South Asia Citizens Wire | March 15-16, 2007 | Dispatch No. 2378 - Year 9 [1] Pakistan: - Illegal removal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan) - Sacking of The Chief Judge (M.B Naqvi) - All too familiar a scene (Shamshad Ahmad) - Pakistan's 'isolated' president (Ahmed Rashid) [2] Sri Lanka: Armed groups infiltrating refugee camps (Amnesty International) [3] India-Pakistan: For signs of peace, look out for vultures (Jawed Naqvi) [4] Bush's Democracy Project in Bangladesh and Nepal (J. Sri Raman) [5] India's Unity in Diversity as a Question of Historical Perspective (Michael Gottlob) [6] Events: (i) meeting to commemorate the life and memory of Kethesh Loganathan (London, 31 March 2007) (ii) talk by Christophe Jaffrelot on Hindu Nationalism: Past and Present (New Delhi, April 3, 2007)
____ [1] Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Press Release Lahore, 9 March 2007 : ILLEGAL REMOVAL OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF PAKISTAN The removal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan is a bitter blow to the independence of the judiciary. Rumours were already circulating that the government was plotting to get rid of him. HRCP doubts that his removal was prompted because of any misuse of authority as such judicial practices are fully tolerated if not encouraged by the Executive. The process adopted is also illegal and irregular. A reference by itself cannot grant the Executive the powers to dismiss a judge of the superior courts. Such dismissal can only be acted upon after the Supreme Judicial Council decides on merit against the accused judge. The speed with which the Chief Justice of Pakistan has been removed shows that the Executive is nervous even of a very tame judiciary. It is significant that the Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court was flown to the capital in haste and in a chartered plane to secure a prompt decision from the Supreme Judicial Council. HRCP also denounces the government's decision to bypass Justice Bhagwandas on the basis of his religion. It may be pointed out that Justice Cornelius was a well respected Chief Justice of Pakistan and not left out in the cold because of his religion. HRCP warns that the institution of justice will decline rapidly and that the people will have no faith in the institutions of the country. Asma Jahangir Chairperson o o o Kashmir Times 15 March 2007 SACKING OF THE CHIEF JUDGE by M.B Naqvi The country's President called the country's Chief Justice to his palace for an explanation and the latter returned under escort and was confined to his residence incommunicado. What went on between the two is not be known. The President will make a reference to the Supreme Judicial Council and to investigate the alleged CJP's misconduct. In what did this misconduct lay has not been divulged, though planted stories tell the tale. The President does not like disorderly or disobedient persons; he has not made the formal inaugural speech of a new Parliament for three years running because he finds the deputies of the parliament disorderly. They shout; hoot, and refuse to listen to the august person in silence. On the other side was Iftikhar Chaudhry whose record is one of judicial activism. He did tread on many sensitive toes. He was given to taking suo motto notice of various happenings. Some of his judgements embarrassed the government. He was the person who ensured Mukhtaran Mai case was taken up, heard and in some way decided. Later she was enabled to travel abroad against the wishes of Gen. Musharraf who said she would defame Pakistan abroad and sully country's image. The suspended CJP had caused serious embarrassments to the government. He frustrated the sale of Pakistan Steel Mills, the largest industrial undertaking. He found this privatization to be non-transparent and public exchequer stood to suffer the loss of many billions of rupees. Then he became a pain in the neck for Authority in the cases of hundreds of Pakistan's citizens having disappeared, leaving no trail. It is widely known that they were picked up by intelligence agencies and have not been heard of again. Their families have been running from pillar to post without knowing whether their dear ones are either alive and where they might be. The CJP upbraded the government several times about why can't they find out where such people have disappeared. In one case, he even fined a Federal Secretary to the government. On the downside, it is said he loved protocol; he was abrasive; he treated lawyers sometimes not very politely; he liked to show off his power; and he had tried to place his policeman son into a better posting. There is no charge of any bribe-taking or other conduct unbecoming of a judge. The legal fraternity is of course in a state of shock. This is a direct assault on what remains of the independence of judiciary. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry thought nothing of embarrassing the government too many times for the sake of providing relief to unimportant people. He has been punished before the SJC has investigated and found him guilty. This is a disgrace to all citizens, not merely to the legal fraternity but also to all aware citizens. Now, most thinking Pakistanis can't raise their heads with pride. The image of the country is mud. Sacking and arresting a Chief Justice after a personal encounter is the most unexpected and ungracious thing to have happened. Most other dictators round the world have not done anything so blatantly. Pakistan is well provided for with evil geniuses to suggest some legal stratagem to get rid of this or that difficult person in a graceful manner. People ask what was the hurry. Naeem Bokhari, a lawyer from Lahore and a TV personality, wrote an open letter detailing various misdeeds of Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry. Although he later denied having written this letter, but the letter did go round the world under his name and is said to contain much of the charge sheet the government has sent to the SJC. That the Chief Justice was not toeing the government line and was careless about saying and giving judgements that the government did not like is the real reason why he was sacked. But even then the people would ask why now and