South Asia Citizens Wire - Dispatch #2 | 14 October, 2004 via: www.sacw.net
[1] Limits to America's 'partnership' (Praful Bidwai)
[2] Anand Patwardhan, the 'Michael Moore of India (Kathleen Maclay)
[3] India: News for 'Secular' activists
- Burqa row in school (Rasheed Kidwai)
- Dalit Leader backs Shiv Sena
- Court directive to ban animal sacrifice
- 'Loya Jirga' tells Couple to become siblings (Gajinder Singh)
- Doordarshan to withdraw a film on Jayaprakash Narayan
[4] India: Sensing the Future: Female Literacy on the Rise in All Communities (Ravinder Kaur)
--------------
[1]
The News International October 14, 2004
LIMITS TO AMERICA'S 'PARTNERSHIP'
Praful Bidwai
In Pakistan, it is often thought that India and the United States have over the past few years developed a "special relationship" or strategic "proximity" of a unique kind. That this is largely a myth - despite improved relations since the late 1990s - was recently demonstrated when the two states declared that the "first phase" of the grandiosely termed "Next Steps in Strategic Partnership" (NSSP) has ended. This is another way of saying that NSSP - launched less than a year ago - yielded very little.
Since then, US under-secretary of commerce Kenneth Juster has visited India to discuss the "second phase" of NSSP. But going by past experience, this may turn out, equally sterile. The "first phase" was to open up India's access to US nuclear and space exports and increase trade in "dual-use" goods (which have both military and civilian applications). But what did it achieve?
At the end of the day, Washington lifted sanctions imposed after the Pokharan-II blasts upon Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) headquarters, abolished 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 part of atomic power stations, like turbines and generators.)
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 which the subsidiaries import range from pins and clips to third-country products using US-made silicon chips or software. Most of these are easily available from alternative (including Indian domestic) sources. They don't contribute to high-technology trade - promoting which is NSSP's purpose.
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 (the London Club). Only 4 of India's 14 nuclear power reactors can possibly import the remaining 12 items governed by US domestic laws. 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. Several Indian companies make these!
So the new "liberal" licensing regime is for the most part irrelevant. In addition, Washington has since imposed fresh sanctions on 14 "entities" on suspicion that these might have helped Iran develop mass-destruction weapons. They include two former chairmen of India's Nuclear Power Corporation, one of whom visited Iran as part of an IAEA delegation!
NSSP's "second phase" might maximally see some loosening of controls on space satellites and components, which Washington treats as "munitions"! But dramatic changes are unlikely. The US is bound by its domestic laws and its commitments to multilateral agreements like the NSG, Missile Technology Control Regime, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group.
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 ... There's this great fixation in India with NSSP, but it's going to set Indians up for a great disappointment.... India and the US are not opening a new chapter, they are merely turning over a new leaf in the same chapter."
Four points are noteworthy. First, the current discussion on NSSP is essentially a hangover from the Vajpayee government days. That government showed irrational exuberance about a "strategic partnership" with Washington and minimised the asymmetrical, skewed nature of India-US relations.
Talbott in his Engaging India reveals that Vajpayee assigned a special role to Jaswant Singh just before the 1998 nuclear tests. Breaking protocol, Singh called on Clinton's special envoy Bill Richardson at the US ambassador's residence-something that senior Indian ministers don't usually 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. Even after the ice broke (with Clinton's March 2000 visit), the character of India-US relations didn't change. Washington won't share high-technology goods with India nor agree to build an exclusive relationship.
Second, Jaswant Singh was misguided in gushingly welcoming Bush's May 2001 announcement of plans to deploy a Ballistic Missile Defence system to give the US a shield against alien missiles. BMD will dangerously change the rules of the global nuclear-deterrence game. Singh's calculation was that the US would share this extremely advanced, cutting-edge technology with India.
Singh made a morally and militarily untenable departure from India's established opposition to BMD. His calculation was downright naive. 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 smaller Theatre Missile Defence technology with a close military ally (Japan) for whom it is developing it. Besides, an Indian TMD will create regional imbalances.
