------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/nJ9qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
South Asia Citizens Wire | 14 Nov, 2005 [1] Quake tests Kashmir and the world (Salman Rushdie) [2] Press Release - Pakistan Peace Coalition wants military sales to be scraped [3] Amidst Kashmir's tragedy, we must prepare for the next big quake in the Himalaya-Hindukush (Kanak Mani Dixit) [4] Sri Lanka: Media Release - Importance of North East Participation in Presidential Elections (NPC) [5] Hopes for a resolution in Nepal threatened by the position taken by the USA (CNDN) [6] India - Pakistan: Blinded by The Bomb (Zia Mian) [7] Book Review: Was Hinduism Invented? Britons, Indians and the Colonial Construction of Religion by Brian K Pennington ______ [1] Toronto Star Nov. 8, 2005 QUAKE TESTS KASHMIR AND THE WORLD by Salman Rushdie *The calamity of Kashmir is a wound on a wounded body. It is death arriving in awful majesty in a place where death has become a grubby, ugly, everyday affair. There has been so much man-made dying in Kashmir that, if one believed in God, one might say that God had become competitive and decided to show the killers -- the killers in uniform and the terrorists cloaked in secrecy -- what a real killer can do. There has been so much man-made agony in Kashmir -- so many young men have been broken, so many women vandalized, so many villages smashed, there have been so many explosions, so much loss, so much blood on the no-longer-virgin snow, the raped, defiled snow -- that the bitterness of this natural disaster is not only beyond bearing, it is obscene. The earthquake is a hammer blow launched against a people who had already been smashed. And now, as if to finish things off, the Himalayan winter is setting in, and the greatest calamity may lie ahead of us, not behind. The Kashmiri winter is beautiful, but it is also cruel. To look upon the valley in its coat of winter white, the frozen ice-sheets of its lakes, the pale air pregnant with the promise of snow, is to feel tears of beauty freezing in your eyelashes. To contemplate the mighty surrounding Himalayas, wrapped in whiteness like an immense Christo artwork, is to learn, again and again, the salutary lesson of human smallness. "If there is a paradise on Earth," the Emperor Jehangir wrote long ago, "it is this, it is this, it is this." In Kashmir's high valleys, too, was born the legend of Shangri-La. But the real Kashmir is not a place where men and women live as immortals, safe from the ravages of time. Paradise in winter was always ruled by cold-hearted gods. Today, more than ever before, Kashmir is Death's dominion. The messages from Kashmir keep coming, and the note of desperation in them grows louder all the time. Millions of people are homeless -- the number may be as high as 3 million, on both sides of the so-called Line of Control, the scar of history slicing across the troubled province's face to divide its India-ruled and Pakistan-ruled sections. On the Pakistani side, according to the regional Prime Minister Sikander Hayat Khan, 70,000 injured people are in need of attention. But many roads were destroyed by the quake, many others are impassable because of landslides and mudslides, and the Red Cross reports that relief helicopters have sometimes been unable to land because the throngs of desperate people scrambling toward them have been so large. And the United Nations says that, unless more funds are received at once, its fleet of helicopters will have to stop flying in the next few days. The decisions of the Indian and Pakistani governments to open the Line of Control to assist the relief effort is belated, but welcome nevertheless. Without an immediate increase in relief funding, however, it will soon look like a useless gesture. If winterproof shelters cannot be built in the next month or so, Kashmir will become an icy graveyard in which literally hundreds of thousands of people will freeze to death. In spite of all the difficulties, the relief effort is taking place. National relief agencies, private charities and many other humanitarian bodies are getting medicine, blankets, warm clothing and tents into the afflicted area. But, as one Kashmiri journalist wrote to me last week, "Nobody can survive the winter in the border villages in a tent." Meanwhile the world seems to be suffering from compassion fatigue. After the eastern tsunami and the western hurricanes, this is not incomprehensible. But the people of Kashmir deserve better than they are getting. They certainly do not deserve to be subjected to a kind of "political test" of aid-worthiness. Yet, ever since the day of the earthquake, people in the United States and Europe have been asking me and many others the same politically loaded question: Will the disaster "help?" Will it enable India and Pakistan to sink their differences and, at long last, to make an end of their long Kashmiri quarrel? It has been hard to avoid the conclusion that Western attitudes toward aiding Kashmir depend to some degree on the answer to this question being "yes." Alas, the answer is "no." India and Pakistan are still mired in mutual suspicion, as the saga of the Indian helicopters reveals: India offered them, but