------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/nJ9qlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
South Asia Citizens Wire | 20 October, 2004 via: www.sacw.net [This issue of the dispatch is dedicated to the memory of the veteran journalist and secular activist Batuk Vora. Batuk Vora died on the 19th of October, 2004. Deeply affected by the Gujarat massacres of 2002, he systematically sent his ideas and leads for SACW posts. . . ! ] o o o [1] Pakistan: Three raging storms (Shahid Javed Burki) [2] Indo-US Ties Stuck In A Groove - 'Partnership' as illusion (Praful Bidwai) [3] Bangladesh: Shaheen Akhtar: Committed feminist (Niaz Zaman and Tasneem Khalil) [4] India: Drafting The Law To Prevent Communal Violence (Asghar Ali Engineer) [5] India: Essay Competition:Democracy versus Communal Fascism: Why India Needs to Remain a Democracy -------------- [1] DAWN 19 October 2004 THREE RAGING STORMS By Shahid Javed Burki Karachi lost its economic dynamism as a consequence of a series of ill-advised actions taken by a succession of Pakistani leaders over a period of four decades. It all began with the decision of President Ayub Khan to move the country's capital from Karachi to a new city he was to call Islamabad. That move deprived the city's well-educated, well-trained, highly experienced and politically inclined work force of jobs in the government sector. A significant number of these people belonged to the Mohajir community. This community had come to Karachi, pulled by the promise of a better life in the capital city of the country they or their parents had fought hard to create. The move of the capital, therefore, was more than an economic loss. It was also a kind of betrayal. The second shock was felt by the city a decade after the decision by9? military leader to relocate the country's capital. While Ayub Khan punctured the public sector, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto inflicted an equally serious blow on the city's private economy. A series of nationalizations of privately held assets ordered by Bhutto devastated private enterprise in the city. Even when Ayub Khan took with him government functionaries to Rawalpindi-Islamabad, there was still a great deal of economic life left in Karachi. Some of it was, in fact, the consequence of the model of economic development the military administration had pursued in the 'sixties. This model had produced a vibrant private economy. In the 1960s, Pakistan developed a commercial banking and insurance industry that was remarkable in its scope, depth and reach for a country at its stage of development. This was not the only part of private enterprise that had grown under the patronage of Ayub Khan. The Karachi Stock Exchange also worked remarkably well. It was able to draw capital from the increasingly prosperous upper and middle-income groups into industry, commerce and finance. KSE's market capitalization increased significantly during the period of Ayub Khan. During that time established as well as new entrepreneurs used "initial public offerings" - or IPOs - to mobilize private savings and put them to use in their enterprises. Karachi's economy would have survived the departure of the civil servants from the city had Zulfikar Ali Bhutto not killed private entrepreneurship. That Bhutto played that role in Karachi's economic travails is surprising since his affection for the city was not hidden from view and manifested itself in many different ways. Not well tutored in economics, he seemed not to have realized that by killing the private sector he was killing the goose that had laid so many golden eggs in the city. Bhutto's nationalization of large-scale industry, finance, insurance and large-scale commerce drained modern sector jobs from the city's economy. Once again, the burden of this change in public policy fell on the shoulders of the Mohajir community. Karachi's growing economic malaise didn't go unnoticed by Bhutto. One way of addressing the city's problems, he thought, was to bring large public sector construction projects to the city. Bhutto realized that it would take more than erecting monuments at some busy roundabouts to create jobs the young needed. Something considerably bigger had to be done. The way Bhutto went about reviving Karachi's fortunes laid the ground for ethnic conflict in the city - between the Mohajirs and the Pushtuns. It was during the Bhutto period and mostly because of his efforts that Pakistan undertook one of the largest construction projects in its history, the building of a steel mill near Karachi. The project provided new employment opportunities first to labour from the various ethnic colonies that had sprung up around the city, and subsequently to the workers who manned the mill once it was operational. It also attracted new migrants to the city from the country's northern areas. The pattern of job creation by the construction and operation of the steel mills offers a useful insight into the first of the many conflicts that were to turn Karachi into one of the developing world's more turbulent cities. As with most other large projects, the mill was constructed by workers drawn predominantly from the Pushtun, Punjabi and Kashmiri communities. Once the mill became operational, the construction workers were sent home and the thousands of people employed to operate the mill were hired mostly from the Mohajir community. Since no other major construction job was undertaken, unemployment levels in the Pushtun communities increased significantly. The workers employed in the mill found a political patron once the Mohajir Qaumi Movement became a potent force, something that happened after Bhutto left the political scene, a development to which I will return momentarily. Since the mill was a public sector enterprise, the MQM was able to use its political clout in the 1980s to expand the payroll with the employment of the members of the community it represented. Some of the employees were "ghost workers" in the sense that they did little real work but turned up only to draw their monthly paycheques. When in the late 1980s and the early 1990s, ethnic violence erupted in Karachi the steel mill became one of several battlegrounds. The immediate cause was Islamabad's attempt to improve the efficiency of the mills by reducing the number of workers it employed. This retrenchment the Mohajir community was not prepared to accept. It