by Mustafa Khan

September 2016 will complete a full decade of the bomb blasts of 2006 in Malegaon. It was this that made Hindutva terrorism a new coinage of ignominy with which the Hindutva Right never felt comfortable. Their smarting under this brand burnt into the flesh more and more as evidence mounted in other related cases of early and middle circa 2000s.

With due respect to our investigation agencies, like the IB, CBI and others, there are other sources of ascertaining facts that they refuse to take cognisance of; phenomenalism, for instance. It is self-evident that “human knowledge is confined to or founded on the certainties or appearances presented to the senses”. All that appears to the senses cannot be hallucination or chimera.

Malegaon 2006 Blasts

I had once reasoned with NIA officers that one of the accused (Azhar Parves) who, according to the police and later ATS, had committed suicide, could not have done so. The reason was that he reportedly bought blade and cut his artery on both the wrists, at the back of the ankles, just above his knees, on the back of his head, etc. He just could not have done the whole gamut of hara-kiri. An artery incision lets the blood gush out of the vessel until it is emptied. The Chief Investigation Officer smiled at me but said that that is what the family stated that he had killed himself. I persisted with IO Pramode Mane and said how could he do all that and then close the door and latch it from outside and get into the room. There was only one door. He was accused of planting the bomb for perhaps his faith and the other, Abrar Ahmad, for money. At least this was what ATS and local police maintained until the son of the deceased much later told The Indian Express that his father was murdered.

Another Gordon's knot to cut was the alleged role of a yarn tycoon, Mahesh Patodiya, distributing huge sums of money to the actual planters and their associates. There was a quarrel at the Mamco Bank in Perry Chowk after the blasts. The people involved demanded more money than was paid. The police swung into action and removed a man, reportedly the tycoon, from the scene by hiding him in a veil. Both the scenes of commotion at the bank and at the police chowki where he was interrogated attracted huge crowds of people, both Hindus and Muslims alike. Luckily the catastrophe of the day had a sobering effect and there was no communal feeling. On the other hand, the Hindus and Muslims had donated blood freely as one people standing in solidarity as the need of the hour demanded.

Among the nine accused some were very learned and could be counted among the proud citizenry of the country. One such was Dr Farog Magdumi who became a “radical” Ahle Hadish follower. Malegaon has a long history of moderate Muslims who have gone through generations of reformation; staunch Muslims, yes, but not radical. There was another group called Noorulhoda Shamshuduha. They took up their pens and wrote down in more than five years of imprisonment about why they were arrested, what was the philosophy of the blasts for which they had to suffer long years of imprisonment and torture. They also correctly raised their finger at one of them who had not only turned approver and then tried to distance himself from the police. It was Abrar Ahmad, a police informer who, according to former MLA Mufti Ismail, brought money to the joint family which did not question the source then. The Mufti took the opportunity to raise such matters in the Id prayer at the camp Idgah ground. In the hubbub then or after their bail and finally after acquittal there was no acrimony or ruckus among them even when the highest punishment for perjury is death penalty.

Farog reflected into the causes and came out with the facts of how “For the last 50 to 60 years Gujarati and Marwari yarn traders (overwhel-mingly Hindu) had been supplying yarn and raw materials to the weavers. A new generation of educated and pious Muslims among them tried to improve the lot of the weavers and formed groups and directly began buying yarn and raw material from the mills. They also started selling their finished product, cloth, directly to the firms in Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Surat. This deprived the middle men in Malegaon of their income.” Then came the bomb blasts of 2006. As an aftermath the trading pattern returned to the previous practice. The Gujarati and Marwari merchants got back their business. By October 17, 2006 the police had acquired information on these. They called Mahesh Patodiya to question him about his role. He was an active member of the RSS. But the members of the saffron group forced the police to release him.1

Id Banner

The police could have tipped Abrar for his chores but causing bomb blasts is a different class of undertaking. It is paid according to a new scale of payment. The government sensed it. Therefore they sent a police officer, Davidas Sonowne, to inquire if some Hindus, namely, Parsuram Shiva Mohite, Balyogi Surajnath and Mahesh Patodiya, were involved in the blasts of 2006. This inquiry had come before the case was handed over to the ATS. Such a move on the part of the government had an air of being haphazard for it was too short-lived and premature. If they really had anything on the three including the tycoon they would have surely arrested them. Sonowne had also remarked that the Maharashtra Police had told the NIA investigators that one Assistant Inspector Awhad was directed by the DSP, M.R. Malegaonkar, to visit Aurangabad, Nanded and Parbhani where similar kinds of blasts had taken place.2 This was the second assumption not carried to any serious test. For had then the probe been really directed to the involvement of locals and similar patterns of Marathwada attacks [Parbhani (2003), Purna (2004) and Jalna (2004) Nanded (April 6, 2006) where Himanshu Panse and Naresh Rajkondowar were killed by the bomb they were assembling; Panse was also a close associate of Sunil Joshi who was behind 2006 Malegaon blasts] the truth would have emerged sooner. The confession of Swami Asimanand could have been obviated by honest perseverance in investigation. But the police were playing the insider's game in allegedly conducting and then inquiring into what turned out to be terrorism.

Contextualised and capsule(d) in shock and awe of the throbbing time it would not be any wild allegation for the several affidavits submitted then like those of Shakeel Ahmad Mohammad Yacub, executed on October 6, 2006, or of Irfan and Atif clearly show police pro-activism in framing and investigation and planting of arms on May 9, 2006 and subsequently the bombings. A more considerate affidavit was of Abrar Ahmed of a much later date. But first of Shakeel.

“I, Shakeel Ahmad Mohammad Yusuf, business joining beam thread, age 38, address Samad Habid Compound, Malegaon, am giving this affidavit in writing.

“I had gone to buy a new cycle from the shop Santosh Cycle Mart, at 3.30 pm on May 14, 2006. As per the receipt 2635 I bought a cycle in the name of my brother. At that time the son of the owner of the shop, Pius Agarwal, was at the counter. After haggling the price was decided and the cycle was being fitted. I sat inside the shop. There was a phone call on the mobile of Pius. He uttered some code words and then spoke in Hindi. ‘Whatever material we had put in the well near Ankai has been removed in the presence of Raj Verdhan [Sinha] sahib. I have talked face to face with him regarding the list of names we had supplied to him. All the names have been properly set in the scheme [framing the Muslims]. Everything is perfect. We will sit there and prepare the strategy for the future.'”

Raj Vardhan Sinha:

“I had already read in papers about the seizure of RDX and arms from there; so I asked him intimately what the connection with the seizure of arms there is with you. You were talking about the seizure of arms just now. He was stunned. He asked me if I was listening. He was perturbed and told me that it was a different personal matter.

“Then he asked me if I would sit there. His daddy would come and prepare the bill for me. He then left the shop soon.

“Fifteen minutes later his father came and prepared the bill. I took it and the cycle and left the shop.

“When the bombs blasts took place in Malegaon [on September 8, 2006] I read in the paper that the cycle on which the bomb was fitted was purchased from the same cycle shop. Then my suspicion grew that the son of the cycle shop owner was involved in it.

“I had informed about this to the Additional Superintendent of Police Anil Kumbhare. I had gone to him along with the MLA Shaikh Rashid Sahib. But I think there was no action taken on the information I had furnished. Therefore I am giving in writing voluntarily this without any greed or under any pressure so that it would help the police to arrest the real criminals.”

Another affidavit executed on September 16, 2006 of Irfan Ahmad Akeel Ahmad in which he states that he worked in Ansar Seth's power loom shed that was located in a lane around the graveyard. It was 6.50 on September 12, 2006 when PC Sachin and two others called him and took him from the shed where he worked with his parents and three brothers and he also had four sisters. They took him to Azad Nagar Police Station from where he was taken to Chawni Police Station. He was handed over to PSI
Ghanoore sahib, House Station Master. In the Sumo Tata, Ghannore took him on the road of MSG College and brought him to about 3 to 4 kilometers away in the dark night. Ghanoore told him to confess that “I am involved in bomb blast”. Then they brought a handicapped and a dumb person. The handicapped said that he (Irfan) had given his footwear to him to care for until the end of the Friday (September 8) prayer. He also said that he saw a bag [thaili] in his hand which he hung by the handle of a cycle.

Irfan realised that he was forced to confess a crime that he had not committed. He refused; thereupon the police beat him mercilessly. They changed their tactic and offered him five lakh rupees to tempt him to do what they asked him to do. They took him back to Chawni Police Station and later to Azad Nagar Police Station the next day. They told him to report to the police station as and when called.

The third affidavit was even more crucial. It was executed at Allahabad High Court. The accused Atif was a servant of Shabbir Masiullah, another accused, who was already in police custody since August 2, 2006. The police said that the bomb was assembled in Masiullah's factory. The police beat Atif and tortured him and made him confess that the bomb was assembled in factory/godown. The police later released him from detention. He escaped away from Malegaon to his village in UP. In his affidavit he disclosed how the police in Malegaon tried to frame him. And forced him to frame others.

Abrar's affidavit clearly shows that the blasts were the insider's job in which he also played some role and then became a turncoat. But in his last pronouncement made after his acquittal along with the others he spoke tongue-in-cheek and manifested he knew more and would reveal according to the circumambient opportunism. But piecemeal with cunning calculation of safeguarding his side.

Id celebration in 2016 saw a chemistry of change. Mufti Ismail prayed for the well-being of the investigation agencies and also for them to take an objective method investigation. Banners in the city went up with his photo and photos of important yarn merchants including Patodiya and noted Muslims in their diverse fields of life in arranging health camps and medical checkup for the poor and the needy to mark the happy occasion. There was no trace of any communalism during Ramzan and the festivities of Id. So Malegaon witnessed a return to the good old days of Muslims sailing on even keel. This return of the halcyon time belies the concern expressed over the ascent of IS elsewhere in the world or recruitments in some pocket of India. During his visit to Malegaon our first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, upheld Malegaon as the ideal example of communal harmony in the country and called the town the Manchester of cotton cloth mills.

Among the lawyers some had foresight and wanted to take up cases of individual accused and plead on their behalf. That way the trial could have started much earlier and could have avoided the impasse in which it is stuck now and again. It could have also avoided what Vrinda Grover observed about cases: “Criminal law knows no clean chit other than an acquittal following a trial.” Those nine acquitted would have been spared high expectation and remained firmly on ground. However human heart is not amenable to cold reasoning. Dr Frog now wants to serve in the development of his city, his State and country. He says that the Superintendent of the Prison, Mr Rane, was overwhelmed by his honesty and proffered him any service he could do in regard to his good character despite suffering. He says that the country is rife with corruption. He would fight against corruption and help his fellow countrymen.

Footnotes

1. Dr Magdumi Farog's lietter in Urdu Times, August 25, 2008.

2. http://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/malegaon-explosions-probe-caught-in-a-maze/story-6MdUHDuv1Bm8tP7SsJ 8c3I.html June 07, 2013

“Human beings are not pure vegetarians like sheep, nor are they pure meatarians like tigers. They need to eat both.”

—A farmer of my village, Papaiahpet, Warangal district, Telangana

When I said in some of my speeches and writings that the kind of vegetarianism that the Sangh Parivar, the Bharatiya Janata Party headed State governments, its central leadership, apart from the Hindu priestcraft, are trying to project as national is wrong and it is in fact anti-national, a lot of dust was raised around it. I want to take up this question in some depth here. In my view, this question is closely related to our economic development and modern competitive nation-building and also manpower development.

In any nation economic development is very much linked to the food culture of the people and the production and distribution of food items so that the people—particularly the productive masses— would have a healthy body and creative mind. In a globalised scientifically competitive world the young children of the nation should be brought up by giving them high protein food, both when they are in the mother's womb, and also when their growth begins after birth. A sound mind of the children in an early stage of six-seven years growth is going to decide their mental abilities lifelong. After all, human mind is like the software in a computer. Any nation's strength depends on the imaginative ability of that software. A nation's strength is dependent on the knowledge potential of the young, more than the physical energy that the “yoga school” is talking about.

Naturally the rich eat well and feed their children well even though they are vegetarian. In a country of caste and untouchability the higher castes have better economic viability and they also have the cultural capital to feed their children very well. For example, in India mostly the Brahmins, Baniyas and Jains (who are also Baniyas) eat several varieties of vegetarian curries, several forms of dal items, ghee, sufficient rice or chapathi, fruits, leave curries, curds and so. They feed their children with a lot of butter, ghee, fruits, ice creams, fruit salads and so on. They can also feed their children more number of times, at regular intervals, as the nursery experts suggest. Even if they are not fed with egg, meat, beef, their body and mind growth would not suffer much. However, all this is not equivalent to high protein meat foods that are required at an young age.

How can a poor mother feed the baby in the womb if rich protein food is not available? Cheap meat foods are the only best source that the poor lactating mothers have in the villages. And later feeding the children with some nutrition-rich food is possible only with cheap meat foods. The village food economy even now is not dependent on the vegetable market. It is dependent on meat and fruit food gathered from the surroundings. Vegetable production is taking place only around the urban areas. But the deeper villages even now are only meat-dependent economies, particularly in South and East India. The North and West Indian poor masses are heavily malnourished forces, as they have by and large become the vegetarian lot under the influence of Gandhian, Arya Samajist and the RSS' vegetarian campaigns.

The Tamil Brahmin intellectuals have done enough damage to the South Indian food culture as they spread all over the country after the Periyar movement. They are the most ardent vegetarian cultural fundamentalists. I was surprised when I stayed one day in the M.S. Swaminathan, the most respected agricultural scientist, Foundation guest house in Chennai They said they serve only vegetarian food in their canteen. His personal and caste choice he imposed on the institution run with public money. The Navdhanya school, headed by Vandana Shiva, is also propagating only vegetarianism. They never studied the impact of these campaigns in a country of superstition, idol worship and Brahminism. Now the RSS has taken up a massive vegetarian campaign from power only to control the poor dalit bahujan mass brain and body growth. It looks as though the weak mind and weak body of these poor caste communities is essential for their nationalism.

They do not study the economic impact of their propaganda on the whole nation. They also do not realise that the vegetarian food culture was first started by Jains in ancient India and now by choice the Brahmins and Baniyas (non-Jain Baniyas) have become vegetarians. Originally the Sangh Parivar was a vegetarian parivar; now it wants the whole nation to go vegetarian.

