------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Ever feel sad or cry for no reason at all? Depression. Narrated by Kate Hudson. http://us.click.yahoo.com/LLQ_sC/esnJAA/E2hLAA/nJ9qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
South Asia Citizens Wire | 21-22 May, 2005 [1] Bangladesh-India: Locked Out: The 65,000 Indians on the wrong side of the fence (Justin Huggler) [2] Pakistan: - Right to freedom of expression (I.A.Rehman) - Women defy Pakistan road race ban (BBC) [3] The trial of war criminals still relevant in Bangladesh (Rashed Khan Menon) [4] 7th Anniversary of India's Nuclear Bomb Tests - Scoring nuclear self-goals (Praful Bidwai) [5] India: Secular Historiography Still Under Attack (Nalini Taneja) [6] India - Gujarat Riots: Letter to the Editor (Mukul Dube) [7] Announcements: Film Premiere: 'Continuous Journey by Ali Kazimi' Documentary on Komagata Maru (Vancouver, May 24) -------------- [1] The Independent - 12 May 2005 LOCKED OUT: THE 65,000 INDIANS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE FENCE A 2,500-mile barrier along the border with Bangladesh is intended to keep out smugglers and illegal immigrants. But thousands of innocent villagers will also be caught in a trap. Justin Huggler reports Rabindra Sarkar is abandoning the home he has lived in for 30 years. He is giving up his farm, and all he owns, to flee with his wife and three small children to a makeshift shack he has built on a patch of wasteland a short distance away. He and his brothers are giving up their only livelihood on the farm. They have no other means of income, and no idea how they are going to provide for their families. The reason is India's answer to Israel's West Bank "security fence". It snakes its way across the hills and through patches of jungle, a series of barbed wire fences packed with nasty jumbles of razor wire that will eventually stretch 2,500 miles around the entire border with Bangladesh. It will also leave 65,000 Indians like Mr Sarkar trapped in a no-man's land between the fence and the Bangladeshi border. India says it is building the fence to keep out illegal migrants and stop smuggling. But the fence does not run along the border itself, but 150 yards inside. The result for Indians like Mr Sarkar is a disaster. His village, Sharmalungma, will be cut in half by the fence. Trapped on the wrong side, he and his family will be cut off from schools, hospitals, even doctors. They will also be cut off from the protection of Indian security guards and at the mercy of Bangladeshis who have already begun threatening them and saying they will seize their farmland once the fence is built. Israel has been criticised around the world for cutting off Palestinians like this with its West Bank "security fence". India is doing the same thing to 65,000 of its own citizens, and the world does not even know about it. Mr Sarkar's village is a tiny place in the remote state of Tripura, buried in the north-eastern corner of India. The thousands who will be trapped by the fence live in villages like this strung all around the border, forgotten places where the politicians from Delhi never come. The fence is all about Fortress India. With its economy booming, India wants to stop the flood of economic migrants from neighbours like Bangladesh. But the border treaty between the two countries says no fence can be put up within 150 yards of the border - so India has decided to sacrifice villagers like Mr Sarkar. You could almost think you were in the West Bank but for the lush tropical scenery, watered by the monsoon. Already the villages here are littered with the ruins of houses demolished to make way for the fence. Sukhla Sarkar's home has been cut in half by the fence. The house where she and her husband lived with their one-year-old child lies in ruins, knocked down because it blocked the path of the fence. Now all they have left is the makeshift hut of bamboo and corrugated aluminium that her husband's parents had moved to, to make way for the young couple. Intended to be nothing but a bedroom for the parents, the tiny hut now has to house the kitchen and provide shelter for the entire family. "We don't know what to do," says Ms Sarkar. "We don't have the money to build another proper house." The villagers are getting no compensation from the government for the loss of land. No one wants to stay on the Bangladeshi side. Rabindra Sarkar - they are not related, all the villagers have the same surname here - says he was threatened the last time he went to his paddy fields near the border. "Bangladeshi villagers told me not to come to my field any more. They said if I did they would shoot me," he says. "They've stolen my rice. Once the fence is finished, we'll be on the Bangladeshi side. Since we're getting threats from the Bangladeshis, we don't feel secure." A series of gates in the fence will let the villagers cross to the Indian side - but nobody is sure where the gates will be, and they will be locked at night. After Indian press reports about the plight of the villagers, the government ordered construction of the fence to be suspended last week in areas where houses will be cut off by it while a solution was found. But when The Independent visited, after that order was given, construction was still continuing. Many of the labourers building the fence are the villagers who will be cut off by it - it's the only work they can get at the moment. In a stretch that was being built, someone with a sense of irony had written in the wet foundations: "I love India." It's not just villagers from Bangladesh the people here are scared of. There is a history of trouble between the Indian and Bangladeshi border guards here, and only three weeks ago the local assistant commander of the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) was killed. India alleges he was dragged across the border by border guards from the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), tortured and then executed. "If the fence is completed, we will be stuck on the Bangladeshi side," said Sunil Das, another villager whose house lies on the wrong side of the fence. "But we're Indian citizens. If we are Indian citizens on the Bangladeshi side, we will be the next victims. If the tensions between the BSF and the Bangladeshi guards continues, we will be the next targets." The tension around the border is palpable. When we visited, Bangladeshi border guards in plain clothes appeared on their side of the border, closely watching our every move. Local villagers warned us not to venture into uninhabited areas where we might wander too close to the border, and run into the BDR. Not everyone is leaving, though. The fence has been finished