Third, if Indian policy-makers really think that friendship/partnership with America will help India enter the Nuclear Club, they are deluding themselves. The US cannot dispense with the global non-proliferation regime. (Only India, Pakistan and Israel have stayed out of it). The US sees the NPT 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. But that's precisely what India (and Pakistan) wants to avoid.
Finally, there are irreconcilable, fundamental differences between Indian and US views of 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.
For the US, nuclear disarmament isn't a long-term goal; its' at best a legal and moral obligation to be defied or ducked. 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. Indeed, sometimes tensions between them become severe. Recently, an Indian RA&W officer (Ravinder Singh) "defected" to the US. Last week, India expressed its disapproval of the US ambassador's public offer of FBI assistance to Assam to combat militancy. Despite improved relations, "strategic partnership" remains an illusion.
______
[2]
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/10/13_patwardhan.shtml
UC Berkeley News
ANAND PATWARDHAN, THE 'MICHAEL MOORE OF INDIA,' brings his hard-hitting documentary films to campus
By Kathleen Maclay | 13 October 2004
Anand Patwardhan
BERKELEY - Despite nearly constant efforts to censor his work, Anand Patwardhan continues his nearly 30-year career of making hard-hitting and often controversial documentary films about the nuclear danger, religious violence and environmental threats.
The award-winning filmmaker from India will visit the University of California, Berkeley's Berkeley Art Museum/Pacific Film Archive (PFA) Oct. 21-24 as part of "Documentary Voices," a project bringing international documentary-makers to the PFA as resident artists.
After a Thursday, Oct. 21, screening of his film, "In the Name of God," and of a short, "We are Not Your Monkeys," Patwardhan will talk about film and activism. On Friday, he will address the audience after the showing of "Father, Son and Holy War." Patwardhan will talk on Saturday, Oct. 23, after the screening of "War and Peace," and on Sunday, Oct. 24, after the showing of "Bombay: Our City" and a short, "Occupation: Mill Worker."
Before he arrives on campus, his films "A Narmada Diary" and "Fishing: In the Sea of Greed" will be shown at the PFA on Thursday, Oct. 14.
For more information, call the PFA at (510) 642-1412 or visit the PFA website.
In the question-and-answer session below, Patwardhan shared with UC Berkeley Media Relations some of his thoughts about filmmaking and the current state of the world.
Q: Documentary films have generated increasing attention of late, at least in the United States. Is there a similar surge in other parts of the world, such as India? If so, to what do you attribute it?
A: Important documentaries were made in the U.S. even in the 60's. Later films like "Hearts and Minds" and "Harlan County U.S.A" won Oscars and by the 80's, several documentaries got theatrical release. But it was not until the phenomenon of Michael Moore that documentaries became box office super hits and actually began to shape mass opinion.
In India, the early documentary scene was dominated by government propaganda made by the Films Division of India, which produced newsreels and documentaries that were compulsorily shown before every commercial film. People either arrived deliberately late or walked out for a smoke during these films, and the tag of "boring" became inescapably attached to the documentary. It has taken several decades of sustained independent work to break this tag.
Today with the DVD revolution making the means of production accessible, the documentary has come of age, and public interest is rising, stoked by several ham-handed attempts by the state (India) to curtail the documentary filmmaker's right to freedom of expression.
Poster for "Father, Son, and Holy War" film, to be screened at UC Berkeley's PF on Friday, Oct. 22
Q: You've called yourself "a non-serious person forced by circumstance to make serious films." What circumstances drove you into the documentary business, and what keeps you there?
A: As it turned out, all my films were driven by political events. I discovered early the joys of mixing my "art" with the desire to speak out about issues I was involved with. In the beginning, I saw filmmaking more in utilitarian terms, as a means towards an end, as a pamphlet that would be more exciting than the usual fare and would overcome the shackles of illiteracy. In time, I was seduced by the medium itself and began to take more interest and pay more attention to the craft of filmmaking and the ways of storytelling. But I don't think my original motivation ever left me, nor has the yardstick by which I judge whether a film has been able to communicate with people widely or not.
