SACW | August 28-29, 2008 / Prachanda / Sarbahara / Orwell in Pakistan / Kashmir / Orissa Pogrom / Gujarat Victims
Harsh Kapoor
aiindex at gmail.com
Thu Aug 28 21:52:06 CDT 2008
South Asia Citizens Wire | August 28-29, 2008 | Dispatch No. 2558 -
Year 10 running
[1] Nepal: a remarkable peace (Ian Martin)
+ The Prachanda Path (Kunda Dixit)
[2] Bangladesh: IGP should immediately retract Sarbahara statement
(Edit, New Age)
[3] Pakistan:
(i) Revive political parties (I.A. Rehman)
(ii) The unalterable law of life (Dr Rubina Saigol)
(iii) Pakistan's Flawed Presidency (Liaquat Ali Khan)
(iv) Letter of Protest to University of Texas re Creation A
Pakistan Studies Chair in the Name of Charlie Wilson
[4] HRCP, People’s forum demand ease of travel between Pakistan,
India (Amar Guriro)
[5] India Must Act on Kashmir Without being a Hostage to Its Hawks:
(i) Peaceful Protests In Kashmir Alter Equation for India (Emily Wax)
(ii) Histories, geographies and memories are at war in Jammu and
Kashmir (Ananya Jahanara Kabir)
(iii). The price of making peace in Jammu & Kashmir (Praveen Swami)
(iv) Editors Guild slams police raid at scribe's house in Srinagar
(v). Lathis - Tear-gas shells land on Valley, by air (Nishit
Dholabhai)
(vi) Refurbishing secular fabric - Saner elements, administration
need to strengthen efforts
(vii). Kashmir on the edge: Devolve powers to the state (Kuldip
Nayar)
(viii) Online Petition on Kashmir
[6] The Pogrom in Orissa - Another Stain on India:
(i) Online Petition Against Attack on Christians in Orissa
(ii) Orissa Violence: Join the Delhi Protest Demo at Orissa Bhawan
Aug 29th at 10am
[7] India: Celebration of victimhood isn’t helping Gujarat. NGOs need
to understand (Ayesha Khan)
______
[1]
NEPAL: A REMARKABLE PEACE
The country's politicians have worked through their differences, an
achievement which should be recognised internationally
by Ian Martin
guardian.co.uk,
August 28 2008
Last Monday, Nepal's Maoist leader Kamal Dahal, known as "Prachanda",
was sworn in as the first prime minister of the Federal Democratic
Republic of Nepal, having won an overwhelming vote in the constituent
assembly elected in April. The assembly's opening action had been to
vote almost unanimously to abolish the 239-year-old monarchy, and in
June ex-king Gyanendra Shah departed the palace, to remain in the
country as an ordinary citizen.
Nepal fleetingly made headlines after the 2001 palace massacre of the
previous monarch and his family: its 10-year civil war was seldom in
the international limelight. So too, the country's unique peace
process has rarely gained outside attention since the guns fell
silent two years ago. Yet amid too many continuing conflicts and
failing peace processes, a success story deserves to be recognised
and supported.
I came to Nepal in mid-2005, when the human rights violations
committed by both sides to the armed conflict, together with the
crackdown on democratic rights as the king seized absolute power, led
the international community to support a monitoring presence of the
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. With no end in
sight to a war with thousands of civilian victims, and democracy far
from the horizon, nobody could have foreseen how the people of Nepal
would express their demand for peace and change. The turning point
was the April 2006 people's movement, when hundreds of thousands took
to the streets, for 19 successive days. The king was compelled to
hand power back to the political parties, and the peace agreement
that emerged ended the conflict, bringing the Maoists into an interim
parliament and government, and promising elections for a constituent
assembly.
The April 2006 people's movement also took the lid off social
pressures often disregarded by the power elites. Although established
as a unitary Hindu kingdom, with politics directed from the Himalayan
foothills, today around half the population live in the fertile
southern plains and more than one-third are from over 50 indigenous
largely non-Hindu communities. Others are also historically
marginalised from the social and political life of the nation,
notably the Dalits, known sometimes as "untouchables", at the bottom
of the Hindu caste system.
The restoration of democracy was for these groups a step towards wide-
ranging social transformation, enabling them to participate more
equally in the life of the country. Given that the election system
for the constituent assembly needed to ensure their representation, a
complex system of quotas was devised. Along with the success of
socially diverse candidates fielded by the Maoists, the constituent
assembly elected in April comprises unprecedented representation of
marginalized groups.
Women, too, had been almost invisible in the political life of the
capital, and indeed in the peace process itself. Now nearly one-third
of the constituent assembly members are women – taking Nepal to first
place in South Asia, and 14th place in the world league table of
women's representation in nationally elected bodies.
The challenges that face Prime Minister Prachanda, the coalition
government that is about to be formed, and the constituent assembly,
are immense. The Nepali political actors have shown an extraordinary
capacity to maintain dialogue and work through their differences, but
trust among them is fragile – the Nepali Congress party has chosen to
remain in opposition, dubious of the Maoists' commitment to
democratic politics.
Nowhere in the world is the transformation of an armed insurgent
group into a peaceful political movement quick or easy. The Maoists
enter the new government still with their own army – confined to
cantonments, with their weapons stored under UN monitoring – and a
Young Communist League that has persistently acted outside the law.
Commitments to resolve the future of the Maoist combatants, alongside
what the peace agreements call the "democratisation" of the state
army, must now be implemented. Another hurdle is to promote respect
for the rule of law and address impunity: none of the human rights
abuses – killings, disappearances or torture – by either side of the
conflict has been effectively prosecuted.
The biggest challenges are those that address the roots of the
insurgency: poverty, injustice and discrimination. One of the costs
of the conflict has been the retreat of local governance and arrested
development in a desperately poor country where over 80% of the
population lives in rural districts. As Nepal aspires to becoming a
federal democratic republic, expectations are high among diverse
groups for greater control of their lives and resources. What
federalism means in practice, taking account of the geographic and
ethnic peculiarities of Nepal, is an elusive and potentially divisive
concept. Reaching a national consensus will be a formidable task for
the assembly, and meanwhile the Nepali people cannot wait until a new
constitution is drafted to see real improvements in their daily lives.
Nepal's peace process has been truly indigenous: it has not been
mediated or managed by any external third party. The UN has
encouraged and facilitated the process – through quiet good offices
during the last years of the conflict, through human rights
monitoring, through assistance during the assembly election, and
through monitoring the arms and armies during the transition. The
Maoist and non-Maoist parties have asked the UN to maintain a
political presence while the issue of the former combatants is
resolved, and we stand ready to support peacebuilding, recovery and
long-term development. From Delhi to Washington, from Brussels to
Tokyo, the international community must be generous and steady in
assisting Nepal to sustain the still fragile success of a remarkable
peace process.
o o o
Wall Street Journal
August 28, 2008
THE PRACHANDA PATH
by Kunda Dixit
KATMANDU, Nepal -- It may have been just a coincidence that a week
after he was sworn in, Nepal's new Maoist prime minister was in
Beijing Sunday for his first foreign visit. But for Nepalis, the
visit had geopolitical meaning. Our leaders traditionally first go to
New Delhi, our largest trading partner, after taking office. The
picture of Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal shaking hands with
President Hu Jintao was splashed across all Nepali newspapers' front
pages this week. Little wonder: Everyone's looking for signs about
how this new government will behave.
After a 12-year war, a fragile two-year peace process and a crippling
food and fuel crisis, voters' expectations are high. They voted for
the Maoists in April elections hoping they would usher in an era of
peace and development. But Mr. Dahal may actually find that waging
war was easier than delivering on his party's utopian promises.
Mr. Dahal is still known here by his nom de guerre, Prachanda, which
means "The Fierce One." He is the first Maoist in history to be voted
in as head of state. The Maoists lead a shaky coalition with the
United Marxist-Leninists (which despite its name is a moderate
leftist party) and a regional party representing the Madhesi people
of Nepal's eastern plains. The center-right Nepali Congress party
decided to stay in the opposition.
In their ambitious election manifesto, the Maoists promised among
other things "revolutionary" land reform, basic health and education,
an ethnicity-based federal state structure and a South Africa-style
Truth and Reconciliation Commission to investigate war crimes.
Overarching all this are their wild promises to deliver 20% GDP
growth and $3,000 per-capita income by 2020, and to transform Nepal
into a "Singapore."
Mr. Dahal's more urgent challenge, however, is simply to provide
economic relief. More than half of Nepal's population lives below the
poverty line, hunger stalks the land and inflation is running at 20%
for foodstuffs. The government can't afford to subsidize petroleum
products and people have endured two years of long queues at gas
stations.