in Mr Das's village, Sanmura, but though he and his neighbours are scared, they are staying, for the time being. "Where will we go?" he asks. "What will we do? We don't have any future. We don't have any money." These people do not have any savings. They live from day to day off their farmland. Without it, they will starve. Mr Das and his neighbours say they are waiting to see if the government offers them compensation, or some land somewhere else. But they do not believe they can stay here long-term. Most of those who will lose their homes in Tripura are refugees from what is now Bangladesh in the first place. The 59-year-old Mr Das's story is typical. As a child he fled with his parents during the Partition of India in 1948. Bangladesh was then East Pakistan, and Hindus like Mr Das's family were being attacked by Muslims who wanted a pure Muslim state. They fled across the border into Tripura, which was then a princely state, and were given Indian citizenship. But it wasn't the end of their problems. Today the majority of Tripura's population is made up of Bengali refugees - but that has created a new tension with the local Tripurese, known as "tribals" in India, who resent the takeover of their state by Bengalis. Militant groups have sprung up demanding independence, and today it is dangerous to leave the area around the state capital, Agartala, without a three-vehicle military escort. In 1980, Mr Das and his family were set upon by Tripurese in their new home. "My brother, Radhacharan, was killed. He was captured and hacked to death," he says. The family fled to the only empty land - up against the border. Now many of the villagers feel that, with the fence, India is forcing them back into the country they fled in the first place. But the local spokesman for the Indian BSF, Y S Bisht, remained unsympathetic. "These people may be living on Indian soil, but they don't have any nationality," he said. "They migrated here. Everyone in Tripura is Bangladeshi except the tribals. They are in league with the smugglers to prevent the fence being built." The villagers are not illegal immigrants - they were granted Indian citizenship decades ago. Even so, it is hard to overstate the paranoia about Bangladeshi illegal immigrants in India. When the state government of distant Maharashtra closed down Bombay's dance bars last month, one of the more bizarre reasons cited by the government was that the dancers were Bangladeshi migrants who were "spying" and reporting home. It may seem surprising in the West that India is concerned about illegal migration, but now that its economy is far outstripping those of its neighbours, thousands are flooding in from Bangladesh and Nepal in search of work - and to escape the political tensions in their own countries. With its own population already in excess of a billion, India wants to keep them out. On top of that, there is a lucrative smuggling trade across the border that India wants to put a stop to. India also alleges several separatist militant groups fighting against the Indian state operate out of camps inside Bangladesh and infiltrate across the border. Bangladesh, of course, denies this. The strange case of Assistant Commandant Jiwan Kumar of the BSF tells you a lot about the mixture of smuggling and political tension that hangs over the border here. According to the Bangladeshis, Mr Kumar wandered across the border by mistake and Bangladeshi guards shot him dead in error. But India claims something altogether more sinister happened. It started with the alleged kidnapping of a local villager, Ramdhan Pal. Mr Pal claims he was captured by men in plain clothes, whom he suspects were Bangladeshi border guards in disguise. India says Mr Kumar, the second-in-command of the Indian BSF guards here, was told about the incident and went to investigate. He approached the border but was suddenly set upon by Bangladeshi guards who dragged him over to the Bangladeshi side. An Indian guard who was with Mr Kumar but survived has alleged they were tortured. When Mr Kumar's body was found, he had cuts all over his body. He was killed by a gunshot. Local reporters say there is more to this. Mr Kumar was known for refusing to take bribes from the smugglers. The word in Agartala is that he was set up and killed by guards in the pay of the smugglers. The BSF has accused Mr Pal of being in on the set-up, and accepting a bribe from the smugglers to be "kidnapped". In this murky world, the villagers do not stand a chance. On the night of Mr Kumar's killing, Indian and Bangladeshi border guards exchanged gunfire across the border for several hours and some villagers had to evacuate to nearby schools to get away from the crossfire. But those who will be trapped on the wrong side of the fence say they fear they will be unable to escape if a similar incident occurs once the fence is finished. Jatindra Sarkar is 72. He has lived on his farmland all his life - he is one of the few villagers who was not a refugee from Partition. He says his family has been here "since the Britishers' time". But now he too is thinking of packing up and leaving, as his farm is on the wrong side. "I'm worried about the fence, but money is my main problem," he says. His sons have no income except the farm. "How can I build a house on the other side? If I go over there what will I do? Life is uncertain. I haven't made up my mind what to do yet." But for Mr Sarkar, and 65,000 others, time is running out. _______ [2] Dawn - May 17, 2005 RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION By I.A.Rehman IT IS doubtful if any state welcomes queries from the UN Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression because such inquiries relate to denial of a key human right. Thus, Islamabad is unlikely to take pride in the fact that during 2004 it was involved in frequent exchanges with the rapporteur. An account of this correspondence, submitted by the rapporteur to the UN Commission on Human Rights in March last, however, is not without some credit to Pakistan. This record shows that during 2004 the government took its obligation to respond to the rapporteur somewhat more seriously than in the past and that is certainly a welcome sign. Before the end of the year Pakistan had answered nine of the 14 communications received from the UNSR. In some cases the replies were sent quite promptly. For instance, an appeal made in January 2004 was answered in the following month and two queries made in June were answered in July. It is possible that replies to the five appeals left unanswered in 2004 could not be sent for lack of time as three of them were made during October- November. Another creditable feature of the record is the degree