Harsh Kapoor
Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:41:06 -0700
South Asia Citizens Wire | October 27-28, 2006 | Dispatch No. 2313 [1] India-Pakistan 'talkathon'- Mutual distrust (M B Naqvi) [2] Sri Lanka: Government and Tamil Tigers Must Address Civilian Protection (HRW) [3] India: An Appeal to Save a Life of Mohammad Afzal Guru, on the Death Row in India (i) Letter by Anuradha Bhasin (ii) Why the President of India must intervene in Afzal Guroo's Case (Tapan Kumar Bose) (iii) Murder, we said (Jug Suraiya) [4] India: Q&A: 'New Delhi has ignored our peaceful struggle' (Sharmila Interview) [5] India: Gujarat as another country - The making and reality of a fascist realm (Prashant Jha) [6] India: Supreme Court notice to EC on electoral rolls [7] Upcoming Events: Debating on 'Capital Punishment Justice or Failure of Justice' (New Delhi) ____ [1] Deccan Herald 28 October 2006 INDIA-PAKISTAN 'TALKATHON' Mutual distrust by M B Naqvi The people should fight against fake patriots who are interested in militarisation, tyranny and backwardness. The India-Pakistan dialogue was relaunched by President Musharraf and Premier Manmohan Singh in Havana in September for the fourth time. This round will again begin by Foreign Secretaries' meeting on November 14. Obviously the pace remains slow. Recent background has damped hope and expectation. The tenor of relations has been marked by increased mutual mistrust. Also, US-Pakistan relations have come under a cloud. Pakistan is deepening its relationship with China in a fashion that America does not like who are now wary and suspicious of Pakistan. Pakistan's only policy maker, Musharraf, has not made a secret of his spleen vis-à-vis India and its leadership, including Dr. Manmohan Singh. How does one expect good results from the dialogue, when the Indian leadership constantly complains of Pakistan-inspired terrorism and suspects Musharraf's designs? This dialogue does not seem to result from awareness in either country that its best interests will be served by better relations between the two countries. This dialogue seems to be a charade: neither side believes that the other is ready to change its national course to enable both sides to cooperate at a growing pace for common ends and to become reconciled friends for achieving good and great things together. In all agreements since the Shimla accord the operative word has been normalisation of relations (normal intercourse between any two nation-states). Nothing more has been envisaged since 1972. The words 'rapprochement' and 'friendship' have been absent as goals from operative parts of any document. Normalisation as a goal is not inspiring enough to change one's national objectives or to expect the other side to change its objectives? Both sides continue believing that the other is an inveterate enemy and will never change. Change in Indo-Pak relations will only come when national politics in both countries changes and the mistrust of each other diminishes. Look at the two governments national security agenda. They are constantly accelerating the arms race that aim at doing the maximum damage to the 'enemy' - the enemy actually being Pakistan for India and India for Pakistan. The race now includes atomic weapons and missiles that are being constantly increased and enhanced in their destructiveness. Missiles of both will take four to seven minutes to reach their targets. Which government can trust the other? It is remarkable that there is no party or leader in either country that stands mainly for friendship and cooperation with neighbours and has a vision for this growth, while there are far too many who thrive on demonising the other parties to the dialogue, have unfriendly designs and tactical stances. There is the folly of assigning no place to nukes in the menu of disputes, except as a secondary problem for foreign Secretaries to discuss. Both sides tacitly accept that they can go on doing what they are doing and all that may be required is some CBMs - a grave mistake. This will not work. As for tactical stances, the Pakistani rulers expect that by managing Mujahideen's pressure with new formulas of Musharraf diplomacy, they can inveigle India into solving the Kashmir dispute. The Indians think while they keep Pakistan engaged in a talkathon on Kashmir, they can move rapidly toward free trade and economic cooperation, the perceived interests of Indian leadership. It is remarkable that neither side is seriously interested in people-to-people contacts by easing the visa regime. Security establishments in both countries regard ordinary citizens of the other country as security risks. Aren't there people who have the vision of a closely knit South Asia developing together, as the West Europeans have done, and who abhor nuclear weapons or power politics of great powers and who are not for taking advantage at whosoever's expense? There are many such people in all South Asian countries. But they are too few and scattered. Vested interests - governments and the industrial-military complex - are more interested in exploiting the Indo-Pakistan animosity to promote militarism in both countries. That earns them influence and money.Why discuss what South Asians are losing by the absence of the 'vision thing'? Factually, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and, in many ways, Sri Lanka and Nepal are partners of the US. None of them, however, is in a