The Asian Waltz

Sadhna #136

Your spelling of definition is wrong three times in three rows (not in a row)

krashid #134

On a lighter note, if you don`t have any use for an Indian defination of democracy nor for an Indian defination of pluralism, then why ask for an Indian defination of freedom?

And btw, have any of L-e-T or J-e-Mohammad even Hizbul ever campaigned for independence of Indian and Pakistani Kashmir?

Sadhana

bd #133

Thanks for your reply. I understand your point, its a very interesting question I agree and of huge scope meriting several articles. Perhaps Indians can learn some lessons from both the good and bad experiences from the longstanding `setup` in the US and from the future Pakistani one.

From general observation mostly of others more in a position to know, I would like to point out that in India, while bureacrats at the district collector/commisioner levels do wield considerable influence in India, possibly wrt panchayats, too, they are in turn extremely vulnerable to political influence.

I am speaking mostly of middle and lower ranking bureacrats. As I understand it, these officers reporting chain of command is headed by the relevant state minister. Now if their boss, the the minister has political linkages in the local sphere of influence of a district collector, say. local political bosses are in a position to exert considerable pressure on the bureacrat. Continuity of democratic tradition has this disadvantage/ advantage, continuity of the political class and political linkages :-).

The regular practice after state ministries change hands is to transfer a number of bureacrats(usually high-ranking ). Part of the Election Commission`s code of conduct is that after elections have been announced, no civil servant can be transferred :-).

The poor public if unfortunately napping gets caught between these two groups, and exacts revenge for its local troubles during voting for the national government!!

That said I think India manages to present a lot of mutually contradictory scenarios in different places where strong cases can be made for both less and more centralized administration.

Hope to see some articles from you sharing with us your considerable knowledge on these and other subjects.

Sadhana

Sadhna#132

Instead of pointing out flaws on Kashmir freedom movement which you think is wrongly fought.

Why don`t you come up with a bright idea of how an independence movement should be fought by 6 million people in the wake of 700,000 Security personnel.

Please enlighten us on particular mode of freedom movement which can give dividend.

Sadhana

Thank you for your references, I shall check it up myself. I was actually interested in the removal of the district level bureacrat and its effect on local ``micro`` government. Based on a village level democracy, the panchayti raj concept has been well enumerated and implemented. Given the divisional commissioners and the district collector level control by the bureacracy, one wonders as to the level of power actually wielded by the panchayats vis` a vis` the district / divisional level bureacrats. I shall investigate further and hopefully will get a chance to discuss this with you.

Sincerely

bd

Feroz #129
Thanks for your reply.
Feroz, you are right, it is indeed unfortunate when religion is brought into politics, in India or Pakistan.

You say ``to understand Pakistan, you have to attempt to accept``. I urge all to attempt the same wrt India, whose very existence I find is not accepted by a number of Pakistanis, attempting to understand it and its own `dynamics`, tho door ki baat.

bd #130

Thanks for your reply.
``let me clarify that the original meaning of jihad and what passes for jihad now are chalk and cheese, and the difference between terrorism and fight for freedom is based on where you are standing.``

If `spirited Pakistanis` (the CE`s own words) want to fight for freedom, let them do it in their own country is what I say. When people from Multan, Karachi or Lahore choose to arm their compatriots and send them to `fight`. its not a fight for freedom from where anyone stands. And the defination for `freedom` going by the status of Pakistani Kashmir and many armed groups` public statements seems to be nothing but accession to Pakistan plain and simple, not my defination of freedom wherever I stand.

Anyway this newsitem from today is interesting:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2000/aug/20jk2.htm
Masood Azhar banned from entering Sindh

``Pakistani authorities have stopped Masood Azhar from speaking at an anti-India rally and banned him from southern Sindh province for three months, officials said in Karachi Sunday...``

Yes, the CE`s devolution plan looks interesting. Hope to continue to hear informed comments on it on chowk forums.

In this regard a search on `Panchayati Raj` will yield some valuable material on its structure and its success/failures. Panchayati Raj is considered to have huge potential in India, mainly due to the direct financial empowerment of local bodies. States who donot hold Panchayat elections donot get a portion of their development funds from the Centre. Success/failure seems largely linked to local awareness, something that both bureacrats and NGOs have in many places helped increase with training programmes, many targetted toward women.