was now sufficiently agitated to practise a new kind of politics - that of challenging the authority of the state by resorting to violence. But let me return to the chronological history of the development of the factors that came together to bring so much violence to Karachi. After Bhutto's departure, another national leader stepped in the late seventies and eighties to adopt policies that compounded Karachi's growing problems. The new military president's approach to Karachi's growing economic and political difficulties was not motivated by any desire to find solutions for the city's failing economy. Ziaul Haq sought a political opportunity for himself from the city's difficulties. He was in search of ways to soak popular support out of Bhutto's political party the PPP, which had a significant presence in the city. He tried to get to that goal by encouraging the disgruntled Mohajir community to coalesce into a new political force, the Mohajir Qaumi Movement or the MQM. It didn't seem to bother the military president that the development of politics on ethnic basis in a city with so many ethnic fault lines meant courting long-term disaster. Even this might not have happened had President Zia offered some political space within his system to the party whose growth he was promoting. But Zia was not inclined to develop political institutions. Once the PPP's influence had been checkmated in Karachi, he left the MQM to its devices and opened space in the city for the forces representing radical Islam. The MQM quickly gained political potency in the eighties and the nineties by practising the politics of agitation and violence. It acquired considerable support for itself as reactionary forces normally do in periods of economic distress. The MQM, in its formative period, was a reactionary movement in the sense that it was reacting against the established economic, political and social order. The organization adopted the use of violence as a political tool for intimidating its followers as well as its opponents. A new element was thus added to those that were already present to turn Karachi into a violent place. It takes at least two large ethnic groups to produce ethnic politics and violence spurred by ethnic interests. As discussed in the first article of this series on Karachi (September 28, 2004), by the time the city's economy went into a tailspin, it had two distinct and spatially separated ethnic groups - the Mohajir and the Pushtuns. There was little social interaction between these two communities. While the loss of opportunities in both public and private sectors had turned a segment of the Mohajir community towards the politics of violence, the Pushtuns were still reasonably satisfied with their situation. This changed suddenly with an incident at Sohrab Goth. The Sohrab Goth community of Pushtuns owes its origin to an entrepreneur who set up a store in the village of that name in Karachi's outskirts, selling imported merchandise smuggled into the country. Soon Sohrab Goth became the site of a "Bara" market, so called because of a similar bazaar in a village of that name, near Peshawar, which also sold smuggled goods. In 1981, thousands of refugees from Afghanistan moved to Karachi and settled in the vicinity of Sohrab Goth. With the Afghans came drugs and weapons and Sohrab Goth became a part of a long supply chain. This chain linked the poppy producing areas in Afghanistan, small drug processing plants in Pakistan's tribal areas, and smuggling centres such as Sohrab Goth that fed the international drug markets. Islamabad came under intense pressure from a number of foreign governments and agencies to move against this community of Pushtuns. This was done on December 12, 1986, when the government sent bulldozers to demolish the shops and houses that were alleged to be a part of the long drug chain. Reaction to the operation came quickly; two days later, on December 16, hundreds of Sohrab Goth residents descended on Orangi, a community of mostly Mohajir residents. What ensued was ethnic violence of the type Pakistan had not known in its history. It left 170 dead and thousands injured. For several days, the government seemed to have lost control over Karachi's outskirts. The army was called in to bring peace to the city. Karachi now had another angry group to contend with - the Pushtun community. While the Mohajir community's anger was channelled into political violence by the MQM, the Pushtuns sought solace in religion. Radical Islam along with a number of its institutions - in particular "deeni madressahs" - had arrived in Karachi along with the Mohajir community in 1947, at the time of Pakistan's birth. But it was not until the late eighties that it became a formidable political force. That happened for a number of reasons and Sohrab Goth was only one of them. The other contributing factors included the first war in Afghanistan, the arrival of political zealots who had fought in that war, and the preaching in the religious seminaries by conservative ulema. As is now well-recognized, radical Islam has flourished in situations of economic distress; in the late 1980s and most of 1990s Karachi faced serious economic difficulties. It presented a good opportunity for radical Islam to take root. Three raging storms have hovered over Karachi's sky for several years now. These are the storms caused by economic difficulties faced by the young and the failure of the city to provide basic services, by ethnic rivalries that cannot be contained by the political system, and, finally, by the arrival of radical Islam. Will these storms clear and bring light into city once again? The answer to that question depends on how the state tackles some of the problems that have produced this turbulence in the first place. ______ [2] The Praful Bidwai Column October 18, 2004 -- INDO-US TIES STUCK IN A GROOVE - 'PARTNERSHIP' AS ILLUSION By Praful Bidwai Clever technocrats have ingenious ways of dressing up bad projects. One way is to declare that the problem project was only a "pilot", "prototype", or the "first phase" of a larger scheme, of which the "second phase" will follow (at a higher expense, of course). India and the United States have played that very trick by announcing the end of the "first phase" of the grandiosely termed "Next Steps in Strategic Partnership" (NSSP)-launched less than a year ago-and the beginning of "second phase". Last