How well will the new government meet these challenges? Finance
Minister Baburam Bhattarai, the Maoist party's chief ideologue, wants
to launch large showcase projects that generate immediate employment.
He has ambitious plans for a railway artery from east to west,
investments in highways, hydropower and a new international airport.
That alone won't be enough. The government needs to find jobs for the
450,000 Nepalis who enter the labor market every year. About half of
them emigrate to find work every year, mostly to India, the Gulf
states, Malaysia and South Korea.
The Maoists realize job creation is not possible without foreign
investment, and have tried to assure domestic business and the
international community they will respect private property, encourage
foreign direct investment and smooth labor relations. Yet investors
aren't convinced. The Maoists' intimidating youth wing has a habit of
extorting businesses. The Maoist threat to enforce a higher minimum
wage for foreign-owned enterprises has already spooked multinationals
in Nepal, as has the governing party's sponsorship of militant
unionism and preferential treatment for domestic enterprises under
its concept of "national capitalism."
Despite these problems, it does look like Messrs. Dahal and Bhattarai
are more in line with Deng Xiaoping than with Mao Zedong or the Gang
of Four on the economy. However, there are hardcore Maoists in the
ranks who think the leadership has sold out on the revolution. The
leadership needs to keep this faction in check.
The Maoist-led coalition's final challenge is to ensure political
stability so that the 601-member Constituent Assembly that was
elected in April can start drafting Nepal's new constitution. The
transition from monarchy to republic in the past two years was
delayed, but it went surprisingly smoothly.
For that progress to continue, the government must integrate the
Maoist army into the national army, while at the same time downsizing
it. This will be the job of a former guerrilla commander, Ram Bahadur
Thapa, who is now Defense Minister. Over the next two years, the
constitutional framers will also have to grapple with how to divide
the country into federal units, how much power over economic policy
each unit should have and how the judiciary should function. These
are all important questions in their own right. They will also affect
the government's ability to address economic challenges.
The road ahead is not easy. But the fact that Nepal has seen such far-
reaching political transformation since 2006 without large outbreaks
of violence and through political negotiations means that it could
just pull it off.
Mr. Dixit is editor of the Nepali Times.
______
[2]
New Age
August 29, 2008
Editorial
IGP SHOULD IMMEDIATELY RETRACT SARBAHARA STATEMENT
THE statement of the inspector general of police, Nur Mohammed, that
the law-enforcement agencies ‘will not give the Sarbahara people any
chance to surrender’ and ‘will pull out their roots’ has had us both
shocked and surprised. His statement tends to suggest that it was
more than a war cry against the operatives of an underground extreme
left movement; it was somewhat a declaration of primacy of
vigilantism over the rule of law. The statement was surprising
because it came from an officer who has risen through the police
ranks reportedly by dint of professional and personal integrity and
efficiency, and commitment to the rule of law.
His statement, put together with the steady surge in the number
of custodial deaths, be they in ‘crossfire’ or because of torture, in
recent times, tends to reinforce the suspicion that we have
articulated in a previous editorial comment, i.e. the state and its
manager, the government in other words, are too eager to espouse such
extremist means as extrajudicial killings in their fight against
extremism of the political groups opposing the existing socio-
economic formation. The statement seems to also reinforce our
suspicion that the ongoing anti-extremist effort is directed
primarily at the underground extreme left outfits. While the radical
right organisations are no less disruptive and destructive, and
working with equal, if not more, vigour to change the existing
system, the government and the law-enforcement apparatus of the state
have thus far been rather lenient, when dealing with them. If we
contrast the fate of Mofakhkhar Chowdhury, Abdur Rashid Malitha and
Mizanur Rahman of the Purba Banglar Communist Party with that of
Shaikh Abdur Rahman and Siddiqul Islam Bangla Bhai of Jamaatul
Mujahideen Bangladesh, the differentiated attitude of the government
becomes all the more clear. While Shaikh Abdur Rahman and Bangla Bhai
were afforded the scope to stand trial, Mofakhkhar, Malitha or
Mizanur Rahman never made it past custody of the law enforcement
agencies.
Here it is important to note that many, if not most, of the
Sarbahara operatives may have long digressed from their political
ideals and indulged in self-seeking criminal activities. They may
also have unleashed a reign of terror in some parts of the country.
However, there are laws to deal with such excesses. The rule of law
dictates that even the vilest of criminals reserves the right to be
tried in a competent court of law and be treated as innocent until
proven guilty. More often than not, captured radical left operatives
fall pray to vigilante justice meted out by the law enforcers, while
their counterparts on the radical right, when arrested, ware afforded
the right to defend themselves in the courts of law.
Such an attitude seems to have been inspired by the imperialist
agenda pushed by the United States across South Asia and other parts
of the world where democracy and the rule of law are yet to take firm
roots; an agenda that readily rejects the leftist ideal of political
and economic egalitarianism and demonises its proponents as
terrorists and enemies of democracy.
However it may be, the statement of the inspector general of
police strikes at the very concept of the rule of law and could
inspire the law enforcers to be more trigger-happy than they already
are. Hence, we demand that the top police official immediately
retract his statement.
______
[3] PAKISTAN:
(i)
Dawn
August 28, 2008
REVIVE POLITICAL PARTIES
by I.A. Rehman
ONE of the issues frequently raised by political parties is that the
crises of the state and the plight of the people have been aggravated
by the failure of political institutions. New institutions have not
been developed, it is said, and the institutions created in the olden
days have been destroyed.
Political leaders usually do not include political parties in the
list of institutions that have decayed. This, perhaps, because of
their feeling of guilt. Whenever the matter is broached they
attribute the decline of political parties to state repression,
especially during authoritarian rule. But no honest political
activist will deny that party leaders also have made a large
contribution to the process.
As regards political parties Pakistan has been unfortunate since its
very inception. The largest party at independence, the Muslim League,
was more an organisation in form than in substance. After the Quaid’s
death even respect for form was given up. After a brief experiment
separating the party from the government the Muslim League became a
permanent maid at the prime minister’s house. Until Iskander Mirza
added the making and breaking of political parties to his functions
as head of state, whoever became prime minister also became the
League chief. The party had little say in the wars of succession that
began with the Quaid’s demise or in the management of public affairs.
The other parties in existence during Independence were paralysed
after losing out to the Muslim League. When they tried to resurrect
themselves, largely in defence of provincial rights, they were easily
suppressed. A challenge to authority could be mounted during
elections only by loose gatherings of estranged members of the elite
and the establishment replied by rigging elections in the western
wing. When it failed to do so in the eastern wing it abandoned the
formality of elections altogether and eventually preferred praetorian
rule to representative government.
For 50 years now political elements have been fighting authoritarian
regimes, and more than that among themselves, on the strength of
intra-elite alliances and their ability to gather the people in one
movement or another. They have done wonders but fostering strong
democratic parties does not figure in their accomplishments. The
field has been dominated by political outfits that prefer to call
themselves movements and spurn democratic elections and regular party
structures. Some parties have relied exclusively on periodic elections.
The stark reality is that political parties have been competing with
autocratic despots in inventing ever new excuses for denying the
people their right to democratic choice. They have been functioning
as little more than contractors for seats in elected bodies and
waiting for moneyed candidates who can buy tickets for offices that
offer the highest possible return on their investment.
Since the state started moving away from its democratic moorings soon
after Independence it had no interest in helping political parties
consolidate themselves as fully operational democratic machines.
Indeed, it drew comfort from the disintegration of political parties.
Instead of removing the obstacles to the flowering of democratic
organisations, by avoiding restraints on the right to assembly and to
dissent and by reducing the cost of electoral contest, among other
things, the state has tried to exceed its authority by arbitrarily
regulating political parties and their activities.
The first attempt in this direction was made in 1962 when Ayub Khan’s
all-out campaign to destroy party-based politics was halted by the
assembly elected through his own devices and he reluctantly
reconciled himself to the existence of political parties. As a
result, the Political Parties Act of 1962 was designed largely to
check the founding and functioning of parties that could be assailed,
however wrongly, for being foreign-aided or inspired by a foreign
ideology.
The first PPP government imposed in the 1973 Constitution only two
conditions on political parties — they could not work against the
state’s integrity and were required to account for their funds. It
kept the Political Parties Act of 1962 in place and amended it only
to facilitate action against the parties it considered undesirable.
Gen Zia added some conditions for parties desirous of contesting
elections including their compulsory registration but this condition
was struck down by the judiciary. The quasi-civilian governments that
followed Gen Zia showed little interest in strengthening political
parties.The Political Parties Order authored by the Musharraf regime
does acknowledge that “the practice of democracy within the political
parties will promote democratic governance in the country for
sustaining democracy” (the excessive use of the word ‘democracy’ in
this short sentence could well have been meant to hide aversion to
it), but the measure merely prescribes easy standards for parties for
participation in elections.
