Nowhere else the love for one’s own religion and the love for one’s own rule are so clearly visible than in the history of Hindusthan.” Further, “what effort was spared by Hindusthan for swarajya and what divine inspiration it did not gain to retain swadharma? And then he quotes Guru Gobind Singh: The man who fights for religion…even if each part of the body is cut off, he does not leave the field…” and goes on to give his opinion that indeed, the entire history of Hindusthan is filled with episodes of brave men fighting for their religion, who did not leave the field even when their bodies were cut to pieces (p. 25) . Therefore even the matter of greased cartridges hurting religious sentiments was just an episode, as annexation of Awadh and other such episodes were, and the “war” would have been waged even had they not taken place, because the matter was not just one of bad rule, but of rule itself which was seeking to destroy the religious personality of the Indians. (Chapters1-2). He has chosen to highlight mainly such passages from leaders as go to illustrate this point. As Jyotirmaya sharma has shown in his essay on Savarkar, despite Savarkar’s regular barbs against Muslim theocratic politics, religion formed the very basis of politics for Savarkar Hindutva, Penguin), and that Savarkar considers 1857 to be a political revolution on the lines of what happened in Mazzini’s Italy, but the essence of which was the establishment of one’s own religion as much as self rule (Sharma, p.142).
What was the connection between swadharma and swarajya? Savarkar said that the “ancients believed” that the two were inseparable, much as Mazzini did, like heaven and earth were two ends of the same thing and could not be dissociated (discussion in Sharma) The sword of swarajya must always be there to defend swadharma. In ancient times revolutions always took a religious turn and went hand in hand with religion and religious sanction…Even Mazzini said the same, says Savarkar, and stands by it for 1857, and approves of it as an essential and desirable element for politics of his time… ( Savarkar Samagra p.19). Without our religion self rule means little, and without self rule our religion is emasculated; .the sword of swarajya should always be drawn in favour of swadharma and concerns of the other world. This bent of mind of the ancients is to be seen in every moment of history…Political revolution without being joined with religion was unknown in our ancient world; this can be understood only if we recognize that their seeds lie in this same grand worldwide sweep of religion. This very means of swadharma and swarajya (i.e., where religion and politics are inseparable) are valid even in the revolution of 1857 (p.27). He quotes Bahadur Shah Zafar’s proclamation as stating: “Why has God given us wealth, country, rights? They are not related merely to the happiness and enjoyment of individuals but for the holy aim of protecting our religion.” According to him Zafar warned that “if you lose the opportunity and means to protect your religion you will be considered a criminal and anti-religious in the court of God…God has willed that you attain self rule because that is the only means for protecting your religion. Those who do not attain self rule are without religion and are traitors to religion. Therefore rise in defense of your religion and attain self rule.” And then Savarkar himself goes on to say: “‘Rise in defense of your religion and attain self rule’—in how many divine miracles has this truth not been revealed throughout our history?” (p. 28).
While there is no doubt that a religion pervaded the world view of most people in 1857, the entire tone and tenor of this proclamation, of which we are given no historical reference, moves in tune with the tone and tenor of Savarkar himself. Then he approvingly quotes Ramdas: “Had not Shri Samarth Ramdas preached to us 250 years ago ‘Die for your religion, kill all while dying, kill all and establish your rule.’ This is the elemental cause of the revolutionary war in 1857. The telescope through which one can discern the clear and true character of that war, that genuine telescope, that is… Die for your religion, and while dieing kill all of them, while killing win your rule. If you look at this war through this telescope, one begins to see a very different picture. Swadharma and swaraj—these two holy causes with which this revolutionary war was fought, its holy character is not diminished by defeat. The efforts of Guru Gobind Singh may have failed if we look at them from a traditional perspective, but this does not lessen the divine character of his efforts.”(p.28).
It is clear thus that even in 1909, when he wrote his 1857, for him, religious politics forms the raison d etre of people’s struggles and the motive force in history. For him swadharma is no dharma of Buddha: it is filled with violence and hatred. Swadharma is not identified by him with some secular duty either which is given an exalted, dharmic status: his is not the language of an atheist, as some historians have claimed him to be. Independence for him is a religious duty, and the goal of independence is the assertion of the religious will.
Another misconception is that he was concerned with the idea of a nation. For a person inspired by Mazzini, and who wrote on him, it is surprising that the word “rashtra” or nation does not really occur in the book. Throughout the book he refers to 1857 as “revolutionary war”: for him it was, as he titled it, essentially the ‘First War of Independence’ from the present enemy in power. It is not a war qualitatively different from the earlier wars against the Mughuls, except that the enemy is the British and the Hindus are joined by the Muslims in fighting against them. For him the British too are qualitatively no different from the Mughuls: they are being fought because they are in power in 1857. He would accept even later, in his Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, that the Hindus and Muslims had fought together against the British. For him the war against the British is like the war against the Muslims earlier: both represented an insult to religion. Throughout 1857 his references to the battles of Hindu kings against the Mughals is referred to and described as a fight of the Hindus against Muslims. One searches in vain in his 1857 book for any nationalism or idea of nation in Savarkar as we understand a modern nation. And it must be remembered he was no Bahadur Shah Zafar or Rani Lakshmi Bai ruling in mid nineteenth century. He was no 19th century peasant or tribal whose mental world was hegemonised by religion. He was writing in the early twentieth century after having spent considerable time in Europe, being exposed to the ideas of liberalism and nationalism, and was somebody who had gone on an academic scholarship to read for the Bar exams in London. The idea that Savarkar upheld 1857 as a “national” war is really the interpolation of the communalists, born out of the need for inventing for themselves a nationalist personality. When he did begin to talk of a nation, he articulated the idea of Hindutva and Hindu rashtra. In 1909 he refers to the 1857 as “war” for independence, and the war for independence is a “dharmyudh” (holy war). The Hindus and Muslims are fighting together, but the Muslims are fighting for their religion and the Hindus for their own. He approvingly quotes a proclamation without giving its source as saying: “Our revolt is only for the protection of our religion, there is no other purpose behind it” and called upon people to “leave aside all personal factors and co-operate with us in the defense of our ancient religion.” (p. 239).
It would be fruitful to quote from his description of the endorsement of Bahadur Shah Zafar as Emperor of Delhi by the rebels after capture of Delhi. He writes: “However this establishment of the power of this old representative of the Mughals, was not for bringing back the old Mughal dynasty or the old barbaric tradition…it could appear so in a narrow sense but was not so in truth, in a broader sense…The Mughal dynasty had not been chosen by the people of this country. Mughal power was imposed upon us by the aggressive personality of the Muslims and the desire to conquer Hindusthan and as a result of treason by people devoid of self respect. ..Here no such force was at work in elevating Bahadur Shah to the throne once again. No, that would have been impossible…It would have been suicidal to do so……because that would have meant that the blood shed by Hindu martyrs, fighters for their religion, for their independence, over the course of three-four centuries has been in vain…the spate of aggression and conquests in all directions started by the barbaric hordes of Arabstan with their acceptance of Islam crushed all under their feet. Nowhere were they resisted, so as they overran country after country, one human race after another human race fell prey to their forcible conversions to Islam. If somebody resisted this formidable and unchecked storm without compromising and with great bravery, fearlessness and determination for the first time it was this country. In the history of other countries such resistance is only an exception. This war continued for more than five centuries. For more than five centuries the Hindus fought for their birthright [natural rights] against these foreign conquerors. ..and in this glorious struggle of centuries and centuries there arose a new Hindu force in the western ghats from among whom thousands and thousands of Hindus sacrificed themselves for the self respect of their race, and which took upon itself uphold the honour of the Hindu race…A brave Hindu, Bhaosahab Peshwa, led his army from Pune to the throne of Delhi, captured it and washed off the dark stains of slavery on Hindu culture. Hindusthan thus shed its slavery, wiped away its defeat and became independent once again. Hindus once again became masters of the land of Hindus—they became blessed once again. So, in truth, the endorsement of Bahadur Shah as Emperor by the people did not represent the reinstatement of the Mughal dynasty in 1857.” (p. 238). This crucial summing up of a defining moment in 1857 reveals his attitude to history and his own world view, his parochialism, the invention of unending bravery of Hindu royal houses
A sub-chapter in the book is precisely titled: Hindu dharma and Hindu rajya must be Struggled For, and Nana Saheb on departure after defeat is quoted as saying: Efforts will have to be made once again to re establish Hindu dharma and Hindu rashtra.” Throughout the 1857 book he refers to Hindustan as “Hindusthan”, and specific areas as “Brahmavarta” and so on. The only heroes to whom separate chapters are devoted and the chapters titled after their names are only Nana Saheb, Tantia Tope, Laxmi Bai, Mangal Pandey, Kunwar Singh and Amar Singh; no Muslim heroes, though in details of various areas they do emerge as local heroes. The old Hindu royal houses are described in a way that leaves no doubt of his admiration for the feudal order, including of the preference of sati of Rajput women in the face of defeat and so on.
More significantly, all the imperialist stereotypes about the people—including the racial sterotypes—are reproduced in all their glory by Savarkar. His easy characterization of the Sikh, the Bengali, the Rohilla, the Maratha, the Gurkha as playing their ethnic and racially designated roles is revealed in the fashion made familiar by old British or rabidly communal historians and administrators. Therefore the Sikh emerge as the betrayer, the south Indian keeps quiet, and the Bengali is indifferent or black sheep, and so on.
Also, in what has become the hallmark of communal historiography, in characterizing it as the “first war of independence”, there is complete silence on all struggles that cannot be termed as “Hindu”. So while we have glowing passages of the kind quoted above with regard to Marathas, there is no mention of Tipu Sultan and Haider Ali, of the peasant and tribal revolts against the British rule all over the country and almost every year since the coming of the British, the entire real pre-history of 1857 that culminated in the great rebellions of 1857.
Considering that he is writing in 1907-1909, long after the formation of many social and political organizations, there is no cognizance or mention that lack of such political organisations may have meant in 1857. Dadabhai’s study on drain of wealth may have been familiar to him as also the impact of British rule on the different sections of the people. But apart from talking of general “destruction” of “Hindusthan”, there is no cognizance of colonialism or Imperialism.
The celebration and glorification of violence so characteristic of fascist/sectarian organizations, and the intense hatred towards those characterized as enemies, the belief that might is right and justification of unprincipled violence and cruelty is evident throughout the book. The way the descriptions go, of attacks on “white men women and children” “attacked for their very whiteness”, Savarkar may have lifted descriptions of senseless violence and cruelty from the most prejudiced colonial accounts, except that he is proud of them. It is sickening to read such descriptions, where the killing of children is justified as killing of the litter of serpents who would grow up to be poisonous. He has completely accepted the imperialist logic in inverting the picture of 1857. Nobody who reads these descriptions and the glorification of killing by treachery and senseless hatred can even consider the proposition that Savarkar’s 1857 book reveals that the early Savarkar was a secular, nationalist and humane personality. It covers so many passages in so many pages, that one can make a full book of it. There is everything in that book which does the spadework for the later, well defined and well developed communal historiography, and it very much shows the future course that Savarkar was to take.