week, under-secretary of commerce Kenneth Juster visited New Delhi to discuss the "second phase" with Indian leaders. Yet, going by past experience, and by US policy on defence-related matters, the "second phase" may turn out to be equally unspectacular. The "first phase" was to open up India's access to US nuclear and space exports and allow increased trade in "dual-use" goods (which have both military and civilian applications). But what did NSSP actually achieve? At the end of the day, Washington lifted sanctions imposed after the Pokharan-II blasts upon Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) headquarters, relaxed licensing requirements for certain low-technology dual-use items for ISRO subsidiaries, and liberalised exports of some equipment intended for "balance-of-plant" use at Indian nuclear reactors already under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards. ("Balance-of-plant" refers to the non-nuclear, back-end part of atomic power stations, like turbines, generators and control systems.) This adds up to very little. ISRO headquarters performs an administrative role. The production functions are handled by its seven subsidiaries, which manufacture propulsion systems, rockets, satellites, etc. They remain sanctioned. The low-end items the subsidiaries import comprise all kinds of goods, from pins and clips, to third-country products using US-made silicon chips or software. Most of these are relatively easily available from alternative (including Indian domestic) sources. They don't contribute to high-technology trade-promoting which is NSSP's rationale. Finally, what of the relaxation of export controls in regard to nuclear power? There are 115 items subject to such controls. Of these, 103 are already covered by multilateral controls under the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (or the London Club). The remaining 12 are governed by US domestic laws. Only 4 of India's 14 nuclear power reactors can possibly import these 12 items: Tarapur I-II and Rajasthan I-II alone are subject to IAEA safeguards. Of the 12 items, only two are relevant for balance-of-plant use: generators and special-alloy valves. But several Indian companies make these! So the new licensing regime is hardly "liberal". As if to rub in the point, Washington on September 29 imposed fresh sanctions on 14 Indian "entities" on suspicion that these might have helped Iran develop mass-destruction weapons. They include two former chairmen of Nuclear Power Corporation (Y.S.R. Prasad and C.M. Surender), one of whom visited Iran as part of an IAEA delegation! NSSP's "second phase" might at best see-if India negotiates extremely hard-some loosening of export controls on space satellites and components, which Washington treats as "munitions"! But dramatic changes are unlikely. The US is bound by its domestic laws like the Non-Proliferation Act 1978 as well as its commitments to voluntary multilateral agreements like the NSG, Missile Technology Control Regime, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group. Washington has repeatedly said its "strategic partnership" must be "consistent with US domestic laws and national security and foreign policy objectivesŠ" As former deputy secretary of state Strobe Talbott put it: "Right now the US and India may feel that they are moving in the same direction but their destination could be different Š There's this great fixation in India with NSSP, but it's going to set Indians up for a great disappointmentŠ. India and the US are not opening a new chapter, they are merely turning over a new leaf in the same chapter." There are four major lessons here. First, the current discussion on NSSP is essentially a hangover from the previous (NDA) government. The Vajpayee government showed irrational exuberance about "strategic partnership" and minimised the asymmetrical, skewed nature of India-US relations. Mr Talbott in his book Engaging India reveals that Mr Vajpayee assigned a special role to his confidant Jaswant Singh just before the May 1998 nuclear tests. Breaking protocol, Mr Singh called on President Clinton's special envoy Bill Richardson at the US ambassador's residence-something senior ministers aren't expected to do. He conveyed the message that "he was under instructions from Vajpayee to serve as a discreet-and, if necessary, secret-channel to Washington, to be used for anything sensitive that the US leadership wished to convey to the Prime Minister". Neither such kowtowing, nor the 14 rounds of Talbott-Singh talks put India-US relations on an even keel or averted reprimand from the Security Council and the G-8. Even after bilateral relations improved after 2000-thanks largely to extraneous factors like the business success of Silicon Valley Indians-, their basic character didn't change. For all its rhetoric, Washington won't share high-technology goods with India nor agree to build an exclusive relationship-even as it designated Pakistan a "major non-NATO ally". Second, Mr Jaswant Singh was misguided in rushing to welcome Mr Bush's May 2001 announcement of plans to deploy a Ballistic Missile Defence (or "Son of Star Wars") system to give the US a shield against alien missiles. He outdid even the ultra-loyal British. BMD will dangerously change the rules of the global nuclear-deterrence game. Mr Singh's calculation-he was in ecstasy when Mr Bush "dropped in" on him-was that the US would share this extremely advanced, cutting-edge technology with India. The new US ambassador, David Mulford, has also since made alluring references to Indo-US cooperation on BMD having gone "beyond mere talking". Mr Singh made a huge, morally and militarily untenable, departure from India's established opposition to BMD and militarisation of space. His calculation was downright naïve. Washington is most unlikely to share with India-and even with its European allies-a cutting-edge technology such as detecting missile launches with satellites and then intercepting them at high speed-akin to hitting a bullet travelling at 24,000 kmph with another bullet travelling at the same speed. The US isn't sharing even the much simpler Theatre Missile Defence technology with a close military ally (Japan) for whom it's developing it. Besides, a regional TMD will neutralise Pakistan's missiles and create "imbalance", to "correct" which Pakistan will want its own TMD. Third, if Indian policy-makers really think