of vigilance displayed by the UN rapporteur in keeping track of happenings in Pakistan that related to the right to freedom of expression. The list of cases taken up by him may not be exhaustive but it is fairly adequate. The substance of the UN rapporteur's appeals and Pakistan's replies, however, reveal a situation that cannot be considered very complimentary to the government of Pakistan. The first three of the rapporteur's communications related to the case involving Khawar Mehdi who was accused of helping two French journalists to make a 'fake' film on the Taliban. Khawar Mehdi has recently been acquitted but for about a year the case did more damage to Pakistan's reputation than the harm alleged to have been caused by him. One of the points on which the rapporteur expressed concern was the accused's trial before an anti- terrorism court. Islamabad maintained in its replies of February 25 and June 10 " that the case of Khawar Mehdi Rizvi was not pending before any anti-terrorist court." How was it possible to make such a wrong assertion? It was in June 2004 that Khawar Mehdi was indicted by the Anti-terrorism Court II, Quetta. The next case concerned Dr. A. H. Nayyar, a well-known peace activist. He had organized some demonstrations in Islamabad in April- May 2003. In March 2004 two policemen called on him and advised him to secure bail before arrest because an FIR had been registered against him. The government said in reply to the rapporteur's appeal that an FIR had been registered against Dr. Nayyar for violating Section 144 but it had been quashed by the Lahore High Court on the ground of its having been filed without lawful authority. Islamabad does deserve some appreciation for its candour in conceding that its officials can ignore the law while initiating criminal proceedings for violations of Section 144. Some of the answers offered by the government cannot easily be appreciated. In June 2004, the special rapporteurs on freedom of expression and on torture made a joint urgent appeal concerning Dewan Hashmat Hayat. His house had been demolished by a sectarian mob and then he had been arrested on a blasphemy charge and allegedly tortured in the Jhelum central jail. He could get pain killers only by bribing the jailers. The government replied quite soon (July 7, 2004) and admitted that Hashmat Hayat had indeed complained of neighbours' threats to demolish his house, and that his house was in fact looted and demolished. The culprits were not prosecuted because the victim neither pursued the case nor presented evidence. As for his arrest, he had been held in relation to a homicide case. This reply furnishes a most unconscionable example of government's repudiation of its elementary duties to citizens or implies that the government was as scared of proceeding against the culprits as was Hashmat Hayat. Even more revealing of the government's authoritarian mind is the case of Sarwar Mujahid, the Okara reporter who was sent to prison under MPO for filing reports on the plight of tenants who were being oppressed by the Rangers. A joint urgent appeal was made on Sept 14, 2004 by three special rapporteurs - on freedom of expression, on arbitrary detention and on torture. The government in its reply (December 13, 2004) insisted that Sarwar Mujahid had been arrested and detained in accordance with the provincial laws because he was disrupting public order by instigating tenants to launch a protest against the district administration/ armed forces. He had written baseless articles in opposition to government policies. The government reply also alleged that Sarwar had been warned by the local press club and had been involved in a scuffle with the police outside the Okara sessions court. In any case he was to be released on Sept 30. The reply was dated 13 December and the information that Sarwar had been freed by the High Court was omitted. The writer of this note obviously has no respect for reason. If Sarwar was held for having committed some offences, why was he held under a preventive detention law? Why was he not prosecuted under a normal law? Above all, the official story did not impress the Lahore High Court as it held Sarwar's detention illegal and ordered his release. The rapporteur's urgent appeals that remained unanswered included the one concerning Javed Hashmi, the PML-N and ARD leader who was sentenced to 23 years' imprisonment for forgery, defamation and 'inciting mutiny in the army.' This appeal was made on April 28, on the same day that the case of the arrest of journalist Sami Yousafzai had been raised. A response to the latter appeal was made in good time (on June 10) but the appeal regarding Javed Hashmi was ignored. In Oct 2004, the special rapporteur sent a long letter concerning a number of cases. These included: denial of official advertising to a number of newspapers; attacks on Jang and GEO offices in Quetta; burning of newspapers by gunmen in Karachi; attacks on the Geo office and the Karachi Press Club; the alleged ban on reporting on the operations in Waziristan and actions against several journalists; interference with the work of journalists who were covering Shahbaz Sharif's abortive bid to return to Lahore; the brief detention of four journalists in Waziristan; ban on some Peshawar journalists' entry into the Fata; and an Islamabad-based woman reporter's detention by a bureaucrat in his office. The reason for not responding to this letter by the end of 2004 is anybody's guess. If the government of Pakistan claims to be a responsible authority, the references to this country in the 2004 report to the UN Commission on Human Rights must lead to some serious thinking. It is necessary to realize that denial of freedom of expression, or violation of any basic human right for that matter, can no longer be concealed from international watchdog bodies even if human rights activists at home can be disregarded or otherwise 'handled', and that no state can afford to be found in contempt of international human rights norms. The best way to avoid censure is to guarantee maximum possible respect for the freedom of expression. However, even the best governments can be led into committing violations of this right. Statements about such matters before world forums have to be drafted with greater regard for truth and commonsense than is evident in the work of officials retained to issue contradictions and clarifications to the national media. Matters should improve a great deal if the government starts releasing to the public the communications received from international agencies and its rejoinders. Among other things this may bring some credit to the information paraphernalia and enable it to disseminate