I am Ashamed and I Apologize

Thanks for this article, Himendra. It takes much guts to write this, and the compassion really shows through.

Hi,

The problem that India faces, and so does most of the world, is a Spiritual problem. It lies in the ``exclusivity of God``. Riots, Poverty, Conflicts, Wars, Fundamentalism, all these are symptoms of a deeper problem. Homoeopathic system of medicine, understands the symptoms but treats whole body, as one organ. It does treat the human body as a set of different organs, which have to be treated separately, in case they develop a disease or begin to malfunction.

The world`s problems are similar. Christianity and Islam specifically, believe in the ``exclusivity of their God/Allah``, and their`s being the ``true reliogion`` and the ``only means to God``.

Add to this, a God whose word is `written in Stone`; without any opportnity for human beings to evolute to Godhood; a God who judges, and punishes if you do not do this or that

These religions in their preaching have reduced Human Beings, capable of becoming a Rumi, Baha u`llah, Buddha, Sai Baba, Vivekanada, Al-Hallaj, Ravi Shankara and Guru Nanak, to mere cats and dogs, who have to follow a certain regimen, so as to reach some next-life paradise, by completely denying their human experiences in this life, killing if need be (themselves or others), to keep the word of their ``only true God`` (and in Islam, Allah - even the name given in a particular language is the only true name, in this case).

Till we realise that we are all rooted in One-ness - a complete being; where just like the if the Heart is malfunctioning Homoepaths look for a disease elsewhere; to treat poverty or a decline in Civic Society (which after all produces the Politicians) we have to look in deeper human beliefs.

Everyone in the world has a belief - their own religon; it could be the religion of no-God, or an `exclusive-God or Allah`, or even ancient societies who worship nature - yet everyone has a religion and a belief underneath.

The problem has to be addressed in this space.

I am by no means suggesting that Hindus are not plagued by this disease, yet, the acceptability to other people`s ``way to God`` is deep-rooted; there is no `rightness` about the Hindu way alone. The Hindu philosophy as a whole is completely rooted in ``Aham Bhramasmi`` (I am That) or ``Shivoham`` (I am Shiva). This is a reflection of the acceptance of human capability to reach Godhood - any human being, without any, binding on religion. So if a Sufi Saint such as Al-Hallaj calls out ``I am That`` (and displays it in actions - through Love and Compassion) - a Hindu would easily bend and touch his feet; the same is mostly not true for followers of Islam and Chritianity.

The moment we remove ``exclusivity of God`` and the concepts of a ``judgemental God who punishes us for doing (or not doing) this or that`` from our belief-system; and to this the flavour of ``oneness`` and ``importance to human experience`` (of even being God, among other experiences), then we can create a Hunger-free, Conflit-free, Peaceful and a Loving world.

Warm Regards,
Rahul Dewan

Srijan Foundation
(www.srijanfoundation.org)

Prem,

First of all do you think that it would be justified if I apologize 2 u for writing all so called CRAP....LOOK....get one thing clear....u havent read my earlier reply....I didnt say any bad words against anyone....I apologized 2 our muslim brothers and sisters for wat some of our foolish hindu brothers did in gujarat....but then I read one of pakis mail and it forced me 2 thaink that only, we hindus, are talking abt Peace....and I definitely dnt agree with u that this kind of mentality is killing humanity....before answering any of your questions....I would like 2 get an answer frm u....how old are you....wats ur age....my mentality is not like this....but if u r more than 30 years....I dnt want 2 argue with u anymore as I m just 20 years and I m ready 2 face the enemy....frm inside as well as frm outside....just tell me one thing....Prithviraj Chouhan released Mohammed Ghauri 14 times and Mohammed Ghauri killed him....thats the mentality which is killing Indians and u have got the same mentality....of....let the bygones b the bygones....not anymore....my friend....we....youngsters are the ones who are going to take India into New Millenium....definitely not the oldies....and believe me....we....youngsters r 2 good in giving back all the hatred and hurt which we received since decades....we r not like our ancestors....who allowed babar and other invaders 2 rule our India for so long....if u want 2 take inspiration then look up for Great Rana Pratap....Shivaji....who fought against the injustice....if these great people had the same mentality like you....and if they would have said that all this revenge and saving our motherland is a CRAP....my dear friend....if it is not for Netaji....Bhagat Singh....Chandrashekhar....Rani Jhansi....u would not have been calling India as free....and remove the misconception that ur favorite sabarmati`s sant....Gandhi....gave u freedom....if Gandhi would had been such a strong person and if he had strong will power....he would had been teh first person 2 take the beatings frm britishers like Lal Lajpat Rai and not just sitting at the back of the meeting and making fool out of common Indians and forcing them to take the beating from the britishers....LOOK....one thing is very clear....we r no longer going 2 adopt the policy of showing our second cheek 2 if someone slaps us on first cheek....definitely not me....but I believe persons like you are harming India as we had paid heed 2 ur talks then we wouldnt had won 1948, 1965, 1971, Kargil....and dnt give me an excuse that the war decides who is left and not who is right....as my relatives r posted on the border and one of my uncle lost his live in 1971 war....he was flying Indian Jet....another uncle of mine lost his live when he stepped on the landmine on east pakistan border....

