------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Does he tell you he loves you when he's hitting you? Abuse. Narrated by Halle Berry. http://us.click.yahoo.com/aFQ_rC/isnJAA/E2hLAA/nJ9qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
South Asia Citizens Wire | 1 June, 2005 [1] Thousands of Bangladeshis flee India's Assam (Biswajyoti Das) [2] India - Pakistan: We need a people's movement (Abid Hasan Minto) [3] Dual India-Pakistan citizenship? (Sandeep Pandey) [4] All India Secular Forum Newsletter May 2005-II [5] India: The Arbiters of Hindutva (Yoginder Sikand) [6] India: Letter to the Editor (Mukul Dube) [7] India: An English School For Katna (Syeda Hameed) [8] Announcements: (i) May 2005 issue of Lines magazine -------------- [1] Boston Globe - May 19, 2005 Thousands of Bangladeshis flee India's Assam By Biswajyoti Das | May 19, 2005 GUWAHATI, India (Reuters) - Thousands of Bangladeshis have fled India's northeastern state of Assam following threats by anonymous groups against migrants and a campaign asking locals not to employ foreigners, officials and residents said. The unidentified groups in the troubled state's Dibrugarh district have circulated leaflets and sent text messages on mobile phones in the past week, warning Bangladeshi nationals to leave immediately or face unspecified action. Mobile phones in Assam are being flooded with text messages saying, "Save the nation, save identity. Let's take an oath ... no food, no job, no shelter to Bangladeshis" while leaflets seeking an "economic blockade" of the migrants are also being distributed. "Many labourers working in brick kilns, rickshaws pullers and construction workers have fled in the past one week due to the threat," said P.C. Saloi, superintendent of police in Dibrugarh. Over the years, hundreds of thousands of illegal Bangladeshi migrants have swamped the tea-growing and oil-rich state in search for work and food. Over two years ago, the government estimated there could be up to 20 million illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India, and labeled some of them a security risk. In the early 1980s, the powerful All Assam Students Union launched a bloody campaign to push Bangladeshis back to their homeland. Thousands of Bangladeshis, including women and children, were massacred across the state by indigenous people who feared they would be reduced to a minority in their own land. The government and the students union signed a pact in 1985, but clauses on the deportation of foreigners have still not been implemented. The campaign against the Bangladeshis has mushroomed into a full-fledged uprising against New Delhi's rule and many rebel groups are still battling for independence. BORDER FENCE India has fenced parts of the 4,000-km (2,500-mile) border with Bangladesh, but officials say this has done little to deter migrants bent on leaving one of the world's poorest countries. Assam shares a 272 km (169 mile) porous border with Bangladesh, a vast stretch of which is unfenced. "Fencing along the border with Bangladesh in this sector has started to prevent illegal infiltration," said federal Home Secretary V.K. Duggal. "Legal and judicial measures have also been adopted to deport illegal Bangladeshi settlers from the country." The lush paddy fields and the sandy, shifting plains of the mighty Brahmaputra river that divides the countries are natural transit routes. Hundreds take rickety boats across the river, which at some places is 15 km (9.5 miles) wide, into India. The migrants become farmhands or river fishermen in villages. In towns they are often construction workers or rickshaw pullers, and the women work as maids. Since the latest campaign against Bangladeshis began, rickshaw pullers in Assam have gone off the road, maids have stopped coming to work and there is a shortage of eggs and chickens as most vendors were Bangladeshi. Brick kilns have been closed due to shortage of labor. Though there are no officials figures of actual numbers of Bangladeshis in Assam, locals say their population could be six million of the state's 26 million people. "Every day around 6,000 illegal infiltrators cross the border and enter the state," said an intelligence official in Guwahati, the state's main city. Police said most of the fleeing Bangladeshi have now moved to districts close to the border with Bangladesh. "The police have been put on maximum alert and instructions have been given that no genuine citizens are harassed and no communal clashes take place in disturbed areas," said Rockybul Hussain, Assam's minister for home (interior). ______ [2] Magazine Section | Dawn - May 29 2005 WE NEED A PEOPLE'S MOVEMENT 'Two things thrive on conflict between India and Pakistan: religious fundamentalism and the military. If this conflict is removed, it will be easier to build a liberal democratic process in our country,' says Abid Hasan Manto ABID Hasan Manto, a lawyer by profession, is one of the founders of the Pakistan India People's Forum for Peace and Democracy, and a member of its central committee. He is also the president of the National Workers Party which was formed in May 1999, coincidentally a few months before the military takeover led by General Musharraf. The following are excerpts from an interview conducted recently with Mr Manto about the current situation vis-a-vis Indo-Pak relations. Q. A generation of Pakistanis has grown up considering the India-Pakistan animosity as the most natural state of being. What, in your view, is the context of this hostility? A: Between India and Pakistan there are certain historical facts that must be kept in mind. To begin with, the two major communities, that is, the Hindus and the Muslims, over a period of thousand years did not have an amiable relationship at all. The Muslims originally came as invaders, they plundered and returned. They did not indulge in empire building at that time. Later on, the Pathans and the Mughals came and built an empire. For several centuries different parts