why not a fortnight earlier or a month later. There is a telltale quasi-explanation. A particular writ has been filed with the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional vires of what the government is openly planning to do: it wants the President to be re-elected by the existing Assemblies a second time just before they are to die (completion of their tenure). The petition also mentions that the government is likely to postpone the election due this year. That too is undesirable. Also included in the impugned government intentions is that the President wishes to continue to remain Chief of the Army Staff indefinitely after being re-elected. How would the CJP have reacted to this petition? What would have been his judgement? This is a matter of great political importance for Musharraf and the system from he has devised. Could it be that Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry was not likely to take a line that would have satisfied President's desire? Now every citizen today feels diminished. The two highest officers of state are behaving in a manner that puts all of us in a bad light. This government is extra-sensitive about the image of the regime. Now, this particular action, so spectacular, should have been foreseen as something that would bring disrepute not only to this government and its shabby political system but also to Pakistan. This is of course not the first assault on the independence of higher judiciary. This has happened many times. Everyone knows of major constitutional cases in Pakistan's top court. It began with GG Ghulam Muhammad in 1953-54. In the latter year he sacked a sovereign Constituent Assembly on a charge of failing to perform its primary duty of writing a constitution for seven years although the man who did this was himself a creature of that Assembly. Sovereignty over Pakistan had been transferred to this Assembly as the representative of the Pakistani people. Ayub Khan tore up the first constitution, hurriedly written on the non-democratic principle of parity between the two unequal wings, barely two and a half years after it came into force. Then the former military chief and the self-appointed Field Marshal wrote a constitution for his own needs. Some people went to the top court and complained. The Chief Judge then, Justice Muhammad Muneer, gave a judgement that still resounds in the great halls of justice as the most disgraceful judgement ever delivered in Pakistan. A legal fiction was invented: state necessity required extra constitutional measures in extraordinary situation. It has served all dictators. That principle has provided a fig leaf behind which naked aggressions against the people of Pakistan by successive military chiefs. CJPs had been either cowardly or in cahoots with dictators. The top courts, to their shame, always upheld a military coup d'etat. It puts the higher judiciary to shame; in the area of darkness there shine a few exceptions who did not 'obey' the tyrants. Justice Chaudhry was the first CJP; earlier some individual judges said 'no' to arbitrary oaths. Most senior judges have failed. Some legal experts disgraced themselves by justifying extra-constitutional actions of freebooters. What view common citizens should take is a question that faces all thinking types. They cannot support it. What are the means available to oppose it: very few. The government of the day is not greatly bothered about the opinion of those who are not with it. They are being ignored and a few of them have disappeared. Many have been killed, some mysteriously, some openly. The systems downside is now in full display - what with the so many disappearances and other actions that are plainly non-democratic. There is nothing that an ordinary citizen can do because there are no strong political parties that would mobilize them and channelise the people's voice to some effect. o o o Dawn 14 March 2007 ALL TOO FAMILIAR A SCENE by Shamshad Ahmad 'FURY said to a mouse that he met in the house, "Let us both go to law. I will prosecute you - Come, I'll take no denial. We must have a trial; for really this morning, I've nothing to do." Said the mouse to the cur: "Such a trial, dear sir, with no jury or judge, would be wasting our breath." "I'll be judge, I'll be jury," Said cunning old Fury; I'll try the whole cause and condemn you to death.' -Lewis Carroll: Alice in Wonderland Another gauntlet has been thrown in the political minefield of our country. It is so déjà vu, and all too familiar a scene. But this time it is Pakistan's judiciary, which for half a century was used to legitimise the infamous "doctrine of necessity" to keep the generals in power, and which now itself faces the "music" with its chief adjudicator "abruptly" sent home in an unceremonious and precipitous manner. A television "whiz" kid from Lahore in an advocate's "cloak" was apparently chosen to be the Trojan horse in this agonising drama. Remember the myth of a wooden horse devised by the Greeks after their abortive 10-year siege of Troy as a ruse and a ploy to enter the city and overpower the unsuspecting and celebrating Trojans? The gates of the wooden horse have since opened and the Greeks have landed. . The Constitution Avenue in Islamabad is filled with fresh smog. Alas, Pakistan is once again in the throes of a new crisis. The man at the helm of the country's apex court had allegedly been "in the line of fire" for some time, and now stands in the mouth of the cannon. The media says he is under house arrest and incommunicado to the outside world. Pakistan's judiciary has been turned upside down strictly "in accordance with the Constitution." It is, however, the same constitution which has been trampled umpteen times in the past and is no more the same document as was adopted by an elected parliament of the country in 1973. Our constitution today is a magic basket with recipes for all tastes. Every one can use it as he likes. The government now cites Article 209 to justify its action against the ousted Chief Justice which it claims it took according to the law for "misuse of authority." The legal fraternity and political opponents of the government also cite the same article in support of their contention that the government acted "illegally and unconstitutionally." The