It can be argued that this order of 2002 has inhibited political
parties from democratising themselves. All that is expected of them
is a party constitution, a list of members, a certificate about
election of office-bearers, and a statement of audited accounts. This
is easy work for professionals. After meeting these legal obligations
political parties tend to believe they have become democratic
entities and nothing more needs to be done in this area.
That the political parties were in disarray on the eve of the last
general election cannot be disputed. The enforced absence of the
heads of the two major parties did matter but that alone could not
have rendered these organisations dysfunctional to the extent
actually noticed. Their preparation for elections was no more than
haphazard improvisation. The change wrought by the people on Feb 18
was without much help from the main political parties. And these
political parties, with rare exceptions here and there, have not been
heard of since then.
The conventional argument is that when a party comes to power
priority has to be given to the fundamental task of managing the
state, to meeting the threats of disturbance and turbulence, and
party affairs have to be put on the backburner. In practice,
governance has essentially meant efforts to undermine all other
parties (including allies), or score points over them, and providing
for self-aggrandisement by a few. The point that is consistently
missed is that the availability of organised party cadres will make
governance both easier and better. Such cadres are vitally needed to
maintain a living link between the rulers and the ruled.
Throughout the past many weeks party mobilisation has been sorely
missed. If the coalition partners had cadres to mobilise a few
hundred thousand people the task of restoring the judges and getting
rid of Musharraf could have been completed in a shorter period and
quite cleanly. So long as political parties are not revived and
raised to due strength the democratic experiment will remain
vulnerable to disruption by praetorian guards.
o o o
(ii)
The News
August 28, 2008
THE UNALTERABLE LAW OF LIFE
by Dr Rubina Saigol
"As for the others, their life, so far as they knew, was as it had
always been. They were generally hungry, they slept on straw, they
drank from the pool, they laboured in the field; in winter they were
troubled by the cold, and in summer by the flies… Sometimes the older
ones among them racked their dim memories and tried to determine
whether in the early days of the Rebellion…things had been better or
worse than now. They could not remember… Only old Benjamin professed
to remember every detail of his long life and to know that things
never had been, nor ever could be, much better or much worse –
hunger, hardship and disappointment being, so he said, the
unalterable law of life."
The above quote from George Orwell's Animal Farm, a brilliant satire
on the Russian Revolution and its aftermath, seems to be singularly
and painfully true of the state in which the people of Pakistan find
themselves today. Irrespective of which ruler remains in power, who
leaves it and who takes over, the lives of millions continue to be
plagued by want, hunger, fear and despair. An autocratic ruler gets
replaced by a megalomaniac and the latter by another dictator. The
more things change, the more they eerily remain the same!
Pakistanis were allowed a brief glimpse of sunshine before their
jubilation and rejoicing were rudely interrupted by the gathering
clouds of yet more uncertainty, political wrangling, power plays and
coalition infighting. Once again iron-clad promises were broken as
hopes and dreams shattered on the proverbial shores of 'reality',
'pragmatism', 'reconciliation' and realpolitik! The judges were not
to be restored as the curtain fell on the obstinate dictator who was
to be given 'safe passage', an 'honourable exit' and indemnity. The
brief revelling came to an abrupt end as public aspirations were
drowned in the cacophony of new sounds about the next president. The
looming danger of another catastrophic decision by the motley crew,
now drunk with power, became real with frantic moves to install a
controversial figure in the presidency. There seems to be little
respite for Pakistanis reeling under the blows of high inflation,
terrorism and the hard to arrest economic downslide.
The quick restoration of the deposed judiciary after Musharraf's much-
celebrated exit would have injected some hope into a depressed
polity. It would have continued the momentum gained by forcing
Musharraf to call it a day. The sense of victory that it would have
generated may have helped people experience some mirth in the midst
of the daily burdens of existence in the face of terror attacks and
bread and butter issues. But the much-awaited restoration was once
again mired in controversy, disagreement and became a victim of
backtracking, dithering and vacillation. The minus-one, minus-two
formulas began to be floated reflecting the PPP's inveterate aversion
to the restoration of Iftikhar Chaudhary. Independent judges are a
threat not merely for dictators. They are also unacceptable to
elected leaders because of the proclivity to challenge those in power
over breaking the rules, violating the constitution and providing
protection to high-level criminals and crimes.
To preclude the possibility of the return of Justice Iftikhar, the
PPP has invented the idea of "politicised" and "non-politicised"
judges in the constitutional package floated by its legal experts.
The proposed changes in Article 209 show that while the package
offers no definition of "politicised" or "non-politicised", it seems
that the intention is to paint Iftikhar Chaudhary as "politicised"
since he can boast of the support of specific political parties that
are either rivals of or opposed to the PPP. On the other hand, the
judges who validated the unconstitutional acts of November 3, 2007
are not accused of being "politicised", despite their capitulation to
the dictator's demands, and a great deal of energy has been expended
on the effort to retain them. Judges who support the PPP and the
erstwhile dictator are seldom branded as "politicised"; on the other
hand, judges who took a stand and pronounced the November 3, 2007
actions as illegal and unconstitutional have been accused of being
"politicised" because of their alleged support to the PML-N. This
reflects double standards on the part of the ruling party which could
either define both sets of judges as "politicised", or neither group
should have been labelled in this vague and discriminatory manner.
By proposing the insertion of Article 270CC in the constitution, the
government plans to indemnify Musharraf's illegal removal of the
judges, for the package refers to the deposed judges as those who had
ceased to hold office as a result of the Oath of Office (Judges)
Order of 2007. Since the COAS was not authorised to remove the judges
they cannot be deemed to have been removed and therefore never ceased
to hold office. They merely require assistance in returning unimpeded
to their official duties through an executive order overriding the
previous illegal one. Furthermore, amendments proposed in Article
184, which empowers the SC to take notice of questions of public
importance with reference to the enforcement of fundamental rights,
appear to be designed to prevent the Chief Justice from taking
actions to protect public interest, especially in the light of the
deposed CJ's propensity to take suo moto actions to ensure the
accountability of powerful public figures. Similarly, clause 2 of
Article 179 seems tailor-made to exclude Iftikhar Chaudhary from
restitution as it purports to limit the CJ's term (possibly to three
years) and is applicable retrospectively. A weakened, tamed and
subordinated judiciary seems to be in the making to enhance executive
control of the judiciary.
The space of public discourse is also awash with talk of indemnity to
Musharraf's unconstitutional acts. According to the proposed
insertion of Article 270AAA "…the Ordinances, except those specified
in the Sixth Schedule, made between the 12th day of July, 2007 and
the 15th day of December, 2007 (both days inclusive) and actions
taken there under shall be deemed to have been validly made and taken
by the competent authority notwithstanding the expiry of period of
four months specified in Article 89 and notwithstanding anything
contained in the constitution shall not be called in question in any
court or forum on any ground whatsoever." The period specified here
covers the National Reconciliation Ordinance passed on October 5,
2007 and the PCO of November 3, 2007. This indemnification would wipe
clean not only Musharraf's slate but also absolve Asif Zardari of all
acts committed before October 12, 1999. It is a classic case of 'you
scratch my back, I will scratch yours'. An independent judiciary
could potentially have struck down such an amendment for being
contrary to the fundamental rights section of the constitution.
Hence, such a watchdog is best eliminated.
A number of bewildering proposed amendments in the constitutional
package now make sense with the announcement of Asif Zardari as the
PPP's candidate for the presidency. If Article 45 were to be changed
as envisaged, the president would have the power to "indemnify any
acts whatsoever". The new president could in effect do anything he
liked and indemnify it himself without the help of the courts or
parliament. Similarly, the change envisioned in Article 243 which
pertains to the appointment of services chiefs would remove the
condition of consultation with the prime minister. The president
would be able to appoint military chiefs of his choice without the
necessary input by the PM. In the same vein, a critical change in
Article 177 would mean that the president would no longer need to
consult the sitting chief justice in making appointments to the
superior judiciary. This further empowerment of the president,
unencumbered by the restraints from an independent judiciary, would
pave the way for civilian authoritarianism and autocracy.
We seem to have come full circle and back to square one. The rays of
hope that shone exactly six months after the February 18 elections,
in the departure of the abhorred dictator, are now dimmed and gone.
One can only hope that our rulers would desist from mimicking
praetorian rulers by making the prophetic Orwell's last lines in
Animal Farm come true: "The creatures outside looked from pig to man,
and from man to pig, and from pig to man again: but already it was
impossible to say which was which."