of India, which were overwhelmingly Hindu, worked within an empire that was primarily Muslim. There is no denial that during this period the relationship between the Hindus and the Muslims as the rulers and the ruled had several ups and downs. Muslim rulers took some steps that generated cordiality and the Sufis and mystics interacted with the people of India in a way that peace and harmony were also created. As a result, to this day, non-Muslims also go to Nizamud din Aulia and Hazrat Chishti's mazars. In spite of all this the basic physical fact is that the Muslims ruled over Hindustan for eight hundred years. Against this background the people who were working within the Hindu community for its resurgence, using its religion and culture, and the fact that the Muslims had subordinated them, is not such an irrelevant thing. Now for those building a Muslim identity on religion it is easy to use this (Hindu resurgence) because it has a historical foundation. But the key issue is the difference between the rulers and the ruled. Such differences exist between the Muslims too. When the Arabs took over Iran they kept a difference between 'Arabi' and 'Ajami' for centuries. The Iranian civilization at that time was an advanced civilization. Similarly, Indian civilization was also an advanced one when the Muslims came here. Anyway, the rulers had an impact on the local culture be it Iran or India. But we should realize that in spite of being Muslims the Arabi and Ajami difference still exists to this day. So establishing peace is not so easy because a lot of prejudices exist for such a long time that it is not possible to eradicate them at a stroke. In fact, it is easy for the establishment to use these differences when it wants. In the Indo-Pak situation, we say we are different from Indians, we have also made a separate country and we feel that we are the smaller country in this equation. At the back of our minds is also our history that we were the rulers and we ruled over a major chunk of the world including India. This is similar in some ways to the superiority that the British feel even towards other Europeans in spite of peaceful relations for many years. This is essential background for us to remember: our relationship with religion. We cannot separate our history of having ruled the world from Spain to India from religion's point of view. Certainly Islam had the last big religious empire. So we are convinced of the power flowing through religion, which may not be as clear to others. In parts of the world where modernism and industrialization have not established themselves people are busy establishing their identity on the basis of religion. Q. What role does industrialization play in this situation? A: Historically, the Indian subcontinent has not entered the modern era completely. We have not entered the industrial and post-industrial era completely. There are several reasons, going back to the Mughal Empire with its own character, and the colonization impact. Colonization forced a distance from the development of society that western societies gained. Western liberalism and democracy were a result of the economic industrialization in those countries. These things complemented each other. Science and technology helped bring down religious prejudices etc. For them to talk about secularism and liberalism is valid because it is part of their historical tradition. Our system is still largely feudal. In fact, to the extent that India was able to progress in industrialization and break down its feudal structures, it is ahead of Pakistan. At the eve of independence, India was at a different level of trade and development and that helped the democratic tradition in many ways. The arbitrariness of feudal structures is reduced in such a situation. The ruling, commercial elite remains arbitrary in some ways, but because they need to sell things, they need to establish some kinds of relationships with a wider variety of people in a host of different ways. This is what happened in Europe and also in India to some extent. Another problem for us is that we got our country by dividing the common struggle against the British. We said 'we don't want the British,' but that we're also against the Hindus. I don't want to go into details of the justifications for this but the fact remains that this is what we did. This we started doing from 1940; before that we were looking to resolve our issues within an Indian confederation or union, whether through Jinnah's 14 points or other means. In 1940, there was a clear break. Although even in 1946 Jinnah moved back on this too, and he accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan, which would have meant a united India. However, Congress did not accept this plan for several reasons. Anyway, our entire struggle for a separate state was six years old and as a result it did not give birth to a mature political leadership here. A long struggle for their independence was the principal struggle that Congress leaders had undergone. Mr Jinnah was not wrong when he said he had 'khotay sikkay' in his pocket. He could not find good leaders; for instance, in Punjab he had to rely on Noon, Sikander Hayat and Daultana, all feudals without a history of struggle for independence. Therefore, these leaders were not anti-empire and, in fact, many had the seal of British approval through titles such as sir etc. These are again facts of our heritage so we need to know them before we can judge the current situation. This is also why there was such a vacuum after his death. The leadership later on was not of the same level - intellectually, culturally or politically. His own political grooming had been during an Indian national struggle and he was very different from the people around him including Liaquat Ali. All of this also left its impact on the political traditions on Pakistan. This class had no interest in making a constitution and delayed it constantly because they were feudal rulers and felt