E D I T O R I A L   P A G E

EDITORIALS

Food for free 
IF one hears a constant rustling sound in New Delhi, it comes from the frantic waving of the white flag by Civil Supplies and Public Distribution Minister Shanta Kumar. With his plans of liquidating the mountains of stocks having failed, he is now talking of giving away foodgrains to the poorest of the poor free or at a substantially lower price. 

Britain beckons India
BRITAIN is the latest to join the lengthening queue of the countries impressed by the level of competence of Indian professionals, particularly in the field of information technology. The USA was the first to recognise the worth of the IITs and IIMs as the repositories of all-round talent, capable of setting rather than following global trends. 

Missiles on hold
PRESIDENT Clinton has done well to leave it to his successor to decide on the controversial national missile defence (NMD) system. Ideally, he should have given the scheme a decent burial but that was perhaps not feasible at the fag end of his presidency. So, he has done the next best thing.

OPINION

THE CULT OF TERRORISM 
Role of Pakistan army 
by K. F. Rustamji
THE damage that Pakistan has done to us in Jammu and Kashmir, killing pilgrims and brick-kiln workers, and families of those who decided to get back from the killing fields, a hundred in one day recently, has not raised Islamabad’s position in the eyes of the world, nor has the use of landmines improved its image. 

Discipline and accountability in politics 
by Balraj Mehta
A FAMILIAR mid-term scenario seems to be fast developing for the NDA government at the Centre. The state Assembly elections due to be held in the coming years are evidently the catalyst. All the mainstream political parties are passing through internal convulsions.

MIDDLE

Pakistan after Musharraf
by V. N. Kakar
THE more I think of Pakistan’s CEO, Pervez Musharraf, the more I am reminded of Khan Aflatoon of Jhang Maghiana. Who was Khan Aflatoon? Not many of the present generation would know that. But old-timers may recall that among the Hotianas, Khotianas, Tiwanas and Diwanas of Sir Sikander Hayat Khan’s Cabinet in good old undivided Punjab in good old undivided India, he was the one who stood head and shoulders above the rest.

NEWS ANALYSIS

World religious leaders in introspection 
From A Balu
AT the summit of religious and spiritual leaders at the United Nations last week, Mata Amritanandamayi Devi, “Amma” to her devotees and followers, narrated at the inaugural session a story with a moral. Leaders of three religions — A, B and C — decided to convene a meeting to bring about peace. God was so pleased with their efforts that he sent out an angel to them. 

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

Food for free 

IF one hears a constant rustling sound in New Delhi, it comes from the frantic waving of the white flag by Civil Supplies and Public Distribution Minister Shanta Kumar. With his plans of liquidating the mountains of stocks having failed, he is now talking of giving away foodgrains to the poorest of the poor free or at a substantially lower price. He also wants to gift each member of Parliament 10,000 tonnes (one lakh quintals) for distribution in his or her constituency. (This is in addition to the Rs 2 crore the MPs get every year for developmental works.) It is a desperate bid and hence may not succeed. His earlier ideas have come a cropper mainly because they were ad hoc solutions to the problems of the moment and lacked linkages with ground reality. How will he identify the poorest of the poor, by the below the poverty line ration cards? These two sets of people are different and there is a distinct possibility that while the Minister may finally have the satisfaction of thinning down the stocks, the poor may not see the gift coming their way. There is a regular diversion of fair price shop grains to the open market, or there was before the price difference began to work against the practice. Anyway, what about the rural poor who are mostly outside the ambit of the fair price shop system? They are the ones who need food support and account for a vast majority of the malnourished in the country. His ministry is simultaneously thinking of coming out with a plan to prompt farmers in this region to shift from the wheat-rice cropping pattern to oilseeds. The department’s secretary has hinted at the government extending the minimum support price and procurement commitment to the new crop as well. This is designed to reduce the wheat and rice stocks but not to reduce the subsidy or the carrying cost (administrative expenditure on the FCI and bank interest).

Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Digvijay Singh wants to set up food banks in each village to be run by the local panchayat. The needy can borrow grain during the lean season and return it when there is work and hence wages to pay back the “loan”. In the vast Hindi belt, which is home to the largest concentration of the very poor and the poor, such banks will play two roles. One, it will fight the growing problem of hunger and undernourishment and, two, help Mr Shanta Kumar reduce the stocks with an admirable social security component. As a Congress MP has written, it is obscene to have a huge stock with the government while hundreds of thousands go hungry. Another way is to restart the food-for-work programme but again under the control of the local agencies. But the works to be undertaken have to have the merit of community asset formation. Sadly, like famine relief programmes, water courses are dug in deserts only to disappear within weeks. Or, local landlords corner the gains, as it happened in Maharashtra during the rural employment guarantee scheme days. Sadly, traditional social institutions in villages have become extinct, destroying equity and common bonding. Some political parties like the DMK in Tamil Nadu and the CPM in Kerala and West Bengal have filled the breach by setting up village-level units and running libraries. These units provide the last link in the statewide delivery system, of even information. States like UP and Bihar need them the most and lack them in a grotesque manner.

Britain beckons India

BRITAIN is the latest to join the lengthening queue of the countries impressed by the level of competence of Indian professionals, particularly in the field of information technology. The USA was the first to recognise the worth of the IITs and IIMs as the repositories of all-round talent, capable of setting rather than following global trends. The visiting British Secretary of State for Home Department, Mr Jack Straw, acknowledged as much during a meeting with businessmen in Delhi. He was more than enthusiastic about examining the possibility of replicating the "American model" under which endorsement from an industry association is deemed sufficient qualification for granting visa for setting up shop in Britain. The renewed British interest in Indian professionals and businessmen is the primary reason why Mr Straw promised a comprehensive Indo-UK pact for combating global terrorism. In a manner of speaking, the country's professionals and businessmen have given the global community valid economic reasons for supporting India's case for collective action for combating international terrorism. The USA wants India to be protected from the baneful effect of cross-border terrorism so that it can concentrate its energy on producing more and better professionals and businessmen for the ever-expanding global market. So do Japan, Germany and now Britain. They too have spread out the red carpet for Indians with the right credentials. US President Bill Clinton in a step-by-step tilt towards India is reported to have conveyed his concern directly to Pakistan Chief Executive Pervez Musharraf over Islamabad’s role in promoting terrorism in Kashmir.

Indian foreign office mandarins are pleased as punch for obvious reasons. President Clinton's statement on the eve of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee's visit to the USA "is the first formulation linking Pakistan with terrorism...more direct than anything he had said during his visit in March". The new Britain which is having to cope with the shortage of trained professionals in key sectors of the economy too has decided that a pro-India policy makes far more economic sense than the one which saw virtue in following the path of "equi-distance". Now, nearly 30 years after Enoch Powell drew the frightening scenario of rivers of blood flowing in England if immigration was not stopped for Asians, Britain is willing to test the credibility of the Conservative politician's thesis by encouraging Indian professionals to apply for immigration. How could Mr Straw have ignored the issue of the impact of cross-border terrorism, during his meeting with Home Minister L.K. Advani, while spreading the red carpet to Indian professionals and businessmen? However, it is easy to sign a document for joint action against global terrorism than to actually work out the nitty gritty of how to implement it. Mr Straw must be aware of the involvement of a number of British Muslim youths in the acts of terrorism in Kashmir. They have received special training at Taliban-type camps in Pakistan. For all intents and purposes they are British citizens. Abu Yahya is one such enthusiastic British Muslim who has been indoctrinated into participating in "jihad" for the "liberation of Kashmir". He admits to have taken part in several episodes of terrorism in Kashmir. Will the British authorities hand him over to India or try him at home for his role in promoting global terrorism? It is evident that the proposed joint working group will have to strive hard for removing the visible and invisible stumbling blocks. It will have to ensure that the pact on terrorism, like so many international treaties, does not end up in the ever-expanding "archives of good intentions". 