The writer is an independent researcher on social development. Email:
rubinasaigol at hotmail.com
o o o
(iii)
counterpunch.org
August 27, 2008
Get Ready for a Rough Ride
PAKISTAN'S FLAWED PRESIDENCY
by Liaquat Ali Khan
Pakistan has been unsuccessful in designing a stable presidency. Two
competing models vie for approval. Pakistan's formulaic constitution,
borrowed from the legal-political traditions of England and India,
establishes a ceremonial presidency subordinated to parliament. The
president with few powers is the head of state and represents the
unity of the Republic. The ceremonial presidency empowers elected
assemblies to run affairs of the state and provinces in accordance
with the wishes of the people. It also spawns political cronyism,
allowing politicians to freely broker power relations, distribute
ministries and governmental offices on the basis of connection rather
than competence and, for the worse, use state resources to advance
personal and family interests.
The competing model, which Pakistan's generals as well as American
policymakers prefer, institutes a strong presidency - a praetorian
presidency - that listens to the armed forces and kow-tows to
American interests. Under the praetorian model, the President
exercises formidable powers, appoints heads of the armed forces, and
can dissolve dysfunctional or discordant elected assemblies. Even the
judiciary is made subservient to the President. The praetorian
presidency empowers what Pakistanis call the establishment—a
congregation of bureaucrats, army generals, advisers, and experts.
The praetorian presidency focuses on economy and foreign relations.
But it alienates political forces and weakens elected assemblies.
Consequently, corruption permeates the state machinery with little or
no accountability.
The nomination of Asif Zardari, the widower of assassinated former
Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, to contest the presidential election
is a disturbing development. If elected, President Zardari would
further muddle the models of presidency. Zardari might not use the
iron hand of praetorian presidency, as did General Pervez Musharraf,
to please the establishment and foreign masters. Under no
circumstance, however, will Zardari be the ceremonial president.
Ceremonial Presidency
The ceremonial presidency works best when the president is a non-
political, consensus figure enjoying the trust of major political
parties. Ideally, the ceremonial president is a person of great
stature, unimpeachable character, and favorable reputation. The
ceremonial president must not be the head of any political party, nor
must the ceremonial president be ideologically inclined toward a
certain foreign policy, domestic agenda, or political set up. This
apparent neutrality of the ceremonial presidency generates confidence
among political forces that the state is open to political diversity
and pluralism.
Zardari does not qualify to be a ceremonial president. Though many
criminal cases filed against Zardari were fabricated, his reputation
is sullied with charges of corruption. His recent conduct to make and
break political accords regarding the restoration of judges also
leaves the impression that Zardari equates the art of politics with
amoral cunningness rather than tough bargaining over controversial
issues.
Furthermore, Zardari is politically too powerful to be a ceremonial
president. He is the co-chairman of Pakistan People's Party (PPP),
the party in power. The other chairman is Zardari's own son. This
family hold on the rank and file of the PPP will continue to exist
even if Zardari resigns from co-chairmanship. Furthermore, the Prime
Minister, a member of the PPP, is unlikely to challenge President
Zardari on the theory that the Prime Minster has the constitutional
powers to run the country. For all practical purposes, therefore,
Zardari will run the country as the top man even if the praetorian
presidency is constitutionally dismantled.
Praetorian Presidency
In opposing Musharraf, the PPP was planning to introduce a complex
constitutional package in the parliament to cut down powers of the
praetorian presidency. Almost all political parties favor restoring
the constitution to its formulaic format. This political consensus
will now fall apart. If Zardari is elected to be the president, the
PPP would most likely withdraw the constitutional package. The
constitution, as it stands, confers huge powers on the president.
Zardari would want to retain these powers in case the political tide
turns against him or the PPP.
Even the United States would prefer that the constitution remains as
is, and that the praetorian presidency is not weakened. It is easier
for the U.S. to deal with one strong man at the top than with an
elected parliament accountable to the people. The U.S. can fight the
war in Afghanistan more effectively if Pakistan furnishes its
intelligence and armed resources to defeat the Taliban and foreign
fighters. Pakistan's praetorian presidency can deliver these
resources to satisfy U.S. interests in the region, including the
pressure on Iran. Zardari, a powerful man who cannot overcome the
reputation of being a crook, is a godsend for the U.S. In the past,
the U.S. has deftly exploited praetorian characters, such as Manual
Noriega, Saddam Hussein, the Shah of Iran, and Pervez Musharraf, for
its global interests.
Pakistan under Zardari
Regardless of whether the constitution is restored to ceremonial
presidency, Pakistan is in for a rough ride under Zardari. Now that
the coalition has split, Zardari's personal character will be
politicized, highlighting his past criminal record. A sullied
civilian president will diminish the nation's confidence in political
rule. The insurgents in Pakistan's tribal areas will intensify their
battle against the government, increasing suicide bombings. The war
in Afghanistan will spill over the border into Pakistan, as the U.S.
daringly strikes the terrorist infrastructure on both sides of the
border. Engaged in inter-personal politics, the government will have
little time to solve the nation's basic problems, including shortages
of electricity, fuel, and clean water.
Ali Khan is professor of law at Washburn University School of Law in
Topeka, Kansas, and the author of the book, A Theory of Universal
Democracy (2003).
o o o
(ii)
LETTER TO UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS PROTESTING THE CREATION OF A PAKISTAN
STUDIES CHAIR IN THE NAME OF CHARLIE WILSON - THE CIA HANDLER
August 26, 2008
Dr. Randy Diehl
Dean of Liberal Arts
GEB 3.216
University of Texas
Austin, TX 78712
Dr. Itty Abraham
Director, South Asia Institute
WCH 4.132B
University of Texas
Austin, TX 78712
Dear Dean Diehl and Dr. Abraham,
We the undersigned South Asia faculty at the University of
Texas, Austin, write to express our strong objection to the
university’s decision to establish a “Charlie Wilson Chair in
Pakistan Studies.”
While Hollywood may profit from valorizing Mr. Wilson’s
role in the Soviet-Afghan war, the concerns of a flagship, state-
funded academic institution should be to maintain high scholarly
standards and to avoid participating in historical caricature. The
cold war in South Asia, which saw the United States shore up decades
of military dictatorship in Pakistan against the democratic
aspirations of its people, cannot be construed as a triumph of “good”
democracy over “evil” communism. Mr. Wilson’s record as the key
Congressman who sent monies and munitions to the anti-Soviet
mujahideen groups underscores the worrisome role the U.S. played in
escalating the Soviet-Afghan conflict, with devastating consequences
for the peoples of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the United States.
“Charlie Wilson’s War,” or the “largest covert action
program since World War II,” channeled more than two billion dollars
to the mujahideen in the 1980s; by 1987 the CIA was supplying 65,000
tons of armaments to the mujahideen. During the 1980s, Osama bin
Laden from his base in Peshawar (Pakistan), used his family’s wealth
to build a series of camps where the mujahideen were trained by the
Pakistani Inter Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) and the U.S.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). These CIA-funded, ISI-supervised
mujahideen operations targeted airports, railroads, fuel depots,
electricity pylons, bridges, and roads, destroying vital civilian
infrastructure in Afghanistan. The mujahideen, while advocating a
narrow and extreme version of Islam, were also brutal killers who
preyed upon the Afghan people and trafficked heroin to finance their
activities. Between 1979 and 1992, thousands of Afghans died, and
six million more became refugees—the largest refugee population in
the world--many of them living in mujahideen-run refugee camps in
Pakistan. Out of the rubble of a decimated Afghan society and the
misery of these camps emerged the second generation of mujahideen:
the Taliban. Space does not allow us to detail the myriad forms of
cold war “blowback” that have continued to affect India, the former
Soviet Republics of Central Asia, and resulted in the events of
September 11, 2001. These facts are, however, well-known. Mr.
Wilson’s central involvement in the cold war in South Asia does not
warrant the honor of establishing a University chair in his name.
A named chair sends a public message that not only the
holder of the Chair, but its donor, represent standards to which the
university and larger community should aspire. To endow a chair in
Mr. Wilson's name implicitly endorses an ideological and romanticized
vision of his legacy, and thereby of South Asian history as well. Mr.
Wilson is not a role model for what we should teach students about
the struggle for democracy in South Asia. It is also hard to imagine
that any credible scholar of Pakistan could be recruited to fill a
chair named after Mr. Wilson.
If Mr. Wilson and the Temple Foundation want to support
research on South Asia, they can be encouraged to make an unmarked
and unrestricted donation to the South Asia Institute at the
University of Texas. We support the idea of establishing a Chair in
Pakistan or South Asian Studies named after a person of integrity and
principle that would allow UT’s South Asia program to recruit from
among outstanding scholars in the field. We are happy to be
consulted and to provide suggestions for a named chair that will
enhance and not compromise the reputation of South Asian Studies at
the University of Texas.