no need for a law or constitution. You can see how the change in the class itself impacted our constitution-making when a different class of leaders from East Pakistan were in power briefly, the constitution was finally made. The outdated feudal Bengali leadership and our feudals could not make this constitution. Q. Kashmir plays a pivotal role in our relationship with India, and to many Pakistanis peace with India is tantamount to a sell-out on the Kashmir issue. A. The ML leadership had thought that Kashmir was contiguous and predominantly Muslim. So of course it would stay with us after partition. At the same time we thought that Hyderabad, although not contiguous with Pakistan, has a Muslim ruler so he will accede to Pakistan. So we took a stand in the middle about accepting the ruler's decision as far as the princely states were concerned. We did not at that time bargain for a poll or public opinion. We may claim now that the Hindu raja was pressurized by the Indian government, but our stand now is weakened by our stance on partition. The fact again is that war happened. Our desire was always that Kashmir should be part of Pakistan. In addition to religion there was the issue of all our rivers originating from Kashmir. A psyche was built up that Kashmir is ours and India is occupying it by force. This disaster has created perpetual conflict between India and Pakistan. In fact, it has turned our state apparatus into a security state; defend yourself against India, which is three times larger than our country. So our focus moved to security, which meant building the army, and that required money, which we did not have, so right from 1951 we looked to the US for money. We entered various defence pacts with the US and in the cold war context the India-Pak conflict was solidified. Q. There have been, however, other episodes of improved relationship between India and Pakistan. Take the example of the '50s cricket matches in Pakistan when the borders were opened. Why didn't they last for long? A. In 1953, there was a cricket match and the borders were opened. There was a general exchange at all levels. I was studying at the Law College at the time, and I took the Punjab University debating team to different cities in India. They welcomed us warmly and we met Nehru. Ghazanfar Ali was the High Commissioner in India at that time and he took several initiatives. And then their teams came and we looked after them here. But this ended quite soon because Pakistan became an active participant in the cold war on the US side. We entered various defence pacts that also bolstered the role of our army in Pakistan's decision-making. India, with a generally non-aligned but largely pro-Soviet stance, was in the other camp. As I said, our conflict was solidified because of the cold war context. The Kashmir conflict continued in spite of negotiations and Nehru's visit. All the politics here was being conducted on the basis of establishing India as the key enemy. However, today's situation does not parallel those previous incidents of peace building. In part, this is because of the realization now that we have tried the path of hostility and it is not going to work. We have realized that the Security Council resolutions are of no use. The institution that makes these resolutions can and will not implement them. We have also realized now that we cannot win Kashmir over form India. We can create disturbance, but we cannot win it over in war. But the right to create disturbance is no longer given to any country other than America today. So in this context, there has been a withdrawal from jihadi politics. It is the age of economics and trade. It is now impossible for us to not trade with our neighbour rather than somebody 2,000 miles away. This will happen inevitably although we will go through certain ups and downs. There have been other experiences as well. For instance, now there is a clearer understanding among the people that the US has time and again used us, and dropped us when a relationship is no longer in their interest - for example, after the Afghan war. Although admittedly the predominant impression in our ruling class is still that being with the Americans is important. But one thing that everyone realizes is that international conditions have changed. Our so-called friend America is itself saying we need to build peace with India, and so is China. These pressures are not just for India and Pakistan. This is an international scenario in globalization in which economic integration requires free access to people and nations for corporate interests. Q. How is this US or corporate interest-sponsored peace likely to affect its sustainability? A. We need to be aware that the ruling elite in both Pakistan and India is overwhelmingly part of US global plans. All this peace is to make it a part of that global economic system, which is another form of colonial extension. Certainly, we cannot stay away completely from the global economic system, but how can we decrease or change the impact? Our party's analysis has been that we need regional arrangements. We have had this analysis since the fall of the Soviet Union and when such notions were not particularly fashionable. In the case of South Asia, Saarc should be converted into a massive ground for trade and economics rather than just striking conversations. Then various other groupings can be pursued like Saarc and the Middle East, Saarc and Central Asia etc. Some of these regional groupings are already emerging and the US is not happy with all of them. For example, they are in competition with the European Union. Even now they do not want the gas coming from Iran to go from Pakistan to India. They are pressurizing us to leave Iran and take the gas from Turkmenistan, where the Americans have military bases. We are not pursuing a radical agenda at this point. We need to get beyond our archaic feudal structures, build our industry, promote equitable trade, and all this is not possible