Quite discreetly, the BJP-controlled States are also propagating vegetarianism. The nation knows how the Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister has stopped feeding lower caste children with egg. From the Prime Minister to all their Chief Ministers, along with party leaders, are not only vegetarian but making the whole state machinery to suffer vegetarianism. In Delhi in any government programme people have to suffer vegetarianism. They do not even believe in allowing any food choice. This is sending a strong signal to the whole nation that it should go vegetarian.

Quite a lot of rural lower caste masses are also coming to believe in vegetarianism because of the media campaign. The Hindu food culture's role must be understood in comparison with the Chinese, Japanese and Euro-American food cultures. their economic strength and intellectual power. India as of now cannot match them in any discoverable knowledge. We must also see how our village economies are still bound by their own food cultural system, which have very positive universal values and strength. The new vegetarian campaign is likely to destroy that cultural strength.

For example, when I was a child in the forest zone village in the Warangal district of Telangana State, our parents could manage some meat item or the other by the evening. Fish, rabbit, a variety of birds, chicken, wet and dry lamb-goat meat were our daily food. Milk, curd butter milk with jawar or rice food items were also part of our diet. We used to get vegetables only in rainy season and old persons among our families would be very unhappy when a vegetable curry was cooked. Among the Dalit families the staple food item along with jawar, rice was beef, wet or dry. In other words, the village food economy was dependent on meat and milk but not vegetarianism. This situation has not changed much. But the new vegetarian campaign is attacking that culture as unhealthy and uncivilised as if only Brahminism knows what civilisation means. This is an arrogant approach to cultural issues.

The vegetarian nationalism is affecting the whole psychological environment of the Shudras, SC/ST/OBCs who used to eat their food with a cultural confidence before the BJP came to power. The cow slaughter ban during the Congress regimes did not lead to a cultural degradation of total vegetarianism. Meateria-nism, beeferianism, fisherianism and so on were part of the Congress culture. It appears that the so-called Congress-vimuktha Bharat will be only vegetarian Bharat. The RSS and its networked media is campaigning about the greatness of vegetarian nationalism day in and day out. Now the Brahminic so-called cultural TV channels have launched a campaign to say that meat, beef and fish-eaters are uncivilised people. The Brahminic sociologists spread false theories that meaterianism is known as polluted food culture and vegetarianism is known as pure food culture. This is an absurd theory but they continue to teach it in the schools and universities also.

This kind of food cultural retrogression has very serious implications to our national growth. The cattle and bird cultivation would suffer quite significantly. The leaders of this cultural movement are actually those who never got involved in food productive or cattle rearing activities. The vegetarian food cultural Brahminism is sought to sustain by juxtaposing it to Islamic and Christian meaterian and beeferian food cultures in India. Part of this cultural campaign originated in the Hindu spiritual system. The vegetarian priestly community, which was never involved in cattle, bird and animal economy, started a campaign called “cow protection” from there; it's now being expanded to total vegetarian nationhood. The ruling dispensation is trying to project that culture as Indian culture. This in the long run would weaken the nation's mental and physical growth.

Economic Viability

Many farmers, whom I spoke to, were of the opinion that with mere vegetarian food they “cannot sustain their working energies in the fields”. One farmer said that ‘'at least twice a week we need to eat meat or fish. This we realise with our own working energies on the day we eat sufficient meat and on the day we eat our food with some vegetable. It may be alright for those who sit at home or do some business to be a vegetarian. But for hard working people like us meat eating is a must.”

They also have another important economic dimension to be remembered. Unless an animal or bird is an economic animal or bird, they cannot maintain them. One person said: “Even if the chicken is not a food bird we cannot feed it and sustain it.” This kind of peasant response to cow protection or any other animal protection is valid because maintaining animals without being of labour value or of food value is just not possible.

Any nationalist argument has to be based on improving the people's mental and physical energies. Nationalism should not weaken the people in physical and intellectual spheres. It is a false nationalist argument that does not understand the existing potential of the people in different spheres. Nationalism cannot depend on sentiments.

This is the land that got defeated by Middle Easterners and Europeans. Now with this kind of false food cultural theories and also nonsensical practices they would like to surrender this country to more energetic, more imaginative and more creative forces that come from outside. The nation must debate this issue more seriously than any other issue.

Prof Kancha Ilaiah Shepherd is the Director, Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy, Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Gachibowli, Hyderabad.

by Kadayam Subramanian

The young woman Irom Sharmila (30) went on an indefinite hunger strike on November 2, 2000 in protest against the killing of innocents by the paramilitary Assam Rifles (AR) under the protection of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958. After nearly 16 years, Sharmila announced recently that she would be ending her historic hunger strike on August 9, 2016 in order to pursue her objectives through other peaceful means. In recent judgments, the Supreme Court of India has come out in support of human security in Manipur. This would strengthen the hands of Irom Sharmila and others in their struggle for justice in conflict-torn Manipur.

On November 2, 2000, a column of the Assam Rifles (AR), the ‘oldest paramilitary force' in India, moving from the Imphal airport, resorted to indiscriminate firing near a bus stop at Malom killing ten innocent civilians. Irom Sharmila was at the bus stop but escaped unhurt.

The unprovoked firing by the men of the AR killing innocents led to the young Sharmila (30) going on an indefinite hunger strike demanding the removal from Manipur of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958, a repressive special legislation, which had been in force in Manipur since 1958 ostensibly for counter-insurgency purposes.

Intrepid Sharmila refused to give up her hunger strike for nearly 16 years despite appeals from family, friends and supporters. She has been medically kept alive by the nasal drip. The AFSPA has not been repealed.

Sharmila's indefinite hunger strike has not only been against the AFSPA but also in favour of the people's right to live and, more recently, her own right to live and love.

The constitutionality and necessity of the AFSPA and its relationship to the historically unique paramilitary force, the Assam Rifles (AR), set up in 1835, has been debated. The AR continues to remain despite the creation of a multiplicity of other paramilitary forces in the subsequent period.

When the AFSPA was imposed on Manipur in 1958 for counterinsurgency functions, the AR was among the immediately available forces to implement the law. The distinguishing features of the AR are its military leadership and its command and control from New Delhi.

Manipur was a part of the then North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA), whose possession by India, was contested by China. The region became a Union Territory of India in the mid-1960s. The budget and administrative control of the AR was transferred to the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Government of India in New Dehi.

Under the Constitution of India, internal security is a State subject. The formation of several new States in the North-East in the early 1970s and the deployment of several new Central Para Military Forces (CPMFs) in the region tended to reduce the relevance of the AR, which developed an ‘identity crisis'. But it continues to exist and performs a largely negative role and enjoys immunity from prosecution under the provisions of the special law, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958.

AFSPA in Manipur

Manipur has been a conflict-torn State ever since its controversial integration into India in 1949. Many insurgent groups operate in the State demanding autonomy and independence. The means adopted by the Indian state to restore stability in Manipur are regarded as having led to instability and insurgency. Most controversial has been the use of the special law, the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), 1958.

The AFSPA was formulated by the British colonial regime in 1942 as an ‘emergency' law. In 1958, it was adopted by independent India to deal with ‘disturbed' conditions especially in North-East India. The 1958 Act was amended in 1972 and empowered ‘any commissioned officer, warrant officer, non-commissioned officer or any officer of equivalent rank' to use force even to the extent of causing death providing them immunity from prosecution. The AFSPA has been regarded asa ‘truly nasty and terrifying piece of legislation'.

When, in 1980, the Act was extended to the whole of Manipur, there were large protests and rallies by voluntary groups and other bodies including women's groups. Several women were injured or killed during actions by security forces. The imposition of the Act had the effect of increasing the violent attacks by underground groups against the security forces. The AFSPA was described as a ‘national security tyranny' since it violated the Indian Constitution as well as the international conventions and instruments to which India is a signatory. Significantly, the terminology employed in the Act conformed to the usage of the Army Act of 1950. The definition of the concept of ‘disturbed area' was considered vague.

In 1987, the atrocities committed by the Assam Rifles while dealing with underground activities at Oinam were castigated by the Guwahati High Court which said that the security forces charged with maintaining law and order and ensuring peace had acted contrary to the law and had become entirely unaccountable.

The Malom massacre by the Assam Rifles on November 2, 2000, in which many innocents were killed, led to Irom Sharmila embarking on an indefinite hunger strike demanding the revocation of the AFSPA.

The brutal rape and killing by the AR personnel of Thangjam Manorama in July 2004 acting under the AFSPA, led to a group of women parading naked in protest against the AR in Imphal, the State Capital. The Government of India was forced to set up the Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee, 2005. The five-member Committee, which had no woman, came out with a report castigating the AFSPA as a ‘symbol of oppression and an instrument of discrimi-nation and high-handedness' and called for its repeal. The report was ignored.

Nari Rustomji, a senior civil servant, stated that attempts to restore stability in the region, mostly based on colonial precedents, had in fact aggravated instability. The imposition of heavy administrative control since independence had largely led to violence and armed insurgency, which was accepted as a normal pattern of life in the region.

As of 2008, in addition to the whole of Manipur (excluding the Imphal valley), several other parts of the North-East were declared ‘disturbed areas' under the AFSPA. Some State Governors with military or police background and the officers who work under them, often acted against the interests of the State governments and even accused it of inaction and collusion with the insurgents. In effect, the State governments existed only under uneasy subjection to a hostile centralised controlling authority.

Despite the AFSPA, militant groups have flourished in Manipur and even grown in number. Officials argue that this justifies the law but others say that its continuance has led to the increase in the number of militant groups.

In November, 2009, a Manipur police commando was involved in the extrajudicial execution of a young woman named Rabina and a young man named Sanjit in the State Capital, Imphal. The police commando, when prosecuted, came out with a confession admitting that he had been responsible for the extrajudicial killing of over 100 people in the name of fighting insurgency.

Impunity of security forces, especially the AR, acting under the AFSPA, is the specific feature of conflict management in Manipur.

It is good news that the formidable woman activist Irom Sharmila is now free to lead her colleagues in civil society to fight for human security and peace in conflict-torn Manipur. Happily, the Supreme Court of India has recently come out with a judgment upholding the rule of law and human security in Manipur on the basis of a public interest litigation taken up by a voluntary agency. The Court has disapproved of extrajudicial killings by security forces such as the AR utilising the provisions of the AFSPA though they are performing a difficult but necessary duty.

The author was a Director General of police in North-East India and is the author of State, Policy and Conflicts in Northeast India, Routledge, 2016.

Remembrance of Things Past

August 15 reinvokes reflections of India's freedom struggle and its aftermath which are customarily carried by newspapers and journals. Apart from the mention of independence and pictures of Gandhiji with a spinning wheel or his traditional walking stick what the freedom struggle meant to the generation that was actually on the battle-ground is often bypassed.

I married into a freedom fighter's family. My father-in-law, Phool Chand Jain, was one of those dyed-in-the-wool freedom fighters. He had participated in the movements or I should say the various initiatives undertaken to throw the Empire off our backs—starting with making bombs along with the fiery group and then using them, and moving on to the non violent league—over-whelmed by Gandhi's special charisma and language. He had been a significant figure in the struggle, in that he was not only the President of the Delhi Pradesh Congress Committee before independence but he was also the editor of the Congress newspaper called Arjun.

He was disappointed as were many others who were like him—people who did not speak English, wore khadi and were utterly serious in their dedication to Gandhi's idiom and ethic. Having been all that and having been in jail several times including in the most punishing part of the jail in the Red Fort, he found the nonchalance of the post-freedom choices and styles of the Congress most disappointing.

People like him, I think, understood and were completely overwhelmed by the methodology used by Gandhi to deliver India from the empire! When they followed Gandhi they also accepted the entire Gandhian package of wearing khadi, of leading a life of simplicity and being constantly engaged in the public space, Gandhi's second freedom, improving the lives of those around in the neighbourhood. The dedication to society was another package; in other words, the individual interest or ambition was overpowered by the desire to participate and move forward with the community.

Post-independence my father-in-law, and I presume many like him, were disparagingly called dhotiwallahs. They were deeply disappointed to notice the behaviour and ‘culture' of the post-freedom leaders of the government. I give one incident which he repeated to us and which I myself witnessed. This was when he came back from a reception on Republic Day at the Rashtrapati Bhawan. He said a separate time and place was kept for them and some shawls were given by the Rashtrapati. He must have meant to those who were wearing dhotis and who could not speak English.

These men and women were excluded on the ground, perhaps, of not being able to speak to the dignitaries and of course our dear civil servants or ‘modern' people, in English

Once he experienced that humiliation and disappointment with post-independent India he realised that the new rulers had left Gandhi behind, as demonstrated by their treatment of those people who imitated Gandhi in his lifetime and embarrassed them in the new India.

My father-in-law, Phool Chand Jain, would be sitting during mornings and nights in a room which he called the ‘baithak' pouring over his own notes and handwritten postcards recording the details of birth and death of every Indian freedom fighter who was shot or hanged; in other words, killed by the British. Then he would tie them up with a string. I am told that soon after independence he would bicycle to the National Archives from Old Delhi and diligently note, on used envelopes, the data relating to the people who had been hanged or shot during the freedom struggle.

He had identified more than 100,000 of these men and women, and, as he explained to me, they were barbers, dhobies, apart from small-time shopkeepers. Imprisoned and then shot or hanged to death.

The legacy which we received from Babuji and his son L.C. Jain was a commitment to simplicity in both—lifestyles, relationships and the work ethic. In the work programme what was strongly emphasised in the first two decades was the effort for reconstructing the lives of those that had been left behind by earlier regimes, including the refugees.

Local development, building local institutions such as cooperatives, strengthening and moving skills into remunerative occupations, federating from local to higher levels of management (Dr Kurien and Amul represent that ethic), pan-chayats—these were all the triggers that seemed to engage us. Lifestyle, which is now often mocked at, was a crucial element in all this engagement. Lifestyle meant restructuring consumption and consuming products which would provide incomes to widespread communities of workers.

It was not difficult to practice these principles. To ensure that the hand driven textile industry would survive, simple solutions of sharing of market were designed. One which I found most moving was to designate sarees, those that had borders were to be woven by the handloom industry and those without borders in the machine-driven industry. Government purchases, whether of school uniforms or medical gloves, had to be made through cooperatives, some-times cooperatives run by war widows and so on.