Kathryn Hansen, Professor of South Asian Studies, Director, Center for
Asian Studies (2000-4)
Akbar Hyder, Associate Professor of South Asian Studies
Judith Kroll, Associate Professor of English
Shanti Kumar, Associate Professor of Radio-Television-Film
Janice Leoshko, Associate Professor of Art History and South Asian
Studies
Gail Minault, Professor of History
Carla Petievich, Visiting Professor of South Asian Studies
Stephen Phillips, Professor of Philosophy
Sharmila Rudrappa, Associate Professor of Sociology
Martha Selby, Associate Professor of South Asian Studies
Stephen Slawek, Professor of Ethnomusicology
Kamala Visweswaran, Associate Professor of Anthropology
______
[4]
Pakistan - India: MAKE WAY FOR PEACE - BREAK VISA BARRIER - EASE TRAVEL
Daily Times
August 29, 2008
HRCP, PEOPLE’S FORUM DEMAND EASE OF TRAVEL BETWEEN PAKISTAN, INDIA
by Amar Guriro
KARACHI: Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) Secretary General
I.A Rehman and Pak-India People’s Forum for Peace and Democracy
(PIPFPD) Pakistan Secretary General Anis Haroon have jointly urged
the governments of Pakistan and India to change their policies toward
each other, especially their visa issuance policies so that people
from both sides can visit each other to ensure long-lasting peace in
the region.
“We recommend dialogue between India and Pakistan to promote the
peace process in the region but because of the Kashmir issue, these
dialogues have been put on ice. For the peace process to take place
at the people’s level, both countries must allow the citizens of the
other country to visit freely, for which we recommend that visa
requirements be lifted, if not then the visa process must be easy, so
that people are encouraged to visit each other,” said Rehman.
Addressing a joint press conference at the HRCP office in Karachi,
Rehman demanded that both governments issue visas to citizens so they
can attend the Lahore convention planned in November by the PIPFPD.
“The PIPFPD has planned the same convention in Lahore in November
2007 but it was postponed as former president Pervez Musharraf
imposed an emergency in the country and again in May 2008 in Peshawar
but the current Pakistani government informed us that the Inter
Services Intelligence (ISI) had not issued clearances so these visas
were not issued to the Indian delegates. We have now set it for
November and demand that the Pakistan government to issue visas to
the Indian delegates,” said Haroon.
She said that such a convention at the people’s level will help both
countries to come closer and to restore peace dialogues started in
2003 and while several confidence building measures (CBM) are on the
cards, neither government is enforcing them.
“By starting peace dialogues, both countries have promised to make
easier visa policies, to start the Thar express and take other
measures but it seems that these efforts are weakening on both sides
and those working for the restoration of peace in both countries are
losing hope,” said Haroon.
She said that peace in South Asia is not possible until India and
Pakistan do not resolve their conflicts and it is only possible when
there is dialogue, a three-sided dialogue between Kashmiris,
Pakistanis and Indians.
Rehman said that nobody has the right to decide the future of Kashmir
but the Kashmiris themselves. “There is no doubt that India is a
democracy but a democracy cannot mean a vast prison house for ethnic
minorities,” said Rehman.
He said that democratic and civil organizations of India and Pakistan
demand that both governments must obstruct the path for people of
both countries to meet each other and establish trade ties. The
Kashmiris, who are deprived of their rights, are being further pushed
to the wall by the economic sanctions imposed on them and the ensuing
economic crisis is affecting women and children. This is nothing
short of a human rights violation, they both said.
______
[5] INDIA MUST ACT ON KASHMIR WITHOUT BEING A HOSTAGE TO ITS HAWKS
(i)
PEACEFUL PROTESTS IN KASHMIR ALTER EQUATION FOR INDIA
Tough Response Criticized as Outmoded
Troops check the papers of a pregnant woman, second from left, being
taken to a hospital during the curfew imposed in Srinagar to block a
separatist protest. (By Dar Yasin -- Associated Press)
By Emily Wax
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, August 28, 2008; Page A08
SRINAGAR, India -- Inside dozens of cramped kitchens in this Kashmiri
city on Saturday, mothers and daughters prepared to make packets of
rice for the hundreds of thousands expected at a sit-in two days
later. Outside, their sons and brothers collected change from
motorists to buy water and juice.
Drumbeats echoed through the Kashmir Valley as college students
chanted "Azadi," or freedom. In middle-class neighborhoods, Internet-
savvy students blogged about their views and posted videos of the
preparations on YouTube.
But early Sunday, Indian security forces blanketed the region,
preventing demonstrators from reaching the center of Srinagar, summer
capital of Kashmir. Authorities announced an indefinite curfew,
blocked Internet access and arrested three prominent Muslim
separatist leaders. At least 15 journalists were beaten.
Despite the government's use of force, many Muslims in Indian-
controlled Kashmir seem determined to find peaceful ways to voice
their separatist aspirations. The slogans of the fighting in the
1990s, such as "I'm going to Pakistan to get an AK-47," have
disappeared as the nonviolent movement flourishes, especially among
the young.
"For the young generation, it's our moment now," said Malik Sajad, a
20-year-old political cartoonist for the Greater Kashmir newspaper
who was raised during the war. "Nobody here saw a childhood. We were
always kept indoors. But we don't believe that the solution is in the
gun. Now we want to show the world that Kashmiris deserve peace."
The unrest this summer in Kashmir has left nearly 40 people dead, all
unarmed protesters, and more than 600 injured in the biggest
demonstrations since an uprising against Indian rule by the region's
Muslim majority broke out in 1989. On Wednesday, troops fired on
protesters in two towns outside Srinagar, killing two people and
injuring more than a dozen.
Political analysts and human rights activists say the Indian
government has failed to adjust its strategy to deal with a
separatist movement committed to nonviolence. Some Indian political
leaders, even those who disagree with the push for Kashmir's
independence, are beginning to wonder whether India's democracy is
mature enough to handle such widespread but peaceful dissent.
"India calls itself the world's largest functioning democracy. But if
we are really a democracy, can't we let people express their
dissent?" asked Omar Abdullah, a Muslim member of India's Parliament
and president of the National Conference, a mainstream political
party in Kashmir. "In every other part of the country, police or army
fire tear gas or rubber bullets during agitations. Why do they shoot
first and ask questions later in Kashmir?"
This scenic valley has long been the battleground between Hindu-
majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan, with each country
claiming Kashmir soon after India's partition in 1947. The two
nuclear-armed countries have waged two wars over Kashmir, and Indian
security forces and separatist fighters skirmish almost daily.
Fighting has left up to 77,000 dead since the early 1990s, according
to human rights groups.
The current uproar began nearly two months ago over a land transfer
that would have given nearly 100 acres of forest to a trust that runs
a Hindu shrine. After a month of street protests by Muslims, the
state government revoked the land grant. That sparked weeks of
counterdemonstrations by Hindus in Jammu, a predominantly Hindu
region of the state. Hindu protesters blockaded roads leading out of
Kashmir, economically suffocating thousands of Kashmiri farmers
during the peak of apple harvest.
The issue has moved beyond the land deal for Kashmir's Muslims,
igniting a people's movement calling for self-rule.
The movement is "purely indigenous, purely Kashmiri," Mirwaiz Umar
Farooq, one of the arrested separatist leaders, said in an interview
before he was detained. "Even we were surprised by the force of it."
Muslim Kashmiris say they are tired of the daily humiliations at the
hands of India's 500,000-member security force, posted in apple
orchards, saffron farms and hospitals. Many say they are subjected to
constant identification checks, car searches and arrests without
reason by soldiers armed with assault rifles and wearing flak jackets.
A senior leader in India's government defended the curfew in Kashmir,
saying that "possible militant elements could take advantage of the
crowds."
"One can understand when there are reasons for people to assemble.
But there is no logic for people to gather in public places without
any valid reason," said Union Home Secretary Madhukar Gupta.
But the nonviolent movement in Kashmir has won over many in India's
intellectual class. And in New Delhi, India's capital, public opinion
on the issue of Kashmir has been mixed for the first time in decades.
Prime-time television shows have hosted debates on whether Kashmiris
should be allowed to vote on their independence. A column in the
Hindustan Times, titled "Think the Unthinkable," asked: "Why are we
still hanging on to Kashmir if the Kashmiris don't want to have
anything to do with us? The answer is machismo."
Booker Prize-winning author and social commentator Arundhati Roy has
become a hero in Kashmir for demanding that the Indian government
rethink its policy and calling for more international attention to
the issue.