March 25, 2007)
The Myth of Early Savarkar: His “Nationalist”1857 Book
Nalini Taneja
IT has now become a truism of modern secular historiography on India that there was an ‘early’ Savarkar and a ‘late’ Savarkar (much in the same way as intellectuals refer to early and late Marx!), and that the early Savarkar was secular, humanist, and a nationalist revolutionary who, only in his later years became the theoretician of Hindutva. His nationalist, secular credentials are based on his activities in Europe and his escape from a ship mid-sea, and more and more frequently now on his book, First War of National Independence, 1857’, written by him in 1907. That we happen to be celebrating the 150th anniversary of 1857 will doubtless add to Savarkar’s glory, particularly as it is easy to prove that the Indian National Congress to begin with, did not uphold 1857.
This distinction between an early and a late Savarkar is clearly misplaced in so far as his secular credentials are concerned, or even his espousal of modern nationalism. A careful reading of the very text so often cited for his secularism brings out clear continuities in his communalist, parochial and elitist stance; between what he wrote in this text and in his Hindutva text written in 1924 after he became a leader of Hindu Mahasabha. His vision of an independent India was less forward looking in 1907 than that of many of his contemporaries, and certainly also as compared with many of the participants themselves in the 1857 rebellions.
The break with the tradition of a composite, lived unity spontaneously acted upon in 1857, came with the consolidation of communalist tendencies in the late 19th century, after which it had to be consciously campaigned for by secular nationalists. Savarkar was very much a child of this communal consolidation and its reliance on revivalism, which colours his view of 1857 even when he defends the rebellions and marks the unity of Hindus and Muslims against the British.
We also need to look at what else Savarkar was doing around the same years, and what else he was writing around that time, and we need to explain first of all his conversion to secularism itself from an even earlier adolescent hostility towards Muslims. Not only does Dhananjay Keer, his biographer, describe an incident in which a twelve year old Savarkar leads a march of his school mates to stone a village mosque, but Savarkar himself in his later recounting, uncritically and with pride recounts the same incident. “We vandalized the mosque to our heart’s content and raised the flag of our bravery on it. We followed the war strategy of Shivaji completely and ran away from the site after accomplishing the task.” (VD Savarkar, Savarkar Samagra, Vol. I, Prabhat Prakashan, pp. 152-153. It was seen by him as a victory of the Hindus in their dharm yudh (holy war) against the Muslims. More important than the period when he recounted this incident is the fact that he never once regretted it: certainly not in his author’s introduction to the 1857 book.
He does make some other statements, however, which are telling: his espousal of Hindu-Muslim unity has little to do with his conviction of equal rights to citizenship or an appreciation of shared living or composite culture. “In 1857 the Hindus and Muslims set aside their centuries old religious war to fight the Christians.” (Savarkar Samagra, Vol. 5, p. 29). He has no doubt even in his so called secular-nationalist phase that Hindus and Muslims are ‘warring nations’. He recognizes that Hindus and Muslims had to unite in 1857 if they had to present an effective challenge to the British, but that necessity does not seem to extend to the period when he is writing that text. He nowhere talks of the necessity of a unified struggle in the present or in the future: 1857 is a special episode, which he is describing as it happened, rather than learning from it to prescribe for the future.
In 1909 communal historiography had still not gained hegemony, 1857 was not that far away-- just about 50 years—and many people of that generation would still have been alive: it was simply not possible to have given a version of 1857 in those days which did not recognize the role of the Muslims in the 1857 rebellions, to give a communal version that could vilify or negate their role in 1857. Savarkar could hardly have done otherwise, once he decided to defend 1857—unlike many who just maintained a silence or opposed it.
The areas of most intense rebellions—Delhi, Meerut, Bareilly, Lucknow, Kanpur, Gwalior, Jhansi, North-west Frontier—had sizeable Muslim populations and 1857 could not have assumed the form of civil rebellions without participation of both Hindus and Muslims. All armies, without exception, at that time were mixed, including that of Rani of Jhansi and Nana Saheb, and all armies, of the British as well as the states continued to be so in 1909 as well; so not even a sepoy Mutiny was conceivable without participation of all sections of the population in the country. Every family in the regions affected would have had a member—parents, grandparents—either for or against 1857. 1857 was a live, not distant memory in 1909. Even the British revenge against Muslims, their policy of marking out enemies and weeding them out of administration was part of ‘current affairs’ of that time. Folk songs abounded all over the country, personifying their heroes who came from all castes and regions, not to speak of religions. Just as today, it is just not possible for even the most rabid among RSS to be able to say about 1947 that killings were not on both sides, even as they may blame Muslims for partition, it was not possible to present in 1909 the communalist version of 1857 current in the shishu mandir texts and RSS shakhas, which completely erase the role of Muslims in any struggle against the Muslims. Mass media did not exist in the form that it does today when even contemporary events can be easily falsified by the might of a hegemonic media.
Therefore let us see what else he wrote in his book on 1857, which throws a closer light on his world view at the time of writing and publishing the book (1909). This book is reproduced in Savarkar Samagra, Vol. 5, published by Prabhat Prakashan from which we will quote.
We must remember that the early twentieth century, when he wrote 1857, was a period of both secular awakening and communal consolidation, and ‘revolutionaries’ could well be revivalist, while other, more ‘moderate’ people (moderate that is in terms of demands from British rule or in their advocacy of methods employed) could be far more radical and democratic in their views on society. Early twentieth century churnings were influenced by anti-caste movements, by the social reform zeal initiated by the Bengal renaissance and the ‘moderates’, the Arya Samaj and the backlash of Sanatan Dharma, by Tilak, the drain of wealth critiques by Dadabhai Naoroji, the census politics and divide and rule politics of the British, the stirrings of revolution in 1905 in the Russian empire and the swadeshi movement following partition of Bengal in 1905, nationalism of both the liberation variety and the chauvinist expansionist variety and much else. What did Savarkar adopt from this wide spectrum of influences to make his own intellectual personality?
Although his writings of that period are replete with references to ‘learning from history’ to build a ‘future’ nowhere in this book or in other writings of the period does he emphasize a secular unity or a secular nation. Rather his sources of inspiration, as they come out in the 1857 text, are Shivaji and the Maratha movement, Guru Gobind Singh, the ‘centuries old struggle of the Hindus’ against ‘Muslim tyranny’, and the cultural nationalism of Tilak rather than the anti-Brahman movements and organizations inspired by Jyotirao Phule. While in London he translated the life of Mazzini, and what he emphasized about him was that the nation can be built only by reaching back to the ‘roots’ of its ‘civilization’. Therefore he may have spoken of Hindus and Muslims as “blood brothers” in 1857, who loved the motherland equally, but throughout his 1857 text it is clear that for him the roots of India’s civilization lay in Hinduism, Hindus and Hinduism constituted the core of India and that his vision of a future India was a Hindu India even then. For him the inspiration essentially came not from the unity of Hindus and Muslims that he saw as true in 1857, but from the great Hindu past and the invented struggles of Hindus against Muslims.
Even as early as 1909 his was a world inhabited by opposing religions and unity was a pragmatic necessity. Mazzini had written in his On Nationality: Whichever people by its superiority of strength, and by its geographical position, can do us injury, is our natural enemy; whichever cannot do us injury, but can by the amount of its force and by its position injure our enemy, is our natural ally. Savarkar, who was greatly inspired by Mazzini and wrote on him, agreed with him on this. The English were guilty of the very sins attributed to the Muslims. They were the target in 1857, not the Muslims, because they were in power and not the Muslims. Given the percentage of Muslim population in pre-independence India and its spread all over the country it was inconceivable in 1909, or at any point till today, even by communalists, that independence could have been won without the contribution of Muslims. The criteria of a secular outlook for the beginning of the 20th century (when he wrote the book) should not be whether one sees Hindu-Muslim unity operating in the past, but whether one sees in it the seeds of a nation free of religious prejudice and religious inequalities.
Whatever may have been the basis of Hindu-Muslim unity in 1857, and however many pages he may have devoted to describing the role of the many Muslim leaders and of the unity exhibited in 1857, for Savarkar in 1909 it was not something to uphold as heritage for a secular unity in the future.
In 1909 too religion formed the very basis of politics for him. In the 1857 book too he politicized the references to religion and introduced religious metaphors to make political points. The epigraph for the book on 1857 is taken from Swami Ravidas. It says: Die for the sake of dharma and while dieing kill all; in killing is your victory, the establishment of your own rule.” (Savarkar Samagra, 5, p.19). Swadharma and swarajya are inextricably linked, he says, and this forms the title of his first chapter. The principal causes of 1857 revolution, its divine force, were swadharma and swarajya (p. 25). And lest we think that by dharma is meant some nebulous ‘way of life’, he goes on to elaborate that “as soon as the terrible, fatal and treacherous assault on our dearer- than-life religion was realized, the thunder of ‘deen-deen’ (our religion- our religion) reverberated in defense of religion, and when this thunder was joined with the realization that the independence provided to us by nature was treacherously taken away from us, and that we are shackled in political slavery, a holy desire arose to gain self rule swarajya, and this sacred desire dealt a blow to the chains of freedom, and it is here the roots of this revolutionary war lie…Nowhere else the love for one’s own religion and the love for one’s own rule are so clearly visible than in the history of Hindusthan.” Further, “what effort was spared by Hindusthan for swarajya and what divine inspiration it did not gain to retain swadharma? And then he quotes Guru Gobind Singh: The man who fights for religion…even if each part of the body is cut off, he does not leave the field…” and goes on to give his opinion that indeed, the entire history of Hindusthan is filled with episodes of brave men fighting for their religion, who did not leave the field even when their bodies were cut to pieces (p. 25) . Therefore even the matter of greased cartridges hurting religious sentiments was just an episode, as annexation of Awadh and other such episodes were, and the “war” would have been waged even had they not taken place, because the matter was not just one of bad rule, but of rule itself which was seeking to destroy the religious personality of the Indians. (Chapters1-2). He has chosen to highlight mainly such passages from leaders as go to illustrate this point. As Jyotirmaya sharma has shown in his essay on Savarkar, despite Savarkar’s regular barbs against Muslim theocratic politics, religion formed the very basis of politics for Savarkar Hindutva, Penguin), and that Savarkar considers 1857 to be a political revolution on the lines of what happened in Mazzini’s Italy, but the essence of which was the establishment of one’s own religion as much as self rule (Sharma, p.142).
