 |
Sunday,
March 16, 2003, Chandigarh, India   |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
GUEST COLUMN
COMMENTARY
Harihar Swarup
India’s cup of joy bees saal
baad?
Humra Quraishi
A graphic allegory of the Kashmiri nature
Ajay not cut for slapstick
comedy
|
SPECIAL FOCUS The high military alert in Washington and London in apprehension of a terrorist attack is supreme irony. It is a case of the biter being bitten and the irony is that had the so-called “Coalition Against Terrorism” gone about doing what it should have in true earnest some of its most ardent members would not be in a state of siege today. The world knows where the fountainhead of terrorism is located but the USA and the UK have shot off in a tangent against Iraq with the war against terrorism not just sidelined but showing evidence that the main protagonists are actually sleeping with the enemy. Doles through the IMF and the World Bank and debt rescheduling have occurred with such speed and generosity that Pakistan no longer feels the need to cooperate fully in seeking out the terrorists who have received sanctuary and sustenance from local “jehadi” networks. And the puppet-master is none other than the official intelligence agency of Pakistan — the Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI). Pakistanis no longer even feel the need to be circumspect over the manner in which their military establishment is running with the hare and hunting with the hound. Many a Pakistani publication have highlighted the half-hearted manner in which the ISI has shared actionable intelligence with the US Federal Bureau of Investigation or with General Tommy Frank’s US Central Command which is leading the war against terrorism. On the contrary they are exposing the fact that the ISI is fanning the resistance against the presence of the FBI in Pakistan and its former Director-Generals are actively involved in providing safe-houses and escape routes to the remnants of the Taliban of Afghanistan and the Al-Qaeda of Osama bin Laden. If weapons of mass destruction are cause
caliber for the war against Iraq, the overt manner in which Pakistan flaunts its arsenal ought to have attracted the kind of action that is being contemplated against Iraq and its leader Mr Saddam Hussein. The recent discovery by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that General Pervez Musharraf is facing a threat of overthrow by the “jehadi” elements within Pakistan ought to elicit a more hardheaded analysis on the part of Washington about what effect the passage of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver them into the hands of Islamic fundamentalists would have on global peace and stability. On the contrary, here too, both Washington and London appear sanguine and unperturbed at the looming prospects. It is of a piece with what happened prior to the attack on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon on 9/11 when the CIA was made to look silly for not reading the signs of preparations for the attack correctly. By refusing to act on the evidence of the threat posed by the Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan the CIA is replicating the conditions that led to 9/11 and does not appear to realise that this time the action could be nuclear and whole cities will have to pay the price for the blinkered handling of international terrorism by the US political leadership (read George Bush Junior). Even its war against Iraq is based on a tissue of lies and subterfuge and the glib manner in which the focus is frequently shifted from Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction to the replacement of Saddam Hussain to alleged Al-Qaeda connections has tended to erode US credibility. The whole picture is reminiscent of pre-Vietnam War scenario when the CIA fabricated the infamous “Gulf of Tonkin incidence” which became the reason for the massive US military intervention against Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in Indochina. The tape-recorded conversations of US pilots feigning an attack by Vietnamese suicide squads on a US carrier task force was the basis or the intervention. That is why the so-called intercepts of conversations between Iraqi generals about their nuclear assets presented by Secretary of State Colin Powell to the UN Security Council evokes a sense of wary deja vu. No wonder the European allies are worried. Both the US and the UK would evoke greater credibility if they concentrated their efforts on Pakistan where there is enough evidence to prove that terrorism is alive and well and flourishing under the official patronage of its military establishment of which General Musharraf is the presiding deity and the Islamic fundamentalist political entities his ISI has nurtured in the course of his bizarre gameplan of political engineering which is intended to be used as a catspaw to wring more financial concessions from the so-called “Coalition Against Terror”. — Asia Defence News International. |
