[GreenYouth] Book Review: Khaki Ethnic Violence in India by Mahtab Alam
Book Review: Khaki Ethnic Violence in India Submitted by admin4 on 15 April 2010 - 1:25pm. *By Mahtab Alam, TwoCircles.net, Name of the book: Khaki Ethnic Violence in India Author: Omar Khalidi Publisher: Three Essays Collective B-957 Palam Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana-122 017, India Phone: +91 98681 26587, +91 91863 44843 Year: 2010 (2nd and Revised edition) Pages: 196 Price: Rs. 300/- * In January 2006, L.K. Advani, then Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha, the lower house of the Indian Parliament, walked out from the house. The reason? Muslim headcount in the Army as proposed by Sachar Committee. But, why this much hue and cry over a simple matter and walkout? Was there anything to hide? Why Mr. Advani Company was so afraid by Muslim headcount in Indian Army? The book under review can give you an idea, why it could have been? This book covers a wider theme of the religious composition of the armed forces, the paramilitary and the police and documents data on marginal representation of Muslims in the Army and other Security Intelligence Services especially on decisive positions till 2008. In fact, it answers some of the crucial questions like - Who runs India’s security sector consisting of ministries of home, intelligence and defence affairs? The book is written by Dr. Omar Khalidi, an independent scholar and a staff member at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), United States of America. *Colonial Hangover* Tracing the changes and continuity in recruitment and other policies in the Army both in colonial period and since the Independence, the author concludes, “As noted before, just before independence the colonial administration agreed to throw open the army to Indians of all the caste and communities… (H)owever, in practice, the matter remained where it was.” (p. 37). And this claim is fully backed by data. He further points, “It is interesting to note that during the colonial era, the army used Urdu written in Roman letters to “solve” the language issues by using neither Devnagari nor Urdu script for written communication. In post-independence era, Sanskritized Hindi replaced Urdu, exemplified by the title change of military news magazine Fauji Akhbar to Sainik Samachar !” (p. 44) *Saffronisation of Army?* The author poses questions like: What is the influence of the ideology of Hindutva in the armed forces?, Do the majority of the rank and file share the Hindutva vision of India? And will the military remain the last reliable line of defence in worsening communal relations, since the police uniforms are tainted with partnership. To answer, the author quotes J. S Nadkarani, “Sympathy for Hindutava is far more wide spread amongst senior officers than was suspected. One has reason to believe that under their immaculate uniforms, a large number of senior officers wear saffron vest. It is quite easy to spot them. They invariably start their conversation by stating that they are really secular at heart. They have never believed in caste or creed. But one must be fair. Don’t you think we are pampering the Minorities? ” (p. 79). The author’s suspicion grows as he sees some 50 top retired officers of the army, navy and air force joining BJP between May 1991 and March 1998 stating the typical ‘nationalistic’ reasons: BJP’s tough stand against minorities and Pakistan. He also cites the incident of 31 May 1999, when the Defence Minister (in BJP led government) took the unprecedented step of taking senior officers to brief the BJP National Executive (p. 80). *Khaki and Communal Violence* One of the most important aspects that the author in this book examines is the impacts of under-representation of ethnic and religious groups especially Muslims in this sector—low percentage in Police and Biased/Partisan/Active Hostility. The author argues, “Even though the police conduct in the riots during the Babri mosque or other similar riots may be dismissed as merely partisanship, dereliction of duty, negligence and so forth, there are a number of instances in which the police was the perpetrators of unprovoked violence against innocent and unarmed Muslims. The two notorious cases are from Moradabad in 1980 and Meerut in 1987. Similarly the police was an active participant in the 1992-93 Bombay killings of Muslims as documented by more than one organization. Later in March 1993 and during Gujarat pogrom, February-March 2002, when police took active part in killing or leading the mobs attacking Muslims” (p. 140-41). The author has dealt this issue at length. *Muslim hence ‘Unreliable’* The last but most important chapter of the book documents the structure of communal biasness in intelligence agencies. In 1970, M K Dhar, a former joint director of IB confessed that his anti-Muslim perceptions were further strengthened by what I was thought at the Anand Parvat training facility of the Intelligence Bureau…I was told in no uncertain terms the Muslims were not to be trusted.” (p. 157).The book