What was the connection between swadharma and swarajya? Savarkar said that the “ancients believed” that the two were inseparable, much as Mazzini did, like heaven and earth were two ends of the same thing and could not be dissociated (discussion in Sharma) The sword of swarajya must always be there to defend swadharma. In ancient times revolutions always took a religious turn and went hand in hand with religion and religious sanction…Even Mazzini said the same, says Savarkar, and stands by it for 1857, and approves of it as an essential and desirable element for politics of his time… ( Savarkar Samagra p.19). Without our religion self rule means little, and without self rule our religion is emasculated; .the sword of swarajya should always be drawn in favour of swadharma and concerns of the other world. This bent of mind of the ancients is to be seen in every moment of history…Political revolution without being joined with religion was unknown in our ancient world; this can be understood only if we recognize that their seeds lie in this same grand worldwide sweep of religion. This very means of swadharma and swarajya (i.e., where religion and politics are inseparable) are valid even in the revolution of 1857 (p.27). He quotes Bahadur Shah Zafar’s proclamation as stating: “Why has God given us wealth, country, rights? They are not related merely to the happiness and enjoyment of individuals but for the holy aim of protecting our religion.” According to him Zafar warned that “if you lose the opportunity and means to protect your religion you will be considered a criminal and anti-religious in the court of God…God has willed that you attain self rule because that is the only means for protecting your religion. Those who do not attain self rule are without religion and are traitors to religion. Therefore rise in defense of your religion and attain self rule.” And then Savarkar himself goes on to say: “‘Rise in defense of your religion and attain self rule’—in how many divine miracles has this truth not been revealed throughout our history?” (p. 28).
While there is no doubt that a religion pervaded the world view of most people in 1857, the entire tone and tenor of this proclamation, of which we are given no historical reference, moves in tune with the tone and tenor of Savarkar himself. Then he approvingly quotes Ramdas: “Had not Shri Samarth Ramdas preached to us 250 years ago ‘Die for your religion, kill all while dying, kill all and establish your rule.’ This is the elemental cause of the revolutionary war in 1857. The telescope through which one can discern the clear and true character of that war, that genuine telescope, that is… Die for your religion, and while dieing kill all of them, while killing win your rule. If you look at this war through this telescope, one begins to see a very different picture. Swadharma and swaraj—these two holy causes with which this revolutionary war was fought, its holy character is not diminished by defeat. The efforts of Guru Gobind Singh may have failed if we look at them from a traditional perspective, but this does not lessen the divine character of his efforts.”(p.28).
It is clear thus that even in 1909, when he wrote his 1857, for him, religious politics forms the raison d etre of people’s struggles and the motive force in history. For him swadharma is no dharma of Buddha: it is filled with violence and hatred. Swadharma is not identified by him with some secular duty either which is given an exalted, dharmic status: his is not the language of an atheist, as some historians have claimed him to be. Independence for him is a religious duty, and the goal of independence is the assertion of the religious will.
Another misconception is that he was concerned with the idea of a nation. For a person inspired by Mazzini, and who wrote on him, it is surprising that the word “rashtra” or nation does not really occur in the book. Throughout the book he refers to 1857 as “revolutionary war”: for him it was, as he titled it, essentially the ‘First War of Independence’ from the present enemy in power. It is not a war qualitatively different from the earlier wars against the Mughuls, except that the enemy is the British and the Hindus are joined by the Muslims in fighting against them. For him the British too are qualitatively no different from the Mughuls: they are being fought because they are in power in 1857. He would accept even later, in his Six Glorious Epochs of Indian History, that the Hindus and Muslims had fought together against the British. For him the war against the British is like the war against the Muslims earlier: both represented an insult to religion. Throughout 1857 his references to the battles of Hindu kings against the Mughals is referred to and described as a fight of the Hindus against Muslims. One searches in vain in his 1857 book for any nationalism or idea of nation in Savarkar as we understand a modern nation. And it must be remembered he was no Bahadur Shah Zafar or Rani Lakshmi Bai ruling in mid nineteenth century. He was no 19th century peasant or tribal whose mental world was hegemonised by religion. He was writing in the early twentieth century after having spent considerable time in Europe, being exposed to the ideas of liberalism and nationalism, and was somebody who had gone on an academic scholarship to read for the Bar exams in London. The idea that Savarkar upheld 1857 as a “national” war is really the interpolation of the communalists, born out of the need for inventing for themselves a nationalist personality. When he did begin to talk of a nation, he articulated the idea of Hindutva and Hindu rashtra. In 1909 he refers to the 1857 as “war” for independence, and the war for independence is a “dharmyudh” (holy war). The Hindus and Muslims are fighting together, but the Muslims are fighting for their religion and the Hindus for their own. He approvingly quotes a proclamation without giving its source as saying: “Our revolt is only for the protection of our religion, there is no other purpose behind it” and called upon people to “leave aside all personal factors and co-operate with us in the defense of our ancient religion.” (p. 239).
It would be fruitful to quote from his description of the endorsement of Bahadur Shah Zafar as Emperor of Delhi by the rebels after capture of Delhi. He writes: “However this establishment of the power of this old representative of the Mughals, was not for bringing back the old Mughal dynasty or the old barbaric tradition…it could appear so in a narrow sense but was not so in truth, in a broader sense…The Mughal dynasty had not been chosen by the people of this country. Mughal power was imposed upon us by the aggressive personality of the Muslims and the desire to conquer Hindusthan and as a result of treason by people devoid of self respect. ..Here no such force was at work in elevating Bahadur Shah to the throne once again. No, that would have been impossible…It would have been suicidal to do so……because that would have meant that the blood shed by Hindu martyrs, fighters for their religion, for their independence, over the course of three-four centuries has been in vain…the spate of aggression and conquests in all directions started by the barbaric hordes of Arabstan with their acceptance of Islam crushed all under their feet. Nowhere were they resisted, so as they overran country after country, one human race after another human race fell prey to their forcible conversions to Islam. If somebody resisted this formidable and unchecked storm without compromising and with great bravery, fearlessness and determination for the first time it was this country. In the history of other countries such resistance is only an exception. This war continued for more than five centuries. For more than five centuries the Hindus fought for their birthright [natural rights] against these foreign conquerors. ..and in this glorious struggle of centuries and centuries there arose a new Hindu force in the western ghats from among whom thousands and thousands of Hindus sacrificed themselves for the self respect of their race, and which took upon itself uphold the honour of the Hindu race…A brave Hindu, Bhaosahab Peshwa, led his army from Pune to the throne of Delhi, captured it and washed off the dark stains of slavery on Hindu culture. Hindusthan thus shed its slavery, wiped away its defeat and became independent once again. Hindus once again became masters of the land of Hindus—they became blessed once again. So, in truth, the endorsement of Bahadur Shah as Emperor by the people did not represent the reinstatement of the Mughal dynasty in 1857.” (p. 238). This crucial summing up of a defining moment in 1857 reveals his attitude to history and his own world view, his parochialism, the invention of unending bravery of Hindu royal houses
A sub-chapter in the book is precisely titled: Hindu dharma and Hindu rajya must be Struggled For, and Nana Saheb on departure after defeat is quoted as saying: Efforts will have to be made once again to re establish Hindu dharma and Hindu rashtra.” Throughout the 1857 book he refers to Hindustan as “Hindusthan”, and specific areas as “Brahmavarta” and so on. The only heroes to whom separate chapters are devoted and the chapters titled after their names are only Nana Saheb, Tantia Tope, Laxmi Bai, Mangal Pandey, Kunwar Singh and Amar Singh; no Muslim heroes, though in details of various areas they do emerge as local heroes. The old Hindu royal houses are described in a way that leaves no doubt of his admiration for the feudal order, including of the preference of sati of Rajput women in the face of defeat and so on.
More significantly, all the imperialist stereotypes about the people—including the racial sterotypes—are reproduced in all their glory by Savarkar. His easy characterization of the Sikh, the Bengali, the Rohilla, the Maratha, the Gurkha as playing their ethnic and racially designated roles is revealed in the fashion made familiar by old British or rabidly communal historians and administrators. Therefore the Sikh emerge as the betrayer, the south Indian keeps quiet, and the Bengali is indifferent or black sheep, and so on.
Also, in what has become the hallmark of communal historiography, in characterizing it as the “first war of independence”, there is complete silence on all struggles that cannot be termed as “Hindu”. So while we have glowing passages of the kind quoted above with regard to Marathas, there is no mention of Tipu Sultan and Haider Ali, of the peasant and tribal revolts against the British rule all over the country and almost every year since the coming of the British, the entire real pre-history of 1857 that culminated in the great rebellions of 1857.
Considering that he is writing in 1907-1909, long after the formation of many social and political organizations, there is no cognizance or mention that lack of such political organisations may have meant in 1857. Dadabhai’s study on drain of wealth may have been familiar to him as also the impact of British rule on the different sections of the people. But apart from talking of general “destruction” of “Hindusthan”, there is no cognizance of colonialism or Imperialism.
The celebration and glorification of violence so characteristic of fascist/sectarian organizations, and the intense hatred towards those characterized as enemies, the belief that might is right and justification of unprincipled violence and cruelty is evident throughout the book. The way the descriptions go, of attacks on “white men women and children” “attacked for their very whiteness”, Savarkar may have lifted descriptions of senseless violence and cruelty from the most prejudiced colonial accounts, except that he is proud of them. It is sickening to read such descriptions, where the killing of children is justified as killing of the litter of serpents who would grow up to be poisonous. He has completely accepted the imperialist logic in inverting the picture of 1857. Nobody who reads these descriptions and the glorification of killing by treachery and senseless hatred can even consider the proposition that Savarkar’s 1857 book reveals that the early Savarkar was a secular, nationalist and humane personality. It covers so many passages in so many pages, that one can make a full book of it. There is everything in that book which does the spadework for the later, well defined and well developed communal historiography, and it very much shows the future course that Savarkar was to take.
Supreme Court seeks Opinion of Gujarat Govt on need for independent probe
(The Times of India
March 24, 2007)
SC seeks Guj view on riots
TIMES NEWS NETWORK [SATURDAY, MARCH 24, 2007 02:19:58 AM]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday sought responses of the Gujarat government and others on a plea that major incidents of communal violence that broke out in the state in February/March 2002 should be probed by an independent investigating agency.
A three-member Bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat, PK Balasubramanyan and DK Jain granted time to the Gujarat government, the victims/NGOs and the accused to file their responses to the plea by April 5 and posted the case for April 16. The Bench passed directions on the plea made by amicus curiae on the matter, senior counsel Harish Salve.
The note of amicus curiae has suggested that the Centre can alternatively file a report on the veracity of the contents contained in certain CDs capturing the gory incidents allegedly perpetrated by the Modi government.
Mr Salve has in his note has said “whatever may be the credentials of NGOs, the role of police in these cases is undisputably such as would give rise to some questions”.
A batch of petitions had been filed before the apex court by various individuals, NGOs and the NHRC seeking transfer of the investigations and trial outside Gujarat on the ground that no fair and free probe was possible in view of the alleged involvement of the government in the riots
The amicus curiae in his note has said the apprehension of bias in the investigations as expressed by the victims is justified on the basis of various surrounding circumstances that followed the communal violence.