said article of the Constitution is clear. If "on information received from the Supreme Judicial Council or from any other source, the President is of the opinion that a Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court, is incapable of properly performing the duties of his or her office by reason of physical or mental incapacity; or may have been guilty of misconduct, the President shall direct the council to inquire into the matter." Any action against a judge including his or her removal from office can be taken only in accordance with the findings of the Supreme Judicial Council. It is unequivocally stated in this article that a judge of a superior court "shall not be removed from office except as provided by this Article." The reference by the president to the Supreme Judicial Council is therefore within his prerogative, which he seems to have exercised on the advice of the prime minister. But there are serious questions being raised by the lawyers' community on the procedure followed in this case including on composition of the council. Things have been moving at an electronic pace as if someone was in haste. The announced Supreme Judicial Council has since held its first meeting within hours of the swearing-in of the new (acting) Chief Justice and after hearing the Attorney-general, scheduled the first hearing of the case yesterday (March 13). Meanwhile, conflicting views are being expressed by government ministers on the one hand and independent legal experts including some of the former chief justices and judges on the other. While the government maintains it acted according to the law, most legal experts insist the president does not have the powers for suspension or making a judge "non-functional". Constitutional experts in their print and electronic media commentaries have been stressing that no action except filing of a reference in the Supreme Judicial Council could be taken by the president until the report of the council was presented. The matter which also involves the question of "constitutional trichotomy" obviously now rests with the Supreme Judicial Council, and hopefully the judicial process as envisaged in the Constitution will take its course rightfully. The exact charges against the ousted Chief Justice have not been made public though speculations abound on whether these charges pertained primarily to the highly "controversial" letter written by a Lahore advocate or involved other more "serious" matters worthy of notice by the Supreme Judicial Council. The only other complaint so far made public was the statement by the Sindh chief minister expressing his "displeasure" with the Chief Justice in "certain" matters about which he claimed to have sent a complaint to the federal government. The common feeling out there on the street today is that the present action against the Chief Justice was "politically motivated" rather than taken on the basis of any real "acts" of "commission or omission." Nevertheless, since the matter is now sub judice before the highest legal and constitutional forum of the country, it would be premature and improper for any one to make any comment or judgement on this highly sensitive issue at this stage. Whatever the nature of the alleged charges of "misconduct" or "misuse of authority" against the Chief Justice, it would perhaps be best to leave them to be probed and judged by the constitutional body in accordance with its constitutional mandate. Perhaps, this is also a godsend opportunity for the government to do some in-depth "soul-searching" and some "stock-taking" of its own patterns of governance in which "misuse of authority" is galore. Gross abuse of power, frequent and protracted spells of military rule and poor and corrupt governance have not only cost us our entire independent statehood, but also left us with a dismal record of our "omissions and commissions" as a nation. Unsure of our future, we are still struggling through an identity crisis and personality "schizophrenia" tearing the nation apart with no common sense of purpose or unity. It is time we as a nation did some soul-searching to restore Pakistan's "raison d'etre" and to improve our image and standing in the comity of nations through a "civilianised" polity in which the "rule of law" reigns supreme. We must return to an authentic democratic order rooted in the will of the people, constitutional supremacy and institutional integrity. For a country, domestically as unstable and unpredictable as ours, there can be not many choices. In today's world, our options are limited. In the ultimate analysis, our problems are not external. Our problems are domestic. Putting our house in order is our topmost priority need. We need to overcome our domestic weaknesses through political reconciliation and national confidence-building. It is also time to rethink our combative approach and to wind down baneful domestic hostilities and inter-institutional clashes. Force or coercion will solve no problems. Grievances must be addressed through constitutional, political and economic means. We cannot afford any more tragedies and national debacles. These are exceptional times warranting exceptional responses to our problems. We must avoid reaching points of no return. Military operations in Balochistan and Waziristan are undermining the constitutional structure of our federation. Use of military power within a state and against its own people has never been an acceptable norm. It has often been proven as a recipe for intra-state implosions, a familiar scene in Africa. In our own country, we have had very bitter and tragic experiences in the past and must not repeat the same mistakes. In the context of the issues that now seem to have cropped up in the current "constitutional" crisis, it would be highly desirable for the government to establish a high-powered judicial or statutory body to review the cases of "commission and omission" on the part of all "constitutional office-holders" and political and public officials in every branch of the government, executive, judiciary, legislature. The bane of "misconduct" and "misuse of authority" is endemic to our entire system and must be addressed in a non-discriminatory manner. Corruption is most prevalent in our elitist and feudalised political