position to influence American policy and purpose. The Americans, on the other hand, constantly influence these governments and their politics. Meaning of honourable conduct in international affairs seems to have changed. Now politicians seek 'pragmatic' courses - and this pragmatism has nothing to do with the philosophical school of the same name - that are indistinguishable from opportunism. But all is not lost. There are enough people of good sense and who will want honourable relationships in South Asia. True, the weight of history hangs heavy on the politics of this region. But good people need to come together and start a struggle against fake patriotisms of those who want their states to remain mired in militarisation, tyranny and backwardness. The task is difficult but is worth doing. ____ [2] Human Rights Watch 25 October 2006 http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/10/25/slanka14454.htm SRI LANKA: GOVERNMENT AND TAMIL TIGERS MUST ADDRESS CIVILIAN PROTECTION IN TALKS (Geneva, October 26, 2006) - The resumption of talks between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) presents an opportunity for both sides to endorse measures that will ensure greater civilian protection and end the rampant and widespread abuses of human rights in the country, Human Rights Watch said today. Talks between the government and the LTTE are scheduled in Geneva on October 28-29. In letters sent today to Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapakse and to LTTE political head S.P. Tamilselvan, Human Rights Watch expressed its deep concern for the ongoing human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law committed by both sides since the renewal of major hostilities this year. "The rapid escalation of abuses shows the urgent need for the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE to abide by international law, hold accountable those responsible for abuses, and support international human rights monitors on the ground," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The Geneva talks present an opportunity for both sides to put such commitments on the table." Human Rights Watch called on the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE, regardless of how the talks in Geneva develop, to institute concrete measures to protect civilians. The government and the LTTE should: * Designate demilitarized zones as sanctuaries in conflict areas and pre-position humanitarian relief in known places of refuge; * Improve humanitarian access to populations at risk, including by ending unnecessary restrictions on humanitarian agencies; * Whenever possible, provide effective advance warning of military operations, both broadly - through loudspeakers, radio announcements or leaflets - and directly through messages to community leaders; * Appoint local civilian liaison officers who are known and accessible to local communities and have sufficient rank to ensure that community concerns are heeded; and, * Agree to the establishment of a United Nations human rights monitoring mission in Sri Lanka, as the extent of abuses and ongoing impunity require an international presence to monitor abuses by all sides. In the letters, Human Rights Watch expressed concern that the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement and the resulting Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission gave inadequate attention to human rights issues. Large-scale hostilities largely ceased from 2002 until mid-2006, but serious rights abuses, including numerous killings and abductions, continued. The failure to fully incorporate human rights concerns into the ceasefire process was a contributing factor to the renewal of major hostilities in July, Human Rights Watch said. In September, Human Rights Watch issued a report, "Improving Civilian Protection in Sri Lanka," that described recent abuses implicating government and LTTE forces and made 34 recommendations to improve civilian protection. "Should the Geneva talks result in negotiations for a long-term settlement, human rights must be an integral component," said Adams. "But whatever the outcome of those talks, both sides should urgently implement measures to improve the protection of the civilian population." _____ [3] [27 October 2006] AN APPEAL TO SAVE A LIFE OF MOHAMMAD AFZAL GURU, ON THE DEATH ROW IN INDIA I am forwarding a letter from Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal, Executive Editor of Kashmir Times, one of the oldest daily news papers of Jammu and Kashmir. Anuradha has shared her concern about how the Intelligence Bureau and other agencies are trying to plant 'stories' in the media which support the hanging of Mohammad Afzal Guru, an accused in the December 2001 armed attack on Indian Parliament. As you may be aware that Afzal Guru and the three other accused were sentenced to death by the trial court. While exonerating two of the accused, S.A.R.Geelani and Ms. Afsan Guru, the Supreme court commented the death sentence on the third accused Saukat Guru. However, the Supreme Court had confirmed the death sentence on Afzal on the 'ground of abatement of murder'. While the right-wing political parties and the Hindu nationalists have been asking for execution of the death sentence, many in India have opposed it. Several leading newspapers have published editorials opposing 'death sentence' some have also expresses serious reservation about manner