 |
| Sunday,
July 1, 2001, Chandigarh, India   
|
Of human
rights and human wrongs MIDSTREAM |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Religious
tolerance and marriages The Akali agenda:
past and present
Harihar Swarup
Congress
just mews over Tehelka
Humra Quraishi
|
Of human rights and human wrongs ALL human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Auschwitz and
Belsen, Kosova and Rwanda, racial prejudice and neo-imperialism have led us to doubt the infinity of human wisdom. We stand at the start of the millennium experiencing both joy and sadness, and though we think that the last century was the most progressive, one wonders if material progress and political and economic development are the criteria of unmitigated good for the human species. Are we not closer to self destruction than our ancestors ever were? Is not the world ruled by the rich nations in collusion with the rich client regimes of the poor nations? Power and profit are the sole motives behind the Western ideology of 'benevolence', 'harmony', and 'globalization'. One has to settle for extremes as the identity tag of our century when exploitation, dismay, and suspicion are all that we are faced with. This complex reality encountered by the dissident writer has brought a new sensitivity to human rights, thereby challenging and unmasking illegitimate authority with the purpose of extending the scope of freedom and justice. With the exposure of Paul de Man's Nazi affiliations, deconstruction came under heavy censure. The first-person subject was being dissolved. Freudians had picked it apart. Deconstruction had deconstructed it. And if this was the case, the question to be asked by Amnesty International was: What are we defending then and in whose name and on what authority? Amnesty International is a self-governing, worldwide pressure group campaigning neutrally for the liberation of all hostages of conscience, that is, people incarcerated or physically abused because of their political or religious beliefs. The general function of the organization is to espouse the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; to work for the release of those apprehended or subjected to physical intimidation by reason of their beliefs, ethnic origin, gender, or language; to oppose detention without trial and to uphold the right to a fair trial; and to resist the use of the death sentence or torture, whether or not the people concerned have sponsored violence. Disregard and disrespect for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind. The advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people. It is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. My last visit to Oxford luckily coincided with the 2001 Oxford Amnesty Lecture, the 10th in the series which have till now raised £1,00,500 for the Amnesty International. The subject this year was 'Human Rights, Human Wrongs' delivered in the context of religion and the state apparatus as constraining forces. Behind these lectures lay the disdain for religion and the nascent powers-that-be, a compelling critique of war, of Islamic fundamentalism, of the oppression of minority cultures by mainstream culture. Tzvetan
Todorov, Michael Ignatieff, Gayatri Spivak, Peter Singer, Gitta
Sereny, Geoffrey Bindman, Susan Sontag and Eva Hoffman were in Oxford to emphasis that the rulers of any system cannot maintain their power without the constant creation of prohibitions that then give the state the power to imprison or intimidate anyone who violates any of the cruel workings of state repression and its nerve-racking effects. The crisis is compounded in intolerant regimes which use considerable ingenuity in their methods of suppressing dissent. The lectures resolutely concentrated on a wide range of questions pertaining to freedom, the abuse of human rights as well as the world-wide patriarchal domination of class systems, the moral wrong-doing, complicity, fairness, integrity and rapprochement. But their focal concern was with the individual sufferer and the freedom which can come only through absolute involvement with politics and a yearning to intercede wherever necessary.