Pakistan refused to accept them unless they were flown by Pakistani pilots, which India in turn refused to accept. Meanwhile the quake victims went right on dying. Moreover, as the recent murder of a moderate Kashmiri politician showed, and as the bombs in Delhi would seem to confirm, there are Islamist groups who remain determined to sabotage any improvement in Indo-Pakistani relations. As long as those groups find sanctuary in Pakistan, a peace settlement will be impossible. All of which should be irrelevant to the matter at hand. For more than half a century the world has turned a blind eye to the political problems of Kashmir. It must not now turn its back on the Kashmiri people. If the flow of aid does not increase at once, it is probable that more people will die in the earthquake's wintry aftermath than perished in the quake itself. It is entirely possible that the final death toll will be greater than the tsunami's. We may be looking at the greatest natural calamity in human history. But in this case we have the power to avert it. In this case we can send the money to fly the helicopters, tend to the sick and build the winter shelters. If we do this, people will live. If we can accomplish this, it will be a great good thing. If we fail -- because we are tired of disasters or because Kashmir is far away, remote and quarrelsome, and doesn't feel like our business -- well, then, shame on us. Shame on us who have our homes and our children and cannot care about those who don't. I do not want to believe, however, that this avoidable catastrophe will be allowed to occur. But time is very, very short. There is not a day to lose. Salman Rushdie is the author of The Satanic Verses, Fury and many other books. ______ [2] Pakistan Peace Coalition P.O. Box 2342, Islamabad Pakistan 7 November 2005 PRESS RELEASE PAKISTAN PEACE COALITION WANTS MILITARY SALES TO BE SCRAPED Pakistan Peace Coalition has welcomed the government announcement that, in view of the gigantic task of reconstruction and rehabilitation of the unfortunate quake victims of Kashmir and Hazara, it is going to revise the F-16 fighter aircraft purchase deal. It said that at a time when the task of reconstruction and rehabilitation was going to cost several billion dollars, it would be mindless and obscene to continue to spend billions of the people's hard earned money on defence purchases and yet shamelessly extend the begging bowl before the world for more aid for earthquake relief. The Coalition has, however, expressed its dismay at General Musharraf's statement that the deal would only be postponed, not cancelled. It was also dismayed that even in the face of this calamity, the government had chosen to finalize a deal to buy early warning SAAB aircraft from Sweden. The Coalition urged that in the interest of alleviating the suffering of the people of the country, the entire plan of purchasing expensive defence equipment be scratched, and the earmarked money be spent solely on the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the earthquake affected people. "With our own money thus available, the government should stop shamelessly begging for international assistance. The people of Pakistan have already opened their hearts and pockets to aid the quake victims. If the nation can do this, it can live without a worthless shining armour. The government's begging is a serious affront to the noble spirit of the people, the Coalition said. PPC has demanded that the plan to buy F-16s be cancelled, and the deal to buy SAAB aircraft be revoked. It has also demanded from India to revoke its purchase of F-18 from the USA. PPC has informed that in collaboration with its sister peace organizations in India, it will jointly start to lobby with the leading arms manufacturing countries of the world to stop selling arms to the poverty stricken South Asia so that the hard earned resources of the region could be used to improve the quality of life of the peoples of the region. The Peace Coalition has welcomed General Musharraf's offer to India to demilitarize Kashmir. However, it believed that the offer would work and would look credible only when it is accompanied by Islamabad seriously reigning in the groups in Pakistan engaged in militancy in Kashmir. It urged the Government of Pakistan to persuade Hizbul Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, and other groups and their reincarnates to announce that they would respond positively to a possible Indian offer of demilitarization by abandoning their militancy. PPC underscored that demilitarization should naturally include non-state actors also. The Peace Coalition has also urged India to reciprocate by announcing the release of all political prisoners in Kashmir, an end to impunity for perpetrators of torture and rape, and a credible effort to account for the people who have disappeared during the period of military crackdown and insurgency. But even if India does not do this, PPC has urged Pakistan to go ahead and do what is in its own interest and in the interest of the people of Kashmir. Dr. A.H. Nayyar, President PPC B.M. Kutty, Secretary General PPC Karamat Ali, Member Executive Committee PPC ______ [3] Nepali Times 28 October - 3 Nov 2005 '8/10' AND AFTER AMIDST KASHMIR'S TRAGEDY, WE MUST PREPARE FOR THE NEXT BIG QUAKE IN THE HIMALAYA-HINDUKUSH by Kanak Mani Dixit Why has the Kashmir Earthquake of 8 October been termed the 'Southasia Quake' by the international media, including the all-powerful, real-time satellite television networks? Southasia is a vast region and the ground trembled beneath one corner of it, well known to the world as Kashmir, on two sides of the 'line of control'. Somehow, it does injustice to the suffering of the living and memory of the dead to call the disaster by the name of the larger region when a local name is available. Meanwhile, the UN has declared the Kashmir catastrophe more devastating than last year's tsunami. Three to four million people are suddenly without homes on the edge of winter. The result of an underground quake, the tsunami of 12/26/04 struck the southern beaches of Southasia, while the earthquake of 8/10/05 hit the northwestern mountain fastness. Because it was such an unusual event and also because many holidaying westerners died tragically, the coverage of the tsunami attracted emergency support on a massive scale. Not so with the Kashmir quake of 8/10. To date the world is not even close to matching the $11 billion gathered for post-tsunami relief. In the face of an earthquake that knows neither borders nor LoCs, of course we must utilise the opportunity of the disaster to ease Kashmir tensions between India and Pakistan. But geopolitical certitude in the two capitals will surely require something more than a shifting of geological plates to undo. What we need is for national establishments in both countries to learn to take the Kashmiris themselves into confidence, as well as find a way to fuzz the frontiers and sanction dual identities. For that, we need a shake-up of the mind, not the ground. The immediate challenge in Muzaffarabad, in Uri, in Hazara, in Tangdhar, is to help those without shelter and means of livelihood to make it through the winter of 2005-06. But thereafter, we are looking at many years of rehabilitation. Given the sharp drop that we can expect in humanitarian concerns as soon as the television cameras stop broadcasting live, the intelligentsia of Pakistan, India and Southasia as a whole have a responsibility not to turn their backs on this quake and its living victims. They have to stay with the Kashmiris for the long haul and keep the governments on their toes. This year, nature chose Kashmir to sound a warning to the rest of Southasia-most importantly, to those who live along the Himalayan-Hindukush rimland. The geologists are not sitting easy and neither should the rest of us. The prospect looms of a horrendous earth shaking in what is known as the Central Himalayan Gap, which covers all of Nepal and more. There has not necessarily been enough release of 'cumulative elastic energy' in the rubbing of plates beneath Nepal and the nearby regions to the north, west and south. A huge swath of territory is therefore dramatically overdue for a devastating quake. The suffering of Kashmiris must at least inform those who are in a position to save lives when the earthquake hits the Central Himalaya. The newly adopted building material all over the Himalaya-Hindukush is concrete. Heavy-set buildings were the death traps of Kashmir as testified by numerous pictures of the tragedy. Kathmandu, the largest urban concentration in the Himalaya, will become a 'valley of death' when the Big One comes, for its buildings are now nearly all of concrete using 'pillar system' construction. And what of rescue? In Kathmandu and elsewhere, there will not be the military helicopters and ground transport available in militarised Kashmir. To die under rubble while awaiting a rescue that never comes is a gruesome way to go, as happened to many on and after 8/10. Kashmir will have to be helped back on its feet, while we look ahead to the next Big One-and prepare. ______ [4] National Peace Council of Sri Lanka 12/14 Purana Vihara Road Colombo 6 www.peace-srilanka.org 09.11.05 Media Release IMPORTANCE OF NORTH EAST PARTICIPATION IN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS There are statements being made and pamphlets being distributed in the north east calling on the people to boycott the forthcoming Presidential elections. This is causing anxiety amongst the people who are concerned about the LTTE's stance with regard to these elections. In their public statements LTTE officials have said that they are going to remain neutral in the elections and will not obstruct the elections in any way. As there is uncertainty in the minds of the people it will be a positive gesture on the part of the LTTE to continue to make it known that they are not opposed to the people casting their votes in the Presidential elections. The Presidential election is one of the most important political events in the country. Those who call for a boycott of the election point to the failure of past elections to solve the problems of the Tamil people. However, there is a need for partnerships to deal with these problems and bring peace to it. No single community can do this, and the south cannot solve the problem without the north east. Just as much as the government's