Indo-Pak Peace Talks and Taliban Provocations
Ram Puniyani
There are reports (February 23, 2010) in Indian media that two Sikhs were killed by Pakistan based Taliban militants in Khyber and Orakzi areas near Peshawar. These Sikhs were part of a group of many Sikhs who had been kidnapped by the Taliban over a month ago. The Taliban had demanded Rs 30 million as ransom for the release of this group and killed two of them after the expiry of the deadline for the payment of the ransom, Jizya. Two persons, Gurvinder Singh and Gurjit Singh amongst others are still believed to be in the custody of the militants.
Some reports suggest that these Sikhs were killed after their refusal to convert to Islam. Indian Government has reacted strongly to this mindless act by Taliban. Many an Indian political groups and a group of Muslim intellectual activists have also condemned this barbaric act in no uncertain terms. The group of Muslim intellectuals/activists in their statement point out, “The inhuman and un-Islamic act of killing innocent civilians has once again exposed the true face of the terrorists whose only aim is to use the name of Islam, the religion of peace and mercy, for their nefarious designs, ulterior motives and worldly pleasures. These are the people who denigrate the name of Islam and bring disrepute to all Muslims of the World. No civilized Muslim would accept the logic of killing innocents in the name of religion. Safeguarding the lives of its minorities from lawlessness, mayhem and protecting their lives and property is the paramount duty of an Islamic State. The continuous pressure on the Sikh community in Pakistan is alarming and demands urgent attention of civil society, religious leadership and the establishment in Pakistan.”
The other aspect of this brutal act is that it is coming just in the wake of the Secretary level talks between India and Pakistan to begin this 25th (Thursday). Earlier also there has been a correlation between the improving Pak-India relations and such acts of insanity which put a great amount of pressure on Indian Government to put off the talks. There are numerous such incidents which one recalls. The first such major incident was the Kargil occupation by Pakistan army under Pervez Musharraf in the wake of Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Bus Yatra which aimed to break the ice of coldness between the two neighbors. This was done without the knowledge of Nawaz Sharif, the President.
The second major act had been the Mumbai 26/11, 2008, before which Asif Ali Zardari had been giving positive signals of improving the relations between India and Pakistan. Today one is clear that there are multiple power centers in Pakistan. The democratic Government is trying to establish its writ, but the army and Taliban are doing their best to thwart the return of democracy, democratization process in Pakistan and betterment of Pak-India relations. One must compliment the Indian Government to keep its cool, and firmness in the face of these deliberate provocations. The need to distinguish between the civilian Governments, army-mullah-Taliban complex is mandatory if we want to understand Pakistan today.
From the decades of 1980s multiple processes have gripped Pakistan and these had adverse impact on the whole of South Asia, India in particular. One recalls the rise of Zia Ul Haq with the support of US and Maulanas, led by Maulana Maududi. The formulations of Maulana Maududi provided ideal foil to the military dictatorship in Pakistan. At the same time US could merrily support Madrassa’s which were training Muslim youth as its cannon fodder for its plans to boost anti Soviet forces in Afghanistan, which was occupied by Russian army. Since US army was deeply humiliated due to its defeat in Vietnam, US masterminded to indoctrinate Muslim youth to be trained as terrorists. These were the one’s who joined anti Russian forces, which got defeated and since then these Taliban’s/Al Qaeda are creating havoc. Not only in India, they have also wrecked the life in Pakistan, several terrorist attacks, one of which killed the Pakistan ex-Prime minister Benazir Bhutto. Today Taliban/Al Qaeda types are like cancer eating into the vitals of Pakistan. Their impact is also felt here in India. Pakistan in a way is caught in a pincer movement, on one hand the Al Qaeda-Taliban creating havoc and on the other Army trying to remain as the major power center. India has a tough task to remain calm and firm in the face of this massive turmoil in the region.
We must see clearly that in this situation Pakistan civil government’s hand must be strengthened so that it can deal effectively against the army highhandedness and terrorist nuisance in the region. One also must make it clear that what Taliban is doing has nothing to do with Islamic teachings as such. As per Islam, there can’t be force or compulsion in matters of religion. To force somebody to convert by force is not acceptable as per Islamic teachings. Also to kill the innocent people also goes against teachings of Koran.
As far a Jizya is concerned it was a tax levied on non Muslims in Muslim rule. This was in lieu of exemption from military duties and was a small proportion of the income of the person. It was mostly lesser than the Zakat, which is mandatory in Islam. Today to talk of Jizya is a political abuse of worst order; those using this language need to be restrained in the democratic society. The million rupee question remains, will civilian rule prevail over the fissiparous forces operating within Pakistan. Indian Government must take up the issue of protection of minorities in Pakistan without any compromise.
--
|
February 27, 2010
February 25, 2010
2006 Letter to the President of India on M.F. Husain (SAHMAT)
In the light of the news report in The Hindu today, that MF Husain has been offered honorary citizenship of QATAR, we re-issue the letter sent to President Kalam in 2006. We never received an acknowledgement or any response to this communication. It is a sad day for our democracy when an artist of the stature of Husain might change his citizenship. The letter speaks for itself.
Ram Rahman, SAHMAT, Feb 25, 2010
SAHMAT
15 November 2006
Letter to the President of India on M.F. Husain
We, the undersigned, write to you to suggest that the arts and the nation would be made proud if the contribution of the distinguished artist, Maqbool Fida Husain, is recognized in the form of the highest award of the land: India’s Bharat Ratna.
M.F. Husain has received national and international recognition in abundance; it remains for him to join the constellation of Bharat Ratna awardees – Satyajit Ray, M.S. Subbalakshmi, Ravi Shankar, Bismillah Khan, Lata Mangeshkar – to become one the most treasured artists of this country. A large number of artists, art historians and critics, as well as spectators in the general public, believe that M.F. Husain, the 91-year-old painter and filmmaker, most fully belongs in this constellation.
The Indian civilization, in all its diversity, has been Husain’s basic inspirational project. Since the year of Independence, through the Nehruvian decades and thereon, cognizant of all the challenges involved in nation-building, Husain has been steadfast in maintaining a most affirmative relationship with the Indian people’s consciousness of their national identity. Through him, we have learned to address a whole gamut of issues pertaining to the interactive dynamic of modernity with the country’s many-layered art and culture.
We believe that he has made a signal contribution in reworking the aesthetic traditions of India including especially the tradition of iconographic innovation. He is among those few modern artists who have focused on mythological and epic narratives, and, for over half a century, he has painted themes from the epics in literally thousands of paintings and drawings. This alone speaks of his passion for these narratives and, further, of his understanding that their literary, performing and visual form has changed through the centuries, and therefore carries the mandate for new articulations within the contemporary.
Equally important, these series of Husain paintings have been shown in urban and rural sites through unique modes of public dissemination. And it speaks of the generous comprehension of this project by viewers all over India, viewers who cut across barriers of class and culture, that they have been received with the affectionate regard and playful participation they require.
Posterity will certainly name Husain as one of the most prominent post-Indpendence artists to shape the contemporary in the spirit of a living and changing tradition. More than any other modern artist in India, he has understood how a syncretic civilization and the dynamics of a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation have together prompted these interpretations and empowered the community of artists to evolve a uniquely modern language consistent with the complexity of these civilizational narratives.
Indeed, Husain is such an iconic figure that we could use the very iconography of Maqbool Fida Husain, of the person himself, to forward ideas about Indian visual culture in the framework of a dynamic public sphere. Already, his life and work are beginning to serve as an allegory for the changing modalities of the secular in modern India – and the challenges that the narrative of the nation holds for many of us. This is the opportune, and crucial, time to honour him for his dedication and courage to the cultural renaissance of his beloved country.
Signed by:
Vivan Sundaram, Ashok Vajpeyi, Gulammohammed Sheikh, Krishen Khanna, Ram Rahman, M.K. Raina, Geeta Kapur, Arpita Singh, A. Ramachandaran, Aditi De, Akbar Padamsee, Alaknanda Patel, Amit Judge, Amiya Bagchi, Aneesh Pradhan, Anil Chandra, Anuradha
Kapur, Arun Vadhera, Ashutosh Gowarikar, Astad Deboo, Atul Bhalla, Atul Tiwari, Aziz Mirza, Bal Chabda, Balkrishan Doshi, Bharati Kher, Bhaskar Chandavarkar, C.P. Chandrasekhar, D.N. Jha, Dadi Pudumjee, Dadiba Pundole, Dolly Narang, E. Alkazi, Gayatri Sinha, Geeta Mehra, Gitanjali Shree, Indira Chandrasekhar, Indra Pramit Roy, Irfan Habib, Javeed Alam, Jayati Ghosh, Jitish Kallat, Jogen Chowdhury, Jyotindra Jain, K. Bikram Singh, K.G. Subramanyan, K.T. Ravindran, Kedar Nath Singh, Kekoo Gandhy, Khorsheed Gandhy, Krishen Baldev Vaid, Kumar Shahani, Kundan Shah, Laxma Gaud, Madangopal Singh, Madhu Prasad, Madhukar Upadhyaya, Malini Bhattacharya, Mani Kaul, Maya Rao, Mira Nair, Mihir Bhattacharya, Mrinalini Mukherjee, Muzaffar Ali, Nadira Babbar, Nagji Patel, Nalini Malani, Namwar Singh, Navjot Altaf, Neelam Man Singh, Nilima Sheikh, Paramjit Singh, Paritosh Sen, Parthiv Shah, Prabhat Patnaik, Prasanna, Pushpamala N., Rafeeq Elias, Raj Babbar, Raj Rewal, Rajeev Bhargava, Rajendra Yadav, Rajinder Arora, Rajiv Sethi, Ram Kumar, Ramgopal Bajaj, Ranbir Kaleka, Reene Saini Kallat, Renu Modi, Saeed Mirza, Sangita Jindal, Sashi Kumar, Sasidharan Nair M., Shashi Tharoor, Sheba Chhachhi, Shireen Gandhi, Shireen Moosvi, Shubha Mudgal, Shyam Benegal, Sohail Hashmi, Subodh Gupta, Sudhir Chandra, Sudhir Mishra, Sudhir Patwardhan, Sukumar Muralidharan, Suresh B.V., Teesta Setalvad, Tyeb Mehta, U.R. Ananthamurthy, Veer Munshi, Vidya Shah, Vijay Bagodi, Virendra Saini, Zarina Hashmi
Ram Rahman, SAHMAT, Feb 25, 2010
SAHMAT
15 November 2006
Letter to the President of India on M.F. Husain
We, the undersigned, write to you to suggest that the arts and the nation would be made proud if the contribution of the distinguished artist, Maqbool Fida Husain, is recognized in the form of the highest award of the land: India’s Bharat Ratna.
M.F. Husain has received national and international recognition in abundance; it remains for him to join the constellation of Bharat Ratna awardees – Satyajit Ray, M.S. Subbalakshmi, Ravi Shankar, Bismillah Khan, Lata Mangeshkar – to become one the most treasured artists of this country. A large number of artists, art historians and critics, as well as spectators in the general public, believe that M.F. Husain, the 91-year-old painter and filmmaker, most fully belongs in this constellation.
The Indian civilization, in all its diversity, has been Husain’s basic inspirational project. Since the year of Independence, through the Nehruvian decades and thereon, cognizant of all the challenges involved in nation-building, Husain has been steadfast in maintaining a most affirmative relationship with the Indian people’s consciousness of their national identity. Through him, we have learned to address a whole gamut of issues pertaining to the interactive dynamic of modernity with the country’s many-layered art and culture.
We believe that he has made a signal contribution in reworking the aesthetic traditions of India including especially the tradition of iconographic innovation. He is among those few modern artists who have focused on mythological and epic narratives, and, for over half a century, he has painted themes from the epics in literally thousands of paintings and drawings. This alone speaks of his passion for these narratives and, further, of his understanding that their literary, performing and visual form has changed through the centuries, and therefore carries the mandate for new articulations within the contemporary.
Equally important, these series of Husain paintings have been shown in urban and rural sites through unique modes of public dissemination. And it speaks of the generous comprehension of this project by viewers all over India, viewers who cut across barriers of class and culture, that they have been received with the affectionate regard and playful participation they require.
Posterity will certainly name Husain as one of the most prominent post-Indpendence artists to shape the contemporary in the spirit of a living and changing tradition. More than any other modern artist in India, he has understood how a syncretic civilization and the dynamics of a multi-ethnic, multi-religious nation have together prompted these interpretations and empowered the community of artists to evolve a uniquely modern language consistent with the complexity of these civilizational narratives.
Indeed, Husain is such an iconic figure that we could use the very iconography of Maqbool Fida Husain, of the person himself, to forward ideas about Indian visual culture in the framework of a dynamic public sphere. Already, his life and work are beginning to serve as an allegory for the changing modalities of the secular in modern India – and the challenges that the narrative of the nation holds for many of us. This is the opportune, and crucial, time to honour him for his dedication and courage to the cultural renaissance of his beloved country.
Signed by:
Vivan Sundaram, Ashok Vajpeyi, Gulammohammed Sheikh, Krishen Khanna, Ram Rahman, M.K. Raina, Geeta Kapur, Arpita Singh, A. Ramachandaran, Aditi De, Akbar Padamsee, Alaknanda Patel, Amit Judge, Amiya Bagchi, Aneesh Pradhan, Anil Chandra, Anuradha
Kapur, Arun Vadhera, Ashutosh Gowarikar, Astad Deboo, Atul Bhalla, Atul Tiwari, Aziz Mirza, Bal Chabda, Balkrishan Doshi, Bharati Kher, Bhaskar Chandavarkar, C.P. Chandrasekhar, D.N. Jha, Dadi Pudumjee, Dadiba Pundole, Dolly Narang, E. Alkazi, Gayatri Sinha, Geeta Mehra, Gitanjali Shree, Indira Chandrasekhar, Indra Pramit Roy, Irfan Habib, Javeed Alam, Jayati Ghosh, Jitish Kallat, Jogen Chowdhury, Jyotindra Jain, K. Bikram Singh, K.G. Subramanyan, K.T. Ravindran, Kedar Nath Singh, Kekoo Gandhy, Khorsheed Gandhy, Krishen Baldev Vaid, Kumar Shahani, Kundan Shah, Laxma Gaud, Madangopal Singh, Madhu Prasad, Madhukar Upadhyaya, Malini Bhattacharya, Mani Kaul, Maya Rao, Mira Nair, Mihir Bhattacharya, Mrinalini Mukherjee, Muzaffar Ali, Nadira Babbar, Nagji Patel, Nalini Malani, Namwar Singh, Navjot Altaf, Neelam Man Singh, Nilima Sheikh, Paramjit Singh, Paritosh Sen, Parthiv Shah, Prabhat Patnaik, Prasanna, Pushpamala N., Rafeeq Elias, Raj Babbar, Raj Rewal, Rajeev Bhargava, Rajendra Yadav, Rajinder Arora, Rajiv Sethi, Ram Kumar, Ramgopal Bajaj, Ranbir Kaleka, Reene Saini Kallat, Renu Modi, Saeed Mirza, Sangita Jindal, Sashi Kumar, Sasidharan Nair M., Shashi Tharoor, Sheba Chhachhi, Shireen Gandhi, Shireen Moosvi, Shubha Mudgal, Shyam Benegal, Sohail Hashmi, Subodh Gupta, Sudhir Chandra, Sudhir Mishra, Sudhir Patwardhan, Sukumar Muralidharan, Suresh B.V., Teesta Setalvad, Tyeb Mehta, U.R. Ananthamurthy, Veer Munshi, Vidya Shah, Vijay Bagodi, Virendra Saini, Zarina Hashmi
Burqa not an integral part of Islam: Election Commission
The Hindu, 24 Feb 2010
Wearing burqa not an integral part of Islam: Election Commission
J. Venkatesan
“Photo electoral rolls will not violate the right of Muslim women to practise religion”
“Article 25 merely protects the essential or integral practice of any religion”
Rolls with photographs are not given to the public
NEW DELHI: The Election Commission on Monday informed the Supreme Court that wearing a burqa by a Muslim woman was a mere religious custom, and not an integral part of Islam.
In its response to a special leave petition to restrain it from publishing photographs of purdah-clad Muslim women in the electoral rolls, the Commission said: “Article 25 of the Constitution does not confer unfettered rights to religious practice, but merely protects the essential or integral practice of any religion.”