Todorov, the structuralist and influential narratologist, critic and writer, commenced by putting forward a number of questions relating to the form and aim of intervention. He was of the opinion that intervention identifies both the self and the other and is never intended at carrying out a one-way critique of the bully. An analytical gaze towards the self is equally vital to the construction of identity and authenticity. The concept of rights often implies related obligations. A conscious evaluation of one's history is a valid exercise. We all need to account for the legacy of all political and social abuse. In this lie our hopes and ambitions, our quest for emancipation and dignity. The moral argument must begin in metaphysics — from an examination of words like 'protection' and 'development' which gain currency within the imperialist discourse, operating as a form of economic genocide through the different agencies of the UN, Nato and many more. Todorov drew upon the vocabulary of 'assistance' extending from simply being of assistance to being present and standing shoulder to shoulder with the oppressed. Michael Ignatieff, freelance writer and broadcaster, was more aggressive
towards the international bodies that had inherent inconsistency built in their very approach to issues of war, and did not operate with complete fairness. The realistic problems in implementation of their policies had to be examined to sort out the internal contradictions. Gayatri Spivak, the committed Marxist postcolonial critic came up with a biting hit at the education policies ingenuously programmed for the poor who are made to learn by rote whereas the rest of the world learns through analysis that stimulates and quickens their critical abilities; this becomes responsible for the cycle of poverty and abuse, and seems to free the rest of us from 'learning to learn from below'. Peter Singer, the Australian philosopher and bio ethicist, in his lecture took up the inspection of theoretical and legal problems related to institutions dealing with human rights and their implementation. He questioned how far humans might be genetically inclined towards aggression against those we identify as being not of our type. Moving away from institutions, Gitta Sereny persuasively showed how racism operates in our daily life, in the language we are taught at school, on the playing field or at home; this kind of 'inner racism' is unlike the institutional racial discrimination which most indisputably is also epidemic. The political activist, Geoffrey Bindman, who was the advocate for the Amnesty against Pinochet, compellingly suggested ways to encourage the effective working of international law to bring the oppressors to book. The penultimate lecture by Susan Sontag, the American writer, supported by her deep interest in photography (she is the author of the important book On Photography, 1977), was absorbing in its rather remarkable analysis of representation of human abuse in art and photography. She was of the belief that her experience of the war in Sarajevo had convinced her that the function of photography in war can serve the purpose of provoking viewers all over the world to raise their voice against violence and in favour of those who suffer hugely during war. The last lecture by Eva Hoffman, on the other hand, took up the role of the narrative through which one generation tells the story of its agonising history. She related how these stories filter down to the next, making available a shared experience that can never ignore the question of human rights which may in fact be the history of human wrongs. Indeed, it was an amazing experience to listen to these level-headed and realistic writers, true to environment and circumstance who, as a result, find themselves at loggerheads with those who try to twist. These internationally distinguished speakers spoke on the acts of political imprisonment and dissidence with an imperishable optimism, a hope that those who will hear will care, will even take action. Physical and psychological intimidation and subjugation is not only common under totalitarian regimes but is widely practised in any modern state and we all must be aware of it. Ethnicity, religious strife, tribalism, and people killing people in the name of race, religion, language and culture are the main characteristics of this age of extremes and terror when we are returning to barbarism. What is encouraging is that there is a world which is still inhabited by people who believe in freedom; freedom to live, freedom to express and freedom to die peacefully. |
|
MIDSTREAM THERE are two aspects of the demand for which the Isaac Swu-Thuingaleng Muivah faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland is engaged in insurgency. The first aspect is that the NSCN wants the Naga area separated from India and recognised as a sovereign independent territory; the second is that it wants all the Naga-inhabited areas of neighbouring Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh to be incorporated in the sovereign independent Nagaland for which it is carrying on the insurgency. The former Home Secretary, K. Padmanabaiah, had in 1999 been negotiating for the government with the Isaac-Muivah NSCN. He was not able to achieve a breakthrough. The talks he was conducting broke down on precisely the issue of a "greater Nagaland". Padmanabaiah's predecessor for the NSCN talks, Swaraj Kaushal, who resigned in 1999, had met the NSCN leaders in Zurich and Amsterdam in 