class and civil-military establishment. One hopes the conduct and practices of our public dignitaries holding constitutional offices including the prime minister and the president will also be reviewed to ensure that there is no more "misuse of authority" and actions prejudicial to the dignity of their high offices. These include use of official planes and transport as well as the whole security and protocol paraphernalia for attending private wedding ceremonies, spring festivals, golf championships and political party meetings. The question of excessive protocol and security for VIP office-holders which is one of the stated "allegations" against the ousted Chief Justice needs to be rationalised and applied equally to the heads of executive, legislative and judiciary branches. If a prime minister or a chief minister can use a special plane and if an IG of a province can have a long motorcade, and if a corps commander can use a BMW, what is the fuss about the head of the judiciary?The "Marco Polo" culture at state expense needs to be given up. Pakistan's problems are in Pakistan, not in Washington or New York or in London, Brussels or Davos. No heads of state or government anywhere in the world, not even of the most affluent G-8 countries are seen travelling around the globe with such frequency and flair. Not a single penny of foreign investment, not an ounce of foreign goodwill and not an iota of Allah's blessings seem to have come to our beleaguered country from countless state and official visits and umrah junkets undertaken with large entourages of political "spongers" and morally bankrupt state-paid "pilgrims." Even their umrah robes to be worn in the House of Allah are provided at state expense. This is not only a blatant "abuse of authority" but also an abuse of the "faith" to which they all professedly claim to belong. Amazing things happen in Pakistan. Federal secretaries and provincial chief secretaries have been rewarded for their "services" with the same facilities and benefits including residential plots at state expense as admissible to the army's two and three-star generals. There could not be a worse case of abuse of power. This must be undone. The writer is a former foreign secretary. o o o PAKISTAN'S 'ISOLATED' PRESIDENT by Ahmed Rashid BBC: March 14, 2007 To many Pakistanis it seems that President Pervez Musharraf is becoming increasingly isolated. The latest headache comes in the shape of who have been staging rallies across the country in protest of what they see as his politically-motivated suspension of the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The sight of black-jacketed lawyers smattered in blood after clashes in Lahore with police does little for the image of Pakistan. But before this, there have been signs of Islamic extremism gaining strength. Ordinary citizens are complaining of worsening law and order. And Pakistan's relations with the United States, Europe and neighbouring countries are becoming more strained. Kalashnikov-wielding women This is an election year for President Musharraf. But two issues are threatening him. Pakistan is now the most fenced in nation in the world The first is the military's failure to assert the government's writ over large areas of the country and its refusal to tackle Islamic extremists head-on. The second development is the assertion of some extremists that they no longer recognise the legitimacy of the state and will only do so when an Islamic revolution takes place. Judges, soldiers, policemen, lawyers and ordinary women and children were the victims of a dozen suicide bombings by extremists in February. The authorities have made few arrests. In Islamabad, foreign diplomats were shocked when the government gave in to some 3,000 Kalashnikov-wielding militant women, who refused to evacuate a religious school that had been set for demolition because it had been built illegally. In the heart of the nation's capital the women refused to recognise any orders from the state. The cabinet was divided with some ministers, including the pro-Islamist right-wing Minister of Religious Affairs Ijaz ul Haq openly siding with the militant women. Meanwhile extremists are threatening female politicians. Law and order is breaking down in the major cities. Up to 200 crimes and robberies are being committed every a day in major cities - in Karachi the figures are double that. Much of the prevalent crime is committed by unemployed youth, who form gangs to steal cars, motor bikes and mobile phones. Public criticism Another blow to Pakistan's self-image came when most of the planes of the state-owned Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) were banned from landing in European Union capitals because of safety concerns. PIA officials and government ministers denied there was any problem. On the international front, Gen Musharraf's credibility is at stake as his commitment to deal with terrorism is being questioned by the US and leading Nato countries. On a five-hour visit to Islamabad on 26 February, US Vice President Dick Cheney warned the president about Pakistan's lack of action against Taleban and al-Qaeda leaders operating from its soil. In several packed hearings in the US Congress, retired US military officers and other American experts testified that Pakistan was deliberately harbouring the Taleban to use as a political card in Afghanistan. Nato countries not normally known for their public criticism of allies have been openly questioning Pakistan's continued commitment to the "war on terrorism". Meanwhile, Iran has become the latest country, after India and Afghanistan, to accuse it of interference in its internal affairs. In early March, Iranian leaders accused Pakistan of becoming a sanctuary for terrorists, after several Iranians were killed by militants who then fled across the border to Pakistan. Iran is also suspicious that Pakistan is supporting the US agenda of trying to create a Sunni alliance of Arab countries aimed at Shia Iran. Pakistan counters that Iran is helping the insurgency by rebels in Pakistani Balochistan. Pakistan is now the most fenced in nation in the world. Iran is now following India's example and erecting a fence on its border with Pakistan, while Islamabad wants to erect a fence on its border