Missiles on hold

PRESIDENT Clinton has done well to leave it to his successor to decide on the controversial national missile defence (NMD) system. Ideally, he should have given the scheme a decent burial but that was perhaps not feasible at the fag end of his presidency. So, he has done the next best thing. What has to be kept in mind is that the orange signal has come not because of the worldwide opposition of the allies and others but only due to the serious doubts about the feasibility of the interception technology. Two of the three tests conducted so far to intercept incoming long-range missiles failed and that is what sealed the fate of the ridiculously expensive system. “We have made progress but we should not move forward until we have absolute confidence the system will work,” Mr Clinton said in a speech at Georgetown University. At the same time, he has directed his Defence Secretary to pursue a “robust programme of technology development”. That means that the NMD can be revived anytime in the future. In fact, Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush has promised to put in place an even more elaborate system at the earliest possible date if he is sworn to power. He has made the “decline” in the state of defence a major campaign issue. That shows how political oneupmanship and jingoism can sidestep rational assessment of threat perception and affordability. Mr Bush has chosen not to speak of where the money is going to come from for the system that may cost anything from $25 billion to $60 billion. Mercifully, Vice-President Al Gore, the Democratic candidate, is non-committal on the fate of the much-commented programme, which was to become operational by 2005.

The NMD system is supposed to be a bulwark against attacks from states like North Korea, Iran and Iraq. In this threat evaluation, implicit is the scant respect shown to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) regime. After all, a missile to target the USA can become feasible only if these treaties prove to be ineffective. So why should these be signed by the world at all when the USA itself is not convinced about their efficacy? Among the staunch opponents of the NMD system are Russia and China. Both are of the view that it can revive the arms race by negating the existing arms control structure. The latter is particularly concerned about the theatre missile defence (TMD) system, which the USA intends to extend over Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. What the USA has failed to realise is that the very opening of the nuclear security umbrella is seen in some quarters as a provocative act, which may give ideas to many terrorist organisations who may be galvanised into giving a befitting reply to the “challenge”. The USA and its allies are so far ahead of all others in the nuclear race that there is no chance of any other country being able to fill the gap. At the same time, there are credible reports that the USA is conducting vital tests despite swearing by the NPT and the CTBT. Since its supremacy is unchallenged and unchallengeable, it is foolhardy on its part to lay its bets on a system of dubious merit. 

THE CULT OF TERRORISM 
Role of Pakistan army 
by K. F. Rustamji

THE damage that Pakistan has done to us in Jammu and Kashmir, killing pilgrims and brick-kiln workers, and families of those who decided to get back from the killing fields, a hundred in one day recently, has not raised Islamabad’s position in the eyes of the world, nor has the use of landmines improved its image. In fact, this impoverished state, based on violence, which is in danger of being declared a terrorist state, specialises in the cult of cruelty. To retrieve their image the Pakistan military rulers will try their best to tarnish ours, and will raise shouts of human rights violations and, worse still, incite communal riots in India through their agents. That would be the worst thing that could happen, and the police must step up all attempts to find trouble-making agents. Extremist groups on our side will also try to excite mobs with communal incitements. We will fall into the trap if we lose our secular balance. Those who scoff at secularism must accept that this is the only hope of peace, and the formation of a union of South-East Asia a few years from now.

The only army in the world, apart from some tribal levies in Africa, that exults in killing unarmed civilians is the Pakistan army. It set up a world record of atrocities in East Pakistan — 1.5 million murders of unarmed Bengali citizens, who were Muslims. It was a rate calculated between 6,000 and 12,000 per day for the 260 days the carnage lasted. Many Hindus had left East Pakistan. The army exulted in killing Hindus, and Generals used to brazenly ask field commanders, “How many Hindus have you killed?” The killings even extended to their own comrades in the army who were Bengalis and showed a spirit of revolt. In one cantonment, another troops were disarmed and then shot in groups by automatic fire. In Comilla, 350 Bengali soldiers were shot dead in one sweep of the Bren. The revulsion of the world was so strong that even their best friends refused to come to help them.

When Bangla mobs chased the Punjabi officers out of the country in 1971, they ran to the BSF posts on the border. There they were given shelter. The BSF shared rations with them, brought charpoys for them to sleep on. Contrast that with a website boast, “All Indian prisoners are killed in the occupied valley. The Lashkar fighter will usually execute an Indian soldier by slitting his throat. However, beheading and disembowelling are also common methods, employed mostly for psychological reasons. In at least one case, a Lashkar fighter, Abu Haibat, brought the head of an Indian soldier back with him to Pakistan.” If this is not sadism, what is it ?