that friendship/partnership with America will help India enter the Nuclear Club, they are deluding themselves. There is no way that the US can dispense with the existing global non-proliferation regime (of which only India, Pakistan and Israel have stayed out). The US may not fulfil its obligations under NPT to disarm nuclear weapons, but it sees the Treaty as a bulwark against the spread of nuclear weapons. The NPT cannot be opened up for signature to more nuclear weapons-states (barring the 5 which conducted nuclear explosions before 1967). It could be amended to permit an additional protocol for India's and Pakistan's signature. But such a "5+2" formula would oblige India and Pakistan to accept additional arms control measures-including limitations on fissile material production. But that's precisely what India has been trying to avoid. This would be a fool's bargain. We must pause and think about what kind of high-technology or dual-use goods we really need. We have long attached iconic, totem-like value to technology for its own sake. For years, India begged the US to sell it a Cray-XMP supercomputer. One such processor was procured. But it sat for years in the Meteorological Department, and has added nothing to the quality of our monsoon forecasts! Meanwhile, India's Centre for Development of Advanced Computing produced the even faster PARAM! Do we really want America's nuclear power technology, which has proved a market failure? In the US, no new reactor has been ordered for 26 years. Is nuclear power the path to energy security, rather than renewable sources, including biomass, wind, and solar? Finally, there are irreconcilable, fundamental differences between Indian and US views of and plans for the world. The US aspires to Empire and domination. It wants to reshape the world by changing the rules of international politics. India's interest lies in a multi-polar world where might is not right, and peaceful resolution of disputes is possible. For the US, nuclear disarmament isn't a long-term goal; its' at best a legal and moral obligation to be ducked or defied. For India, disarmament was an ideal for 50 years-until the NDA violated it. It still remains a long-term objective, and a precondition for a peaceful world. The US imposes unequal trade and investment policies on the world through the WTO and the World Bank/IMF. India declares victory when it can resist these, as it did at Cancun! There is a limit beyond which India and the US cannot be partners. They can reduce friction in their relations and reach understanding on a few issues. They can certainly improve their economic and political relations. But "strategic partnership" is an illusion.-end- ______ [3] New Age October 16, 2004 SHAHEEN AKHTAR: COMMITTED FEMINIST Shaheen Akhtar has published two novels and three volumes of short stories. Recently she met Niaz Zaman and Tasneem Khalil and discussed her work at Ain O Salish Kendra, her writing and women's issues in Bangladesh New Age: You are a maker of documentary films as well as a fiction writer. Is there any conflict between these two aspects of your work? Shaheen Akhtar: I have made documentary films as part of my work. The fiction I write for myself. The themes are completely my own choice. My fiction is quite autobiographical, based on my experience, on things that I have seen. The themes of my documents were based on what my office required from me. NA: How does your later fiction differ from what you wrote earlier? SA: My early writings were very abstract. But my novel Talash is different. Before I wrote it I was doing some research for Ain O Salish Kendra, interviewing women who had been raped in 1971. This research had some impact on my fiction writing. The theme of Talash relates to 1971. I hadn't thought that I would write fiction about 1971 but when I became involved in the ASK Oral History Project, about women who were victimized in various ways during the Liberation War, I realized that there was another face of war. Everyone talks about women being raped in 1971, but what was the reality? There are many things that have been glossed over, many things that we do not know. It was to know this reality that I interviewed many women even outside the project. NA: You have mentioned that it was the politics of the state as well as of the family that hid the truth by relegating what happened to numbers and statistics. SA: Yes. For example, there were a number of women rehabilitation centres where women had to fill up forms with their names, addresses etc. But the womenís addresses were destroyed so that when they went back to their own families, their identities would be hidden. NA: Can you tell us something about the story of Talash? Who is the main character of the book? SA: The main character is a young woman and the story follows her as she leaves Dhaka. The war begins and she is captured and put into a camp. There are a number of sub-plots, but hers is the main story. NA: Most readers of Talash would say that the writer is a feminist? Would you agree? SA: If one writes about women, and from their perspective, I suppose one would be a feminist. NA: Talash was your second novel. What was your first novel and how did it differ from Talash? SA: My first novel was Palabar Path Nei (2000). And it had a straightforward linear structure. For Talash I had done some sort of research and had a definite idea of what I wanted to do. But because it was not based on my experience, I would have to stop my writing and go back to my interview notes. NA: Did you get help from libraries and books? SA: No. For example, no books give any information on what life was like in the camps where these women were. No interviewer has gone into any detail. Yes, they asked how many people tortured the girls and for how long, but no one really bothered to find out what the daily lives of these women who stayed in the camps for days on end was like. Some women were so desperate that they committed suicide. It was for details like these that I needed to do research. Perhaps I will not have to go into such details for any other book. NA: So you really had to do a lot of research for this book? SA: Yes, I collected several notebooks in the prices of preparing for this book. Sometimes there was a lot of information which I couldn't use. I realized I was writing fiction but there was information that I wanted to give. I had to ask myself