the police had put together the case, leaving several questions about serious lapses in the security of the Parliament unanswered. I request you to read Anuradha's letter and take steps to counter the campaign of the Intelligence agencies by writing to the President of India. The postal address and e-mail of President of India is given below. In solidarity Tapan Kumar Bose South Asia Forum for Human Rights Please write to: The President of India Rashtrapati Bhawan New Delhi 110001 India E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] LETTER FROM ANURADHA JAMWAL BHASIN Dear friends, The Indian belligerence and the Hindutava's hate soaked propaganda on Afzal Guru issue is already well known and needs a consistent and united campaign to tackle. The more the campaign builds up, the state, as nation-states are expected to do, will think of innovative ways to counter these campaigns. I don't know how many of you are aware of the Intelligence Bureau or Home Ministry again making attempts to use media as a tool. I am concerned by the stories doing rounds (I have received them for publication and obviously rejected these) that Intelligence Bureau is particularly concerned by Afzal Guru case and has recommended that his mercy petition be dispensed with immediately. These stories state that the IB fears that "terrorists may hold some VVIP or his her kin hostage to bargain for Afzal Guru." One of the stories doing rounds also includes Sonia Gandhi and on this basis an official chopper for her has also been justified. The stories also seek to justify the pre-poned execution of Maqbool Bhat who was hanged in a hurry when an attempt to kidnap Indian diplomat was foiled. It may not be long before these stories become part of the media propaganda. And this, I fear, would be a double edged sword. For the government, perhaps, a heads I win, tails you lose situation. If these stories become part of popular modern folk lore, the government may use it to build a campaign in favour of death penalty. But since there is no other rational argument to support capital punishment in this case, this ploy may or may not finally work. But I am wondering - could this be used as a weapon by those who want to cover up for the mystery of parliament attack stage a drama of getting him released in lieu of some hostage? We don't know who was behind the attack on parliament? Jaish? Lashkar? STF? So, if at all, any kind of a kidnapping is being planned to barter for Afzal Guru, would we ever know who is behind that? Would we ever know Afzal Guru's whereabouts if at all he is released in that barter? Would he remain alive in either case? And, more importantly, would any of us know how or why the attack on parliament took place? Anuradha Bhasin Jamwal Executive editor Kashmir Times A NOTE ON WHY THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA MUST INTERVENE IN AFZAL GUROO'S CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE by Tapan Kumar Bose While pronouncing its judgment the Supreme Court said that persons like Afzal Guroo deserve to die. The question that arises is whether killing Afzal will take us nearer to the objective of ending violence and 'terrorism'. The evidence from all over the world shows that executing 'violent criminals' has failed to cleanse the society of violence. The state of Texas executes the highest number of persons in the USA and has the worst record of violent crimes. As the aftermath of hanging Maqbool Bhat shows, hanging Afzal will certainly not create the desired impact of ending militancy. Aa we know, all the four accused of the Parliament attack case, Afzal, Geelani, Saukat and Afsan were tried under POTA, a law that prescribes harsh punishment. POTA does not prescribe death sentence for those who were not the actual perpetrators of the act of terror. Afzal, like the three other accused was nowhere near the Parliament when the attack was mounted. However, the Supreme Court, which exonerated Geelani and Afsan Guroo, and commuted Saukat's death sentence to life imprisonment decided to sentence Afzal to death by falling back on Indian Penal Code, charging him with abetting murder to justify his death sentence. In fairness the same principle of POTA, which was applied to the other three accused should have been applied to Afzal. Even under Section 121A of IPC the punishment for conspiracy to wage war against the state, which is the only charge attributed to Afzal through out the trial, the maximum punishment is life imprisonment. If 'Execution' is based on the principle that some persons are irredeemable, does Afzal fall in that category? Does his behaviour during the trial show a 'black soul'? The trial records indicate that Afzal voluntarily confessed to assisting Mohammad who led the armed attack on the Parliament. It is only through his statement that we learn that he had brought Mohammad to Delhi and set him up. Afzal told the court about his trip to Muzaffarabad for training in militancy. He talked of his disillusionment with militancy and his surrender to the Border Security Force. He talked about his efforts to 'return' to 'normal' life opening a medicine shop, getting married and becoming a father. He also told the court how at different stages, the Special Task Force (STF) had compelled him to spy on his neighbours and friends, name other militants and when he failed, arrested him and tortured him, threatened to implicate him into cases of