From the very birth of Pakistan the Army has assumed that it has a special role in protecting that country. That means subverting democratic governments and indulging in living well and drinking hard. General Musharraf may be an exception, but how long will he be able to keep the greed of his men in check? They could not do it at the time of Yahya Khan because he himself led them into it. Even General Zia could not control them. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

General Musharraf is making the same mistake that General Ayub committed. I suppose it is the military mind that believes that if he is able to conquer Kashmir, the people of Pakistan will be convinced that military rule is worth having. When the 1965 infiltration failed, General Ayub was booted out by the students of Peshawar. General Musharraf crying “Kashmir”, “Kashmir” will not meet the same fate if he steps down in time. He seems different, and that is why we should talk to him. He may have something important to say.

The policy of terrorism which Pakistan has embarked upon has several related chapters. The first is that of finding employment for the thousands of Afghans who have descended upon Pakistan and want to earn a living. Secondly, it provides an easy method for General Musharraf to send the men to jehad and create a diversion from the damage of military rule, and earn points with some nations. Thirdly, it helps him to keep the diehards on his side by targeting India. Fourthly, it enables him to cadge money from Saudi Arabia and other donors, and raise funds in the form of local donations which are not considered taxes. What he fails to mention is that we in India have more Muslims than Pakistan. We are a secular state in which they have found a home, and if you ask them they would like Kashmir to stay with India. That is the flip side of a plebiscite.

The people of Pakistan were fully in support of Mr Nawaz Sharif when he felt that the military was taking the country to disaster and wanted to war with India. In every election, the people have failed to support any of the extremist groups. The people are like us — secular and gentle. That goes counter to military dreams of dominating the world. How absurd those dreams are can be seen from the websites. So democracy has to be subverted, its leaders imprisoned, and the whole apparatus of Pakistan, including the judiciary, made to toe the line of the dictator. The Government of India has failed to bring all this out before the world, in an effective manner.

Let us not forget that the whole problem being made out about Kashmir is not where it should be, but what way it should touch India. The real dispute: is are we going to be a secular state or will we too become a blood-thirsty communal one? Do we go the way of the military ruler and his cohorts and commit murder, or do we pursue the path of secularism, giving protection and opportunity to all, building on the traditions of the land and a Constitution which enjoins that the welfare of one is compounded by the welfare of all?

The future of our nation is in the hands of the military, the police and government leaders because Kashmir is such an important issue. They have acted with courage, have resisted terrorism in the right way and have now to face the alienation and tiredness that is creeping into the picture. We need men with vision, sympathy and understanding, men like Chief Secretary Arun Jaitley, and Director-General of Police Gurbachan Jagat. Above all, we need men who will support and enhance democracy in Jammu and Kashmir.

The present phase of terrorist-police conflict cannot last long. It has reached the stage of desperation. We have passed through a similar phase in Nagaland. Suddenly we discovered that all the elan of the terrorists had disappeared and they were ready to come to a settlement. Both sides were tired, both sides wanted an end to the conflict , the government side had more staying power. And once peace came, the Nagas were taken into the BSF and made excellent fighters. The Nagas are brave, never brutish.

The factor to which we are not paying proper attention is the cruelty that our forces see all around them. Here in Srinagar it is all that harms morale and calm thinking. In Jammu and Kashmir the people live on the far side of despair; they wonder when that despair will turn to hope — violence forgotten, the night silent, the day full of joy.

“My sole hope and prayer is that Kashmir should become a beacon light to this benighted subcontinent.” — M.K. Gandhi, December 29, 1947.

Discipline and accountability in politics 
by Balraj Mehta

A FAMILIAR mid-term scenario seems to be fast developing for the NDA government at the Centre. The state Assembly elections due to be held in the coming years are evidently the catalyst. All the mainstream political parties are passing through internal convulsions.