As a "non-serious" person, I would like to have made more playful films, but there is so little time left over from making and screening films about serious issues that I am usually too mentally exhausted. Sometimes, of course, the playful peeps through even in films of import.
Q: Do you think you make a difference in terms of the many issues relating to environmental and social justice, war and peace?
A: This may be wishful thinking, but the honest answer is yes, at least at the micro level. If I didn't think this, it would have been hard to sustain my own levels of engagement.
Where is the evidence? It comes in small ways, from individuals who speak out at screenings, from letters from viewers, from essays written by school and college kids, from a movie star who decided to become an activist, from a fundamentalist who questioned his own belief system, from an usher at a posh club where the film was screened who bicycled for miles to track me down and get a Hindi version of the film.
The list, fortunately, is very long and has always saved me from sinking into doubt and despair, no matter how hard the circumstances. Even the fact that the state and the fundamentalists have tried to suppress my work proved to me that they found the work threatening, i.e., effective.
Q: Your film "War and Peace" explored issues surrounding the nuclear tests conducted in India and Pakistan in 1998. Has the situation gotten better or worse since then?
A: We went through a period for about a year - after the Indian Parliament was attacked by armed gunmen allegedly sent by Pakistan - when Indian and Pakistani troops were eyeball to eyeball on the "line of control." Anything could have happened then, fingers were tightened on the nuclear trigger.
Since that time, there has been a palpable thaw. Peace talks have taken place, as have cultural exchanges. Perhaps more importantly for the masses in both countries, cricket and hockey matches have been played in an atmosphere of great cordiality, something we never expected would happen so fast. It seems clear that people on both sides want peace, but in both countries, fundamentalists continue their campaign of hate, and the balance could easily be tilted with a few well chosen terror strikes, so one can never breathe easy.
Q: What do you make of Iran's interest in nuclear weapons, and North Korea's nuclear capabilities? Do you have ideas of how these situations might be resolved peacefully?
A: I see the militarism of the U.S. as the single biggest threat to world peace. North Korea and Iran pale in comparison. When was the last time they invaded a virtually disarmed country? Is there a single terrorist whom we fear today who does not have a long history of being trained, armed or supported in the past by the U.S.?
We have to rethink the words we use, our core beliefs, if we are to come close to the reality of what is happening in the world.
Q: You wrote an essay, "How We Came to Love the Bomb." Can you give a short summary?
A: I wrote that article in despair over the fact that my country had abandoned the non-violent legacy of Mahatma Gandhi and embraced the path to nuclear disaster shown to us by our super power Big Brother. I also made a film, "War and Peace," documenting the mad euphoria that we saw in the streets as Indians and Pakistanis celebrated their newfound powers of mass destruction.
A few years later, when my film "War and Peace" was shown in the U.S., A. Hamrah of the Boston Globe wrote a perceptive piece comparing the jingoism seen in "War and Peace" with the recorded jingoism that greeted the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 and the development of nukes in the U.S. in the 50's. A whole bomb culture had evolved then with pop songs, T-shirts, the works.
Q: You protested the Vietnam War while living in the U.S. in the '60s. How do you feel about the Iraq war, and are there similarities between the two?
A: Both wars were illegitimate, immoral, but I think the reasons for the Iraq war are even more transparently venal. If there is less public protest this time than there was during Vietnam, I attribute it to the fact that there is no draft.
A majority of the young Americans being killed in Iraq are from low income groups and minorities. Sadly, it is only when rich kids die that America seems to really wake up. Perhaps only when those who vote for war are forced to commit a loved one into battle will wars come to an end.
Q: During your career, you've dealt with attempts by the Indian government to censor your films, and with Hindu activists who pressured the American Museum for Natural History in 2002 to postpone screening some of your films. Who are your biggest allies in trying to fight censorship?