killings, extracted money from his family for his 'release' and final forced him to join the so called Special Operations Group (SOG). Afzal's life story is a sad commentary on the counter insurgency policy of the Indian state. Instead of helping him to be resettled in life, the STF forced him to become a 'spy' and a 'foot soldier' of counter insurgency. Instead of hanging Afzal, should we not ask as to why the STF harassed him so much that he was forced to close down the medicine shop he had opened and abandon his hope to settle down after his marriage and lead a middle class life with his wife and his child. Afzal told the court that it was at the STF camp that he had met one Tariq, who forced him to bring to Delhi Mohammad, one of the perpetrators of the attack on the Parliament House. Tariq remains an absconding offender. Who was this Tariq? How did Tariq get access to STF camp? What was his connection with Mohammad? Was there any investigation to find Tariq and to learn the truth about of Afzal's statements before the court? During the trial, when his lawyer attempted to change the statement of a witness about Afzal accompanying Mohammad to his shop to buy the Ambassador car that was used in the attack on the Parliament, Afzal intervened to say that the witness was speaking the truth. The court believed him then. But it did not believe him when he said that he was not aware of the real purpose for the purchase of the vehicle. According to records when Afzal was arrested in Srinagar on December 15, at about 10 a.m. the mobile phone number 9811489429 was sized from him. It has been claimed that Afzal used this phone to contact the mobile phones recovered from the dead militants. The police claimed that they got the unique identifying IMEI number of the instrument that linked Afzal with the instrument at the time of seizure in Srinagar. However, while deposing on oath during the trail, the arresting officer of J & K police admitted that he had not opened the telephone instrument to check the IMEI number. This number is inscribed inside every mobile telephone. No one can see it without opening the back of he instrument. Obviously the IMEI number of the instrument, which has been attributed to Afzal, was added to the record later. Strangely, the SIM card of this instrument was also never produced. Yet the record of calls fro this phone was produced to link Afzal with the militants. According to the investigation team, amongst the telephone numbers recovered from the three mobile phone instruments recovered fro the dead militants, they came across a telephone number belonging to Dubai. It has also been stated that one of the militants had called this number just about two minutes before they mounted the assault on the Parliament. Strange as it may sound, the investigating team did not bother to find out anything about the Dubai telephone number. Yet they found it important to interrogate Hindi film actor Ms. Priety Zinta whose e-mail address was found inside the pocket of one of the dead militants. Recently, Indian newspapers published pictures of the widows of the two dead policemen killed in the attack on parliament house. The women had petitioned the President asking him not to commute the death sentence on Afzal. One widow was quoted asking why Afzal's wife Tabassum's plea for saving her husband's life be granted, when her husban was killed in the attack on the Parliament. We share the grief of the women who lost their husbands to violence, however, the principle of an eye for an eye and a life for a life cannot be the basis for dispensing justice in India. The tradition in India has been never to award the death penalty to a person who though a conspirator, did not directly participate in the actual commission of the act. In case of Kehar Singh, an accused in Indira Gandhi's murder case this tradition was breached. In Kehar Singh's case while awarding him the death sentence, the Supreme Court held that under Article 72 of the Constitution for commutation the President had the power to re-apprise the entire evidence and come to a different conclusion, even on guilt. The doubts raised on the facts above should attract the President's scrutiny to see whether Afzal should be hung. This review of the judgment by the President is not a derogation of the verdict of the Supreme Court. Tapan Kumar Bose South Asia Forum for Human Rights 3/23 Shree Darbar Tole, Patan Dhoka, (Near Lalitpur Zila Hulak Office) Lalitpur, Nepal Tel: +977-1-5541026, Fax: +977-1-5527852 o o o The Times of India MURDER, WE SAID by Jug Suraiya If there were to be a national referendum on whether Mohammad Afzal, the convicted conspirator in the terrorist attack on Parliament, ought to be hanged or not, which way would you vote, yes or no? How would you vote in the case of Santosh Singh, convicted of raping and killing Priyadarshini Mattoo? Or on the fate of Sanjay Das, the Delhi domestic servant who attacked three children, killing one aged four? As different as these cases are, they have one thing in common: the possibi-lity of incurring the death penalty. This raises several questions about our response to what is euphemistically referred to as capital punishment and which is really the premeditated revenge-killing of a human being. In other words, state-sponsored murder. Do we, as individual citizens, endorse this act? If we do, then we must accept the responsibility of being accomplices