Counsel for the Commission Meenakshi Arora submitted before a Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B.S. Chauhan, hearing a special leave petition, that the photo electoral rolls would not violate the right of Muslim women to practise their religion under Article 25.
The SLP was directed against the September 7, 2006 judgment of the Madras High Court, dismissing a petition filed by M. Ajmal Khan against the use of photographs in the rolls.
Senior counsel P.S. Narasimha and Counsel V. Balaji, appearing for the appellant, contended that the use of photographs in the rolls was likely to cause damage to the sentiments of Muslims as a whole, since there was a likelihood of misuse of the rolls, if they were made available to polling agents.
Mr. Narasimha suggested that the photographs of Muslim women be deleted from the rolls given to polling agents as their religious belief did not permit circulation of their photographs.
Ms. Arora said rolls with photographs were not given to the public, and even the soft copy “does not contain photograph.” She said only the political parties and polling agents were given the rolls as it would ensure free and fair poll.
The Commission, in its affidavit, said: “To maintain the sanctity of democratic process, it is necessary to prevent fraud of voter identity, and the photo electoral rolls will greatly help in identification of electors and prevention of bogus enrolment.”
Mr. Justice Balakrishnan said: “It is not possible to deny access of the photo electoral rolls to the polling agents. If we give privilege to one candidate, lakhs of other candidates will come, and it will create a problem. If an order is passed by this court, thousands of applications will come seeking exemptions. You come out with a better suggestion without touching the religious issue. We will consider it.”
The Bench adjourned the hearing by three weeks.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/02/24/stories/2010022463591600.htm
Wearing burqa not an integral part of Islam: Election Commission
J. Venkatesan
“Photo electoral rolls will not violate the right of Muslim women to practise religion”
“Article 25 merely protects the essential or integral practice of any religion”
Rolls with photographs are not given to the public
NEW DELHI: The Election Commission on Monday informed the Supreme Court that wearing a burqa by a Muslim woman was a mere religious custom, and not an integral part of Islam.
In its response to a special leave petition to restrain it from publishing photographs of purdah-clad Muslim women in the electoral rolls, the Commission said: “Article 25 of the Constitution does not confer unfettered rights to religious practice, but merely protects the essential or integral practice of any religion.”
Counsel for the Commission Meenakshi Arora submitted before a Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B.S. Chauhan, hearing a special leave petition, that the photo electoral rolls would not violate the right of Muslim women to practise their religion under Article 25.
The SLP was directed against the September 7, 2006 judgment of the Madras High Court, dismissing a petition filed by M. Ajmal Khan against the use of photographs in the rolls.
Senior counsel P.S. Narasimha and Counsel V. Balaji, appearing for the appellant, contended that the use of photographs in the rolls was likely to cause damage to the sentiments of Muslims as a whole, since there was a likelihood of misuse of the rolls, if they were made available to polling agents.
Mr. Narasimha suggested that the photographs of Muslim women be deleted from the rolls given to polling agents as their religious belief did not permit circulation of their photographs.
Ms. Arora said rolls with photographs were not given to the public, and even the soft copy “does not contain photograph.” She said only the political parties and polling agents were given the rolls as it would ensure free and fair poll.
The Commission, in its affidavit, said: “To maintain the sanctity of democratic process, it is necessary to prevent fraud of voter identity, and the photo electoral rolls will greatly help in identification of electors and prevention of bogus enrolment.”
Mr. Justice Balakrishnan said: “It is not possible to deny access of the photo electoral rolls to the polling agents. If we give privilege to one candidate, lakhs of other candidates will come, and it will create a problem. If an order is passed by this court, thousands of applications will come seeking exemptions. You come out with a better suggestion without touching the religious issue. We will consider it.”
The Bench adjourned the hearing by three weeks.
http://www.hindu.com/2010/02/24/stories/2010022463591600.htm
The Proposed Communal Violence Bill 2009 in its present form is totally unacceptable! : Online Petition
This is an urgent call to all democrats and responsible citizens to register their protest to the government of India for not having taken into consideration widespread demands since 2005 by independent legal experts, human rights defenders and secular activists for a much needed proper legislation on Communal Violence. Despite repeated efforts from civil society groups seeking specific changes in the proposed communal violence, the government has turned a deaf ear.
In the present form the Communal Violence Bill has been rejected by all major anti-communal groups in India and it will prove to be dangerous for the minorities, Muslims, Christians and all others. The govt is pushing the bill. We must mount pressure within this week to stop the govt from tabling this bill in the Parliament.
Pasted below is a public statement that was issued after the recent National Consultation on the Communal Violence Bill (see also a critique of the CV Bill: http://www.anhadin.net/article97.html).
We appeal to all to urgently endorse the public statement by adding their names online. We will print and send the above public statement (with all signatures gathered by the March 5th, 2010) to the Prime Minister of India, The Home Minister and to the UPA Chairperson.
* To directly endorse and sign the public statement go to: [http://www.anhadin.net/article101.html] [signatories will recieve an automatically generated confirmation mail to validate your signatures. Please remember to also look into you spam folders too incase you cant find the confirmation mail.]
* We also invite all signatories to send individual faxes / e-mails to The Prime Minister, Mr Manmohan Singh ( fax-23019334,) UPA Chairperson and Leader of the Congress Party Mrs Sonia Gandhi (fax- 23018651/ )/ The Home minister, Mr P. Chidambaram (fax- 23094221) / / ) Rahul Gandhi (23012410/ office@rahulgandhi.in) and send a copy to us (anhad.delhi@gmail.com) please.
Please treat this as urgent.
You can use a free faxing facility to send you faxes directly via the internet: (http://www.tpc.int/fax_cover_auto.html) [you must prefix the fax numbers with: +91-11 ]
I sincerely hope we can mobilise atleast 100 letters to the authorities.
Shabnam Hashmi
Anhad
-----------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Model Letter For Those Sending Individual Letters
Date:
To: Honorable Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh
Subject: We demand that the government revise the proposed Communal Violence Bill
Text:
Dear Prime Minister,
I [or we] write to you to vigourously protest against the proposed Communal Violence Bill in its present form that is soon to be tabled in the Parliment. As responsible citizens of this country we find it truly reprehensible and unfair that wise counsel of anti communal groups, human rights defenders and independent legal experts was not taken stock of and their very important suggestions and modifications have been totally ignored. The bill in its present form as is being proposed is dangerous for the health of our secular democracy and it could cause great harm to protect victims of communal violence. We want you to urgently intervene and ensure that the vitally needed legislation on Communal Violence be reviewed and revised. We want your government not to rush in a law for electoral or short term considerations. We want this important law to be amongst the finest and the best in the world; As citizens of country that has been torn and wounded by communal strife, we want a law that best protects us and gives us justice. You will set a fine democratic precedent by taking a step back and listening to our plea.
Yours sincerely
-----------------------------------
Statement Issued at National Consultation on The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009
February 12-13, 2010, New Delhi
The demand for a law on communal violence emerged from a brutal record of recurring violence in our country, the increasing occurrence of gender-based crimes in communal conflagrations, and complete impunity for mass crimes. The reasons are many - lack of political will to prosecute perpetrators, State complicity in communal crimes, lack of impartial investigation, and lack of sensitivity to victim’s experiences. But there is also, crucially, the glaring inadequacy of the law. Today, despite huge strides in international jurisprudence, India continues to lack an adequate domestic legal framework, which would allow survivors of communal violence to seek and to secure justice.
The UPA Government’s Common Minimum Programme in 2004 had promised to give the citizens of this country a ‘comprehensive legislation’ to fill this legal vacuum. We were promised a legislation that would strengthen the hands of the citizens in the struggle against communalism. However, The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill 2005, introduced in the Rajya Sabha in December 5, 2005, was a complete betrayal of that promise. The 2005 Bill was roundly criticized and rejected by civil society at all levels. Eminent jurists, legal experts, activists who worked with survivors, and all prominent minority groups rejected the Bill and urged the Government to make serious changes in it. The Bill was sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for its review and recommendations. But the Standing Committee report, when it was finally tabled in Parliament in December 2006, suggested no significant changes.
Between 2005 and now, civil society groups have repeatedly engaged with the government at all levels and time and again communicated our serious objections to this Bill. We have written critiques, given alternative formulations, written alternative draft laws, and suggested changes in several specific Chapters and clauses. Civil society groups have met everyone over the last 4 years - from the Chairperson of the UPA, Prime Minister, two successive Home Ministers, officials in the Home Ministry, to members of parliament. And yet the Government appears unwilling to listen.
[. . .]
Full Text at: http://www.anhadin.net/article101.html
In the present form the Communal Violence Bill has been rejected by all major anti-communal groups in India and it will prove to be dangerous for the minorities, Muslims, Christians and all others. The govt is pushing the bill. We must mount pressure within this week to stop the govt from tabling this bill in the Parliament.
Pasted below is a public statement that was issued after the recent National Consultation on the Communal Violence Bill (see also a critique of the CV Bill: http://www.anhadin.net/article97.html).
We appeal to all to urgently endorse the public statement by adding their names online. We will print and send the above public statement (with all signatures gathered by the March 5th, 2010) to the Prime Minister of India, The Home Minister and to the UPA Chairperson.
* To directly endorse and sign the public statement go to: [http://www.anhadin.net/article101.html] [signatories will recieve an automatically generated confirmation mail to validate your signatures. Please remember to also look into you spam folders too incase you cant find the confirmation mail.]
* We also invite all signatories to send individual faxes / e-mails to The Prime Minister, Mr Manmohan Singh ( fax-23019334,
Please treat this as urgent.
You can use a free faxing facility to send you faxes directly via the internet: (http://www.tpc.int/fax_cover_auto.html) [you must prefix the fax numbers with: +91-11 ]
I sincerely hope we can mobilise atleast 100 letters to the authorities.
Shabnam Hashmi
Anhad
-----------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Model Letter For Those Sending Individual Letters
Date:
To: Honorable Prime Minister of India, Dr Manmohan Singh
Subject: We demand that the government revise the proposed Communal Violence Bill
Text:
Dear Prime Minister,
I [or we] write to you to vigourously protest against the proposed Communal Violence Bill in its present form that is soon to be tabled in the Parliment. As responsible citizens of this country we find it truly reprehensible and unfair that wise counsel of anti communal groups, human rights defenders and independent legal experts was not taken stock of and their very important suggestions and modifications have been totally ignored. The bill in its present form as is being proposed is dangerous for the health of our secular democracy and it could cause great harm to protect victims of communal violence. We want you to urgently intervene and ensure that the vitally needed legislation on Communal Violence be reviewed and revised. We want your government not to rush in a law for electoral or short term considerations. We want this important law to be amongst the finest and the best in the world; As citizens of country that has been torn and wounded by communal strife, we want a law that best protects us and gives us justice. You will set a fine democratic precedent by taking a step back and listening to our plea.
Yours sincerely
-----------------------------------
Statement Issued at National Consultation on The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2009
February 12-13, 2010, New Delhi
The demand for a law on communal violence emerged from a brutal record of recurring violence in our country, the increasing occurrence of gender-based crimes in communal conflagrations, and complete impunity for mass crimes. The reasons are many - lack of political will to prosecute perpetrators, State complicity in communal crimes, lack of impartial investigation, and lack of sensitivity to victim’s experiences. But there is also, crucially, the glaring inadequacy of the law. Today, despite huge strides in international jurisprudence, India continues to lack an adequate domestic legal framework, which would allow survivors of communal violence to seek and to secure justice.
The UPA Government’s Common Minimum Programme in 2004 had promised to give the citizens of this country a ‘comprehensive legislation’ to fill this legal vacuum. We were promised a legislation that would strengthen the hands of the citizens in the struggle against communalism. However, The Communal Violence (Prevention, Control & Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill 2005, introduced in the Rajya Sabha in December 5, 2005, was a complete betrayal of that promise. The 2005 Bill was roundly criticized and rejected by civil society at all levels. Eminent jurists, legal experts, activists who worked with survivors, and all prominent minority groups rejected the Bill and urged the Government to make serious changes in it. The Bill was sent to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for its review and recommendations. But the Standing Committee report, when it was finally tabled in Parliament in December 2006, suggested no significant changes.
Between 2005 and now, civil society groups have repeatedly engaged with the government at all levels and time and again communicated our serious objections to this Bill. We have written critiques, given alternative formulations, written alternative draft laws, and suggested changes in several specific Chapters and clauses. Civil society groups have met everyone over the last 4 years - from the Chairperson of the UPA, Prime Minister, two successive Home Ministers, officials in the Home Ministry, to members of parliament. And yet the Government appears unwilling to listen.
[. . .]
Full Text at: http://www.anhadin.net/article101.html
1984 anti-Sikh riots case: Sajjan Kumar 'missing'
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/1984-anti-Sikh-riots-case-Sajjan-Kumar-missing-PSO-files-complaint-suspended/articleshow/5614793.cms
The Times of India
PTI, Feb 25, 2010, 11.48am IST
NEW DELHI: Former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar, whom the CBI has failed to arrest despite a non-bailable warrant against him in anti-Sikh riots cases, is "missing" for the past one week and his Personal Security Officer (PSO) has been suspended.
Delhi Police Constable Ram Niroha, posted as the PSO of the Congress leader and Z+ category protectee, had approached the Security Wing on February 19 informing them that Kumar had gone missing from that day.
Sources said Niroha, posted with the Security Wing, was suspended from service and a probe is on to establish the veracity of his claims.
Police has stationed a PCR van outside Kumar's residence in Madipur. His brother Ramesh Kumar is MP from South Delhi constituency.
"It seems Kumar has gone underground to evade arrest," a senior police official said.
Kumar could not be contacted for comments. His lawyer had earlier told the court that he was not running away and was just exploring all statutory remedies available to him by approaching a higher court.
The CBI had on February 23 informed the court that they could not arrest Kumar as he could not be located, prompting the judge to slam the investigating agency for "not being serious in apprehending" the Congress leader.
The Times of India
PTI, Feb 25, 2010, 11.48am IST
NEW DELHI: Former Congress MP Sajjan Kumar, whom the CBI has failed to arrest despite a non-bailable warrant against him in anti-Sikh riots cases, is "missing" for the past one week and his Personal Security Officer (PSO) has been suspended.
Delhi Police Constable Ram Niroha, posted as the PSO of the Congress leader and Z+ category protectee, had approached the Security Wing on February 19 informing them that Kumar had gone missing from that day.
Sources said Niroha, posted with the Security Wing, was suspended from service and a probe is on to establish the veracity of his claims.
Police has stationed a PCR van outside Kumar's residence in Madipur. His brother Ramesh Kumar is MP from South Delhi constituency.
"It seems Kumar has gone underground to evade arrest," a senior police official said.
Kumar could not be contacted for comments. His lawyer had earlier told the court that he was not running away and was just exploring all statutory remedies available to him by approaching a higher court.
The CBI had on February 23 informed the court that they could not arrest Kumar as he could not be located, prompting the judge to slam the investigating agency for "not being serious in apprehending" the Congress leader.
February 22, 2010
Competitive ‘Exclusionism’
The Economic and Political Weekly, february 13, 2010
The state has to assert itself to defeat the politics of exclusion of the two Senas in Maharashtra.
The politics of exclusion, intimidation and violence has begun to boil once again in Maharashtra, especially in Mumbai. This time there is the added edge of competition with the Shiv Sena seeking to recapture its traditional agenda from the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), whose presence has led to the former receiving a drubbing in two elections over the past year.
The threats to the film actor Shahrukh Khan and the film My Name Is Khan have occupied the headlines. But there is some- thing deeper and more worrying that is happening in Mumbai, which goes much beyond the issue of one actor or one film. If the Shiv Sena’s recourse to “outsider-bashing” is a case of reaction to the burst of popularity for the MNS in the state, the party headed by Raj Thackeray has already made it a central plank of its poli- tics to mimic – and has, sadly, proved successful in this respect – the formative days of the older party with its rabble-rousing and pursuing a “nativist’’ agenda. The spurt of attacks on any public figure who reiterates that any citizen can live anywhere in the country (and that therefore no one can be kept out of Mumbai) and the use of the language of threats against migrants from the northern states are reminiscent of the 1960s when the Shiv Sena first went after the trade unions, and then launched its “sons of the soil” movement targeting south Indians.