Foreign Affairs

July/August 2002

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20020701fareviewessay8530/radha-kumar/india-s-house-divided-understanding-communal-violence.html

SUMMARY

Why are some parts of India -- such as the recently riot-stricken state of Gujarat -- plagued by communal violence while other parts are not? Ashutosh Varshney`s new book finds an answer in civil society.

India`s House Divided: Understanding Communal Violence

by Radha Kumar

From Foreign Affairs, July/August 2002

Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. By Ashutosh Varshney. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002, 384 pp. $45.00.

Radha Kumar is Senior Fellow in Peace and Conflict Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

India once stood tall in the annals of postcolonial nations. Beset by deep poverty, great inequality, and a vast population, the country still managed to avoid the dictatorships that befell so many of its neighbors. India`s democracy, now encompassing a billion people, may have been maddeningly slow to reform, but at least it was resilient. Governments rose and fell, new participants swelled the ranks of the political elite, and the middle class kept expanding. Although the country`s many religious, linguistic, and caste groups frequently squabbled -- and sometimes exploded into violence -- they also coexisted.

Whereas other multiethnic countries underwent violent breakups leading to ethnically homogeneous states, India appeared to have pulled off that unlikely feat: maintaining a pluralist administration under a secular government. The country`s rulers proved surprisingly responsive to diverse ethnic and minority claims when compared to other developing nations, and even some developed ones. In its first 15 years of independence alone, India created 11 new states based on linguistic and cultural identity and also implemented a broad system of affirmative action to redress traditional discrimination. This record, combined with booming economic growth in the 1990s, led many in the international community -- and indeed, many Indians themselves -- to view the country as a force for stability in a volatile region.

Then came the Hindu-Muslim riots of this spring in the prosperous western Indian state of Gujarat, six weeks of violence that left more than a thousand people dead and a hundred thousand in makeshift shelters. The riots began when a Muslim mob torched a trainload of sloganeering Hindu nationalists, killing 59 of them. A wave of retaliatory rioting rolled over Gujarat; the overwhelming majority of the riots` victims were Muslim. Unlike earlier riots that ended as abruptly as they began, the bloodletting in Gujarat has not ceased. Although reduced in intensity, violence continues to flare up, primarily in the underpoliced Muslim areas of Gujarat`s major cities, where there are daily instances of murder, looting, and arson.

The central and state governments, both run by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have been disturbingly slow to curb Hindu retaliation. While India`s parliament debated whether the Gujarat government should be dismissed for failing to restore the rule of law, even more disturbing reports emerged that some of the Hindu mob leaders were activist members of the ruling party or its allies in the wider ``family`` of Hindu nationalist organizations. Is India beginning to suffer the same kind of communal convulsion that has ravaged so many multiethnic countries in recent years?

KEEPING SOCIETY CIVIL

That would be the wrong conclusion to draw, says University of Michigan political scientist Ashutosh Varshney in Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. In his view, there are two reasons why India is unlikely to succumb to the maelstrom that broke up countries such as Yugoslavia. First, Hindu-Muslim conflict is highly localized, and so any one wave of violence has limited potential to spread across the country. And second, India`s complex polity is made up of a range of constituencies with cross-cutting interests in which linguistic or caste affinities, for example, often supersede religious loyalty. Hindu nationalism is therefore unlikely to become the kind of cohesive murderous force that Serb nationalism turned into. Moreover, argues Varshney, the need to cater to these cross-cutting interests forces all political parties to the secular center once in government -- even when that government is, as at present, formed by Hindu nationalists.

Varshney`s first argument is more convincing than his second. Using data for a 45-year period from 1950 to 1995 -- that is, covering most of independent India`s history -- he shows that the

vast majority of communal riots have been concentrated in 4 of India`s 28 states, located in the northern, western, and eastern parts of the country. All four have large Muslim minorities. But so do several of the southern Indian states, yet southern India has remained largely calm over the past 50 years -- even while the country`s northern and western areas have been periodically ravaged by Hindu-Muslim violence.

By itself, this is not a surprising finding. It is fairly well known that Hindu-Muslim relations in northern and southern India are poles apart. The real surprise of Varshney`s data lies in their revelations of the subregional nature of Hindu-Muslim violence. Even within the four states in which ethnic conflict has been concentrated, most of the riots have been restricted to a handful of cities. In fact, 70 percent of Hindu-Muslim violence takes place in only 30 out of India`s more than 400 cities. More startling still, just 8 cities are responsible for almost half of all deaths in Hindu-Muslim riots.

In other words, ancient hatreds have little to do with ethnic conflict in India. Although India is a predominantly agricultural society, violence between Hindus and Muslims is an overwhelmingly urban phenomenon. During the 45-year period that Varshney`s data cover, rural violence accounted for just over three percent of all deaths in Hindu-Muslim riots. India`s traditional heartland, its villages, has been largely unscathed by the communal killings that have swept its cities.