[GreenYouth] CNN IBN Interviews Arundhati Roy
*Sagarika Ghose:** You wrote your article ‘Walking with the comrades’ in The Outlook before Dantewada happened. In the aftermath of the Dantewada, do you still stand by the tone of sympathy that you had with the Maoists cause in that essay?* *Arundhati Roy:* Well, this is a odd way to frame before and after Dantewada happened because actually you know this cycle of violence has been building on and on. This is not the first time that a large number of security personnel have been killed by the Maoists. I have written about it and the other attacks that took place between the years 2005-2007. The way I look at is often you know people make it sound that oh on this side of people, who are celebrating the killing of CRPF jawans and that side of the people who are asking for the Maoists to be wiped out. This is not the case. I think that you got to look at the every death as a terrible tragedy. In a system, in a war that’s been pushed on the people and that unfortunately is becoming a war of the rich against the poor. In which rich put forward the poorest of the poor to fight the poor. CRPF are terrible victims but they are not just victims of the Maoists. They are victims of a system of structural violence that is taking place, that sort to be drowned in this empty condemnation industry that goes on which is entirely meaningless because most of the time people who condemn them have really no sympathy for them. They are just using them as pawns. *Sagarika Ghose:** Who then will break the cycle of violence? The state argues that the reason why the state has to cleanse the area or sanitize the area is because whenever it initiates development works on bridges or starts school; those are blown up by the Maoists. Is it that the cycle of violence according to you can only be broken by the states and if the state pulls back is that what you believe?* *Arundhati Roy:* There is some simple sort of litmus test for that, is it the case that there are hospitals, schools, low malnutrition and lot of development in poor areas where there aren’t any Maoists? That’s not the case. The fact is even if you look at the studies that have been done by doctors in a place like Bilashpur. What Vinayak Sen describes as nutritional aids is happening. When you go into the schools, you see that they are used as barracks. They are built as barracks so as to say that Maoists blow up schools and they are against development is a bit ridiculous. *Sagarika Ghose:** But you condemn state violence and the charge against you is that you don’t condemn Naxals violence and also you don’t condemn Maoists violence. In fact you rationalise it and even romaticising violence? That is a charge made against you and in fact if I can read from your essay where you have written that, “I feel I want to say something about the futility of violence but what should I suggest they do? Go to court, a rally, and a hunger strike that sounds ridiculous; which party they should vote for, which democratic institution they should approach? You seem to be saying that non-violence is futile?* *Arundhati Roy:* This is a strange charge on someone who is writing about non-violence and non-violence movement fro 10 years now. But what I saw when I went into the forests was this - that non-violence resistance though it has actually not worked; not in the ‘Narmada Bachao Andolan’ and not even in many other non-violence movements and not even in the militant movements. It has worked in some parts of the movement. But inside the forests it’s a different story because non-violence and in particularly, Gandhian non-violence in some ways needs an audience. It’s a theater that needs an audience. But inside the forests there is no audience when a thousand police come and surround the forest village in the middle of the night, what are they to do? How are the hungry to go on a hunger strike? How are the people with no money to boycott taxes or foreign goods or do consumer boycotts? They have nothing. I do see the violence inside that forest as a ‘counter violence’. As a ‘violence of resistance’ and I do feel terrible about the fact that there is this increasing cycle of violence that the more weapons the government arms the police with those weapons end up with the Maoist PLGA. It’s a terrible thing to do to any society. I don’t think that there is any romance in it. However I’m not against romance. I do feel it’s incredible that these poor people are standing up against this mighty state that is sending thousands and thousands of Para-military. I mean, what they are doing in those forests against those people with AK-47 and grenades. *Sagarika Ghose:** But Maoists have AK-47 too? They have pressure bombs too? * *Arundhati Roy:* They snatched it from cops. *Sagarika Ghose:** Should people like you for not been raising their voices against the cycle of violence or should you actually been trying to find out rationalization for it because your been called as ‘apologists for