efforts to find a solution to the ethnic conflict by itself proved futile, so will any Tamil belief that they can stay aloof from the imperatives of national politics including those of the south. North east and south are inextricably inter-connected, and what happens in one part impacts upon the other. This is why partnerships, and not boycotts or isolation, are vitally important for peace building. The National Peace Council believes it is in the national interest to encourage the Tamil people to take part in the forthcoming Presidential elections. We regret the circumstances that have made people living in the LTTE-controlled areas disadvantaged by having to travel large distances from their places of residence to cast their votes in polling stations one kilometer inside the government-controlled areas. Sri Lanka's democratic development and the resolution of the ethnic conflict through peaceful political processes depend on the ability of all its citizens to exercise their franchise in an unhindered manner. The day must soon dawn when polling stations for elections will be set up close to peopleís homes in all parts of the country and they can cast their votes without fear in free and fair elections. We call on all parties to act positively to take the peace process forward through the democratic process, and with international support, by facilitating the people's democratic right to vote now and in the future. Any direct or indirect pressure on the Tamil people not to vote at the forthcoming Presidential elections will be unacceptable to Sri Lankans who respect democratic values as well to the international community which has already sent its teams of election observers into the country. Those who work for peace in Sri Lanka can only gain legitimacy nationally and internationally only within the democratic framework. Executive Director On behalf of the Governing Council ______ [5] Canadian Network for Democratic Nepal November 6, 2005 Press Release HOPES FOR A RESOLUTION IN NEPAL THREATENED BY THE POSITION TAKEN BY THE USA Recent events have brought Nepal to a crossroads in the effort to establish enduring peace and democracy in the country. The unilateral ceasefire announced by Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) has resulted in its dialogue with the seven agitating parties' alliance. This is a certainly a positive move toward such peace. However, last weekís press statement from the US Ambassador to Nepal, James F. Moriarty, aims to undercut this incipient alliance. The US government has urged the seven agitating parties to form an alliance with the monarch instead. The US fails to grasp that such an alliance is not feasible in the current political reality of Nepal, nor does it reflect the aspirations of the Nepali people. The US position can only perpetuate the current crisis and further the erosion of human rights, the loss of civil liberties and the collapse of the economy that have only intensified under King Gyanendraís regime. The parliamentary political parties tried their best to forge alliance with monarchy to break this stalemate. Events have shown that such alliance is not possible due to the Kingís adamant position and the repressive measures carried out in the name of the monarchy. Assessing this situation, the political parties have rightly determined that forging an alliance with the Maoist is the best way to break this impasse and move toward a positive resolution of the conflict. In effect, they are trying to break the equilibrium, isolate the king, establish republican Nepal and restore peace. In the light of numerous commitments made by Maoist leadership for multi-party democracy and development of nationalistic capitalism, there are no signs that Maoist victory will lead to imminent establishment of a communist state. Thus, such alliance is the only meaningful way out of the impasse. The result, otherwise, will be further loss of life due not only to the armed conflict, but also the exacerbation of poverty. The statement is clear evidence that the US is more concerned with keeping the monarchy in power than in supporting a peaceful political resolution in Nepal. How easily the US government forgets that it was itself was borne of an armed struggle against an oppressive monarchy! In standing so firmly behind the autocratic monarchy the US continues its dishonorable history of propping up repressive monarchies and illegitimate dictatorships in other countries. Therefore, The Canadian Network for Democratic Nepal (CNDN) strongly demands that international forces, particularly the US government, refrain from intervening to bolster an autocratic monarchy. Such restraint would clear the way for the implementation of a common agenda of and for the people of Nepal, i.e., negotiation and weapon management under UN supervision, the formation of an interim government and the election of a constituent assembly. Web: www.pdfnepal.com Email: paribartan (AT) pdfnepal.com ______ [6] Himal - Southasian November 2005 Analysis BLINDED BY THE BOMB Against all civilisational values, Islamabad and New Delhi proceed to prepare their bombs and missiles - for nuclear war to be fought on our soil. by Zia Mian For decades, leaders of