"The reaction of the people in Kashmir is actually a referendum," she
said recently. "India needs freedom from Kashmir as much as Kashmir
needs freedom from India."
o o o
(ii)
Indian Express,
August 28, 2008
Our way or the highway?
HISTORIES, GEOGRAPHIES AND MEMORIES ARE AT WAR IN JAMMU AND KASHMIR
by Ananya Jahanara Kabir
An poshi teli, yeli van poshi, or ‘while there are forests, there
will be food’. This Koshur proverb attributed to Kashmiri Sufi Nund
Rishi offers uncanny commentary on the present crisis in Jammu and
Kashmir, where controversies over forest land have intertwined with a
furore over an economic blockade, and where environmental concerns
have been bypassed in the clash of religious and political symbols
now demarcating the interests and emotions of Jammu from those of
Kashmir. Yet there exists a widespread inability to analyse the
situation as a battle of symbols and symptoms. This is a
psychologically sick state, but its sickness betokens something
rotten in the state of India. To understand it, we need to understand
two sets of symbolic oppositions that precede 1947, but which have
defined the current crisis: the Valley vs. Jammu; and the Srinagar-
Muzaffarabad highway vs. the Banihal pass route.
The opposition between the Valley and Jammu originates in the
colonial creation of ‘Jammu and Kashmir’ as a ‘princely kingdom’,
sold by the British for a song to Gulab Singh and his descendants.
The strategic desire for a buffer zone between the Indian plains and
the Central Asian playing fields of the Great Game soon led to the
need for a prime holiday retreat for the Raj. During the 19th and
early 20th centuries, hunting, fishing, espionage, photography, and
summer balls flourished in the Valley under the gaze of the Dogra
maharajas based in Jammu, even as the rulers ruthlessly exploited the
inhabitants of this prized space. Kashmiris of the Valley were denied
the basis of modern subjecthood such as education, sidelined to
promote the Dogra rulers’ self-fashioning as, according to historian
Mridu Rai, ‘Hindu rulers of a Hindu state’. Their practice of
‘begaar’ conscripted Kashmiri Muslims as unpaid porters for the
manual transportation of goods across the kingdom. Kashmiri Pandits,
showcased by European Orientalists as representatives of a Hindu
antiquity, were however mobilised to enhance Dogra Hindu identity.
These are regional memories not easily forgotten.
Class-based exploitation spearheaded the Valley’s mass uprising
against the Dogra rulers led by Sheikh Abdullah in 1931. Though his
socialist manifesto for a Naya Kashmir had room for Kashmiri Pandits
and Muslims, the older privileges of class continued to antagonise
the two groups. These divides resurfaced with the Pandit exodus in
1991, which quickly fitted into the wider communal polarisation of
the 1990s. The Pandits in Jammu’s refugee camps had little else left
but their claims on a pre-Sanskritic, Hindu antiquity for Kashmir and
Kashmiri culture, which resonated with Jammu’s historical interest in
those claims. Many of their intellectuals gravitated towards the
Hindu right, which eagerly embraced their cause. Conversely, many in
the Valley rejected the much-hyped syncretism of ‘kashmiriyat’ to
assert an Islamic Kashmiri identity. Physically separated, with new
generations growing up bereft of a composite demography, Kashmiris
now spoke bitterly of one Kashmir ‘this side’ of the Pir Panjal
mountains, and another on ‘that side’. The Pandits’ exile in Jammu
has exacerbated and complicated the deep historical tensions between
Jammu and Kashmir that underlie the present détente.
India retained the Dogra juxtaposition of Jammu and Kashmir, but had
to relinquish the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad Highway. This was the only
feasible road linking Kashmir to the plains, but the Indo-Pak war of
1948 and the creation of the LOC severed this artery. Nehru had
presciently obtained Gurdaspur district, through which the only
possible alternative road to the valley would need to pass at
Pathankot. But trouble arose immediately after Partition: Indian
troops were airlifted to Srinagar to face the Tribal Invasion in
October 1947, pointing to the urgency for a bypass surgery that would
ultimately blast out of the mountains the Jawahar Tunnel. Kashmiris
still remember a time when the natural route out of the Valley
facilitated the movement of goods as well as people between the
Valley and its markets in that part of the Valley beyond the LOC,
including Muzaffarabad. The Kashmiris who marched towards
Muzaffarabad to sell their rotting fruit struck at the nation’s
Achilles’ heel. But they were primarily asserting a deep-rooted
regional memory of their relationship to the Valley’s geography,
their basis for the same Kashmiriyat that well-meaning secular
discourses reduce to ‘syncretism’.
The problem lies in Indian ignorance of Kashmiri history, memories,
and self-construction, their equivalent of the ‘synthesis between
history, geography and politics’ through which scholar Mahmood
Mamdani examined the roots of the Tutsi genocide by Hutus.
Kashmiriyat for Kashmiris is about putting the Kashmiri back into the
landscape and redefining that relationship on their own terms. Pandit
and Muslim Kashmiris commonly identify with the endangered Hangul
deer: can’t the deadlock over the forested land be broken by
rearticulated its cost in environmental terms, surely of equal
concern to all? But to get there, the political temperature has to be
lowered first. The full re-opening of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad
highway would be the most effective step in that direction.
The writer is a senior lecturer at the University of Leeds and the
author of ‘Territory of Desire: Representing the Valley of Kashmir’
o o o
(iii)
THE PRICE OF MAKING PEACE IN JAMMU & KASHMIR
by Praveen Swami
New Delhi’s well-meaning but ill-conceived dialogue process
communalised Jammu and Kashmir and laid the ground for the ongoing
crisis.
http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/29/stories/2008082955841000.htm
o o o
(iv)
The Hindu - August 28, 2008 : 1935
EDITORS GUILD SLAMS POLICE RAID AT SCRIBE'S HOUSE IN SRINAGAR
New Delhi (PTI): Editors Guild of India on Thursday slammed Jammu and
Kashmir police for conducting raid at the house of a noted journalist
of a prominent national daily in Srinagar, terming it as a "high-
handed" and "intimidatory" action in violation of the freedom of press.
The Guild said the police action had caused harassment to the family
of Shujaat Bukhari, Bureau Chief of The Hindu daily, and demanded
that authorities in the state should stop such activities "which
violate the freedom of expression".
Strongly condemning the "high-handed and intimidatory action" of the
Counter Intelligence wing of Jammu and Kashmir Police in raiding
Bukhari's residence, the Guild said in a statement here that the
action is a "direct violation of the freedom of press".
The sleuths searched the house and were apparently looking for
separatist leaders Shabir Shah and Naeem Khan. The journalist was not
at home at the time of the raid.
"The raid on Bukhari's residence, in the guise of searching for
wanted leaders, was also aimed at looking for papers and documents
which would have been gathered by Bukhari in the course of his
journalistic work," the statement issued by the Guild President Alok
Mehta and Secretary General K S Sachidananda Murthy said.
"This raid is a direct violation of the freedom of press," the Guild
added.
o o o
(v)
The Telegraph
August 29 , 2008
LATHIS LAND ON VALLEY, BY AIR
- Tear-gas shells arrive from Northeast and south
by Nishit Dholabhai
New Delhi, Aug. 28: The air force is rushing planeloads of arms to
security forces in Jammu and Kashmir, from places as far as the
Northeast and Tamil Nadu.
The AN-32s are bringing in lathis and tear-gas shells.
Caught between the protests in the Valley and Jammu, police and the
CRPF — which alone has some 25,000 men in the two sectors — are
running short of these commonest of weapons in a state that bristles
with guns.
Guns are, however, not the weapon of choice for the forces at a time
their primary job is to control mammoth crowds of protesters rather
than beat back militants.
So, the Centre has arranged for “solidified plastic lathis” to be
flown in by the Indian Air Force, along with surplus teargas shells
from states such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Assam.
Since the CRPF is deployed in Kashmir on counter-insurgency duties,
it does not have enough lathis or tear-gas shells, used mainly to
maintain law and order.
Having fired close to 10,000 tear-gas shells in the past 15 days and
beaten back tens of thousands of protesters, the CRPF has exhausted
its stocks. Ditto for the state police.
“When most of the force has been deployed for counter-insurgency
duty, how can the CRPF be equipped for law-and-order problems? We
just planned our stocks,” a senior CRPF official said.
Sources said there were fewer law-and-order problems in some states
and so surplus stocks were available. Every state’s police get
monthly stocks of tear-gas shells, but not all of them need to fire
these too often.
Bengal, where the need to control unruly mobs never goes out of
fashion, may learn its lessons from Kashmir. The security forces’
plight in the northern state – and the shape the Singur siege is
taking -- could well prompt the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government to
consider stocking up on lathis and tear gas.