information instead of disinformation. Besides, the practice of keeping communications to and from the UN secret is by itself a denial of the right to freedom of expression and information. o o o o BBC News - 21 May, 2005, 15:24 GMT 16:24 UK WOMEN DEFY PAKISTAN ROAD RACE BAN Asma Jehangir: Violence is counter-productive Hundreds of Pakistani rights activists have held a mixed-sex road race in Lahore in protest at a ban on men and women racing alongside each other. The authorities had pledged to halt the 1km race, but police stood by and let it proceed. They used force to break up a similar event last Saturday. Rights activist Asma Jehangir said it was a victory for law and order. Radical religious demonstrators, who oppose women running in mixed races, were kept back by police. The authorities realised violence and heavy-handedness are counter-productive Rights activist Asma Jehangir Ms Jehangir, head of the nation's Human Rights Commission, said she was "glad sense had prevailed". "The authorities realised violence and heavy-handedness are counter-productive," she told the BBC News website. "It was a symbolic marathon to make the point that this tyranny had to be broken." High heels About 500 men and women took part in the race, which underwent a last-minute route change through less visible areas of the city. The BBC's Paul Anderson in Lahore says women participants wore traditional dress, the salwar kameez, and not all sported running shoes - some were in high heels. It is unclear why the authorities failed to enforce the ban on the race. Last Saturday's scenes were not repeated City mayor Mian Amir had promised to stop it. He was unavailable for comment afterwards. Lahore police chief Aftab Cheema said activists had been peaceful. Ahead of Saturday's event, a leader of the country's Islamic alliance accused race organisers of being an elite group trying to emulate the West. The deputy parliamentary leader of the Islamic alliance, the MMA, Hafiz Hussain Ahmed, told the BBC News website: "In our culture, no parent would like to see their daughter running on the roads along with the boys and that, too, in shorts." Moderates were outraged at police tactics last Saturday, when about 30 activists were bundled roughly into police vans and briefly detained, Ms Jehangir among them. The ban on mixed gender races was enforced in April after Islamic hardliners attacked runners in a race in the city of Gujranwala, about 100km (60 miles) north of Lahore. _______ [3] Holiday - May 13, 2005 THE TRIAL OF WAR CRIMINALS STILL RELEVANT IN BANGLADESH Rashed Khan Menon The recent row between China and Japan on the issue of the distortion of the history of Japanese aggression and war crimes in China in the Second World War subsided when the Japanese Prime Minister surprised the heads of state and government present in the Afro-Asian Conference, held in Indonesia to commemorate the historic Bandung Conference, by apologising in his speech for these acts. Before that, anger raged through the government and the public in China. The Chinese Prime Minister, in his last leg of tour to India in April last, said very strongly that Japan should give attention to the reaction in China caused by the understanding of the extent of Japanese aggression and the war crimes in the school textbooks of Japan. He also made a veiled threat about blocking the Japanese effort to gain a permanent seat in the UN Security Council by saying that only those who have respect for history and acknowledge the misdeeds of the past have the capacity to shoulder international responsibility. The students of China, on the other hand, came out on the streets and brick-batted the Japanese embassy in Beijing. The sale of Japanese goods was stopped. The apology of the Japanese Prime Minister has cooled down the situation but the dispute still remains and China will not be satisfied until the textbooks are amended to tell the schoolboys the proper history of those events. This recent outburst of reaction in China about history dates back to 1943 when the Japanese captured Nanking and perpetrated a genocide in which three hundred thousand people were killed and twenty thousand women raped. This barbarous event, known as 'Nanking Massacre' or 'Rape of Nanking' in history, was brought to light during Tokyo's trial of the Japanese war leaders in the International Tribunal after the Second World War. But the subsequent Japanese rulers tried to put the whole episode in another light and in the textbooks on history the 'Nanking Massacre' was dubbed the 'Nanking Incident' and it was claimed that the reports on it were overblown. A Japanese journalist, whose investigation and research brought the gruesome history to light, was accused of national betrayal. All the subsequent governments in power backed the rightist reactionaries who tried to justify the occupation and the actions of the Japanese army in China and in other countries during that period. The Chinese, Koreans and other governments and people of those countries always contested the distortion of history and asked the Japanese government to apologise for those acts. The earlier Japanese governments, in their effort to mend relations with these countries, made public apologies. But at the same time their history books described those events in a way that hurt the sentiments of the people of those countries. So it remained as a bone of contention between Japan and other countries. The debate on history and war crimes between China and Japan is very relevant for Bangladesh as this country also had to go through mine months of horrific occupation by the Pakistani army and hundreds of thousands of its people were killed and raped by them. The night of the twenty-fifth of March saw the genocide begin in Dhaka, and it continued throughout the country with unabated ferocity. The Pakistani murderers were joined by the local collaborators of Jamaat-e-Islami, Muslim League, Nizam-e-Islam and others in those acts, and millions of people had to flee the country and take shelter in India, where many of them died in the refugee camps. The war crimes of the Pakistani army and their collaborators were not brought to trial and are hardly mentioned in the textbooks of Bangladesh. The electronic media, controlled by the government, seldom mention the massacre. Rather there is a conscious effort on the part of the ruling class of the country to make people forget it. The Nirmul Committee, led by Shahid Janani Jahanara Imam, revived the demand for trial of the war criminals and made big advances in that direction by holding a mock trial of those war criminals in the Gano Adalat. But this was opposed by the then BNP government, and the