According to the note, the Gujarat government does not have any proper reply to the various allegations, including on the appointment for the trial of public prosecutors, who are close to the state government. The note suggested that the Centre can give its findings to the court on the veracity of the CDs. Such CDs are presently in the custody of the Nanavati-Shah commission probing the riots.
However, noting that the Gujarat government had disputed the various allegations besides questioning the bona fides of the NGOs representing the victims, the note felt that a probe by an independent investigating agency could establish the truth behind the incidents.
The places where the major incidents of communal violence were reported are Gulberg Society, Ode, Sardarpura, Naroda Gaon and Patiya.
March 24, 2007)
SC seeks Guj view on riots
TIMES NEWS NETWORK [SATURDAY, MARCH 24, 2007 02:19:58 AM]
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday sought responses of the Gujarat government and others on a plea that major incidents of communal violence that broke out in the state in February/March 2002 should be probed by an independent investigating agency.
A three-member Bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat, PK Balasubramanyan and DK Jain granted time to the Gujarat government, the victims/NGOs and the accused to file their responses to the plea by April 5 and posted the case for April 16. The Bench passed directions on the plea made by amicus curiae on the matter, senior counsel Harish Salve.
The note of amicus curiae has suggested that the Centre can alternatively file a report on the veracity of the contents contained in certain CDs capturing the gory incidents allegedly perpetrated by the Modi government.
Mr Salve has in his note has said “whatever may be the credentials of NGOs, the role of police in these cases is undisputably such as would give rise to some questions”.
A batch of petitions had been filed before the apex court by various individuals, NGOs and the NHRC seeking transfer of the investigations and trial outside Gujarat on the ground that no fair and free probe was possible in view of the alleged involvement of the government in the riots
The amicus curiae in his note has said the apprehension of bias in the investigations as expressed by the victims is justified on the basis of various surrounding circumstances that followed the communal violence.
According to the note, the Gujarat government does not have any proper reply to the various allegations, including on the appointment for the trial of public prosecutors, who are close to the state government. The note suggested that the Centre can give its findings to the court on the veracity of the CDs. Such CDs are presently in the custody of the Nanavati-Shah commission probing the riots.
However, noting that the Gujarat government had disputed the various allegations besides questioning the bona fides of the NGOs representing the victims, the note felt that a probe by an independent investigating agency could establish the truth behind the incidents.
The places where the major incidents of communal violence were reported are Gulberg Society, Ode, Sardarpura, Naroda Gaon and Patiya.
March 23, 2007
Revisiting Babri
(Issues in Secular Politics
March 2007 II)
Revisiting Babri
Ram Puniyani
This 6th Dec., it will be 15 years when Babri Mosque was demolished by the RSS combine in a well coordinated operation. When Babri was being demolished, it was not just demolition of a mosque and hurting the sentiments of largest minority in the country, it was also a blow to the democratic Indian ethos. It was a complex process and multiple factors were involved. Who is to be blamed for the whole episode needs to be understood in the perspective of the political factors unleashed by sectarian politics. Rahul Gandhi recently (March 2007) stated that had Gandhi family person been around, meaning especially Rajiv Gandhi; the Masjid could not have been demolished. It is one of the big ifs of history.
That the then Prime Minister Narsimha Rao aided the demolition is beyond any shadow of doubt. Some have gone to the extent of saying that RSS and Rao were in collusion, some have gone to the extent of saying that Rao was wearing Khaki shorts underneath his dhoti, like many other Congressmen, who are ideologically compromised and are in Congress mainly to enjoy the fruits of power. They have nothing whatsoever to do with the values which were the dominant part of Congress, the values which had lions share in leading the struggle for India’s independence. While the political phenomena have their own logic, the values held by the leaders matter a lot. And it is here that Rao was aiding the RSS project of deepening the politics of hate in India.
Let us recapitulate the events as they unfolded in the decade of eighties in order to understand the process of demolition. It was mainly a reflection of the rising clout of RSS. Beginning with 1980s one witnessed the discomfort in the sections of middle class Hindus, who saw the 'disturbing' change in the form of dalits coming to the fore, the women coming out from the four walls of the house and making their presence felt in the social sphere. Both these sections of society, living as subordinate and subjugated groups for centuries saw the possibility of striving for equality, as enshrined in Indian constitution. This subtle but sure phenomenon of Indian society was unacceptable to the entrenched affluent middle classes. Their discomfort with this change came up in the form of opposition to reservations for dalits, Gujarat anti Dalit riots 1981 and Gujarat Anti OBC/ dalit riots of 1986, being just a manifestation of the same.
It is during this period that communal polarization started coming up and the case of Shah Bano acted as a trigger for consolidation of the RSS supporters. This time Rajiv Gandhi’s lack of grooming in the deeper understanding in politics, led him to bypass the court judgment. This in turn was used as a pretext for polarizing of Hindu upper middle classes under the leadership of Sangh combine. This act of Rajiv Gandhi was Œsuccessfully’ propagated as appeasement of minorities and pseudo secularism. These formulations were lapped up by the dominant middle classes, who started responding more and more to Yatras and other VHP initiated campaigns. After playing this ŒMuslim card’ the immature Congress leadership decided to play the Hindu card by yielding to the pressure of BJP/VHP and company for getting the locks of Babri opened and later permitting Shilaynyas for Ram temple. This pressure of Hindu rightwing was also discernible when Rajiv launched the campaign for 1989 elections on the plank of Ram Rajya. These came in handy to Hindu consolidation, which later got further boost when V.P. Singh, for his own compulsions, decided to implement Mandal. To bypass Mandal BJP resorted to intensify Yatras, identity based politics. Keeping electoral compulsions in mind, BJP’s politics revolved around Ram Temple as its central agenda. Incidentally Ram temple was no where on the agenda of BJP, which was harping on Gandhian socialism, till then. Its discovery that Lord Ram can be of great help in garnering votes led it to put most of its eggs in the basket of the campaign and conspiracy to destroy the Babri Mosque.
Ram temple issue became the symbol of assertion of affluent Hindutva politics in opposition to the democratic values. Identity, especially religious one, came up in a big way and waylaid the real issues of the poor and struggling majority of Hindus as well as other sections of society. As Congress, after Nehru’s death, had already been open to heavy compromises on the issue of secularism, a fertile ground was already there starting from Indira Gandhi to undermine the secular values and to merely pay lip service to secularism, to use Muslims only as vote banks. It is under these circumstances that Narsimha Rao could enjoy his siesta when the shovels and trishuls of RSS combine were piercing Indian constitution, when Bari was being mauled by the saffron foot soldiers. These foot soldiers were indoctrinated by the ideology of Hate Muslim, Babar as the invader, the Muslims as destroyers of temples and killers of our mother cow. It was the most clever and wily move by Brahminical politics to use the down trodden to hoist the saffron flag atop Babri and to herald the political assertion of Manusmriti’s values in the garb of Hindu glory. While the leadership wanting to impose Hindu Rashtra, ignited and incited, the sections of poor community acted as the foot soldiers behaving as if under trance, under the spell of opium of religious identity.
Coming to the events, National Integration Council concerned with the events took the promise from UP chief minister Kalyan Sing of BJP that he is under constitutional obligation to protect the mosque. The same Kalyan Singh later called it as a matter of honor for him to have supervised the demolition. It is another matter that as a weather cock he kept changing his versions from glory to shame, depending on the political contingencies. He was strategically located as UP chief minister. State Government was responsible for supervising law and order. The RSS combine mobilized crowds, which also included some of those elements that were specially trained for the task of demolition. It is unlikely that the intelligence agencies would have missed it. Rao played the ideal foil to these designs and not only during demolition but also prior to that when the heat was building up, cleverly slept over the build up for demolition. He had the Œideal’ home minister in the form of Shakar Rao Chavan, who had no mean role in aiding the process of demolition.
While one does concede that probably Rao was the worst person to be in the seat of power, one also notes that with the rot in which Congress had been falling at ideological level, how much any body else could have been able to protect the mosque is not clear. Rajiv himself had blundered on various secular issues all through. Anti Sikh pogrom in Delhi, opening the doors of Masjid and Ram Shila pujan, all these showed that irrespective of his intentions he had no ideological tools to protect the Babri. One may partly grant Rahul Gandhi’s point, but one must look at the deeper societal processes and the will of the leadership to stand for values even at the cost of power. While currently there are some encouraging signs from the Congress top leadership on the issue of secularism, that’s not only inadequate, it can not hold the national together on the grounds of national community. Even Rahul Gandhi’s own statement betrays the lack of political training amongst the leadership of Congress in general and all non BJP parties in particular. While BJP has the heavy influx of RSS trained volunteers, the one’s trained in the ideology of Hate other, in the ideology of Hindu nation disguised as nationalism.
Have the parties like Congress tried to introspect as to what are the ideas which its cadre is having? With the current ideological frame of its workers it cannot be trusted to uphold the torch of values of Gandhi-Nehru i.e. freedom movement. As such, Rahul Gandhi’s statement grasps just a minor part of the problem. For the nation, question is not just of this or that leader but of the values of Indian Constitution. It is not just a matter of Rao versus Rajiv, but of democracy versus Hindu Rashtra. For the nation the issue is of undertaking political steps which should wean us away from identity politics to the issues of people, the issue between democratic nationalism and pseudo i.e. Hindu nationalism. The issue relates to address the concerns related to bread butter, shelter, employment, health and education and bypassing the agenda set by RSS, the agenda of temples and similar emotive campaigns.
-
March 2007 II)
Revisiting Babri
Ram Puniyani
This 6th Dec., it will be 15 years when Babri Mosque was demolished by the RSS combine in a well coordinated operation. When Babri was being demolished, it was not just demolition of a mosque and hurting the sentiments of largest minority in the country, it was also a blow to the democratic Indian ethos. It was a complex process and multiple factors were involved. Who is to be blamed for the whole episode needs to be understood in the perspective of the political factors unleashed by sectarian politics. Rahul Gandhi recently (March 2007) stated that had Gandhi family person been around, meaning especially Rajiv Gandhi; the Masjid could not have been demolished. It is one of the big ifs of history.
That the then Prime Minister Narsimha Rao aided the demolition is beyond any shadow of doubt. Some have gone to the extent of saying that RSS and Rao were in collusion, some have gone to the extent of saying that Rao was wearing Khaki shorts underneath his dhoti, like many other Congressmen, who are ideologically compromised and are in Congress mainly to enjoy the fruits of power. They have nothing whatsoever to do with the values which were the dominant part of Congress, the values which had lions share in leading the struggle for India’s independence. While the political phenomena have their own logic, the values held by the leaders matter a lot. And it is here that Rao was aiding the RSS project of deepening the politics of hate in India.