A: Where the enemy has been state censorship, my biggest ally has been a healthy Indian Constitution that guarantees "freedom of expression" and dedicated civil liberties lawyers like P.A. Sebastian and Nitya Ramakrishnan, who have successfully defended my films. To date, despite repeated bans and attempted deletions, not a single frame of any of my films has been sacrificed. Although the official release of many films was delayed, in the end we were always able to win in court and through public pressure generated by a sympathetic press.
Where my opponents have been religious fundamentalists, my allies have been secular Indians of all faiths, all those who are marginalized by caste and creed, and the many Hindus who have always taken pride from the inclusivity and tolerance of their belief system.
Of the many attempts made by fundamentalists to shut down our screenings, very few have succeeded. In Kerala (India) last year, "In the Name of God" was banned by a district officer who gave in to threats by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. But a month-long agitation that included street marches by secular Keralites forced the ban to be withdrawn. Even the Museum of Natural History in New York, facing an e-mail barrage by secular Indians, reversed its ban on the film. Unfortunately, it did not get up the guts to keep the screening on its own premises, but relocated it to New York University.
Q: You've been called the "Indian Michael Moore." Your thoughts about that description, and about the work of the American filmmaker?
A: It is an honor to be compared with Michael Moore. But my own films have never gotten into the mainstream. So I'm thrilled as much by Moore's work as the impact he has had. My heart went out to him on Oscar night. He stood up and was counted.
With his films, I've loved much of what he has done, although I'm not sure how exactly his work is understood by those who do not already agree with him. There is a nagging doubt about whether middle-of-the-road Americans take kindly to him.
I do not mean to be critical because I think those who like Moore see through the lies that the U.S. and the Bush administration have told the world, and their morale needs to be lifted. Moore does this brilliantly, but perhaps a less personal attack would have served better to bring out the systemic problems in the U.S.
At times I have also been accused of mocking my "enemies" and I always defended myself by saying that one needed a sharp instrument to cut through the layers of deceit and disguise. I think Moore's technique is legitimate, but sometimes he is guilty of striking too many blows even after his opponent is down for the count. That is what happened the second time he talked to Charlton Heston in "Bowling for Columbine." And "Fahrenheit 9/11" would have been better if it was less Bush-centric.
But nothing I say takes away from the sheer chutzpah of Mike. He is the best thing that has happened to America since (linguist and activist Noam) Chomsky.
Q: What are you working on now?
A: Doing screenings and fighting court cases. "Father, Son and Holy War" (1995) won two national awards in 1996 on the basis of which I approached state-controlled Doordarshan national TV to broadcast the film. When they, as usual, refused, l went to court and won. Then they went to Supreme Court, which is where the matter now stands.
I do have some half-finished films on the back burner, but it's too early to talk about them.
Q: What are your plans while at UC Berkeley?
A: Just doing the screenings, meeting with friends, recharging my batteries.
______
[3]
The Telegraph October 13, 2004
BURQA ROW IN SCHOOL
Rasheed Kidwai
Betul (Madhya Pradesh), Oct. 12: A 15-year-old schoolgirl here has become the public face of a radical group's campaign for an "Islamic" dress code in a controversy similar to the one sparked by the recent French ban on headscarves in classrooms.
The row started after Shabnam, a ninth standard student of a co-ed government higher secondary school, arrived in a burqa but was turned back by the teachers.
She returned the next day, the "net curtain" in place that allowed her to see but prevented others from seeing her eyes. She was not alone - one of her classmates, too, was in a burqa.
Realising that the row could soon take a political turn in BJP-ruled Madhya Pradesh, principal Pushpalata Chowdhury shot off a letter to district authorities seeking guidelines on "violation" of the school dress code. She also called parents requesting them to give up the "burqa campaign". Chowdhury said burqas could pose a threat as miscreants could use it as disguise to sneak into the school.
Soon the word was out that Muslim girls were being prevented from fulfilling their religious obligations. Local muftis, maulvis and religious outfits joined in. The radical Anjuman Islamia Committee took charge, asking the authorities of the Garg Colony school on the bank of the Machna to "see reason".