So it was not the licence/permit raj only, it was a raj that attempted to heal the wounds of colonisation as well as war. Its main goal was livelihood, economic freedom both for the nation as well as the individual.

Interestingly, a report in the newspaper to day, published by the World Bank, argues that livelihood, economic strength is the most crucial need or service that enables the poor out of poverty—social inputs are second to this primary need. Azaadi was also liberation from economic oppression and exclusion. We have surrendered that possibility.

Devaki Jain is an economist, and was married to Lakshmi Jain, a former member of the Planning Commission and Gandhian intellectual. She can be contacted at e-mail: devakijain@gmail.com

by Binoy Viswam

The forces of the Sangh Parivar are well trained in the art of ‘bahu bhashan' (duplicity in utterances). On the same subject they would speak often in different ways, sometimes expressing diametrically opposite views. Those who listen to them would be confused, but for the parivar, it is part of a calculated strategy. Prime Minister Narenda Modi is a proven architect and practitioner of the art of bahu bhashan. These days the BJP patriarch is busy with the task of preparing for the forthcoming elections in UP, Uttarakhand, Manipur, Punjab and Gujarat.

The Sangh Parivar's onslaught on Dalits in various parts of the country, especially in Gujarat, has unmasked all the claims of the BJP. Though they talk aloud about ‘Vishal Hindu', the Dalits and the downtrodden are often kept out of its purview. Those vast sections of Hindus are treated as human beings only during elections. Once those are over, their sorrows are never taken care of. The Sangh Parivar and its politics of Right-wing majoritarianism naturally will play to the tune of the rich and upper castes which is their class and social base.

Soon after Modi came to power, the question of beef began to rock the nation. Innocent people were brutally tortured and even killed in the name of the cow. Ministers in the Modi Government arrogantly urged the beef-eaters to leave India and go to Pakistan. Sadhvis and sanyasins, who also are BJP MPs, openly threatened all those who did not side with them. Every patriotic Indian would rightly ask: ‘Where was Modi when all these anti-Dalit, anti-Muslim tirades were taking place?' The man who used to be vocal and was known for his rhetoric was tight-lipped during the long spell of such incidents. Now, when the elections are round the corner, suddenly he got activated and has begun to talk in a different tone. Modi is now trying hard to paint himself as a fighter against the army of ‘gau rakshaks'. Simultaneously he pretends to be the saviour of Dalits. One may wonder listening to the harsh words he has chosen to address the gau rakshaks: is this the Sangh Parivar! This is how they practice the theory of bahu bhashan. It teaches them to talk according to the needs of the given occasion. One may be authorised by the Sangh Parivar to do so in different voices on the same issue at the same time.

When Narendra Modi's drama-like utterances against the gau rakshaks were supported by the RSS, the VHP came out openly in defence of the gau rakshaks. At one end, they want to pacify the Dalits and minorities, and at the other end they stretch their hands to embrace the men in the ‘cow army'. The goal of this strategy is to bag the vote-banks of both at the end of the day.

This issue cannot be understood in a casual manner. The ideological moorings of the Sangh Parivar and its political manifestations are to be clearly analysed. The RSS, throughout its history, has attempted to project the cow as a political icon. Interlocking it with religious faith is their much used practice to fan up anti-Muslim and anti-Dalit sentiments with a political edge. No doubt, it is the Hindutva ideology and its cow- centric politics that led to such inhuman atrocities in UP, Gujarat and elsewhere. Narenda Modi cannot hide this reality with his public outpourings.

While adorning the mantle of ‘Dalit protector', Narenda Modi has initiated a new campaign projecting the BJP as a party that has something to do with the national freedom movement. Only with that intention recently he made a visit to the birthplace of Chandrasekhar Azad, the legendary hero of the freedom movement. Modi and his team have chalked out plans in detail for Central Ministers to visit the houses of renowned freedom fighters all over the country. It is not difficult to understand the reason behind this propagandist measure, especially on the eve of the 70th anniversary of independence. The role, rather ‘the lack of it', of the Sangh Parivar in the freedom struggle is not at all a secret. When the whole of India was on the war path fighting for freedom, they were nowhere to be seen even as mere spectators. The RSS swayam sevaks were instructed to keep away from such kind of ‘unnecessary' political activities. In fact that is the essence of ‘cultural nationalism,' on which the whole ideology of the RSS is built. Subservience to imperialism is its real face. And the colonial masters always took note of it. They profusely praised the RSS for not being engaged in political activities.

Now, when decades have passed, the RSS faces discomfort due to its pro-imperialist stance during the freedom struggle. Hence it attempts to rewrite history in line with its political schemes. The Sangh Parivar historians have no hesitation to depict V.D. Savarkar and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya as leaders of the freedom movement. Some of them even went to the extent of equating August 15 with December 6, the black day when the Babri Masjid was demolished.

But when elections are approaching, Modi has realised the need for building a bridge between the RSS and the freedom struggle. His vote- oriented ‘pilgrimage' to national heroes only carries this ugly message. Modi and his team should bear one fact in mind. The RSS resources and state machinery, put together, would be able to rewrite the pages of history, but that will not be sufficient to erase the blood, sweat, and tears of a great people and nation who fought in unison to liberate this country. The saga of sacrifices will always be kept alive through generations along with the facts about the struggle for freedom and thus truth will prevail.

The author, a former Minister of Forests and Housing in the erstwhile LDF Government in Kerala, is a member of the National Executive of the CPI.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has raised the issue of Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistani occupied Kashmir in his Independence Day speech on August 15, 2016 in response to Pakistan dedicating its Independence Day, celebrated a day earlier, to ‘Freedom of Kashmir'. This is the first time India has officially expressed support for the cause of Balochistan. People in these areas are unhappy with the Pakistani Government. While there is a full-fledged movement in Balochistan going on to demand autonomy from Pakistan, people in Gilgit-Baltistan want basic civic rights and democracy.

Pakistan has said that this is proof of India's involvement in Balochistan. While it may not be a well-known fact in India, people in Pakistan widely believe that just like Pakistan aids the secessionist movement in J&K, India is helping the separatists in Balochistan. It is also a common belief that India, through the Afghanistan border, provides military and other assistance to the freedom fighters there through its intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing. The Pakistani Government has blamed India for a recent suicide attack in Quetta killing 80 people, believed to have been perpetrated by the Taliban. Such allegations are as common as in the Indian media, fed by the government agencies, Pakistan is blamed for any violence in Kashmir or terrorist act in India.

Modi has obviously responded to the obnoxious Pakistani statements on Kashmir offering aid after the violence in the aftermath of Burhan Wani's killing. For long India-Pakistan relations have been marked by the tit-for-tat policy. So there is nothing new about it; but what is new about the Balochistan statement is that from now on India will have to support the cause of the people fighting in Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir on the issue of human rights violations in these areas, unless it was an impulsive reaction to the pre-Independence Day Pakistani adventure. If India is taking a morally high position, then it'll have to stand by the people of Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK like it has done with Tibetans taking on the Chinese wrath.

The question which then will be raised is: if India is so concerned about the human rights violations by the Pakistani Army and actually supports the cause of freedom in Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK, then why does it carry out human rights violations in its own Kashmir? India as a soverign country has a right to deny entry to UN Human Rights Commission in Kashmir only if it responsibly dealt with its people. Using pellet guns on its own people, including women and children, is no sign of a mature government sensitive to human rights concerns.

The Right-wing nationalists are compli-menting Modi for giving a befitting reply to Pakistan but in the long run such a belligerent attitude will not help. If we accept the fact that dialogue and not war will solve the India-Pakistan problem, then Modi has just taken us away several steps from the process for establishing peace and friendship. Of course, the Pakistani side is equally to be blamed for provoking India.

In a way Modi has done a repeat of Vajpayee. Before India tested the nuclear weapons in Pokhran, India enjoyed a traditional military superiority over Pakistan. However, chest- thumping declarations of having made a nuclear weapon gave a chance to Pakistan to carry out its tests too, thereby starting a nuclear weapons arms race which has acted as a leveller in terms of the destructive power of the two neighbours now. So far India concerned itself with only Kashmir, Pakistan was seen as an intruder and India received international sympathetic support on this issue. Now India's public position of Kashmir being an integral part of India will be weakened as from now on both countries will accuse each other of interfering in their internal matters. With Modi's posturing India is going to lose certain credibility on the Kashmir issue. Whether we like it or not, Pakistan has been able to make inroads in the Kashmiri psyche whereas India does not have any emotional relationship with the Balochis. At best it can offer long-distance moral support.

India will also have to face the uncomfortable question from both the dominant parties in Tamil Nadu and internationally on why it did not stand up for the rights of Tamilians when they were being massacred by the Sinhalese dominated Sri Lankan Government. Tamilians in Sri Lanka are ethnically closer to the people of Tamil Nadu than the people from Balochistan are to people anywhere in India. Balochis are fighting for an independent country with Balochis from Iran and Afghanistan.

As a matter of principle India must support the people of Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK just as it is supporting Tibetans. At the same time it must also support Tamilians in Sri Lanka. But instead of admitting our failure in having won the hearts of the people of Kashmir if we continue to blame Pakistan for all the wrongs in Kashmir, we are not going to be able to solve this problem. As we kept alienating the Kashmiris, Pakistan's interference increased. Just as Pakistan's failure to keep the people in Balochistan, Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK happy is giving India a chance to raise the issue now.

Leaders of both Pakistan and India must realise that we are not engaged in some competition where we can score points over each other with our display of nationalist fervour of the jingoistic kind. There are real people in Indian J&K, PoK, Gilgit-Baltistan, Balochistan and Sri Lanka. The two governments must respect the sentiments of the people and cooperatively solve the issues so that the local people's aspirations are taken care of. A Right- wing-dominated thinking, which treats it as a prestige issue, is doing this only at the cost of people's lives and sensitivities.

Noted social activist and Magsaysay awardee Dr Sandeep Pandey was recently sacked this year from the IIT-BHU where he was a Visiting Professor on the charge of being a “Naxalite” engaging in “anti-national” activities. He was elected along with Prof Keshav Jadhav the Vice-President of the Socialist Party (India) at its founding conference at Hyderabad on May 28-29, 2011.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is sadly mistaken if he thinks that he gave a ‘tit-for-tat' for Pakistan's interference in Kashmir affairs by raising human rights violations in Balochistan in his Independence Day address to the nation on August 15. Kashmir is an international issue, whereas Balochistan is local. India's friends like Iran will have reason to worry if the genie of Balochi sub-nationalism is let loose. It seems Modi mounted the Balochi tiger without realising that he may find it difficult to dismount.

Narendra Modi earned a unique distinction this weekend as the first Prime Minister in India's history to raise human rights violations in the Pakistani province of Balochistan, where a separatist insurgency has been raging for decades.

Modi feels elated that Balochi nationalists adore him for doing that. He chose his customary Independence Day address to the nation on August 15 from the ramparts of the Red Fort, the seat of the Mughal dynasty in Old Delhi, to stage the theatrics rich in symbolism.

However, even as Modi was espousing the cause of the Balochis on August 15, in his home State of Gujarat, a massive public rally was held by the Dalit community—‘untouchables' in the Hindu caste hierarchy—with the support of Muslims, protesting against persecution and social and political discrimination.

To put matters in perspective, the Dalit population in India is estimated to be in the region of 200 million; Balochis of Pakistan number around seven million.

Indeed, human rights and the Modi Govern-ment make an oxymoron. Political morality should have prompted Modi to steer clear of the human rights situation in Balochistan. So, why did he decide otherwise? The short answer is —expediency.

Modi is a past-master in diversionary tactics. At a time when an Intifada-like movement is erupting in the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley seeking independence for the region from the rest of India, the spectre of the ‘Kashmir problem' once again haunts Delhi.

Intimidation or use of brute force by the Indian state, compliant local government, corrupt political class, blanket deployment of security forces numbering over half-a-million —the hackneyed formula to keep control over the Kashmir Valley may have exhausted its possibilities after over six decades of wear and tear. Fatigue is visible.

An exit strategy would mean ‘out-of-the-box' solutions of the kind Britain found for Northern Ireland, for instance. But that would call for decentralisation and devolution of powers (which was also, by the way, the basis of the accession of the region to India at the time of independence in 1947).

However, that very thought is anathema for the Hindu fundamentalists who mentor the Modi Government. The ideologues of Hindutva find it abhorrent that the Muslim-majority Kashmir Valley could ever be conceded local autonomy.

The result is that Delhi finds itself between the rock and a hard place to quell the unrest in the Valley, which has been under curfew for over a month. There is some talk that regions of the Valley may be put under direct Army rule. Delhi seems preparing for a massive crackdown.

At such a juncture, the Modi Government finds it expedient to stage a political drama by whipping up xenophobia and make it look as if Pakistani interference is fuelling the upheaval in the Valley—rather than the other way around.

Tirades against Pakistan help boost the sagging morale of the Hindu nationalist lobby and divert public attention away from the crisis in the Valley.

Of course, the television channels through the weekend have been dutifully conducting discourses regarding Balochistan. Self-styled experts are digging into Balochistan's past history to weigh the chances of its secession from Pakistan.

The Hindu fundamentalists visualise Modi as the Iron Man of Indian politics. They are wedded to the belief that Modi will someday vivisect Pakistan and it will be the final nail on the coffin of the Pakistani state, opening the door for the undoing of the Partition of 1947 and the emergence of Akhand Bharat (a unified Hindu-dominated Indian subcontinent).

All this may look to the outside world to be a bizarre notion—betwixt two nuclear powers in the second decade of the 21st century. But, make no mistake, a significant and vocal section of Modi's starry-eyed followers anticipate Pakistan's disintegration in all earnestness.

Evidently, Modi took to stage-acting on such a potentially explosive theme as human rights without thinking through the profound conse-quences. For a start, he is sadly mistaken in his estimation that this is ‘tit-for-tat' for Pakistan's interference in India's internal affairs.

Kashmir is an international issue, whereas Balochistan is on par with Chechnya or Xinjiang or Mindanao or Kurdistan—an entirely different category. The fact of the matter is that even friendly countries like Iran or Afghanistan would have cause to worry if the genie of Balochi sub-nationalism is let loose.

Iran in particular will feel uneasy that India is destabilising the hugely sensitive region of Balochistan. (Iran's sister province of Sistan-Balochistan is already seething with militancy and separatism.)