|
Of invasion and the right of pre-emption The present assessment is that the USA would not like to start the military strike till most, if not all, of the millions of Muslim pilgrims, who have congregated in Saudi Arabia for the Haj, have dispersed. President Saddam Hussein must be knowing that the US-UK invasion of Iraq is just a few days away. Would he wait till they launch the invasion or would he exercise his right of pre-emption in the face of the open threats to occupy Iraq and overthrow him? Would he launch a pre-emptive strike in Kuwait or pro-US Kurds in Northern Iraq or on Israel to force US ground troops fight prematurely and add to the Muslim anger against the USA and create difficulties in the return of the Haj pilgrims? Sources say that while the dangers of such a pre-emptive strike by Saddam have been factored into US planning, its possibility is rated low due to two reasons. First, with the Iraqi territory, air space and communications network under continuous surveillance by the USA, it would be very difficult for Saddam to launch such a strike. Secondly, despite this, if he manages to do so, opposition to the US-UK invasion plans from France, Germany, China, Russia and the Arab countries might melt away and his isolation would be complete. By launching a pre-emptive strike, he would lose the aura of a martyr and play into the US hands. What are the possibilities of Osama bin Laden’s International Islamic Front (IIF), the Hizbullah, the Hamas, the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade and similar anti-US and anti-Israel terrorist organisations launching widespread pre-emptive strikes in different countries against US-UK targets in the hope of adding to the public pressure against the war? Would there be a flare-up in Afghanistan to divert the US attention from Iraq? The dangers of this are rated high since the intelligence agencies of the West, despite their being beefed up post 9/11, are still considerably handicapped in collecting preventive intelligence about the thinking and plans of the terrorist organisations. The American and British intelligence agencies are playing it safe — as all intelligence agencies including those of India often do on such occasions — by over-assessing the threat perception even in the absence of precise intelligence so that they are not later accused of intelligence failure if pre-emptive terrorist strikes materialise. The extensive security precautions undertaken in the USA and the UK during the last few days reflect such over-assessments by the intelligence agencies. Deliberate over-assessment may also have a psychological value in influencing the waverers to come out in support of the war. The message, supposedly of Osama bin Laden, broadcast by Al Jazeera on February 11, 2003, is defensive. It does not read like a call for action to his followers all over the world to prevent a US invasion of Iraq. It is more a call for action after the US troops have invaded Iraq in order to defeat them. While he has called upon true Muslims to tactically support the Saddam regime despite its apostate character in order to defeat the USA, it is apparent from a careful reading of the message and of the kind of sermons being given in Pakistani madrasas, particularly in the Binori madrasa of Karachi headed by Mufti Shamzai, widely seen as Osama’s religious mentor, that the anti-US Muslim elements would be happy to see the US troops invade Iraq. They are calculating that this would further aggravate the Muslim anger against the USA and Israel all over the world, thereby facilitating the ultimate defeat of the “crusaders” and the Jewish people. A similar calculation is evident in the thinking of the Shias of the region and of the Government of Iran but for a different reason. There is genuine fear in Teheran that if the US operations in Iraq are successful, Iran might be the USA’s next target for a similar operation. The Iranians would, therefore, want the USA to get bogged down in a war without end in Iraq, in the hope that this would discourage US “adventurists” from undertaking similar operations against Iran. Teheran’s advice to the Shias of Iraq is likely to reflect this calculation. Almost the entire propaganda in the Islamic world is directed against the USA and Israel. The Islamic world is ignoring the UK with contempt. Of the leaders of the Islamic world, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and General Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan have reasons to be concerned over the sequel to the US invasion of Iraq, if and when it materialises. In both the countries, there is a strong anti-US fundamentalist influence at the lower and middle levels of the Army. More in Egypt than in Pakistan. How would these fundamentalist elements react to the US invasion?