without peace with regional players. Therefore, we need to consciously pick up the issue and build a people's movement. We do not want to become a pawn in the hands of MNC globalization. As far as possible we want to benefit from globalization, which is not possible on IMF and WB conditions. A people's movement is necessary to pressurize the government in the right direction. In India, for instance, a Common Minimum Programme has been agreed between the left parties and Congress to decide how much inclusion in the globalization process, how much privatization etc. are they willing to work towards. For us it is problematic because such a movement is weak in our country. The situation is such that the mainstream political parties are looking for employment with the US. Instead of mobilizing the people these parties put in an application to the Americans to impose democracy in our country. Corporate globalization will have an impact on our industry, including textile, which will obviously have an impact on farmers and cotton crops. The rich countries insist that we cannot provide subsidies to our farmers while they continue to subsidize theirs. And then we are expected to compete with their farmers. This effect on the rural economy has a direct bearing on the urban economy. At its most basic unemployment in rural areas translates into migration to cities creating greater pressure on urban structures. Here, with privatizations in cities we can see further unemployment, lack of social legislation etc. Even our traditional economists are beginning to realize these problems. In Pakistan two things thrive on conflict between India and Pakistan: religious fundamentalism and the military. If this conflict is removed it will be easier to build a liberal democratic process in our country. A people's movement on the lines of, with some changes, Latin America is what we need in South Asia. Brazil and Venezuela are not cutting off the world but want to exert control on their resources and decisions. - Humeira Iqtidar _______ [3] Daily Star May 31, 2005 DUAL INDIA-PAKISTAN CITIZENSHIP? Dr Sandeep Pandey We are grateful to the Pakistani government for allowing us to enter Pakistan and symbolically complete the India Pakistan Peace March scheduled from Delhi to Multan between March 23 and May 11, but regret that we were not given permission to walk within Pakistan. The only consolation is that we reached Multan on the scheduled date, which was not looking possible at one point because of bureaucratic hurdles. The highlight of the Multan event was the presence of both Shah Mahmood Hussain Qureshi, the Sajjada Nashin of the Dargah of Bahauddin Zakaria in Multan where our March ended and Nazim Syed Ali Shah Nizami, the Gaddi Nashin of the Dargah of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya in Delhi from where the march began. The march was meant to carry the message of Sufi saints and we accomplished our objective to a large extent. The response from people on both sides of the border was overwhelming. The signs are very clear. The people of India and Pakistan are for peace and friendship and they blame their governments for not giving it to them. The people of India and Pakistan are anxious to meet each other as no other two communities of people around the globe. The governments of India and Pakistan have made it so difficult for the two people to meet as probably nowhere in the world. A very complicated travel restriction regime exists between India and Pakistan. Some of the restrictions are beyond the comprehension of common people. For example, why does one need the permission of one's Home Ministry to cross the Wagha border on foot if the other country has granted a visa? This permission is not needed when you're crossing over from one country into the other by any other means -- air, rail, or bus. Hence, if you cross the same border on Delhi-Lahore bus service then you don't need the permission from the Home Ministry. There is also a rule which mandates a group of a minimum of four to cross the border on foot. Most of the common Indian and Pakistani citizens are neither terrorists nor criminals, but they are required to report daily to the police if they are in the other country. It is funny that during our stay in Pakistan a police squad was continuously accompanying us and they had minute to minute knowledge about our movement but still our friends Saeeda Diep or Shabnam Rashid had to waste a couple of hours every day to carry our passports to the police headquarters. One has to use the same means to return that one used to enter the other country. There is a senseless strictness about port of entry. Most importantly, you cannot go into the other country unless you have a relative or an invitation. The Pakistani High Commission in Delhi had refused to entertain our visa applications until our names were cleared by the Interior Ministry in Islamabad, which meant that unless we had influential friends in Pakistan it was virtually impossible for us to enter Pakistan. And we had to go through all this after Pervez Musharraf's recent trip to New Delhi where the two governments had talked about increasing people to people contact and making the borders softer! The bureaucracy on the two sides is still not willing to acknowledge the changing realities between the two countries. It wants to maintain its hold over people and create all possible obstacles in the path of people wanting to go to the other country. Only twelve of us had got the nod of the Pakistani Interior Ministry to enter Pakistan. About ten times more people who wished to accompany this march into Pakistan were disappointed. A close friend Vinish Gupta, who left his Ph.D. programme at IIT Delhi to become a Buddhist Monk and presently lives in Sarnath, wanted to come to Pakistan to see his ancestral home in Lahore which houses Habib Bank today. His grandmother would have been most happy if he could have brought photographs of this home back with