The breaking away of Raj Thackeray from the parent party and the recourse to nativism have meant that both the agenda as well as the violent “politics of the street” are back. As two insightful commentaries on the Shiv Sena-MNS-Mumbai politics in this issue argue, ever since the formation of the MNS in 2005, the party has taken a strident “Maharashtrian identity” approach, pushing the nativist agenda back to the forefront of politics in the state. The Shiv Sena had during the 1990s ventured into aggressive Hin- dutva and had tasted power at the centre and in the state. In the process it had toned down one strand of its agenda of exclusion. The MNS has focused on intimidating migrants from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, in particular, trying to fan feelings of hatred among vast sections of Marathi-speaking working people in Mumbai. The party has also gained the support of a section of the upper and middle classes, who share the majoritarian im- pulse propounded by it.
So virulent has the campaign against migrants from north India become that even the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its patron, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, have distanced themselves from the rhetoric of their ally, the Shiv Sena. And they have gone on to affirm their “protection” of Hindi-speaking migrants in the state. It is apparent that for the larger national party that the BJP is, militant exclusionary politics of the Senas’ variety is unpalatable, coming at a time when the party is suffer- ing a large trust deficit in Uttar Pradesh and faces elections later this year in Bihar.
The “retaliatory” stances by the other major parties in the state, the Congress, in particular, have, on the other hand, been limited to symbolism and theatrics. Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi’s visit “defying” the threat of protests by the Shiv Sena struck a chord among a section of the middle classes which was appalled with the Senas’ politics. But given how the Congress has in the past either nurtured the Shiv Sena or has made use of defectors to buttress itself (such as the embrace of Sena dema- gogues like Narayan Rane and Sanjay Nirupam), its opposition to the politics of the Senas has been lukewarm. The long ruling Congress-Nationalist Congress Party government has taken a few genuine steps to curb the activities of the MNS, since it has reaped “the benefits of using” the latter to undercut the support base of the Shiv Sena. Indeed, the presence of the MNS severely hurt the electoral fortunes of the Shiv Sena-BJP combine in the assembly and Lok Sabha elections of 2009. Besides, it helps the state government to keep public attention alive on such issues of iden- tity; far more relevant issues dogging the state such as inflation, difficult living conditions and matters related to livelihood are thereby relegated to the background.
The continued use of illiberal politics and vandalism, the luke- warm reaction by the state government and the mild response by members of civil society in the recent past have only emboldened the MNS and the Shiv Sena. Seen in this light, the remarks by popular actors and sports personalities, of late, against the Shiv Sena and the MNS’ politics appear like strong positions. But that is not sufficient to take on the entrenched politics of exclusionism practised by these parties or the cynical opportunism of the rul- ing parties that has helped sustain it.
Will the state recognise that it has to reassert its constitutional mandate to put down the violent politics of intimidation and blackmail of the Senas? Will the other mainstream political par- ties realise that they are riding a tiger if they embrace this politics in the hope that they can make lasting electoral gains?
The state has to assert itself to defeat the politics of exclusion of the two Senas in Maharashtra.
The politics of exclusion, intimidation and violence has begun to boil once again in Maharashtra, especially in Mumbai. This time there is the added edge of competition with the Shiv Sena seeking to recapture its traditional agenda from the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), whose presence has led to the former receiving a drubbing in two elections over the past year.
The threats to the film actor Shahrukh Khan and the film My Name Is Khan have occupied the headlines. But there is some- thing deeper and more worrying that is happening in Mumbai, which goes much beyond the issue of one actor or one film. If the Shiv Sena’s recourse to “outsider-bashing” is a case of reaction to the burst of popularity for the MNS in the state, the party headed by Raj Thackeray has already made it a central plank of its poli- tics to mimic – and has, sadly, proved successful in this respect – the formative days of the older party with its rabble-rousing and pursuing a “nativist’’ agenda. The spurt of attacks on any public figure who reiterates that any citizen can live anywhere in the country (and that therefore no one can be kept out of Mumbai) and the use of the language of threats against migrants from the northern states are reminiscent of the 1960s when the Shiv Sena first went after the trade unions, and then launched its “sons of the soil” movement targeting south Indians.
The breaking away of Raj Thackeray from the parent party and the recourse to nativism have meant that both the agenda as well as the violent “politics of the street” are back. As two insightful commentaries on the Shiv Sena-MNS-Mumbai politics in this issue argue, ever since the formation of the MNS in 2005, the party has taken a strident “Maharashtrian identity” approach, pushing the nativist agenda back to the forefront of politics in the state. The Shiv Sena had during the 1990s ventured into aggressive Hin- dutva and had tasted power at the centre and in the state. In the process it had toned down one strand of its agenda of exclusion. The MNS has focused on intimidating migrants from Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, in particular, trying to fan feelings of hatred among vast sections of Marathi-speaking working people in Mumbai. The party has also gained the support of a section of the upper and middle classes, who share the majoritarian im- pulse propounded by it.
So virulent has the campaign against migrants from north India become that even the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its patron, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, have distanced themselves from the rhetoric of their ally, the Shiv Sena. And they have gone on to affirm their “protection” of Hindi-speaking migrants in the state. It is apparent that for the larger national party that the BJP is, militant exclusionary politics of the Senas’ variety is unpalatable, coming at a time when the party is suffer- ing a large trust deficit in Uttar Pradesh and faces elections later this year in Bihar.
The “retaliatory” stances by the other major parties in the state, the Congress, in particular, have, on the other hand, been limited to symbolism and theatrics. Congress General Secretary Rahul Gandhi’s visit “defying” the threat of protests by the Shiv Sena struck a chord among a section of the middle classes which was appalled with the Senas’ politics. But given how the Congress has in the past either nurtured the Shiv Sena or has made use of defectors to buttress itself (such as the embrace of Sena dema- gogues like Narayan Rane and Sanjay Nirupam), its opposition to the politics of the Senas has been lukewarm. The long ruling Congress-Nationalist Congress Party government has taken a few genuine steps to curb the activities of the MNS, since it has reaped “the benefits of using” the latter to undercut the support base of the Shiv Sena. Indeed, the presence of the MNS severely hurt the electoral fortunes of the Shiv Sena-BJP combine in the assembly and Lok Sabha elections of 2009. Besides, it helps the state government to keep public attention alive on such issues of iden- tity; far more relevant issues dogging the state such as inflation, difficult living conditions and matters related to livelihood are thereby relegated to the background.
The continued use of illiberal politics and vandalism, the luke- warm reaction by the state government and the mild response by members of civil society in the recent past have only emboldened the MNS and the Shiv Sena. Seen in this light, the remarks by popular actors and sports personalities, of late, against the Shiv Sena and the MNS’ politics appear like strong positions. But that is not sufficient to take on the entrenched politics of exclusionism practised by these parties or the cynical opportunism of the rul- ing parties that has helped sustain it.
Will the state recognise that it has to reassert its constitutional mandate to put down the violent politics of intimidation and blackmail of the Senas? Will the other mainstream political par- ties realise that they are riding a tiger if they embrace this politics in the hope that they can make lasting electoral gains?
Why must superstars flirt with fascism?
dawn.com, 22 February, 2010
by Jawed Naqvi
An unnerving feature of fascism is that it readily finds a popular base among unsuspecting people. Another feature of fascism is that it can use the pretence of democracy to gain power.
Without the Enabling Act passed by parliament Hitler would not have become Fuehrer. It was only then that he acquired mesmeric dimensions that swept the Germans off their feet. Big business idolised him in a big way.
Narendra Modi’s charisma has lured India’s biggest business tycoons — powerful tycoons who are invited to attend American presidents’ inaugurations — to see in him a role model leader not for Gujarat alone, but for India.
Film actor Amitabh Bachchan is fascism’s newest recruit. He has recently become brand ambassador of Modi’s state — Gujarat. While Shahrukh Khan, Bollywood’s other superstar never went quite so far, he did say in an interview that he had nothing against Narendra Modi because Modi had never harmed him personally.
In his new and popular film My Name Is Khan, co-produced by Rupert Murdoch, people who were outraged by the rape and mass murder of Muslims in Gujarat (for which Modi is being investigated) are condemned as being satanic.
It was not always the case that Indian cinema could be brazenly exploited by rightwing interests. In fact, the presence of a highly influential left-liberal movement — Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) — within India’s nascent world of performing arts ensured that much of the ethos of the cinema reflected social strife and collective hope of a young nation. But IPTA has all but disappeared from the scene, not unlike the political movement that had shored it up.
Therefore, as India’s cinema gets “depoliticised” and focuses on candy floss themes or when it is busy marrying resurgent narrow nationalism with the threat of terrorism, it becomes difficult to speak up, much less fight the tendency.
Yet the struggle is on. More and more people are prepared to accept the consequences of protesting, of speaking out. For some it means social approbation, for others (let’s say those in places like Kashmir, Manipur, Orissa, Jharkhand ,Chhatissgarh and yes, Gujarat) it could mean prison, or even death in a ubiquitous ‘fake encounter’.
Among the few who have been fearlessly involved in bearding the lion in its lair, is actor Mallika Sarabhai, danseuse and social activist Mallika Sarabhai. She wrote the following letter to Amitabh Bachchan to question his support for Narendra Modi’s Gujarat.
“My dear Bachchanji, Greetings from a Gujarati You are indeed a fine actor. You are an intelligent man and a shrewd businessman.
But should I believe in your endorsements? Let’s take a brief look at what you proclaim you believe in (albeit for huge sums of money). BPL, ICICI, Parker and Luxor pens, Maruti Versa, Cadbury’s chocolates, Nerolac paints, Dabur, Emami, Eveready, Sahara City Homes, D’damas, Binani Cement and Reliance. And now Gujarat.
I wonder how you decide what to endorse. Is your house built with Binani Cement? Do you really like Cadbury’s chocolates or do you have to resort to Dabur’s hajmola (whose efficacy you have earlier checked) after eating them? And having endorsed two pens, one very upmarket and one rather down, which one do you use?
Have you, except perhaps for the shooting of the ad, ever driven or been driven in a Versa? Do you know whether the Nerolac paint in your home (you do use it don’t you?) has lead in it that can poison you slowly as it does so many people? Or are the decisions entirely monetary?
It has been reported that no direct fee will be paid to you for being my Brand Ambassador.
So, with no monetary decision to guide you, how did you decide to say yes? Did you check on the state of the State? I doubt it, for the decision and the announcement came from one single meeting. And I somehow doubt that you have been following the news on Gujarat closely.
So, as a Gujarati, permit me to introduce my State to you.
Everyone knows of our vibrancy, of the billions and trillions pouring into our State through the two yearly jamborees called Vibrant Gujarat. But did you know that by the government’s own admission no more than 23 per cent of these have actually moved beyond the MOU stage?
That while huge subsidies are being granted to our richest business houses, over 75,000 small and medium businesses have shut down rendering one million more people jobless.
You know of Gujarat’s fastpaced growth and the FDI pouring in, you have no doubt seen pictures of the czars of the business world lining up to pour money to develop us. To develop whom?
Did you know that our poor are getting poorer? That while the all-India reduction in poverty between 1993 and 2005 is 8.5 per cent, in Gujarat it is a mere 2.8 per cent?
That we have entire farmer families committing suicide, not just the male head of the household? You have heard of how some mealy mouthed NGO types have been blocking the progress of the Narmada project, how the government has prevailed, and water is pouring down every thirsty mouth and every bit of thirsty land. But did you know that in the 49 years since it was started, and in spite of the Rs29,000 crore spent on it, only 29 per cent of the work is complete?
That the construction is so poor (lots of sand added to the you know which cement) that over the last nine years there have been 308 breaches, ruining lakhs of farmers whose fields were flooded, ruining the poorest salt farmers whose salt was washed away?
That whereas in 1999, 4,743 of Gujarat’s villages were without drinking water, within two years that figure had gone up to 11,390 villages? (I cannot even begin to project those figures for today — but do know that the figure has gone up dramatically rather than down).
With our CM, hailed as the CEO of Gujarat, we have once again achieved number one status — in indebtedness.
In 2001, the state debt was Rs14,000 crore. This was before the State became a multinational company.
Today it stands at Rs1,05,000 crore. And to service this debt we pay a whopping Rs7,000 crore a year, 25 per cent of our annual budget.
Meanwhile, our spending on education is down, no new public hospitals for the poor are being built, fishermen are going a begging as the seas turn turgid with effluents, more mothers die at birth per thousand than in the rest of India, and our general performance on the Human Development Index is nearly the first — from the bottom.
One rape a day, 17 cases of violence against women, and, over the last 10 years, 8,802 suicides and 18,152 “ accidental” deaths of women have been officially reported. You can imagine the real figures.
You have said that you are our ambassador because we have Somnath and Gandhi.
Somnath was built for the people. Gandhiji was a man of the people. Do the people of this State matter to you? If they do, perhaps your decision will be different. I hope you will read this letter and decide.In warmth and friendship, Mallika”
by Jawed Naqvi
An unnerving feature of fascism is that it readily finds a popular base among unsuspecting people. Another feature of fascism is that it can use the pretence of democracy to gain power.
Without the Enabling Act passed by parliament Hitler would not have become Fuehrer. It was only then that he acquired mesmeric dimensions that swept the Germans off their feet. Big business idolised him in a big way.
Narendra Modi’s charisma has lured India’s biggest business tycoons — powerful tycoons who are invited to attend American presidents’ inaugurations — to see in him a role model leader not for Gujarat alone, but for India.
Film actor Amitabh Bachchan is fascism’s newest recruit. He has recently become brand ambassador of Modi’s state — Gujarat. While Shahrukh Khan, Bollywood’s other superstar never went quite so far, he did say in an interview that he had nothing against Narendra Modi because Modi had never harmed him personally.
In his new and popular film My Name Is Khan, co-produced by Rupert Murdoch, people who were outraged by the rape and mass murder of Muslims in Gujarat (for which Modi is being investigated) are condemned as being satanic.
It was not always the case that Indian cinema could be brazenly exploited by rightwing interests. In fact, the presence of a highly influential left-liberal movement — Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) — within India’s nascent world of performing arts ensured that much of the ethos of the cinema reflected social strife and collective hope of a young nation. But IPTA has all but disappeared from the scene, not unlike the political movement that had shored it up.
Therefore, as India’s cinema gets “depoliticised” and focuses on candy floss themes or when it is busy marrying resurgent narrow nationalism with the threat of terrorism, it becomes difficult to speak up, much less fight the tendency.
Yet the struggle is on. More and more people are prepared to accept the consequences of protesting, of speaking out. For some it means social approbation, for others (let’s say those in places like Kashmir, Manipur, Orissa, Jharkhand ,Chhatissgarh and yes, Gujarat) it could mean prison, or even death in a ubiquitous ‘fake encounter’.
Among the few who have been fearlessly involved in bearding the lion in its lair, is actor Mallika Sarabhai, danseuse and social activist Mallika Sarabhai. She wrote the following letter to Amitabh Bachchan to question his support for Narendra Modi’s Gujarat.
“My dear Bachchanji, Greetings from a Gujarati You are indeed a fine actor. You are an intelligent man and a shrewd businessman.
But should I believe in your endorsements? Let’s take a brief look at what you proclaim you believe in (albeit for huge sums of money). BPL, ICICI, Parker and Luxor pens, Maruti Versa, Cadbury’s chocolates, Nerolac paints, Dabur, Emami, Eveready, Sahara City Homes, D’damas, Binani Cement and Reliance. And now Gujarat.
I wonder how you decide what to endorse. Is your house built with Binani Cement? Do you really like Cadbury’s chocolates or do you have to resort to Dabur’s hajmola (whose efficacy you have earlier checked) after eating them? And having endorsed two pens, one very upmarket and one rather down, which one do you use?
Have you, except perhaps for the shooting of the ad, ever driven or been driven in a Versa? Do you know whether the Nerolac paint in your home (you do use it don’t you?) has lead in it that can poison you slowly as it does so many people? Or are the decisions entirely monetary?
It has been reported that no direct fee will be paid to you for being my Brand Ambassador.
So, with no monetary decision to guide you, how did you decide to say yes? Did you check on the state of the State? I doubt it, for the decision and the announcement came from one single meeting. And I somehow doubt that you have been following the news on Gujarat closely.
So, as a Gujarati, permit me to introduce my State to you.
Everyone knows of our vibrancy, of the billions and trillions pouring into our State through the two yearly jamborees called Vibrant Gujarat. But did you know that by the government’s own admission no more than 23 per cent of these have actually moved beyond the MOU stage?