If ethnic conflict is limited chiefly to a handful of Indian cities, then why do we fear its destructive potential for the country at large? One reason is that these cities are the power centers of the country. They include India`s metropolitan and trading hubs and several of its state capitals. India`s three largest and most cosmopolitan cities are among the eight that top Varshney`s list of ``riot-prone`` areas -- the nation`s capital, New Delhi, and the influential state capitals Mumbai (Bombay) and Kolkata (Calcutta). Each has a population of over 12 million, and together they are linchpins of India`s economy.

Each of the eight cities that top Varshney`s list has a large middle class, a high literacy rate, and an old and established Muslim minority. Two of them are in Gujarat, and it is a testimony to the predictive value of Varshney`s data that he ranks Ahmedabad, Gujarat`s financial capital, as the second most riot-prone city in India. (Mumbai leads the death count.) Ahmedabad saw the worst of the recent killings in Gujarat and continues to burn as of this writing. The city where the riots began, Godhra, also appears in Varshney`s data, on the longer list of 30.

CRASHING THE PARTY

Why should these cities, with better standards of living than most of the rest of India, greater economic opportunity, and more power to shape government policy, suffer from a pattern of recurrent Hindu-Muslim violence?

Varshney`s answer to this question is deceptively simple. Each of these cities, he says, has suffered a gradual and progressive decline in civic life. Ahmedabad, for example, was largely untouched by the violence between Hindus and Muslims that hit other cities in the early twentieth century and during the partition of colonial India in 1947. Gujarat was Mohandas Gandhi`s homeland and a testing ground for his methods of nonviolent resistance, and it also had some of the strongest civil associations in India, built by the Congress Party as well as by Gandhi`s disciples in both industry and labor. These associations served to integrate Hindus and Muslims and stepped in to prevent Hindu-Muslim violence during the partition riots of 1947-48. After independence, however, the Congress Party neglected its various programs promoting cooperative credit, women`s health and employment, and educational and media outreach. Following the death of India`s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, in 1964, the party leadership started to fragment. Its different factions began to focus on wooing specific voting blocs by cultivating the more chauvinist elements within India`s different castes and religious communities.

Ahmedabad`s first serious Hindu-Muslim riots occurred in 1969 as a result of a local dispute over a religious procession; they were followed by more violence in several subsequent years. Gujarat was then relatively peaceful from the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s. But this calm was deceptive, according to Varshney; during that period the Congress Party`s civic decline was followed by its political decline. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi did away with Congress` internal elections and limited the powers of the party`s local branches. The party`s vast apparatus in Gujarat, its one remaining integrative network for Hindus and Muslims, dwindled to a shadow of its former self.

At the same time, there was a parallel decline in Gujarat`s largest nonparty organization, the Textile Labor Association. Based in Ahmedabad, the Gandhian trade union was the last significant source of Hindu-Muslim cooperation in the city. When its numbers dwindled as mill production gave way to the rise of the power-loom sector, the vacuum was filled by Hindu nationalist organizations that founded new schools and newspapers and performed a range of social services.

The BJP benefited from the Congress Party`s decline in Gujarat. Varshney shows how the state turned to the Hindu right well before the rest of India did. In the 1980s, when the BJP won between 5 and 7 percent of the vote nationally, it polled over 15 percent in Gujarat. In the mid-1990s, when the BJP`s share of the national vote rose to 20 percent, it was 42 percent in Gujarat. In 1990-92, Hindu nationalists were able to mobilize hundreds of thousands of the state`s citizens for a nationwide agitation to build a temple to the Hindu god Ram -- who is as central to Hinduism as Jesus is to Christianity -- in his purported birthplace, the far-off northern Indian city of Ayodhya. The temple site was also home to a seventeenth-century mosque, which was destroyed in 1992 by a 10,000-strong mob of Hindu nationalists who had gathered from all over the country. Gujarat was one of the largest contributors of volunteers to this mission of destruction; when Hindu-Muslim riots followed, it was Gujarat that saw the largest number of deaths.

The BJP came to power in Gujarat in 1995 and in the central government in 1998 -- but at the national level it is part of a wider coalition including secular regional parties. The BJP leadership in New Delhi said that, out of respect for the coalition, they would put the more contentious issues on their agenda, such as building the Ram temple, on the back burner. The BJP`s leaders had already begun to restrain the party`s hard-liners after the riots that followed the destruction of the Ayodhya mosque, and India remained relatively calm between 1993 and 2002. Like Varshney, many analysts concluded that India`s polity forces all political parties to the secular center once they have to govern.

THE UNCERTAIN CENTER

The Gujarat riots of this spring, however, have made this conclusion look doubtful. They came quickly on the heels of the BJP`s reelection in Gujarat under a new hard-line leadership. The state`s chief minister makes no secret of his belief that Muslims must be second-class citizens in the Hindu nation he is bent on creating, and he is one of the most ardent supporters of the Ram temple campaign. Despite New Delhi`s pleas for restraint, he was one of the leaders who supported the revival of the campaign in early March. The Hindus who were torched by a Muslim mob in Gujarat two weeks later -- the incident that sparked the recent riots -- were returning from Ayodhya. They had made a preemptive bid to begin building the temple on the ruins of the mosque but were thwarted by the central government, which had dispatched 2,500 troops to keep the peace.