Mohammad Islamil of the Anjuman told the authorities that Islam impresses upon women to "lower their gaze and guard their modesty" and hijab was definitely established as obligatory dress code in the Shariat.
Privately, however, not many Muslims here favour the Anjuman's "back to basics" approach. Abdul Rahim, whose daughter is among 56 girls supporting the burqa campaign, said almost in a whisper that while he acknowledged that Islam outlined a code of modesty, it did not commend a certain style.
Asked why he was not protesting, Rahim said as the father of two girls, he did not want to become an "outcast". Some others said it was important to note that Islamic values of modesty applied to both men and women.
For the time being, district authorities are trying to settle the issue at the local level. District education officer S.S. Thakur said he was "applying his mind" and has asked for guidelines from the capital, Bhopal. "Prima facie, it appears to be a case of a violation of dress code," he said.
Not many in Betul, which is about 200 km from Bhopal, have heard about the controversy in France that erupted in the wake of an amendment in the code of education banning students from wearing conspicuous religious symbols to state schools.
The ban also covers Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses, to ensure that secular rules are applied evenly. The ban does not apply in Catholic and other private schools.
o o o o
http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/oct/13sena.htm
AMBEDKAR BACKS SHIV SENA October 13, 2004 19:02 IST
The Shiv Sena on Wednesday received support from unexpected quarters with Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangh leader and Dr B R Ambedkar's grandson, Prakash Ambedkar, hinting at "issue-based association" with the saffron party.
"Political rivalry is one thing but on certain issues we are not averse to working with the Sena," Ambedkar said, coming down heavily on the Bharatiya Janata Party as well Congress for "alienating" the middle class and working class through their economic policies.
Ambedkar, whose party had three MLAs in the 1999 assembly polls, however, was all praise for the Sena for its criticism of the privatisation policy of the National Democratic Alliance government that rendered many jobless.
The Sena leadership may come out with its solution to ward off the ill-effects of privatisation, Ambedkar hoped.
The Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangh, a splinter Republican Party of India group, is contesting 83 seats and was an former ally of the Congress before the three of its MLAs switched loyalties to the latter.
o o o o
Deccan Herald, October 14, 2004
HC DIRECTIVE TO BAN ANIMAL SACRIFICE
The Khurda district administration has given a green signal to the gory tradition this year too, where animals are butchered during the Durga puja, in violation of the cruelty to animals act.
BHUBANESWAR, DHNS:
The Orissa High Court has directed the local administration of a coastal district to initiate steps to prevent animal sacrifice in a major Hindu temples during the upcoming Durga Puja. The week long festival is scheduled to begin in different shrines next week.
Responding to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by T K Maharana and nine others, a two member bench of the High Court, directed the Collector and Superintendent of Police(SP) of Khurda district, to take strong action to prevent animal sacrifice during the festival at the shrine of Goddess Bhagabati in Banpur.
The PIL stated that large numbers of animals are brutally butchered during the Durga puja in the shrine every year, which violates the cruelty to animals act.
The Khurda district administration has not been able to end the tradition of animal sacrifice at the Bhagabati temple during Durga puja, mainly due to pressure from local people, particularly from the priests of the shrine. In fact, this year the district administration has already given a green signal to the gory tradition, after a meeting convened by the deputy Collector of Khurda to discuss the issue failed to each a consensus. The meeting was attended by the temple priests and representatives from local villages.
However, the HC directive is expected to help the district administration to ban animal sacrifice at the shrine this year. The order has also brought relief to animal rights activists in the state who have been fighting to end the age old brutal tradition of animal sacrifice in different shrines during different festivals, particularly during Durga puja. However, they are still worried because the HC order is confined to one shrine only and large number of animals are likely to be axed in other temples. The state government too has not been able to end the cruel tradition, though the issue was discussed in the floor of the assembly on several occasions.
o o o o
The Telegraph October 14, 2004
COUPLE TOLD TO BECOME SIBLINGS
Gajinder Singh Chandigarh, Oct. 13: Couple yesterday, siblings today.