The tempo of these developments barely one year after the general election was not anticipated. The formation of the NDA government headed by Mr A.B. Vajpayee with a comfortable majority in Parliament was expected to restore what is euphemistically called political stability that was supposed to provide smooth sailing for the privatisation-globalisation policy. All these expectations are turning out to be a gross miscalculation. The ruling party leaders taking a rosy post-election view geared themselves to enforce discipline, curb dissidence and enjoy the fruits of office for a full term of five years.

But the reaction of the cadre of the NDA parties as well as the major opposition parties seems to have been contrary to the smug perceptions of the leaders. The cadre had a more authentic sense of the mass mood. The people had not really given a mandate in favour of the privatisation-globalisation policy. The electoral verdict was not a carte blanche to the ruling clique for the break-neck implementation of the market-friendly policy prescriptions. The popular verdict, properly understood, was for a change in policy in favour of giving precedence to the strengthening of the political and economic autonomy of India in the world order. The people sought precedence for opportunities to the domestic business enterprise and the skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour in India for gainful participation in economic activities in the urban and rural areas. The people voted for effective measures for immediate relief to the cruelly deprived and poverty-stricken population of India. The eruption of dissidence on policy matters in the major political parties, especially the BJP and the Congress, is inspired, it seems, by a far higher scale of values in favour of democratic accountability as against the rigid norms of party discipline and loyalty to the party leaders.

It is not fortuitous either that after the general election the market-friendly policy priorities are becoming more and more perverse. The second stage of the economic reforms is based on the expectations of the inflow of massive foreign investments that will choke all healthy impulses for self-reliant economic growth in India. The urge for accelerating economic growth in developing countries such as India must also be related to equity and adjustments made for this objective. It must be relevant to productivity improvements and mass welfare also. Then alone can economic reforms become meaningful for the people and can be implemented on the basis of national consensus.

A dangerous nexus has, however, developed between the entrenched vested interests in the economy and the ruling elite after the elections. The Prime Minister’s Council on Trade and Industry has delineated frankly a far-reaching policy and political agenda that frankly controverts the democratic mandate. Its recommendations on diverse economic and social issues were nonchalantly accepted by the Prime Minister without consulting even the Union Cabinet, let alone the Planning Commission. A serious and honest effort to build a “national consensus” on the economic and social policy has been made irrelevant by Mr Vajpayee in his second term as head of a coalition of disparate coalition parties. He has now defiantly identified himself with the agenda of the comprador big business and transnational corporations and is trying to implement their behests without any reservation. The claim that in the matter of “governance”, the Prime Ministerial prerogative transcends the policies and commitments of his own party, let alone democratic sanctions, is what authoritarian rule is all about.

The process of realignment of social and political forces in India has not, however, ended with the NDA coalition forming the Central government. The Prime Minister may give precedence to the confidence of foreign investors and their political leaders in his leadership of the Indian government. His admirers in India too may place their hopes in his ingenuity as well as willingness to override popular sentiments and aspirations by manipulating politics and policies. But dissension within even his own party and the Union Cabinet has surfaced and refutes his inordinate claims in the matter of policy-making and governance. The allies of the BJP in the NDA too are becoming restive and may soon become assertive. Popular discontent is growing and becoming forbidding. The so-called economic reforms, especially its privatisation-globalisation dimensions, are becoming a sharply contentious issue in politics.

The leaders of many of the so-called mainstream political parties and the self-serving intelligentsia may rely on slogan-mongering to advance their careers. But they do not, indeed cannot, alter the balance of social forces by their activities. On the contrary, they have tended to alienate themselves from the mass of the people in India, as in many other developing countries. This state of public affairs has, therefore, placed the principle of democratic accountability rather than party discipline as central to meaningful politics. What is relevant in political contention really are policy commitments in the forging of political alliances and frequent realignment of political and social forces. The scope for political wheeling-dealing and manipulation is circumscribed if and when the mass of the people have a chance to intervene in policy-making.