1998, without any lasting success. Prime Minister Vajpayee and his Principal Secretary Brajesh Mishra are said to have met Muivah in Paris in September 1998, on their way back home from the UN. Last November, the Central Government, after a further extension of the ceasefire, is reported to have sent Chief Minister Zoramthanga of Mizoram, who had been a rebel previously, to meet Thuingaleng Muivah in Bangkok — where he was being held by the Thai authorities for travelling on a fake passport. Some progress was then reported to have been made. But nothing substantial emerged from the talks. Government weakness and vacillation continued. Now, after discussions reportedly between Padmanabaiah and Muivah, the government, in its latest extension of the ceasefire, has evidently expanded it to cover all the Naga-inhabited pockets in the neighbouring states. The leaders of the neighbouring states — Manipur most of all! — have seen implications in this of an eventual shrinking of their territories as Naga-inhabited areas are given over to a larger Nagaland. They resent the fact that they were not consulted. Last Sunday, Prime Minister Vajpayee, during a two-hour discussion with a high-powered delegation of visiting Manipur leaders, assured them that the Centre had initiated a review of various aspects of the ceasefire agreement with the Isaac-Muivah faction of the NSCN. He stated categorically that the territorial integrity of Manipur — and of the other
neighbouring states — would be preserved. He is expected to hold yet another meeting with the Manipur leaders on July 8. The Manipur leaders did not appear totally convinced. Manipur's former Deputy Chief Minister Chandramani Singh, who was the delegation's spokesman, was quoted saying that if the Centre was unable to do anything concrete in the matter by July 31, "we (in Manipur) may be compelled to take some hard decisions", because "we have a commitment to our people". The All-Manipur Students Union, which has spearheaded the agitation, is continuing, meanwhile, to call for "nothing short of revolution". Thuingaleng Muivah's brother, James Muivah, who lives at Ukhrul in Manipur, is stated to have agreed that "sovereign statehood for Nagas is going too far, . . . but to deny us the Naga-inhabited areas for a greater Nagaland would be disastrous for all. . . . The hills of Nagaland have been inhabited by Nagas since time immemorial". This is hardly likely to reassure the Manipuris — and also the people in the other neighbouring states. The Centre's response to the two aspects of Isaac-Muivah NSCN demand would, one imagines, also have two aspects. The first aspect of the response might be that the question of separating the Naga areas from India simply does not arise. Since Nagaland was part of British India — which became eventually India, Pakistan and then also Bangladesh — it will remain part of the successor nation-state of India. In the second aspect of the response, dealing with the matter of the boundaries of India's Nagaland state, and of Nagaland's neighbouring states, the matter would have to be decided in a well-considered, constitutional way. The mind goes back to 1960, when Jawaharlal Nehru stated in the Lok Sabha that "we have always regarded the Nagas as full Indian citizens. I have said to the Naga people several times in the past that there could be no question of independence for the Nagas. . . . I must however make it clear that no government can permit hostile activities on its soil . . . and we shall continue to deal firmly with the hostile elements". The statement was more firm than implemental action or initiative for security and territorial integrity. It is unfortunate that up to now the approach and attitude of the present and most past governments at the Centre have tended to be ad hoc, rather than long-term, consistent and well-structured. It would be, obviously, wise and timely to consider in an organised way the various demands being made in various parts of the country, violently as well as non-violently, for "homelands" and for changes of state-boundary. For example, there is known to be discontent in some of the new states that have been formed — Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Uttaranchal — relating to districts or parts that their leaders feel should have been included from other states and territories. There are other districts in the country that have demanded Union Territory status, and still others that might advantageously be given that status. Some state leaders have demanded a redefinition of Centre-state relations — currently the most vocal among these being perhaps Andhra Pradesh's Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu, who argues for more funds and greater powers from the Centre to the states. More or less integrating with the question of redefinition of Centre-state relations — the category in which even demands such as for greater Nagaland, as well as resistance to that idea, seem to fall — appear to be questions of socio-economic development and of national security. Take for example the question of joblessness in the North-East region. There are estimated to be 16 lakh youths "on the unemployment register" in Assam alone. Is it surprising that terrorist groups such as the United Liberation Front of Assam and the National Democratic Front of Bodoland should thrive? "Bodoland" might, from all accounts, comprise no more than a couple of districts or so! This is possibly true of most of the areas over which states