in an intrinsically criminal act speciously legitimised by the state to preserve and protect its sovereign monopoly on the use of lethal violence: if you kill someone it's a crime; if the state kills you for killing someone, it's the due process of law. Can and ought any state which calls itself democratic have such an unqualified and unquestioned right, which necessarily includes the right to make each one of us into witting or unwitting accessories to the taking of human life? [. . .] The smell of blood is overwhelmed by the odour of vengeful sanctity. The president may or may not grant clemency to Afzal, or to the others currently on death row. But ought we to grant clemency not only to them, but by the same token to ourselves as well? The choice, and the vote, is ours. Not in any official public referendum, but in the private plebiscite of our individual consciences. Should we vote for collective murder, or for that shared commonality in ourselves that we call humanity? FULL TEXT AT: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/131731.cms _____ [4] The Times of India 26 Oct, 2006 Q&A: 'NEW DELHI HAS IGNORED OUR PEACEFUL STRUGGLE' Gandhigiri may have captured the imagination of the people, but the government of India has refused to engage with Irom Sharmila's epic struggle for justice. Sharmila, an activist and poet in her 30s, has been on a hunger strike for the past six years in Imphal, Manipur. She wants the draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 to be repealed. This controversial Act has been enforced in large parts of the north-east. It gives the armed forces excessive powers over civilians even at the expense of basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Sharmila, who arrived in New Delhi to continue her strike, was arrested and shifted to AIIMS. She spoke to Amrith Lal about her non-violent struggle for peace and justice: Why are you on hunger strike? I don't have the physical or financial power to fight the Indian state. A shocking incident in a Manipur village prompted me to go on hunger strike. (Sharmila had gone to Malom village on November 2, 2000, to attend a meeting called to organise a peace rally. The same day a convoy of Assam Rifles was attacked by insurgents. The soldiers returned fire killing 10 people who were waiting for a bus. Sharmila began her fast the same day.) Do you have the support of mainstream political parties? None. If I had their support, I would not have had to wage this struggle for so long. They have been adamant in maintaining the status quo in Manipur. But now the world is getting to know about our struggle. Every time a lower court releases me, the government orders a rearrest. The charge is always the same: attempt to suicide. I have been given fluids through artificial means. It is with great difficulty that I came to Delhi. A few human rights activists smuggled me out of the hospital and took me to the airport. I boarded the flight as I S Chanu. There was a central minister travelling in the flight. So all the officials were busy attending to him. It was my golden chance to escape. I came to Delhi because this is the seat of the central government. For the last six years, the Centre has been avoiding this most peaceful struggle. There is a sense of sin in their (ministers and officials) minds about the inaction. How would you like others to respond to your struggle? We want the support and solidarity of everybody. I don't know how I should put it. This is a struggle of the whole humanity and civili-sation. It should be taken up by the entire country. Politicians see politics as a business. My struggle is to change their corrupted minds. I am optimistic about my struggle. Do you still write poetry? An Imphal-based NGO will soon publish a collection of my Manipuri poems. There are 70 of them, some of them very long. I even wrote one recently about my first experience of travelling in a plane. _____ [5] Himal South Asian October 2006 Cover story GUJARAT AS ANOTHER COUNTRY THE MAKING AND REALITY OF A FASCIST REALM At a time when a progressive patina is being painted over the rule of Chief Minister Narendra Modi, a reporter visiting Gujarat four years and six months after the pogroms finds a state where Muslims are being thrust forcibly into ghettos. The trauma of the butchery is as raw as ever. The active participation of the Hindu middle class in Modi's agenda, and the silence of the few who think otherwise, will guarantee the social and moral poverty of all Gujarat, even as it secedes from the rest of Indian society. Meanwhile, the wilful turn of the communal wheel will deliver radicalised militants and, thereby, a further marginalisation of Muslims. The Gujarat of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi has become unrecognisable. Nothing short of a massive social movement is required to cleanse the state of Gujarat. Text and photographs by Prashant Jha Ahmedabad is a divided city. On one side resides fear and anxiety, helplessness and anger. Walk across Jamalpur, Mirzapur, Dani Limda, Kalopur, Lal Darwaza and other parts of the Walled City. Go to Juhapura - one of the largest Muslim ghettos in India. Scratch a little, and people want to talk. An entire community feels under attack, with many resigned to their newfound fate of being second-class citizens. Rights are negligible, and the sense of representation non-existent. What remains strong is the cry for