The desperate attempts of the entrenched vested interests in the Indian economy and society to restore what is euphemistically called political stability, presumably by way of a highly centralised administration, are bound to queer the pitch for India’s democratic polity. What the people of India have been seeking for long is a government accountable and responsive to them. This can be a guarantee in itself of wide-ranging radical reforms in their favour in the socio-economic structure and governance of the country in tune with the cultural, ethnic and religious diversities as well as balanced socio-economic development. However, this is possible only if India regains autonomy for the development process from the globalisation process that is pushing this country under neo-colonial dependency.

Pakistan after Musharraf
by V. N. Kakar

THE more I think of Pakistan’s CEO, Pervez Musharraf, the more I am reminded of Khan Aflatoon of Jhang Maghiana. Who was Khan Aflatoon? Not many of the present generation would know that. But old-timers may recall that among the Hotianas, Khotianas, Tiwanas and Diwanas of Sir Sikander Hayat Khan’s Cabinet in good old undivided Punjab in good old undivided India, he was the one who stood head and shoulders above the rest.

May his soul rest in peace! I recall one day his PA’s mother-in-law died. The PA had to rush to his village. He could not contact Khan Aflatoon. He just left the telegram he had received from home on the table of Khan Aflatoon and took the first train to wherever he was to go. When Khan Aflatoon returned to office from a Cabinet meeting or something like that and saw the telegram on his table, he started weeping zar-zar (profusely). It was much later that he made two great discoveries. One, the telegram was not intended for him. Two, his mother-in-law had kicked the bucket long, long before his PA’s had thought it fit to do that.

Khan Aflatoon was in love with things old, including old socks. They say that he changed his socks only when the socks developed more holes than these could possibly be put up with. Old socks, like stale fish, throw up awful smell. Khan Aflatoon’s dutiful wife always made sure that he did change his socks before going to the Chief Minister’s residence. She managed to exercise an effective check on this. But then one evening, as she was going along with Khan Aflatoon, to Sir Sikander Hayat Khan’s place for dinner, she found the smell oozing out of Khan Aflatoon’s well-polished shoes rather too powerful.

“Haven’t you changed your socks?” she asked Khan Aflatoon.

“I knew,” said he, “that you would put to me this question. For your general knowledge, I beg to say that I did change my socks. And as proof thereof, I have brought in my pocket, to show to you, the old pair as well.”

Khan Aflatoon and his wife were going on a boat cruise on the Ravi. In mid-stream, the boatman said that his boat was getting flooded and there was the danger that all three of them, Khan Aflatoon, his wife and the boatman, were going to be sunk.”

“Why?” asked Khan Aflatoon.

”The boat,” said the boatman, “has developed a small hole and water has started coming on to the boat through it. The hole is getting bigger and bigger and the danger is that by that time I can take the boat back to the river-bank, the boat will be flooded and once it is flooded, all three of us will be drowned. ”

“Oh jhalia (simpleton),” said Khan Aflatoon to the boatman, “where is your akkal (intelligence) gone? Such a small thing and you are shivering as if you have developed high fever. Why don’t you dig another hole in the boat and allow the water that comes in through the hole you are talking about to get out of the one I am suggesting to you?”

God knows what happened thereafter. But as I think of Pervez Musharraf, and I think of him every day because of his great expertise in hijacking petty things like democracy, justice, liberty and all that, I am reminded of Khan Aflatoon who must have become dear to the Lord long before Musharraf was born.

World religious leaders in introspection 
From A Balu in New York

AT the summit of religious and spiritual leaders at the United Nations last week, Mata Amritanandamayi Devi, “Amma” to her devotees and followers, narrated at the inaugural session a story with a moral. Leaders of three religions — A, B and C — decided to convene a meeting to bring about peace. God was so pleased with their efforts that he sent out an angel to them. The angel asked the leaders what they wished. The leader of Religion A said: “Religion B is responsible for all the problems, so please wipe them off the face of the earth.” The leader of Religion B said: “Religion A is the cause of all troubles and you have to reduce them to ashes.” By now the angel was disappointed and turned expectantly to the leader of Religion C. With an expression of grave humility, he said: “I wish nothing for myself. It will be enough if you merely grant the prayers of my two colleagues.” A more telling depiction of the attitudes of various religions and their leaders around the world could not have been made.