A happily married couple in Haryana has been told to regard each other as brother and sister by a council of similar caste villages which decreed their marriage was unacceptable on social grounds.
In Sunday's bizarre ruling in Asanda, Jhajjar, near Delhi, a Rathee khap panchayat ordered Rampal and Sonia, who is three-months pregnant, to terminate their marriage of one-and-a-half years.
The panchayat, comprising elders from three villages, said there was "bhaichara" (brotherhood) between members of Rampal's gotra Dahiya (a sub-caste in the Jat community) and Sonia's Rathee gotra.
The unwritten social code in the state forbids them from marrying each other, the elders ruled. The "sin" could be undone only if they accepted each other as siblings. That Sonia was happily married to Rampal and was even carrying his child had no effect on the elders, who said they delayed the decision because of "confusion" over Sonia's gotra.
Sonia has reportedly said she would prefer death to accepting her husband as a brother. She claims she belongs to the Hooda clan - a sub-caste whose members can tie the knot with a Dahiya - as her father, Satvir Singh, used the surname. She has also refused to accept a Rs 10 note from Rampal as acceptance of the decree.
But Rampal, whose gotra is in a minority in the village, has buckled under pressure. "I have no choice. I am with the panchayat as of now," he said. But his three sisters support Sonia, who has left the village to stay with one of them till a solution is thrashed out.
Sonia's father said he would approach the court. "We are not living in the age of cannibals. They cannot wreck my daughter's life," Satvir, a policeman, said.
Sources said the state could not intervene as no FIR had been lodged.
Four years ago, a similar khap panchayat in Jaundhi village had ordered a woman to tie a rakhi on her husband, though the couple had an 18-month-old son. Their sin was they had married in the same sub-caste. The couple fled the village. They have not returned.
o o o o
The Tribune, October 14, 2004
It amounts to censorship DD has faulted in blocking JP film
Although the government has tried to wash its hands off the controversy over the decision of Doordarshan to withdraw a film on Jayaprakash Narayan which was to be telecast on his birthday on Monday, doubts linger. The Opposition is not the only one accusing the government of being partisan and biased. The Congress has a record of being less than fair in such matters, considering that similar crude attempts have been made in the past to scuttle "Aandhi" and "Aaj Ka MLA". Prasar Bharati CEO K.S. Sarma has even justified the decision not to show the film on the ground that its treatment of the Emergency was not "balanced". That gives the game away. How autonomous Prasar Bharati happens to be is known to everybody. Apparently, it has either got its orders from the high-ups or knows how to please the political bosses. So, it has played it safe by refusing to telecast the film. What it does not seem to realise is that such kneejerk reaction amounts to censorship, which happened to be a hallmark of the Emergency days.
Prakash Jha's film on JP was commissioned by the previous government. It was jointly sponsored by the Ministries of Culture and Information and Broadcasting. The portrayal of JP's role in the resistance against the Emergency is indeed central to the film, as former I and B Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has pointed out. Trying to excise these portions does no credit to the current dispensation.
What must be borne in mind is that speaking openly about an event happens to be the best catharsis. Take Gulzar's film "Maachis" for example. It freely mentioned the excesses committed by the police during the terrorism days in Punjab. There was a hue and cry by a certain section but it was rightly ignored. The film went on to win many awards. It did not cause any social upheaval either. In a democratic setup, everyone needs to be given certain leeway, artistes all the more so - and also the people who enjoy the Right to Know.
______
[4]
The Times of India - October 14, 2004
SENSING THE FUTURE: FEMALE LITERACY ON THE RISE IN ALL COMMUNITIES Ravinder Kaur
The census is a modern tool of 'governmentality'. Modern states cannot be governed without numbers and statistics. As the French scholar Foucault told us in his famous essay on 'Governmentality', statistics has to do with the 'science of the state' which turns people into populations and produces numbers necessary for governance. He, however, went on to point to a more insidious use of such statistics - to classify and organise populations into handy categories in order to 'discipline' or 'manage' them easily. Below Poverty Line (BPL) is such a created social category of governmentality.