with Afghanistan. All these problems come ahead of polls in which Gen Musharraf wants to be re-elected for another five years by the current parliament, while continuing to remain army chief. Expectations of a free and fair elections are lowered daily as Gen Musharraf insists in public statements that people vote for his nominees, while newspapers report that the ubiquitous intelligence services are already interviewing prospective parliamentary candidates to ascertain their loyalty to the president. Pakistanis are used to military rulers prolonging their innings indefinitely and also to rigged elections. But what they are not used to is the growing rise of extremism around the country from the rugged mountains of Waziristan to the pristine avenues of Islamabad. For a country armed with nuclear weapons, ordinary people are getting scared of the future. _____ [2] AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PRESS RELEASE AI Index: ASA 37/007/2007 (Public) News Service No: 049 14 March 2007 SRI LANKA: ARMED GROUPS INFILTRATING REFUGEE CAMPS Armed groups, some identified as part of a breakaway group of Tamil Tigers known as the Karuna faction, are infiltrating camps for newly displaced people and abducting residents, according to sources known to Amnesty International. Tens of thousands of people have been fleeing their homes after intense fighting in the eastern region of Batticaloa over the weekend, pushing the number of displaced people to well over 120,000. "We are hearing reports of armed men, wearing the uniforms of the Karuna faction, roaming the camps and even distributing relief goods," said Purna Sen, Asia Pacific Direct at Amnesty International. "The Karuna faction appears to operate throughout Batticaloa town with the complicity of the Sri Lankan authorities." The military action of the Karuna faction in the east has increased violence and displacement. Analysts observe that the Sri Lankan Army tolerates its military camps as the Karuna faction has assisted in the Sri Lankan military campaign against the Tamil Tigers. "The people who have been forced to flee the fighting are in an extremely vulnerable position: they have left behind their livelihoods and their homes, they may not know the area and they are likely to be very scared. The government has a responsibility to ensure that camps are safe and civilian in nature -- it is unacceptable for men with guns to be wandering around as if they're in control." There have also been reports of armed men abducting young people from internally displaced people (IDP) camps. In one previously unreported incident on 9 March, a 15-year-old boy was approached by a white van as he waited for a bus at a temple near an IDP camp. Armed men tried to pull him into the van, but his struggling and screams attracted a crowd and the abductors fled. A witness said members of the Sri Lankan army watched the incident but did not step in to help the boy. Food shortages and overcrowding in the camps for displaced people are another concern and Amnesty International is calling on the government to ensure it provides food, water, housing and medical care to all those who have been displaced by the fighting. "As the fighting continues, we fear even more people will be forced to seek protection in the camps -- and basic necessities like food and water will be stretched even further," said Purna Sen. "The government must act now to ensure supplies can meet the increasing demand." Amnesty International is also concerned at reports of people who have been displaced being forced to resettle in the north of the country. Over the weekend displaced people were asked to leave Batticaloa to go to the north-eastern town of Muthur. Around 40 buses transported them away; some of the people apparently did not wish to go. In a welcome move, the Sri Lankan government invited the UN Secretary General's Representative on internally displaced people to visit at the opening of the UN Human Rights Council earlier this week. Given the humanitarian crisis, Amnesty International urges the government to allow the visit to take place as soon as possible. Background Recent fighting in Batticaloa has resulted in a significant increase in internally displaced people. Large numbers of people are seeking shelter and protection in areas controlled by the Sri Lankan Army (SLA) as the SLA continues to shell Tamil Tiger or 'uncleared' areas. Batticaloa already had 80,000 IDPs and 40,000 more are now seeking shelter. More than 250, 000 civilians have been displaced by the conflict since April 2006. In 2004, former Tamil Tiger commander Colonel Karuna broke away from the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) to form his own splinter group, Tamileel Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal, or People's Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (TMVP). A prominent TMVP sign welcoming people to Batticaloa stands opposite an Sri Lankan Army checkpoint on the lagoon. The TMVP is not a political party. Its military wing appears to be operating with the support of the Sri Lankan Army to challenge the LTTE. In the past year there have been increasing numbers of abductions of children for use as soldiers. Both the Tamil Tigers and the Karuna faction have been implicated. Public Document **************************************** For more information please call Amnesty International's press office in London, UK, on +44 20 7413 5566 Amnesty International, 1 Easton St., London WC1X 0DW. web: http://www.amnesty.org ______ [3] Dawn March 12, 2007 FOR SIGNS OF PEACE, LOOK OUT FOR VULTURES by Jawed Naqvi The opening line of the scarcely noticed press release issued after a second meeting of the India-Pakistan Joint Commission in New Delhi on February 21 said: "The working group on environment has discussed the decline in vulture population." Thus we got to know that one of six or eight working groups set up to take forward the tasks of the joint commission would look into the recent disappearance of the scavenger birds in India, Pakistan and possibly also in Nepal. The news was extremely comforting for at least two reasons. First, it was deeply reassuring that the two countries that had on several occasions threatened to annihilate each other's human population were