``http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/i_oibs/Panchayats.html``
A small bibliography on the subject

Someone provided me these URLs:
http://www.frontlineonline.com/fl1708/17081200.htm
The message of panchayati raj
http://www.frontlineonline.com/fl1706/17060450.htm
Democratic devolution
http://www.frontlineonline.com/fl1705/17050710.htm
Rural realities in Rajasthan

A search on `Panchayati Raj` in amazon.com yielded some 40 results.

Regards,
Sadhana

Forezk #129

Good points, Sir, so true if unfortunate.

Sincerely

bd

Sadhana #128

Thank you for your compliments, does that mean that I can go back to addressing you with the honorific ``ji``?, just kidding.

Your comment: ``No, in my opinion its bad whether its silent or its `caught out`, but its worse if its flaunted in the face of the world in the form of an entitlement or a `let` such as in `jihad is not terrorism`, `inevitable dynamics of jihad`, etc. ``, I agree, jihad is not terrorism is plainly not correct. Before anybody jumps my bones, let me clarify that the original meaning of jihad and what passes for jihad now are chalk and cheese, and the difference between terrorism and fight for freedom is based on where you are standing. Sadhana, the CE (if you are referring to his quote about jihad not being terrorism) couldn`t say anything else. The CE cannot stand up to small issues such as women`s 50% participation in the councils and other issues, do you imagine him saying anything else? he would have got lynched :).

Your next point, ``But religious groups did whip up the same religious fervour in India with equally sad and predictable results.`` Which incident are you referring to, is it an international incident? Surely you are not comparing internal law and order and socio-political tussle with cross-border sponsored violence?

Most definitely not, Sadhana, i am not comparing them at all, what I am trying to say is that religion was used in both cases, where national good was over-ridden by religious based fervour. (The Babri masjid issue as compared to the jihad`s) You would also realise that as soon as religion is ``used``, national boundaries fall apart and that makes our socio-political institutions powerless to control or manage it. Let me put in another way, Sadhana, there is a strong possibility that this religious genie may get out in India as well. In many ways, it will be worse since it has a political legitimacy which Pakistan never had. In any case, i hope it does not. This is in the future, this is my opinion, and I wish i was wrong or am proved wrong.

Your other point about the ``genie``. I am as much likely to know about Pakistan or India as you, Sadhana. After all, who can claim to know about such complex societies such as Pakistan or India. On the other hand, if somebody can comment on my statement, i would love to hear and discuss with them. Perhaps they are busy with other more interesting issues? :) Discussions about GDP or number of phones or growth rates are easier, insofar as numbers are concerned. It is also easier to discuss about history. Simply because they are historical in nature and your viewpoint is as good as mine. On the other hand, discussions about religion, national psyche/identity and future directions are difficult. You see, given the rather ``unhappy`` experience with institutions in Pakistan, who does the common man turn to? the courts? the politicians? the education system? the executive? the army? the NGO`s? the businessman?, the answer comes down to religion who say, forget about all these guys, you will get your reward in your next life. (Thank you for saying that I keep out of these discussions :) ).

On the other hand, Sadhana, I would strongly recommend that you take a look at the CE`s devolution plan. If he manages to pull it off, it will be fascinating and excellent to the Pakistani state. As a matter of fact, that could very well be appropriate to India`s case as well, if not more so. The role of the bureaucracy has been relatively benign in case of India, but still can be improved dramatically. Another mailing list, which I found very interesting indeed, is the South Asian Citizens Web, to subscribe, send a blank email to act-subscribe@eGroups.com.

Sincerely

bd

Re Sadna # 128

Cross-border or internally inspired religious paens for violence is wrong. Period! I have said this before on Chowk and will do so again and that is, violence in the name of religion does not justify the fact of killing another person!

It is the misfortune of Pakistan that religion is being used to serve political ends for the few and no one can stand up against them, because they would, in toto, be against Islam as the debate in Pakistan is presently misunderstood.

Pakistan is a contradiction and to understand Pakistan, you have to attempt to accept, not understand or even rationalize, the contradiction!

We are a contradiction inside a puzzle wrapped within an irony!