Be that as it may, it is necessary to go beyond census figures to grasp certain nuanced social changes. Based on NSS data, I compare how the most disadvantaged group, women, has progressed in educational attainment over the last two decades. The comparison is done in both absolute terms, and relative to men. The data are for two periods, 1983 and 1999. The figures have been deliberately processed for the age group 8-24, to represent youth literacy, with literacy defined as having had at least two years of schooling rather than the proverbial 'signature' literate.
The results from this exercise are startling, and rather encouraging. The data show that most communities (Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian and SC/ST) are progressing at a near equal rate from their initial positions. In fact, the more worse off the women in a community were in 1983, the faster was their rate of progress. Thus, SC/ST young women show the greatest increase in their literacy levels, from 27.9 per cent in 1983 to 59.6 per cent in 1999, showing a gain of 31.7 per cent. Hindu and Muslim young women are progressing at a slower, but equal pace - an increase in literacy levels of 22.6 per cent and 23.3 per cent, respectively. The latter statistic - a larger increase in female literacy among Muslim women - might shock those who bemoan the lack of progress among the minorities. The only correct way of interpreting this fast and surprising improvement in female education levels is via the understanding that the hunger for education knows no barriers, whether of religion, caste, or gender. With all the caveats, education still spells the surest route to improving one's life chances. And today, far fewer women wish to be governed by customs that have curbed their progress.
People who cry discrimination at the mere smell of vote banks may also need the reality check provided by these figures. These youth literacy and educational attainment figures for women of Muslim and SC/ST communities show that they may no longer be facing some of the religion and caste barriers which kept them (and the men of their communities) down earlier. If the government can claim some benefit for having furthered the cause of the SC/ST women, it cannot do the same in the case of Muslim women. Minority schools and colleges have helped somewhat but the real reason for this change appears to be the demand for education by communities which appear to have accepted it as a condition of life in the modern world.
A recent study of Muslim women by Ritu Menon and Zoya Hasan states that parental opposition to the education of girl children is a disappearing variable, except in some rural pockets. In fact, their study finds that there is not much opposition by younger Muslim parents to even co-education.
To get back to the results: As expected, Christian women are at the top with a literacy rate of 95.9 per cent, showing an increase of only 8.1 per cent because they don't have much catching up to do. Surprisingly, the Sikhs, who are justifiably receiving the short end of the stick where the sex ratio is concerned, are not far behind the Christians. They have progressed by 19.8 per cent points from a youth literacy level of 72 per cent in 1983 to 91.8 per cent in 1999. If female literacy is linked to fertility decline, the question in the case of the Sikhs (the Punjabis and Haryanvis, more correctly) is - why do they still not like girl children? National Family Health Survey data for 1998-99 indicates that this too may be changing but is not on the radar screen - yet. In addition to absolute improvements, closure of the gender gap, or the gap between male and female literacy, is also in evidence. Sikh and Christian women are snapping closely at the heels of their men - here the gender gap in 1999 was only 9 per cent and 3 per cent, respectively.
The narrowing of the gender gap in educational attainment can have good and bad consequences for women and families. On the positive side, women will have less children and participate in the workforce in larger numbers. This will hopefully increase their participation in intra-household decision-making as well. Empowered women will be role models for both sons and daughters - again, hopefully, leading to a breakdown of strict gender roles.
On the negative side, girls seen as over-educated may not find spouses or companions easily. Women who outstrip men in education are likely to find less educated local grooms unacceptable. Husbands with less education than their wives may feel threatened and take it out on them by being physically violent. The increases in domestic violence appear to be in direct proportion with women's enablement. The latter is a scenario society needs to avoid.
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
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.
_______________________________________________ Sacw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://insaf.net/mailman/listinfo/sacw_insaf.net