expressing a shared concern for the survival of a raptor bird. Secondly, it was good to know that the two sides were beginning to look at life beyond their hatred of each other, a hatred that has taken them to the brink of nuclear war. The case of the disappearing vultures is pretty interesting. Scientists believe the phenomenon is due to toxic residues from a veterinary drug. Vultures which feed on the carcasses of livestock given diclofenac, an anti-inflammatory widely used on the subcontinent, build up such levels of the drug that they suffer kidney failure. This is what the French scientists, who have followed the problem, say. Ornithologists have for long been baffled by the steep decline (more than 95 per cent) of the numbers of the Oriental white-backed vulture (Gyps bengalensis), a bird that plays a vital link in the food chain, over the past decade. Once one of the commonest raptors on the Indian continent, the creature is now listed as critically endangered. The question is: If the bird is a critical part of nature's food chain, should the mystery surrounding its disappearance be allowed to elude us till the Kashmir issue is resolved? The simple answer is that one does not preclude the other.The veil of mutual mistrust still hangs heavily over the neighbours despite the shared concern for vultures. In fact, Pakistani officials say privately that the idea of the joint commission itself is an Indian ploy to focus on what they both believe are soft issues compared to the largely political matters that are discussed within the composite dialogue framework, a fourth round of which is due to be kicked off in Islamabad this week. A cursory look at the bouquet of issues broached at the joint commission's meeting in Delhi resembles subjects that are more appropriate for countries in the European Union or APEC. What is on the table are issues like environmental concerns and education and not the tired problems of territorial disputes and basic freedoms that are the typical concerns of South Asia, issues that should have been resolved years ago but have lingered for decades. Therefore, the question arises whether the problem areas outlined under the joint commission's mandate have an urgency of their own, or would they be taken up earnestly only after the core issues enshrined in the composite dialogue are first resolved. The question is tricky but the solutions are not intractable. What does the joint commission mandate the two countries to do? Unfortunately, in the hurly burly of headline-grabbing stories that followed the joint declaration on nuclear risk reduction, which came in tandem with the press release on the joint commission, it was natural that the so-called softer issues got buried. So what were the issues apart from the shared concern about missing vultures? The list is really impressive and should enthuse a lot of people. If the leaders of the two countries are true to their salt they should facilitate and not impede the agenda that they have themselves agreed to pursue. There is room for ornithologists from both countries to get involved in joint research on migratory water birds, for example. There is a proposal to jointly establish botanical gardens in Pakistan, sharing of experience in desert afforestation, general environment protection, including conservation and efficient use of energy resources. Would anyone at all object to such concerns? Similarly, there is a working group on Science and Technology. Its officials have discussed the subjects of medicinal plants, herbal medicines, biotechnology, renewable sources of energy and popularisation of science itself. Who could quarrel with the ideals of this group? Its interlocutors have suggested some probable ways of cooperation. These include joint workshops, seminars, exploratory visits, training and collaborative research. Tourism has been taken up as a separate issue in the joint commission. Possible areas for cooperation in this field were identified as human resource development, exchange of statistics/promotional material, familiarisation tours by travel agents and tour operators and the role of public-private partnership. Scribes get ready for your free jaunts. Or am I jumping the gun? The working group on agriculture is looking at production of quality seeds, agricultural research and the question of quarantining livestock that is traded across the border. This could be a serious area for any number of rights-based groups to get involved with. After all agriculture is a globally sensitive issue and genetically modified seeds, if that is where this proposed bilateral cooperation heading, is an extremely volatile subject to be left to the care of the two governments. For the medical fraternity there is room for cooperation on practically everything: from control of polio to management of avian influenza, public-private partnership in healthcare and family welfare. The two countries have also agreed to explore cooperation in health-related intellectual property rights, capacity building in health sector, administrative structures relating to drugs and pharmaceuticals in the two countries and traditional systems of medicine. So there you go. How about joint research in Unaani, Tibbi, Ayurvedic medicines? The officially stated prospect of cooperation in information technology can be converted by the people to give us a chance to jointly shift the focus away from software to something more durable, like hardware production of computers, which is totally missing from the scene in both countries. Education. Yes, there is a joint working group on education too. Come on historians, sociologists, philosophers. Face each other and come to terms with yourselves. It's time we gave up the pretence of teaching partial half-baked history to our captive audiences. Of course, the proposed working group on education is typically bureaucratic and deals tentatively with cooperation between institutions like University Grants Commission in India and HEC in Pakistan. However, there is provision also for exchange of printed material relating to educational development, sharing of experiences by the education research institutes, as well as National Book Trust of India and National Book Foundation of Pakistan. There is provision for exchange of