Let us recapitulate the events as they unfolded in the decade of eighties in order to understand the process of demolition. It was mainly a reflection of the rising clout of RSS. Beginning with 1980s one witnessed the discomfort in the sections of middle class Hindus, who saw the 'disturbing' change in the form of dalits coming to the fore, the women coming out from the four walls of the house and making their presence felt in the social sphere. Both these sections of society, living as subordinate and subjugated groups for centuries saw the possibility of striving for equality, as enshrined in Indian constitution. This subtle but sure phenomenon of Indian society was unacceptable to the entrenched affluent middle classes. Their discomfort with this change came up in the form of opposition to reservations for dalits, Gujarat anti Dalit riots 1981 and Gujarat Anti OBC/ dalit riots of 1986, being just a manifestation of the same.
It is during this period that communal polarization started coming up and the case of Shah Bano acted as a trigger for consolidation of the RSS supporters. This time Rajiv Gandhi’s lack of grooming in the deeper understanding in politics, led him to bypass the court judgment. This in turn was used as a pretext for polarizing of Hindu upper middle classes under the leadership of Sangh combine. This act of Rajiv Gandhi was Œsuccessfully’ propagated as appeasement of minorities and pseudo secularism. These formulations were lapped up by the dominant middle classes, who started responding more and more to Yatras and other VHP initiated campaigns. After playing this ŒMuslim card’ the immature Congress leadership decided to play the Hindu card by yielding to the pressure of BJP/VHP and company for getting the locks of Babri opened and later permitting Shilaynyas for Ram temple. This pressure of Hindu rightwing was also discernible when Rajiv launched the campaign for 1989 elections on the plank of Ram Rajya. These came in handy to Hindu consolidation, which later got further boost when V.P. Singh, for his own compulsions, decided to implement Mandal. To bypass Mandal BJP resorted to intensify Yatras, identity based politics. Keeping electoral compulsions in mind, BJP’s politics revolved around Ram Temple as its central agenda. Incidentally Ram temple was no where on the agenda of BJP, which was harping on Gandhian socialism, till then. Its discovery that Lord Ram can be of great help in garnering votes led it to put most of its eggs in the basket of the campaign and conspiracy to destroy the Babri Mosque.
Ram temple issue became the symbol of assertion of affluent Hindutva politics in opposition to the democratic values. Identity, especially religious one, came up in a big way and waylaid the real issues of the poor and struggling majority of Hindus as well as other sections of society. As Congress, after Nehru’s death, had already been open to heavy compromises on the issue of secularism, a fertile ground was already there starting from Indira Gandhi to undermine the secular values and to merely pay lip service to secularism, to use Muslims only as vote banks. It is under these circumstances that Narsimha Rao could enjoy his siesta when the shovels and trishuls of RSS combine were piercing Indian constitution, when Bari was being mauled by the saffron foot soldiers. These foot soldiers were indoctrinated by the ideology of Hate Muslim, Babar as the invader, the Muslims as destroyers of temples and killers of our mother cow. It was the most clever and wily move by Brahminical politics to use the down trodden to hoist the saffron flag atop Babri and to herald the political assertion of Manusmriti’s values in the garb of Hindu glory. While the leadership wanting to impose Hindu Rashtra, ignited and incited, the sections of poor community acted as the foot soldiers behaving as if under trance, under the spell of opium of religious identity.
Coming to the events, National Integration Council concerned with the events took the promise from UP chief minister Kalyan Sing of BJP that he is under constitutional obligation to protect the mosque. The same Kalyan Singh later called it as a matter of honor for him to have supervised the demolition. It is another matter that as a weather cock he kept changing his versions from glory to shame, depending on the political contingencies. He was strategically located as UP chief minister. State Government was responsible for supervising law and order. The RSS combine mobilized crowds, which also included some of those elements that were specially trained for the task of demolition. It is unlikely that the intelligence agencies would have missed it. Rao played the ideal foil to these designs and not only during demolition but also prior to that when the heat was building up, cleverly slept over the build up for demolition. He had the Œideal’ home minister in the form of Shakar Rao Chavan, who had no mean role in aiding the process of demolition.
While one does concede that probably Rao was the worst person to be in the seat of power, one also notes that with the rot in which Congress had been falling at ideological level, how much any body else could have been able to protect the mosque is not clear. Rajiv himself had blundered on various secular issues all through. Anti Sikh pogrom in Delhi, opening the doors of Masjid and Ram Shila pujan, all these showed that irrespective of his intentions he had no ideological tools to protect the Babri. One may partly grant Rahul Gandhi’s point, but one must look at the deeper societal processes and the will of the leadership to stand for values even at the cost of power. While currently there are some encouraging signs from the Congress top leadership on the issue of secularism, that’s not only inadequate, it can not hold the national together on the grounds of national community. Even Rahul Gandhi’s own statement betrays the lack of political training amongst the leadership of Congress in general and all non BJP parties in particular. While BJP has the heavy influx of RSS trained volunteers, the one’s trained in the ideology of Hate other, in the ideology of Hindu nation disguised as nationalism.
Have the parties like Congress tried to introspect as to what are the ideas which its cadre is having? With the current ideological frame of its workers it cannot be trusted to uphold the torch of values of Gandhi-Nehru i.e. freedom movement. As such, Rahul Gandhi’s statement grasps just a minor part of the problem. For the nation, question is not just of this or that leader but of the values of Indian Constitution. It is not just a matter of Rao versus Rajiv, but of democracy versus Hindu Rashtra. For the nation the issue is of undertaking political steps which should wean us away from identity politics to the issues of people, the issue between democratic nationalism and pseudo i.e. Hindu nationalism. The issue relates to address the concerns related to bread butter, shelter, employment, health and education and bypassing the agenda set by RSS, the agenda of temples and similar emotive campaigns.
-
More BJP appointments from the RSS
(The Hindu
Mar 23, 2007)
New BJP appointments from the RSS
Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI: Several more "pracharaks" of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh — some newly inducted and some who had been earlier working with the Bharatiya Janata Party — have been given key positions in the party organisation.
The organisation general secretary, Ram Lal, who has come from the RSS, will now be "helped" by two joint organisation secretaries, V. Satish, earlier looking after the Northeast zone, and Saudan Singh, who was earlier helping the party in Chhattisgarh.
P. Nandshekhar, a new induction from the RSS, will be the BJP's new Northeast secretary and Shanmugnathan, who had been working in the BJP's documentation centre here at the party's headquarters for the last two to three years, will now be the `co-office' secretary of the BJP's parliamentary wing. He will assist parliamentary secretary O.P. Kohli.
Shyam Jhajhu has been formally appointed as `prabhari' (in-charge) of the main party office, a position in which he has been functioning for some time.
All the new appointees are "pracharaks" of the RSS.
Mar 23, 2007)
New BJP appointments from the RSS
Special Correspondent
NEW DELHI: Several more "pracharaks" of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh — some newly inducted and some who had been earlier working with the Bharatiya Janata Party — have been given key positions in the party organisation.
The organisation general secretary, Ram Lal, who has come from the RSS, will now be "helped" by two joint organisation secretaries, V. Satish, earlier looking after the Northeast zone, and Saudan Singh, who was earlier helping the party in Chhattisgarh.
P. Nandshekhar, a new induction from the RSS, will be the BJP's new Northeast secretary and Shanmugnathan, who had been working in the BJP's documentation centre here at the party's headquarters for the last two to three years, will now be the `co-office' secretary of the BJP's parliamentary wing. He will assist parliamentary secretary O.P. Kohli.
Shyam Jhajhu has been formally appointed as `prabhari' (in-charge) of the main party office, a position in which he has been functioning for some time.
All the new appointees are "pracharaks" of the RSS.
Man who complained against Bajrang Dal leader goes missing
(Indian Express
March 23, 2007)
Man who complained against Bajrangi missing
Express News Service
Mehsana’s Natubhai Acharya missing since March 17, family doesn’t suspect Bajrangi’s hand yet
Ahmedabad, March 22: A mere 39 days after filing a criminal complaint against Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi for not allowing the release of Parzania in Gujarat, Mehsana-based Natubhai K Acharya has been reported missing under mysterious circumstances. Acharya’s family saw him last on March 17.
A retired deputy Mamlatdar and social worker, Acharya (53) had on February 6 this year filed a criminal complaint against Bajrangi before a local court in Mehsana town. Acharya had alleged that “Bajrangi was running a parallel government in the state and threatening theatre owners not to show the film.”
A day after this, judicial magistrate G M Damodra ordered the police to conduct a detailed inquiry into the matter and submit a report within 15 days.
In the meantime, Acharya went missing from his Parsavnath Society residence under mysterious circumstances on March 17. “Acharya left his home around 9 am that day saying he had some work in the collectorate office. His family, however, never saw him after this,” Mehsana town police inspector, R R Pathak said.
The Acharyas, including his wife Ritha, two daughters and a son, who did not panic initially, called up all their relatives and searched for him at Kedarnath, Ambaji, Himmatnagar and Mehsana, and all other likely places where he could have gone. But there is no trace of him.
His son Yovan Acharya, a businessman, finally lodged a complaint with Mehsana Town Police. However, instead of registering it as a complaint, police have only made note of it as a missing entry. Nathubhai Acharya’s brother Mukundbhai who works at the district collector’s office in Patan, said, “We do not suspect Bajrangi’s hand in this yet. There could be some other reasons.’’
In his petition with a local court in Mehsana, Acharya blamed the state government for not taking any steps for the release of Parzania in cinemas and multiplexes in the state. “The atmosphere of peace and harmony prevails in the state and the film, based on a Parsi boy missing since the 2002 riots, will not disturb peace in the state. The boy’s family also wanted to see the film,’’
Acharya stated in his petition.
However, senior police officials including Mehsana SP S K Dave were unaware of this development.
Meanwhile, the otherwise garrulous Bajrangi has become incommunicado since his ‘ouster’ from Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal.
Though the self styled messiah of the Patel community is still eluding media attention and refuses to make any comment, one of his close aid, on condition of anonymity, said yesterday that “Babubhai would continue to do his work of rescuing the straying Hindu girls in spite of what the VHP and Bajrang Dal does.”
“Let me make it clear that we do not abduct girls,” he said, adding that Babu only gets the girls return to the right path if they stray. “The parents of the girls come to us and then only we get them back,” he said.
Babu, however, chose to keep his distance from the media. “Babubhai would speak to the press after the matter with the Supreme Court is resolved,” he added.
It may be noted here that following the notice issued by the Apex Court on Babu and state governments of Gujarat and Maharashtra on Monday last following a petition filed by Ajay Nikam, Raju Medige and Abhijit Vijay Sonavane who have alleged that they are being harassed by Bajrangi at the behest of their Patel in-laws from Gujarat. Subsequently, VHP and Bajrang Dal had severed their ties with Bajrangi on Tuesday and issued a press release stating that they have nothing to do with Bajrangi, who is not even a member of either organisation.