have fear of loss — a district or two here, a district or two there. Presumably, the basis of the desire to gain a district or fear its loss is protection and preservation of cultural identity — such as in the "Bodoland" demand. Why, then, should not a constitutional way be found for some kind of "chain of autonomy" going through every state to its district and village level? Greater autonomy that starts in the relationship between the Centre and the states? The related question of national security arises when groups take to insurgency to achieve their "homeland" ends. Consider the many "People's War Groups" in various places, usually citing "cultural identity" or economic causes or "caste identity" problems. All these calls and claims boil down to a demand for "self-rule" by cultural, ethnic or linguist groups. Their urges would best be met by a uniform devolution of power in federal democracy, not by sovereignty. To grapple with these discontents, fears, ills and linked problems in an organised way, it would seem urgently necessary for the Central Government to set up a second States Reorganisation Commission. The Commission could take up not only questions relating to Nagaland and its neighbouring areas, the insurgency-infected areas of Assam and other parts of the North-East region. It might also consider such demands as in Telangana, Vidharba, Saurashtra. It could, indeed, take into consideration even the demand of autonomy for Jammu-Kashmir made by the government of Farooq Abdullah. Its considered recommendations might then be discussed in Parliament and in the concerned state legislatures. The results of all these discussions should yield a democratic solution and modification to the demands being made for state-changes and separation — too often violently by misled insurgents. There seems no other way. A businesslike, methodical and constitutional approach is imperative. Continuing with ad hoc responses and measures will only add to the mounting chaos and confusion in the country — chaos and confusion which is much too often and much too glibly miscalled "necessary elements in a democratic system", and which leads invariably to violence, cowardly killing of innocents, drug-trafficking, extortion, kidnapping and other crimes. (Asia Features) |
|
Religious
tolerance and marriages What is your religion? He asked me. All sensible men have the same religion. And what is that? Sensible men never tell. — Desraeli My wife and I were sitting on a bench at Worli when an elderly gentleman, with a mop of white hair, walked up to us and said, "You Parsees?" "Yes" I said warily, wondering what the game was. "Fire-worshippers?" "Why do you want to know?" I asked. "I am a teacher of religion and I have always wondered whether you worship the Sun or fire." "I am not an expert," I said. "Probably we honour both — the ancient world consisting of Egyptians, Phoenicians, Persians and Hindus all worshiped the Sun, and the ancient pastoral tribe wandering on the steppes of Central Asia, from whom the Parsees have descended, had to preserve fire or else they would have perished, so we honour both." "The ancient have been proved right by
Science. Science has shown that the Sun is our Creator. Life started in the primordial slime millions of years ago. From tiny cells grew all animal and vegetable life by evolution. To worship the Sun was right in the past. How do you justify it today?" I said "The word worship does not fit easily into the world of today. The Sun, undoubtedly, controls all aspects of life on earth. It enables photosynthesis in green leaves, on which life depends, through the red and blue parts of its spectrum. Perhaps there are different types of rays in the Sun. There seems to be some design section somewhere. For instance, the eye could not have come up by evolution alone or the human genome. There must be a design agency in the universe somewhere and we do not know where it is. I expect it must be in the Sun or the stars." I mentioned this conversation to an agnostic friend. He said: "I told you I do not believe in any one religion. I believe in the morality of all religions. All of them show the right way to live and behave with each other. What I am totally against is the belief that if you perform namaskar facing the Sun every morning, you will pass the examination, or win a lottery. True, religion gives hope, and hope is important for life. It teaches persistence, which is again important. What I am totally against is the use of religion to fight battles in politics or train innocent young men for jehad to earn a living. To my mind that is the biggest fraud that man can commit." "Listen", he continued, "my daughter has to write a thesis on religious tolerance and intolerance. She dislikes my ideas. Can you help her to prepare the framework, with a lot of emphasis on what intolerance has done to the world? She was such a beautiful girl that I felt I could spell out intolerance for years. She looked at me with her big brown eyes and said: "Do you believe in your religion?" "Yes, I said, "all sensible men believe; to a certain extent." And "do you believe in other religion?" I said, "Yes, again; to a certain extent", "What does certain extent mean?" "Like your father," I began, "I believe in the morality part.” I refuse to believe in the miracles, the heaven and the hell concepts made up by clerics to frighten us of the hereafter, and I certainly do not believe in the exclusiveness of any one faith to give salvation. I believe in