New Delhi`s prompt action to prevent violence in Ayodhya stands in stark contrast to its reluctance to intervene in Gujarat. The Gujarat government has made little effort to stop the riots; worse still, it has transferred out many of the police officers who did turn back the mobs. Reports indicate a total breakdown of law and order in Ahmedabad`s mostly Muslim old quarter, as well as in several of the city`s outlying areas. New Delhi has repeatedly expressed concern at

the continuing violence -- yet neither the central government nor the BJP leadership is prepared to take any action

that might run counter to the Gujarat government`s wishes.

Trounced in state-level legislative elections last year, today the BJP governs Gujarat alone out of India`s 28 states. So New Delhi has dug in its heels, and the BJP has ignored its coalition allies who have asked that the Gujarat government step down. Far from being constrained to adhere to the secular center, it seems that the BJP is now being pushed by Gujarat to move toward the far right. Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has made no secret of the fact that he wanted Gujarat`s government to step down, but BJP hard-liners persuaded him to yield. For their part, the BJP`s allies are unwilling to see the government fall over this issue, so they have limited their response to mere remonstrations.

Nevertheless, the BJP`s recent electoral losses suggest that Indian support for Hindu nationalism resembles support for the far-right anti-immigrant parties in Austria, France, and the Netherlands more closely than it does something like Serb nationalism. Each of the former has shown a disturbing rise in the past decade, but none has been able to capture the mainstream. Slobodan Milosevic`s Communist Party, by comparison, did extremely well at the Serbian polls until his government lost the war over Kosovo.

Unlike the western European countries, however, India has not been able to cauterize the destructive potential of its ethnic and religious nationalists. Over the past decade, 4,000 Indians have died in battles over the Ram temple campaign, but the Hindu nationalists are unwilling to seek a compromise solution. The regional parties that are the BJP`s allies have not been able to persuade the BJP to act in Gujarat; nor has the opposition. The corrective mechanisms of Indian politics appear to have only a weak hold over its legislators and government.

DEMOCRACY IN INDIA

As Varshney argues, this decay in India`s party politics puts the spotlight squarely on civil society. Here the picture is more reassuring. The most stable Indian states are those in which Hindus and Muslims have joint economic, educational, and political associations -- even if the latter rely more on power-sharing than on integration. But it is not necessary to have the entire gamut or a combination of such associations: as Varshney shows, at the ground level any one Hindu-Muslim group can successfully prevent the spread of conflict. In one textile-producing city in Gujarat, for instance, the local manufacturers` and traders` association kept the peace in the old city area; indeed, press accounts of the latest riots tell the story of a Hindu-Muslim workers` colony that successfully turned the mobs away.

Top-down initiatives can also work, says Varshney, citing an industrial city whose poor record of violence was turned around by a police officer who set up Hindu-Muslim peace committees in all the city`s localities. But they are inherently weaker because they are not subject to the same tests of accountability that locally based associations face.

Sadly, Varshney does not examine religious organizations in his analysis; he addresses only Hindu-Muslim associations. Yet the greatest conundrum of all might well be the role that religious organizations play in sparking or dampening Hindu-Muslim tension. Unlike the Christian and Muslim religious leaders who added to communal conflict in Bosnia, or the priests and nuns who were implicated in genocide in Rwanda, most Hindu religious leaders shun the Ram temple campaign. At one of Hinduism`s largest and most important religious festivals, the Kumbh Mela, Hindu priests expelled advocates of the Ram temple campaign. After the Gujarat riots began, several of India`s leading Hindu priests offered to help find an alternative site for the temple. Ironically, their offer has yet to be accepted by the BJP government.

It is a pity, too, that Varshney does not examine government institutions such as the judiciary, the National Human Rights Commission, or the National Commission for Minorities. All three have displayed a new activism in the wake of the Gujarat riots. The Indian Supreme Court is currently holding a landmark hearing on the human rights commission`s findings about the violence. India`s attorney general has also criticized the Gujarat government for its failure to protect minorities. And the minorities commission has just organized the first meeting between Gujarat`s chief minister and representatives of the Muslim community.

These are heartening indications of Indian democracy`s willingness to reclaim the secular center. Varshney`s findings are more heartening still for India. If the task of building unifying networks is a daunting one, it is encouraging to know that improving civic life in just eight cities could make all the difference. Tellingly, too, the recent Human Rights Watch report on Gujarat makes many of the same policy recommendations that flow from Varshney`s book: in particular, that support for integrative civic associations is now the need of the hour in cities such as Ahmedabad.

Apart from the immediate policy relevance of Varshney`s book, his material also makes a lasting contribution to our understanding of how to tackle the roots of communal violence in India. This is an issue that Indian policymakers have ignored for too long. Perhaps Varshney`s book can help close that gap.

Romair #133:

Azim Premji did speak out against the violence in Gujarat. In an unrelated thing, his foundation is funding 800 schools in Gujarat, apart from 1000+ each in Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

Regarding Abdul Kalam, some of the articles from Indian Muslims in the Indian press (eg Dr Rafiq Zakaria) indicate that the Muslims do not consider Kalam as `one among them` - as he has never stood for Muslims particularly, though he has talked about development of all Indians.