One of the prime accused in the Naroda Patiya case, Bajrangi had surfaced as the most vigilant moral police of the state, who ‘rescued’ more than 500 Patel girls who dared to marry outside their community.
Only recently, he displayed his strength by beating up number of boys from minority community, on the pretext of eve teasing. Apart from number of riot-related cases, cases of abduction of girls who married in inter-caste or inter-religion, too, are pending against him. He has also forced a number of Patel girls to undergo abortion after he ‘rescued’ them from their lovers.
March 23, 2007)
Man who complained against Bajrangi missing
Express News Service
Mehsana’s Natubhai Acharya missing since March 17, family doesn’t suspect Bajrangi’s hand yet
Ahmedabad, March 22: A mere 39 days after filing a criminal complaint against Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi for not allowing the release of Parzania in Gujarat, Mehsana-based Natubhai K Acharya has been reported missing under mysterious circumstances. Acharya’s family saw him last on March 17.
A retired deputy Mamlatdar and social worker, Acharya (53) had on February 6 this year filed a criminal complaint against Bajrangi before a local court in Mehsana town. Acharya had alleged that “Bajrangi was running a parallel government in the state and threatening theatre owners not to show the film.”
A day after this, judicial magistrate G M Damodra ordered the police to conduct a detailed inquiry into the matter and submit a report within 15 days.
In the meantime, Acharya went missing from his Parsavnath Society residence under mysterious circumstances on March 17. “Acharya left his home around 9 am that day saying he had some work in the collectorate office. His family, however, never saw him after this,” Mehsana town police inspector, R R Pathak said.
The Acharyas, including his wife Ritha, two daughters and a son, who did not panic initially, called up all their relatives and searched for him at Kedarnath, Ambaji, Himmatnagar and Mehsana, and all other likely places where he could have gone. But there is no trace of him.
His son Yovan Acharya, a businessman, finally lodged a complaint with Mehsana Town Police. However, instead of registering it as a complaint, police have only made note of it as a missing entry. Nathubhai Acharya’s brother Mukundbhai who works at the district collector’s office in Patan, said, “We do not suspect Bajrangi’s hand in this yet. There could be some other reasons.’’
In his petition with a local court in Mehsana, Acharya blamed the state government for not taking any steps for the release of Parzania in cinemas and multiplexes in the state. “The atmosphere of peace and harmony prevails in the state and the film, based on a Parsi boy missing since the 2002 riots, will not disturb peace in the state. The boy’s family also wanted to see the film,’’
Acharya stated in his petition.
However, senior police officials including Mehsana SP S K Dave were unaware of this development.
Meanwhile, the otherwise garrulous Bajrangi has become incommunicado since his ‘ouster’ from Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal.
Though the self styled messiah of the Patel community is still eluding media attention and refuses to make any comment, one of his close aid, on condition of anonymity, said yesterday that “Babubhai would continue to do his work of rescuing the straying Hindu girls in spite of what the VHP and Bajrang Dal does.”
“Let me make it clear that we do not abduct girls,” he said, adding that Babu only gets the girls return to the right path if they stray. “The parents of the girls come to us and then only we get them back,” he said.
Babu, however, chose to keep his distance from the media. “Babubhai would speak to the press after the matter with the Supreme Court is resolved,” he added.
It may be noted here that following the notice issued by the Apex Court on Babu and state governments of Gujarat and Maharashtra on Monday last following a petition filed by Ajay Nikam, Raju Medige and Abhijit Vijay Sonavane who have alleged that they are being harassed by Bajrangi at the behest of their Patel in-laws from Gujarat. Subsequently, VHP and Bajrang Dal had severed their ties with Bajrangi on Tuesday and issued a press release stating that they have nothing to do with Bajrangi, who is not even a member of either organisation.
One of the prime accused in the Naroda Patiya case, Bajrangi had surfaced as the most vigilant moral police of the state, who ‘rescued’ more than 500 Patel girls who dared to marry outside their community.
Only recently, he displayed his strength by beating up number of boys from minority community, on the pretext of eve teasing. Apart from number of riot-related cases, cases of abduction of girls who married in inter-caste or inter-religion, too, are pending against him. He has also forced a number of Patel girls to undergo abortion after he ‘rescued’ them from their lovers.
Gujarat 2002 rehab measures with an eye on elections
(The Telegraph
March 23, 2007)
Gujarat balm before battle for UP
Our Special Correspondent
A Bajrang Dal activist during the Gujarat riots
New Delhi, March 22: Ahead of the Uttar Pradesh elections, the Centre has announced a rehabilitation package for the victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots on the lines of that drawn up for the 1984 anti-Sikh massacre.
The Centre came up with the package in the wake of complaints about the state government’s failure to provide adequate relief.
According to the plan cleared by the Union cabinet tonight, immediate relatives of those killed in the riots will get an ex-gratia of Rs 3.5 lakh, in addition to the money already paid by the state government. The official death toll in the riots was 1,169.
Each of the 2,548 injured will get Rs 1.25 lakh, including what the state has paid.
The entire package will cost Rs 106.57 crore, parliamentary affairs minister Priya Ranjan Das Munshi said. It also includes Rs 30.10 crore paid by the state government for damage to residential property and Rs 17.18 crore for uninsured commercial or industrial premises.
Other than the compensation, the rehabilitation package promises that children of those who died in the riots will be given preference for jobs in the paramilitary forces, Indian Reserve Battalions, state police forces, public sector undertakings and central government departments.
The Centre is also planning to launch a special recruitment drive for the riot-affected families, to ensure that those who lost their jobs get re-employment. Pension will be given to those who were forced to give up their jobs because of the riots but have since crossed the retirement age, the government said.
Although the package was in sight for some time now, the government has timed its announcement a month ahead of the crucial Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh where the Congress is trying hard to woo back the Muslim voters. Elections in Gujarat are also due this year, in November.
The party has already come under attack from the BJP, which accuses it of practising the politics of minority appeasement.
The package is based on the recommendation of the Union home ministry, which had consulted the National Minorities Commission. A team of the commission had visited the state recently.
In another decision, the cabinet put its stamp of approval on providing security support to the organisers of the World Cup in the West Indies. India has sent three Intelligence Bureau officials, two bomb disposal squads from the National Security Guard and officials from Delhi police.
The security apparatus would cost the government Rs 2.58 crore.
March 23, 2007)
Gujarat balm before battle for UP
Our Special Correspondent
A Bajrang Dal activist during the Gujarat riots
New Delhi, March 22: Ahead of the Uttar Pradesh elections, the Centre has announced a rehabilitation package for the victims of the 2002 Gujarat riots on the lines of that drawn up for the 1984 anti-Sikh massacre.
The Centre came up with the package in the wake of complaints about the state government’s failure to provide adequate relief.
According to the plan cleared by the Union cabinet tonight, immediate relatives of those killed in the riots will get an ex-gratia of Rs 3.5 lakh, in addition to the money already paid by the state government. The official death toll in the riots was 1,169.
Each of the 2,548 injured will get Rs 1.25 lakh, including what the state has paid.
The entire package will cost Rs 106.57 crore, parliamentary affairs minister Priya Ranjan Das Munshi said. It also includes Rs 30.10 crore paid by the state government for damage to residential property and Rs 17.18 crore for uninsured commercial or industrial premises.
Other than the compensation, the rehabilitation package promises that children of those who died in the riots will be given preference for jobs in the paramilitary forces, Indian Reserve Battalions, state police forces, public sector undertakings and central government departments.
The Centre is also planning to launch a special recruitment drive for the riot-affected families, to ensure that those who lost their jobs get re-employment. Pension will be given to those who were forced to give up their jobs because of the riots but have since crossed the retirement age, the government said.
Although the package was in sight for some time now, the government has timed its announcement a month ahead of the crucial Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh where the Congress is trying hard to woo back the Muslim voters. Elections in Gujarat are also due this year, in November.
The party has already come under attack from the BJP, which accuses it of practising the politics of minority appeasement.
The package is based on the recommendation of the Union home ministry, which had consulted the National Minorities Commission. A team of the commission had visited the state recently.
In another decision, the cabinet put its stamp of approval on providing security support to the organisers of the World Cup in the West Indies. India has sent three Intelligence Bureau officials, two bomb disposal squads from the National Security Guard and officials from Delhi police.
The security apparatus would cost the government Rs 2.58 crore.
Text of Govt Press Release - Relief and rehab for 2002 Gujarat Riot victims
Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Press Release
March 22, 2007
RELIEF AND REHABILITATION OF VICTIMS OF COMMUNAL RIOTS IN GUJARAT OF 2002
21:6 IST
The Union Cabinet today gave its approval to the following proposals in respect of Relief and rehabilitation of victims of communal riots in Gujarat of 2002 :
There were 1169 deaths. The next of kin would be paid ex-gratia at Rs. 3.5 lakhs which would be in addition to amount already paid by the State Government. This implies a liability of Rs. 53.19 crores.
For the 2548 cases of injury, an ex-gratia would be paid at Rs. 1.25 lakhs each which would be reduced by the amount already paid by the State Government yielding a net liability of Rs. 39.20 crores.
The State Government has paid ex-gratia of Rs. 30.10 crores for damage to residential property. This implies an additional liability of Rs. 9.03 crores.
Similarly, the State Government has paid an ex-gratia of Rs. 17.18 crores for uninsured commercial / industrial property. This implies an additional liability of Rs. 5.15 crores.
The aggregate liability for items (i) to (iv) above is, therefore, Rs. 106.57 crores. The above package would be treated as separate and ‘standalone’ case.
The following components of the package are not quantifiable as they are contingent upon the number of applicants for the benefit :
a) Children / family members of those who died in the riots of 2002 will be given preference in recruitment in para-military forces, IR Battalions, State Police Forces, Public Sector Undertakings and other State and Central Government Departments by giving necessary age relaxation.
b) The Central Government / State Governments may launch a special recruitment drive to accommodate eligible members from riot affected families.
c) Those who had lost their jobs would be allowed to rejoin by treating the period of absence as ‘dies-non’.
d) Those who had to leave their jobs due to riots and have already crossed the age of superannuation may be given necessary pensionary benefits by relaxing the normal rules to the extent possible.
This Cabinet’s decision will result in relief and rehabilitation of the victims of the communal riots in Gujarat of 2002, on par with the measures taken in respect of victims of anti-Sikh riots of 1984.
Government of India
Press Release
March 22, 2007
RELIEF AND REHABILITATION OF VICTIMS OF COMMUNAL RIOTS IN GUJARAT OF 2002
21:6 IST
The Union Cabinet today gave its approval to the following proposals in respect of Relief and rehabilitation of victims of communal riots in Gujarat of 2002 :
There were 1169 deaths. The next of kin would be paid ex-gratia at Rs. 3.5 lakhs which would be in addition to amount already paid by the State Government. This implies a liability of Rs. 53.19 crores.