participants of the Gano Adalat were charged with anti-state activities and criminal cases were filed against them. In a surprise judgement the Supreme Court also gave back the chief collaborator of the Pakistani army, Jamaat's Amir Golam Azam, his citizenship, which had been taken away for his war crimes. The next government, of the Awami League, which came to power by using the Nirmul Committee's movement, also did not do anything about the trial of the war criminals, and did not include the true history of liberation war in the textbooks for the new generation. And now the Bangladesh government not only boasts about its relations with Pakistan, but two of the main collaborators of the Pakistan occupation army and its wilful partner in the genocide of Bangladeshi people, the intellectuals and others, are in the government, holding very important positions. The senior ministers of this government are on record saying that by siding with Pakistan, the Jamaat-e-Islam's members only performed their duty as citizens. The general secretary of the BNP recently asked people why one cannot be forgiven for his misdeeds of thirty and more years back. A Pakistani opposition leader of an Islamic group acknowledged the misdeeds of the Pakistani army in Bangladesh in 1971, but advised the concerned people to forget them. But can such atrocities be forgotten? The Japanese war crimes were brought to trial in the international courts and twenty-seven of the leaders of the government and army were sentenced in the Tokyo Trial. But the matter did not end there. Nor did it come to an end in Europe even after Nuremberg trial convicted the persons involved in the Nazi war crimes in the Second World War. These crimes are being publicised by the historians, by the filmmakers and writers, and the people are constantly reminded of them. In the political arena, no neo-Nazi parties are allowed to function legally. Even when some of them could sneak to the Parliaments of different countries of Europe by winning elections, they were not allowed to sit there. The countries and people of Europe take pride in the victory of the anti-fascist war and though the Soviet Union is no more there, the glory of the Soviet army and the valiant fight of the Communist Party were displayed in the memorial march recently held in Moscow to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the anti-fascist war where leaders of the world, including the President of USA, were present. In the case of the East, the countries of China, Korea, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia, who suffered under Japanese occupation, were one in asking apology from Japan, and Japan, though grudgingly, made the apology. So history is not forgotten even if time passes, and events like aggression and war crimes are never forgotten. Rather the people are reminded every time so that atrocities are not repeated in the future and civilisation can make progress. But in Bangladesh the history of Pakistani occupation, its collaborators, the killing and raping by these people have fallen through the hole of political expediency, and the mainstream politicians try to bypass the issue just for the sake of power. This has led to the distortion of the history of our liberation struggle and allowed those criminals to rehabilitate themselves socially and politically, so much so that they are even sharing power with this government. The recent debate on history and war crimes between China and Japan and also between Korea and Japan has shown how relevant these issues are for the countries which have made progress and have got relations with the countries who committed these crimes. The mention of war crimes or demand for apology has not spoilt good relations between these countries, but rather put the relations in a real historical perspective from where they can advance. Internally it prevents the revival of those criminal politics and outlook and helps the country to progress. In Bangladesh, the Constitution of the country was amended to put the war criminals on trial and a law, the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, was passed in the Parliament to enable detention, prosecution and punishment of persons responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other crimes under international law. Recently the international community has also become very vocal about war crimes, and trials have taken place for atrocities in Rwanda and Bosnia. The Rome Convention has been signed to bring the perpetrators of war crimes to trial. So there is constitutional provision, relevant law and international legal support. What is necessary is the political will of the government because it is only the government that can bring up allegations about these crimes. So it has now become very important to force this or subsequent governments to go for trial of war criminals. This should be made one of the main issues of the democratic movement if the country is to be saved from the clutch of the communal and fundamentalist forces who are trying to not only rotate the wheel of history backward, but also to change the whole basis of this country. What is true for the world is also true for us. The mere passing of time does not make the trial of war criminals a dead issue. It is most urgent to end the distortion of history and put the glorious history of our liberation struggle in its proper place. (Rashed Khan Menon is a member of the Bangladesh Worker's Party and a long time progressive politician.) _______ [4] Khaleej Times - May 15, 2005 SCORING NUCLEAR SELF-GOALS By Praful Bidwai On the seventh anniversary of India's Pokharan-II nuclear tests, how do South Asia's strategic and political balance-sheets look? The honest answer is, distinctly ungainly. The Manmohan Singh government did not celebrate the anniversary although it observed May 11 as "Science Day." At the party level too, there was no enthusiasm for celebrating the Shakti tests. Only the Bharatiya Janata Party held a commemoration-a small symposium, where the tone was peevishly self-justificatory. Party president L.K. Advani used the occasion to pillory the Left and demand it be firmly kept out of all areas that affect vital national interests. He cited Communist Party (Marxist) general secretary Prakash Karat's description of the nuclear tests as "adventurist and very unfortunate" events which weakened India. Advani was barking up the wrong tree. It is not just Karat, but much of the Opposition in 1998, which questioned the wisdom behind the nuclear blasts, including Manmohan Singh, H.D Deve Gowda, Mulayam Singh and many others. During the 1998 Monsoon Session of Parliament, the government came under intense fire over