— ADNI |
|
GUEST COLUMN “Most of the time, to fight a war would be a tragedy. But at rare times, not to fight one would bring a calamity”. I wrote that line in the context of the war against terror, sometime back. I repeat the same now in a different context and for avoiding a war. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has categorically stated that India does not want war, India opposes any unilateral action and India is against an attack on Iraq. Mr Vajpayee believes that peace must guide the destinies of nations and is conscious that loving peace alone is not enough, and those who love it must voice concern against war. If India is against war, it means that India is in favour of peace and those in favour of peace cannot support wars. India has a history without stain for having worked in patience for peace and has been amongst the foremost advocates of pacification. The UN too came into existence only in favour of peace and its Charter was designed to forbid war amongst its members and not for sanctioning, authorising or legitimising a war. John F. Kennedy said in 1961: “Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind”. War has been, and will always be, the curse and crime of civilisation and peace its virtue. War does not enrich, but impoverishes the world and its negative effects will be tremendous. Its ability to destroy had been increasingly mounting. Historical records reveal that since the creation of the universe, there have only been a total of 300 years, which have not witnessed any wars. The USA averaged a major war about every 25 years. Britain that is now aligning with the USA, averaged a major war for every 12 years. The 20th century was the bloodiest in the history of humanity because of two world wars, the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf wars. For almost 50 years we have lived under the threat of a nuclear war. I personally feel that a war against Iraq must be avoided because a war in this region can bring a calamity for the entire world. This region is famous for crude nationalism, ethnic bitterness and religious animosity. It is also capable of bringing environmental disaster for the entire region. Remember the way the oil wells were set on fire in 1991. Everything should be tried to avoid a war including bribing the Iraqis — not with money and material but with love and goodwill. What could not be achieved with threats and intimidation can perhaps be achieved with goodwill and love. Let’s not forget that Iraq President Saddam Hussein had put up with strict sanctions buttressed by two no-fly zones for more than 12 years. Thousands of bombs the USA dropped for policing the “no fly zones” had no effect on him. According to UNHRC, the sanction alone might have killed 7,20,000 children. Every effort including deadly methods were tried on Iraq. What remains to be tried is only goodwill and love. Why not give them a try? Let’s not forget that more than 1,200,000 civilians died since the start of the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. One lakh Iraqi soldiers died during the Operation Desert Storm a year later. Looking for a smoking gun before smoking out the architect of 9/11 is not a far-sighted approach. The war on terror is not a war that can be left half fought. Osama bin Laden is alive and kicking and holding out threat for the USA and the rest of the world. To weaken the war on terrorism will result in a greater calamity particularly when the whole region gets destabilised. Mr Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi people can be given a little more time. Mr Saddam Hussein may be a dangerous tyrant with weapons of mass destruction which he is said to be hiding. But this is an American perception that is not shared by many in Europe. The weapons inspectors could not find WMD. Iraq may have something to hide but the USA with the world’s best intelligence and spy satellites has the obligation to show clinching evidence of those hidden WMD to the world. Mr Saddam Hussein must go. He is guilty. Does not the sole superpower owe responsibility to give him time to prove his innocence? America cannot be found adopting the attitude of the lion towards the lamb in the old fable, which goes like this. Both the lion and the lamb were drinking water from a mountain stream; the lion upstream and the lamb downstream. The lion, looking for an excuse to kill the lamb accused him of dirtying his water that was flowing down. The poor lamb pleaded that it is he who is drinking the water muddied by him. Cornered by the logic of the lamb, the lion roared and said that it might be your mother who might have fouled the water upstream and you will therefore be killed. If the USA persists on waging war against Iraq, the superpower will be accused of adopting the attitude of the lion towards the lamb. There are other equally if not more dangerous tyrants strutting around loudly proclaiming to use WMD against the neighbour. He is hand in glove with dreaded terrorist organisations. Yet, the USA treats him with kid gloves. Stopping tyrants from creating catastrophe for the world is noble, but doing that with arrogance and that too by the world’s sole superpower will be a poor act that will deny the USA the ideological high ground. Creating a catastrophe to prevent an imagined one does not make sense or logic. The