how I could do this. NA: How long did it take you to write this book? SA: Three years. Doing research and writing. Of course, I also wrote other things while writing Talash a couple of short stories especially when I seemed to have got stuck. NA: Have your short stories been published? SA: Yes, one anthology has been published from India and two from Dhaka. NA: What do you think of the recent movement to use the Purba Bangla, the East Bengal, dialect for creative writing? SA: I don't know whether you can call it a movement. And I don't quite like the term Purba Bangla. After all there are other dialects as well, thereís the Chittagonian dialect, the Sylheti dialect and so on. Of course, I agree that the Kolkata Bangla which seems to have become the standard literary Bangla is not the language we use in our everyday life. So of course we do not have to use it in our creative writing. Writing must reflect what we see around us and be in the language that we hear around us. NA: Do you consciously try to do this in your writing? SA: I don't know whether I do it consciously, but a lot of this has entered Talash since the book is about people of this part. When I think about a certain character, that characterís language also enters my consciousness. We used to have a complex about ourselves regarding our language; I don't think we have this inferiority complex any more. We don't think that our words or phrases are inferior to the West Bengal standard. I think that this consciousness has affected all our writers, whether they take part in a Purba Bangla language movement or no. In the seventies and eighties, if you attended any literary gathering, you would find our intellectuals trying to talk in the Kolkata style. Today they don't. Today our writers talk in their own dialects. NA: Have any of your writings been translated? SA: Yes, a few of my short stories have been translated. Amit Chaudhuri has taken a chapter about Kolkata from my novel Palabar Path Nei for a book he is doing on Kolkata. I think Penguin is supposed to be publishing it. And Urvashi Butalia, who was formerly with Kali for Women and has now started a publishing house of her own, has expressed an interest in an English translation of Talash. NA: Will the book on Kolkata represent writers from both Bangladesh and West Bengal? SA: I think the book is trying to represent the new generation of writers. NA: Letís return to the question of feminism. Many women writers, even when they write about women and about discriminations against women, refuse to call themselves feminist. But you accept the label that you are a feminist writer. What exactly do you mean when you say that you are a feminist writer? SA: As a woman, there are some experiences that I have had that inspire and motivate me to write fiction. And it is as woman that I write about these experiences. NA: What differences do you see between a male writer and a woman writer? SA: Womenís experiences are prominent in their writings. Perhaps men can also write about these, but womenís writings would be more detailed. And I don't think a woman has to proclaim herself a feminist to be one. For example the Urdu writer Ismat Chugtai. Her writings were feminist, weren't they? Womenís writings are about felt experiences, from within, in a way that menís writings cannot be. NA: Should women writers have an agenda? SA: I donít know what you mean by an agenda. And I don't think that writers should have agendas. There should be something spontaneous about writing. Writers should write from their experience. My experience will be different from the experiences of someone else. Writers should write from the self. This is something I've also thought about. A lot of Indian women of the earlier generation have written autobiographies. Kamala Das, for example. But I don't think any woman from either of the Bengals has written in quite this way. NA: A lot of women choose a male protagonist. Are your protagonists always women? SA: No, I have also used a male protagonist for some of my fiction. But most of my fiction has been woman-centred. NA: In which story did you choose a male protagonist? And why? SA: This story was inspired by my father. It was about 71. The story is about a man who tries to escape from his village because he knows that the army will attack, but he is finally unable to leave. NA: Have you written other stories about '71? SA: There are about three stories that I've written about 71. One of them is called, 'Tini Guro Maricher Behabar Jantein' (She knew how to use pepper). NA: There has been a lot of controversy about Taslima Nasreen. What are your views about her? SA: I think that she has written about a lot of important issues. She is a fluent writer and her columns were very well written. She had a large readership. On the other hand, I feel that some of her writings led her to being used. Still, I will say that she is a very courageous writer. But perhaps. . . NA: Do all her writings have great depth? SA: I don't think it is necessary for all oneís writings to have great depth. Many writings can be interesting without being of great depth. But I think that she has become famous not because of the depth of her writings but because of the controversy that surrounded her writings. There is something political about the matter. NA: But wouldn't you agree that Taslima Nasreen has played an important part, particularly in the lives of the younger generation? SA: Yes, of course. The way she has written about womenís issues has reached a lot of young women and made them aware in a way they weren't previously. They were able to identify with her writing. About her present writing, I would say, however, that she is catering to the market. I think that she has become used to the limelight and she doesn't want the light to move away from upon her. She is afraid of being in the dark. After this piece of writing I think she will try to be even more daring NA: Has any writer influenced you? SA: Not that I know. NA: What has been the reaction of literary critics to you? SA: Not very good, I'm afraid. However, recently Pervez Hussain wrote about my writing in Prothom Alo. The next week Sumon Rahman wrote about my novel in just two paragraphs. I wouldn't call it praise, but I think he understood what my novel was about. Very little has been written about me, perhaps it is because I fall outside the literary circle, the literary