[GreenYouth] Chidambaram’s Crocodile Tears by Glad son Dungdung
-- Forwarded message -- From: Gladson Dungdung gladsonhractiv...@gmail.com Date: 15 April 2010 10:19 Subject: [arkitectindia] Chidambaram’s Crocodile Tears by Gladson Dungdung To: Arkitechindia arkitectin...@yahoogroups.com, humanrightsactivist humanrightsactiv...@yahoogroups.com Chidambaram’s Crocodile Tears By Gladson Dungdung Jharkhandmirror.org 15 April, 2010 Soon after hearing the heart breaking news from Dantewara of Chhatisgarh, where 76 CRPF personals were killed in the Maoists attack on April 6, 2010, the India’s Home Minister P Chidambaram gave his resignation saying, “I have no hesitation in saying the buck stops at my desk. I accept fully responsibility for what happened in Dantewara”. Of course he is right; apparently because he is the person who had sent the CRPF personals for preparing the investment roadmap by killing the Maoists as they are the biggest threat to the investment climate that’s what our economist Prime Minister Manmohan Sigh had said earlier. A brilliant corporate lawyer turned Home Minister P Chidambaram’s odd face had also appeared in the media, shedding tears for the CRPF personals who laid down their lives in Dantewada. But how could the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had accepted Chidambaram’s resignation when his assigned job for preparation of the investment climate has not yet accomplished? As usual, the corporate media did not hesitate in coining Chidambaram as hero of the day merely for submitting his resignation not for his deeds for the nation. But is he? Is it not true that he shed the crocodile tears merely to mobilize the middle class sentiments in the favour of his war against the Adivasis in corporate interest? Perhaps, the ARMY Chief General V K Singh has unmasked the corporate Home Minister saying that there appeared to be “internal deficiencies” in the training of the personals lost their lives in the attack. Though Chidambaram has rejected it by saying it “incorrect and baseless” but question is how the ARMY chief who is responsible for the security of the nation can talk on the baseless matter? Does Chidambaram know better than the ARMY chief about the security related matters? Of course, he can not be challenged on the matters of the corporate but every one can doubt on his ability on the security matters if he challenges the ARMY chief. Secondly, the matter of the law and order is the state subject but there were no support extended to the CRPF personals by the local police during the anti-Naxal operation in Dantewara. Thirdly, there is no electricity, good telephone service and other facilities available in the CRPF camp of Dantewara. Ironically, the CRPF personals had no vegetables for last three months. They were having chapattis with mangos available nearby the CRPF camp. In fact, the CRPF camp was established in Dantewara without availability of the required infrastructure, support and facilities. This is how our brave security personals are being treated and our ruling elites shed the crocodile tears when they lose their lives and we also walk with them. Is it not true that the CRPF personals were left to die in an unknown utterly dangerous place without any help of the local police and the villagers? Who is responsible for the loss of 76 brave lives? Paradoxically, the opposition party the BJP has backed Chidambaram saying ‘it is not the time for a Senapati (commander) to step down. His resignation at this stage would be meaning a victory for Naxalites’. A question comes into one’s mind is whether the BJP would have behaved in the same manner with Chidambaram if the Jehadi terrorists would have done the same damage to our security forces? If the 26/11 can end Shivraj Patil’s career as Home Minister then why should Chidambaram stay back? However, the Left parties especially the CPI (M) has shocked the most as now Bhudhadev Bhattacharjee has also agreed to work together with Chidambaram and of course, his party is very keen to establish corporate corridor in the so-called red corridor. The people are amazed to see the rights left and centre alliance on the issue of cleansing the Maoists. It is apparent because all these parties are working hard for converting the so-called red corridor into the corporate corridor. Now the corporate houses have also become the election investors therefore our political parties are committed for the corporate interest rather than the people’s interest. Obviously, they are the main actors who run the biggest democracy of the world, where the marginalized have only a day once in a five years to rejoice the democracy and rest of the days they have to face the brutality. Indeed, the untrained CRPF personals were deliberately put into danger with the expectation, if they are killed by the Maoists that would be the best opportunity for mobilizing the middle class sentiments for using the Army to get the Adivasis land clear for the corporate sharks in the name of cleansing the Maoists.