expertise in the field of elementary, secondary and adult education. There's room for people's involvement here. And finally, there's a new forum that should interest the media in both countries. The press release of the joint commission says that its working group on information "discussed issues concerning participation in seminars by journalists, media coverage of historical and religious events in the two countries, combating piracy of films, music and channel contents and exchange of radio, television programmes and films". This is inane, boring stuff. The media's job is not to describe events in mosques and gurudwaras; that should be left to the saints. Journalists on both sides need the freedom to move and report freely in each other's country. That's the important point. Why should we grant these privileges (that's what they are at present as opposed to core media rights) only to the western media and not to each other's scribes? Here's an opportunity to turn our back on that lingering slavery to the West. To sum up, remember the song the Beatles look-alike vultures sang in the famous film based on Kipling's Jungle Book? "We are friends," the lovely vultures sang in unison. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that where men are seen as frail and failing, the quest for missing vultures may be the right way to go if we are serious about becoming friends. ______ [4] truthout.org 13 March 2007 BUSH'S DEMOCRACY PROJECT IN BANGLADESH AND NEPAL by J. Sri Raman Who says that President George Bush and his men and women promote democracy only by destructive wars? They do so also through creative, unconventional diplomacy. Look at their latest achievements in Bangladesh and Nepal. In both these countries bordering India, whose ruling establishment has enlisted in the Bush crusade to save democracy (especially "emerging" democracies), the cause has hit a major roadblock. And it is representatives of Washington who have placed a mega-sized boulder on the path to much-awaited elections in both cases. In the case of Nepal, Bush's mouthpieces have not really bothered to conceal this. In the case of Bangladesh, Washington and its Western allies have only declared a more devious war on democracy. In talking of Nepal, these columns have repeatedly noted striking instances of the distinguished style of US Ambassador James Francis Moriarty's diplomacy, through the entire period since the people of the Himalayan state overthrew a hated monarchy and opened the door to democracy. A higher official of the US administration has now outdone him. Moriarty has tried many tricks barred by the book of diplomacy in a bid to prevent the return of Maoists to the political mainstream, and to break the historic accord between them and the Seven-Party Alliance (SPA) that ended King Gyanendra's despotic rule last April. Moriarty has played a role in keeping Washington's "terror tag" on the Maoists. While insisting on their electoral insignificance, he has tried to stall their inclusion in the interim government by warning of US assistance only to departments under non-Maoist ministers. He has also made a very un-diplomat-like visit to a center of ethnic unrest and voiced support for the demands of the Madhesi minority, which the Maoists and the SPA do not oppose anyway. Notwithstanding Moriarty, Nepal was to move ahead to the next stage of its democratic transition on March 14th, when the Maoists were to join the interim government under Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala. US Under Secretary of State for Management Henrietta H. Fore, on a visit to Kathmandu last week, ensured that progress in the process was put off. On March 10th, she proclaimed Washington's displeasure with "two trends that, if unresolved, threaten Nepal's democratic progress." The first - surprise, surprise - was "the continuing failure of the Maoists to renounce violence". The second, equally predictably, was ethnic unrest. This, she said showed the need for "inclusiveness" in Nepal, though the Maoists were to be excluded. She followed up that critique with a call on the aging and ailing prime minister. The outcome was, again, predictable. Koirala announced that the Maoists could not enter the interim government until they "return all the people's property they had seized and account for all their weapons." The moment Fore left Nepal, Koirala hastened to assure the offended Maoists that they would be inducted into the government "shortly." The damage, however, was not totally undone. Maoist leader Prachanda has now threatened street protests if the interim government is not expanded by the end of March. More scarily, he has alleged a "conspiracy" by the "pro-palace" camp to assassinate Americans in Nepal, blame it on the Maoists, and seek a ban on them. It is significant that some knowledgeable observers in Kathmandu think that the Nepal situation may lead to a "Bangladesh-type" solution. What they mean is not a declared military rule, but a military-backed dispensation that will keep out the Maoists and parties ready to make up with them. This will be a "democracy" that Moriarty and Fore will not disapprove of. This is also the kind of "democracy" in Bangladesh of which Washington and its Western allies do not disapprove. This has become evident in the two months of rapid events since the general election originally scheduled for January 22 was scrapped. The opposition led by the Awami League of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed, of course, wanted the elections scrapped; it feared massive poll-rigging under the caretaker regime of President Iajuddin Ahmad, who is known to be close to the right-wing Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) of Hasina's rival and former Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia. Both parties extended support to the caretaker government of Fakhruddin Ahmed, sworn in on January 13th. Not many, however, foresaw two developments that followed. Fakhruddin Ahmed's regime soon turned out to be only the front of the Bangladesh army with a history of frequent political interventions. The public can only speculate about the identity of the faceless, string-pulling military rulers. But, like several other "benevolent" military regimes in the past, this