the 10 commandments, the hadiths of Prophet Mohammad, the Geeta and Gathas, and the Buddha's life and words. All of them have elevated us." Then she asked me charmingly: "Do you believe in mixed marriages?" I felt that the ground was a bit slippery, so I excused myself and went home. A few days later I went back to my friend’s house. There was a rumpus on inside which I could hear clearly. The girl said in an angry voice "You damn well know I have to go.... what's wrong with him?" She suddenly came out looking very dishevelled, stared rudely at me and said, "Your talks about all religions being the same does not apply to us, I find." "What's happening?" I asked my friend. "I really don't know. Every few days this comes up. I suppose it is the Moon. It not only affects the tides, it affects all animal life. Many atrocious crimes seem to occur at the same time for which there is no explanation. Why did the massacre of the Nepali Royals coincide with the horrible crime of eight children being killed by a lunatic with a knife in Japan; or the case of an Indian woman whose eyes were gouged out savagely by her drunk husband? Was it only drugs that were the common factor? Or did drugs combine with some terrestrial factor?" I heard that the girl had married a Hindu and had left India in disgust. "What happened?" I asked my friend when we met. "It was a difficult job for them to keep together in India" he said. "Happens in such cases" I said helpfully, "when religions differ." "No, no" he said "Religion was not the problem, both are sensible people believing in truth and goodness, and religion helped them both to believe in tolerance. It was the relations and the social milieu that made life difficult for them. His mother was certainly a wrecker. In fact, both respected each other's faith, and even followed it. They needed a new place and the USA gave it to them. Both have good jobs and are happy there. And my daughter and I now agree about everything." |
|
The Akali agenda: past and present IF one tries to prepare a balance-sheet of gains and losses for the Sikhs achieved through all the successful Akali morchas, it comes out to be a very negative balance-sheet. Punjabi Suba, which is touted as a great success of the Akalis, has circumscribed the expansive aspirations and opportunities for the Sikhs even in the small area that was left of Punjab after partition. The new state has to function from a capital located in a Union Territory and the protagonists of the Sikhs can wield power only with the goodwill of the Hindus who constitute 40 per cent of the population. The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leaders have been generally able to carry the Sikh masses with them despite having objectives and strategy often contrary to the Sikhs tenets and tradition. The SAD leadership is well aware of this contradiction in its percepts and practice which often traps it in snares of its own making. The Akali hype about the Sikh rights and their suppression by the insensitive Hindu majority, produced Sant Bhindranwale. There came a time when Bhindranwale came to be perceived by and large as the true leader of the Sikh panth. The SAD stuck to its commitment to non-violence but would not confront-Bhindranwale on this issue. They even came to accept the role of playing a second fiddle to Bhindranwale. The killer gangs of Bhindranwale operated from within the precincts of the Golden Temple complex which was under the control of the SGPC dominated by the SAD. The SAD cooperated with Bhindranwale by getting a hukumnama issued calling for a social boycott of the Nirankaris. The SAD has displayed a certain stubbornness and single-mindedness in the pursuit of its objectives which has baffled its adversaries. The British could at best only save face in the Guru ka Bagh Morcha and the Jaito Morcha till they got the cat of the Gurdwara Act set among pigeons i.e the leaders. No such stratagem could be devised for the post-partition Akali morchas. It is alleged that Bhindranwale was originally propped up by the Congress to wean the Sikh masses from the SAD. The late Sant Longowal at an informal meeting with the author, stated that the SAD perceived Bhindranwale as such and, therefore, the SAD strategy was to turn the table against those who had set him up. The Sikh tenets and tradition do not accept non-violence as a valid creed for all occasions and all times. Guru Gobind Singh prescribed that a Singh must be always armed and he said that when all remedies failed it was lawful to resort to sword to settle an issue. Therefore, when the Akalis are able to mobilise the masses for any objective as the appropriate Panthic objective, it is bound to produce radicals who will invoke the Khalsa tradition and take to violent means to achieve the same objective. Gandhiji when confronted with a similar situation in the national movement chose to publicly disown any encouragement or association with violence despite the charisma which such votaries of violent means enjoyed. But the SAD strategy was to remain correct on record and cash in on the fear of the whole movement turning violent if the SAD leaders were spurned. Therefore, it is to be accepted that if this strategy had brought them political power, it has the prospect of repeating itself. Those who exceeded the brief of the SAD struggle and strategy deserve to be recognised as those who have helped the SAD in achieving their objectives. Ranjit Singh who had assassinated the Nirankari Guru, had to be rewarded by being appointed Jathedar of Akal Takht. The hijackers of the IAC plane had to be rewarded by giving the SAD ticket for the SGPC. The IFS officer who resigned from service after Operation Bluestar was appointed a paid Secretary of the SGPC. There should be no surprise if Wassan Singh Zaffarwal, after his trial and discharge from the criminal cases against him, gets suitably rewarded and rehabilitated during the SAD dispensation in Punjab. This is a reality and fact of life in Punjab that must be understood if events and issues in the state have to be properly analysed or appreciated. |