USA does not have to prove to anyone that it has the power and ability to parcel out mass death in countless ways and disarm any tyrant without difficulty. There can be no credibility problem on that count for the USA. No nation in the world can today dent its credibility. If America is not getting the respect due for a superpower, it is because it flaunts its military power a little too fast and with less foresight. The 20th century has witnessed some of the most brutal tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and Osama bin Laden, etc. and the death and destruction caused by them is immeasurable. They might have accounted for a minimum of 70 million deaths approximately in the last century. Pol Pot of Khmer Rouge regime was the most brutal, having killed about two million Cambodians. Idi Amin of Uganda murdered 10,0000 to 4,00,000 people. However, the UN Security Council had not even once condemned his regime. If a war was ever justified for throwing out a ruler, it was World War II. It put down Hitler who would have otherwise caused a catastrophe of unimaginable magnitude to the world. Then, the fear of the world was that if the Nazis could devise a few nuclear bombs and place them in the hands of Hitler, he would have changed the face of earth beyond recognition. The world would have witnessed many more Hiroshimas and Nagasakis. This fear forced the Americans to go in for the Manhattan Project in 1942 because it was German scientists who had first discovered nuclear fission. Certainly, Mr Saddam Hussein is not comparable to Hitler. The writer is Union Minister of State for Home Affairs. |
|
COMMENTARY At the Congress of Oppressed Nationalities, held in Brussels in 1927, Jawaharlal Nehru said: “...the great problem of the near future will be American imperialism, even more than British imperialism. Or, it may be, and all indications point to it, that the two will join together to create a powerful Anglo-Saxon bloc to dominate the world.” Nehru had gone wrong on many things. But not on this. Here, he was absolutely right on both counts. The Anglo-Saxon dominance is a reality today. Then, why did the world (much of it, including India) accept American leadership of the world? For three major reasons: 1) because there was no alternative. People were not ready to give up their gods. They were not ready to embrace godless communism. 2) And some of them were partial to Mammon — the deity of Wall Street. And, thirdly, a Roosevelt or Truman was in greater favour than Stalin. Today, there is no threat to the gods. But the threat to Mammon continues. That is why the constituency of Mammon, spread over the world, is still on the side of America, the leader of the capitalist world. And America has thrown up more charismatic Presidents. For example, Eisenhower, J.F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton. They evoke greater trust in America. Thus has America been able to beguile the peoples of the world. Today America is the only super power. It is highly arbitrary. No wonder, it is hated. It threatens to take law into its own hands if it is not allowed its way. America creates bushfires all over the world. But it expects the world to do the fire-fighting. Terrorism was its creation. But it wants the world to join the war against it. Most nations are ready to oblige. Why? Because their rulers are in some way obliged to America. We are familiar with America’s double standards. But not with its Janus face. It champions democracy and human rights, but it also fights for world supremacy. In 1992 Paul Wolfowitz, deputy to the present Defence Secretary, produced a momentous report for the Republicans. It called on America to maintain its military dominance. In 1996 there was a call for the removal of Saddam. Then it was in support of Israel. Today, it is to promote democracy among Arabs. It is wrong to call Bush the villain. I believe Americans have a sense of history. But they do not realise that when American power bows out of the stage (it will not take long before it does so), there will be nothing good to recall it by. In fact, there will be much to loathe it. Like the Greeks, Americans could have aspired for greater things. History has been harsh to America. Harold Pinter, the British author, says of America that it is a “fully fledged monster”. And Hannah Arendt, the famous US sociologist, says that violence is inherent among American refugees, and that they lack idealism. The business of America is business. The Americans say so. We beg to differ. Business carries no values. It is the source of all the corruptions of our times. And about its excesses, Goldsmith had said: “Where wealth accumulates, men decay.” The decay of America is now at an advanced stage. It is not that the world is unfamiliar with American excesses. But, as I said, there are vested interests ready to promote them. And foremost among them are the European powers. But at no time in the postwar years has the gap between the USA and Europe been so wide as now. With the growth of the Right, the gap continues to widen. And yet it is deceptive. Uncle Sam has been paying the security bill of the Europeans for over half a century. What is more, preserving the capitalist order too. And these powers — above all, Britain, France, Germany and Italy — are nations with an unholy past. They are unlikely