The batons Bengal police now use are made mostly of cane, fibreglass
and wood, and are sourced from the Defence Research and Development
Organisation, but the government might toy with the idea of using
solidified plastic too.
However, in Jammu and Kashmir, where the security forces are bracing
for a long haul, just getting extra stocks from other states may not
be enough.
The problem is, the country’s only tear-gas factory at Tekanpur, near
Gwalior in Madhya Pradesh, has shut down production for a month – a
yearly routine during the monsoon -- because of humidity.
Experts, however, have held out hope of production resuming soon.
“Moisture absorbers, which are used on a smaller scale in cameras and
electronic equipment, are now used on an industrial scale. So we have
recommended that the factory be made moisture-resistant,” a source said.
The factory is controlled by the home ministry and receives technical
guidance from the Bureau of Police Research and Development.
Between June 22 and August 20, the CRPF has controlled protesters for
about a week in Kashmir and a fortnight in Jammu. There were 74
incidents in the Valley and 30 in Jammu.
In the Valley, 231 CRPF personnel were injured while four civilians
died in firing by the force. In Jammu, 88 CRPF personnel were injured
while controlling mobs.
o o o
(vi)
Kashmir Times
August 29, 2008
REFURBISHING SECULAR FABRIC
SANER ELEMENTS, ADMINISTRATION NEED TO STRENGTHEN EFFORTS
The efforts of a miniscule section of the society for the
refurbishment of secular fabric of two regions are not just
appreciable but are perhaps the only hope to cement the broken ties
of communal harmony and brotherhood during the unfortunate incidents
witnessed by the state during the past two months. At a time when the
whole state is on the boil and sanity has taken a backseat, this
needs courage to come out and talk of peace, amity and brotherhood,
so obviously any such endeavour, howsoever little and in whatever
form, should be encouraged by all the saner and well-meaning citizens
of the state. Although the damage caused by those who instigated the
people to fight in the name of religion and region both in the Jammu
and the Valley could not be undone fully, but certainly this is the
time to bury deep the bitter memories and move forward to assuage the
hurt sentiments of all those who suffered during this whirl of
passions, genuine or misplaced. This has been a set pattern that the
vested interests never lose an opportunity to exploit the sentiments
of the people and grind their own axe, even if it is at the cost of
the life of many a innocent. Amid the reports of migration by the
people belonging to minority communities in Jammu, Kishtwar and
Rajouri-Poonch after some incidents of harassment and torching of
some temporary hutments of Gujjars and communal violence in the
border districts of state, this was heartening to note that some
people have resolved not to migrate from their native places despite
insecurity to their lives from some miscreants. Their assertion is
that they want to live with their neighbours, with whom they have
spent their entire lives and they only want that the administration
should take immediate steps to rein in those vested interests and
provide them security against those miscreants trying to create
divide. Perhaps this is the right spirit with which we can undo the
damage caused to our secular fabric. It is desirable that the
administration should respond positively without any further delay to
encourage all such efforts.
o o o
(vii)
Deccan Herald
August 29, 2008
KASHMIR ON THE EDGE: DEVOLVE POWERS TO THE STATE
by Kuldip Nayar
The talks with the Hurriyat leaders may reveal that they are not for
secession but for their separate identity.
It is not yet possible to determine who are to blame for the
situation in Jammu and Kashmir. There is no doubting the inept
handling by the government of India and its advisers. Religious
ferment is the consequence of what has happened in the two regions,
not the cause. The cause is the lack of political will and the
inability of successive governments at the Centre to take decisions
when they should have. Influenced by a hawkish bureaucracy and ill-
informed intelligence agencies, New Delhi has failed to appreciate
the depth of people’s alienation in the Valley and the widening gulf
between Kashmir and Jammu.
The Muslim-majority Kashmir and the Hindu-majority Jammu had been
going apart for some years. Yet the government did very little to
reverse the trend by balancing the share of both in governance or
development. The Valley’s estrangement from the rest of the country
has been increasing since 1990. Statements like “the sky is the
limit,” were never concretised, either during the talks with the
Kashmiri leaders or by transferring all subjects except defence,
foreign affairs and communications to the state unilaterally.
Some well-meaning persons are suggesting that India should quit
Kashmir. They do not realise that Yasin Maliks and Umar Farooqs will
be pushed out in no time and the Valley will be taken over by the
Taliban or terrorists. The unfortunate part is that the Kashmiriyat,
akin to Sufism, has got burnt. Kashmir has become avowedly Islamic
and Jammu avowedly Hindu. New Delhi, still clueless, knows only one
way: the use of force.
Whatever can be retrieved from the ashes of Kashmiriyat is valuable.
This will be important for tomorrow’s democratic, pluralistic India.
Democracy is a constant dialogue. But it is yet to be appreciated by
the 61-year-old nation which is still in the making.
India’s ethos of pluralism has been hit the most. What effect the
stand taken by the Valley, more Islamic than Indian, would have on
the polity is difficult to say. But secular forces in the country
have been weakened. There is still no effort to talk to the Kashmiri
leaders. New Delhi would be well advised to issue a white paper on
Kashmir, containing talks with them and the Pakistan government. I
still believe that the talks with the Hurriyat leaders may reveal
that they are not for secession but for their separate identity which
was guaranteed when the state joined India. The problem is political
and needs deft handling.
The pressure of events may force the Pakistan government to take a
stand. The tragedy now is that the governments in both the countries
are in no position to discuss azadi. The Gilani government in
Islamabad is yet to attain stability.
The Manmohan Singh government has no mandate from the electorate to
change the country’s borders. Even if it were to hold talks with the
Hurriyat, it would not be able to reach anything concrete because it
cannot prejudge who would come to power after the Lok Sabha
elections. The temperature in Kashmir has reached the boiling point.
Even if the Hurriyat leaders were to think of waiting till after the
polls, they would find it hard to convince the people to defer the
agitation. The threat that the terrorists would take over from the
Hurriyat leaders is a superficial reading of the situation. Were the
movement to take that direction, the security forces would use all
the force to crush insurgency. The world is watching how the
democratic India deals with a peaceful defiance.
My fear is that the demand of secession may give a handle to the BJP
which is looking for an emotive issue. The nation is not prepared to
have another partition. It is difficult to imagine the fallout in the
country. The North-East too is watching the developments in Kashmir.
Fundamentalists in Pakistan may be happy. The ISI may want to fish in
the troubled waters. But they should realise that the azadi demand
holds good for Kashmir under Pakistan as much as for Kashmir on the
Indian side.
However, there is no time to waste. New Delhi should hold talks with
the Kashmir leaders to assure them of an independent status, minus
foreign affairs, defence and communications. Kashmir can have a UN
seat as Ukraine in the Soviet Union had.
In the meanwhile, New Delhi must attend to the fears of the Muslim
community in India. It feels insecure and helpless. In recent days I
have travelled to some parts of the country and talked to many
people, including well-placed Muslims. The community knows that the
happenings in Kashmir have polluted the atmosphere. But it believes
that the arrests of the young among them are not because of Kashmir.
Their concern is that on the pretext of curbing the activities of
SIMI, scores of Muslims are picked up.
What is most disturbing is that the Muslim community finds the
pluralistic ethos in India weakening. This means that even after 61
years of independence, the nation has failed to establish a secular
polity. It is, indeed, disturbing.
o o o
(viii) [Perfectly reasonable to ask the Brits, but not because they
were the formal imperial power . . . HK.]
ONLINE PETITION ON KASHMIR
http://www.petitiononline.com/jk2008/petition.html
To:
Gordon Brown
Prime Minister
United Kingdom
David Miliband
Foreign Secretary
United Kingdom
Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General
United Nations
José Manuel Barroso
President
European Commission
We are writing to bring to your attention the increasingly
deteriorating situation in the Indian-controlled part of the disputed
region of Jammu and Kashmir. Over the last two months, the people of
Kashmir have held mass public processions protesting against an
economic blockade imposed against the valley of Kashmir by extremist
elements in the southern region of Jammu.
These peaceful protests have now escalated into a demand for the
right to self-determination guaranteed to the people of Kashmir by
various United Nations Resolutions (including nos. 57/1948, 51/1948,
80/1950, and 122/1957). These rallies have drawn widespread support
from hundreds of thousands of Kashmiris across the length and breadth
of the Kashmir valley.
The Indian authorities have responded to these non-violent protests
by using excessive lethal force including firing live rounds on
unarmed protestors. So far, more than 25 unarmed civilians have been
killed in firing by Indian soldiers. There are now more than 600,000
Indian soldiers and paramilitaries on active duty in Kashmir (which
translates to approximately one soldier for every eight Kashmiris).