One thing is apparent - Abdul Kalam is a hero to the middle class youth in India and his religion is not a factor here. Earlier Presidential candidates have been obscure politicans with no political base and appointees of the party in power (usually the Congress). Kalam OTOH is well known, at least amongst the middle class and youth.

Chandrababu Naidu and Mulayam Singh Yadav supported his candidature because of vote-bank politics. For the BJP, he was not their first choice (though Kalam is a hero to the RSS types too), so I am not sure if `appeasing Gujarat` was a motive - may be I am being generous to the BJP here.

In any case, I think most Indian Muslims and secular types among Hindus have seen through the BJP after Gujarat. I dont think Kalam becoming President is going to help the BJP gain votes from these two sections.

I am not sure if Kalam being President will help Muslims in any way, just as Narayanan being President has not helped Dalits much. Upliftment of Dalits and other sections of society can come only through changes at the bottom, especially through education.

Personally, I think Kalam as President will be a mixed blessing. He is not a politician. His `Vision 2020` is well meaning but naive and shallow. Thankfully the President`s post is pretty much that of a rubber stamp. I hope Kalam has enough sense to be like one (irrespective of which party is in power) and not create any constitutional crisis. His knowledge of national issues is disappointing.

India is desperately short of leaders who can appeal to all sections of society, who can inspire the youth to rise above divisions and move ahead. Kalam can be such a leader. That he is not a politician is a major plus point. That he is a Muslim commanding such respect can only be good for communal harmony in India.

Romair:

``For a population of 140 million, or more, I have to say Indian Muslims are quite passive. I hope, it isn`t because they are scared. Such a large no. of people, and that too in a democracy, are the swing vote etc., on many issues. ``

You make the same mistake that the Hindu Right wingers tend to make. All 140 Million Muslims are not a uniform bloc. In fact, to paint all Indian Muslims in a corner as ``Muslim Vote`` is to do them a disservice. It is also easier to manipulate a community if they vote as a bloc, especially if they are a minority.

That`s why I keep parroting the mirror issues of African Americans in the US. That community is ignored by the Republicans, and taken for granted by the Democrats. Because they tend to vote as a bloc, it is also fairly easy to demonize their issues. The Willie Horton case being an example where literally Bush Sr won the election by scaring the white majority shiteless.

Literally, that`s what the BJP does in India. Lot of propaganda about Muslims is simply untrue. FALSE. Ask BJP supporters about their gripes against Muslims. A big one is the Haj subsidy. I just found out recently that Hindus too are given subsidy to travel to Mount Kailas etc. But, people don`t know/choose to ignore that.

I honestly believe that harping on ``Muslim`` issues or rather community specific issues for any minority tends to boomerang coz it then encourages the ``other`` or the majority to think in terms of community as well.

Now, I am also aware that this leads the minority in a difficult position of not being able to expound it`s specific views. I beblieve that they can, just by manipulating politics to make them seem like national issues.

Moral of the story: In a democracy, minorities should resort to guile rather than confrontation to get their issues resolved.

dost-mittar #137: Thanks for the straight-forward reply.

I am still not satisfied however. The only real solid (and refreshingly ruthless) criticism I have seen of the riots has been mostly from certain Indian Hindus. Arudhitya Roy for one. And many others. Very little from Indian Muslims. Quite odd.

When prominent people criticize something, it carries a lot more weight. I would think that Roy`s books may not be bought by her BJP readers, anymore And I assume, she has now made herself a target of the BJP, as well. But that hasn`t seemed to stop her.

Could you point me to the criticism by Premji. I would be interested in reading it.

For a population of 140 million, or more, I have to say Indian Muslims are quite passive. I hope, it isn`t because they are scared. Such a large no. of people, and that too in a democracy, are the swing vote etc., on many issues. I don`t know how the BJP can just run over them like this. After all, whatever I have read, indicates that the BJP has only around 22% of India`s vote bank. So perhaps 220 million Indians, under its influence.

My point regarding Kalam was not that he shouldn`t have accepted the nomination for the Presidency of India. It was only that he should not have accepted the BJP nomination, in light of the Gujrat riots (and in light of the anti-Muslim BJP manifesto). The declination would have been a great statement. If some other party had nominated him, he should have accepted.

Doesn`t accepting the BJP nomination, make him into some sort of an Uncle Tom?

I would be interested in your views on what will happen to the BJP, in the future. My prediction is that it will lose the next national elections, but will become the main opposition (in which case, its true colors will really start to show). What do you think the odds are of the BJP completely being removed from Indian politics? Will it happen?

Watch What You Say

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

NEW YORK TIMES

RAWALPINDI, Pakistan — Before recounting how President Clinton burned alive dozens of Christians (this feint is known in the column trade as baiting the right), let me offer a quick historical quiz: What religion were Muhammad`s parents?

You might think that they, like most people in Arabia in the sixth century, probably worshiped tribal gods and idols. It might seem difficult for anyone to have been a Muslim before Muhammad.