Sheikh Hasina — giving roots to democracy WHILE India is building an unprecedented hype over President Pervez Musharraf’s visit, an event of great significance has been taking place elsewhere in the subcontinent. In sharp contrast to what is being described as the “rape of democracy” in Pakistan, Sheikh Hasina, Banga Bandhu Mujibur Rahman’s daughter, has completed a full five-year term as Bangladesh’s Prime Minister. Democracy, it appears, has been taking roots in what was East Pakistan 30 years back but in the truncated Pakistan the people’s verdict was stifled repeatedly and there is not even a remote possibility of the revival of popular rule. Had East Pakistan not been liberated and Bangladesh formed, the Bengali people too would have been groaning under the army rule. Sheikh Hasina established herself as the mass leader having achieved the distinction of remaining the first Prime Minister for a full term in spite of multi-pronged challenges and threat to her own life. Only last month an abortive attempt was made on her life by what the Bangladesh Home Minister, Mohammad Nasim, described as “the defeated forces of the 1971 liberation war and Jamat Islami elements” and said now their immediate objective was to create disturbances to frustrate the coming election. They
would, obviously, not like to face defeat again. A powerful bomb which ripped through the Awami League office killed 22 party workers. With tears rolling down her eyes the Prime Minister bemoaned the gruesome murder of her colleagues in these words: “Kill me! But don’t kill my sons and daughters”. This was not the first attempt to target Prime Minister Hasina. In March 1999 a blast at a cultural organisation meeting at Jessore killed 10 persons followed by another in October in a mosque at Khulna in which 10 persons died. A total of six blasts had taken place in last 27 months. Sheikh Hasina has perpetually lived in the dread of an attempted military takeover. She has now completed the five-year term; a remarkable feat indeed. Just after the 1996 elections when she was trying to form the government, a Major-General tried to organise a coup but failed. She effected a drastic army reshuffle soon after taking over as Prime Minister. This year, an election year, she again reshuffled the army top brass and para-military forces to enable her exercise firm control over the country’s military establishment. The gruesome killing of BSF Jawans in the Indo-Bangladesh border is said to be a fallout of changes in the army hierarchy. June 23, 1996, was a great day in the history of Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina, daughter of the founding father of the young nation, was sworn-in as the 10th Prime Minister of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh marking the end of 21 years of ruthless oppression, freewheeling corruption and overt and covert martial law. Democracy has finally been restored. Sheikh Hasina has always taken a resolute stand against military rule and never compromised on her commitment to the people. Her prolonged struggle against military rule was crowned with success when the last military dictator had to surrender power in ignominy. On December 4, 1990, General Ershad was forced to step down following a 24-hour ultimatum issued by her. August 15,1975, was a frightful night in Dacca. Some disgruntled officers assassinated the father of the nation, Sheikh Mujib, his wife, three sons and all the inmates of his residence to grab power. Sheikh Hasina was then on a visit to West Germany. Her divine fate led her to escape and, in the course of time, she led the beleaguered nation to democracy and a new era, fulfilling the dream of her late lamented father. She had to struggle for a decade under the banner of her party, the Awami League , to free her countrymen from the yoke of military rule. She was elected unanimously the League’s President in 1981 when she was still in exile but determined, as she was, to fight for her people, Sheikh Hasina decided to defy the then rulers and returned home to a tumultuous welcome by millions of people. She took a vow to fight for restoration of the democratic rights of her people though initially her was the lonely voice against military coups and army rule. Born on September 28, 1947, in Tungipara, a remote village under Goapalgonj district, which was also, incidentally, the birthplace of her father, Sheikh Hasina was married in 1968 to an eminent scientist of Bangladesh, M.A. Wazed Miah. She continued her studies after marriage and graduated from the University of Daka in 1973. Coming from a political family, Sheikh Hasina was actively involved in student politics in her college days. She gained political experience as a gobetween her father and the political and student leaders during Sheikh Mujib’s repeated imprisonment by Pakistani rulers. She actively participated in the mass upsurge of 1969 and at the time of liberation war of 1971, she, along with her husband and children were imprisoned by Gen Yahya Khan’s army officers who had plundered what was then known as East Pakistan. |