Initially the Indian government allowed the protests to proceed
without much opposition. However, it has recently changed its
approach and begun to adopt repressive measures. The Indian
government has banned local television channels and placed
restrictions on media freedom. Pro-freedom politicians have been
arrested without charge and prevented from attending processions and
giving speeches. Indefinite curfew has been imposed across the ten
districts of the Kashmir valley and soldiers have been given shoot-at-
sight orders in some places.
We are deeply disturbed by the absence of any comment by the British
government, the European Union or the United Nations on the recent
spate of violence in Kashmir. When protests broke out in Tibet in
March earlier this year, only a few thousand people took to the
streets in Lhasa and other towns. Yet, there was a flurry of
condemnation of the Chinese authorities by Western governments and
international organisations. China was urged to refrain from using
excessive force and to initiate meaningful talks with the Tibetans.
In stark contrast to this vocal stance on Tibet, the international
community has maintained complete silence on Kashmir.
We call upon the British government, as the former colonial power in
South Asia, to discharge the moral responsibility it has to speak out
against human rights violations in Kashmir and to urge all parties to
exercise restraint and initiate peaceful negotiations for solving
disputes. India is a member of the Commonwealth just like Zimbabwe
and the Indian government deserves to be reminded of its obligations
just as much as Mr Mugabe. In today’s world, the British government
simply cannot afford to be seen as being selective in its criticism
of other countries and exposure of state excesses when it comes to
maintaining ethical and humanitarian high-grounds.
We, therefore, call upon you to urge the Indian government to:
• exercise restraint in dealing with protests in Kashmir,
• ensure human rights are not violated and bring perpetrators of
human rights to justice, and
• initiate peaceful and meaningful negotiations to address the
underlying causes of unrest in Kashmir, including the fundamental
question of Kashmir’s future status.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
______
[6] THE POGROM IN ORISSA - ANOTHER STAIN ON INDIA:
(i)
ONLINE PETITION AGAINST ATTACK ON CHRISTIANS IN ORISSA
To
The President of India
It is with deep concern and dismay that we hear the recent news
pouring out from Orissa.
The atrocities perpetrated by the Sangha Parivar and Hindu
fundamentalist outfits, against Christian community and their
Missionaries in the state is a threat to our national unity and shame
for our secular entity.
Hundreds of Christians have been chased out of their homes and
attacked and looted. When the carnage enters into the fourth
consecutive day, scores are dead and many missing. Attack against the
Christian community runs unabated.
We request you to immediately direct the central and state government
apparatus to contain these unfortunate (but intentionally master-
planned) attacks against the Christian community and also use your
offices to thwart any other such incidents from happening, in the
future.
We request all secular and democratic forces of the country,
intellectuals, media, to sign and express your solidarity against the
attempts by VHP/BJP/Hindutwa outfits that are spreading and
spearheading their long-held agenda of communal hate and religious
fundamentalism.
We stand for a united India, in which all communities could live
alongside each other in complete trust, unity and brotherhood.
We also appeal to the leaders of Hindu community to restrain their
hooligans, whose doings would help only to make the whole nation bow
our heads in perpetual shame.
Sincerely,
http://www.petitiononline.com/RAJ1962/petition.html
o o o
(ii) ORISSA VIOLENCE: JOIN THE DELHI PROTEST DEMO AT ORISSA BHAWAN
AUG 29TH AT 10AM
Orissa Bhavan behind Ashoka Hotel
The Sangh is wreaking havoc in Orissa. Schools, orphanages, churches
are being attacked, damaged, vandalised. Pastors and priests are
being killed and nuns raped and set ablaze. Properties of hundreds of
Christians have been burnt down, looted, vandalised. People are
hiding in the forest and are witnessing their homes and businesses
being burnt. Smoke is rising from all over.
The protest meeting has been initiated by a number of Christian groups.
Please do come and Join the protest.
(iii) STATEMENT BY AHMEDABAD CITIZENS CONDEMNING THE VIOLENCE IN ORISSA
http://communalism.blogspot.com/2008/08/statement-ff-ahmedabad-
citizens.html
______
[7]
JUST LET ME BE
by Ayesha Khan
Indian Express, August 29, 2008
Continual celebration of victimhood isn’t helping Gujarat. NGOs need
to understand this
Perhaps it is the times we live in. Tragedies now engender
anniversary celebrations. There’s a new social class of vocal,
visible victims. And publicly parading pain is the new thing. So in
Gujarat on August 26, a month after the Ahmedabad blasts, there were
functions, official and NGO-sponsored. One of the latter variety was
organised by the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) in Quresh Hall,
Ahmedabad. There, 2002 riot victims met 2008 terror victims.
What was the idea? Fostering secular bonding? Who can argue against
that? But one can and must point out that life, and life in Gujarat,
is not Amar, Akbar, Anthony. Manmohan Desai had the three brothers of
different faiths united via an impossible conjunction of medicine and
maa — siblings simultaneously donating blood to their mother, tubes
running from their arms to their mother’s. Such ideas of the heroic
potential of inter-faith bonding seemed quite apt when the organisers
of the Quresh Hall meeting said that the attempt was to “bridge the
gap” and “get them talking to each other in empathy, with sympathy”.
“Our grief is same, our pain is same, our tragedies are similar, even
if our faiths are different.”
Read the subtext. Riot victims of 2002 are Muslims who were victims
of the state, the system and the majority Hindus. Victims of the
Ahmedabad bombs in 2008 are Hindus, the perpetrators are Muslims. So,
Muslims are victims, Hindus are victims, the bad guys may be
different, but we all stand united — in fear, in tragedy. In Gujarat,
it seems only fear and tragedy can secure the bonds.
Gujarat, let’s say it again, is becoming a strange place. The strange
response to its brand of politics is now not only from society, but
also from even civil society groups. Gujarat is perhaps the only
Indian state to have the intriguing distinction of a memorial planned
for riot victims — as CJP plans one in Ahmedabad’s Gulberg Society,
the site of one of the most gruesome riots in 2002, where ex-MP Ehsan
Jafri died. So we are to have a Gulberg Museum of Resistance. The
sponsors didn’t ask anyone, didn’t ask me, for example, whether I
want this. Whether as a Muslim or a Hindu, or Gujarai or Indian,
whatever one’s identity is, such a memorial only brings deep discomfort.
This museum is not my culture, not my language. This is supposedly to
be a museum that will be a reminder of human frailties and depravity.
But will it soothe, will it heal? No, it will just help the wounds to
fester. Gujarat has more than its fair share of slogans, hoardings,
anniversaries and memorial functions. They are all over, in all
shades and nuances. And they all bring discomfiture — they don’t help.
Bollywood secularism is not the answer to Gujarat’s political and
social divides. This is missed even and especially by those who write
reams on post-riot Gujarat. Six years later, there’s no escaping this
narrative. I, like all of us, have layered identities. I am a
journalist. I am Gujarati. I am a woman. I am a Muslim. But well-
meaning groups wait for a month to pass after the Ahmedabad bombs day
and start reminding me, lest I forget, that I am also to remember the
riots, and the importance of being a victim. Why the presumption that
this is what I want? Why the presumption that this is what anyone
wants? If tragedies mean most in the personal dimension, then
individuals should be allowed to deal with it.
So what victim-meets-victim programmes do is make me angry — because
I am yet again labelled as the victim. I resent the reminder of
victimhood being foisted on me. Apparently, in Gujarat, you can’t
escape being a victim if you have once been identified as one.
Victimhood takes different forms, searches for different contexts,
waits for many anniversaries — but it’s always there. This is bizarre
and made more so by the fact that there seems to be no recognition
that all this coming together is not happening organically but
because, in effect, different groups are being told they all have
reasons to be afraid.
The state once wanted to decide for me in Gujarat where I stood in
the scheme of things. Now, civil society groups also want to do that.
That the motives might be different makes little difference. I don’t
want the state or civil society groups to decide for me. I want the
space and the time to decide for myself.
This is not an exceptionally demanding request. This is not a request
that should surprise either politicians or civil society groups. This
is not even a request that really needs to be made. Then why am I
making it? And many in Gujarat feel this way.
We have to say this aloud because willy-nilly we have been playing a
role decided for us. That role was something terrible when the
state’s politics took that horrible turn. When civil society
responded to that, and respond it had to, the role changed, the
script changed, the people deciding the role changed, the motives
were obviously infinitely better — but it was still a role I, and we,
were expected to play.
I say this years after the riots, years during which I have felt
constricted.
All that Gujarat wants is a space that the rest of India gives — to
Indians irrespective of their faith and/or ideology. The state failed
Gujarat on this. Will civil society groups let us down too?
Let me be. Just let me be.
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: http://sacw.net/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/
DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.
More information about the SACW
mailing list