If that`s what you think, bite your tongue — if you visit Pakistan.

Dr. Younus Shaikh, a teacher at a medical college, sits in a brick prison here, after being sentenced to death for blasphemy last year. I couldn`t interview him because the warden caught me trying to slip into the prison as a visitor (I didn`t look like a family member). But the issues are clear.

...more at

http://www.sulekha.com/redirectnh.asp?cid=213153

Fatimah #140

In India we can express shock and protest. In Pakistan that is the state policy.

Claude Arpi

Homelands in Pakistan

One form of relaxation for me is watching sports programmes on television. On the same sports channel, Pakistan TV beams its daily news and very often I watch it for a short time. The music programmes and the serials, I must say, are not very different from Hindi serials aired on the Sahara channel. If a test were conducted and any foreigner asked which of the two countries a particular programme belonged to, very few would guess right.



The same holds true for the ads. This is no doubt normal for two nations which share 5,000 years (minus 50) of history.

But one thing is radically different and nobody can miss it: the news.

Whatever relaxation I may have enjoyed on the sports channel quickly fades away when I hear (and see) the systematic and constant anti-India propaganda. It seems that this nation (or at least its government) has had for the past 50 years only one obsession: India.

Within this obsession, there is another: Kashmir. You cannot watch a single news bulletin or debate without hearing about the `excesses of the Indian security forces` on the people of Kashmir `struggling for their self-determination`, though it is usually the same footage of security forces facing a mob during one of the Srinagar bandhs shown again and again.

Now, a new topic has recently appeared on PTV: the regrettable riots in Gujarat, which followed the Godhra incident. Since Gujarat saw an outburst of violence, PTV News seems full of delectation. The tone is, `did we not tell you that they would do this?` It is so excessive that it makes one feel Pakistan may not be fully innocent of the incident.

It is not only television but also other media who are enjoying this new occasion for India-bashing. For example, a Pakistani news Web site, Paknews.com, wrote an article titled Thank God we have Pakistan last month.

Not only did they declare that ``genocide against minorities is nothing new in India or in Indian-occupied areas``, but went one step further and announced a partition of India. For the purpose they quote some US media: ``This has led to vocal calls from Information Times, an American Media in Washington DC for the breakup of India into smaller countries where minorities are in the government and are able to protect their rights. This idea of partition has again come up after 55 years because the underlying argument of `Two-Nation Theory`, which was basis of creation of Pakistan, a home and safe haven for Muslims is once again valid and applicable on India. However, this time around, rather than creation of disparity in countries, India is eight times bigger than Pakistan, creation of smaller countries of equal area and resources should be carved out of India.

``In Pakistan as well as overseas, every Pakistani is praying for safety of fellow Muslims in India, and is thinking, `Thank God we have Pakistan`, `Thank God for the farsightedness of Iqbal and Jinnah for creating our homeland`.``

While it is not certain that all Pakistanis are praying for the breakup of India, this article raises a very interesting point: is it not Pakistan which is on the brink of breaking up?

Recently, Fortune magazine published a long article entitled `Kidnapped Nation` by Richard Behar, which is an in-depth look into the catastrophic economic situation in Pakistan. There is no doubt that Pakistan is close to an economic collapse.

Behar was told in Quetta by one of the leaders of the jihadi outfit Sipah-e-Sahaba: ``Sept 11 was all the fault of Jews, God will destroy Bush.`` He also blamed Musharraf for the Taliban`s defeat and happily provided Fortune details about the cash, supplies and soldiers Sipah had slipped across the porous border to aid the Taliban.

Behar analysed: ``Pearl`s death and the mid-March bombing of a Protestant church in Islamabad are only the most visible signs of a dysfunctional nation -- call it Problemistan -- a country that professes to be an ally of the US in its war on terrorism, but probably harbors more terrorists than any place on earth.``

This is only one of the many journalists who have begun to see that the best ally of the US in the region is in fact the largest nest of world terrorism and that Musharraf, despite all his declarations to the contrary, cannot do anything even if he wanted to (and it is not certain at all that he wants to).

Another example of the country`s bankruptcy is Musharraf`s dramatic speech on January 12 when he announced that jihadi groups would no longer be able to operate from Pakistani soil. To give his American mentors proof of his good faith, he arrested 2,000 militants (out of a few millions). Most of them are now free.

It appears that when the Lahore high court directed the Punjab government to furnish details of the records of cases against those who were picked up, the government was unable to substantiate the cases. For example, the leader of the banned Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Prof Hafeez Mohammad Saeed, who had been detained under the Maintenance of Public Order on charges of making inflammatory speeches, has been released as the MPO empowers the government to detain a person for only 90 days.

But more serious problems are in stock for Musharraf; he may pray for India`s breakup, but there are today strong possibilities that it may happen to Pakistan.

First, he has no control over very large regions of his territory, one of the worse being the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan. A few of weeks ago, a news item reported the arrest of Osama bin Laden`s senior aide Abu Zubaydah in Faislabad. It appears that the US intelligence agencies had arrested some Pakistanis in Kabul, who tipped off the Americans about bin Laden`s aide.