Pakistan has been cautioning Tehran against allowing Indian presence in Chabahar Port, which is located in the Sistan-Balochistan province. Pakistan has also been propagating that India is fostering cross-border terrorism in Balo-chistan, aimed at undermining the $ 46 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

Modi may have unwittingly given credibility to these Pakistani allegations whose sole purpose is to malign India as a country that uses terrorism as an instrument of regional policy.

The point is, Modi's tirade against Pakistan may only draw more international attention to the carnage in the Valley, which is after all the root cause of India-Pakistan tensions today. India's interests lie in keeping things under wraps in the Valley.

Again, Pakistan will turn the table on India's own abysmal human rights record. Pakistan may not have a lily-white reputation, but India too has many skeletons in the closet—such as the grotesque human rights dimensions of the oppressive Hindu caste system or the alienation in the Christian-majority North-Eastern regions of the country.

Suffice it to say, Modi has mounted the Balochi tiger without the foresight that he may now come under compulsion to keep riding it. Pakistan won't let him dismount easily, either.

Meanwhile, India's other tiny neighbours— Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal Sri Lanka and the Maldives—are watching. They will be extremely wary of the perceived hegemonic intentions of Delhi. They will increasingly look toward China as a ‘balancer' in the region.

On the other hand, tensions are steadily increasing in the India-China relations, too. The Sino-Indian ties are set to deteriorate even further as India lurches toward the US' rebalance strategy in Asia.

One can easily foretell that the SAARC summit due in Islamabad in November has been effectively derailed. With that, India's leadership role in South Asia is crumbling. Modi's regional policies face a difficult future.

So long as Modi remains in power, normalisation of India-Pakistan relations is simply out of the question. The probability is that tensions may cascade, and the two nuclear powers may be risking a war at some point. The Balochi tiger with its rider has begun walking toward the dark and deep jungle.

(Courtesy: Asia Times)

Ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).

POLITICAL NOTEBOOK

New Delhi is finding Kashmir more ungovernable by the day. A mindless, thoughtless, directionless government is talking about Kashmir in several voices. One day, Finance Minister and No. 2 in the government, Arun Jaitley, says Kashmir needs development which was denied for the past sixty years by the Congress and National Conference governments. The very next day the Prime Minister contradicts him and says development alone cannot solve the Kashmir problem. One day Jaitley says the boys pelting stones are ‘aggressors' and they need to be dealt with ‘firmly'. The next day the Prime Minister says all those who lost their lives were ‘part of us'. One day Jaitley says Pakistan is behind all protests. Next day the PM thanks the Opposition delegation from Kashmir for giving him ‘detailed information about the ground situation'. Do not his party and the intelligence agencies keep him informed of the ‘ground situation'?

New Delhi says there will be no talk with the ‘separatists'. Does the government really believe that normalcy can be restored and political dialogue resumed without the participation of those it chooses to call ‘separatists'? These are the people who are daily defying curfew and orders under Section 144, daily clashing with the security forces and daily getting killed by bullets or permanently blinded by pellets — pushing all prospects of peace further and further away. These are the people who have forced the police to flee from 33 out of 36 police stations from four districts of southern Kashmir, namely, Pulwama, Shopian, Kulgam and Anantanag even as hundreds and thousands of people are daily holding ‘azadi' rallies right under the nose of the security forces. The present dispensers of India's destiny must be living in a fool's paradise if they think that all these thousands can be labelled ‘anti-national' and dealt with accordingly. Injustice at home cannot be justified by citing the injustice Pakistan is doing to its own people in Balochistan or PoK.

The Prime Ministers and his senior colleagues in the party and the government will have to go a long way, understand the sentiments of the Kashmiri people and find out that causes that have brought about such a deep schism between the people of Kashmir and the Government of India. Narendra Modi and his colleagues will have to get rid of the heavy ideological baggage they have been traditionally carrying, to get close to the people of Kashmir and win their confidence.

Which way lies the solution of the ‘Kashmir problem' and what actually is the ‘problem'? In a perceptive interview given to this journal in its Independence Day number, Shujaat Bukhari, editor-in-chief of Rising Kashmir, spoke of the continued denial of political rights to the Kashmiris, of thrusting sham elections on the people. He accused the Congress and National Conference coalition government of throttling democracy and not allowing people to restore their faith in the democratic process. In the face of a long list of betrayals and deceit by Delhi, Pakistan found it quite easy to provoke the Kashmiri youth to launch an armed struggle. Bukhari pointed out that the unrest stems from the political dispute that needs to be resolved. His prescription was: recognise Kashmir as a political problem. Reach out to Kashmirirs. Talk to them. Listen to them. Introspect yourself how you are creating space for unrest in Kashmir as you don't recognise the problem on the ground. Indeed, the first step to unravelling the Kashmir knot is to recognise it is a political problem and involve all political elements in the negotiations.

The media can play an important role in preparing the climate for a political dialogue. Unfortunately, a major section of the pro-Establishment media is unashamedly and blindly toeing the official line. In their chest-thumping and competitive chauvinism they have gone to the extent of labelling the two Communist Parties and the Janata Dal (U) as the ‘real culprits' who are blaming the Central Government and not Pakistan for what is happening in Kashmir. To them, the long-term integration of the Kashmiri youth is crucial to foil their collective radicalisation. But during this process, Indian democracy will be forced to sacrifice some freedoms for the security, unity and integrity of the country. In other words, unfreedom should be welcomed to secure freedom! It is this mindset of the ruling dispensation that is the biggest obstacle to win over the people of Kashmir and put a permanent end to decades of confrontation and conflict.

August 23 B.D.G.

I recently wrote the following letter to newspapers:

“It is deceitful to describe pellet guns as ‘non-lethal'. While they may not kill, they have maimed people permanently, specially by causing loss of vision. Breaking up a public gathering by blinding those in it is inhuman. Tear gas is at least as effective and does no long term damage.”

An English friend reacted thus: “I find it outrageous that the situation in India has deteriorated to the point at which you are advocating the use of tear gas.” I pointed out that tear gas had been used extensively in India for decades as a form of crowd control and said that he should not compare India and England.

My friend responded with: “Maybe I'm just too naive when I see the use of tear gas condoned as an acceptable form of crowd control. This is no reflection on you, but a comment upon the times in which we live: in many parts of the world protesters expect to be met with water cannon, batons and tear gas...”.

Minister Rajnath Singh said, during his visit to Kashmir on August 24-25, “In the coming few days, we will give an alternative to the pellet guns. These guns were earlier considered non-lethal but some incidents have taken place... We formed an expert committee a month ago which was expected to give report in two months but it will be coming very soon” (The Hindu, August 29, 2016).

And what is this alternative? “The pump action guns from which pellets are fired are here to stay. From now on, the pellets will not be of metal but of soft material like polymer, soft plastic, rubber and even paper. The Ordnance Factory Board, which manufactures the pump action guns, has been asked to produce the other types of pellets as well,” said one of the members of the committee (same source).

It is a matter of common sense that tightly rolled or crumpled paper becomes hard, and that a projectile of such material which travels at high velocity can cause considerable damage to human tissue. At school in the early 1960s, we boys would fire pieces of rolled up paper at one another with stretched rubber bands. This “sport” was banned after a boy lost the vision of the eye in which he was hit. It cannot be said that the proposed alternative is any less damaging than metal pellets.

I do not know if the “pellet guns” are ordinary shot-guns (12 bore or other), but even if they are not, they work on the same principle. What we have is guns with cartridges which are ordinarily used to kill birds being used against humans. So much for “non-lethal”.

The author is a writer, editor and photographer.

A Dalit Asmita Yatra was taken out in Gujarat between July 31 and August 15, 2016 by the Una Dalit Atyachar Ladat Samiti from Ahmedabad to Una, where the obnoxious incident took place on July 8 when some Dalits were beaten up for skinning dead cows. Symbolically, on Indepen-dence Day the Dalits demanded that they must be freed from the task of disposal of cattle carcasses and instead they should be given land so that they may survive by engaging in agriculture, a more respectable vocation than what they have been traditionally doing. Any landless Dalit is in any case entitled to receive land from the panchayat. Essentially the demand was to implement the provision in law for the Dalits. Even in cases from around the country where Dalits have been given land titles by panchayats, they are not able to take control of their land sometimes. Encroachment over Dalit land is a fairly common problem. The police and administration tend to favour the powerful upper-caste people who encroach upon the land of the Dalits, just like they did in the Una incident.

Dr B.R. Ambedkar was for nationalisation of land. As land reforms have not taken place in spite of the implementation of the land ceiling law and the people fear that any surplus land will be given to private corporations rather than landless labourers, it may not be a bad idea to revive the call for nationalisation of land given by Dr Ambedkar. There should be a way of more equitable use of land. This will give Dalits the opportunity to give up vocations which are inhuman.

The young convenor of the Samiti, Jignesh Mevani, says that he doesn't want it to just remain a Dalit movement. He would like to invite other progressive forces to join this movement for emancipation of the Dalits. He invokes Shaheed Bhagat Singh also in his speeches. There is an appeal for promoting inter-caste and interfaith marriages and also to strengthen Dalit-Muslim unity as Muslims too have been at the receiving end of the cow protection campaign. In fact, as long as it was only the Muslims getting killed or attacked by cow vigilante groups, the Prime Minister kept quiet. It was only when the Una incident received bad publicity and threatened the electoral prospects of the BJP in the forthcoming elections in Punjab and UP, that Narendra Modi in quite an unexpected about-turn came down heavily upon these groups.

However, the PM's outburst doesn't seem to have had any affect on the cow vigilante groups. The Hindu Jagarana Vedike has killed Praveen Poojary, interestingly a BJP worker, who was accused of carrying cattle in a vehicle for the slaughter house. So, it appears that the PM's apparent anger was more for public consumption than actually intended to stop such incidents. In any case the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other Hindutva groups have condemned the PM's accusation that 80 per cent of the cow vigilantes are anti-social elements by the night. It certianly cannot be denied that they take law into their own hands. The faith seems to be given more importance than our Constitution.

The Dalit Asmita Yatra received a good response in Gujarat and gave a platform to the Dalits for assertion of their rights. The method of protest they have chosen, of abandoning the cattle carcasses, reflects the agony of their profession. Earlier Dalits were known to have given up this task in 19 villages of Mehsana district of Gujarat. Unless they give up these menial jobs, their children will not be able to go to schools and generation after generation they'll remain in the same tradition.

Now it is up to the class, which is the consumer of leather items, to worry about how they would remove the skin of dead cattle so that it may be used by the leather industry. The cow vigilante groups have also protested against the use of cow leather for making various items. With the Dalits in Gujarat having resolved on a big scale not to skin dead animals, it has already become a problem for the government there. It is thinking of employing machines to perform the task and dispose of the dead cows. The leather industry may be under serious threat because of the misplaced enthusiam of the cow vigilantes and a Right-wing government not too keen to suppress the ‘Hindu' sentiment.

In any case, a number of humiliating tasks, including getting down into sewer lines to clean them, which are performed by Dalits, should have been mechanised long back. Just as this Yatra was to end in Una, news came in of four people having died in Madhapur in Hyderabad because of suffocation when they had entered a manhole to clean it. It is really shameful that in the era of modernisation when most inhuman tasks involving drudgery are being mechanised, we still make live human beings enter the hell which is the sewer line. This is another task that the Dalits must be freed from.

It is only when the Dalits are freed from the inhuman tasks that it will give a chance to the Dalit children to think about a more respectable future for themselves by adopting alternative careers after getting educated. Wherever Dalit families have got a chance, they have left such humiliating professions. But the problem is that most Dalits, engaged in menial tasks, live in conditions of poverty which don't allow them to unshackle themselves from their situation. Even a Free and Compulsory Right to Education Act, which got implemented in the country in 2009, is not able to pull all their children out and get them admitted in schools. When 23 Valmiki (a community which is traditionally involved in sanitation work) children were to be admitted along with another eight Muslim children to the prestigious City Montessori School in Lucknow last year under the RTE, the school opposed their entry tooth and nail. Only by a Court order 13 Valmiki children got admitted to the school in 2015. The school again wanted them out in the current academic year. The Supreme Court has reprimanded it for this. The elite class has made the life of children of sanitation workers miserable, humiliating them at every step.

Noted social activist and Magsaysay awardee Dr Sandeep Pandey was recently sacked this year from the IIT-BHU where he was a Visiting Professor on the charge of being a “Naxalite” engaging in “anti-national” activities. He was elected along with Prof Keshav Jadhav the Vice-President of the Socialist Party (India) at its founding conference at Hyderabad on May 28-29, 2011.

by Nazimuddin Siddique

In the recently concluded Assembly elections of Assam, the heterogeneous society of the North-Eastern State has accorded majority mandate to the Bharatiya Janata Party (henceforth the BJP), a party which essentially promotes religious homogeneity over social heterogeneity.

The elections have remained significant on multiple fronts. Firstly, the elections were essentially contested on the premise of ‘us' versus ‘them' or ‘self' versus ‘other'. Secondly, the mandate is marked by a major shift of votes to the BJP from the Congress and other regional parties, signifying an unprecedented maiden victory of the former, in the history of Assembly elections of Assam. Thirdly, the successful alliance that the BJP formed with two regional chauvinist parties of the State, compounded with the failure on the part of the Congress to form an alliance with the All India United Democratic Front (henceforth the AIUDF), proved crucial to the win of the BJP vis-à-vis the miserable defeat of the Congress. This paper endeavours to delve into the underlying dimensions, and investigate the factors responsible for the outcome of the elections.