That while huge subsidies are being granted to our richest business houses, over 75,000 small and medium businesses have shut down rendering one million more people jobless.
You know of Gujarat’s fastpaced growth and the FDI pouring in, you have no doubt seen pictures of the czars of the business world lining up to pour money to develop us. To develop whom?
Did you know that our poor are getting poorer? That while the all-India reduction in poverty between 1993 and 2005 is 8.5 per cent, in Gujarat it is a mere 2.8 per cent?
That we have entire farmer families committing suicide, not just the male head of the household? You have heard of how some mealy mouthed NGO types have been blocking the progress of the Narmada project, how the government has prevailed, and water is pouring down every thirsty mouth and every bit of thirsty land. But did you know that in the 49 years since it was started, and in spite of the Rs29,000 crore spent on it, only 29 per cent of the work is complete?
That the construction is so poor (lots of sand added to the you know which cement) that over the last nine years there have been 308 breaches, ruining lakhs of farmers whose fields were flooded, ruining the poorest salt farmers whose salt was washed away?
That whereas in 1999, 4,743 of Gujarat’s villages were without drinking water, within two years that figure had gone up to 11,390 villages? (I cannot even begin to project those figures for today — but do know that the figure has gone up dramatically rather than down).
With our CM, hailed as the CEO of Gujarat, we have once again achieved number one status — in indebtedness.
In 2001, the state debt was Rs14,000 crore. This was before the State became a multinational company.
Today it stands at Rs1,05,000 crore. And to service this debt we pay a whopping Rs7,000 crore a year, 25 per cent of our annual budget.
Meanwhile, our spending on education is down, no new public hospitals for the poor are being built, fishermen are going a begging as the seas turn turgid with effluents, more mothers die at birth per thousand than in the rest of India, and our general performance on the Human Development Index is nearly the first — from the bottom.
One rape a day, 17 cases of violence against women, and, over the last 10 years, 8,802 suicides and 18,152 “ accidental” deaths of women have been officially reported. You can imagine the real figures.
You have said that you are our ambassador because we have Somnath and Gandhi.
Somnath was built for the people. Gandhiji was a man of the people. Do the people of this State matter to you? If they do, perhaps your decision will be different. I hope you will read this letter and decide.In warmth and friendship, Mallika”
February 19, 2010
Hindutva terror probe haunts Pune investigation
The Hindu, 19 February 2010
by Praveen Swami
Investigators focus on jihadist groups, but some fear Hindutva group may have carried out German Bakery bombing.
Back in November 2008, as Lieutenant-Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit walked into a Nashik court to face trial for his alleged role in the bombing of a Malegaon mosque, Hindutva activists showered the rogue military officer with rose petals.
Last week’s bombing of the German Bakery in Pune has brought the ugly story of Abhinav Bharat — the Hindutva terrorist group Purohit helped found — back from the obscurity to which it was consigned by the Mumbai carnage, which took place just days after the trial in Nashik began.
In private, Hindus sympathetic to the ultra-right have been saying the bombings demonstrate the moral legitimacy of Purohit and his Hindutva terror project. Even as the police detained more than two dozen young Muslim men for questioning, some community leaders have been arguing that the bakery attack could just have easily been carried out by a Hindutva group.
Part of the reason for the controversy is that key suspects involved in Abhinav Bharat’s terror campaign have never been held. Jatin Chatterjee — better known by his alias Swami Asimanand — is thought to be hiding out in Gujarat’s Adivasi tracts, where he runs a Hindu proselytisation organisation. Ramnarayan Kalsangra, Abhinav Bharat’s key bomb—maker, is also a fugitive.
Founded in the summer of 2006, Abhinav Bharat was set up as an educational trust with Himani Savarkar — daughter of Gopal Godse, brother of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin — as its chairperson. But, documents filed by Maharashtra prosecutors show, members of the group were soon involved in discussing armed activity. In June 2007, Purohit allegedly suggested that the time had come to target Muslims through terrorist attacks — a plea others in Abhinav Bharat rejected.
But, the evidence gathered by the police suggests, many within the group were determined to press ahead. At a meeting in April 2008, key suspects including Madhya Pradesh-based Hindutva activist Pragnya Singh Thakur and Jammu cleric Sudhakar Dwivedi, also known as Amritananda Dev Tirtha, met Purohit to hammer out the Malegaon plot. Explosives were later procured by Purohit, and handed over to Kalsangra in early August 2008.
Abhinav Bharat’s long-term aims, though, went far beyond targeting Muslims: its members wanted to overthrow the Indian state and replace it with a totalitarian, theocratic order. A draft constitution prepared by Abhinav Bharat spoke of a single-party system, presided over by a leader who “shall be followed at all levels without questioning the authority.” It called for the creation of an “academy of indoctrinization [sic.].” The concluding comment was stark: “People whose ideas are detrimental to Hindu Rashtra should be killed.”
Purohit’s plans to bring about a Hindutva state were often fantastical. He claimed, the prosecutors say, to have secured an appointment with Nepal’s King Gyanendra in 2006 and 2007 to press for his support for the planned Hindutva revolution. Nepal, he went on, was willing to train Abhinav Bharat’s cadre, and supply it with assault rifles. Israel’s government, he said, had agreed to grant members of the group military support and, if needed, political asylum.
Many believe that Abhinav Bharat carried out many attacks earlier attributed to jihadist groups — notable among them, the bombing of the Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad in May 2007, and a subsequent attack on the famous shrine at Ajmer. Despite persistent questioning of Abhinav Bharat cadre, though, the investigators have not been able to link the group to the attacks.
Matters are complicated by the fact that some of the operations attributed to Abhinav Bharat may not have had much to do with the group — even though its leading luminaries claimed responsibility for the attacks.
For example, Purohit allegedly claimed to confidants that the attack was carried out by the Dewas-based Hindutva terrorist Sunil Joshi, who was murdered in December 2007. But the United States Treasury Department later imposed sanctions on Lashkar-e-Taiba activist Arif Kasmani — a Karachi-based jihadist with close links to the Taliban and al-Qaeda — for financing the attack.
In January this year, Pakistan’s Interior Ministry chief Rehman Malik went further, admitting that “there were some Pakistan-based Islamists who had been hired to carry out the Samjhauta Express attack.”
Judging by recent Hindutva terror attacks, like last year’s bombings in Goa, it is unclear if they still have the capabilities to mount a sophisticated attack of the kind seen in Pune. Few investigators believe that the organisations — or other Hindutva cells — mounted the operation. “Still”, says one Maharashtra police official involved in investigating both Hindutva and jihadist attacks, “you can’t help wondering — what if?”
Signs are the investigation into the bombing of the German Bakery will take time. All that investigators have by way of suspects are three men recorded holding brief meetings before the blast by a poor-quality closed-circuit television camera. From the videotape, it is unclear if the men had anything to do with the attack.
The longer the investigation takes, the more time conspiracy theories and speculation will have to proliferate — likely deepening the communal fissures the bombing is already opening up.
by Praveen Swami
Investigators focus on jihadist groups, but some fear Hindutva group may have carried out German Bakery bombing.
Back in November 2008, as Lieutenant-Colonel Prasad Shrikant Purohit walked into a Nashik court to face trial for his alleged role in the bombing of a Malegaon mosque, Hindutva activists showered the rogue military officer with rose petals.
Last week’s bombing of the German Bakery in Pune has brought the ugly story of Abhinav Bharat — the Hindutva terrorist group Purohit helped found — back from the obscurity to which it was consigned by the Mumbai carnage, which took place just days after the trial in Nashik began.
In private, Hindus sympathetic to the ultra-right have been saying the bombings demonstrate the moral legitimacy of Purohit and his Hindutva terror project. Even as the police detained more than two dozen young Muslim men for questioning, some community leaders have been arguing that the bakery attack could just have easily been carried out by a Hindutva group.
Part of the reason for the controversy is that key suspects involved in Abhinav Bharat’s terror campaign have never been held. Jatin Chatterjee — better known by his alias Swami Asimanand — is thought to be hiding out in Gujarat’s Adivasi tracts, where he runs a Hindu proselytisation organisation. Ramnarayan Kalsangra, Abhinav Bharat’s key bomb—maker, is also a fugitive.
Founded in the summer of 2006, Abhinav Bharat was set up as an educational trust with Himani Savarkar — daughter of Gopal Godse, brother of Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin — as its chairperson. But, documents filed by Maharashtra prosecutors show, members of the group were soon involved in discussing armed activity. In June 2007, Purohit allegedly suggested that the time had come to target Muslims through terrorist attacks — a plea others in Abhinav Bharat rejected.
But, the evidence gathered by the police suggests, many within the group were determined to press ahead. At a meeting in April 2008, key suspects including Madhya Pradesh-based Hindutva activist Pragnya Singh Thakur and Jammu cleric Sudhakar Dwivedi, also known as Amritananda Dev Tirtha, met Purohit to hammer out the Malegaon plot. Explosives were later procured by Purohit, and handed over to Kalsangra in early August 2008.
Abhinav Bharat’s long-term aims, though, went far beyond targeting Muslims: its members wanted to overthrow the Indian state and replace it with a totalitarian, theocratic order. A draft constitution prepared by Abhinav Bharat spoke of a single-party system, presided over by a leader who “shall be followed at all levels without questioning the authority.” It called for the creation of an “academy of indoctrinization [sic.].” The concluding comment was stark: “People whose ideas are detrimental to Hindu Rashtra should be killed.”
Purohit’s plans to bring about a Hindutva state were often fantastical. He claimed, the prosecutors say, to have secured an appointment with Nepal’s King Gyanendra in 2006 and 2007 to press for his support for the planned Hindutva revolution. Nepal, he went on, was willing to train Abhinav Bharat’s cadre, and supply it with assault rifles. Israel’s government, he said, had agreed to grant members of the group military support and, if needed, political asylum.
Many believe that Abhinav Bharat carried out many attacks earlier attributed to jihadist groups — notable among them, the bombing of the Mecca Masjid in Hyderabad in May 2007, and a subsequent attack on the famous shrine at Ajmer. Despite persistent questioning of Abhinav Bharat cadre, though, the investigators have not been able to link the group to the attacks.
Matters are complicated by the fact that some of the operations attributed to Abhinav Bharat may not have had much to do with the group — even though its leading luminaries claimed responsibility for the attacks.
For example, Purohit allegedly claimed to confidants that the attack was carried out by the Dewas-based Hindutva terrorist Sunil Joshi, who was murdered in December 2007. But the United States Treasury Department later imposed sanctions on Lashkar-e-Taiba activist Arif Kasmani — a Karachi-based jihadist with close links to the Taliban and al-Qaeda — for financing the attack.
In January this year, Pakistan’s Interior Ministry chief Rehman Malik went further, admitting that “there were some Pakistan-based Islamists who had been hired to carry out the Samjhauta Express attack.”
Judging by recent Hindutva terror attacks, like last year’s bombings in Goa, it is unclear if they still have the capabilities to mount a sophisticated attack of the kind seen in Pune. Few investigators believe that the organisations — or other Hindutva cells — mounted the operation. “Still”, says one Maharashtra police official involved in investigating both Hindutva and jihadist attacks, “you can’t help wondering — what if?”
Signs are the investigation into the bombing of the German Bakery will take time. All that investigators have by way of suspects are three men recorded holding brief meetings before the blast by a poor-quality closed-circuit television camera. From the videotape, it is unclear if the men had anything to do with the attack.
The longer the investigation takes, the more time conspiracy theories and speculation will have to proliferate — likely deepening the communal fissures the bombing is already opening up.
February 17, 2010
India: Court says make policy on policy on unauthorised religious constructions
The Hindu, Feb 17, 2010
Frame policy on unauthorised religious structures, Supreme Court tells States
J. Venkatesan
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the States and Union Territories to formulate, within eight weeks, a comprehensive policy on removal, relocation and regularisation of unauthorised religious constructions.
A Bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and K.S. Radhakrishnan pointed out that in its December 7, 2009 order the States were asked to prevent unauthorised construction of temples, churches, mosques or gurdwaras in streets, parks or other public places. While the States filed affidavits stating that steps had been taken to prevent any future unauthorised construction, in respect of formulation of a policy for the existing unauthorised structures, most of them had not framed the guidelines.
Therefore, the Bench said, it had become imperative to direct the States and the UTs to formulate a comprehensive policy and to identify all unauthorised structures. The State should spell out within what period it would demolish/relocate/regularise the structures. The Bench directed the Chief Secretaries to file affidavits in this regard.
Tamil Nadu stand
In its response, Tamil Nadu said it had evolved a strategy for removing unauthorised structures at public places without hurting people’s sentiments. This “includes the process of identification, to relocate the said structure.” A high-level committee had been constituted under the chairmanship of the Revenue Minister to deal with eviction as well as to monitor the progress of eviction proceedings. The court’s orders had been communicated to all District Collectors and they were directed to strictly comply with the directions.
Andhra Pradesh said that as per a preliminary survey “there are about 647 religious structures on footpaths and road margins in the area of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation; 25 temporary structures which have recently come up and have low potential of creating a law and order problem and can be removed; 55 structures that can be removed by convincing the managements and local people, and 496 structures which are old, permanent and have a high potential of creating a law and order problem.” An action plan had been finalised to conduct a detailed survey and to take action as per law.
Both Karnataka and Kerala said strict instructions had been issued to the Collectors to strictly comply with the court direction that no unauthorised construction of any kind be carried out or permitted on public land. Similar affidavits were filed by other States.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on April 6.
Frame policy on unauthorised religious structures, Supreme Court tells States
J. Venkatesan
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the States and Union Territories to formulate, within eight weeks, a comprehensive policy on removal, relocation and regularisation of unauthorised religious constructions.
A Bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and K.S. Radhakrishnan pointed out that in its December 7, 2009 order the States were asked to prevent unauthorised construction of temples, churches, mosques or gurdwaras in streets, parks or other public places. While the States filed affidavits stating that steps had been taken to prevent any future unauthorised construction, in respect of formulation of a policy for the existing unauthorised structures, most of them had not framed the guidelines.
Therefore, the Bench said, it had become imperative to direct the States and the UTs to formulate a comprehensive policy and to identify all unauthorised structures. The State should spell out within what period it would demolish/relocate/regularise the structures. The Bench directed the Chief Secretaries to file affidavits in this regard.
Tamil Nadu stand
In its response, Tamil Nadu said it had evolved a strategy for removing unauthorised structures at public places without hurting people’s sentiments. This “includes the process of identification, to relocate the said structure.” A high-level committee had been constituted under the chairmanship of the Revenue Minister to deal with eviction as well as to monitor the progress of eviction proceedings. The court’s orders had been communicated to all District Collectors and they were directed to strictly comply with the directions.
Andhra Pradesh said that as per a preliminary survey “there are about 647 religious structures on footpaths and road margins in the area of Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation; 25 temporary structures which have recently come up and have low potential of creating a law and order problem and can be removed; 55 structures that can be removed by convincing the managements and local people, and 496 structures which are old, permanent and have a high potential of creating a law and order problem.” An action plan had been finalised to conduct a detailed survey and to take action as per law.
Both Karnataka and Kerala said strict instructions had been issued to the Collectors to strictly comply with the court direction that no unauthorised construction of any kind be carried out or permitted on public land. Similar affidavits were filed by other States.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on April 6.
February 15, 2010
Secularism & the role of the Supreme Court
From The Hindu : Book Review, 16 February 2010
Shaikh Mujibur Rehman
ARTICLES OF FAITH — Religion, Secularism, and the Indian Supreme Court: Ronojoy Sen; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 675.
As the contemporary Indian political folklore suggests, secularism as state ideology has become contentious ever since Hindutva emerged as a major political plank. For the academia, the history of the contentious nature of this debate is somewhat older, and intriguing. What is, however, striking is that the political and academic streams of discourse have employed two different connotations of secularism. The political strand focussed on the fairness of the way the concept is applied in practice, with one section even accusing the state of being biased towards the minorities, particularly Muslims. On the other hand, the academic discourse stressed mostly on its genesis and on questions such as whether it is Western or Indian in origin. While both allude to the part the Supreme Court of India has been playing in this area, citing its different verdicts wherever necessary, there has been no systematic research into its proactive role. This book fills this vacuum quite comfortably.