Another story surfaced a couple of days later: bin Laden himself had been staying in the same house a day or so earlier and had just left (probably informed by one of his contacts in the ISI) when the combined raid by the Pakistani security forces and the Federal Bureau of Investigation flew down to Faislabad. One can imagine the situation in the border areas renowned for their porousness if bin Laden could hide in the heart of the Punjab! (By the way, Musharraf had been announcing for months that bin Laden was dead, but this time he did not comment.)

The district known as the Federally Administrated Tribal Agencies has had a long history of lawlessness. It dates even before the 19th century when the British were the masters of the subcontinent ... except for a piece of land: the land of the Pushtoons (or Pathans). But the empire was always resourceful: a senior British diplomat, Sir Mortimer Durand, was requested to divide this land into two. He did so with a pen and the Pushtoons found themselves in two different countries: Afghanistan and British India. But to this day, the Pushtoon tribes on both sides of Durand`s border do not accept the existence of this stroke of his pen. It is even said that the bonds of tribe and ethnicity amongst the Pushtoons are more important than their Islamic faith.

The division did not help the British much and they had no option but to grant autonomy to these areas. It did not deter the population from dreaming of a reunification of the Pushtoon land. In the first years after the independence of Pakistan, the Government of Afghanistan took up the matter with Pakistan through Washington, which first was in two minds about the validity of the Durand Line. But the US administration knew that if Kabul`s claims were accepted, it would be the end of Pakistan as a state; it was not in their strategic interests to do so.

Apart from the fact that Musharraf has very little control over the area, the return of King Zahir Shah in Kabul leaves very little doubt that the issue of Pushtoonistan will resurface. The struggle between the Northern Alliance mainly composed of Uzbeks and Tajiks (like Ahmed Shah Masoud) against the Pathan regimes in Kabul is also to be seen in this perspective. It was certainly one of the reasons why Islamabad had to `control` Kabul`s regime and why the ISI with the help of the CIA installed the Taliban.

After `Problemistan` and `Pushtoonistan`, the other headache for the Pakistani general is `Sindhistan`. Though a few days ago the Mohajir leader Altaf Hussain said he was `neutral` about the referendum proposed by Musharraf, he has not always been neutral and the separatist tendencies of Sindh are very much present today.

In September last year, Hussain delivered a fiery speech by telephone from London. He said he ``will launch a struggle for self-determination`` in Pakistan`s Sindh province. He was ready to approach ``the United Nations, United States, India and other democratic countries``.

For Hussain, 54 years ``under the colonial yoke of the Punjabi establishment were enough``. He declared that it was the mission of his life to free Sindh.

Hussain, who leads the Mohajirs -- about 20 million Muslims who migrated to Pakistan from India during and after Partition -- feels that his community has received no rights in Pakistan. ``We were deceived in the name of Islam.``

He accused the Punjabi establishment of regarding the Mohajirs, the Sindhis and the Baluchis as security risks when they get government positions and concluded: ``No one will grant you your rights, you will have to take it from the usurpers.``

On top of this, Pakistan has a very serious problem in the northern areas of occupied Kashmir. An announcement from the Chinese Xinhua News Agency reported last week that the Khunjerab pass between Sinkiang and Pakistan will finally be reopened in May for the first time after September 11.

This pass is one of the most strategic regions in the world because of the old US-Pakistan-China axis. (One should not forget that it was Ayub Khan who battered the first Mao-Nixon meeting in the early 70s.) Soon after the destruction of the twin towers, it was reported that jihadi tribes had taken over the pass and no one was allowed to go through. The safest bet for China (and perhaps for Musharraf) was to close the pass.

Just before the Agra summit, the general had a series of consultations with political and religious leaders of Pakistan, including Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, but he did not invite any representative of the Northern Areas (Gilgit and Baltistan) for these discussions. The reason came to be known later: in June 2001, Gilgit and its surroundings were in a serious state of unrest due to protests from Sunni organisations over the decision of the local administration to introduce separate religious textbooks in the schools for the Shias (who are in a majority in Gilgit). Embarrassed by the incident, Musharraf stopped all movement between Gilgit and Pakistan and imposed very strict censorship.

In the ensuing riots thousands of activists from different political Sunni groups blocked the roads to the city of Gilgit to prevent Pakistani reinforcements from reaching the spot. They had finally to be rushed by helicopters and the demonstrators were ruthlessly removed. This is only one of many incidents that have occurred recently.

An attitude similar to the one adopted by Islamabad in Sindh and Baluchistan was noted by an Indian journalist who visited Gilgit in March. He was told by Ali Mardan, the editor of the local weekly Naqqara: ``If the government continues to ignore the grievances of the Northern Areas, it could even end up facing an armed struggle.`` He added: ``Pakistan does not trust the people of Gilgit-Baltistan. To date, we have never had a local chief secretary or police chief. They are either Punjabis or Pathans.`` One of the interviewed persons told the journalist: ``At least in your part of Kashmir, though he is a puppet, a Kashmiri Muslim is at the helm.``

For 50 years these areas have never been administrated by a Kashmiri and even the National Kashmir Committee, recently created by Islamabad under the chairmanship of Abdul Qayyum Khan, has very few Kashmiri members.