network. I don't have much interaction with other writers. I came to writing late, as you know, after working in documentary films. NA: What do you expect from literary critics? SA: That they explain my shortcomings. I would like to learn something from them. So far, there is nothing I can learn from them. NA: What is your opinion of the next generation of writers? SA: Some of them are very good. Audity Falguni, for example, and Papri Rahman. I think that there are some brilliant male writers as well, but I would say that they are mostly writing poetry, not fiction. NA: You work and write. Which is full time? Your writing or your work? SA: I work from 9 - 3.00. But mentally my writing occupies much more of my time. NA: Do you consider yourself a writer? SA: I would love to do so, but perhaps I have to write more and better in order to call myself a writer. NA: Thank you very much for your time. SA: Thank you. ______ [4] (Secular Perspective October 16-31,2004) DRAFTING THE LAW TO PREVENT COMMUNAL VIOLENCE Asghar Ali Engineer The Gujarat carnage had shaken the country very badly and it was felt that there should be a separate law to prevent recurrence of such carnage resulting in the death of hundreds of innocent people and bring shame to our country in the comity of nations. The UPA Government also promised such a law in its Common Minimum Programme but it is hardly its priority. It is no more talking about it nor is it preparing any draft for discussion. Some NGOs like the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism and Communalism Combat took initiative to prepare such a draft and circulate it for discussion among other NGOs and other concerned people. Surprisingly Mr. Ajit Singh of U.P. also took initiative and drafted a bill to this effect and a discussion was held in Lucknow. We will throw some light on these drafts here. It is felt that such law must come into effect as early as possible so that future recurrence of communal violence may be stopped. Before we proceed with the draft law it is also important to point out that some police and IAS officers who were invited to participate in the discussion on the draft bill pointed out that there was no need for such special law as present laws are sufficient to take care of any such situation. Problem is that these laws are not honestly implemented. The need, therefore, is to implement these laws effectively and punish the culprits who create disturbances in the society. This is also a valid point of view. The laws are not implemented and not only this the guardian of law themselves violate the law i.e. the police. The provisions of IPC section 153 (A), if enforced honestly can prevent the provocateurs from delivering provocative speeches resulting in outbreak of violence. How far the police is responsible for this state of affairs? It would be of course unfair to blame the police alone though the police should also share part of the blame. In fact the complicity of the politicians is no less responsible. If the state government is determined to prevent violence no communal riot can occur and if it does, it can be checked within no time. The best examples of this are states of West Bengal and Bihar. In West Bengal no major communal riot has taken place for last 27 years since the Left Government is in power. The West Bengal Government has issued strict instructions to the police not to allow any communal riot to take place and in the event of any riot taking place the police officers of the area will be held responsible and punished. It has worked very well. Similarly since Lalu Yadav took over in Bihar no riots have occurred though Bihar was highly sensitive state. The last major riot in Bihar took place in Sitamarhi in 1993. Mr. Yadav controlled it effectively. But in most of other states the governments have no will to control communal riot as it is part of their political culture. Some chief ministers have even encouraged communal violence for their own selfish political gains. A chief minister in Maharashtra in early eighties even made a political deal with the Shiv Sena Supremo to unleash communal violence for his personal political gain and Bhivandi-Bombay witnessed major outbreak of communal violence in 1984. Hundreds were killed and properties worth crores of rupees were completely destroyed. Thus much depends on political will. In Gujarat carnage it is well known that Mr. Narendra Modi not only looked the other way when communal carnage was taking place but even allowed his cabinet ministers to lead marauding and pillaging mobs. This clearly shows that Narendra Modi was encouraging the violence. The violence went on unchecked for months. The police openly sided with rioters and marauders. If the existing law is violated with such impunity what the new law will achieve? This question of course cannot be dismissed lightly. But still there is some point in drafting the new law. This will be a Central enactment. In fact law and order is a state subject. Normally Centre does not interfere with law and order matter in the states. But when state fails to ensure law and order the Indian Constitution makes a provision in the form of articles 355 and 356 to intervene. The proposed law will be a Central enactment and if a state government totally fails to check widespread communal violence the provisions of this law will apply and the Centre will intervene to check the violence. But if in the state and Centre same party governments are there the Central government may be reluctant to take action. When Gujarat carnage took place BJP was in power both in state as well as in the Centre and when in Mumbai widespread communal violence broke out after demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 the Congress happened to be in power both in Maharashtra as well as in the Centre and hence no action was taken in both cases by the Centre. But due to regionalisation of political power and possibility of only alliances of parties ruling at the Centre such probabilities of same party government both at the centre and in the state is becoming less and less. And even if it does happen and such a law against sectarian violence does exist one can file a case under this law in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has much better record for delivering justice to the aggrieved and hence it can be relied on enforcing provisions of such a law if state or Central