him. However, Tenzin, as he is now known, was not given the opportunity by the Pakistani Interior Ministry to fulfill even as small a wish as this. The great Gautam Buddha had said that desrire is the source of pain. Tenzin has learnt this the hard way. However, what right the bureaucracies on the two sides, who themselves are not accountable to anybody, have to deny even simple freedom to the people to travel and meet people they wish to on the other side? Even though we're demanding a complete doing away with of the passport-visa regime for travel between India and Pakistan, the common sentiment that was expressed by people along our route was that the two governments must grant visas on arrival at the border. The governments of India and Pakistan can do it if they want to. They have to merely demonstrate the political will as they did when they started the Delhi-Lahore bus service, implemented the cease fire agreement, allowed over 5,000 people to cross over to watch a cricket match and most importantly, against all odds, introduced the Muzaffarabad-Srinagar bus service. In fact, it would be a very novel idea for India and Pakistan to allow granting dual citizenship to people of the other country who wish to apply for it. There would be a number of Pakistanis willing to obtain Indian citizenship too and similarly a number of Indian citizens willing to obtain Pakistani citizenship too if given the choice. This would be the surest way to get rid of distrust between the people of two countries which exists because of sustained propaganda on both sides against the other country and its people. It would also make life easier for a number of us who wish to frequently travel to Pakistan to meet friends and attend events and have to go through the tedious process of getting approval of Interior Ministry of Pakistan every time. And till the day of our departure we're not sure whether the Indian Home Ministry would allow us to cross the Wagha border on foot, even though we might have the visa from the Pakistani government. No governments possibly treat their citizens in such a disrespectful manner as the governments of India and Pakistan when it comes to traveling between the two countries. Why should the citizens of the two countries be subjected to this shoddy treatment by their governments? Dr Pandey is a social activist and recipient of the Ramon Magsaysay Award for the year 2002. He has been on the engineering faculties of IIT Kanpur and Princeton University and founded ASHA For Education Trust in 1991. Crossing the Wagha border. _______ [4] All India Secular Forum Newsletter May 2005-II While we witnessed the increase in the number of communal incidents in Rajasthan and against Christian missionaries, the law to curb communal violence came more as a set back rather than a relief. There is a demand that the guilty be punished after every incident of violence. But as per the present state of things most of those organizing violence or taking part in violence get away without any punishment. It is this light that measures have been demanded by human rights groups to curb this process. UPA Govt came up with a law for discussion, in this direction. As it turns out this law gives immense powers to authorities, without asking for the answerability. It is in this light that CSSS organized one day consultation to oppose the implementation of this bill. Following was the resolution passed unanimously at this meeting attended by activists and legal luminaries. A group of activists, lawyers and police officers met in Delhi on 18th May 2005 to discuss the government draft of the Communal Violence (Suppression) Bill, 2005. After careful consideration of the proposed Bill, the meeting was entirely unanimous that the draft was entirely unsatisfactory and even dangerous, the solution being worst than the disease. We believe that the government does not lack sufficient powers even under the existing laws to prevent and control communal violence. The new law only adds draconian powers to the state and the armed forces in communal situations, which experience shows tends to be used most against minorities and marginalized groups. The meeting endorsed the view of the former Chairperson of the NHRC, Justice Verma, that the Bill should be restricted to ensuring accountability of state and central governments and reparation and rehabilitation according to accepted international covenants. More such meetings are in the offing in different places. There is a need to build up pressure against this bill. The improvement in the Indo Pak relations is most heartening phenomenon which is taking place slowly but consistently. The Maharashtra Chapter of Pak India Peopleís Forum for Peace and Democracy has organised a meeting from 10th June in Pune. Those interested may [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ram Puniyani (Editor) -- Resources- ìModi-fied Justice and Rule of lawî-The case of Best bakery, with Introduction by Rajeev Dhavan Edited by Ajay Kumar. Published by Udbhavna A-21 Jhilmil Industrial Area GT Road Shahdara Delhi 95. Available in Hindi also. ______ [5] Outlookindia.com Web | May 31, 2005 THE ARBITERS OF HINDUTVA 'It is for Hindu religious leaders and social reformers to talk on the religion,' and not a 'declared non-believer' Karunanidhi, argues RSS mounthpiece Organiser. Why, then, does it present itself as a saviour of Muslim women from the 'tyranny' of 'obscurantist' and 'barbaric' Islam? Yoginder Sikand The irony cannot be more striking. Known for their fierce opposition to reforms in Hindu law that sought to ameliorate the conditions of Hindu women, Hindutva groups present themselves as ardent champions of Muslim women. The image of Muslim women as oppressed by their men and their religion is central to Hindutva discourse, buttressing their claim of Islam and Muslims being inherently and unrepentantly 'obscurantist' and 'barbaric'. This explains the hypocritical defence by Hindutva ideologues of Muslim women's