As the UN Secretary-General, Mr Kofi Annan, told the summit, the practice of religion can have its dark side too. But religion is not itself to blame. The problem, he said, was not with the faith, but with the faithful. Many other religious leaders who addressed the unprecedented assembly at the UN were frank enough to admit that religion had been misused and exploited, resulting in conflict and violence. “Some people have abused and exploited religion to support violence,” Cardnial Francis Avinze of Nigeria, and President of the Pontifical Council for inter-religious dialogue at the Vatican, said: “Religious leaders have a duty to see that religion is not abused in this way.”

The Millennium Peace Summit was first conceived not by any religious or spiritual leader, but the media moghul Ted Turner of CNN three years ago. It was followed up by a team of organisers led by Bawa Jain, noted for his initiatives on inter-faith movement. Two years of efforts culminated in an unique event that turned the General Assembly hall where fierce international diplomatic battles have been fought into a sanctuary that gave the opportunity to the world religious and spiritual leaders to extend their blessings and support to the challenging undertakings of the world organisation for peace and amity. The only regret among the participants was the absence of the Dalai Lama who was not invited apparently at the instance of China, and protesters outside the UN called the summit a hypocritical farce.

The attempt at the peace summit was clearly to find a common ground that unites all people irrespective of what religion or faith they practised. Rabbi Meir Lan from Israel put it in a picturesque way. If all the world’s species could live together on Noah’s Ark, people of different religions could do the same in dry land. “They lived on the arc because they had no choice,” he said amid applause. “Outside the ark was a common enemy, the flood, water. Everyone wanted to stay alive. Are we not equal to the days of Noah’s Ark? Don’t we, all of us, have common enemies, poverty, disease?”

If the eloquent pronouncements and proclamations at the summit conveyed one singular theme, it was that all religions carry only one message — to be merciful, to be tolerant, to love thy neighbour. As Mr Kofi Annan summed it up, no religion could claim a monopoly on such teachings.

The final declaration that emerged from the peace summit was a “commitment to peace”, acknowledging that war and violence “are sometimes perpetrated in the name of religion.” The summit pledged that the signatories would work “with the UN and all men and women of goodwill” towards peace. They would also honour freedom of religion, towards narrowing the gulf between the rich and the poor and for environmental protection. An Earth Charter adopted by the summit articulates a set of basic ethical and moral principles to guide the behaviour of people and nations towards earth and each other.

The moot question is how these goals are to be carried out. Since the summit, largely funded through foundations, was held in collaboration with the UN, to that extent the hope is being expressed that an advisory council would continue to work in collaboration with the world organisation and other international agencies. The chief value of the summit was, of course, as Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, chief Rabbi of the United Kingdom, said, simply in having met and interacted with people of other faiths.

For the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), which along with the Modi Foundation coordinated with the summit secretariat, the outcome was most satisfying. The largest contingent of delegates and observers numbering 350 came from India and many of them conveyed unequivocally the message that there had to be respect for all religions and in no way any religion should try to lure anyone. Along with Buddhists and Sikhs, Hindu leaders succeeded in proposing a review of Article 18 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly in 1948 to make it clear that proselytisation is not sanctioned by the Declaration.

“I should not be trampling on your foot and you should not be trampling on my foot,” Swami Murugananda Saraswati of Arunachal Unique Mountain Trust of Iiruvannamalai in south India, said, underlining the significance and sanctity of freedom of religion. “My rector at the university once told me that since I was born on Christmas Day I should become a Christian. I told him that I will never change my mother.”

It was sweet music for the VHP to hear Ted Turner tell the summit at the United Nations: “As I studied the world’s great religions, what struck me was that my Christian sect was very intolerant — not intolerant of religious freedom for other people, but we thought that we were the only ones going to Heaven. It confused the devil out of me. I was turned off by it.” 

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

Man is the embodiment of Satyam Shivam and Sundaram .... He has to spread consolation and comfort through speech and action, swallow the poison of anger and greed .... He must saturate his daily life in truthful speech, virtuous acts and holy thoughts. He must reveal the Divine qualities of love, humility, detachment and contentment.

*****

—Sri Aurobindo Ghosh, Collected Poems, 567