governments fail in their duty. Thus seen from whatever angle this law does have its validity. The Centre for Study of Society and Secularism took initiative to draft this law and requested Justice Daud to prepare a draft for discussion. A meeting of justices, eminent lawyers, retired and on duty police officers, writers and social activists were invited to discuss the draft. The draft provides both for pre and post violence situations. The Bill was originally called the “Act to Prevent and Punish Genocide” but after discussion it was agreed to drop the word genocide and replace it with “sectarian violence”. The statement of objects and reasons of the Bill says, among other things, “For more than 5 decades after getting independence this country had to contend with several genocides conveniently classified as communal riots, caste conflicts, and group differences. These carnages are a blot on the nation and seriously prevent its emergence as a strong, united and throbbing democracy. The origin of every group riot lies in something insignificant or obscure. It is the spark lit by the evildoers who have driven the targeted group into a corner by painting it as treacherous, lecherous, unreliable and unscrupulous. The yellow press, which unfortunately has a fairly large readership in this country, is not slow to embellish accounts received by it and knowingly publish accounts, which are untrue, or exaggerations of what has really transpired.” The Bill states that “With a view to prevent group-hatred and violence emanating there from and in furtherance of the duty cast upon the Union Government under Article 355 of the Constitution of India, it is hereby enacted as follows” and then various sections of the Bill follows. In Section 4 of the Act it is states “wherever within the territory of India, (a) speaks and or writes in any manner or publish matters tending to incite hatred or ill-will against any group or individual belonging to a group, resident of any State on account of their or his group identities; (b) aids or abates the physical, social or economic harm to any person or persons on the grounds of their affiliation to any such group; (c) advocates the perpetration or perpetuation of any injury to any group or individual belonging to that group as a constituent of that group, shall be punished with imprisonment of either descriptions for seven years and also with fine.” The section 5 of the Bill provides for registration, the investigation and the trial of offences falling under this Act shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. Under Section 6 of the Bill the Central Government shall have the power to issue directions to all authorities functioning in the land to do or refrain from doing that will trigger, aggravate or give rise to disharmony amongst groups of people in any part of the country. The authority so directed shall be bound to carry out the directions given. The Act also provides for compulsory inquiry of all such acts of sectarian violence. Thus it says after every act of genocide irrespective of the number of those killed, wounded or maimed and the value of the property destroyed, the Central Government shall appoint a Commissioner to ascertain the perpetrators of the violence and destruction of the property, whether it be on individual or organisations, if the State Government has not done so. The report will have to be submitted in any case within 12 months of appointment of Commissioner and in section 8 the Central Government on the basis of the Commissioner’s report shall compensate the bereaved families, the injured persons and those suffering financial damage as a consequence of the rioting, in full. Thus this Bill will also take care of proper compensation as today it tends to be arbitrary. It will mot depend on the whims of the chief minister. The section 10 of the Bill also provides for debarring the perpetrators, abettors and initiators of the violence from contesting or canvassing elections to any representative body for a period of 10 years. Today the perpetrators not only contest and win elections but also become ministers or chief ministers as it happened in Gujarat. Thus enactment of such a bill will greatly help control communal violence and Gujarat like situation will not repeat. If the state government fails to act it will be the duty of the Central Government to intervene and check violence and punish the culprits. It is for the UPA Government to enact such a law before communal violence again breaks out in any other State. The UPA government should fulfil its pledge to people of India on priority basis. Unfortunately so far it has not moved in the matter. It is for NGOs and activists for communal harmony to put pressure on the UPA Government to act as early as possible in this direction. This exercise by the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism is part of that campaign. --------------------------------------- Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai. ______ [5] Subject: Essay Competition:Democracy versus Communal Fascism: Why India Needs to Remain a Democracy To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CREATIVE WRITING COMPETITION FOR DELHI AND MUMBAI STUDENTS DELHI: ESSAY COMPETITION What is Communalism? Why we need a Democracy? What is fascism? Can U stop Gujarat from happening again? Would U like to discuss these questions and many more with Rahul Bose? Enter the Youth For Peace (Anhad) Essay Writing Competition and Interact With Rahul Bose. EXPRESS YOUR VIEWS / WRITE Topic Democracy versus Communal Fascism: Why India Needs to Remain a Democracy Last date: November 15, 2004 Results to be declared: November 20, 2004 The winners meet Rahul Bose on: November 24, 2004 For entering the competition read the rules & regulations. Rules 1. The Essay Writing Competition is open to students : CATEGORY I-studying at the graduate level of various colleges, universities and institutes based in Delhi and CATEGORY II- students of class IX-XII of schools based in Delhi. 2. The entries should be in English or Hindi. 3. The essays should be CATEGORY I- 2,000 to 3,000 words , CATEGORY II- 1500-2000 words. The entries should be typewritten, on A4-size paper with all pages numbered. 4. A separate cover sheet with the following details should be included: essay title, student’s name(s), name of the school/ college/ institute, class, age, home address and contact number and e-mail if any. The student’s name should not appear in the main essay. 