The Elections

Assam has 126 Assembly seats and the elections were conducted in two phases—the first phase was held on April 4 for 65 constituencies and the second phase followed on April 11 for 61 constituencies. The elections witnessed a massive turnout of voters which amounted to 83.9 per cent of the total electors of the State and a triangular contest among three fronts. On the first front were the BJP and its allies, that is, the Bodoland Peoples Front (henceforth the BPF) and Asom Gana Parisad (henceforth the AGP). On the second front was the Congress and the third front was the AIUDF. In terms of geographic formation, Assam can be divided into three segments—Upper Assam, Lower Assam and the Barak Valley. The contest in Upper Assam was fundamentally between the Congress and the BJP combine. While in Lower Assam, by and large, the contest was between the Congress and AIUDF,1 in the Barak Valley the contest was virtually between all the three fronts. The BJP contested the elections playing the ‘outsiders' card coloured with communal hatred, while the Congress relied on its credentials of fifteen years of development. The AIUDF, on the contrary, contested the elections with the claim to be the saviour of the minorities of the State. The confidence level of the BJP rose sky-high as the party had recorded a massive win of seven seats, out of the total fourteen Lok Sabha seats of Assam in the parliamentary elections of 2014.2

The result of the elections was declared on May 19 with the BJP as the party with the highest number of seats. The party has won 60 seats, and the stupendous rise of the party in the State became even more palpably evident given the fact that in the elections of 2011 it could win only five seats. (See Table 1)

The Congress, the party which fared miserably, had won 78 seats in the 2011 elections and the number of seats had gotten reduced to a meagre 26 in this year's elections. Two regional parties, the AGP and BPF, having won 14 and 12 seats respectively, by and large have performed in a consistent manner since the last Assembly elections. The AIUDF, whose chief Badaruddin Ajmal, was expected to be the ‘kingmaker' in the elections, could manage only 13 seats in his account, and his party performed poorer than in the 2011 elections, when it had won 18 seats. (See Table 2)

Source: Election Commission of India.

In the elections, the Congress has recorded a perceptable decline in the percentage of the vote-share vis-à-vis the Assembly elections of 2011. (See Table 3) Nonetheless, among all the political parties the Congress has polled the highest percentage of votes in the elections with 31.3 per cent of the vote-share. On the contrary, a sharp rise in the percentage of votes is visible on the BJP's account, in comparison with the last Assembly elections. The percentage of votes polled by other regional parties remained, by and large, identical to that of the last Assembly elections.

The Other

The issue of the ‘outsider' or ‘illegal immigrants from Bangladesh' has occupied the centre-stage of the politics of the State since the 1980s. Now the question is: who are these ‘illegal immigrants'? Officially, the migrants who have come to Assam across the international border of Bangladesh, post-March 24, 1971, are illegal immigrants or ‘Bangladeshis'. But in the majoritarian political discourse of the State, the entire community of East Bengal origin—Muslims—is viewed as ‘Bangladeshi'.

The history of Assam is marked by the history of migration of different socio-ethnic groups. Ludden (2003) locates Assam as the region which has hosted ‘in-migration' of ‘different generations and collection of settlers each century, from prehistoric times'. In this line the last significant wave of migration took place in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, of the peasants of East Bengal, inter alia. (See Hussain 1993) Most of these peasants were Muslims and presently known as East-Bengal origin Muslims of Assam. Arguably, this social group has contributed significantly towards enriching the economy, literature, and culture of the society of Assam. This particular community's acceptance of Assamese as their mother tongue has strengthened the language and thus it is recognised as the language spoken by the majority of the population in the State. This is not to mention that over the decades the community has assimilated with the Assamese culture; in other words, they Assamised themselves comprehensively. Nonetheless, the irony is that this community has been labelled as the ‘other' in Assam for long. Bauman (1991:8) explicates ‘the other' as woman is the other of man, animal is the other of human, stranger is the other of native, abnormality is the other of norm, deviation is the other of law abiding, illness is the other of health, insanity is the other of reason, lay public is the other of expert, foreigner is the other of State subject, enemy is the other of friend.

The binary of the ‘self' and the ‘other' in the interplay of various social groups positions the ‘self' as the superior social group, while the ‘other' is the inferior one; additionally, the latter is perceived as outsider to the society of the former. Not to mention that the ‘other' is the suppressed, marginalised, exploited, degraded and ignored as the inferior social category. In Assam, the process of ‘othering' got sharpened during the 1980s when the infamous and violent Assam Movement 3 started and whose ‘methods' were ‘double-faced and proto-fascist'. (Guha 1980) Theoretically the movement was against the ‘illegal immigrants from Bangladesh', but in essence, this was a movement against the entire community of Bengali origin peasants. Gradually but unmistakably a ‘fear psychosis' has been implanted ‘into the Asamiya mind of being outnumbered' by the East Bengal origin Muslims in due course. (Ibid.) The anger, thus roused, surged to the point that multiple massacres took place in the State, the deadliest being the Nellie massacre, where no less than 3000 people from this marginalised community—mostly women and children—were brutally butchered to death in a single day. (See Siddique 2014) It is fundamentally on the premise of this ‘fear psychosis' issue that the AGP came to the power for two terms, but the party couldn't solve the ‘Bangladeshi' problem. It is noteworthy to mention here that Borooah (2013) has aptly argued that the Muslim immigration from Bangladesh is a phenomenon blown out of proportions and is nothing more than a myth.

It was again this complex ‘fear psychosis' of the Asamiya Hindus which was used in the 2016 elections by the BJP with utter cunningness. Hindutva is at the forefront of the BJP agenda, and, in the campaign the BJP has obstreperously labelled the East Bengal origin Muslims as the ‘other', and further deepened the divide by labelling them as ‘invaders' of Assam. The party went to the extent of terming the election as the “Last Battle of Saraighat” and urged the people to save the State from ‘Muslim invasion'.4 East Bengal origin Muslims, who are the majority constituent of the Muslims of Assam, were unapologetically labelled as ‘Bangladeshis' or ‘outsiders' during the entire campaign with the help of the vernacular media of the State. Furthermore, in the election discourse, the AIUDF was termed as the party of the ‘Bangladeshis' by the ‘little-nationalists' of the State.5 This strategy of spreading communal hatred by the BJP proved successful yet again, and helped unify and bring the Bengali and Assamese Hindu electors into its fold.

Clout of Alliance

Earlier this year, in the Assembly elections of Bihar, the BJP got clumsily defeated by the mahagathbandhan—a JD(U), RJD and Congress combine. The party had learned a pronounced lesson from the setback it received in those elections, and was determined to set up an alliance prior to the Assembly elections of Assam. Therefore, the party meticulously stitched together a pre-poll alliance with the two chauvinist parties of Assam, that is, the AGP and the BPF, and the alliance formation proved to be a major factor for the BJP combine's win. Selection of Sarbananda Sonowal as the chief ministerial candidate was accepted by its alliance parties without any contestation, and the same emerged as a fruitful decision for the party. As mentioned earlier, the BJP-led alliance has won a total of 86 seats in the elections. The AGP had suffered substantial decline in the earlier elections, and had virtually nothing to lose in the recent polls. Nonetheless, the party holds multiple reliable bastions and support-bases, which benefited the BJP. Though the AGP had been on the threshold of a natural death, it survived due to its robust organisational struc-tures at the grassroots level in numerous parts of the State. The organisational structure of the BJP at the grassroots level was not as robust as the AGP, and the alliance facilitated the former to utilise the organisational units of the latter. The BPF is largely composed of the ‘former cadres of the Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT), a dreaded ruthless militant group that once blazed its name with massacres and acts of extreme terror'. (Gohain 2008) The party had been consistent in showing its strength in the districts of the Bodoland Territorial Area District (BTAD). (See Siddique 2015)

In a contrasting scenario, the Congress and AIUDF failed to form a pre-poll alliance, which contributed enormously towards the gloomy debacle of both the parties. The Congress didn't pay heed to the call for forming an alliance by the AIUDF, for it was scared of losing the votes of the chauvinist forces of the State. The division of votes between the Congress and AIUDF has directly ensured the win of the BJP candidates in no less than 17 seats. These seats are Barchalla, Barkhetry, Barkhola, Barpeta, Batadroba, Bilashipara East, Golakanj, Gossaigaon, Katigorah, Lumding, Mangaldoi, Nowgong, Patharkandi, Raha, Ratabari, Sonai and Udharbond. Additionally, excessive division of secular votes in some constituencies too has contributed towards the victory of the BJP, a case in point being Sarbhog. Out of the 26 seats the Congress has won in the elections, no less than 13 seats have been won from constituencies where the Muslims are in a majority. These constituencies include Chenga, Dalgaon, Goalpara East, Goalpara West, Jania, Laharighat, Rupohihat, Abhayapuri North, Mankachar, Samaguri, Sarukhetri etc. This significantly underscores the shift of a significant number of Muslim votes from the AIUDF to the Congress.

Chaos in Congress

The chaos in the Congress too, especially in the last five years of its tenure, has contributed fairly to the unprecedented success of the BJP. The Congress Government could commit little time towards the governance of the State, as it was too busy in handling the internal feuds of the party. The fight between the Tarun Gogoi faction with the dissident faction led by Himanta Biswa Sarma pitched the entire administration into chaos for a significant period, till its last days, and the voters got rancorously disenchanted with the altercation. The central leadership too failed, or didn't pay any heed to contain the party dissidents. The fundamental reason behind this prolonged fracas was allegedly the dynastic politics of the Congress, or of Tarun Gogoi to be precise. Tarun Gogoi contested the ambition of Himanta to be the next Chief Minister, and was preparing the ground for Gaurav Gogoi, his own son, as his successor. This made Himanta disconcerted and disenchanted and he eventually left the party to join the BJP, which proved catastrophic for the Congress. Severe misrule of the State administration followed as a consequence to the chaos, and profoundly contributed to the BJP's success in the State.

Conclusions

From the above discussion it becomes obvious that multiple factors can be identified as responsible for the victory of the BJP. The ‘othering' of the Muslims, along with its divisive Hindutva agenda was accepted by a significant section of the people of the State, which translated into the victory of the BJP combine. The defeat of the Congress has given a humongous setback to the party not only in the State but even in the national stage. The Congress' vote-bank in Upper Assam got eroded in favour of the BJP thereby ensuring its humiliating defeat. The AIUDF won 18 seats in the 2011 elections; these have been reduced to 13 in these elections. The defeat of the party supremo, Badaruddin Ajmal, can be viewed as a strong message—not to take the Muslim votes for granted. Unfortunately Ajmal has been notoriously involved in dynastic politics by promoting multiple members of his family as MPs and MLAs, and this definitely made the voters highly disenchanted. The AIUDF extended its candidature to many constituencies of Upper Assam, where it has almost no support-base, and this proved significantly detrimental for the Congress and conclusively helped the saffron party in the elections.

A major section of the ‘indigenous' people of Assam has been xenophobic regarding the ‘illegal Bangladeshi immigrants' for decades. Nonetheless, these people have voted for the BJP, the party which has proposed to facilitate settlement the illegal Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh—with Indian citizenship. Is it a manifestation of the amalgamation of ‘Assamese identity' with the Hindu identity? This remains an open question. 

Endnotes

1. In most of the constituencies of Lower Assam, primarily the contest was between the AIUDF and Congress but in numerous constituencies the BJP emerged victorious on account of the high division of votes between the two parties.

2. In this paper we have deliberately not focused on the ascendency chapter of the BJP in Assam. The influence of the BJP got increased with the consolidation of Hindutva in the State. The same has been discussed at length by Bhattacharjee (2016).

3. This movement ‘propelled unprecedented terror and counter-terror' in the State. For details, see Hussain (1993, 2000).

4. The battle of Saraighat was fought between the Mughals and Ahoms in 1671. This was never a Hindu versus Muslim battle, as the Moghul side was led by Raja Ram Singh—who was a Hindu; on the other hand, one the main fighters of the Ahom General, Lachit Barphukon, was a Muslim, namely, Bagh Hazarika, also known as Ismail Siddique. For details of the battle, see Gait (2008).

5. I borrow the term ‘little-nationalist' from Guha (1980).

Reference

1. Bauman, Z. (1991), Modernity and Ambivalence, Cambridge: Polity Press.

2. Bhattacharjee, Malini (2016), “Tracing the Emergence and Consolidation of Hindutva in Assam”, Economic and Political Weekly, April 16.

3. Borooah, Vani Kant (2013), “The Killing Fields of Assam: Myth and Reality of Its Muslim Immigration”, Economic and Political Weekly, January 26.

4. Gait, Sir Edward (2008), A History of Assam, Guwahati: EBH Publishers (India).

5. Gohain, Hiren (2008), “Once More on Ethnicity and the North-East”, Economic and Political Weekly, May 24.

6. Guha, Amalendeu (1980), “Little Nationalism Turned Chauvinist: Assam's Anti-Foreigner Upsurge, 1979-80”, Special Number, October, 1980, Economic and Political Weekly.

7. Ludden, David (2003), “Where is Assam? Using Geographical History to Locate Current Social Realities” (CENISEAS Papers 1: Sanjib Baruah Series Editor), Guwahati : Centre for Northeast India South and Southeast Asia Studies, OKD Institute of Social Change and Development.

8. Hussain, Monirul (1993), The Assam Movement, Class, Ideology & Identity, Delhi: Manak Publications Pvt. Ltd.

9. ——— (2000), “State, Identity Movements and Internal Displacement in the North-East”, Economic and Political Weekly, December 16.

10. Siddique, Nazimuddin (2014), “Massacre in Assam: Explaining the Latest Round”, Economic and Political Weekly, May 31.

11. ——— (2015) “Bodoland Territorial Area District Elections 2015“, Economic and Political Weekly, August 1.

Nazimuddin Siddique is a Ph.D Student, Department of Sociology, Gauhati University. He can be contacted at e-mail: nazim10dream[at]gmail.com

When I was born I was not a child

I was a dream, a dream of revolt

that my mother, oppressed for thousands of years, dreamt.

Still it is untouched in my eyes

Covered with wrinkles of thousand years, her face

her eyes, two lakes overflowing with tears

have watered my body.....

—Sahil Parmar1

Well-known Gujarati poet Sahil Parmar's poem ‘When I Was Born' perhaps reverberates these days in Gujarat when we are witnessing a Dalit upsurge—the first of its kind at least in that region's history. It will be a talk of folklore for times to come how the flogging of Dalits in a village in Saurashtra by Hindutva fanatics suddenly erupted into a mass movement of Dalits which could catch the imagination of the people cutting across different sections of society. An attempt is being made here to understand the dynamics of the movement and its likely impact on the future trajectory of Hindutva.

I

Love Cows, Hate Human Beings?

There are moments in the trajectory of any authoritarian/fascist/Right-wing project where one of its closely guarded secrets suddenly tumbles out in the open and then it becomes difficult for it to fix it. The Hindutva brigade today finds itself in a similar situation—thanks to the Dalit upsurge in Gujarat which is still unfolding before our eyes.