breaking the consensus to have a nuclear capability, but not to cross the threshold and make weapons. Singh went as far as to warn that a defence strategy based on nuclear weapons would lead to an arms race which would turn out to be so expensive that there would be "nothing left to defend." Today, the BJP's claim that it did both the right thing, and the popular thing, by conducting the Pokharan blasts, sounds laughable. Opinion polls show that 63 to 72 percent of Indians are against making or using nuclear weapons. This is in keeping with the figures in most major countries of those who want nuclear disarmament. These range from 67 percent (Russia) and 78 percent (Japan) to 87 percent (US, Germany and UK) and 93 percent (Canada). In most Non-Aligned Movement countries, there is an even stronger sentiment against nuclear weapons. Poll ratings apart, South Asia has become more insecure since 1998 despite the recent improvement in India-Pakistan relations, itself uneven, wobbly and reversible. As far as a flashpoint for a nuclear confrontation goes, South Asia still remains the world's "most dangerous place". More than one billion ordinary civilians living in that region have become vulnerable to a devastating nuclear attack, whether intended, accidental or unauthorised, against which there is no defence, military, civil or medical. Seven years ago, the Indian Bomb lobby made at least five claims about the virtues of nuclearisation. It said India and Pakistan would become more secure and self-confident because neither could now blackmail the other on the strength of conventional strategic superiority or even covert support to militant groups. This new strategic equation would form the bedrock of stability. Second, Pakistani and Indian leaders would behave "responsibly" and "maturely": the Bomb's destructive power would ensure that, irrespective of the leaders' qualities. Third, after the Pokharan-Chagai tests, an India-Pakistan conventional war would become inconceivable. Doesn't deterrence theory tell you that nuclear weapons-states do not go to war with one another? The low-intensity skirmishes between the USSR and China in the 1960s and 1970s across the Ussuri river were only an aberration. That doesn't affect the rule. Fourth, nuclearisation would greatly expand India's and Pakistan's capacity for political-diplomatic manoeuvre in world affairs. And fifth, nuclearisation's adverse social-political impact would be minimal, and its economic costs affordable. All five predictions have proved disastrously false. India and Pakistan have become edgy, nervously unsure about each other's doctrines, more prone to panic reactions-and strategically unstable. Nuclear weapons have not induced "maturity" and "sobriety" into India-Pakistan relations. Indeed, they have promoted rank adventurism based on the premise that nuclear weapons furnish a shield or cover for needling and harassing the adversary in numerous conventional ways. The casual, cavalier, manner in which Indian and Pakistani officials exchanged nuclear threats in 1999 and 2002 was spine-chilling. The two came close to the brink of a nuclear attack at least three times. Thanks to pure adventurism, Pakistan and India went to war at Kargil a year after the Pokharan-Chagai nuclear tests. Kargil was a serious middle-sized conflict by international standards, involving 40,000 Indian troops, top-of-the-line weaponry, and billions of dollars. The casualties exceeded 1,000. Take global stature and the supposed ability to expand room for international manoeuvre. After Chagai, Pakistan became a virtual pariah state-until 9/11, which gave it a chance to get into an alliance with the US. True, India's global profile has risen. But that is more because of information technology successes and economic growth-and despite nuclear weapons. India's bargaining power and room for manoeuvre vis-à-vis Washington has shrunk thanks to nuclearisation. That's one reason why India had to get into an unequal "strategic partnership" with the US and take ambivalent positions on many US policies and actions. Nuclearisation's still-unfolding economic costs have proved extremely burdensome. India's military budget has more than doubled in absolute terms since Pokharan-II. Pakistan's spending has followed the same trend. This is just for starters. As their nuclear programmes proceed towards deployment, military spending will skyrocket. With an arms race-in the Indian case, two races, the other being with China-, it could spiral out of control, ruinously, for all concerned. The low-end estimate for a small arsenal, one which is only one-fifth the size of China's, is Rs 60,000 to 100,000 crores. This would entail doubling the military budget, which is now 3.2 percent of GDP. All this means paying through our nose to court yet more insecurity. The nuclear danger cannot be contained or managed while retaining nuclear weapons. Systematic elimination of nuclear weapons, beginning with the South Asian region, is the only solution. India can work for it if it revives and upgrades the thoughtful Rajiv Gandhi Plan of 1988, which involves a three-stage process of global nuclear elimination. But this means making an extraordinarily bold gesture of nuclear restraint in the South Asian region. Is India ready for this? The alternative is an unsafe world over which the nuclear sword will hang forever.-end- _______ [5] People's Democracy - May 15, 2005 SECULAR HISTORIOGRAPHY STILL UNDER ATTACK Nalini Taneja MOST people think that with the RSS defeated and a secular party at the helm of affairs, secular historians can breathe easy and secular historiography is now safe from attack by the goons of the RSS. That this simply cannot be taken for granted is clear from the recent orchestrated attack by the RSS and its media on senior teacher, Zahoor Siddiqi, of School of Open Learning, Delhi University. A vilification campaign against the said teacher is going on in Panchjanya, the RSS mouth piece, and in the Jagran owned TV channel, which has been organising so-called discussions by 'experts' like Tarun Vijay of Panchjanya and leading member of the RSS think tank to not just to misreport what has actually been written by Zahoor Siddiqi in the reading material prepared for the correspondence course of the university, but also to falsify history itself. The Democratic Teachers' Front (DTF) of Delhi University has issued a strong press release on the matter (see box) and is also writing to the university officials. As the press release makes clear the reading material targeted is not new, and neither is the attack on it by the RSS a first time attack. Similar attempts were made in 1979 and 1983, questions were raised by RSS