India and Pakistan have been bewitched by the power of the bomb. Regardless of their various other differences, they seem to have believed that the threat of massive destruction represented by nuclear weapons is a force for good, and that the weapons themselves are vital to the well-being of their respective countries. President A P J Abdul Kalam, for instance, has claimed that nuclear weapons are "truly weapons of peace". For his part, President Pervez Musharraf has declared that his country's nuclear weapons are as critical and important as national security, the economy and Kashmir. For those not blinded by the Bomb, however, the pursuit of nuclear weapons has brought nothing but a competition in destructive capabilities and crisis after crisis. The Cold War seemed proof enough, but the lessons have been lost to those who rule in India and Pakistan. New Delhi's nuclear ambitions have served only to encourage Islamabad to follow blindly. The 1974 nuclear test at Pokhran sharpened Pakistan's determination not to be left behind and, as many had feared, the bomb was not willing to be left in the shadows for long. First India and then Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in May 1998. Things went from bad to worse. The Kargil War followed barely a year afterwards, proving that two nuclear armed countries could indeed fight wars - contrary to the suggestions of some. Many hundreds of soldiers died on each side, as the leadership in the two countries threatened apocalypse. A little over two years later, India and Pakistan prepared to fight again. An estimated half-million troops were rushed to the border and, as days turned into weeks and months, nuclear threats were made with abandon. What lessons were learned from the extended standoff at the border? None, it seems - other than perhaps that each country needed to be better prepared to fight a nuclear war. In 2005, both countries carried out major war games that assumed the possible use of nuclear weapons. An India-Pakistan nuclear war, in which each used only five of their available nuclear weapons, would kill an estimated three million people and severely injure another one-and-a-half million. Meanwhile, even as Southasian and world public opinion press both countries to step back from the nuclear brink, New Delhi and Islamabad respond with efforts to portray themselves as 'responsible' nuclear states. At the same time, they continue to push forward as hard as possible with their arms race. The abyss between words and deeds was clear from the first public show of nuclear responsibility - the 1999 Lahore summit between prime ministers Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Mian Nawaz Sharif. Even though the two men had ordered their nuclear establishments to undertake tests barely a year earlier, in Lahore they discussed "sharing a vision of peace and stability" and "progress and prosperity" for their peoples. The summit produced little in the way of tangible progress on controlling the nuclear arms race. The two states did agree to inform each other about ballistic missile tests, but it was only in October 2005 that they finally followed through on that agreement. Even so, the accord does nothing to limit the future development or testing of missiles. War games The Subcontinent is in the middle of a missile race. Both India and Pakistan have tested various types of missiles in recent years, even taking initial steps towards the deployment of nuclear-armed missiles. India has introduced the 2000 km-range Agni-II missile into its arsenal. Pakistan has done the same with the 750 km Shaheen missile, as well as having tested the 1500 km Ghauri. These missiles would need as little as five minutes of flight time to reach important cities in the 'opposing' countries. Just as happened during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, in Southasia the development of these missiles has triggered a frantic search for a defence shield, as well as a counter to such a defence. India has sought ballistic missile defences from Russia, Israel and the US to neutralise Pakistan's missiles. Pakistan has responded by testing a 500 km-range ground-launched cruise missile, which General Musharraf linked to concerns about Indian plans: "There was a feeling that there was an imbalance, which is being created because of the purchase of very advanced-technology weapons ... Let me say this improves the balance." The quest for advantage triggers the quest for balance and on it goes. It is no surprise that military budgets in both India and Pakistan have spiralled since the nuclear tests began. India spent over INR 2.2 trillion on its military between 2000 and 2004. Gen Musharraf has revealed that Pakistan has spent more since 2000 on its nuclear arsenal than it had in the previous 30 years. The future looks worse. In June 2005, the US and India signed a 10-year defence-cooperation agreement, which involves the sale of advanced weapons and assistance to both India's space and nuclear programmes. As a senior US official explained: "[Our] goal is to help India become a major world power in the 21st century," adding, "We understand fully the implications, including military implications, of that statement." The