rights, while at the same time the pogroms they unleash lead to the death and rape of Muslim women. While Hindutva ideologues present themselves as saviours of Muslim women from what they describe as the 'tyranny' of Islam, they are fiercely opposed to any measures that might threaten Brahminical Hindu patriarchy. Thus, the cover story of the last issue of Organiser, the RSS' official English weekly, protesting against a move to reform Hindu marriage, should come as no surprise. Titled, 'A Mischievous Proposal to Tinker With Hindu Faith', and written by a certain R. Balashankar, the article furiously denounces the proposal put forward by the Tamil politician, M. Karunanidhi, leader of the anti-Brahmin Dravida Munnetra Kazhagham, to allow for 'self-respect' marriages that do without a mandatory priest, who is generally a Brahmin. The article refers to a letter sent recently by Karunanidhi to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh demanding an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in order to legalise, at the all-India level, marriages without a priest. Presently, such marriages are recognized only in Tamil Nadu. This demand has been a long-standing one, and was first put forward by E.V.Periyar Ramaswamy Naicker, the pioneer of the anti-Brahmin movement in Tamil Nadu. Periyar was a bitter critic of Brahminical Hinduism, seeing it as a thinly-veiled guise for Aryan, North Indian, 'upper' caste Hindu hegemony. He regarded Hinduism as a creation of 'wily Brahmins' to assert their control over the 'low' caste majority whom they had reduced to servitude. He believed that the non-Brahmins could effectively challenge Brahmin hegemony only if they developed a sense of self-respect and refused to consider the Brahmins as 'gods on earth', a status that the Brahmins claimed for themselves. As part of the comprehensive plan for cultural revolution that Periyar laid out, non-Brahmins would dispense completely with Brahmins to officiate over their religious and social functions. In particular, the use of Brahmins to conduct the marriage of Hindu couples was to be strictly avoided. In this way, non-Brahmins would be able to assert their equality with the Brahmins and would, at the same time, be saved from paying the Brahmins the hefty fees that they charged as ritual specialists. In place of Brahmin-officiated marriage ceremonies, Periyar launched what he called 'self-respect' marriages, which were conducted without any priest at all. Unlike the Brahminical marriage, in which the bride is explicitly recognized as subordinate to the husband and is given away as a commodity to him, the 'self-respect' marriage was an egalitarian one. In contrast to the Brahminical marriage, the 'self-respect' marriage did not entail any dowry. That the RSS, and the Hindutva brigade as a whole, are simply a new face of Brahminism is well-known. Little wonder, then, that the Organiser spies in Karunanidhi's proposal for state recognition of 'self-respect' marriages throughout India a conspiracy to 'meddle with Hindu religion', going so far as to denounce it as 'promot[ing] atheism by deritualising and de-Hinduising Hindu marriages'. Clearly, it recognizes that marriages that dispense with Hindu priests, mostly Brahmins, are a potent challenge to Brahminism. It is, however, careful not to register its protest in a way that reveals its own Brahminical agenda. Instead, it denounces such marriages as 'anti-Hindu', as 'intimidation of Hindu religion', and as calculate to 'to spite the religious sentiments of the Hindu majority'. The fact that the vast majority of 'Hindus' are non-Brahmins, who might well believe that they are equally capable as Brahmins to conduct their own marriages, is, of course, ignored. So, too, is the fact that many Dalit castes and Tribals, whom the RSS seeks to include within the 'Hindu' fold in order to augment 'Hindu' numbers, continue to conduct their marriage ceremonies without Brahmin priests and dispensing with Brahminical ceremonies. Any critique of Brahminism, therefore, is interpreted as an attack on Hinduism as such by the RSS. Any move that might challenge the hegemony of the Brahmin minority or make a dent in the citadel of Brahminism is presented as an attack on the 'Hindu majority' and 'Hinduism', even if such moves as 'self respect' marriages might work in favour of the non-Brahmin majority. As defenders of Brahminical or 'upper' caste privilege, Hindutva ideologues see every issue from the point of view of the Brahminical elites. Hence, the reasonableness of Karunanidhi's demand is completely dismissed, without any recognition of the fact that it might well help the majority of the 'Hindus', who are from the oppressed castes, victims of Brahminism. The Organiser sees no merit in the proposal at all, and, instead, makes the ridiculous suggestion that it might be a communist-inspired conspiracy to 'wean away Hindu youth from the fold of family and religion and make them tools of atheist, anti-Hindu tirade'. The Organiser ends its vehement denunciation of Karunanidhi's proposal with by insisting that, 'as a declared non-believer, Karunanidhi and the [sic.] likes have no right to talk on Hindu religious affairs'. 