linked MPs in parliament, and the usual vilification with peppering of words like 'sons of Macaulay' and 'agents of madrassas' was carried out through out the city of Delhi and in national newspapers. It is to the credit of the Department of History that it had stood steadfast in defense of secular historiography and academic freedom of a teacher. Under the headship of Prof D N Jha, the well known historian, the department unanimously defended the reading material, and a report clearly stating that there was not only nothing unobjectionable but also nothing factually wrong in the material being objected to by the RSS was sent to the university and the then vice chancellor, Moonis Raza. One can of course then wonder what all the fuss is about once again - except that by now we are only too familiar with the fascist Goebelsian methods perfected by the RSS over time, and that it is not willing to lose any opportunity. The teacher, Zahoor Siddiqi, has now retired, and the RSS probably thinks the university and teachers organisations will perhaps not take that much of an interest. He has, of course, impeccable secular and Left credentials. He has taken the initiative to bring out an Urdu fortnightly Altamash, which obviously is Left and anti-communal, and he has also been an active member of the BJP Harao Manch. The RSS has sent a legal notice to Zahoor Siddiqi, as well as to the university and the college, the main points of which are that he has "distorted" history with reference to the RSS, and also the Indian Constitution, made certain negative references about Sardar Patel etc. In other words, the RSS thinks he must be penalised for showing the RSS and its leaders as communal, for referring to constitutional debates which did not allow for greater democratic content, and for pointing towards the role of Godse brothers in the Gandhi murder - all of which, as we well know, are commonplace facts available in all secular history texts, including textbooks prescribed in the university. Zahoor Siddiqi had quoted some of these in the preparation of the reading material. Dinanath Batra, convenor of the RSS history cell, has in a pamphlet called the reading material a "serious criminal conspiracy to distort history". He has called for meetings, demonstrations and using all other avenues of protest they think suitable for expressing their anger to the Delhi University VC. While the Democratic Teachers' Front has come out in Zahoor Siddiqi's defense, the same cannot be said for the college and the university, whose definition of academic freedom is that it is a teacher concern what he/she writes and says! This, as we can clearly see, is an attitude that has broad academic, political and legal implications. Any reading material, published by the university, and circulated by it must be assumed to have the sanction of the university, and the university must hold itself accountable for it. An academic institution must defend academic freedom against any unlawful and unwarranted attacks. Such defense is not the responsibility of the teacher alone, who has written or delivered a lecture or made a presentation at a seminar etc in the service of scholarship and his academic contribution to the institution. On the flip side, any reading material which may be communal and against the spirit of the Constitution, and which is prepared by any individual teacher or department, and is being circulated in the name of the university, must not only not be defended, it must be withdrawn after adopting the proper procedures and ascertaining its unsuitability. This is the real meaning of academic freedom. An institution of repute cannot absolve itself of defending secular history or letting communal history be circulated in its name, in the name of academic freedom of the teacher concerned. If the circulation of RSS sponsored textbooks is being tolerated in our country today it is a reflection of the weakness of our secularism, of the lack of political will of the government and the bourgeois political leadership, not because academic freedom demands that that myths be taught in the name of history in schools. Zahoor Siddiqi has prepared the reading material as part of his duties as a teacher of the university, and was assigned this work by his institution, through his department. His is not a speech made at some open forum or a book published by him on his own, which may be a matter of citizens' concern, but with which the university officially has an option to involve itself or not. This is an officially approved reading material belonging to the university, and circulated by it. Moreover, it is material, which already having come under controversy earlier, has been unanimously supported and approved of by the History Department of the university in 1983. The Delhi University is therefore, bound, from all points of view, to defend it against motivated communal attacks by the RSS, and to stand by the teacher. It is, therefore, regrettable that in this case the university is yet to make its position clear and to take any steps to defend Zahoor Siddiqi against vilification and intimidation by RSS linked goons. ______ [6] The Hindu - May 20, 2005 | Editorials A shocking absence of outrage The gruesome attack on a woman engaged in a campaign against child marriage in Madhya Pradesh is a reminder that despite claims to being on the threshold of developed nation status, India has not been free from the worst forms of social backwardness and obscurantism. As if the incident was not shocking enough, the initial reaction of the State Government was scandalous. Instead of condemning the assault on Shakuntala Verma, a child welfare worker of the State Government, Chief Minister Babulal Gaur threw up his hands and asserted that it was not possible to stop child marriages. Ms. Verma was attacked by a sword-wielding man who barged into her home and tried to chop her hands off. After initially trying to pin the motive for the attack on personal enmity, the Madhya Pradesh Government belatedly admitted that it was indeed linked to the social worker's attempts to prevent a child marriage in a village in Dhar district. One person has been arrested but this has come following street protests in Bihar, anger in Parliament, and a Supreme Court notice to the State Government on a petition on behalf of the injured woman. Aside from seeking compensation, the petition demands the arrest of those behind the attack, and the prosecution of all officials concerned, including the Chief Minister, for a negligent attitude towards child marriages. The official attitude bears the hallmark of a `soft state' bordering on collusion with social reaction and law breaking. Every year, in