to fall out with America, whatever they might say. What are their records? Britain did the greatest damage to the image of India by painting it in the darkest of hues. We are still on the job of washing it clean. True, Britain discovered India for us, but it also divided the country, and left a legacy of hatred. And by turning Kashmir into a “dispute”, it has cut an artery of India so that it will bleed to death. One cannot expect a country of such record to possess a larger vision of the human destiny. Today, Jack Straw, British Foreign Secretary, is ready to admit the old mistakes. But to what purpose? The mischief has been set afoot and it will have its way. Can the French be different? True, it carries a false image. What can one say of a country which fought to the bitter end to maintain its right to rule over others? The French say they are logical. But there was no logic in what they did. And they have been more brutal. And what can one say of Germany and Italy, authors of Nazism and Fascism, with their record of the Second World War? These are nations with scarred souls. How can they save the world when they could not save themselves? What about China and Japan? China is a country which has looked upon the rest of the world with contempt. It rejects anything which is not Chinese. This was the case against Buddhism — that it was “foreign”. We are not familiar with Chinese atrocities against Buddhist monks of all people. But it is shocking. Japan? Its record during the Second World War is well known. It was even ready to bomb the whole of China with the virus of bubonic plague! Can we expect sane leadership from these nations? Can we expect them to check American excesses? Will they restrain the Bush administration? Can they ever provide an alternate world leadership? I do not think so. I see only two nations which are less scarred in history. They are India and Russia. But they are both weak. India has always treated mankind as a family. Service to that family has been its greatest ideal. It has never indulged in conquests, pillage and plunder. And whatever may be said about Stalin and the Communists, it is true that the Russian Revolution called for the greatest sacrifices from the Russian people. And they did make them. They did it to make the world better. What sacrifices have the Americans made? None. Some say that September 11 was “good”. How? Because, for the first time, Americans have come to realise that they are vulnerable. Europe brought on the humanity two world wars and a cold war. It is now engaged in bringing upon mankind greater tragedies. The record of the West is a warning. John Maynard Keynes predicted the growth of the “Casino economy” — an economy of global speculators. The prediction has come true under American management of the global economy. And Lord Palmerston had said in 1844: “If all the crimes committed from creation down to the present day were added together, they would not exceed, I am sure, the guilt of the slave trade.” This is the record of the West. Can we suddenly expect the same West to develop a conscience? |
All eyes on this dare-devil During the first gulf war, Barbara along with 26 Americans was held hostage at the US embassy in Kuwait by occupying Iraqi forces for more than four months. Most of the hostages broke down in horrifying conditions without water, power, telephone and adequate food supplies, but not the young lady diplomat; ordeal made her more resolute. She was Deputy Chief of the Mission of the US embassy in Kuwait when the Iraqi forces invaded and occupied the country. Defying an order by Saddam Hussain for all embassies to close, she ensured that the US embassy remained open and provided shelter to more than 200 of her countrymen through the occupation. Bodine received the Secretary of State’s Award for valour for her work during that period. Barbara spent most of her career as a diplomat in Southwest Asia and Arabian countries and that included a posting in Baghdad from 1981 to 1983. She had also first-hand experience of terrorism when she negotiated the release of three kidnapped Americans in Yemen in 1999 and was a passenger later on an airliner that was hijacked. The flight carried 90 other passengers from Yemen, hijacked in mid-flight and diverted to a destination in Africa. She was Ambassador to Yemen in 2000 when the USS Cole, soon after entering the Port of Aden off the coast of Yemen, was hit by a suicide bomber. The blast killed 17 and injured 35 Americans. Views of Barbara on Democracy and Islam are worth taking note. She has reportedly said that democracy and Islamic religion are not incompatible and that Americans should not view all Muslims as enemies and Islam is not the enemy. “We do not accept that the West is more monolithic political construct. Neither is Islam”. Despite her brushes with terrorism, she believes that there is a moderate majority of Muslims in the Middle East who would welcome democracy and good relations with US. During her decades in the foreign service, Barbara has seen a significant shift in the nature of terrorism. Prior to the 1990s, terrorist groups tended to be leftist, secular and structured and they played a set of rules with a view to trying to make a political point. They were not necessarily trying to create casualties. The situation changed in the following decade