On landmark cases
How the Supreme Court has been addressing the issues related to Hinduism and minority religions such as Islam is discussed extensively under different heads. In each chapter, considerable space is devoted to analysing the landmark cases that have a definitive bearing on Indian secularism. Among the significant points the author makes in his multi-layered argument is that the judicial verdicts are, in some measure, reflective of the dominant personalities of the court at a given time. In fact, the chapter titled, “Judging Religion: A Nehruvian In Court,” is entirely about P.B. Gajendragadkar, who served as the Chief Justice of India during the 1960s, and his was a dominant voice in matters of religion. Going by the manner in which the public debate and political campaign have proceeded in the area of secularism, there is a perception that the state’s relationship with minority religions, particularly Islam, needs to be grasped sensibly in order to make sense of its practices. In an attempt to depart from this dominant perception, the author devotes two chapters to discussing how the Supreme Court has been shaping the country’s political portrait and, in the process, created a lot of confusion about the connotations of ‘Hinduism’ and ‘Hindutva’. According to him, the confusion is partly due to the absence of Gandhian view of Hinduism in judicial discourse. He needs to have also noted that Hinduism in non-Hindutva sense is not completely compatible with the idea of tolerance. In fact, Dalit scholars such as Gopal Guru, Kancha Ilaiah, and Gail Omvedt consider that the idea of Hinduism in its brahminical construct is as pernicious, if not more, as it is in its Hindutva avatar.
Deviating from the conventional path, the author suggests that secularism needs to be visualised in a broader relationship not just with Islam but also with Hinduism. He devotes substantial space to the issue of minorities and Islam, with one chapter dealing exclusively with the question of Uniform Civil Code, one of the most contentious issues figuring in the secularism debate. This well-written chapter, however, could have profited from a discussion on the drafts that various civil society groups based in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Pune have been working on since the later part of the 1980s.
Insights
Viewed in the context of the vicious communal attacks witnessed in Kandhamal recently, where Christians were the target, the valuable insights offered into the way the courts have handled conversion-related issues acquire special relevance. How the Indian state grapples with religious conversion is, as the author says — and rightly so —“in many ways very central to the constitutional experiment with secularism.” Equally noteworthy is the chapter that deals with minority rights in running educational institutions.
Scholarship
This book, however, is not about the “unfettered role of religion and religious practices.” While discussing the core dimension of Indian secularism, he suggests that the court “rethink its language of uniformity in favour of one accommodative of religious and legal pluralism.” Otherwise, he warns, religion and faith could be hijacked by religious fundamentalists. The book, the core of which is a product of the author’s doctoral work, has further enriched the wealth of scholarship on secularism. In addition, it should serve as a valuable source for students of law and Indian politics.
Shaikh Mujibur Rehman
ARTICLES OF FAITH — Religion, Secularism, and the Indian Supreme Court: Ronojoy Sen; Oxford University Press, YMCA Library Building, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi-110001. Rs. 675.
As the contemporary Indian political folklore suggests, secularism as state ideology has become contentious ever since Hindutva emerged as a major political plank. For the academia, the history of the contentious nature of this debate is somewhat older, and intriguing. What is, however, striking is that the political and academic streams of discourse have employed two different connotations of secularism. The political strand focussed on the fairness of the way the concept is applied in practice, with one section even accusing the state of being biased towards the minorities, particularly Muslims. On the other hand, the academic discourse stressed mostly on its genesis and on questions such as whether it is Western or Indian in origin. While both allude to the part the Supreme Court of India has been playing in this area, citing its different verdicts wherever necessary, there has been no systematic research into its proactive role. This book fills this vacuum quite comfortably.
On landmark cases
How the Supreme Court has been addressing the issues related to Hinduism and minority religions such as Islam is discussed extensively under different heads. In each chapter, considerable space is devoted to analysing the landmark cases that have a definitive bearing on Indian secularism. Among the significant points the author makes in his multi-layered argument is that the judicial verdicts are, in some measure, reflective of the dominant personalities of the court at a given time. In fact, the chapter titled, “Judging Religion: A Nehruvian In Court,” is entirely about P.B. Gajendragadkar, who served as the Chief Justice of India during the 1960s, and his was a dominant voice in matters of religion. Going by the manner in which the public debate and political campaign have proceeded in the area of secularism, there is a perception that the state’s relationship with minority religions, particularly Islam, needs to be grasped sensibly in order to make sense of its practices. In an attempt to depart from this dominant perception, the author devotes two chapters to discussing how the Supreme Court has been shaping the country’s political portrait and, in the process, created a lot of confusion about the connotations of ‘Hinduism’ and ‘Hindutva’. According to him, the confusion is partly due to the absence of Gandhian view of Hinduism in judicial discourse. He needs to have also noted that Hinduism in non-Hindutva sense is not completely compatible with the idea of tolerance. In fact, Dalit scholars such as Gopal Guru, Kancha Ilaiah, and Gail Omvedt consider that the idea of Hinduism in its brahminical construct is as pernicious, if not more, as it is in its Hindutva avatar.
Deviating from the conventional path, the author suggests that secularism needs to be visualised in a broader relationship not just with Islam but also with Hinduism. He devotes substantial space to the issue of minorities and Islam, with one chapter dealing exclusively with the question of Uniform Civil Code, one of the most contentious issues figuring in the secularism debate. This well-written chapter, however, could have profited from a discussion on the drafts that various civil society groups based in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Pune have been working on since the later part of the 1980s.
Insights
Viewed in the context of the vicious communal attacks witnessed in Kandhamal recently, where Christians were the target, the valuable insights offered into the way the courts have handled conversion-related issues acquire special relevance. How the Indian state grapples with religious conversion is, as the author says — and rightly so —“in many ways very central to the constitutional experiment with secularism.” Equally noteworthy is the chapter that deals with minority rights in running educational institutions.
Scholarship
This book, however, is not about the “unfettered role of religion and religious practices.” While discussing the core dimension of Indian secularism, he suggests that the court “rethink its language of uniformity in favour of one accommodative of religious and legal pluralism.” Otherwise, he warns, religion and faith could be hijacked by religious fundamentalists. The book, the core of which is a product of the author’s doctoral work, has further enriched the wealth of scholarship on secularism. In addition, it should serve as a valuable source for students of law and Indian politics.
February 10, 2010
Women Who Dared
From: csss-isla.com, 10 February, 2010
by Asghar Ali Engineer
Women generally are considered weak in our patriarchal society and men feel they need to be protected. Is it true? Well it may be true in some contexts but there are instances where women have dared where men chicken out or 'weaker' women have proved to be morally much stronger. Here it also needs to be stressed that only physical strength or strength of arms is not real strength, it is moral values which make really strong. Those who have moral superiority need not fear anyone and cannot be defeated.
Though no one can say women are inherently morally stronger but women tend to have better morals than men. There are number of reasons for that. Men aspire more for power and domination than women and hence resort to more morally unsound practices. They are involved more in crime than women and women tend to be more ethical in their behavior.
With very few exceptions women have not waged wars. Most of the ferocious and highly destructive wars in which millions of innocent human beings were killed were launched by men. In the last century two world wars were launched and fought by men, women only suffered. Women are far more sensitive to human life than men. It is women who give birth to life and sustain it. She carries human life for nine long months in her womb and than, after giving birth, nurtures it for years before child becomes self sufficient.
Men, on the other hand, to realize their own ambitions or wealth or power, would kill thousands of human beings within few seconds by dropping bombs or launching deadly missiles. Who caused atom bomb to be dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima killing more than two lakh people at a time? Not a woman. For men, power and authority are far more important than sensitivity to human life.
In communal riots in India too men have been real culprits than women. In my 40 years of investigating and monitoring communal riots in India I have not find a single instance in which any woman plotted and executed riots, much less killed any Hindu or Muslim. It was only in Gujarat that one Maya Kodnani is alleged to have instigated men to kill innocent human beings in Narodia Patia. I have found no other instance.
However, I have come across several instances in which women have saved the lives of innocent people. These women are real inspiration for peace loving people. I would like to throw some light here on the role of these women. Some I discovered while investigating riots and some I read about in newspapers and subsequently met them and some we had occasion to felicitate them on behalf of Women for Secularism, an organization working for rights of women at grassroots.
I came first such instance during investigation of communal riots in Ahmedabad in 1969. Now I do not remember her name but she was a vegetable vendor living in Jalimsingh Ni Chawl in Ahmedabad where there were two Muslim families as her neighbors. During the riots of 1969 a mob surrounded the Chawl and demanded that the Muslims be handed over to them to be killed and their household looted.
This woman the vegetable vendor, heard this and came out of her room with her sickle with which she used to cut her vegetables, came down the stairs and stood at the entrance challenging the mob to step forward to kill Muslims. I will cut the head of anyone stepping forward with this sickle, then you can kill me and walk over my dead body to kill the Muslims. None came forward and the mob of 500 dispersed.
I met this lady during my investigation and asked her why did you risk your life to save Muslims? She said first of all they were my neighbors and it was my duty to save their lives or die before they were killed. Secondly they were from my own village in Rajasthan. What face I would have shown to my villagers if they were killed. Thirdly, it was my duty to save human lives. They were innocent and had nothing to do with the ongoing violence.
But there were men in the Chawl, they could have come forward to save their neighbors' lives. If these men had no courage, what could I do? I did what I could to save my Muslim neighbors. She was indeed an inspiration for hundreds of men. These men hid inside their homes while this woman alone took the challenge.
Another instance I know of was of Mrs. Yadav from Aligarh when communal riots broke out there in 1994. A bus carrying baraat (marriage party) going towards Lucknow was parked in the bazaar and driver had gone for some work. A Hindu mob came to set fire to the bus. They were mostly women and children going for the marriage. Mrs. Yadav was passing from there along with her son.
She saw that bus will be set afire killing 40 women and children. She looked around for something with which she could ward off the mob. She found an iron rod, picked it up and charged the mob with it. The mob ran away and she asked her son to drive the bus towards their house. Fortunately the driver had left the ignition key in the bus itself enabling her son to drive the bus off to their compound thus saving 40 lives single-handedly.
The Chief Minister Mulayamsingh Yadav himself met the lady and rewarded her with 1 lakh of rupees for her courage. I also met her when I went to Aligarh for investigation. She told me she was not sure whether she would be able to save their lives but I considered it my duty to at least make an attempt. More than courage, she said, it was my duty to save innocent lives, especially women and children. They all would have been reduced to ashes. I am fortunate to save their lives.
In this case too there were many men around but none showed courage or interest to save these innocent lives where a woman alone could pick courage and wielded rod and saved these lives. More than any thing else women after all are more sensitive to human life. She became talk of the town in Aligarh for her unusual feat.
In 2008 riots broke out in Bhainsa in Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh. A house of Muslim Syed Osman was set afire on October 10 in which whole family including women and children would have been burnt alive but for the courage of Tuljabai 61 and her son and other women members of her family who saved their lives. Others looked on. Again a woman came forward showing extra-ordinary courage and others showed no concern. Communal minded men were busy killing and destroying.
Communal riots broke out in Sangli, Miraj, Ichalkaranji and Kolhapur district in early September 2009 on the eve of Ganesh festival 7-9 September 2009. During these riots 60 mosques and dargahs (mausoleums) were destroyed or damaged. But several Hindu women from these villages not only saved Muslim lives but also repaired these mosques and dargahs. For example the Gram Panchayat of Kavthepiran, which is run by women, decided to repair the damaged Muslim religious places and try to get life back to normal. These Hindu women said, "Our Muslim sisters played an equal role in getting the award for our village. There are over 100 Muslim houses in the village and some had started leaving the village after the riots. But we stopped them. All women from the village visited the Muslim houses and assured to protect them." Thus they prevented Muslims from migrating from villages and assured them of security to their lives and properties. This sanity in the midst of communal frenzy by men was shown by illiterate rural women.
Some of these women were Hasubai Buchare, Rekha Chanade, Vandana Gaikwad and Nisha Butade, all grassroot workers. I met them in Icchalkaranji where we felicitated them on behalf of Women for Secularism in a convention held on 13th November 2009. I found them very courageous and though some of them illiterate or with very little education, spoke with great verve against those who organize communal violence to serve their political ends and vowed never to allow such violence in their village.
The communal violence in Kandhmal district wherein about 40 Christians were killed by some Hindu fanatics, also saw many Hindu courageous women who came forward to save lives of Christians fellow villagers in 2008. Some of these women were Ms. Ranchi Pradhan, Ms. Suruchi Pradhan of Rudenia village, Ms. Satyabhama Nayak and Ms. Nabojini Pradhan who showed exceptional courage in saving lives of many Christians or protect their houses. We felicitated all of them in the convention of All India Secular Forum. (Pradhan is the title used by Hindu tribals of Kandhmal)
These women are also all illiterate and grass root workers. Their humanism is very much alive and are free of communal prejudices. They proved to be more of human being than Hindu, Christian or Muslim. It gives us great hope and proves two things: one, that women are far more compassionate than men and two, illiterate women are far more free of communal prejudices than highly educated urban people.
The Women for Secularism is, therefore, concentrating on these grass root women and mainly working among them. These women suffer much more at the hands of tradition bound men, especially those men who are votaries of communal ideologies and yet these women are far less prejudiced and are more humane. They are our asset and we must see that they get their Constitutional rights. They need to be better organized than they are today. There is also great need to build awareness of their rights.
by Asghar Ali Engineer
Women generally are considered weak in our patriarchal society and men feel they need to be protected. Is it true? Well it may be true in some contexts but there are instances where women have dared where men chicken out or 'weaker' women have proved to be morally much stronger. Here it also needs to be stressed that only physical strength or strength of arms is not real strength, it is moral values which make really strong. Those who have moral superiority need not fear anyone and cannot be defeated.
Though no one can say women are inherently morally stronger but women tend to have better morals than men. There are number of reasons for that. Men aspire more for power and domination than women and hence resort to more morally unsound practices. They are involved more in crime than women and women tend to be more ethical in their behavior.
With very few exceptions women have not waged wars. Most of the ferocious and highly destructive wars in which millions of innocent human beings were killed were launched by men. In the last century two world wars were launched and fought by men, women only suffered. Women are far more sensitive to human life than men. It is women who give birth to life and sustain it. She carries human life for nine long months in her womb and than, after giving birth, nurtures it for years before child becomes self sufficient.
Men, on the other hand, to realize their own ambitions or wealth or power, would kill thousands of human beings within few seconds by dropping bombs or launching deadly missiles. Who caused atom bomb to be dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima killing more than two lakh people at a time? Not a woman. For men, power and authority are far more important than sensitivity to human life.
In communal riots in India too men have been real culprits than women. In my 40 years of investigating and monitoring communal riots in India I have not find a single instance in which any woman plotted and executed riots, much less killed any Hindu or Muslim. It was only in Gujarat that one Maya Kodnani is alleged to have instigated men to kill innocent human beings in Narodia Patia. I have found no other instance.
However, I have come across several instances in which women have saved the lives of innocent people. These women are real inspiration for peace loving people. I would like to throw some light here on the role of these women. Some I discovered while investigating riots and some I read about in newspapers and subsequently met them and some we had occasion to felicitate them on behalf of Women for Secularism, an organization working for rights of women at grassroots.
I came first such instance during investigation of communal riots in Ahmedabad in 1969. Now I do not remember her name but she was a vegetable vendor living in Jalimsingh Ni Chawl in Ahmedabad where there were two Muslim families as her neighbors. During the riots of 1969 a mob surrounded the Chawl and demanded that the Muslims be handed over to them to be killed and their household looted.
This woman the vegetable vendor, heard this and came out of her room with her sickle with which she used to cut her vegetables, came down the stairs and stood at the entrance challenging the mob to step forward to kill Muslims. I will cut the head of anyone stepping forward with this sickle, then you can kill me and walk over my dead body to kill the Muslims. None came forward and the mob of 500 dispersed.
I met this lady during my investigation and asked her why did you risk your life to save Muslims? She said first of all they were my neighbors and it was my duty to save their lives or die before they were killed. Secondly they were from my own village in Rajasthan. What face I would have shown to my villagers if they were killed. Thirdly, it was my duty to save human lives. They were innocent and had nothing to do with the ongoing violence.
But there were men in the Chawl, they could have come forward to save their neighbors' lives. If these men had no courage, what could I do? I did what I could to save my Muslim neighbors. She was indeed an inspiration for hundreds of men. These men hid inside their homes while this woman alone took the challenge.