Ciao!

bd #125

``As with everything else, if one does it cutely and silently, then its good, the real problem comes when one are caught out.``
No, in my opinion its bad whether its silent or its `caught out`, but its worse if its flaunted in the face of the world in the form of an entitlement or a `let` such as in `jihad is not terrorism`, `inevitable dynamics of jihad`, etc.

``But religious groups did whip up the same religious fervour in India with equally sad and predictable results.``
Which incident are you referring to, is it an international incident? Surely you are not comparing internal law and order and socio-political tussle with cross-border sponsored violence?

``It is my contention that given the national psyche of the common man in Pakistan, ``Kashmir, Islam, Pakistan`` has become inextricably linked, and NO PAKISTANI STATE BODY can do anything about it. As Feroz Saheb succinctly mentioned, that genie is out of the bottle.``

I will be really sorry if this is true, you are likely to know more about it than me. However, I quite wonder why no Pakistani chowkwallah is debating this point here with you, specially the `nothing to live for and religion to die for in defiance of all rationale` corollary :-).

Elsewhere on chowk if someone even mentions India`s per capita GDP, one gets howls of protest about putting down Pakistan in comparison. I`m wondering that if Indians are worse off than Pakistanis(I concede you have not said so yourself) and noone can expect a rational foreign policy from Pakistan with the genie and all, then why expect anything better from India, where things are worse in the sense that the leaders can do nothing without the consent of the general public? An element of wanting it both ways, here, I feel(though as I hastily repeat, not on your part, apparently).

I hope for the day when this current `fashion` ends and when the world flocks to Pakistan to recruit the talents of its people for many varied endeavours except the wrong type of IT. Thats the more constructive vision/image to project internally and externally(and the self-image matters a lot in bringing change, IMHO) and will pay off more in the long run, I sincerely believe.

Sadhana
PS: I do appreciate your innate courtesy and patience :-).

Re: Sac

Sorry yaar! I over looked your question!

Taiwan-China relationship is an interesting one and I am still ``reading``, but till China incorporates Taiwan into the mainland, China will be prone to an adventurist role in Asia. As to the Americans, it is more tricky, because they do acknowledge one China policy, because in 1974 USA agreed to this policy in lieu of the opening of its ties with Beijing. The Americans want Taipei to keep China pre-occupied and it will be interesting to see how this develops!

Are you in the IR business to?! :)

Ciao!

Re:Pankaj # 123

I did not suggest war as an option. I was saying that actions which cause misunderstanding and lead to war have to be avoided! Military option is not a viable option!

Agree on the LoC suggestion!

Ciao!

Sadhana #124

I have to apologise if you felt that I was being sarcastic towards you by appending the honorific ``ji`` to your name, it was my intention to be polite and respectful, ah! well, the best laid plans of mice and men and all that. Onwards and upwards with the discussion, i say. :)

The issue, as we were discussing, was how religion can have a very strong hold on a human`s psyche, and I explained that with reference to the jihadis in Pakistan as well as the Bajrang Dal and its compatriots in Ayodhya. I presume that you do agree with me on that issue that religion can overshadow normal human rights, national ``good`` and human development. You raised some examples and I raised some about government sponsored international terrorism. You as well as I agree that India as well as Pakistan has been involved in that. Whether it has been more or less, is a relative matter. Proxy wars are cheaper in the short run than all-out wars, and in the long run we are all dead. As with everything else, if one does it cutely and silently, then its good, the real problem comes when one are caught out. So that settles that point.

Now comes the point that Pakistan is using the same religious fervour to whip up religious sentiments to gather Kashmir into the fold of Pakistan while India did not do that. But religious groups did whip up the same religious fervour in India with equally sad and predictable results. Same concept, different countries. I do believe that the essential difference between your point about ``leverage`` and it being an excuse/argument and my point that its a fact and we have to deal with it is the following. It is my contention that given the national psyche of the common man in Pakistan, ``Kashmir, Islam, Pakistan`` has become inextricably linked, and NO PAKISTANI STATE BODY can do anything about it. As Feroz Saheb succinctly mentioned, that genie is out of the bottle. You may think that this is leverage or an argument, I tend to see it as a fact. For India to succeed in containing the Kashmir issue, it has to be a combination of military skills / economic development on the ground as well as a judicious amount of political/diplomatic effort on the domestic and international circuit. India also has to manage the dichotomy between professing a belief in secularism and the rise of religious based organizations in society. As for Pakistan, as I mentioned, I am extremely doubtful whether any state body or institution can control the aforementioned situation. One can hope, but one cannot see how this can be controlled in the short term. A convenience or not, it is here to stay.