justice, and the knowledge they will not get it - not in Gujarat. Why? "Because", explains one elder in Shah Alam, "we pray to Allah. That is our transgression." There are the borders everywhere. A patch of road, a wall, a turn across a street corner, a divider in the middle of a road - this is all it takes to polarise and segregate communities throughout Gujarat. Each town and city now has countless borders, forcibly making people conscious of their religious identity. Me Hindu, you Muslim. Or one could look at it differently: the borders on the ground merely reflect and reinforce the polarisation that has already taken place in the minds of ordinary Gujaratis. [. . .] AMI VITALE What led to such a situation? The Hinduisation of Gujarat has surprised many observers: this is a region that had a pluralist culture; the people are driven largely by a mercantile ethos; it did not undergo the troubled Partition experience as intensely as did some other states; and, despite being a border state, it does not have any special reason to harbour intense bitterness towards Pakistan, a fact that could have led to animosity towards Muslims within. Instead, the answer perhaps lies in its political evolution and economic competition. If the state is now considered the lab of Hindutva, a century ago a British ethnographer is said to have termed the state the 'laboratory of Indian casteism'. After Gujarat became a state in 1960, carved out from the then state of Bombay, the Brahmans, Vanias and Patidars held sway over the political structure. This hegemony was broken in 1980 with the Congress's KHAM formula, which encompassed the Kshatriya, Harijan, Adivasi and Muslim. The erstwhile ruling-castes retaliated, initially by instigating caste conflict. But they soon realised that the 'lower' castes could not be discarded, and thus began attempting to carve out a broader Hindu coalition where the 'enemy' would not be the Dalit, but the Muslim. Sections of Dalits and Adivasis were slowly co-opted into the Hindutva-guided system, induced with promises of upward mobility and enhanced status, along with other political and economic dividends. The BJP also seemed like an attractive alternative to these groups because, despite voting for the Congress for five long decades, they had little to show in terms of improvement in livelihood. These developments in Gujarat took place at a time when the Hindutva forces were consolidating themselves at a pan-India level through the late 1980s and 1990s. The significant organisational work put in by the Sangh Parivar in Gujarat over the previous two decades bore fruit, creating a political base for the BJP that spanned across all sections of society. "While we were writing op-ed pieces and organising college protests against communalism, they were distributing millions of leaflets all over and building a base on the ground," says an introspective Shabnam Hashmi, who runs ANHAD, an NGO that works to build communal harmony. The decline of textile mills, especially in Ahmedabad, destroyed common employment spaces shared by working-class Hindus and Muslims. These changes created an unemployed segment of society looking for a cause, and this provided the foot-soldiers of the Hindutva movement. There are some other specificities of Gujarati society that made the polarisation easier here than elsewhere. For example, the fact that Gujarati Hindus are publicly and obsessively vegetarian has helped to create a visible marker of difference with the Muslims. First, this creates a social barrier in and of itself, and makes it possible for Hindutva outfits to capitalise on the matter of cow slaughter by Muslims. '100 percent vegetarian' restaurants crowd the market streets of Hindu Ahmedabad, and the very fact that Hindus and Muslims rarely dine together in restaurants drastically reduces the possibilities of social engagement. Mani Chowk border, Ahmedabad While the chief agent of the polarisation was the Hindu middle class, it found its natural ally in the Non-Resident Gujarati. This group constitutes an extremely prosperous section of the Indian diaspora overseas, and flushes the RSS and its affiliates with enormous sums of money. Supporting this dynamic have been the various religious sects and preachers who crowd the spiritual market in Gujarat, as well as large and influential sections of the Gujarati-language press. The trading culture of Gujarat might have created a pluralist, inclusive environment in the past, but the economic advantages of social cohesion seem to have been sacrificed at the altar of Hindutva. In fact, the relative affluence and stability of the economy is one reason why - based on Hindutva propaganda - a large section of the middle class veered towards religious chauvinism. The well-off had another reason to join the Hindutva bandwagon. They saw it as an opportunity to push their Muslim economic competitors into a corner with hate propaganda. Economics played a critical role during the pogrom in 2002, when those Hindus on the rampage were keen to destroy the property of some of their rivals. It did not help that, unlike some others states of India, Gujarat does not have a tradition of left, Dalit or even progressive student movements - which not only provided space to the Hindutva campaign, but also ensured that there was no culture of protest. Muslims constitute around nine percent of the state's population, but have never had an