'It is for Hindu religious leaders and social reformers to talk on the religion', it insists. If that is the case, then why, one must ask, do the Hindutva-walas appear to take such an inordinate interest in the 'plight' of Muslim women? If non-Hindus and self-declared non-believers have no right to talk about Hindu religious matters, what gives the RSS and its affiliates in the Hindutva camp the right to talk about Islam and shed crocodile tears over the 'oppression' of Muslim women? It is striking how, despite their visceral hatred of each other, Muslim and Hindu fundamentalists think alike on a range of issues. Both speak of religious identity as a monolith, conveniently ignoring the obvious fact that the interests of the elites they champion have little in common with those of the poor. On the issue of gender, too, both are firm upholders of patriarchal privilege. Like their counterparts among the Muslim clerics, the Hindutva-walas see patriarchal control as essential to their vision of religion, and hence any step that threatens to challenge it is regarded as a sinister anti-religious plot, as the Organiser's furious reaction to Karunanidhi's sensible and very welcome proposal makes amply clear. ______ [6] D-504 Purvasha Mayur Vihar 1 Delhi 110091 1 June 2005 The *Hindu* of 30 May reports Shri Lal Kishenchand Advani as having said, "We have been discharging our duties as people's representatives ... outside Parliament" and also that "we have capable leaders in the second generation, even more capable than me." Why do not this epitome of modesty and his capable young followers resign their parliamentary seats and do their fine work on the foot- path, the election to which is what they really fought and won? Mukul Dube ______ [7] The Telegraph June 01, 2005 AN ENGLISH SCHOOL FOR KATNA A combination of grit and resourcefulness enabled Jugnu Ramaswamy to set up a school in the middle of nowhere, writes Syeda Hameed Dream come true Jugnu Ramaswamy had started Jagriti School in 1990 to educate Delhi's street children. Under the aegis of Street Survivors India, the school, located in Delhi's Motia Khan slum in Paharganj, began in 1990, and grew from some 30 children to over 500 students. During the 12 years of its existence, it transformed the lives of slum, street and railway-station children. In 2002, the Delhi government, reclaiming valuable commercial space, demolished Motia Khan. Along with it the school too became debris. On June 24, 2002, Jugnu wrote: "The bulldozer works fast. And this one is as mean as they come. Before you can say 'Ananth Kumar' it's all gone - several classrooms and a small kitchen where working children once learnt and ate, a hall that sheltered the homeless among them each night and the only tiny toilet to boast of a commode among a squatter population of over 30,000." Then he and his wife, Shabnam Ahmad, decided to continue Jagriti. But by now Jugnu had realized the importance of owning land. He sold his house, collected all his savings and set out for a place where even modest people like him could own their very own piece. He decided to take the school to Katna, a village in the Kandi sub-division of Murshidabad district. This is where Shabnam was born and it was from here that, owing to the sagacity of her father (the first graduate of Katna), she went to Darjeeling and Calcutta for school and college education, respectively. He told me that the building had just been completed. He, Shabnam, I and Nurul Amin (a district official who had been sent as my escort) talked for two hours. I forgot how tired I was from the day's exertions in Berhampore and the 2-hour drive to the village. I just listened and listened. I heard Jugnu's account of how the building came up. All his savings went into buying the land. After Motia Khan, he could not risk another bulldozer ripping apart his dreams. Then came architect friends who understood the environment of rural Bengal and the imperative of cutting corners. Slowly the building started coming up. Meanwhile, he faced untold hardships, political coercion, betrayals, and death threats; so much so that a bomb was hurled at his vehicle and almost got both of them. But he did not give up. Slowly the enemies melted away; the would-be assassin came to touch his feet. The dream had overcome the nightmares. By the time we finished talking, dusk had settled in. It was then that I went around the building. Among the verdant paddy fields, in natural terra colours, fringed by ferns and trees, stood the monument of his hard work. The underlying idea of his school was to provide a level playing field for rural children. It aimed to give all advantages, including aesthetic surroundings, quality English-medium education, sports and extra curricular activities to the poorest of the poor village children of Murshidabad and nearby districts. The fact that it was located in Katna village meant that it would reach quality education to many Muslim children, since Katna is almost 98 per cent Muslim. The school was expected to open its doors on May 16, 2005. There was no big money behind the school. It was funded entirely by private resources raised by Jugnu from individual donations. On appeal from him, friends just sent what they could. And in his circle, no one is very rich; there are teachers, writers, film-makers. He told me of a man from England who, while getting his boots polished, learnt of a certain school where the little polisher studied. Not believing the boy's story, he landed in Motia Khan and became a solid supporter of Jugnu's work. Then there was a long silence - maybe he was dead. When Jagriti had to be launched and Jugnu was tapping friends, he wrote to the man. In reply came a stout promise, followed by a cheque. While I was in Katna, another friend called to say, give whatever you have on my behalf; I will reimburse you in Delhi. The school prospectus, beautifully designed and printed, says tuition fee: Rs 350 per month. Not a large amount when there are schools in metros, which charge Rs 1 lakh a month for the air-conditioned education of privileged kids. But for these beedi-rolling women and men of Murshidabad, even Rs 350 is a huge amount. So Jugnu thought of instituting scholarships for the poorest of the poor. So here it was, before my unbelieving eyes; a fully-equipped English medium school on a two-acre campus in this remotest of remote settings. It was a glowing example of the president of India's idea of PURA - Provision of Urban Facilities in Rural Areas. Why can't we replicate it all over the country, I though to myself. The next day, many cars pulled up at Jugnu's house. The entire district administration had landed up to see Jagriti School. "Look Jugnu, who is here," Shabnam said. He looked at me with his laughing eyes and