For the 2548 cases of injury, an ex-gratia would be paid at Rs. 1.25 lakhs each which would be reduced by the amount already paid by the State Government yielding a net liability of Rs. 39.20 crores.
The State Government has paid ex-gratia of Rs. 30.10 crores for damage to residential property. This implies an additional liability of Rs. 9.03 crores.
Similarly, the State Government has paid an ex-gratia of Rs. 17.18 crores for uninsured commercial / industrial property. This implies an additional liability of Rs. 5.15 crores.
The aggregate liability for items (i) to (iv) above is, therefore, Rs. 106.57 crores. The above package would be treated as separate and ‘standalone’ case.
The following components of the package are not quantifiable as they are contingent upon the number of applicants for the benefit :
a) Children / family members of those who died in the riots of 2002 will be given preference in recruitment in para-military forces, IR Battalions, State Police Forces, Public Sector Undertakings and other State and Central Government Departments by giving necessary age relaxation.
b) The Central Government / State Governments may launch a special recruitment drive to accommodate eligible members from riot affected families.
c) Those who had lost their jobs would be allowed to rejoin by treating the period of absence as ‘dies-non’.
d) Those who had to leave their jobs due to riots and have already crossed the age of superannuation may be given necessary pensionary benefits by relaxing the normal rules to the extent possible.
This Cabinet’s decision will result in relief and rehabilitation of the victims of the communal riots in Gujarat of 2002, on par with the measures taken in respect of victims of anti-Sikh riots of 1984.
March 22, 2007
Gujarat 2002 - Unfinished justice
(The Times of India
22 March 2007)
Unfinished justice
by Harsh Mander
Five years after the events of 2002, a great deal desperately remains to be done for the people of Gujarat who suffered some of the most brutal communal violence — especially targeting women and children — since Independence.
Since law and order is a state subject, the central government pleads its inability to intervene to secure justice for the survivors of the 2002 carnage, citing constitutional propriety in a federal structure.
But Article 355 of the Constitution authorises, indeed requires, it to intervene in situations of grave internal strife.
There is perhaps no instance since Independence of such open and sustained denial to a segment of citizens — of elementary rights of security, livelihood, shelter and legal justice — only on the grounds of its adherence to a minority faith.
This is an eminently appropriate reason for the Centre to step in with binding directions to the state govern-ment.
Its failure to do so amounts to its abdication of its duties to defend the secular democratic ideals of the Constitution.
The state government has not restored even a sense of security and equal citizenship to the affected persons, which is evidenced by the fact that almost five years after the mass communal violence, several thousand people have still not returned to their original homes and are losing hope of doing so in the future.
Many have moved out of the state, others have bought or rented homes in the burgeoning Muslim ghettos that offer sectarian security, and around 30,000 who have not returned to their homes are living in 81 makeshift relief colonies that the state government refuses to acknowledge, let alone equip with basic human facilities.
Socio-economic boycott is a reality in majority of the villages that were affected by the violence in 2002, though it is not always obvious at first glance.
The state government has given meagre compensation, and has no rehabilitation package in place to aid the affected rebuild their homes and livelihoods.
Witnesses remain under great pressure to not give evidence against those who attacked them and destroyed their homes; often it is a precondition for returning to their homes.
With the police, courts and prosecution being openly biased, criminal cases against the accused are sinking like stones in a turgid pool.
The central government recently announced a compensation package based on the most progressive features of the one given to the survivors of the 1984 riots.
While this is a welcome move, the home minister followed it up with a retraction, and confusion conti-nues to prevail about the status of this announcement.
The central government appears characteristically defensive in putting its lot with people who have had to live amidst hate and fear with tacit or open state support.
Similarly, the anti-democratic law, POTA, has been repealed, but without retrospective effect. The result is that the state government is free to misuse this draconian Act to victimise and incarcerate members of the minority community for many years, with very little evidence.
To counter the unprecedented subversion of the criminal justice system, the central government should empower the National Human Rights Commission to re-examine all cases of closure, acquittal and bail, and if it finds prima facie miscarriage of justice at the stages of complaint, investigation, prosecution and trial, it should be empowered to order and supervise a retrial.
The central government must also establish norms to ensure prosecution of all civil and police officers, and political leaders, who failed in their responsibility to prevent and control violence, protect victims, and extend relief and rehabilitation.
There were a few police officers who performed their duties with exemplary fairness and courage during the carnage. They were subsequently penalised by the state government with punishment postings.
A special task force should be set up to monitor and take appropriate action against all individuals and organisations that preach or provoke hatred amongst people on the grounds of faith.
It should take cognizance of the systematic manufacture of hatred against minorities through textbooks and ensure their immediate replacement with a liberal curriculum, which actively promotes secularism, equity, respect for all faiths, and democracy. India cannot afford the shame, agony and betrayal of another Gujarat.
The writer works for Aman Biradari.
22 March 2007)
Unfinished justice
by Harsh Mander
Five years after the events of 2002, a great deal desperately remains to be done for the people of Gujarat who suffered some of the most brutal communal violence — especially targeting women and children — since Independence.
Since law and order is a state subject, the central government pleads its inability to intervene to secure justice for the survivors of the 2002 carnage, citing constitutional propriety in a federal structure.
But Article 355 of the Constitution authorises, indeed requires, it to intervene in situations of grave internal strife.
There is perhaps no instance since Independence of such open and sustained denial to a segment of citizens — of elementary rights of security, livelihood, shelter and legal justice — only on the grounds of its adherence to a minority faith.
This is an eminently appropriate reason for the Centre to step in with binding directions to the state govern-ment.
Its failure to do so amounts to its abdication of its duties to defend the secular democratic ideals of the Constitution.
The state government has not restored even a sense of security and equal citizenship to the affected persons, which is evidenced by the fact that almost five years after the mass communal violence, several thousand people have still not returned to their original homes and are losing hope of doing so in the future.
Many have moved out of the state, others have bought or rented homes in the burgeoning Muslim ghettos that offer sectarian security, and around 30,000 who have not returned to their homes are living in 81 makeshift relief colonies that the state government refuses to acknowledge, let alone equip with basic human facilities.
Socio-economic boycott is a reality in majority of the villages that were affected by the violence in 2002, though it is not always obvious at first glance.
The state government has given meagre compensation, and has no rehabilitation package in place to aid the affected rebuild their homes and livelihoods.
Witnesses remain under great pressure to not give evidence against those who attacked them and destroyed their homes; often it is a precondition for returning to their homes.
With the police, courts and prosecution being openly biased, criminal cases against the accused are sinking like stones in a turgid pool.
The central government recently announced a compensation package based on the most progressive features of the one given to the survivors of the 1984 riots.
While this is a welcome move, the home minister followed it up with a retraction, and confusion conti-nues to prevail about the status of this announcement.
The central government appears characteristically defensive in putting its lot with people who have had to live amidst hate and fear with tacit or open state support.
Similarly, the anti-democratic law, POTA, has been repealed, but without retrospective effect. The result is that the state government is free to misuse this draconian Act to victimise and incarcerate members of the minority community for many years, with very little evidence.
To counter the unprecedented subversion of the criminal justice system, the central government should empower the National Human Rights Commission to re-examine all cases of closure, acquittal and bail, and if it finds prima facie miscarriage of justice at the stages of complaint, investigation, prosecution and trial, it should be empowered to order and supervise a retrial.
The central government must also establish norms to ensure prosecution of all civil and police officers, and political leaders, who failed in their responsibility to prevent and control violence, protect victims, and extend relief and rehabilitation.
There were a few police officers who performed their duties with exemplary fairness and courage during the carnage. They were subsequently penalised by the state government with punishment postings.
A special task force should be set up to monitor and take appropriate action against all individuals and organisations that preach or provoke hatred amongst people on the grounds of faith.
It should take cognizance of the systematic manufacture of hatred against minorities through textbooks and ensure their immediate replacement with a liberal curriculum, which actively promotes secularism, equity, respect for all faiths, and democracy. India cannot afford the shame, agony and betrayal of another Gujarat.
The writer works for Aman Biradari.
March 21, 2007
Prema A. Kurien's book on American Hinduism
A Place at the Multicultural Table
Price: $26.95
Subtitle: The Development of an American Hinduism
Author: Prema A. Kurien
Subject: Sociology / Religion / Asian American Studies
Paper ISBN 0-8135-4056-9
Cloth ISBN 0-8135-4055-0
Pages: 352 pages
Publication Date: July 2007
Praise for A Place at the Multicultural Table
"This book is an impressive work of scholarship in its breadth and depth of information on the Hindu American experience."-Nazli Kibria, author of Becoming Asian American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean American Identities
Description:
Multiculturalism in the United States is commonly lauded as a positive social ideal celebrating the diversity of our nation. But, in reality, immigrants often feel pressured to create a singular formulation of their identity that does not reflect the diversity of cultures that exist in their homeland. Hindu Americans have faced this challenge over the last fifteen years, as the number of Indians that have immigrated to this country has more than doubled.
In A Place at the Multicultural Table, Prema A. Kurien shows how various Hindu American organizations-religious, cultural, and political-are attempting to answer the puzzling questions of identity outside their homeland. Drawing on the experiences of both immigrant and American-born Hindu Americans, Kurien demonstrates how religious ideas and practices are being imported, exported, and reshaped in the process. The result of this transnational movement is an American Hinduism-an organized, politicized, and standardized version of that which is found in India.
This first in-depth look at Hinduism in the United States and the Hindu Indian American community helps readers to understand the private devotions, practices, and beliefs of Hindu Indian Americans as well as their political mobilization and activism. It explains the differences between immigrant and American-born Hindu Americans, how both understand their religion and their identity, and it emphasizes the importance of the social and cultural context of the United States in influencing the development of an American Hinduism.
About the Author:
Prema Kurien is an associate professor of sociology at Syracuse University. She is the author of Kaleidoscopic Ethnicity: International Migration and the Reconstruction of Community Identities in India, which was co-winner of the American Sociological Association's 2003 Asia/Asian America book award.
Price: $26.95
Subtitle: The Development of an American Hinduism
Author: Prema A. Kurien
Subject: Sociology / Religion / Asian American Studies
Paper ISBN 0-8135-4056-9
Cloth ISBN 0-8135-4055-0
Pages: 352 pages
Publication Date: July 2007
Praise for A Place at the Multicultural Table
"This book is an impressive work of scholarship in its breadth and depth of information on the Hindu American experience."-Nazli Kibria, author of Becoming Asian American: Second-Generation Chinese and Korean American Identities
Description:
Multiculturalism in the United States is commonly lauded as a positive social ideal celebrating the diversity of our nation. But, in reality, immigrants often feel pressured to create a singular formulation of their identity that does not reflect the diversity of cultures that exist in their homeland. Hindu Americans have faced this challenge over the last fifteen years, as the number of Indians that have immigrated to this country has more than doubled.