5. The closing date of the competition is November 15, 2004. Entries which are not in compliance with any of the competition rules will be disqualified. 6. The essays will be assessed in confidence by an independent panel of judges. No appeals will be entertained. The results of the competition will be announced on 20, November 2004. 7. The essays will not be assessed separately on the basis of the language in which they are written, but the best essays would be selected from all received entries. 8. A viewing list and reading list is provided . It is advisable for the students to view at least one documentary/ film and read at least one book from the provided list before writing the essay. 9. The editorial board reserves the right to edit essays selected for publication. 10. For further information, please call Mansi Sharma/ Moyna Manku at Anhad- 23327366/ 67 11. The entries should be sent to Anhad by either post/ personally or through e-mail latest by November 15, 2004: Anhad, 4 , Windsor Place, On Ashoka Road, Opp Kanishka Hotel ( new name – La Shangrila Hotel), New Delhi-110001, tel- 23327366/ 23327367, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Topic: Democracy versus Communal Fascism: Why India Needs to Remain a Democracy Prizes 11. Prizes will be awarded as follows: Best 100 essays: Commendation Certificates (50 from CATEGORY I and 50 from CATEGORY II) Best 50 essays from across India ( these competitions are being organized in other cities also)will be published in a book and also put on Anhad’s website (under construction) (25 from CATEGORY I and 25 from CATEGORY II) Best 20 essays (10 from each category) : Students whose essays are selected as the best 20 (10 from CATEGORY I and 10 from CATEGORY II) would : 1. Receive Rs. 1500 and a plaque 2. On November 24, 2004 have an interaction on the issues related to secularism and democracy from 10am to 12.30 pm with the Film Actor Rahul Bose. 3. November 24, 2004 Lunch from 1-2 pm with Rahul Bose, the Full Panel of Judges and Anhad activists. Viewing/ Reading List The following documentaries/ films can be borrowed and screened in colleges/ schools or students can come and view them at the Anhad office (Between 4pm to 8 pm from Monday to Saturday and 9am-8pm on Sundays). It is preferred that students come in groups of not less than 5, however even students coming individually can view the films. Students should ring up the Anhad office and inform the time when they would like to come. The books are available on sale at the Anhad office. We are not in a position to lend the books, however if there are some students who want to read the books at the Anhad office they are welcome to do so. Documentaries and Films Men in the Tree- Producer & Director- Lalit Vachani Final Solution- Producer & Director-Rakesh Sharma In Dark Times- Producer & Director-Gauhar Raza Naata- Producer & Director-KP Ravishankar and Anjali Monterio In The Name of God- Producer & Director- Anand Patwardhan Mr & Mrs Iyer- Director- Aparna Sen Naseem- Director- Saeed Akhter Mirza Garam Hawa- Director-MS Sathyu Zakhm- Director- Mahesh Bhatt Books- The books are not published by us, we are trying to negotiate special rates for students. Apart from the books listed below there are many other books available, which students can refer to at Anhad: Communalism: A Primer- by Bipan Chandra- Rs 30 (in Hindi and English) Communalism: What is False, what is True? –Ram Puniyani- Rs. 5-(in Hindi and English) Before the Night Falls- Prof. KN Panikkar- Rs 150 ( In English) Communalism: An Illustrated Primer-Ram Puniyani Rs. 175 (student’s concession-Rs. 100) -(in Hindi and English) Cry, My beloved Country- Harsh Mander- Rs 95 ( In English) YOUTH FOR PEACE ANHAD 4, Windsor Place, New Delhi-110001 Mumbai: Creative Writing Competition Why India must remain a democracy? What is Fascism? Can we stop violence? Is it possible to counter hatred? Can I make a difference? Can you make a difference? Do these questions bother you? Do you want to remain a silent spectator? Or do you want to stop this madness? CAN YOU MAKE PEACE COOL? Youth For Peace (Anhad) & Youth for Secular Democracy Invite entries on Communal Harmony, Secularism, Peace, Democracy ANY FORM OF CREATIVE EXPRESSION (lyrics, poetry, essays, short stories, slogans, songs, articles ) Rules 1. If you are a student of any college, school, institution in Mumbai you can enter the competition. 2. The entries can be in English, Hindi, Marathi, Urdu 3. The entries can be sent to <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/>[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ or can be sent to Anhad Office, c/o Bhupesh Gupta Bhawan, 3rd Floor, Leningrad Chowk, 85, Sayani Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025 4. All entries would be pooled together and would be judged by an independent panel of judges on the basis of quality and content as a whole. There would be no separate categories for language or form while judging. 5. All entries must have the following information: name, college, age, address home, telephone, e-mail –if any. 6. Last date November 15, 2004 7. Awards would be announced on November 20, 2004 Awards 1. The students whose entries are selected amongst the first 25 entries would: Get a cash prize of Rs.1000/ each Get an opportunity to present her/ his work at a public function in Mumbai on November 25, 2004, attended by prominent people from the creative field and prominent activists working on the issue. Shubha Mudgal has confirmed to interact with winners. 2. Best 50 entries( from all over India) irrespective of form & language would be published in a book by Anhad. 3. Best 100 entries get appreciation certificates. _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on matters of peace and democratisation in South Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit citizens wire service run since 1998 by South Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/ SACW archive is available at: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/ Sister initiatives : South Asia Counter Information Project : snipurl.com/sacip South Asians Against Nukes: www.s-asians-against-nukes.org Communalism Watch: communalism.blogspot.com/ DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/act/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/