The historic march to Una town of Saurashtra region—under the banner of Una Atyachar Ladat Samiti—might be over; thousands and thousands of Dalits, who had gathered there from different parts of the State and outside, might have returned home but their resolve not to undertake the despicable caste practice of manual scavenging and disposing of cattle carcasses still reverberates all over the State. And their demand before the State Government that within the next one month—by the 15th of September—it starts distributing five acres of land to each rural Dalit family for rehabilitation, is reaching far and wide and gathering fresh support.

None from the Hindutva fraternity had ever imagined that in their so-called ‘model State' itself they would be faced with such a challenge which would put their carefully crafted pan-Hindu social coalition to test. It was beyond their comprehension that Dalits—the most downtrodden section in the Varna hierarchy—who had been slowly roped in down the years in the Hindutva politics and a section amongst them had also become a party to the anti-minority violence in 2002, would one fine morning turn their backs on them and readily join hands with the ‘other' demanding a life of human dignity and putting in jeopardy the very raison d'etre of the project.

And, as can be expected in such a situation, they literally floundered when they were asked to react to this uprising. The multiple voices which emerged from the broader ‘Parivar' were an indication of their confusion.

No doubt talking in multiple tongues has always been a part of their overall strategy but this time it also demonstrated disorientation in their own ranks. The moot question became whether to uphold the perpetrators—who were following the script—or support the victims. And thus one found the Prime Minister exposing the majority of the cow vigilantes as being anti-social elements and asking the Home Department to prepare a dossier about them and another significant leader of the same ‘family' denouncing such characterisation as being ‘anti-Hindu'. The confusion was understandable. In fact, it was for the first time in recent times that Hindutva Supremacists are discovering that the more they push one of their key agenda centering around cow politics—which has served them well till date—the more there is the possibility that their dream of Hindu Unity would see further fissures. (Vidya Subrahmaniam describes it as ‘A reverse Ram Mandir Moment' in her article on present situation in UP. http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/its-mayawati-versus-modi-in-up/article9022511.ece? ref=topnavwidget&utm _source=topnavdd&utm_me dium=topnavdropdown widget&utm_campaign= topnavdropdown) Apart from Dalits, who have come under increasing attack at the hands of overzealous ‘cow protectors' and are slowly turning against the ‘Parivar' itself, a large section of the peasant population is peeved over the fact that politics around the cow has made their life miserable as they are not able to do away with cattles who have become old or have stopped producing milk. One of the couplets by Saint Tulsidas captures Hindutva's plight beautifully: ‘Bhayal Gati Saap Chachunder Jaisi..'.

II

“Rashtravadi toh hamare saath hain, humein Dalit aur pichchde ko saath lana hai”

Everybody knows that there was nothing ‘unusual'—as far as depradations unleashed by Hindutva fanatics under the name of cow protection were concerned—about what happened to Dalits from Mota Samadhiyala village when they were skinning a dead cow.

One can recollect that such attacks were common even in those days when the BJP did not have a majority of its own at the Centre. A classic example has been the killing of five Dalits in Dulina (Jhajjar)—hardly fifty kilometres away from the national Capital—who were similarly skinning dead cows, by a cow vigilante mob (2003) before the Dulina Police Station itself with leading officers of the police and administration remaining mute witnesses. A leading Hindutva leader (dead sometime back) even ‘justified' the killings by citing reference to ancient Hindu sciptures claiming that in the ‘Puranas cows were more valued than human beings'. The killings definitely led to an outrage; there were few symbolic arrests as well but the commotion died down soon and in fact the perpetrators of this massacre were decorated as ‘cow protectors'.

In fact, most such attacks in recent times had been rather more brutal. To name a few, lynching of two young men after their brutal torture near Latehar, Jharkhand by cow vigilantes; killing an adolescent near Udhampur while he was sleeping in a truck by throwing petrol bomb under the suspicion that the truck was carrying beef; near riot-like situation which emerged in Palwal, Haryana because of the cow vigilantes' attack on a truck carrying meat or the way two transporters were fed cowdung laced with urine when they were found transporting cattle for sale near Gurgaon. Scan the internet to watch the ‘valour' of these fanatics and you will find scores of such criminal attacks on innocents. Videos after videos are available showing how these self-proclaimed cow protectors brutalised the people for carrying cows from one place to the other or because of suspicion that they were carrying beef and how there was no action against them from the law and order people.

But thrashing of Dalits from Mota Samadhiyala village by cow vigilantes, uploading the video of their ‘valour' on the social media has proved to be a turning-point.

Anybody can see that the Dalit uprising which the Una incident has triggered has inadvertently or so unearthed the ‘well guarded secret' behind this exclucivist project—where it is clear even to a layperson now that for Hindutva, Dalits or the other marginalised are lesser human beings or the ‘other', whatever might be its claims about the great samrasta it upholds. There is a growing realisation that the formal posturing of Hindutva politics, where it is presented /understood in the form of religious imaginaries where ‘minorities'—may be Muslim or Christian—are portrayed as the ‘other' is one thing but essentially the whole idea of a Hindu Rashtra is an attempt to further legitimise the Brahminical project of hegemonising and homogenising the Indian society where the secondary position of Dalits has received religious sanction also. An inkling of how they view Dalits and the backwards—when they are talking among themselves—can be had from the recent comments by PM Modi when he spoke at length at a meeting which was attended by 400 top leaders of the BJP, at the end of the 15-day patriotism drive. Newspaper reports tell us that he called on his party to continue playing the nationalism card which is ‘central to the BJP's ideology'. Perhaps the most telling comment made by him was the following: “Rashtravadi toh hamare saath hain, humein Dalit aur pichchde ko saath lana hai. The nationalists are with us, we need to bring Dalits and backward groups.”(http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/nationalists-are-with-us-lets-reach-out-to-dalits-backwards-pm-modi-to-party-2993281/)

Was it just a slip of tongue or an admission of the truth that for the Hindutva non-backwards, non-Dalits, that is, the upper castes, have sole claim over the nation and Dalits as well as backwards outside its purview need to be brought closer. (http://scroll.in/article/814769/the-daily-fix-what-did-modi-mean-when-he-said-there-is-a-chasm-between-dalits-and-nationalists)

Perhaps a marker of their continuing indifference or disdain towards the plight of the Dalits (forget those Bollywood-type dialogues ‘Shoot Me but Do Not Shoot My Dalit Brothers') could also be gauged from the fact that when the Dalit upsurge was at its peak in the State, the provocative statement by one of their own MLAs from Telangana who ‘justified' the beatings and uploaded a video on facebook did not prompt them to take any action. His words were: “Jo Dalit gaye ke maas ko le ja raha tha, jo uski pitai hui hai, woh bohut hi achhi hui hai [Those Dalits who were taking the cow, the cow meat, those who were beaten, it was a very good thing to happen].”(http://scroll.in/latest/812903/anyone-who-kills-cows-deserves-to-be-beaten-says-bjp-mla-raja-singh)

III

Unpacking the Gujarat Model!

Recently Jignesh Mewani, the convener of the ‘Una Dalit Atyachar Ladat Samiti' which is spearheading this upsurge, was in the Capital to communicate the message of the movement to a broader audience and also garner support for the Rail Roko programme organised by the front from September 15. He underlined the resolve of the Dalits that they are firm in their decision not to clean up other people's dirt, nor to lift carcasses of dead cattles. He told the audience how twenty thousand Dalits had gathered in their rally in Ahmedabad and have taken an oath not to undertake any such profession which they have been condemned to because of the Varna hierarchy and are further stigmatised because of that. In a tongue-in-cheek comment he added:

“We (Dalits) are not going to clean up people's dirt any more. Modiji, now you are welcome to experience the spirituality that is supposed to be there in scavenging.”

(http://www.telegraphindia.com/1160821/jsp/frontpage/story_103638.jsp#.V74anPl97IU)

Jignesh—who is an advocate and an activist—was referring to Karmayog, a collection of Modi's speeches to trainee IAS officers, brought out by a Gujarat PSU, in which he had said that scavenging was an “experience in spirituality” for the Valmikis (a sub-caste of Dalits). (See: https://kafila.org/2014/02/12/modi-and-the-art-of-disappearing-of-untouchability/)

Explaining the genesis of the movement and why the flogging incident of Dalits by self-proclaimed cow vigilantes affiliated to a Hindutva organisation triggered the uprising, he shared details of the lives of deprivation and discrimination and atrocities faced by Dalits under the much-talked-about Gujarat Model. According to him,

—there are thousands of cases of atrocities against Dalits every year;

—atrocities continued to rise during Mr Modi's chief ministership which lasted for 13 years;

—there are more than 55,000 Dalits who are still engaged in the work of scavenging;

—one lakh sanitation workers are still not getting minimum wages;

—Dalits in 119 villages in Gujarat are living under police protection;

—the rate of conviction in cases of Dalit atrocities is merely three per cent.

According to him, a glaring example of denial of justice to Dalits has been the killing of three Dalits by the police with ‘AK 47 rifles as if they were terrorists' in Thangarh in Gujarat in the year 2012 and despite the fact that more than a lakh Dalits demonstrated against these killings, there was no action by the government against the accused police personnel. (As we go to press one hears that the Gujarat Government has announced an SIT to look into the killings and has also raised compensation for the affected families.)

When someone in the audience posed a question about availability of land in the State, Jignesh shared figures about availability of land under various schemes and how dominant castes/classes have been in actual possession of such land meant for the exploited and the marginalised. According to him, thousands of acres of land with the state that it got during the Bhoodan aandolan have also not been distributed. He further shared lesser known provisions about the SC-ST sub-plan which talks about ‘purchase of land for its distribution to the landless' in case of its unavailability. His simple poser which struck a deep chord among the audience was that ‘if under the name of development the state can allocate thousands of acres of land at throwaway prices to the Ambanis, Adanis and the Tatas, why should Dalits be denied their rightful due?' He also explained how the recent changes undertaken by the State Government under the Land Acquisition Act have many ‘draconian' provisions inherent in it where the ‘consent' clause has been deleted—means if the government wishes to hand over land to the corporates for ‘development' work, then it can simply take over the peasant's land supposedly for ‘public good', offer some symbolic compensation and need not seek her/his consent.

To the poser as to what would happen if Dalits leave their ‘traditional profession' which grants them some sort of ‘economic security', he quoted Ambedkar who had asked his followers during the historic Mahad Satyagrah (1927) that they should get ready to ‘die of hunger' to live a life of dignity but should never undertake such stigmatised professions.

Gujarat Model: Dalit, tribal, OBC landless denied surplus land, Patels “received” 12 lakh acres

Fresh facts have come to light suggesting that in Gujarat there has been extremely questionable progress in the allocation of surplus land to the landless, acquired from big landlords under the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960. Based on RTI applications, the District Registrar of Land Records, Junagadh, has admitted that out of 11 of 16 villages for which information was sought, “no survey of surplus land has taken place” for the last 24 years; hence there was no allocation.

In another instance, in Navsari district, the Gujarat Government declared that between 2006 and 2008, while Modi ruled the State, it had “allocated” land to 7542 landless beneficiaries; but a year later, it admitted the land titles were yet to be given to 3616 beneficiaries. “However, now, on the basis of an RTI reply, we know that things have not changed even in 2015.”

In an article published in Dalit Adhikar, a Gujarati periodical, Jignesh Mewani says: “Information with us suggests that the Gujarat Government, in all, acquired 163,808 acres land under the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960, and we feel most of it has been allocated to the landless only on paper. The landless, mainly Dalits, tribals and belonging to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs), haven't yet got actual possession of land.”

Mewani says: “Chief beneficiaries of the land-to-the-tiller policy have been the upper-caste Patels. About 55,000 Patels were allocated 12 lakh acres of land declared mainly in Saurashtra and Kutch regions of Gujarat. But as for Dalit landless agriculturists, they have received not even 12 inches of land. Only a very small section, which is very close to the powers-that-be, has gained.”

According to Mewani, “Let us give a sample of the Gujarat Government's good governance: We made in all 65 RTI applications between 2011 and 2015 to find out facts about allocation of just 6500 acres of land in different villages. Yet, officials are refusing to give copies of land titles which may show that land has been actually handed to the beneficiaries.”

Associated with the Jan Sangharsh Manch, a Gujarat-based human rights organisation, Mewani says: “Of the 163,808 acres of surplus land, 70,000 acres of land is under dispute with the revenue tribunal, Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court. While this land may not be allocated, there is a need to answer as to why the rest of the land, too, remains unallocated.”

In fact, says Mewani, there are 15,519 acres of surplus land, on which there is “no dispute” at all, yet the Gujarat Government is “refusing to act”.....

(http://www.milligazette.com/news/13251-gujarat-model-dalit-tribal-obc-landless-denied-surplus-land-patels-received-12-lakh-acres)

Jignesh's claims about continuous denial of justice to Dalits or the great hiatus which exists between claims by the government and the actual situation on the ground is a fact which even earlier reports by the NHRC have admitted. A cursory glance at its 2009 report had declared that Gujarat accounted for 3813 complaints of human rights violation of the total of 94,559 cases from across the country, which was less than only Uttar Pradesh and Delhi. (The Indian Express, March 20, 2009)

A 23-page confidential report, submitted by the State Social Justice Department to the State Chief Secretary and legal departments, provides glaring examples of ‘mishandling' of cases registered under Prevention of Atrocities Act against SC/STs. (The Indian Express, September 15, 2006). The rate of conviction of cases under the Prevention of Atrocity Act against SC/STs in Gujarat is a mere 2.5 per cent while the rate of acquittal is 97.5 per cent.

The report provides details of how cases are not investigated properly by the police and the hostile role played by public prosecutors during the time of trials.

—The Act clearly stipulates that offences which are registered under this Act cannot be investigated by an officer below the rank of Deputy SP but more than 4000 such cases have been investigated by Police Inspectors or Police Sub-Inspectors.

—Acquittal of the perpetrator because the victim not identified as a member of the SC or ST community. Reason, not attaching caste certificate of the victim with the case papers.

—Public prosecutors' false claims before the courts that the Act has been modified by the State Government altough it is known that it is a Central Act.

—Granting of anticipatory bails although there is no such provision in the Act. Interestingly the Parliamentary Committee on SC and ST affairs had also expressed concern over such anticipatory bails granted ‘in atrocity cases in the State of Gujarat'.