Congress just mews over Tehelka Having tried building a public wave of anger over Tehelka, did the Congress falter in the last stages? The party collected nearly 6.5 crore signatures in its campaign to seek the ouster of the Vajpayee government over the Tehelka expose. The number of signatures surprised even the Congress leaders who had set their targets lower. But when it came to pulling the punch, the Congress seemed to go soft. One, the signatures were handed over to President K.R. Narayanan in the absence of Congress president Sonia Gandhi who was on a tour to the USA. Could the party not have waited for her to return when it had not adhered to a particular deadline in collecting signatures. Mrs Gandhi’s presence would have certainly added more weight to the Congress delegation which comprised mostly party general secretaries. Second, the Congress felt shy of demanding dismissal of the Vajpayee government. Though the party had collected the signatures over its memorandum demanding dismissal of the Vajpayee government, the letter that the Congress leaders gave to the President studiously avoided the word ‘dismissal’. The party only urged the President to decide how to save the people of India from “this impervious government.” Asked about the toning down of its demand, party leaders said they “could not tender advice” to the President. Why, then, did they collect signatures from the people demanding dismissal of the government? “These are people’s feelings,” a CWC member opined. Mango diplomacy Riven by traditional enmity any commonality is a welcome development for Indo-Pakistan ties. Former military ruler of Pakistan Zia-ul-Haq capitalised on this concept when he used cricket diplomacy to defuse border tensions between the neighbours. Now with Gen Pervez Musharraf all set to visit India, representatives from both countries are looking for friendly topics to approach each other. When Pakistan High Commissioner Ashraf Jehangir Qazi called on the Samajwadi Party chief and former Defence Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav, the two sides resorted to sweet nothings,
literally. The subject chosen was the delicious mango which is grown on both sides of the border. In the backdrop of a bumper crop, Mulayam Singh Yadav and his party General Secretary Amar Singh, were involved in a long talk on the various aspects of the king of fruits. When pressed by journalists to reveal the content of the discussion a beaming Singh said: “It was all about mango diplomacy”. Going by this precedent, leaders of the two countries are bound to have their plates full when they meet for the summit talks. Different strokes There was a marked difference in the intensity of Congress reactions to the arrival of separatist leader Jagjit Singh Chohan in Punjab. While the Punjab unit of the party was angry and vociferous and demanded immediate arrest of the separatist leader, the AICC was quite restrained. Though the AICC spokesman did say that silence of the Centre and Punjab government on the issue of Chohan’s arrival was intriguing, he desisted from categorically demanding the arrest of the Khalistani ideologue. On being reminded of the Punjab Congress demand for Chohan’s arrest, the spokesman merely said that the law should take its course and the party agreed with the stand of its Punjab unit. The apparent reason behind the AICC’s reticence was that the national party did not want to be seen as making a demand for the arrest of an individual (even if he happened to be one who had announced a reward on the head of a former Indian Prime Minister). Would the Congress spokesman have been equally reticent if the Shiv Sena chief had made similar provocative remarks? Manipur dilemma Manipuri MLAs are in a catch-22 situation these days with the people venting their ire on them for the Centre’s decision to extend the ceasefire with NSCN(I-M) to other north-eastern states beyond Nagaland and the Centre is in no mood to withdraw it. With at least two MLAs being attacked by a frenzied mob in Imphal soon after the ceasefire extension, all Manipur MLAs have thought it fit to camp in the National Capital. However, their stay away from home has not been without its share of pinpricks. Here too they had to face the wrath of Manipur students who prevented them from entering the Manipur Bhavan. Only the intervention of the police could help them get shelter. Unable to face the people’s wrath against the ceasefire, the MLAs announced that they would resign en masse if the Government did not retract the ceasefire extension beyond Nagaland before July 31. They now find themselves in a catch-22 situation as the Centre has shown no inclination to accept their demand before the deadline. Perhaps this is what the Government wants them to do. Exporting yoga This is something that will cheer up the votaries of swadeshi in the Sangh Parivar. Senior General Secretary of the Bharatiya Janata Party Narendra Modi was recently in Australia at the invitation of their Government. However, it was not just politics that Modi talked in the land of the Kangaroos. He spread word about the benefits of yoga to his hosts. Modi’s meeting with Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer was particularly fruitful in this regard. He explained the benefits of yoga and the immense potential that it had. Downer