Another instance I know of was of Mrs. Yadav from Aligarh when communal riots broke out there in 1994. A bus carrying baraat (marriage party) going towards Lucknow was parked in the bazaar and driver had gone for some work. A Hindu mob came to set fire to the bus. They were mostly women and children going for the marriage. Mrs. Yadav was passing from there along with her son.
She saw that bus will be set afire killing 40 women and children. She looked around for something with which she could ward off the mob. She found an iron rod, picked it up and charged the mob with it. The mob ran away and she asked her son to drive the bus towards their house. Fortunately the driver had left the ignition key in the bus itself enabling her son to drive the bus off to their compound thus saving 40 lives single-handedly.
The Chief Minister Mulayamsingh Yadav himself met the lady and rewarded her with 1 lakh of rupees for her courage. I also met her when I went to Aligarh for investigation. She told me she was not sure whether she would be able to save their lives but I considered it my duty to at least make an attempt. More than courage, she said, it was my duty to save innocent lives, especially women and children. They all would have been reduced to ashes. I am fortunate to save their lives.
In this case too there were many men around but none showed courage or interest to save these innocent lives where a woman alone could pick courage and wielded rod and saved these lives. More than any thing else women after all are more sensitive to human life. She became talk of the town in Aligarh for her unusual feat.
In 2008 riots broke out in Bhainsa in Adilabad district of Andhra Pradesh. A house of Muslim Syed Osman was set afire on October 10 in which whole family including women and children would have been burnt alive but for the courage of Tuljabai 61 and her son and other women members of her family who saved their lives. Others looked on. Again a woman came forward showing extra-ordinary courage and others showed no concern. Communal minded men were busy killing and destroying.
Communal riots broke out in Sangli, Miraj, Ichalkaranji and Kolhapur district in early September 2009 on the eve of Ganesh festival 7-9 September 2009. During these riots 60 mosques and dargahs (mausoleums) were destroyed or damaged. But several Hindu women from these villages not only saved Muslim lives but also repaired these mosques and dargahs. For example the Gram Panchayat of Kavthepiran, which is run by women, decided to repair the damaged Muslim religious places and try to get life back to normal. These Hindu women said, "Our Muslim sisters played an equal role in getting the award for our village. There are over 100 Muslim houses in the village and some had started leaving the village after the riots. But we stopped them. All women from the village visited the Muslim houses and assured to protect them." Thus they prevented Muslims from migrating from villages and assured them of security to their lives and properties. This sanity in the midst of communal frenzy by men was shown by illiterate rural women.
Some of these women were Hasubai Buchare, Rekha Chanade, Vandana Gaikwad and Nisha Butade, all grassroot workers. I met them in Icchalkaranji where we felicitated them on behalf of Women for Secularism in a convention held on 13th November 2009. I found them very courageous and though some of them illiterate or with very little education, spoke with great verve against those who organize communal violence to serve their political ends and vowed never to allow such violence in their village.
The communal violence in Kandhmal district wherein about 40 Christians were killed by some Hindu fanatics, also saw many Hindu courageous women who came forward to save lives of Christians fellow villagers in 2008. Some of these women were Ms. Ranchi Pradhan, Ms. Suruchi Pradhan of Rudenia village, Ms. Satyabhama Nayak and Ms. Nabojini Pradhan who showed exceptional courage in saving lives of many Christians or protect their houses. We felicitated all of them in the convention of All India Secular Forum. (Pradhan is the title used by Hindu tribals of Kandhmal)
These women are also all illiterate and grass root workers. Their humanism is very much alive and are free of communal prejudices. They proved to be more of human being than Hindu, Christian or Muslim. It gives us great hope and proves two things: one, that women are far more compassionate than men and two, illiterate women are far more free of communal prejudices than highly educated urban people.
The Women for Secularism is, therefore, concentrating on these grass root women and mainly working among them. These women suffer much more at the hands of tradition bound men, especially those men who are votaries of communal ideologies and yet these women are far less prejudiced and are more humane. They are our asset and we must see that they get their Constitutional rights. They need to be better organized than they are today. There is also great need to build awareness of their rights.
February 09, 2010
India: Short on secularism
Frontline, Feb. 13-26, 2010
by K.N.PANIKKAR
The impact of growing religiosity and the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention in assessing the state of secularism in India.
AFP/FILES
Gandhiji at Delhi’s Purana Qila where Muslim refugees prepare to depart for Pakistan, on September 22, 1947. His assassination by a Hindu fanatic was a setback to secularism.
SECULAR India has undergone several convulsions during the past 60 years, so much so that doubts about its survival were entertained by many. Some of them tend to relate these convulsions to the nature of Indian society, to which they attribute centrality to religion in both personal and public affairs. In such a society, it has been argued, secularism can only have a perilous existence, that too by compromising some of its basic tenets. This view has received academic respectability and political support: the former from those who had no faith in the ability of Indian society for institution building and the latter from those who were inimical to secularism as a political creed.
The scepticism about secularism has only increased in recent times. The defenders of secularism are shrinking and some of them are exploring conditions beyond secularism. The weaknesses of secular practices add fuel to the fire: they confirm the doubts about the relevance of secularism in Indian conditions. At the same time, the unprecedented popularity that religiosity has gained has pushed secularism to the backyard. In assessing the state of secularism today, the impact of growing religiosity as well as the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention.
Concept of Secularism
All debates about secularism in India occur in the context of the European experience. The church-state relationship, which was central to the development of secularism in Europe, is the starting point of all discussions, both by supporters and by critics of secularism. For the consideration of the Indian situation it is a red herring. What is important in India is not church-state dynamics but state-society relationship and, more specifically, being a multireligious society, relations within society.
The Indian notion of secularism, based on uniform respect for all religions by the state and divorce of religion from public institutional practices, was evolved in the context of this Indian social reality. The obsession with the European experience overlooks the historicity of the Indian phenomenon. The process of secularisation is not necessarily similar in all societies. But all societies, including India, have undergone the process of secularisation at the onset of modernity. The European experience is important, as it was the earliest manifestation, but it does not connote that what happened in other societies is its mirror image.
When this process began in India would be difficult to locate with certainty, but the historical antecedents in which the process is rooted can be traced to fairly early times, possibly to the period of the Buddha. Let it not be misunderstood that what is suggested is that secularism existed at the time of the Buddha, but that Buddhism and the Bhakti movement and other churnings within different religions, being critiques of the then existing religious practices, created the space for secularism to emerge at a later time. Its modern form, however, found articulation and momentum during the course of the 19th century when humanism, rationalism and religious universalism provided the intellectual base for a secular discourse. The Indian Constitution internalised the logic of this discourse to shape it as secular in practice, although the concept of secularism was neither included nor elaborated in the Constitution until a later date. What imparted this character to the Constitution was, at least partly, the historical experience of Indian society.
Whether this concept – popularly described as sarva dharma samabhava – was adequate to ensure a secular state has been a subject of considerable debate. The equal attitude towards all religions does not make the state secular; on the other hand it might implicate the state in religious matters. This fear is not misplaced, as during the past 60 years, in the name of impartiality, the state had to associate itself with almost all religions. The consequence was not the equidistance of the state from all religions, but the involvement of the state in the concerns of all religions. Moreover, the state succumbed to the pressures of all religions. Therefore, instead of being secular the state and its apparatuses were mired in religious matters. Jawaharlal Nehru tried to resist this deviation and kept aloof from participating in religious ceremonies. The then President, Rajendra Prasad, did not uphold that principle and attended the consecration of the newly constructed Somnath temple, to the great chagrin of the Prime Minister. Nehru’s legacy was also not owned by his successors, who in their quest for electoral support compromised the state with the demands of religious leaders. The worst phase was the period of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute when the Prime Minister appeared to bend over backwards to appease religious leaders. Unless the state remains secular, society can never preserve its secular character. With the decline in the commitment of the state to secularism during the post-Nehru era, secular space in society became progressively smaller, which was eventually colonised by communalism.
Impact of Communalism
What affected the secular character of Indian society most decisively was the intervention of Hindu communalism, which has a long history dating to the 18th century even though riots became frequent only during colonial rule. By the 20th century, communalism had made inroads among both Hindus and Muslims, considerably undermining the secular ethos in society and, finally, leading to Partition. The assassination of Mahatma Gandhij by a Hindu fanatic was a severe setback to secularism. After this Hindu communal organisations were rather dormant, which, however, did not mean they were inactive. The Gandhi assassination did not dampen their spirits, and under the leadership of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) they soon regrouped and reinvigorated their cultural work and physical training.
The communal organisations were aware that communalism could thrive only by undermining secular consciousness. As a result, the main thrust of the communal agenda was to eliminate the fairly powerful secular hegemony present in most domains. The communal attack on secularism was, therefore, intended to delegitimise it, accusing it of being an alien ideology without roots in Indian soil. Moreover, secular activists were physically intimidated and secular artists and intellectuals were defamed. The purpose was to ensure that the public prestige and acceptability that secularism enjoyed was tarnished so that communalism could occupy the secular space. The campaign was not without any impact. In the face of communal aggression, secularism considerably lost out politically in the 1990s. Martha Nusbawm, an American scholar, observed that during this period India slipped into religious terrorism but managed to slip out of it. This ‘escape’ from the possible continued communal subjection was mainly, though not exclusively, because of the strength of its secular tradition.
Secularism and Communal Harmony
Secularism in India is used as a synonym for communal harmony and religious togetherness. For long, Indian society had a reputation for collaboration and accommodation. The history of India bears testimony to this social condition in which Indians lived for centuries.
They not only shared material resources, but often worshipped the same deity. Hindus and Muslims contributing to the maintenance of each other’s shrines is a fairly widespread phenomenon. In a village in Marathwada where there are no Muslims, the Dargah of a Sufi saint is maintained by Hindus. At Bababudangiri in Karnataka, both Hindus and Muslims worshipped the same saint under different names. The now-popular Hindu shrine of Sabarimala in Kerala has a Muslim ‘deity’ whom all devotees of the Hindu god invariably worship. Although Hindus have now appropriated the Sai Baba of Shirdi, nobody is sure whether he was a Hindu or a Muslim. This mutual relationship is based not on tolerance but on respect for and belief in each other’s faith. Such practices and perspectives were shared by the high and the low – from the rulers to the peasants in the villages.
Communal harmony, however, is not secularism; communal harmony can only be an outcome of secularism, which is a condition in which religion, like any other faith, is a purely personal affair of the individual. It should not intervene in interpersonal relationships or institutional functioning. If secularism is to be a reality, therefore, it is not sufficient to have a secular state, there must also be a secular society. If the society is not secular the state is likely to depart from secular principles, as happened on several occasions during the past 60 years.
The greatest success of communalism has been to vitiate human interpersonal relations in society into a religious relationship, which affected the secular ethos adversely. Social relations thus came to be guided not by secular considerations but by religious identity. The 60 years of experience indicates that the secular character of the Indian state and society has declined steadily.
Religionisation and Secularism
A major and discernible change during the past 60 years has been the rapid religionisation of society. Traditionally, religious rituals were confined to temples, where devotees congregated, or to homes, in which family members participated. Religion is now out in the open, with religious celebrations being conducted in public places and religious processions of all communities crowding the roads with music and fanfare. The improvement in technology has facilitated pilgrimages, and a secular enterprise like tourism has come to be linked with places of religious worship. The resulting commodification of religion is a spectacular change, which has led to the growth of pilgrimage tourism as an industry. As a result, the popular aphorism that India is a religious country does not need much convincing, particularly with the proliferation of meditation centres and godmen. The places of worship have not lagged behind; in fact, the increase in their number is phenomenal. The most saleable commodity in India today is religion.
It is arguable that belief in religion is not antithetical to secularism, if the character of secularism in a multireligious society is essentially communal harmony. It is a common argument that all true believers are secular in outlook and hence do not entertain animosity towards the followers of other religions. This may as well be true. But secularism is not communal harmony; communal harmony is the outcome of secularism. It is, therefore, imperative to explore what constitutes secularism as an ideology beyond harmony.
The real foundation of secularism is poised on a triad consisting of humanism, rationality and universalism. Most religions propound humanism and universalism, but rationality is alien to religion because the essential features of religion are based on faith. Moreover, rituals and superstition derive their legitimacy from religion, and division between religions is marked by religiosity. As a result, religiosity acts as an impediment to secular practice.
A weakness of Indian secularism is that its goal is limited to communal harmony. Even Gandhiji, perhaps the most committed exponent of harmony, could not succeed in his life mission of Hindu-Muslim unity because his passionate efforts were not backed by a secular foundation in society. Given this historical experience, secularism had to be reinvented in post-Independence India. The possible prescription was a creative combination of the Nehruvian notion of a secular state and the Gandhian idea of social togetherness. Unfortunately, the state increasingly lost its secular character and community relationship slipped steadily into religious antagonism, the sad consequences of which were witnessed in Gujarat and Orissa.
Deviations from Secularism
Despite limitations and departures, the post-Independence Indian state maintained a modicum of secular character, although for electoral reasons the state made several deviations from the ideal, particularly during the rule of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. The secular character of the state suffered most grievously during the six years when the Bhartiya Janata Party had control over the state apparatuses. The interventions of the state, particularly in education, culture and police administration, were palpably anti-secular. Under its administration the Indian state assumed a distinctly Hindu communal character and used the opportunity to undo the secular traditions of Indian society.
The unfortunate fact is that the ‘secular’ rule that followed has not been able to erase this scar. Moreover, in many of its actions the state continues to carry the anti-secular baggage. Is it not because of that that a Bill for the prevention of communal riots has not been passed? Is it not for the same reason that the recommendations of the Sachar Committee have been kept in cold storage? Or that no action has been taken so far against those who have been indicted by the Liberhan Commission for the Babri Masjid’s demolition after 16 years of its labour?
The more abiding impact of Hindu communal activities has been on undermining the harmonious social relations that existed among different communities. This was attempted through a variety of ways, among them, through communal politics, hate campaigns, falsification of history and instigation of communal riots. Violence is the chief instrument of communalism, which spreads hatred, fear, ghettoisation, and so on, and communal violence is not an end in itself but the beginning of further rift between communities, undermining thereby the existing secular relations.
During the past 60 years, the activities of communal organisations have been such that Indian society has been ideologically and socially communalised. Moreover, communalism has made society brutal; brutality of the kind perpetrated in Gujarat and Orissa was unknown in the past despite communal riots occurring rather regularly.
The communal advance witnessed during the past 60 years is at the expense of secular space. That space has to be reclaimed if India is to remain a democratic society. Being a multireligious and multicultural society, democracy cannot survive in India without secularism. Are there efforts afoot, both by the state and by civil society, to further the process of secularisation?
After the defeat of communal forces in the general elections of 2004, secularism appears to have been put on the back burner both by the secular parties and by civil society organisations. Understandably because there was a sense of relief that the threat had been warded off. The general elections of 2009 gave enough reason for further complacency because communal forces were worsted in them. But secularism does not come to stay because of successes in an election or two. It has to be assiduously constructed through sustained work; continuity is the key to the creation of social consciousness. The secular forces hardly realise this fundamental factor, but believe that secularism can be fought and won in the political arena.
One of the main reasons for the success of Hindu communalism has been the failure of secularism to intervene effectively in the social and cultural domains, in which communalism is ever active. But secularism is as much a cultural and social phenomenon as a political one. The secular forces have not evolved an agenda based on such an understanding. At the same time, anti-secular forces attribute great importance to the non-political sector.
The agenda of secular forces has neither been innovative nor culturally sensitive to evolve an idiom to communicate with the masses. Much of the secular activity does not go beyond press statements by intellectuals and seminars in which committed secularists alone participate. There is hardly any attempt from secular intellectuals to reclaim popular cultural consciousness. The accusation that the secular intellectuals and cultural activists circulate alien ideas among themselves appears to stick, even if it is not entirely true.
If secularism is to be a force in society, it has to reinvent itself in cultural and social terms. Then and then alone it will be a part of the ideology of the masses. The Hindu and Muslim villagers in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan who greet each other with Ram Ram have their own notion of secular interpersonal relations, despite being believers of different religions. Secularism has to internalise the culture of this social relation if it aims to be a hegemonic force in society.
K.N. Panikkar is former professor of Modern Indian History at JNU and currently Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council. E-mail: knpanikkar(at)gmail.com
by K.N.PANIKKAR
The impact of growing religiosity and the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention in assessing the state of secularism in India.