In A Place at the Multicultural Table, Prema A. Kurien shows how various Hindu American organizations-religious, cultural, and political-are attempting to answer the puzzling questions of identity outside their homeland. Drawing on the experiences of both immigrant and American-born Hindu Americans, Kurien demonstrates how religious ideas and practices are being imported, exported, and reshaped in the process. The result of this transnational movement is an American Hinduism-an organized, politicized, and standardized version of that which is found in India.
This first in-depth look at Hinduism in the United States and the Hindu Indian American community helps readers to understand the private devotions, practices, and beliefs of Hindu Indian Americans as well as their political mobilization and activism. It explains the differences between immigrant and American-born Hindu Americans, how both understand their religion and their identity, and it emphasizes the importance of the social and cultural context of the United States in influencing the development of an American Hinduism.
About the Author:
Prema Kurien is an associate professor of sociology at Syracuse University. She is the author of Kaleidoscopic Ethnicity: International Migration and the Reconstruction of Community Identities in India, which was co-winner of the American Sociological Association's 2003 Asia/Asian America book award.
What Is Justice for Survivors of Gujarat 2002?
Economic and Political Weekly
March 17, 2007
What Is Justice for Survivors of Gujarat 2002?
The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women recently pulled up the government of India for an inadequate response on the 2002 Gujarat riots despite specific queries by the committee on the issue. The concluding comments of the CEDAW offer a significant advocacy tool for human rights organisations working to secure justice for the riot victims.
by Sheba George, Kalpana Kannabiran
March 17, 2007
What Is Justice for Survivors of Gujarat 2002?
The United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women recently pulled up the government of India for an inadequate response on the 2002 Gujarat riots despite specific queries by the committee on the issue. The concluding comments of the CEDAW offer a significant advocacy tool for human rights organisations working to secure justice for the riot victims.
by Sheba George, Kalpana Kannabiran
Convention Against Communalism in Kushinagar
CONVENTION AGAINST COMMUNALISM IN KUSHINAGAR
Padrauna, the headquarter of Kushinagar district which adjoins Gorakhpur in Eastern U.P., was the worst affected in the communal clashes organized by the Gorakhpur M.P., Adityanath. A CPI(M) team visited the affected areas at the end of February and met with district officials for compensation for those who had lost their homes and all their belongings and to bring the guilty to book. Some progress had been made since then. Also a convention was held against communalism on the 18th March by the party in Kasia, a large town of the district.
The Convention was held in the Collectorate. More than 350 people attended the event. Leaders of all the major political parties spoke to the people. Considering that elections have been announced in the State and the battle-lines have been drawn this was a very positive development. Many women of AIDWA for the district and a group of men and women from Gorakhpur also took part. What was very heartening was that many who had suffered heavy losses in the communal clashes and had been living in terror also traveled long distances to attend the event.
Com. Vijay Srivastava, a leading lawyer of the district and a CPI(M) leader presided over the convention which was conducted by Com. Ayodhyalal, district secretary. Shri Harshararan Srivastava, former President of the District Bar, condemned the activities of Adityanath and his supporters and said that the Communists must intensify their efforts to organize the poor in the area. He was followed by Shri Kushwaha of the BSP who made the point that Adityanath exploited every incident, however, minor that involved people even young children of the two communities. If two cyclists collided with each other and they happened to belong to the two communities, he would immediately arrive on the spot and create a situation resulting in communal mobilization and an attack on muslims. Shri Kushwaha said that people in public like himself and all the others attending the Convention had a duty towards society to maintain harmony and they had to ensure that they did nor remain silent spectators but that they played an active role in defusing tension whenever and wherever it was created. Speaking in a very rustic idiom he said that one person making a comment aimed at creating communal trouble could wreck relationships that were decades old but, at the same time, it was equally true that if other intervened to restore normalcy, most people responded very positively because they did not really want a clash.
Shri Iliyas of the SP said that it had to be admitted that the handling of communal incidents by governments was not satisfactory and, therefore, the role of concerned citizens became very important. Com. Siddiqui of the CPI(ML) echoed these sentiments and said that organizing united struggles was very important.
Com. Vibhuti Chauhan, a recognized leader of the Musahar community in the area made a rousing speech saying that whenever people like him had intervened and actively organized resistance to communal elements, the poorest of the poor had always responded positively and, where they were organized and had participated in militant struggles, they refused to be used as pawns by communal leaders like Adityanath. Unfortunately, where the poor, the backward communities and the dalits were not organized many of them fell prey to Adityanath's blandishments and were actively involved in rioting.
A senior journalist from the Hindustan daily, Manoj Singh, who has been active in the movement to defend secularism in the area for the last several years, also spoke. He was very forthright in attacking the media for its partisan and prejudiced role. He said that it was sections of the media and the vested interests that it represents who made leaders like Adityanath larger-than- life. They gave undue publicity to him and his supporters and left very little space for any opposition. Manoj Singh also said that Adityanath had assumed leadership of the Thakur community to which he belonged and, as a result, all political leaders belonging to this community along with members of the adminstration, the media, the legal profession etc. all extended every kind of support to him. Governments and administrations treated him with kid gloves and added to his aura. Despite all this, the vast majority of people did not support his actions and utterances but they felt that they could neither do or say anything to change things. It was this situation that had to be changed by people like those attending the convention.
CPI(M) State Sectt. Member, Com. Premnath Rai addressed the convention and assured all those present that the party would intensify its campaigns and struggles in the area.
I had been invited to the Convention as the Chief Guest and was the last speaker. I emphasized the point that the real problems and suffering of the people of the area were receiving no attention from anyone because of the permanent situation of imminent communal conflict that had been created. As a result, unemployment was rampant while all factories and sources of employment were being closed down;
Japanese encephalitis had become a scourge while Govt. hospitals were starved of medicines and facilities; people were being denied ration cards and rations while illicit liquor was flooding villages. The entire area was the victim of the worst kinds of communal, caste and criminalised politics. And yet, whenever and wherever, people organized themselves for struggles and interventions, they could make a difference. In one village, Lakshmipur, of Gorakhpur, during the Moharram disturbances, Adityanath's followers in the village had refused to allow the muslims to take out the tazia procession . AIDWA members of the village along with their children took a stand and picked up the tazias. They were then joined by both Muslim and Hindu villagers and the procession was taken out.
The importance of this convention lay not in its attendance but in the fact that it was held at all. In the communally surcharged atmosphere of Eastern U.P., voices speaking out against communalism and Adityanath are very few and very far between
Subhashini Ali
Padrauna, the headquarter of Kushinagar district which adjoins Gorakhpur in Eastern U.P., was the worst affected in the communal clashes organized by the Gorakhpur M.P., Adityanath. A CPI(M) team visited the affected areas at the end of February and met with district officials for compensation for those who had lost their homes and all their belongings and to bring the guilty to book. Some progress had been made since then. Also a convention was held against communalism on the 18th March by the party in Kasia, a large town of the district.
The Convention was held in the Collectorate. More than 350 people attended the event. Leaders of all the major political parties spoke to the people. Considering that elections have been announced in the State and the battle-lines have been drawn this was a very positive development. Many women of AIDWA for the district and a group of men and women from Gorakhpur also took part. What was very heartening was that many who had suffered heavy losses in the communal clashes and had been living in terror also traveled long distances to attend the event.
Com. Vijay Srivastava, a leading lawyer of the district and a CPI(M) leader presided over the convention which was conducted by Com. Ayodhyalal, district secretary. Shri Harshararan Srivastava, former President of the District Bar, condemned the activities of Adityanath and his supporters and said that the Communists must intensify their efforts to organize the poor in the area. He was followed by Shri Kushwaha of the BSP who made the point that Adityanath exploited every incident, however, minor that involved people even young children of the two communities. If two cyclists collided with each other and they happened to belong to the two communities, he would immediately arrive on the spot and create a situation resulting in communal mobilization and an attack on muslims. Shri Kushwaha said that people in public like himself and all the others attending the Convention had a duty towards society to maintain harmony and they had to ensure that they did nor remain silent spectators but that they played an active role in defusing tension whenever and wherever it was created. Speaking in a very rustic idiom he said that one person making a comment aimed at creating communal trouble could wreck relationships that were decades old but, at the same time, it was equally true that if other intervened to restore normalcy, most people responded very positively because they did not really want a clash.
Shri Iliyas of the SP said that it had to be admitted that the handling of communal incidents by governments was not satisfactory and, therefore, the role of concerned citizens became very important. Com. Siddiqui of the CPI(ML) echoed these sentiments and said that organizing united struggles was very important.
Com. Vibhuti Chauhan, a recognized leader of the Musahar community in the area made a rousing speech saying that whenever people like him had intervened and actively organized resistance to communal elements, the poorest of the poor had always responded positively and, where they were organized and had participated in militant struggles, they refused to be used as pawns by communal leaders like Adityanath. Unfortunately, where the poor, the backward communities and the dalits were not organized many of them fell prey to Adityanath's blandishments and were actively involved in rioting.
A senior journalist from the Hindustan daily, Manoj Singh, who has been active in the movement to defend secularism in the area for the last several years, also spoke. He was very forthright in attacking the media for its partisan and prejudiced role. He said that it was sections of the media and the vested interests that it represents who made leaders like Adityanath larger-than- life. They gave undue publicity to him and his supporters and left very little space for any opposition. Manoj Singh also said that Adityanath had assumed leadership of the Thakur community to which he belonged and, as a result, all political leaders belonging to this community along with members of the adminstration, the media, the legal profession etc. all extended every kind of support to him. Governments and administrations treated him with kid gloves and added to his aura. Despite all this, the vast majority of people did not support his actions and utterances but they felt that they could neither do or say anything to change things. It was this situation that had to be changed by people like those attending the convention.
CPI(M) State Sectt. Member, Com. Premnath Rai addressed the convention and assured all those present that the party would intensify its campaigns and struggles in the area.
I had been invited to the Convention as the Chief Guest and was the last speaker. I emphasized the point that the real problems and suffering of the people of the area were receiving no attention from anyone because of the permanent situation of imminent communal conflict that had been created. As a result, unemployment was rampant while all factories and sources of employment were being closed down;
Japanese encephalitis had become a scourge while Govt. hospitals were starved of medicines and facilities; people were being denied ration cards and rations while illicit liquor was flooding villages. The entire area was the victim of the worst kinds of communal, caste and criminalised politics. And yet, whenever and wherever, people organized themselves for struggles and interventions, they could make a difference. In one village, Lakshmipur, of Gorakhpur, during the Moharram disturbances, Adityanath's followers in the village had refused to allow the muslims to take out the tazia procession . AIDWA members of the village along with their children took a stand and picked up the tazias. They were then joined by both Muslim and Hindu villagers and the procession was taken out.
The importance of this convention lay not in its attendance but in the fact that it was held at all. In the communally surcharged atmosphere of Eastern U.P., voices speaking out against communalism and Adityanath are very few and very far between
Subhashini Ali
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