was very impressed with the Indian exercise. In fact, Modi’s suggestion to set up a Yoga training institute in Australia was appreciated by the Foreign Minister. Last heard was that Australian officials were looking at the proposal seriously. Modi has offered to send Indian experts in yoga to man the institute. Cellular war Slashing prices often lure more customers to buy. However, the Indian cellular market is different. With the MTNL bringing down its rates to near basic telephone tariff, customers are not rushing to buy their services. Instead, there has been a near halt in new connections. There is expectation that other private operators too would slash their prices. In that event the consumer would go in for the best buy. Some logic this! (Contributed by Satish Misra, T.V. Lakshminarayan, Girija Shankar Kaura, Prashant Sood, S. Satyanarayanan and Gaurav
Choudhury). |
Political interference ‘becoming blatant’ WITH
the expected turn of events on the bureaucratic front — present Cabinet Secretary T.R. Prasad’s term getting extended for another two years — the Centre seems to have achieved much, in the sense that it has not only bypassed the senior -most bureaucrat N.C. Saksena but has also made sure that the system is further influenced along political wants. When contacted, some senior bureaucrats refused to comment on this latest trend saying “it will be against service rules”, but did hint that political interference is becoming more and more blatant and that now tenures are getting to be like those never-ending commissions of inquiry. Prasad is said to be close to Andhra Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu, and needless to add, without the latter’s support this present government at the Centre cannot pull on. Saksena will continue as Secretary in the Planning Commission, though there has been talk of another round of transfers. But in all probability, these transfers will only take place after the Agra summit. And it seems that the slot of Press Adviser to the PM is going to lie vacant for some time, as the present Press Adviser H.K. Dua leaves for Denmark as our Ambassador. In fact, there are three other ‘prominents’ who are leaving town — Montek Singh Ahluwalia who goes early next month to Washington to head IMF’s freshly created ‘evaluation unit.’ This unit will evaluate the work being carried out by the different divisions of the IMF. And joining the ADB at Manila will be Piyush Mankad, former Finance and I&B Secretary in the GOI. And Pavan K. Varma presently posted as J.S. Africa Desk and better known for his prowess at the writing desk is going to Cyprus as our Ambassador. Receptions and farewell parties have begun for them …. On Thursday evening O.P. Jain, INTACH chief, hosted a reception for Dua and Varma. Both Dua and Varma are extremely popular on the social circuit , and as one of the guests said, “Once they leave Delhi what will happen to page three space!” And to Dua goes the credit of starting the trend of marrying for the sake of companionship — a widower for over eight years the 60 plus Dua had recently married former ITC employee Auditi who is in her late 50s. I think it is one of those most sensible things and it is really a pleasure to see them…. Anyway, to get to you all back from altar memories, let me continue with some more details of this party. It was one of those relaxing parties with O.P and Dua and Varma giving short crisp speeches … on how departures should be seen in that positive streak of arrivals…“until we meet again” type of sentiments. Some of the prominent guests to be spotted that evening were Crafts Museum man Jyotindra Jain and his German spouse Jutta, INTACH’s Vice-Chairman S.K. Misra who was just back from Scotland, socialite Kaamna Prasad, writer Anurag Mathur, former director of UN Information Centre-turned-writer Bhaichand Patel, Indian Express Editor Shekhar Gupta and spouse Neelam, political commentator -cum-MP Kuldip Nayar, writer Bulbul Sharma, several from the MEA…. Except for Omar Abdullah, no other politician could be spotted. Should we add, thankfully? I
suppose… With the countdown started for the Indo-Pak summit I suppose I have to include some oft heard frills to the proposed visit of Gen Pervez Musharraf. There has been much speculation on the choice of the Minister on Special Duty whilst the general is here, and if reports are to be believed (though they could not be confirmed), it will be one of the two Muslim ministers in the Cabinet — Omar Abdullah and Shahnawaz Hussain. But with either around, security would have to be further tightened — Omar for obvious reasons and Shahnawaz because of those well -splashed-out news bits when he was slapped in a Delhi mosque. And the joke going around is that what if the General and his Begum decide to see one of our latest films and what if that film happens to be “Gadar”…. Well, well! It could undo much of the enthusiasm on either side, for the film does have enough provocative stuff. Totally uncalled for, especially in the times we are living in….. Don’t know whether those on the censoring board decide to have a second look at it, but if reports are to be believed the PM is keen to see it, especially now that members of the Muslim community in Lucknow have faxed an urgent appeal to him. If for no other reason but not to displease his constituency people, the Prime Minister is likely to intervene and soon, that is much before the summit formalities start. |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