with terrorists adopting religious fanaticism as their creed. Throughout her career, Barbara served primarily under rightwing “old boys” where their oil interests were being promoted. Under Reagan, she served as Deputy Principle Officer in Baghdad. Under Bush Sr, she served a Deputy Chief of Mission in Kuwait and was there during the Gulf War. At one stage, she was also associated with Henry Kissinger. In 2000, she was a Clinton appointee in Yemen. Boline was born in 1948 in St. Louis, Missouri. She earned her B.A. in Political Science and Asian Studies and graduated (magna -cum- laude) from the University of California at Santa Barbara. She received her Master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in Massachusetts. She also studied at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Department of State’s Language Training Field Schools in Taiwan and Tunisia. She has served on the Advisory Council to the Programme on Southwest Asian and Islamic Civilisation Studies at the Fletcher School. Following her Kuwait assignment, Bodine was appointed the Associate Coordinator for Operations and, later, served as the Acting Coordinator of counter-terrorism. |
India’s cup of joy bees saal baad? A message doing the rounds on e-mail circuit is three reasons why India is going to lift the 2003 World Cup. First, India has to be the champion this time by sheer arithmetic progression. The first (and also the second) champions, West Indies had notched up victories in 1975 and 1979, a difference of four years. Australia, the defending champion this time, had also won the Cup twice — 1987 and 1999 — the difference being 12 years. The logic of arithmetic progression says this number should now be 20 years (4, 12, 20) which means that the team that won the Cup 20 years ago would emerge victorious this time also. It was India that had won the Cup 20 years ago. And thirdly, when Australia reaches the finals on March 23, it would have won 16 one-day matches in a row and will be looking for their 17th victory in a row. Incidentally, India was the only team in the world that prevented Australians from making their 17th successive victory in tests. So by cricket logic India should prevent the Australian juggernaut from rolling into its 17th consecutive win this time as well. Learning the ropes She quickly overcame her depression. When the issue was raised by a close associate, she philosophically remarked that the party workers should not take such things seriously and should rather concentrate on how to increase the party’s clout. One surest way was to remain on the right side of power, she smilingly told one of her close confidantes. The grapevine has it that she has been assured of a berth in the Union Cabinet. Storm in a tea cup The one- man Janata Party is on the verge of expanding itself. Its President Subramanian Swamy has agreed to step down from the post paving the way for former Janata Dal President S.R.Bommai. Former Prime Minister H.D.Deve Gowda, is also set to join the Janata Patrty. The big question doing the rounds is what would irrepressible Swamy do now? A little bird tells us that Swamy would be appointed Chairman of the Political Affairs Committee of the party which would clear all appointments. But then what would Deve Gowda do in the Janata Party? It is understood that Gowda would be Janata Party’s Ambassador at the CPM headquarters. Did you say: “Storm in a tea cup”? Women’s day out It was an unusual day for 100 illiterate women sarpanches on the International Women’s Day. They were brought to Delhi and taken in batches to Parliament and, significantly, also the office of the national news agency, United News Of India. Most of these sarpanchs never saw a newspaper or a news agency office before that. They were thrilled to see the functioning of a news agency. These simple, but vocal grassroots leaders were least bothered about issues such as interest rate cut, money laundering bill. During their meeting with women MPs in Parliament, they only stressed the need for a safe drinking water facility, schools and a government that does not interfere. Tricky situation The other day during his reply in Lok Sabha to a discussion on the Union Budget 2003-04, Jaswant Singh made a reference to creation of so many mandays during 2001-2002. Renuka Chaudhary, the vociferous Congress MP, stood up and wanted to know why mandays are called “mandays”, why not “womandays” or the gender-neutral “workdays”. The seasoned Jaswant Singh knew exactly how to get out of a tricky situation like this. He smiled it away. Ghazals &
cricket Contributed by T V Lakshminarayan, Satish Misra, S Satyanarayanan, Tripti Nath and Rajeev Sharma. |