AFP/FILES
Gandhiji at Delhi’s Purana Qila where Muslim refugees prepare to depart for Pakistan, on September 22, 1947. His assassination by a Hindu fanatic was a setback to secularism.
SECULAR India has undergone several convulsions during the past 60 years, so much so that doubts about its survival were entertained by many. Some of them tend to relate these convulsions to the nature of Indian society, to which they attribute centrality to religion in both personal and public affairs. In such a society, it has been argued, secularism can only have a perilous existence, that too by compromising some of its basic tenets. This view has received academic respectability and political support: the former from those who had no faith in the ability of Indian society for institution building and the latter from those who were inimical to secularism as a political creed.
The scepticism about secularism has only increased in recent times. The defenders of secularism are shrinking and some of them are exploring conditions beyond secularism. The weaknesses of secular practices add fuel to the fire: they confirm the doubts about the relevance of secularism in Indian conditions. At the same time, the unprecedented popularity that religiosity has gained has pushed secularism to the backyard. In assessing the state of secularism today, the impact of growing religiosity as well as the inadequacy of secular practices demand close attention.
Concept of Secularism
All debates about secularism in India occur in the context of the European experience. The church-state relationship, which was central to the development of secularism in Europe, is the starting point of all discussions, both by supporters and by critics of secularism. For the consideration of the Indian situation it is a red herring. What is important in India is not church-state dynamics but state-society relationship and, more specifically, being a multireligious society, relations within society.
The Indian notion of secularism, based on uniform respect for all religions by the state and divorce of religion from public institutional practices, was evolved in the context of this Indian social reality. The obsession with the European experience overlooks the historicity of the Indian phenomenon. The process of secularisation is not necessarily similar in all societies. But all societies, including India, have undergone the process of secularisation at the onset of modernity. The European experience is important, as it was the earliest manifestation, but it does not connote that what happened in other societies is its mirror image.
When this process began in India would be difficult to locate with certainty, but the historical antecedents in which the process is rooted can be traced to fairly early times, possibly to the period of the Buddha. Let it not be misunderstood that what is suggested is that secularism existed at the time of the Buddha, but that Buddhism and the Bhakti movement and other churnings within different religions, being critiques of the then existing religious practices, created the space for secularism to emerge at a later time. Its modern form, however, found articulation and momentum during the course of the 19th century when humanism, rationalism and religious universalism provided the intellectual base for a secular discourse. The Indian Constitution internalised the logic of this discourse to shape it as secular in practice, although the concept of secularism was neither included nor elaborated in the Constitution until a later date. What imparted this character to the Constitution was, at least partly, the historical experience of Indian society.
Whether this concept – popularly described as sarva dharma samabhava – was adequate to ensure a secular state has been a subject of considerable debate. The equal attitude towards all religions does not make the state secular; on the other hand it might implicate the state in religious matters. This fear is not misplaced, as during the past 60 years, in the name of impartiality, the state had to associate itself with almost all religions. The consequence was not the equidistance of the state from all religions, but the involvement of the state in the concerns of all religions. Moreover, the state succumbed to the pressures of all religions. Therefore, instead of being secular the state and its apparatuses were mired in religious matters. Jawaharlal Nehru tried to resist this deviation and kept aloof from participating in religious ceremonies. The then President, Rajendra Prasad, did not uphold that principle and attended the consecration of the newly constructed Somnath temple, to the great chagrin of the Prime Minister. Nehru’s legacy was also not owned by his successors, who in their quest for electoral support compromised the state with the demands of religious leaders. The worst phase was the period of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute when the Prime Minister appeared to bend over backwards to appease religious leaders. Unless the state remains secular, society can never preserve its secular character. With the decline in the commitment of the state to secularism during the post-Nehru era, secular space in society became progressively smaller, which was eventually colonised by communalism.
Impact of Communalism
What affected the secular character of Indian society most decisively was the intervention of Hindu communalism, which has a long history dating to the 18th century even though riots became frequent only during colonial rule. By the 20th century, communalism had made inroads among both Hindus and Muslims, considerably undermining the secular ethos in society and, finally, leading to Partition. The assassination of Mahatma Gandhij by a Hindu fanatic was a severe setback to secularism. After this Hindu communal organisations were rather dormant, which, however, did not mean they were inactive. The Gandhi assassination did not dampen their spirits, and under the leadership of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) they soon regrouped and reinvigorated their cultural work and physical training.
The communal organisations were aware that communalism could thrive only by undermining secular consciousness. As a result, the main thrust of the communal agenda was to eliminate the fairly powerful secular hegemony present in most domains. The communal attack on secularism was, therefore, intended to delegitimise it, accusing it of being an alien ideology without roots in Indian soil. Moreover, secular activists were physically intimidated and secular artists and intellectuals were defamed. The purpose was to ensure that the public prestige and acceptability that secularism enjoyed was tarnished so that communalism could occupy the secular space. The campaign was not without any impact. In the face of communal aggression, secularism considerably lost out politically in the 1990s. Martha Nusbawm, an American scholar, observed that during this period India slipped into religious terrorism but managed to slip out of it. This ‘escape’ from the possible continued communal subjection was mainly, though not exclusively, because of the strength of its secular tradition.
Secularism and Communal Harmony
Secularism in India is used as a synonym for communal harmony and religious togetherness. For long, Indian society had a reputation for collaboration and accommodation. The history of India bears testimony to this social condition in which Indians lived for centuries.
They not only shared material resources, but often worshipped the same deity. Hindus and Muslims contributing to the maintenance of each other’s shrines is a fairly widespread phenomenon. In a village in Marathwada where there are no Muslims, the Dargah of a Sufi saint is maintained by Hindus. At Bababudangiri in Karnataka, both Hindus and Muslims worshipped the same saint under different names. The now-popular Hindu shrine of Sabarimala in Kerala has a Muslim ‘deity’ whom all devotees of the Hindu god invariably worship. Although Hindus have now appropriated the Sai Baba of Shirdi, nobody is sure whether he was a Hindu or a Muslim. This mutual relationship is based not on tolerance but on respect for and belief in each other’s faith. Such practices and perspectives were shared by the high and the low – from the rulers to the peasants in the villages.
Communal harmony, however, is not secularism; communal harmony can only be an outcome of secularism, which is a condition in which religion, like any other faith, is a purely personal affair of the individual. It should not intervene in interpersonal relationships or institutional functioning. If secularism is to be a reality, therefore, it is not sufficient to have a secular state, there must also be a secular society. If the society is not secular the state is likely to depart from secular principles, as happened on several occasions during the past 60 years.
The greatest success of communalism has been to vitiate human interpersonal relations in society into a religious relationship, which affected the secular ethos adversely. Social relations thus came to be guided not by secular considerations but by religious identity. The 60 years of experience indicates that the secular character of the Indian state and society has declined steadily.
Religionisation and Secularism
A major and discernible change during the past 60 years has been the rapid religionisation of society. Traditionally, religious rituals were confined to temples, where devotees congregated, or to homes, in which family members participated. Religion is now out in the open, with religious celebrations being conducted in public places and religious processions of all communities crowding the roads with music and fanfare. The improvement in technology has facilitated pilgrimages, and a secular enterprise like tourism has come to be linked with places of religious worship. The resulting commodification of religion is a spectacular change, which has led to the growth of pilgrimage tourism as an industry. As a result, the popular aphorism that India is a religious country does not need much convincing, particularly with the proliferation of meditation centres and godmen. The places of worship have not lagged behind; in fact, the increase in their number is phenomenal. The most saleable commodity in India today is religion.
It is arguable that belief in religion is not antithetical to secularism, if the character of secularism in a multireligious society is essentially communal harmony. It is a common argument that all true believers are secular in outlook and hence do not entertain animosity towards the followers of other religions. This may as well be true. But secularism is not communal harmony; communal harmony is the outcome of secularism. It is, therefore, imperative to explore what constitutes secularism as an ideology beyond harmony.
The real foundation of secularism is poised on a triad consisting of humanism, rationality and universalism. Most religions propound humanism and universalism, but rationality is alien to religion because the essential features of religion are based on faith. Moreover, rituals and superstition derive their legitimacy from religion, and division between religions is marked by religiosity. As a result, religiosity acts as an impediment to secular practice.
A weakness of Indian secularism is that its goal is limited to communal harmony. Even Gandhiji, perhaps the most committed exponent of harmony, could not succeed in his life mission of Hindu-Muslim unity because his passionate efforts were not backed by a secular foundation in society. Given this historical experience, secularism had to be reinvented in post-Independence India. The possible prescription was a creative combination of the Nehruvian notion of a secular state and the Gandhian idea of social togetherness. Unfortunately, the state increasingly lost its secular character and community relationship slipped steadily into religious antagonism, the sad consequences of which were witnessed in Gujarat and Orissa.
Deviations from Secularism
Despite limitations and departures, the post-Independence Indian state maintained a modicum of secular character, although for electoral reasons the state made several deviations from the ideal, particularly during the rule of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi. The secular character of the state suffered most grievously during the six years when the Bhartiya Janata Party had control over the state apparatuses. The interventions of the state, particularly in education, culture and police administration, were palpably anti-secular. Under its administration the Indian state assumed a distinctly Hindu communal character and used the opportunity to undo the secular traditions of Indian society.
The unfortunate fact is that the ‘secular’ rule that followed has not been able to erase this scar. Moreover, in many of its actions the state continues to carry the anti-secular baggage. Is it not because of that that a Bill for the prevention of communal riots has not been passed? Is it not for the same reason that the recommendations of the Sachar Committee have been kept in cold storage? Or that no action has been taken so far against those who have been indicted by the Liberhan Commission for the Babri Masjid’s demolition after 16 years of its labour?
The more abiding impact of Hindu communal activities has been on undermining the harmonious social relations that existed among different communities. This was attempted through a variety of ways, among them, through communal politics, hate campaigns, falsification of history and instigation of communal riots. Violence is the chief instrument of communalism, which spreads hatred, fear, ghettoisation, and so on, and communal violence is not an end in itself but the beginning of further rift between communities, undermining thereby the existing secular relations.
During the past 60 years, the activities of communal organisations have been such that Indian society has been ideologically and socially communalised. Moreover, communalism has made society brutal; brutality of the kind perpetrated in Gujarat and Orissa was unknown in the past despite communal riots occurring rather regularly.
The communal advance witnessed during the past 60 years is at the expense of secular space. That space has to be reclaimed if India is to remain a democratic society. Being a multireligious and multicultural society, democracy cannot survive in India without secularism. Are there efforts afoot, both by the state and by civil society, to further the process of secularisation?
After the defeat of communal forces in the general elections of 2004, secularism appears to have been put on the back burner both by the secular parties and by civil society organisations. Understandably because there was a sense of relief that the threat had been warded off. The general elections of 2009 gave enough reason for further complacency because communal forces were worsted in them. But secularism does not come to stay because of successes in an election or two. It has to be assiduously constructed through sustained work; continuity is the key to the creation of social consciousness. The secular forces hardly realise this fundamental factor, but believe that secularism can be fought and won in the political arena.
One of the main reasons for the success of Hindu communalism has been the failure of secularism to intervene effectively in the social and cultural domains, in which communalism is ever active. But secularism is as much a cultural and social phenomenon as a political one. The secular forces have not evolved an agenda based on such an understanding. At the same time, anti-secular forces attribute great importance to the non-political sector.
The agenda of secular forces has neither been innovative nor culturally sensitive to evolve an idiom to communicate with the masses. Much of the secular activity does not go beyond press statements by intellectuals and seminars in which committed secularists alone participate. There is hardly any attempt from secular intellectuals to reclaim popular cultural consciousness. The accusation that the secular intellectuals and cultural activists circulate alien ideas among themselves appears to stick, even if it is not entirely true.
If secularism is to be a force in society, it has to reinvent itself in cultural and social terms. Then and then alone it will be a part of the ideology of the masses. The Hindu and Muslim villagers in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan who greet each other with Ram Ram have their own notion of secular interpersonal relations, despite being believers of different religions. Secularism has to internalise the culture of this social relation if it aims to be a hegemonic force in society.
K.N. Panikkar is former professor of Modern Indian History at JNU and currently Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council. E-mail: knpanikkar(at)gmail.com
February 08, 2010
Shiv Sena's Tirade Against Shah Rukh Khan: An Open Letter to the Maharashtra Chief Minister
From: shabnam hashmi
Date: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:31 PM
Subject: An Open Letter to CM, Maharashtra
To: chiefminister@maharashtra.gov.in
Cc: hm@nic.in
The Chief Minister
Maharashtra
Dear Mr Ashok Chavan,
Every society gives enough warning signals before turning totally anti democratic and fascist in nature. If we go back in history we will find that even in fascist Germany the first attack came on the freedom of expression of artists and intellectuals. It is very natural as the struggle for peace, democracy, secular thought, justice and communal harmony is waged by sensitive and creative people. The dream of an equal and just society has always been projected by either the mass movements of ordinary poor and marginalized people, secular political forces, human rights activists or has been portrayed by artists, poets, film makers, theatre directors etc. So those people whose agenda and preoccupation is to spread hatred and disharmony always attack the artists, activists, intellectuals and thinkers.
Unfortunately in the past we have ignored these danger signals and violent acts thus allowing the perpetrators of hate mongering not only to go scot free but also to further vitiate the atmosphere.
What has been happening in Maharashtra the past few months is absolutely shocking and is an attack on the democratic rights of the citizens of not only Maharashtra but all Indians.
I am writing to you as a member of the National Integration Council, Ministry of Home Affairs and I request you to immediately take steps to ensure that the goondaism unleashed by the Shiv Sena and MNS is stopped immediately.
I request you to ensure that Shahrukh Khan, Aamir Khan , whose effigies were burnt in Mumbai and especially Shahrukh Khan, who has received threats in the past few days, are given adequate security, that there is no disturbance when their films are released or screened in theaters. I request you to ensure that no taxi driver or auto rickshaw driver is harassed for not knowing or speaking Marathi (its good that you backtracked on January 20 from a similar unconstitutional stand on the question of issuing licenses to the taxi drivers) and that their constitutional and democratic rights of working or living in any part of India are not violated by Shiv Sena hoodlums on the roads.
The kind of filthy language which is being used and threats which are being issued against the senior leaders of your own party are absolutely unacceptable and need to be condemned strongly.
I request you to urgently arrest and prosecute those who are behind the recent incidents.
Sincerely yours
Shabnam Hashmi
Member, National Integration Council, MHA
CC Home Minister, GOVT of India
Date: Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:31 PM
Subject: An Open Letter to CM, Maharashtra
To: chiefminister@maharashtra.gov.in
Cc: hm@nic.in
The Chief Minister
Maharashtra
Dear Mr Ashok Chavan,
Every society gives enough warning signals before turning totally anti democratic and fascist in nature. If we go back in history we will find that even in fascist Germany the first attack came on the freedom of expression of artists and intellectuals. It is very natural as the struggle for peace, democracy, secular thought, justice and communal harmony is waged by sensitive and creative people. The dream of an equal and just society has always been projected by either the mass movements of ordinary poor and marginalized people, secular political forces, human rights activists or has been portrayed by artists, poets, film makers, theatre directors etc. So those people whose agenda and preoccupation is to spread hatred and disharmony always attack the artists, activists, intellectuals and thinkers.
Unfortunately in the past we have ignored these danger signals and violent acts thus allowing the perpetrators of hate mongering not only to go scot free but also to further vitiate the atmosphere.
What has been happening in Maharashtra the past few months is absolutely shocking and is an attack on the democratic rights of the citizens of not only Maharashtra but all Indians.
I am writing to you as a member of the National Integration Council, Ministry of Home Affairs and I request you to immediately take steps to ensure that the goondaism unleashed by the Shiv Sena and MNS is stopped immediately.
I request you to ensure that Shahrukh Khan, Aamir Khan , whose effigies were burnt in Mumbai and especially Shahrukh Khan, who has received threats in the past few days, are given adequate security, that there is no disturbance when their films are released or screened in theaters. I request you to ensure that no taxi driver or auto rickshaw driver is harassed for not knowing or speaking Marathi (its good that you backtracked on January 20 from a similar unconstitutional stand on the question of issuing licenses to the taxi drivers) and that their constitutional and democratic rights of working or living in any part of India are not violated by Shiv Sena hoodlums on the roads.