Cheers

bd

bd #117

I havenot forgotten the international cross-border exercises you mention, I don`t know about Burma. But if one looks at the issue as government encouragement of popular involvement of its own citizens in cross-border violence and using it as leverage against the targetted country, the LTTE episode comes closest but still not close enough. The Indian government may have encouraged covert support of the LTTE in Tamil Nadu, politically and wrt arms, funds and as a refuge for Sri Lankan Tamil activists, violent or otherwise, but did the Indian government at any time encourage any group of INDIAN citizens to actually and openly organise itself and go wield arms against the Sri Lankan Army. Did India use a thriving cottage industry of its own armed citizens as leverage while `pursuing peace` with Sri Lanka? Was a stated goal of any Indian group of citizens, ever accession of foreign-held territory in common with the government`s goals? If anything, welcome or unwelcome(and things have changed 180 degrees now)the Indian Army was ultimately sent to disarm the former protege, LTTE.

And tell me of one gathering of Bajrang Dal or any other organisation in a major Indian city where arms were brandished against another Indian entity, let alone another country? Also, has any state action been ever taken `in national good` against `jehadi` activity in Pakistan? (religion leaving so many citizens in your words `foaming at the mouth, bereft of any kind of sense, human rights thought for the future well being of society or even national good`). Or is it like women`s rights and Islam, the principle not even professed and the practice unfortunately invisible, but everyone still self-congratulatory?

Thats what I meant by leverage. I`m guessing its worth a lot of money(millions of dollars and the world`s disinclination to `isolate` or even take punitive steps) to project Pakistan as half-a-step away from being swept away by zealots. Who am I to get in the way of this? The part which sticks in the gullet is trying the same argument with Indians. `We are in this great mess, so you have no real alternative but to grant us our point or we will go under`. `War is inevitable if you oppose our willing-to-die jehadis having free rein of Kashmir, and see, we can do nothing about them even in Pakistan, the only way out is India stop obstructing our aims`.

All I say to this argument is `very convenient` :-)

Sadhana

PS: Do please drop the `ji`, we are all fellow-acronyms here and I sense sarcasm :-).

Re Mr Ferozk

I think that the war between India and Pakistan can not decide the fate of Kashmir. It will only cause further bloodshed, deepening of hatred between people and push us years behind in the development race. The scenario has become even more scary since both the countries have nukes.

So lets leave that option out.

I remember you once suggested that LoC should be made the permanent border between the two countries. I would rather agree with that. Also the parts of Kashmir which are in India and Pakistan can be given greater autonomy. They can be made independent in all repects except defence, Communications, and foreign policy.

I do not think that there is a future of an independent Kashmir. First of all, its creation is fraught with all kinds of power conflicts which may mar its inception. Secondly it has got a very stragetic location between India, Pakistan,China and Russia. So India or Pakistan would not like to part with it. Thirdly, it has very meagre economic resources to support it and as such it will have to look to the other countries for help. This may give other powers a chance to interfere in the region and give rise to a potentially explosive situation. Indian Kashmir collects only Rs 800 crore as revenue and the Central Govt provides it around Rs 3000 crores to meet its basic needs. Fourthly if ever it is created it will only be a weak military state which is landlocked. Economically there does not seem ample proof that it will be stable or its people will prosper. Except for tourism no other major buisness thrives there and also it does not have a port facility.

So in my view, LoC should be accepted as an international border and then we should start work on a war scale to develop our own countries. We could not participate in the industrial revolution because we were a colony. The time beckons us to participate in a knowledge revolution, else we will again be thrown in the dustbin of history as a third world people.

Cheers

Ref: Asif #116

``That`s an idea from a typical Hindu mind which always has and alwayz will be anti-Muslim``

By the way, just how many Hindus do you actually know to be able to come to this conclusion?

And I guess you personally, as a muslim, have been spreading religious amity and peace all around?

-narain