Certain quarters in Pakistan may continue to `thank God for the farsightedness of Iqbal and Jinnah for creating our homeland`, but the fact remains that there are today several `homelands` in Pakistan. One does not see how the general, even if he gets a five-year new lease as the master of Pakistan, will be able to contain the centrifugal forces with his cosmetic reforms and grandiloquent anti-India speeches.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/apr/26guest.htm

SOCIAL STUDIES BOOK CLAIMED TO BE PUBLISHED ACCORDING TO THE NCERT (NATIONAL COUNCIL OF EDUCATION RESEARCH & TRAINING)OF INDIA SYLLABUS FOR 6TH GRADES,ONLY HAS INFORMATION ON HINDUISM

http://www.telegraphindia.com/



PUBLISHER FACES FLAK FOR BIAS IN TEXT





FROM MONOBINA GUPTA New Delhi, June 20: It?s now the turn of the National Council of Educational Research and Training to pull up a private publisher of school textbooks for hurting the sentiments of a minority community.

A sixth standard social science textbook, published by Goyal Brothers Prakashan, has become the target of criticism by minority organisations for exclusively carrying a chapter on Hindu religion and leaving out the rest. The publisher claims that the textbook?s contents are in accordance with the latest NCERT guidelines.

With the Supreme Court stay on new NCERT textbooks in social science, history and Hindi, private publishers are flooding the market with their books, all claiming to be in line with the new syllabus.

?There are few people discerning enough to be able to differentiate between an original NCERT textbook and others that are just claiming to follow its syllabus,? said an official.

Goyal Prakashan?s textbook came to the notice of the Sunni Students? Federation, Kerala, which petitioned human resources development minister Murli Manohar Joshi to intervene.

?It was with shock and dismay that we noted that the newly introduced social science textbook for the sixth standard authored by D.N. Kundra (strictly in accordance with the 2002 NCERT guidelines) has dropped the part about Islam from its Major Religions chapter,? the federation said in its letter.

?We strongly condemn this act of spoiling the secular status of our nation and request the concerned authorities to withdraw this book with immediate effect,? it added.

Rajendra Dixit, convenor of the Curriculum Group, replied: ?The NCERT syllabus of 2002 has not left out Islam. The social science syllabus of the sixth standard is limited to ?People and Society in the Ancient Period?.?

Dixit explained that Islam had been included in the seventh standard social science syllabus.

Private publishers have given NCERT some ammunition against the Supreme Court. Their main argument is that the court does not clamp down on private publishers and cut off the supply of new textbooks ? it is only the NCERT that is stopped from going ahead with the printing. The next court hearing is scheduled for July 16.

If the court order goes in favour of NCERT, students of Class XI may be spared the trouble of running from pillar to post for new textbooks.

AlephNull #136:

...thanks for the link...

rgds,

t

temporal #136

I note with interest that Vir Sanghvi`s two columns on the Presidential election,

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/240302/VIR60.asp

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/160602/vir71.asp

contain a significant omission - the name of the first person that Sonia Gandhi proposed as an alternative to Dr. P.C. Alexander. This gentleman appears to have been Indian High Commissioner to Great Britain prior to becoming a BJP MP. I confess I had never heard of him before. His name, curiosly enough, is L M Singhvi. More at:

http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/may/18prez.htm

Romair #133:

[...One of the most surprising things about the Gujrat riots, is the lack of criticism from prominent Indian Muslims. Maybe, I missed it. But did people like Premji, Shahrukh, and others in their category, say anything about the massacres. If not, then why not?...]

---i know you prefer to have answers from the indians...but am surprised you do not know the answers already!…it needs people with guts, breeding and courage…like shabana azmi for instance…and there have been other indian muslims not as well known who have come out and criticized modi and brigade…

…why premji or shah rukh would not come out is the same reason ‘prominent’ Pakistani hindus, or ahmedis do not come out to criticse the GoP policies…self preservation and personal interests…


...as for kalam as president read this and his earlier column on the subject:

A sordid, messy race

Counterpoint / Vir Sanghvi

If there is one thing we’ve learnt over the last week, it is this: you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to become President of India.

But, by God, it helps

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/160602/vir71.asp

rgds,

t

Chowkies (and please excuse cross-posting on other boards):

There is a petition being put together by an organization of Indians and Pakistanis in the US (but open of course to all) that calls for both governments to work together for peace. I hope you will read the petition, and if you think it makes sense (as I hope all of you will), you will also sign it. Here is the link.

www.petitiononline.com/IPPP1/petition.html

Romair:---the Commando with the velvet glove.

``Kyaa baat hai,kyaa baat hai,kyaa baat hai vAllah``

Jura`at

.....biblical quote, ``Merrily,Merrily the rod of Moses goes into the sea of Galillee----and the bells in Jerusalem are ringing!``

The inimitable way a `christain` friend of mine read this was almost like a video-clip....and it always drew howls of laughter among those listening.