The kind of filthy language which is being used and threats which are being issued against the senior leaders of your own party are absolutely unacceptable and need to be condemned strongly.
I request you to urgently arrest and prosecute those who are behind the recent incidents.
Sincerely yours
Shabnam Hashmi
Member, National Integration Council, MHA
CC Home Minister, GOVT of India
February 06, 2010
Peace Mumbai on IPL, Shah Rukh Khan and Shiv Sena
Press Statement
4th February 2010
The Peace Mumbai, a coalition of organisations and activists from Mumbai
working towards just peace in the sub-continent in particular, expresses its
grave concern at the highly deplorable farce of keeping Pakistani players
out at the recent auction of the IPL. Things looked so ugly that even the
Union Home Minister, no peacenik by any stretch, has gone on record strongly
disapproving the orchestrated tamasha.
In this context, the Peace Mumbai finds it even more revolting that the Shiv
Sena, in Mumbai, has launched a vile and vicious tirade against an extremely
popular silver screen hero, Shah Rukh Khan, who is also a co-owner of the
Kolkata Knight Riders - one of the participating teams, for voicing his
disapproval of this development. Khan has also made it known that he would
have still hired a Pakistani cricketer had there been any slot available.
While the Union Home Minister has been spared, even though he expressed
exactly the same sort of sentiments, SRK has been chosen as a target clearly
on account his perceived vulnerability on more than one counts.
The Peace Mumbai, in the same vein, would also like to place on record of
its profound appreciation of SRK for his gritty refusal to buckle down. It
also demands that the state government must provide all the legitimate
protection to him in this specific context.
Sukla Sen Varsha R Berry Nasreen Contractor Asad Bin Saif
4th February 2010
The Peace Mumbai, a coalition of organisations and activists from Mumbai
working towards just peace in the sub-continent in particular, expresses its
grave concern at the highly deplorable farce of keeping Pakistani players
out at the recent auction of the IPL. Things looked so ugly that even the
Union Home Minister, no peacenik by any stretch, has gone on record strongly
disapproving the orchestrated tamasha.
In this context, the Peace Mumbai finds it even more revolting that the Shiv
Sena, in Mumbai, has launched a vile and vicious tirade against an extremely
popular silver screen hero, Shah Rukh Khan, who is also a co-owner of the
Kolkata Knight Riders - one of the participating teams, for voicing his
disapproval of this development. Khan has also made it known that he would
have still hired a Pakistani cricketer had there been any slot available.
While the Union Home Minister has been spared, even though he expressed
exactly the same sort of sentiments, SRK has been chosen as a target clearly
on account his perceived vulnerability on more than one counts.
The Peace Mumbai, in the same vein, would also like to place on record of
its profound appreciation of SRK for his gritty refusal to buckle down. It
also demands that the state government must provide all the legitimate
protection to him in this specific context.
Sukla Sen Varsha R Berry Nasreen Contractor Asad Bin Saif
Shiv Sena Tirade against Shah Rukh Khan
Shiv Sena Ire against Shah Rukh Khan
Ram Puniyani
A fortnight ago (January 2010) Shah Rukh Khan, the celebrated film star, voiced his opinion that Pakistani Cricket players should not be prevented from playing in IPL cricket League. This sparked a big row of protest from the local Shiv Sena supporters, who criticized Khan and tore the posters of his film, ‘My Name is Khan’, they also went on to say if Shah Rukh’s ‘Khan’ is awakening he should very well go to Pakistan and be there. At the same time Shiv Sena is spearheading a violent campaign, ‘Mumbai for Maharashtrians’, to which even cricket star Sachin Tendulkar, a Maharashtrian, amongst others voiced their opinion that all parts of India belong to all the Indian citizens.
Mumbai is currently seeing the turmoil around these twin issues, regionalism, and communalism in its worst form. One knows that India-Pakistan relations have been quiet strained right since the beginning. There have been three wars between these two neighbors. The people living across the borders, with relatives on either side have been moaning with pain and anguish due to this strife between the two countries. Many issues have been a bone of contention between the two neighbors, the major lately being terrorism.
Terrorism needs to be understood in its depth if it is to be eliminated. The roots of this terror lie in the politics of oil, creation of Madrassas on the soil of Pakistan to train the Al Qaeda terrorists by US. US wanted to confront the Russian occupation of Afghanistan in the late 1970s. This Al Qaeda was created by indoctrinating the Muslim youth by instilling distorted version of Islam. Osama bin Laden was brought in again by machinations of US, same Osama was given millions of dollars and tons of armaments to join the anti Russian forces.
After the defeat of Russian forces this indoctrinated outfit turned against others in the region. It did create havoc and continues to torment the region. It has been like a Frankenstein’s monster, which has misused the identity of Islam for the acts of violence and currently Pakistan is the major victim of this monster.
While the terrorism’s base might be in Pakistan, it is not the Pakistani state, or Pakistani people or democratic elements that are supporting this poisonous cancer. As such Pakistan lost her ex Prime Minster and regularly we see the acts of terror in Pakistan. To eliminate this cancer, the civilian Government in Pakistan is trying its own bit, but the Military-Mullah complex in Pakistan, patronized by US, is the one, which nurtures this phenomenon. While we are fully justified in condemning terrorism, calling upon civilian government to control it, it is also true that gestures of friendship to Pakistan will strengthen civilian government and eliminate terrorism in the long run. So peace with Pakistan has to be strengthened through music, sports, business and educational exchange. A Hate campaign between the neighbors will be harmful to the interests of both the countries.
So while anger against terrorism is natural, we can’t ignore the deeper dynamics of the region and shun peace. Peace is the pre-requisite of progress of the region. The insinuations by Shiv Sena against Shah Rukh, asking him to go to Pakistan, just because his name is Muslim, is against the values of Indian Constitution and the spirit of the National movement, which built the country. The divisive nature of regional politics is to be condemned through and through. Our concept of citizenship is not based around religion. People of all religions are equal citizens of the country. To doubt the patriotism of any citizen just because of ‘one’s religion’ is the insult of Indian Constitution.
Same way, while appreciating the fact that the metros like Mumbai can’t accommodate the population beyond a point, there is also a need to introspect as to why so many people migrate to Mumbai? As such, it is lop sided development of the country which forces people to migrate to such a metropolis. So while demanding a curb on Shiv Sena for its hooliganism and anti national utterances, one also has to focus attention for a pattern of development where people don’t have to migrate just to survive. That’s where the crux of the matter is.
Shiv Sena has a complex history. It was supported by industrialists and partly nurtured by a section of Congress leadership decades ago. The idea then was to smash the left trade unions, which were struggling for workers rights in an honest way. Later the same Shiv Sena attacked the South Indians, then Gujaratis and finally North Indians for sometime before jumping on the Rath (chariot) of Hinduvta spearhead by BJP’s Lal Krishna Advani. Shiv Sena has been the most firm ally of BJP and its communal politics all through. Shiv Sena’s supremo Bal Thackeray has also been indicted in the Srikrishna Commission report, a report which has been put into cold storage by the Congress government. Interestingly Shiv Sena, SS, presents its role in Mumbai violence as being that of protecting Hindus, a formulation which is from the World of make believe, which presents victim as the culprit, as Shrikrishna Commission makes it very clear.
The methods employed by Shiv Sena earlier and MNS (Maharashtra Nav Nirnman Sena) of Raj Thackeray show the parallels with the ones’ employed by Hitler’s foot soldiers, i.e. to intimidate people through street violence. In this direction on regular basis Shiv Sena in particular attacked artists, Gulam Ali, a Gazal singer from Pakistan, M.F. Hussain, a Painter, and now Shahrukh Khan. In these ‘storm trooper’ methods it SS had been associated with the parallel ones from RSS stream, Bajrang Dal etc. The idea is to vandalize and make a glaring attack on liberal values of democracy. While outfits like SS, MNS and Bajrang Dal are fascists, they use democratic space, the lapses of opportunist centralist politics to come up in the social space. Hitler also used the democratic space to come, to abolish the democratic space itself. The analogies of such formations with Hitler, fascists are too glaring to be ignored. They are a product politics of vested interests, taking advantage of centrist formations like Congress and than turning into Frankenstein’s monsters.
With Bal Thackeray trying to pass on the mantle of his fascist politics, Uddhav and Raj, son and nephew respectively, claimed the inheritance. Bal Thackeray decided to anoint his son Uddhav as the heir apparent. Peeved by this the more aggressive Raj launched his own outfit, Maharashtra Nav Nirman Sena. In the formative period of MNS, Congress again played a complicit role by sitting pretty when Raj unleashed his aggression against hapless taxi drivers from North India and Bihar. This acted as the tonic for the MNS, and it became bold enough to unleash rampage time and over again. It has come to stay as a political force. The role of Congress has been very compromising as for as formation of Shiv Sena and MNS are concerned.
Shiv Sena- MNS primarily belong to divisive- fascist anti national ideology of communalism and regionalism. Their disregard for the values of Indian Constitution is there for all to see. Their politics also proves that divisive ideologies strengthen each other. Both these outfits, particularly Shiv Sena has been using both these sectarianisms for its political benefit.
Shiv Sena and its offshoot, Maharashtra Nav Nirman Sena, both thrive on the divisive sentiments. The spirit of National integration is being attacked by the actions of these regional forces. We should not target our citizens in the name of religion or region. The encouragement of Hate against Pakistan is shortsighted and is playing to the crude emotions, ignoring the deeper causes of terrorism, for that the finger of accusation should point to the US policies which has been pursing its politics of control in the region and has used Pakistan as the base and ally for its ambitions of appropriating this Black Gold. One must support the rights of all our citizens within the limits of Indian Constitution and restrain the regional and communal forces for the sake of national progress.
--
Ram Puniyani
A fortnight ago (January 2010) Shah Rukh Khan, the celebrated film star, voiced his opinion that Pakistani Cricket players should not be prevented from playing in IPL cricket League. This sparked a big row of protest from the local Shiv Sena supporters, who criticized Khan and tore the posters of his film, ‘My Name is Khan’, they also went on to say if Shah Rukh’s ‘Khan’ is awakening he should very well go to Pakistan and be there. At the same time Shiv Sena is spearheading a violent campaign, ‘Mumbai for Maharashtrians’, to which even cricket star Sachin Tendulkar, a Maharashtrian, amongst others voiced their opinion that all parts of India belong to all the Indian citizens.
Mumbai is currently seeing the turmoil around these twin issues, regionalism, and communalism in its worst form. One knows that India-Pakistan relations have been quiet strained right since the beginning. There have been three wars between these two neighbors. The people living across the borders, with relatives on either side have been moaning with pain and anguish due to this strife between the two countries. Many issues have been a bone of contention between the two neighbors, the major lately being terrorism.
Terrorism needs to be understood in its depth if it is to be eliminated. The roots of this terror lie in the politics of oil, creation of Madrassas on the soil of Pakistan to train the Al Qaeda terrorists by US. US wanted to confront the Russian occupation of Afghanistan in the late 1970s. This Al Qaeda was created by indoctrinating the Muslim youth by instilling distorted version of Islam. Osama bin Laden was brought in again by machinations of US, same Osama was given millions of dollars and tons of armaments to join the anti Russian forces.
After the defeat of Russian forces this indoctrinated outfit turned against others in the region. It did create havoc and continues to torment the region. It has been like a Frankenstein’s monster, which has misused the identity of Islam for the acts of violence and currently Pakistan is the major victim of this monster.
While the terrorism’s base might be in Pakistan, it is not the Pakistani state, or Pakistani people or democratic elements that are supporting this poisonous cancer. As such Pakistan lost her ex Prime Minster and regularly we see the acts of terror in Pakistan. To eliminate this cancer, the civilian Government in Pakistan is trying its own bit, but the Military-Mullah complex in Pakistan, patronized by US, is the one, which nurtures this phenomenon. While we are fully justified in condemning terrorism, calling upon civilian government to control it, it is also true that gestures of friendship to Pakistan will strengthen civilian government and eliminate terrorism in the long run. So peace with Pakistan has to be strengthened through music, sports, business and educational exchange. A Hate campaign between the neighbors will be harmful to the interests of both the countries.
So while anger against terrorism is natural, we can’t ignore the deeper dynamics of the region and shun peace. Peace is the pre-requisite of progress of the region. The insinuations by Shiv Sena against Shah Rukh, asking him to go to Pakistan, just because his name is Muslim, is against the values of Indian Constitution and the spirit of the National movement, which built the country. The divisive nature of regional politics is to be condemned through and through. Our concept of citizenship is not based around religion. People of all religions are equal citizens of the country. To doubt the patriotism of any citizen just because of ‘one’s religion’ is the insult of Indian Constitution.
Same way, while appreciating the fact that the metros like Mumbai can’t accommodate the population beyond a point, there is also a need to introspect as to why so many people migrate to Mumbai? As such, it is lop sided development of the country which forces people to migrate to such a metropolis. So while demanding a curb on Shiv Sena for its hooliganism and anti national utterances, one also has to focus attention for a pattern of development where people don’t have to migrate just to survive. That’s where the crux of the matter is.
Shiv Sena has a complex history. It was supported by industrialists and partly nurtured by a section of Congress leadership decades ago. The idea then was to smash the left trade unions, which were struggling for workers rights in an honest way. Later the same Shiv Sena attacked the South Indians, then Gujaratis and finally North Indians for sometime before jumping on the Rath (chariot) of Hinduvta spearhead by BJP’s Lal Krishna Advani. Shiv Sena has been the most firm ally of BJP and its communal politics all through. Shiv Sena’s supremo Bal Thackeray has also been indicted in the Srikrishna Commission report, a report which has been put into cold storage by the Congress government. Interestingly Shiv Sena, SS, presents its role in Mumbai violence as being that of protecting Hindus, a formulation which is from the World of make believe, which presents victim as the culprit, as Shrikrishna Commission makes it very clear.
The methods employed by Shiv Sena earlier and MNS (Maharashtra Nav Nirnman Sena) of Raj Thackeray show the parallels with the ones’ employed by Hitler’s foot soldiers, i.e. to intimidate people through street violence. In this direction on regular basis Shiv Sena in particular attacked artists, Gulam Ali, a Gazal singer from Pakistan, M.F. Hussain, a Painter, and now Shahrukh Khan. In these ‘storm trooper’ methods it SS had been associated with the parallel ones from RSS stream, Bajrang Dal etc. The idea is to vandalize and make a glaring attack on liberal values of democracy. While outfits like SS, MNS and Bajrang Dal are fascists, they use democratic space, the lapses of opportunist centralist politics to come up in the social space. Hitler also used the democratic space to come, to abolish the democratic space itself. The analogies of such formations with Hitler, fascists are too glaring to be ignored. They are a product politics of vested interests, taking advantage of centrist formations like Congress and than turning into Frankenstein’s monsters.
With Bal Thackeray trying to pass on the mantle of his fascist politics, Uddhav and Raj, son and nephew respectively, claimed the inheritance. Bal Thackeray decided to anoint his son Uddhav as the heir apparent. Peeved by this the more aggressive Raj launched his own outfit, Maharashtra Nav Nirman Sena. In the formative period of MNS, Congress again played a complicit role by sitting pretty when Raj unleashed his aggression against hapless taxi drivers from North India and Bihar. This acted as the tonic for the MNS, and it became bold enough to unleash rampage time and over again. It has come to stay as a political force. The role of Congress has been very compromising as for as formation of Shiv Sena and MNS are concerned.
Shiv Sena- MNS primarily belong to divisive- fascist anti national ideology of communalism and regionalism. Their disregard for the values of Indian Constitution is there for all to see. Their politics also proves that divisive ideologies strengthen each other. Both these outfits, particularly Shiv Sena has been using both these sectarianisms for its political benefit.
Shiv Sena and its offshoot, Maharashtra Nav Nirman Sena, both thrive on the divisive sentiments. The spirit of National integration is being attacked by the actions of these regional forces. We should not target our citizens in the name of religion or region. The encouragement of Hate against Pakistan is shortsighted and is playing to the crude emotions, ignoring the deeper causes of terrorism, for that the finger of accusation should point to the US policies which has been pursing its politics of control in the region and has used Pakistan as the base and ally for its ambitions of appropriating this Black Gold. One must support the rights of all our citizens within the limits of Indian Constitution and restrain the regional and communal forces for the sake of national progress.
--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