Of Partition & its aftermath This week I attended some lectures and seminars focusing not on the mundane. Professor Mushirul Hasan delivered the MN Kapur Memorial Lecture. (Kapur was Principal of New Delhi’s Modern School). He spoke on “In the shadow of Partition: a story of exile, dislocation, resettlement in Avadh”. It broke the myth that Partition troubles had mainly remained confined to Punjab, Sind and Delhi regions. He focused on some of the other neglected areas within that parameter — the prominent towns of Avadh, the noted families, career patterns “illustrate how the conduct of the service and landed class in a locality raises serious doubts about the ideological certainties of a clear model. Muslim government servants and landlords were just part of this elite and their connections with Hindus who belonged to the elite were far stronger than their connections with Muslims who did not...” JNU Professor and well-known sociologist Professor Imtiaz Ahmad held a two-day meet on “Hindutva & Minorities”. It was an open forum where the speakers and audience freely interacted with each other. They deliberated on the dilemma and the mess around. Sudhindra Sharma, a Kathmandu-based sociologist, said Nepal is a Hindu Rashtra, but there are problems. Religion ought to be delinked from governance, he said. Professor V.K. Tripathi of Delhi IIT, who recently organised “Violence Resistance Week” through a door-to-door contact programme with faculty, students and staff, said workers of all religions are one. They constitute 85 per cent of India’s population, but possess 15 per cent of national resources. “All violence is aimed at accentuating economic exploitation and oppression… the slogan of a religious state is a ploy to strengthen the rule of the elite over the masses”, he said. I feel an average Indian wants nothing beyond two square meals a day and peace. Last weekend, I saw the audio visual series jointly produced by filmmaker Saeed Akhtar Mirza and Action India. Cutting across socio- economic patterns, Mirza has interviewed over 200 families in the country and each person accorded priority to food and peace. |
A graphic allegory of the Kashmiri nature Driving down a Srinagar street is like being part of a circus act – hair-raising, funny, exhilarating, incredible. Cars, autorickshaws, unwieldy handcarts, raucous mini-buses, vans, bicycles, all rush round each other, weaving off at sharp angles at the last possible moment before a collision. And in the middle of this chaos, pedestrians merrily amble onto streets, heading for the other side without glancing left or right. Kashmir’s traffic police seem to have tuned themselves to this tendency and it is almost comic to watch a constable languidly directing traffic in one direction while an autorickshaw or car cuts sharply in another, right in front of him. This daily madness would be utterly comic if it were not so terribly risky. Of course, chaotic traffic is common on roads elsewhere too, but Kashmir’s roads are made spectacular by the sheer speed of movement, and the blasé disregard for danger. The traffic scene can be viewed as a graphic allegory of the Kashmiri nature. There is obviously tremendous social entropy here, individualism taken to an extreme. Each one goes his own way as fast as he can, with no concern for either those who might be passing or for the rules that are meant to order society. This social free-for-all can help one to understand why people are so terribly disgusted at the demolitions that the Mufti government has undertaken. Illegal structures, extensions that range from balconies to roadside kiosks, are being razed all over the valley. There can be no complaint against this under law, but people complain that they are a terrible
infringement of their rights. Kashmiris have for decades been used to respecting the law, including building by-laws, mainly in the breach. Corruption oils a system that allows people to flout rules with as much impunity as they show on the roads every day. If one thinks about it, this wild entropy is of a piece with the patterns of Kashmiri behaviour even in the political field. It was manifest in Kashmir’s insurgency. Kashmir’s most respected psychiatrist, Dr Mushtaq Ahmed Margoob, describes the
behaviour as “epidemic of disorders.” He speaks of obsessive compulsive disorders, dissociation, fainting and hysteria, saying they affect large groups of people together, particularly in Kashmir over the past few years. But the malaise runs much deeper. Perhaps its roots are to be found in the vicious slavery to which successive regimes tied Kashmir – Pathans followed by Sikhs and then Dogras – for close to two centuries. A psychoanalyst can study this, but are people here subconsciously seeking opportunities to release pent-up hysteria? The swaggering self-assurance one sees on the roads, as drivers, cart-pushers and pedestrians all together move audaciously on in top gear, is perhaps a subliminal invitation to a collision. The denouement whenever a collision does occur certainly is that not only those involved in the accident, a lot of bystanders too promptly embroil themselves in a screaming explosion of anger. Psychiatrists and sociologists should examine this theory of repressed societal angst. Kashmiris’ behaviour on the roads reflects a carelessly foolhardy attitude, as if life had cumulatively become so cheap, or so traumatised, that toying playfully with death was not a big deal. If that is indeed the case, it is not funny. It could be dangerously explosive. |
Ajay not cut for slapstick