In fact a detailed and systematic study of 400 judgements done by Vajibhai Patel, the Secretary of the Council for Social Justice (March 11, Year 2005, No. 106, http://www.sabrang.com) had compelled the government to work on this 23-page report. It tells us that utterly negligent police investigation at both the higher and lower levels, coupled with a distinctly hostile role played by the public prosecutors, is the main reason for the collapse of cases filed under the Atrocities Act. It is worth noting that he has meticulously documented these judgements delivered under this Act since April 1, 1995 in the Special Atrocity Courts set up in 16 districts of the State. The study also blasts the common perception that the inefficacy of this law is due to false complaints being lodged or compromises between the parties; in actuality it is a complicit State that has rendered the Act toothless.

IV

‘Keep Cow's Tail With You, And Give Us Our Land'

On March 20, 1927, Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar led the Mahad satyagraha—for drinking water from the Chavdar tank at Mahad. This was the “foundational struggle” of the Dalit movement, a movement for water—and for caste annihilation.

In his statement at the time, Dr Ambedkar put the movement in the broadest possible context. Why do we fight?—he asked. It is not simply for drinking water; drinking the water will not give us very much. It is not even a matter of only of our human rights, though we fight to establish the right to drink water. But our goal is no less than that of the French Revolution...

And so Dalits went to drink the water at Mahad. They were met with ferocious repression: attack by the caste Hindus followed. The Dalits retreated, came back several months later on December 25 for a renewed struggle, and since the Collector had given an injunction against any further attempt, Ambedkar decided to honour this and instead burned the Manusmriti. A fitting climax to the first battle of dalit liberation!

(https://seekingbegumpura.wordpress.com/2013/03/22/the-mahad-satyagraha/)

The Dalit uprising in Gujarat and the manner in which it has rattled the State Government and severely impacted the BJP's well-laid-out plans to consolidate its support-base among the Dalits has been a whiff of fresh air for every peace and justice-loving person in this part of Asia.

What has caught the imagination of the people is the key slogan of the movement which says: ‘Keep Cow's Tail With You, And Give Us Our Land'. It is a single slogan which encapsulates the question of caste discrimination as well as communalism and puts forward a positive demand to fight material deprivation—which has been an integral part of the sanctified hierarchy of caste.

The emphasis of the movement that Dalits leave the ‘stigmatised professions'—which have condemned them to the lowest position on the Varna/Caste hierarchy—and wholehearted participation of thousands and thousands of Dalits in it, the militancy it has added to the Dalit movement has broken a new ground in the Dalit movement.

No doubt, there was a lot of spontaniety in the movement but the way it moved ahead and added a new edge to Dalit assertion could not have been imagined without the young leadership which took charge. Their inclusive approach also helped them rope in on a common agenda activists of other organisations or attract many such people who are opposed to or uncomfortable with the Hindutva politics. Inclusiveness of the movement was also evident in the fact that Muslims—who have been put in a very miserable condition post-2002 carnage—also joined the Azaadi Kooch to Una. Many welcomed it on the way in large numbers and also travelled to Una in their hundreds for the August 15 Independence Day rally held there.

A less discussed aspect of this upsurge is the fact that Dalits are merely seven per cent of the State's population and have not had a long history of militant movement but despite these limitations the impact of the movement has been phenomenal. Not only did it compel the BJP to change its Chief Minister for mishandling the movement, but it also disturbed its Dalit outreach plans elsewhere.

Remember, barring the historic struggle led by Dadasaheb Gaikwad—a close comrade of Dr Ambedkar—in the late 1950s in Maharashtra where the issue of land was highlighted, rare have been occasions in post-independence times when the issue of material deprivation of Dalits was creatly integrated with socio-cultural discrimination and political marginaliation. Una has changed the picture. It has also raised many unheard of slogans in the Dalit movement. ‘Dalits of the World Unite', ‘Workers of the World Unite' or ‘Jai Bhim', ‘Lal Salaam' and ‘Jai Savitribai'. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= 9jqgA75o5PE)

Analysts have rightly pointed out it that the Dalit movement in recent times has largely remained limited/focussed on what can be called the issue of ‘identity/asmita' but Una marks a new beginning where the issue of ‘existence/astitva' has also come to the fore. Possibly gone are the days when ‘victimhood' was highlighted or the rhetoric of ‘Brahminism down-down' was repeated ad nauseum and a careful silence was maintained about economic issues. As a revolutionary activist shared in his e-mail, ‘[a]n important thing to note is that the Una struggle can also be seen as part of a continuum where a social movement connects itself with anti-systemic struggles.'

Definitely the Una struggle, which has sent shivers down the spine of the Hindutva Supremacists, cannot be seen in isolation. It is rather a continuation of growing Dalit assertion against Hindutva depradations, especially after the ascendance of the Modi-led regime at the Centre. The realisation has slowly sunk in that not only does it want to attack affirmative action programmes but its economic policies—coupled with its regressive sociocultural agenda—are bringing ruin to the Dalits and other marginalised sections of society. It is becoming more and more clear to them that the people in power want a docile/pliable Dalit polity which can dance to their tune. They want Ambedkar but not the real one, only his sanitised version. How much they are scared about the real Ambedkar and his ideas can be seen from a decision of the Anandi Patel-led government: it literally dumped four lakh copies of Ambedkar's biography, which it had printed for massive distribution, as the author of the book had also included 22 vows which Ambedkar recited with his followers at the time of conversion to Buddhism.

And this realisation has given rise to a tremendous reaction. Ranging from the successful campaign against derecognition of Ambekdar Periyar Study Circle active in Chennai, IIT by the management (https://kafila.org/2015/06/05/no-to-ambedkar-periyar-in-modern-day-agraharam/), or the countrywide movement—where students and youth were in the forefront—after the ‘institutional murder of Rohith Vemula' (https://kafila.org/2016/01/22/long-live-the-legacy-of-comrade-vemula-rohith-chakravarthy-statement-by-new-socialist-initiative-nsi/), or the massive mass mobilisation against demolition of the Ambedkar Bhavan in Mumbai by the BJP-led government or the ‘Zameen Prapti Movement' in Punjab led by the revolutionary Left where Dalits have come together to form collectives etc., one can easily see that such assertion is increasing in its intensity and militancy.

In Punjab, the share of the Dalits in the 1,58,000 acres of Panchayat land is 52,667 acres. There are also legal entitlements for them in the Nazool lands. However, the actual possession of these lands has remained with the landlords and rich peasants. As per the agricultural census 2010-11, the SCs in Punjab, who are a third of its population, owned just 6.02 per cent of the land holdings and 3.2 per cent of the land area of the State. Of these operational holdings also a large proportion (nearly 85 per cent) are said to be unviable due to the small size of less than five hectares.

Since 2014, the Dalit peasantry, organised under the banner of ZPSC (Zameen Prapti Sangharsh Samiti) and holding firmly aloft its red flag in the blazing sun, has begun to assert their claim over what is rightfully theirs. These lands used to be auctioned to dummy candidates of landlords; a gaushala in Sangrur district has been given land for 30 years at the rate of Rs 7000 an acre by the Akali-BJP Government of the State whereas the price for Dalits is over Rs 20,000 an acre. This struggle, that is spreading in districts of South Punjab, has been met with police and landlord repression, false FIRs against ‘unknowns', but the struggle rages on like a spreading blaze.

(https://nbsdelhi.wordpress.com/2016/08/24/hail-the-assertion-by-landless-dalits-of-punjab-and-gujarat-of-their-right-to-land-land-to-the-tiller-key-to-annihilating-caste/)

If the unexpected shift of a section of the Dalit masses—for various reasons—towards the BJP was an important factor in the latter's ascent to power in the year 2014, this growing assertion of Dalits is a proof that they cannot be hoodwinked anymore. With the real agenda of these Hindutva Supremacists out in the open—which is witnessed not only in its attacks on the right to life and right to livelihood of every exploited and marginalised section but also in its hurry to co-opt Ambedkar and bulldoze every element of Dalit assertion—the battlelines have been finally drawn.

And the unfolding Dalit uprising has added new lustre to it.

FOOTNOTE

• Translated from the original Gujarati by G.K. Vankar. (http://roundtableindia.co.in/lit-blogs/?tag=sahil-parmar)

Subhash Gatade is a writer and Left activist who is associated with the New Socialist Initiative.

There is a new generation of Kashmiri Muslims in the Valley who have little or no personal acquaintance with Pandits. To most of them, stories of syncretic living in schools, colleges, work-places, eateries, sports arenas, cultural festivals, weddings and cremations are largely imbibed as hearsay. Their most acute experiences are embedded in three decades of militancy, and state repression. Most of them believe that the state's accession to India was both coerced and illegal, and, in contrast to the secular Kashmiri nationalism of the first decade after independence (Sheikh Abdullah had said to Jinnah, “what can a Sufi Kashmir have to do with a theocratic Pakistan?”), the nationalism of this new generation is tinged with religious faith and observance. (In colonised Algeria, many modern Algerian women took to the veil as a political gesture of defiance.)

I am often among some of the brightest young Kashmiris at academic seminars, and intense social and personal interactions. It would be a grave mistake to assume that this generation, despite their conformism with outword religious forms, has any love lost for the prospect of an oppressive theocratic existence or state. What may seem in them a diminution of secular ideals is profoundly a response to the everyday breaches of that ideal all over India, especially lately. Their anxiety at not being reduced to a minority springs precisely from such a concatenation of national occurrences, pertaining particularly to stories of how even highly accomplished and professional Muslims are treated socially on the mainland. Which is another way of saying that their cynicism and skepticism about claims made on behalf of the virtues of Indian democracy is deep and based both on analysis and experience. They can produce little evidence of the operations of a credible democracy in the state after the watershed arrest of Sheikh Abdullah in August 1953 leading up to the decisive rupture—a brutal one, you might say—with any democratic hope in the ‘elections' of 1987. Nor can they be shown any substantial evidence of the least efforts made by the Indian state to truly place trust in their allegiance and aspiration, or to integrate them without discrimination and with felt dignity and acceptance with the life of the nation. The face of the state they most are familiar with is that of men in khaki

As I have said, the vanguard of this new generation are some of the finest scholars, researchers and teachers I have known, a generation not amenable to wishy-washy enticements.

What would be another grave misperception is to think that this generation is enamoured of Pakistan or are inclined to consider a merger with Pakistan even as a mentionable political option. This fact needs to be emphasised. In 2005, a Mori International poll conducted among the Muslim-dominated areas of the State of Jammu and Kashmir revealed that 59 per cent wished to be independent, 35 desired to retain their Indian citizenship, and six per cent opted for merger with Pakistan. I can say with confidence that were a poll conducted today, that six per cent would be down to minus. Those on the mainland who do not see this point do not know a great deal about the people of Kashmir. And do not be fooled by the green flags that appear from time to time; these are semiotics of taunt against coercive Hindutva nationalism. If the faultline between the dominant sentiment on the mainland and in the Valley follows a denominational divide, that between the Valley and Pakistan is an ethnic one. Kashmiris have known from early times how the Punjabi-Wadera dominated state of Pakistan has dealt with even the Mohajirs who were originators of the idea of Pakistan, not to speak of the Balochis, the Hazaaras, the Bengalis, and now even the Sindhis. Given that history, nobody in the Valley, barring the patently Islamic sections, is fool enough to think that the Pakistani ruling elite would treat Kashmiri-speaking Muslims any better.

With every passing day, it seems even to me that the political situation in the Valley may be fast becoming irretrievable. It hardly seems likely that the familiar gangrenous status quo can or ought to continue. It is this realisation that keeps me here from recounting in a routine way the crests and troughs of governance and of electoral politics in the State in any detail. This, even as there have been time-spans (for example, 2002-2008) which seemed to raise ‘normalcy' both internally and between India and Pakistan to a level of hope not experienced before. My assessment is that the time to count resolution of the problem of disaffection in Kashmir, in terms of the state of tourism or of successful yatras, is over.

So, what may be the factors to consider as different stake-holders seek, with varying degrees of earnestness or honesty, to bring Kashmir to a consensual resolution?

If Pakistan were to be left out of the equation for now (Pakistan may or may not have a Kashmir problem, India does) and a round-table were attempted that would include all our internal stake-holders, what might result? At two ends of the ideological spectrum, the RSS/BJP and the Gilani faction would argue their maximalist positions as full integration with the Union and merger with Pakistan severally; the JKLF would route for independence for both parts of the divided state; the Congress might make vague postulations about inducing greater democracy into the electoral politics and institutional life of the State; the PDP most likely would reiterate allegiance to the accession but make a case for ‘self-rule', meaning thereby an opening up to the occupied part of the state in terms of commerce and a broad spectrum of social and cultural inter-penetration, and the National Conference would equally reiterate their commitment to the accession but contend that autonomy based on the terms of the accession be restored in full. From among the ‘separatists' the position of the Mirwaiz faction might turn out to be the most creative and constructive, once some credibility was generated in the parleys. As custodian of Kashmir's enlightened Islam, he would have most anxiety about the other variety of the faith as propagated by the Salafist ISIS.

Two things might be safely assumed: no stake-holder, once some serious conversation began, would with any conviction consider force, overt or covert, indigenous or extraneous, an option worth the taking; and no stake-holder, since all as of now seek a resolution on the basis of a commitment to the undivided state as at present constituted, would insist for long that any viable consensus could be obtained based exclusively on any one single position offered by any stake-holder.

This seeming jamboree of contentions must not be seen as either unique or intractable. Any number of instances from global contentions of this nature can be cited in defence of that optimism.

Time would show that the wholly unaccep-table preferences would turn out to be a referendum and any thought of merger with Pakistan, or the insistence on an erasure of commitments made with a view to obtaining a non-consensual assimilation of the State into the Union. If that is understood, what would be left would be a body of considerations wherein a formal connection with the Indian state and Constitution is retained but a structure of institutional arrangements worked out that would fully and unequivocally honour and restore the terms of autonomy upon which the Delhi Agreement of 1952 was formulated. This, with the further extension of internal democracy that would accord with the suggestions that were made by the Committee on Devolution of the early fifties headed then by the late Balraj Puri—one that would involve statutory establishment of Assembly structures in the three parts of the State, with real and operative authority of local governance bestowed on panchayats and zilla parishads. The Union would undertake to underwrite the finances that would be required to arm the State with schemes of investment worked out wholly by the elected bodies of Jammu and Kashmir, and schemes formulated in relation to education and employment that would offer a wide spectrum of integrative opportunities to the Kashmiri youth in national projects and structures of power. Depending on the clout and willingness of political authorities in PoK, an interactive life of the two parts of Kashmir may be affected without any change of borders thereof. By general consent and commitment, the return of the Pandits to the Valley may be worked out with all stakeholders party to that commitment. The Army may be withdrawn to the borders, and the Kashmiri judiciary and bureaucracy empowered in real terms to deliver justice and governance. The writ of the Central Election Commission and of the Supreme Court of India may be retained by mutual consent as guarantors of unblemished electoral democracy and justice without colour.