said, "Because you are here. We have been inviting them for months." One day, a month after my visit, with three weeks left for the school opening, Jugnu sat in the school with Shabnam working on the last details. He complained of his stomach hurting. I still recall the divan lying on the side of his desk. He walked there and lay down, breathing heavily. Those were his last breaths. I did not even realize until I read the notice in the papers that he was only 48-years old. The question is, what now? Jugnu's work cannot be allowed to go waste. Shabnam has risen from her mourning to pick up the pieces and continue his mission. Every rupee in the school account is fully committed. Jugnu was just collecting money for three second-hand vehicles in which to transport the children. How will it all come together? But in my heart I know it will. Just a few years, four or five, to create jagriti (awakening) in the community; just a few years of help and Jagriti will become self-sustaining. The cruel twist to the story, Jugnu, has deprived us of you but given a strange new life and vigour to your dream. At the end, as I and many friends like me say goodbye, I want to place at Jugnu's feet two lines of Iqbal which symbolize him, his life and his mission: Jugnu ki raushni hai kashana-e-chaman mein Ya shama jal rahi hai phoolon ki anjuman mein (Is the glow from firefly which illumines the bower?/ Or is it a candle lit in the assemblage of flowers?) The writer is a member of the planning commission ______ [10] [Announcements: ] Dear Friends, This is to inform you of the launch of May 2005 issue (Volume IV; Issue 3) of lines (at <http://www.lines-magazine.org/>http://www.lines-magazine.org Information about subscription to the print issue, as well as the table of contents for this issue is noted below. As always we invite submissions for forthcoming issues and comments and responses to past issues. In solidarity, Vasuki Nesiah S. Nanthikesan Ahilan Kadirgamar lines is a quarterly magazine and you will receive these announcement letters four times a year; If you wish to unsubscribe please write to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> May 2005 Volume IV; Issue 1 Editorial Comments: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/vasuki.htm>Commissioning Accountability? Political Assasinations and the Politics of Fear - Vasuki Nesiah <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/ahilan.htm>Engaging the JVP on Federalism - Ahilan Kadirgamar <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/nanthi.htm>Hello JVP, Meet Mr. Gramsci… Civil Society, NGOs and the State - Nanthikesan Interventions: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/kumardavid.htm>Taxonomy of the JVP circa 2005AD - Kumar David <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/upali.htm>An initial assessment of the post-1988 JVP - Upali Cooray <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/sumathy.htm>displaced and displeased: fragile fragments of conversation - sumathy, along with nazeera <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/nishan.htm>Vienna Convention and Sri Lankans on Death Row - Nishan de Mel <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/faramirakedited.htm>Post Tsunami Reconstruction and the Eastern Muslim Question - Fara Haniffa and Mirak Raheem In Memoriam: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/kalaichelvan.htm>Remembering Kalaichelvan (Gfyplf; fiyQd; - fiyr;nry;td; - In Tamil with Bamini Font) Guest Column : <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/pradeep.htm>SouthPaw Two - Pradeep Jeganathan Critic's Corner: Engagements with 'At the Water's Edge' <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/nivedita.htm>At the Edge of Fiction - Nivedita Menon <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/mangalika.htm>At The Water's Edge: A Review - Mangalika de Silva <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/chimingyang.htm>Taxi! Cabs and Capitalism in New York City - Chi-ming Yang <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/aaron.htm>From the Revolution to New Forms of Struggle: Review of 'No More Tears Sister' - Aaron Moore In The Public Sphere: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/asha.htm>Breaking Taboos: Speaking about Rights and Intimidation in Toronto - Asha lines off the web: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/marian.htm>On the Road with 'In the Shadow of the Gun' - Marian Yalini Thambinayagam Reader's Comments: <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/jennifer.htm>Musings from a North Paw - Jennifer Hyndman <http://www.lines-magazine.org/Art_May05/Artwallahyouthwallah.htm>On Our Cover Art Subscriptions We place these articles on our website free of charge. If you read our articles online and you can afford a subscription to our print edition, we would very much appreciate it if you would consider taking one. Subscriptions outside Sri Lanka help subsidize distribution in Sri Lanka. To register for the lines subscription list online or to be taken off the subscription list, email us at: <http://mail.yahoo.com/config/login?/ym/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED] lines ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTIONS (including postage) Sri Lanka: Rs. 250 By air mail: Asia, Africa and Latin America US$ 30 North America, Europe and Australia US$ 40 Please make cheques and Money Orders payable to Social Scientists Association Name ............................................................ Address ......................................................... ..................................................................... ..................................................................... lines Publications Distributed by Social Scientists Association 425/15, Thimbirigasyaya RoadColombo 5, Sri Lanka. Tel: 501339, Fax 595563 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ 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/