comedy Ajay Devgan hardly ever talks unless he has to. The words strong and silent describe him perfectly. The actor might call himself lazy, but he has had an extraordinary upsurge. From “Company” to “The Legend Of Bhagat Singh” to “Deewangee”, his range has been breathtaking. “Thanks,” he says and smiles. “I guess the roles, scripts and directors all counted. I guess I was lucky to be at the right place at the right time,” Ajay told IANS in an interview. “The kind of impact these performances made is scary. Suddenly I no longer know what to sign, and whether there’re people out there who’d make the same kind of films for me. I can’t afford to make mistakes now.” The career of the actor, who has completed 12 years in films, is on the upswing. He has eight releases lined up in 2003. So is his personal life — fatherhood is around the corner. “Kajol and I are going to be parents by April end. We’re excited. But also tense.” Last time Kajol had gone through a traumatic miscarriage. As an actor, Ajay says he needs to be convinced in order to look convincing. “Otherwise it doesn’t work for me. I can’t do slapstick comedy because I don’t believe in it. One can be witty without making faces and slipping on banana peels!” Always cautious, he says: “Fortunately quality scripts are coming my way. I’ve been hearing scripts that prove one thing: our cinema is ready to finally grow up.” Among the films he is doing are Ram Gopal Varma’s ambitious international film “Ek” and a thriller called “Murder at Shri Krishna Hall” which Ajay is co-producing with Varma. “I’m also doing a very interesting role in Raj Kumar Santoshi’s “Khaki”. I’m the only leading man who isn’t playing a cop in the film,” a twinkle creeps up into those languorous eyes. “But I’m very much a cop in Prakash Jha’s film “Gangaajal”, though not a filmy cop. Ajay seems to be moving closer and closer to reality-based mainstream cinema. “One has to be very careful about technical details while playing a real cop. I don’t need to give deadly looks into the camera. Cops in real life don’t do that.” Ajay thinks the future of mainstream Hindi cinema lies in neo-realism. “I know films must have a commercial angle. Films have to make money. But the definition of mainstream entertainment is changing. The audience is changing. It wants interesting, entertaining and relevant films..” Ajay's next release will be Varma’s “Bhoot”.
IANS |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 123 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
Few in this part of the world have heard the name of Barbara Bodine and fewer know her background. In the event of the annexation of Iraq by US, the 54-year-old diplomat is going to be a very important person and world’s eyes are bound to focus on her. President Bush has decided to divide Iraq into three sectors for restoration of civil administration, rebuilding a war-ravaged country and selected her as the ruler of the crucial central sector which includes Baghdad. She has been recalled from study leave at the University of California to serve as the senior civilian on the Pentagon task force that is entrusted with the responsibility of reconstructing Iraq. “She is a big player”, say US officials. Barbara may be comparatively junior in the hierarchy of the US Foreign Service but she has acquired the reputation of a dare-devil. She is known as an American diplomat with a taste for danger and ambition to advance the cause of Arab women.
A television advertisement with the punchline “bees saal baad” may be prophetic in a subtle, and perhaps unintended, way. The ad by a leading Indian motorcycle manufacturing company features six cricket stars — Sourav Ganguly, Virender Sehwag, Harbhajan Singh, Mohammad Kaif, Yuvraj Singh and Zaheer Khan. It shows their childhood exploits of 20 years ago and then shows the present-day heroes with the punchline “bees saal baad”.
Secondly, the history of World Cup shows that except for the inaugural event in 1975, a South Paw (cricketing term for a left-hander, but here with pun intended) and a right-hander have alternated the World Cup winning team’s captain since 1979. Since last time champion team’s captain, Steve Waugh, was a right-hander, it should be a left- hander this time. Of the three left-hander captains in contention this time — Saurav Ganguly, Sanath Jayasuriya and Stephen Fleming — Ganguly seems to be the hot favourite.
Mamata Bannerjee seems to be maturing and taking setbacks in her stride. The other day the Trinamool Congress supreme leader went into depression when she was told by her party colleagues that Finance Minister Jaswant Singh had responded positively to a suggestion of her bete noire, Budhadeb Bhattacharya. The West Bengal Chief Minister wanted upgradation of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose airport in Kolkata. Jaswant Singh maintained that the Centre had no hesitation to upgrade the Kolkata airport as was being done in Delhi and Mumbai. Every point Bhattacharya scores in his dealings with the Centre, it is seen at the expense of Mamata Di.
The otherwise busy Railway Minister, Nitish Kumar took nearly two hours off to enjoy Ghazal maestro Jagjit Singh’s
mellifluous voice at a concert at the main auditorium of India Habitat Centre. The auditorium was packed to capacity with the entire Railway family comprising Chairman and members of the Railway Board and railway employees and their families on the annual day of CONCOR. Nitish Kumar could not resist the intoxicating ghazals and was seen leading the crowd in clapping to the accompaniment of timeless ghazals. The ghazal singer began the evening in a rather unexpected manner by telling the audience an exaggerated cricket score “Score hai saath pe chah wicket,’’ he said. The India-Sri Lanka match was on the same time.