agreement's purpose was made clear when former US ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill, asked, "Why should the US want to check India's missile capability in ways that could lead to China's permanent nuclear dominance over democratic India?" The June decision was followed in July with a more explicit nuclear deal, in which the Bush administration agreed to overturn US and international regulations that have for decades restricted India's access to uranium, the raw material for both nuclear fuel and nuclear weapons. For its part, India will separate its military and civil nuclear facilities and programmes and will volunteer its civil facilities for inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The US has not asked India to halt the production of nuclear weapons material as part of the deal; India is unlikely to do so. Access to the international uranium market would allow India to free up more of its domestic uranium for a significant expansion of its nuclear weapons capabilities. India's options could, for example, include building a third nuclear reactor to make plutonium for more weapons; beginning to make highly-enriched uranium for weapons; or making fuel for the nuclear submarine it has been trying to build for decades. Pakistan has now asked for the same deal from the United States. Former army chief Jahangir Karamat, now ambassador to the US, has warned: "The balance of power in Southasia should not become so tilted in India's favour, as a result of the US relationship with India, that Pakistan has to start taking extraordinary measures to ensure a capability for deterrence and defence." The US has refused Islamabad's request, citing, among other things, Pakistan's role in spreading nuclear weapons technologies to North Korea, Libya and Iran, and its refusal to come clean on the A Q Khan affair. Despite all the talk of a 'minimum deterrent', Pakistan may now seek to prepare for an expansion of its own programme. A former Pakistani foreign secretary has even argued that Islamabad "should refine its deterrent capability by stepping up research and development and by integrating strategic assets on land, air and sea - though even that project would be costly and take years." Time of madmen The increasingly powerful nuclear weapons complex in both India and Pakistan is overwhelming good sense and derailing the possibility of peace. On both sides, with similarly narrow goals, nuclear weapons proponents are driving the Subcontinent ever faster down the path toward bigger and more dangerous nuclear arsenals and war. The time has come for us to echo the words of the American sociologist Lewis Mumford, writing soon after the dawn of the nuclear age: "Madmen govern our affairs in the name of order and security. The chief madmen claim the titles of general, admiral, senator, scientist, administrator, Secretary of State, even President." If Southasia is to survive its own nuclear age, we will need strong peace movements in both Pakistan and India, as well as throughout the rest of Southasia. The first steps have already been taken. The Pakistan Peace Coalition, founded in 1999, is a national network of groups working for peace and justice. On the other side of the border, Indian activists in 2000 established the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace. These movements will need all the help and support that they can get to keep the generals, presidents and prime ministers in check. Leaders in India and Pakistan must be firmly told that the people will not allow a nuclear war to be fought. ______ [7] Asia Times Online 12 November 2005 BOOK REVIEW The evolution of Hinduism Was Hinduism Invented? by Brian K Pennington Reviewed by Aruni Mukherjee William Wilberforce, a British parliamentarian who died in 1833, once spoke of the "dark and bloody superstitions" that embody the creed that came to be termed Hinduism. Prior to that, the mind-boggling diversity in sub-continental religious practices existed without a common definition to bind them together, and this "crystallization of the concept" is what Brian K Pennington traces in his book Was Hinduism Invented? Britons, Indians and the Colonial Construction of Religion. Between 1789 and 1832, the Orientalist fascination for the "cloud of fables" - according to William Jones, the 18th century Indian historian - embodied in Vedic literature was replaced by the East India Company-backed intelligentsia who were preoccupied with utilitarian criticisms of the "sinister principles" of the same, depicted nowhere more vividly than in the works of James Mill and Thomas Macaulay. Pennington argues that the modern avatar of the somewhat homogenized ancient religion that can be loosely termed Hinduism is a direct reaction to such seething and degrading criticism from the colonial academics, some of it indeed valid (such as vilifying the sati tradition - the traditional Hindu practice of a widow immolating herself on her husband's funeral pyre). He argues that the elites within Hindu society entered a "dialectical space" with colonialism, thereby producing a defensive self-determined version of their faith. While celebrating colonial promotion of certain scriptures, they vehemently