one too has started off with a series of measures aimed at the heart of the middle class. An alleged crusade against corruption and for a new "political culture" has followed, with the prospect of polls receding rapidly in the process. The process gathered momentum with the arrest of Begum Zia's unpopular son Tarique Rahman and raids on Hasina's residence on March 8th. The very next day, all political activity (including indoor meetings) was banned. The second development is the entry into politics of eminent economist Mohammad Yunus. He has turned out to be a typical candidate of the same political camp and constituency that the behind-the-scene military rulers represent and back. Even more significant is the extra-Bangladesh dimension of his electoral appeal and that of his hastily assembled party called Nagorik Shakti (Citizen Power). Moriarty and Fore have played politics in Nepal, but their counterparts in Bangladesh would seem to have gone a step further by fielding their own candidate and a party in the forthcoming election, if and when it is held. The US ambassador in Bangladesh, Patricia Butien, has been more circumspect than Moriarty. But a former US ambassador in Bangladesh (and Pakistan ) and currently an academic at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC, William B. Milam, has nearly given the game away. Milam's proximity to the power centre in Washington is seen in the fact that he was to be a US observer of the scrapped election of January 22nd. On January 9th, almost two weeks before that, he wrote in a newspaper column, "My trip to Bangladesh ... is off." He said "the US and EU have ruled out sending teams (of observers)" because, among other reasons, it "would convey an unofficial sanction to an election that will be clearly wanting in legitimacy." The US and the Western governments, however, have not only supported the "clean-up" drive of the Fakhruddin Ahmed regime. They have also kept mum, not mysteriously so perhaps, about the eloquent silence of the caretaker regime about the election plans. Milam goes further. In a subsequent column, he derides the united demand of Hasina and Zia for an announcement of the election date and asks why they call for early polls. "Could it be that they suspect that the longer an election is delayed, and the more time given to a new third party to develop a platform and make itself known, the weaker are their prospects in that election? Do their interests converge again on a single point: the need to forestall the growth and development of a new party that might take the centre of politics away from them?" He also notes, approvingly, that "the announcement the other day by the chief of the caretaker government that it could not yet set an election date gives Yunus and his organizers more time to pull it all together." Of what his candidate can do, if elected, he says: "(That) depends on how well the caretaker government does its job in cleaning up the political culture so that reformers like Yunus will have a chance to make a difference." All this, however, can only produce a system that is very different from democracy as the people in Bangladesh or elsewhere understand it. ______ [5] Economic and Political Weekly March 3, 2007 INDIA'S UNITY IN DIVERSITY AS A QUESTION OF HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE In the debate about political unity and cultural diversity in India, the representation of the past often was (and is) the main battlefield. While secularists invoke the Indian tradition of toleration thus pleading for a multicultural India, communalists point to the long experience of religious strife and conclude the necessity of territorial demarcation. Some post-colonial critics even view the very reliance on history as the basic problem. The frequent instances of violence against minorities in connection with disputes over the past give cause to reconsider the role of history in the emergence of the nation state in India. Those obsessed with origin in their idea of the nation assume no perspective of change that would allow heterogeneous elements to merge. Secularists often bring into play only a singular, particular perspective, in which other possible perspectives are neglected. By inserting both the unifying model of the nation state and the diversity of cultural and social forms of life into an overarching perspective of temporal change, a modern form of unity canbe accomplished that may be called unity in diversity. by Michael Gottlob http://www.epw.org.in/showArticles.php?root=2007&leaf=03&filename=11139&filetype=pdf ______ [6] EVENTS: PERMANENT BLACK in collaboration with the INDIA INTERNATIONAL CENTRE invites you to a talk by CHRISTOPHE JAFFRELOT whose most recent work (as editor) is HINDU NATIONALISM: A READER (Permanent Black and Princeton University Press, 2007) on HINDU NATIONALISM: PAST AND PRESENT chaired by SUMIT SARKAR who will discuss the subject and moderate questions venue IIC, Conference Room 1 date 3 April 2007, 6 p.m. (tea followed by the talk) do come o o Sri Lanka Democracy Forum invites you to a MEETING TO COMMEMORATE THE LIFE AND MEMORY OF KETHESH LOGANATHAN, who was brutally gunned down at his residence in Colombo, Sri Lanka on 12 August 2006, on Saturday, 31 March 2007 from 6.30 to 9.30 pm at the Conway Hall 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1 (nearest tube: Holborn) Keynote Speaker: Hon. Bob Rae (former Prime Minister of Ontario, Canada), and speakers from Sri Lanka and the Diaspora "A former militant, academic, journalist, and tireless advocate of human rights and a return to democratic values in Tamil politics, Kethesh was one of the leading activists of the dissenting Tamil community who firmly believed in a negotiated democratic political solution to the ethnic conflict as opposed to the bleakness of a maudlin Tamil nationalism" - Sri Lanka Democracy Forum _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Buzz for secularism, on the dangers of fundamentalism(s), on matters of peace and democratisation in South Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit citizens wire service run since 1998 by South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/ SACW archive is available at: 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