effective political voice, as they do in UP or Bihar - another reason why the Hindu Right could so easily ride roughshod over their basic rights. The Congress Party, since the 1970s and through the 1980s, had taken the easy way out to win the Muslim vote, by encouraging conservative elements among them; it also protected certain hardened criminals who happened to be Muslims. The Sangh Parivar cleverly used this as a pretext to convince the Hindus in Gujarat that minorities were being appeased at their cost. While Muslims were and are being targeted elsewhere in India as well, these factors have combined to create a rather unique situation in Gujarat. One-man state The critical state support for communal extremism following the rise of Narendra Modi, the fact that a large section of Hindu society harbours extremist notions about Muslims, and the absence of an effective political opposition to this discourse makes Gujarat stand out in the broader Indian context. Fortunately, the particular mix of societal factors that have made Gujarat 'another country' - while they may exist in small areas elsewhere - do not come together at a statewide level anywhere else. Gujarat has gone into its extremist cocoon willingly and alone, and there is the hope and expectation that no other part of India will follow where Gujarat has gone. Sauyajya (R) and a friend. Hindutva catches them young. The elevation of Narendra Modi as chief minister in late 2001 has everything to do with what Gujarat has become. He provided the match to the communal powder-keg that the state had already become. Political psychologist Ashis Nandy (along with Achyut Yagnik) interviewed Modi in 1992, and Nandy has written about how he was left shaken by the experience. Emerging from the meeting, Nandy told Yagnik that Modi met all the criteria of an authoritarian personality, and was a clinical and classic case of a fascist. A decade later, that assessment proved correct, when Modi systematically engineered the carnage against Gujarat's Muslims. Faced with the outrage that engulfed India after the Gujarat massacres, rather than take a defensive approach, Narendra Modi has aggressively introduced a potent mixture of Gujarati parochialism and Hindutva to cement his political foundations. His trick has been to construct a four-fold binary - of the insider versus outsider, Gujarat versus Delhi, Gujarati media versus English media, and Hindu versus the 'pseudo-secularist'. Any criticism can be easily deflected by using this matrix. While manipulation of the mass mindset may have helped Modi turn vilification to advantage, in intervening elections at the state and local levels the image of the Hindutva ogre is something he has decided he can do without at present. This is because Modi has his vision firmly set on the national BJP leadership, for which he has now to coin a new image for himself - that of a strong, anti-terrorism leader, focused on development and good governance. And this explains the recent brand-building exercise to portray Gujarat as the most developed state in the country. Gujarat has always been a relatively prosperous state, and for Modi to try to hog credit for the traditional achievements of an entrepreneurial class seems excessive. If anything, Modi can be faulted for not being able to build substantially upon this base. Economists of varied hues have doubts about the idea of Gujarat as a new economic haven, yet another of Modi's propositions as he tries to reposition his image. Investment in the state is largely restricted to a few large players pumping in huge amounts of money in capital-intensive units, which have little trickle-down effect. Gujarat has missed out on the new economy, with a weak Information Technology base and few of the outsourcing units that are all the rage in other successful states. In addition, the state's educational system is in a rut, the crucial local co-operatives are riddled with scams and divisions, and the state is quickly slipping on the human development index scale. The idea of Modi as a good administrator, too, is a bogey that has its roots in his strong-leader image. In interacting directly with the state's far-flung hierarchy, he has been accused of undercutting the authority of ministers and legislators alike. Modi can be ruthlessly efficient, but only when he wants to see results in his pet projects. "His is the efficiency of the emergency era. This fear-induced work culture is not sustainable, because it is weakening public institutions. Gujarat has become a one-man state," says Javed Chowdhury, a former bureaucrat of the Gujarat cadre. The good-management myth was severely bruised with the late-August floods in Surat, which were entirely due to faulty dam-water management by the state administration. What Modi's dictatorial style of functioning has done is to create massive dissension within his own party, as well as in the broader Hindutva parivar. But while that may somewhat upset Modi's own political trajectory, it has had little impact on Gujarat's communalism. The dissidents are more radically 'Hindu' than even Modi. Their differences with him are about power and patronage - not about Hindutva. One of the reasons the Gujarati political discourse has been so completely captured by the saffron agenda is the abject political and ideological surrender of the Congress party. Flirting with a variety of soft Hindutva itself, the party's Gujarat