the six States of Madhya Pradesh, Chattisgarh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and Jharkhand, on a particular day of the Hindu calendar known in north India as akha teej and in the south as akshaya tritiya, thousands of children are married. This, in blatant violation of the 1929 Child Marriages Restraint Act (CMRA) under which no girl under the age of 18 or boy under 21 can wed. This year too, despite a directive from the National Human Rights Commission to the governments concerned to take all measures to prevent child marriages, many instances have been reported. According to a 2001 UNICEF study, the number of prosecutions under the CMRA did not exceed 89 in any year. Admittedly, the law as it stands is weak. Child marriage is not a cognisable offence; carrying out arrests of offenders is difficult; and most important, the marriage itself remains valid. The Prevention of Child Marriages Bill introduced in the Rajya Sabha in December 2004 is more comprehensive and has some teeth. It seeks to empower courts to "stay" child marriages and provides for declaring such marriages void (although only on the basis of a complaint by the child). If the Government is at all serious about stamping out the outrageous practice, officials responsible for enforcing the law must be made accountable for every case of violation. In the long term, there is no solution other than making registration of marriages compulsory. ______ [7] [Letters to the Editor] D-504 Purvasha Mayur Vihar 1 Delhi 110091 13 May 2005 Sundar Singh Bhandari, old RSS hand and Governor of Gujarat when his own "family" massacred Muslims there in 2002, now says (see "Governor in the time of riots Bhandari slams Modi " *Indian Express* [www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=70286] ) that Modi and the BJP's central leadership failed to react quickly and firmly. "The riots were taken lightly," he said, keeping up the pretence that the violence was not a pogrom -- in the planning of which, moreover, he himself has been held by many to have been central. Can it be coincidence that Sevak Bhandari speaks of the "blot" just days after Sevak Pramod Mahajan did the same? Can it be coincidence that neither *sevak* said anything remotely like this for thirty-eight months, not even when Sevak Advani, then Home Minister, told Parliament that Modi was in control, in London praised Modi's "stern action", and told a U.S. news magazine that he was "satisfied" with Modi's handling of the situation? Can it be coincidence that K.R. Narayanan, then President of India, very recently said that the then Prime Minister, Sevak Vajpayee, had ignored his advice on the proper use of the army? It is not only that the rats have begun to scurry madly among their lies now that the truth is coming out. The rats are also attacking one another. All this promises to become a fine soap opera about rodent behaviour: "Choohe Jo Kabhi Sher Bante The". But we should never forget that rats can also be carriers of bubonic plague. Mukul Dube ______ [8] [Announcements: ] Dear members and friends of SANSAD: We draw your attention to the Vancouver premiere of the award-winning, ground-breaking documentary Continuous Journey by Ali Kazimi Tuesday, May 24, 2005 7:30 p.m. The Vogue Theatre (918 Granville Street, Vancouver) Based on eight years of detailed research and drawing from solid archival material, Continuous Journey documents the tragic and shameful saga of the Komagata Maru ship, which almost to the day ninety-one years ago, on May 23, 1914, arrived on the Vancouver shores with 376 aspiring immigrants from India. The ship's arrival was also an act of defiance against the overtly racist policies of this country. After practically decimating the indigenous peoples of this land, and forcing the left-overs into tiny, isolated Reserves, "White Canada for Ever" didn't want anymore brown, yellow and black people to come here. However, they could not formally keep the people of India from coming; India being as much a colony of the British empire as was Canada. The Canadian government thus passed an ordinance stating that people were welcome to come, as long as they came on a "continuous journey"; and their masters in the United Kingdom made sure that no shipping company travelled directly from India to Canada. Komagata Maru, as a chartered ship, arrived here after two months on the open seas in a "continuous journey". it sat in the Burrad Inlet for another two months. Not only the Government of Canada but also the entire British empire conspired to keep the passengers from coming on shore. Finally the ship was forced out of Canadain waters with the guns of Canadian Naval ship pointed at it. Continuous Journey is a documentary which must be seen by everyone who wants to know about the history of this land. And it must be seen by us, the South Asians - people whose ancestral roots go back to the Indian sub-continent. For us, the Komagata Maru episode is of profound historical significance. The 386 Hindu, Muslim and Sikh men, women and children on that ship were among the pioneers who laid the solid foundation of our people's struggles in Canada. They suffered much hardship. They suffered hunger and thirst. They suffered the humiliation of being turned back from these shores. Many were killed by the British police when they reached back in India, many were incarcerated. But through all this they symbolized unity, perseverance, determination, and a daring to struggle for their rights. Komagata Maru is a common heritage for all of us. And Continuous Journey by Ali Kazimi brings this heritage alive in a very creative manner. ******* So make it a date. Come to the Vogue Theatre on Tuesday, May 24, 7:30 p.m. Ali Kazimi, the director, and many other distinguished guests will be in attendance. **** The screening of Continuous Journey is the gala opening of a week-long annual DOXA Docementary Film and Video Festival of Vancouver. For full listing of other films and venues in the Doxa festival, go to this site: www.doxafestival.ca Advance tickets for the gala night ($15.00 per person) are available at Bibliophile Bookshop, Videomatica and Festival Box Office at 604.257.0366 or www.festivalboxoffice.com Information: 604.646.3200 or www.doxafestival.ca Hari Sharma for SANSAD _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, 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: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/ Sister initiatives : South Asia Counter Information Project : snipurl.com/sacip South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/ DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/act/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/