opposed stereotyping, as can be seen in the outcry among the Bengali educated middle classes over the label of the effeminate babu. This similar dialectic process was behind the rise of Hindu nationalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, as well as behind the progress made by the Hindutva movement of the late 1990s. Nevertheless, Pennington refuses to present the colonial state with the credit of transforming "fragmented, disparate, localized, particularistic and ever-changing mini traditions" into a world religion. Whereas "Indophoebia" and the "racist science" of the 19th century did indeed contribute substantially toward the development of a defensive definition of Hinduism, crediting the state with the invention of Hinduism as we know it is ignoring the "mess of encounters" that can better explain this development. Whereas literary critic Edward Said accused the West of essentializing the East, the opposite argument is also true. Pennington makes a distinction between various classes of Hinduism's "other", and argues that class, nationality, outlook and background of the actors on the ground made the encounters between, say, a missionary and a peasant much different from that between a colonial academic and a local historian. What follows from the importance of the nature of the "other" is the fundamental significance of religious values in this discourse, discarded by many schools of historians preferring to focus solely on socio-economic trends. Pennington associates himself with Partha Chatterjee who wrote in the first volume of the Subaltern Studies about the various ways in which the downtrodden communities often express themselves in the form of their religion. This is also seen in the works of David Hardiman on Adivasis or indigenous people in western India, as well as that of Saurabh Dube on the Satnamis of central India. Pennington uses a relatively small number of first-hand sources, but adheres closely to them. The archives of the Church Missionary Society reveal the attitudes of missionaries toward evangelizing the natives, an attitude advocated by many including Charles Grant, the Scottish politician, and Wilberforce. On the other hand, the transformation in colonial attitudes can be seen in the archives of the Asiatick Researches, which gradually gets taken over by colonial influences, sidelining the Orientalists. He also dwells on the religious newspaper Samacar Chandrika published by Bhabanicaran Bandyopadhyaya, which took on the task to refute much of the essentialism dished out by colonial literature. However, all of this does strengthen the author's point about the importance of religion, explicit or implicit, in colonial policy-making. Two questions beg to be answered by Pennington. First, he says nothing about the crude distinction made by the colonial state between "martial" and "non-martial" races in the subcontinent, and the various categories of castes it defined. Such essentialization went a long way toward complicating the already juxtaposed threads of Hinduism, and much of that legacy exists to this day. Moreover, whereas the colonial state may not have explicitly defined Hinduism, its criticisms of the same nevertheless led to Hindu nationalism adopting a very homogenous and essentially narrow view of Hinduism. As Amartya Sen has argued in his recent work The Argumentative Indian, Hinduism is simply too diverse to speak of in one single breath. Therefore, the prevalent definition of Hinduism (as in the stereotype used in the public domain today) may well have been invented during the high noon of colonialism. Second, Pennington argues that there is increasingly a "need of structuring the relationship of religion and the nation state". This contemporary universal "need" can be readily questioned if one looks at secular Europe and India. Debates about race relations in Britain and France, and that of minority reservations in India are more to do with social exclusion and opportunities rather than any concerns about delineating the contours of state and religion. A more relevant discussion is the Middle East, where Islam and the nation state remain problematically juxtaposed. However, Pennington is in need of recognizing the "essence" of Hindu philosophical writings during times much before his book covers, but which can indeed be a useful apparatus to determine the role of the state vis-a-vis religion. The image of the Brahmin holding the sveta-chattra (white umbrella) over the king was never involved in the analytical modus operandi of the colonial state while defining Hinduism. On the larger question of whether contemporary Hinduism was invented, Pennington seems to adopt a persuasive argument. Whether there exists an alternative and distinct definition is a question that he leaves unexplored. Was Hinduism Invented? Britons, Indians and the Colonial Construction of Religion by Brian K Pennington. Oxford University Press, April, 2005. ISBN 0195166558, hardback. Price:$45, 260 pages. Aruni Mukherjee is based at the University of Warwick, England. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ 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/ 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/