unit has decided not to take on Modi's fascist state directly. Congress workers, after all, were also part of the marauding mobs in 2002, and even today the party refuses to take up issues of discrimination against Muslims publicly. This has left Muslims despondent, but they have little choice. Usmanbhai Sheikh, a Muslim activist in Ahmedabad, explains: "Congress treats us like its mistress, knowing we cannot turn elsewhere." But the Modi government is not invincible. If the Congress is able to put together a proactive, secular agenda, and consolidate an alliance between Dalits, Adivasis and Muslims, it has a good chance of ousting the chief minister and his party, and of reversing his divisive agenda. At the peak of polarisation during the 2002 assembly elections, after all, more than 50 percent of the population voted against Modi - a figure that would have to have included a substantial number of Hindus. A change in Gujarat's government would come as some relief, for the state would not be as active in engineering everyday hatred. But even if the Congress party state unit were to muster the energy to take on Modi, it is doubtful that this alone would help to restore a social fabric that has been left in tatters. The communalism in Gujarat has not only become deeply entrenched, it has become bolted to the plank of fascism. Politics-as-usual can hardly be the panacea; what is needed is a social movement for Gujarat to cleanse itself. Modified society It is early September. Baroda is tense. Its Muslims are scared. It is the last day of the Ganesh festival, when Hindus will take part in large processions before immersing their idols. Trouble is anticipated. Only four months ago, the demolition of a dargah had triggered riots here. Security has been beefed up across the city - the state government does not want another blemish on its record, at least not now. [. . .] When this reporter, with his longish beard, walked into an elite government colony in Ahmedabad to meet a senior official, three children suddenly got off their bicycles. One screamed aloud, "Terrorist!" Why? "Because you are a Mussalman," he responded. So? "All Muslims are terrorists. My father is a judge. He will call you terrorist in court." Really? "Yes. Now get out of here. This is a Hindu area!" Sauyajya is 12 years old and has not met a single Muslim in his life. No one knows how many Sauyajyas are in the making in Gujarat. FULL TEXT AT: http://himalmag.com/2006/october/cover_story.htm _____ [6] The Hindu 27 October 2006 SUPREME COURT NOTICE TO EC ON ELECTORAL ROLLS Legal Correspondent Publishing photos of Muslim women may wound sentiments: petitioner # Rolls should only be used for verification, says petitioner # They should not be circulated to the public, political parties New Delhi: The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Election Commission on a special leave petition (SLP) against a Madras High Court judgment upholding the Commission's decision to release electoral rolls with photographs of voters, including Muslim Gosha women. A Bench, comprising Justices K.G. Balakrishnan and D.K. Jain, issued notice to the Commission, the Union of India, the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary and the State Chief Electoral Officer after hearing senior counsel A.K. Ganguly, who contended that publishing photographs of Muslim Gosha women was opposed to their religious belief. The High Court, by its order dated September 7, dismissed a petition by M. Ajmal Khan a few days prior to the Madurai Central by-election, holding that wearing of `purdha' did not form part of Islam. Assailing the order, the petitioner said the SLP was not directed against any election process but against the Commission's powers to interfere with religious affairs, a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution. He submitted that Muslim voters were not questioning the Commission's authority in issuing photo identify cards, but their grievance was over its direction to print the photographs and circulate them with the electoral rolls to the public and political parties. Religious custom This decision interfered with the religious custom and preaching of the Holy Koran, which laid down that Muslim women should wear `purdha.' The petitioner submitted that the rolls should be used only by the officers concerned for verification, and they should not be circulated to the public and political parties. Their publication was likely to wound the sentiments of the Muslim community as there was every chance of misuse of the photographs, if the rolls were made accessible to unscrupulous persons. Important questions of law of public importance were involved in the SLP, which required determination by the apex court, he said, and sought quashing of the impugned order. _____ [7] Upcoming Events Debating Politics series on 'CAPITAL PUNISHMENT; JUSTICE OR FAILURE OF JUSTICE' speakers *Dr. Badri Raina Sonia Jabbar Ravi Nair* Venue : Seminar Room *Kirori Mal College * DelhiUniversity, North Campus Date : *27th October 2006* Time : *12:30 pm.* *Youth and Students' Forum* in collaboration with English Literary Society, KMC contact: 9871499738, 9871406533, 9210578165 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ 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. _______________________________________________ SACW mailing list SACW@insaf.net http://insaf.net/mailman/listinfo/sacw_insaf.net