It has been seen the world-over that extreme positions to such disputes have a way of sidling towards a workable medial arrangement that satisfies a maximum section of the populace and isolates those whose positions patently offer no arguable way out. The Hindu Right-wing would have to understand that mere slogans of unity and threat of coercive occupation would not only be self-defeating but in course of further time bring matters to a point where separation would become a real prospect. Just as those that seek for merger with Pakistan would need to confront popular Kashmiri nationalism that distrusts, as I have said above, the Pakistani state dominated by a Punjabi ethnicity and a brutal military regime. Sheikh Abdullah had presciently understood that a Punjabi domi-nated Pakistan that treats its other nationalities as vassals would do no better with the Kashmiris. And those who seek independence would need to confront the prospects—geo-political and economic—that would ensue from a severance of the Muslim parts of the State from the rest. Many educated Kashmiri Muslims will tell you privately that given the preponderance of ‘crocodiles' waiting in the wings, the ‘sovereignty' of an ‘independent' Valley would be pretty short-lived, and something worse than what Kashmiris have experienced thus far.

But for any of that to happen, the Indian state must acknowledge fully and finally that it has committed perfidies of mistrust and betrayal with the Kashmiris, and that, unless it wishes things to come to an unlikely pass, it must boldly and comprehensively honour all commitments made. One is not even mentioning the implication that any major mishap in the Valley would have for the Muslim citizens in the rest of India, or in several other parts of the country where incipient disgruntlement of a real nature could yield a horrendously uncontrollable future.

Let this not seem a utopian offering. The quality of anger in the Valley this time does not compare either in motivation or rigour with the often cited events of 2008 and 2010. The fact of the RSS/BJP now in power is not only a new one but a qualitatively deleterious one, however sanguine the explanations offered on behalf of the present coalition arrangement. Given the fact of the RSS/BJP in control of state power at the Centre, Kashmiris in the Valley see the prospect of the realisation of a very bad dream, one that they have fought off with determination ever since the whittling down of autonomy began to be a central project in contravention of covenants made at the time of the accession. The Indian ruling class needs to evolve to a new bold embrace of decentralised and pluralist democratic arrangement with the federated units if the unity of which it speaks so stridently is to be achieved at all.

What the Indian state has failed to demonstrate thus far is that the people of Kashmir are as integral to its affections and concerns as the land in which they live. This lacuna needs to be addressed and remedied without further denial or prevarication. No assertive nationalist sloganeering is likely to paper over the widespread and deeply internalised estrangement that renders customary palliatives of little use any more. Contrarily, those seeking to secede from the Union need equally honestly to acknowledge the furthest limits of what the Indian state can do, and to aim for the most consequential extensions of democracy and autonomy that can be negotiated. As suggested above, the Kashmir imbroglio does not promise complete fulfilment or satisfaction to any stake-holder, but many times better for all parties in the fray.

(Courtesy: The Indian Express Online MediaPrivate Limited)

The author, who taught English literature at the University of Delhi for over four decades and is now retired, is a prominent writer and poet. A well-known commentator on politics, culture and society, he wrote the much acclaimed Dickens and the Dialectic of Growth. His latest book, The Underside of Things—India and the World: A Citizen's Miscellany, 2006-2011, came out in August 2012.

by Suranjita Ray

On August 15, 2016 we celebrated our 70th Independence Day. The least one does is to recollect the great sacrifices of our freedom fighters for the country and for us to see this day. Such celebrations remind us of what independence gave us. For the ruling party it becomes an opportunity to take pride in listing what its political regime has achieved during its tenure in one of the largest democracies of the world. While the anti-colonial struggles widened the inner meanings of Freedom, Right to Life, and Human Dignity, for the majority in contemporary India, experiencing freedom and human dignity remains a constant struggle against the social, economic, political and cultural oppressions and exploitations. For many it is difficult to recover from what they have experienced over the years. Lives of people are embodiments of conflicts that have increased between the state and its people.

The state is not only supposed to represent its people but also protect their rights and freedom. From what is continually happening around us, we see that there is an increasing trust deficit between the people and the state. And I fear the widening of this distrust. Incidents of violence against the Dalit community like the one in Una, hanging two Muslim men to death from a tree for cattle trading in a Jharkhand village, killing of Mohammad Akhlaq by a lynch mob in Dadri, the attacks on Narendra Achyut Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, M. M. Kalburgi, Perumal Murugan, and many others to crush the voice of dissent, and several similar living experiences of the people only help us to realise that the callous state is being relived. It is relived in not only denying the right to live with dignity but also in denying dignity to the dead.

Humanitarian Catastrophe

Dana Majhi, a tribal man in Kalahandi, wrapped his wife Amanga Dei's body in old sheets from the bed at the hospital in Bhawanipatna (the district headquarters) when she died from tuberculosis in the early hours of August 24, 2016. He carried his wife's body on his shoulders and started walking to his home in Melghar village in Thuamul Rampur block about 60 kilometres away. The district hospital authorities ostensibly refused to arrange for a van as Dana Majhi had no money. Despite several requests, he was not helped. Left with no option he had to carry his wife's body, as his 12-year-old daughter walked weeping by his side.

It was after they had walked for 10 kilometres that some youths, who saw them, alerted the local officials and an ambulance was sent to take the body to Melghar village. This is not the first time that a person had to carry a body in a such manner. Similar incidents have been reported in the past. Recurrence of such tragedies has only reprojected the cruel state which refuses to learn the right lessons from its history. It is unfortunate that Kalahandi continues to be dragged deeper into the quagmire of humanitarian catastrophe. The tribal people in this region are vulnerable to the processes of systemic deprivations, exploitations and violations of human rights.

The complete disregard for human life has exposed a brutal state in a way that is impossible to comprehend. The state has become one with which the majority of the poor and deprived can no longer identify. While the state has not cared much about the human sufferings despite its constitutional responsibility that makes it accountable for its actions to the people, can the exploited and oppressed disown the state? Despite the growing distrust between the state and its people, the state is needed even more than ever before. The decision not to provide support to the poor tribal man when he needed it the most shows the failure of the state. Perhaps the authorities did not anticipate the consequences that will follow their decision. This is a serious mistake.

Political Mandate

Such tragedies spell calamity for the democratic governments. Preventing such crises in future should be a priority for the state. It is vital for the state to look beyond its narrowly defined political mandate as political parties across ideological divides have only campaigned for more funds during the elections to build infrastructures. Two decades after the imple-mentation of the Long Term Action Plan (LTAP) in the KBK (comprising eight districts—Kalahandi, Bolangir, Koraput, Nuapada, Nabarangpur, Rayagada, Sonepur and Malkangiri)) region, and huge grants poured into this region, nothing much has changed for the tribal people of Kalahandi. People have to travel 60 kilometres to reach a hospital for treatment without facilities. The Kalahandi experience shows that despite the positive responses of the state to pressures from the people's rights movements and the fear of defeat of the ruling parties at the polls which brought about development programmes, successive governments for more than two decades have not been able to ameliorate the conditions of destitution and prevent the vulnerability of the tribal people, in particular, to the processes of alienation, deprivation and impoverishment that persist in this region. Though Kalahandi had declared its success in conquering famine (in narrower terms mass mortality), it has failed to prevent the tribal people from becoming vulnerable to the processes of hunger and famishment, which have a complex genealogy, and have been a subject of endless debate in the media, courts, Legislative Assembly, policy research and public forums. They raise larger questions of justice to the citizens in a democratic state.

It is imperative to understand the huge gaps between policy reforms and their implications in the context of democracy where the state has its constitutional responsibilities towards its citizens. The construction of structures of dominance and an analysis of the institutions and practices of control reveal that persisting poverty is the result of the cumulative distress that is caused by depriving the tribal people of their access, ownership and control over the resources of livelihood. The dialectical relations between the state and its people explain the process of democratic transitions, but that has not changed the class character of the state. In fact, the state is constrained by its very class character to intervene in the structures and practices of hegemony, which has rather got consolidated in recent years. The history of Kalahandi had seen the subjugation of the tribal people economically, socially, politically and culturally. This raises pertinent questions about the kind of democracy that is practised in the region in particular and elsewhere with similar experiences.

The state has made all possible attempts to make the growing conflict invisible—between the dominant class and the subordinates, and between the state and its people. It has been successful at times in weaving the conflicts and reworking the strategies that appeal to the vast majority, without annoying the dominant class. The two-pronged strategy of the government to enhance the capability of the poor through its rights-based approach, as well as its alliance with the economically dominant class to privilege the interest of the corporate world have added to the paradoxes.

The portrayal of the state as being trapped within the webs of hegemonic forces needs to be questioned as it has been a conscious decision of the democratic state to reinforce such forces for its political gains. The denial of dignity to the dead shows that the state is not an ‘impartial power' which is accountable to the people. It not only maintains but also reproduces the inequalities of everyday life by prioritising the interest of the privileged class. Though democratic pressures have compelled the state to intervene and the inclusive society has enhanced the social capital of its citizens, it has not built their political capital, which has remained confined to participation in elections and not effective citizenship.

Blame-game

Though Kalahandi has always returned to the news to trouble the government officials, it is quite normal for both the ruling and Opposition parties to use such opportunities to claim their respective achievements only as attempts to win the ballots of the people. Bhakta Charan Das, a former MP from Kalahandi, has ‘expressed his anguish that despite its promise of development and better health care for the tribals and Dalits the Naveen Patnaik Govern-ment has done little'. He further said that ‘he had arranged two ambulances when he was an MP for the Bhawanipatna hospital... that they should have been of help to the tribals in time of need'! (Mohanty, 2016: 11) On the other hand, the Naveen Patnaik Government claimed that the launch of the ‘Mahaparayana' scheme in February offered free transportation of bodies from government hospitals to the residences of the deceased. (The Hindu, 2016: 9) However, such claims are rhetorical for the poor tribals of this region who remain vulnerable to the processes of deprivation and exploitation. The democratic state has in practice provided a shield to the symbiotic relationship between the ruling class and the privileged class which is hard to break.

While controversies surround such claims, public officials at the higher level continue to defend their positions by putting the blame on the lower officials, who in turn blame the victims, in this case Dana Majhi, for not waiting for the vehicle. The Collector of Kalahandi, Brundha D., claimed that ‘Majhi did not wait for a vehicle to be arranged'. But, Majhi said that despite all efforts he could get no help from the hospital authorities. ‘A poor man cannot afford a vehicle...despite repeated requests they said they cannot offer any help...,' he said. Brundha D. told The Indian Express that after learning about the incident she has sanctioned Rs 2000 to Majhi from the State Government's funeral assistance scheme and another Rs 10, 000 from the District Red Cross Fund. (Mohanty, 2016: 11) The state officials should learn to be more responsive to build the trust of people and keep promises made during elections. The constitutional responsibility of the democratic state to secure the basic rights to its people shall not become the prerogative of the state.

Living Reality

Such tragedies should not be viewed in isolation but as part of a spectrum of the irresponsible state that has legitimised itself over the years. The life story of Dana Majhi might find no space in the statistics of the state, but for many of us it illustrates the real living conditions of a majority of the people. The state has no means to assess the continuum of distress beyond the period of extreme conditions of agony. It is high time that the state rethinks its strategies to protect the democratic rights of its people.

The image has shaken the people's conscience provoking strong reactions from around the world. While for many of us it will remain only an image that once caught our attention, it is difficult for Dana Majhi to recover from such an experience. The message from such experiences needs to be remembered—as humans have a right to live with dignity, they also have a right to be respected after death.

References

Mohanty, Debabrata (2016), The Indian Express, August 25, page 11.

The Hindu, (2016), August 25, page 9.

Suranjita Ray teaches Political Science in Daulat Ram College, University of Delhi. She can be contacted at e-mail: suranjitaray_66@yahoo.co.in

There cannot be consistency or uniformity in madness. Instances are aplenty. A British newspaper on August 2, 2016 carried a news item under the caption, “Dalit sarpanch pays Rs 10 lakh to build in her Gujarat village a temple. but is banned from entering because of her caste”. In the cornerstone of the story lies untouchability, discrimination and prejudice against the Dalits in India. A Dalit woman, Pintooben, a sarpanch of Rahemalpur on the outskirts of the State capital Ahmedabad, has constructed a temple dedicated to the Hindu god Shiva. This has been financed out of her personal funds. The owner of 35 bighas of land, the sarpanch is blessed with sound economic base for sustenance. To meet the spiritual quest of the people of her panchayat, she undertook this unusual scheme, which had ignominy in store for her. Her entry into the temple was banned. This is the story born out of intractable social malice and prejudice of the upper castes against a Dalit woman sarpanch.

India's social perception overshadows every aspect of life, economic, political, spiritual and what not. So the overseas daily took note of the fact: “Like numerous other fellow Dalits excluded from religion in Gujarat, Pintooben is not allowed to enter the sanctum of any Hindu house of worship.” This is a case that bothers no upper-caste Hindu. The Dalit and tribal communities, who number millions of Indians, are claimed and counted as Hindus merely for the fact that they help swell the demographic strength to establish the superiority of the Hindu community.

Illustrations of Rani Rashmoni of Bengal and Pintooben of Gujarat prove India hasn't moved an inch ahead

There are illustrious instances of people who were subjected to similar ignominy in the past. The same attitudinal hostility, therefore, continues to operate unabated even now. One prominent illustration from the Bengal of nineteenth century can be cited. A Bengali landlord of the nineteenth century, Rani Rashmoni (1793-1861), had built a Kali temple over 60 acres of land at Dakshineshwar in the suburbs of Calcutta at a cost of Rs 900,000 in 1855. The reputed Mackintosh Company, a British firm, was engaged in execution of the project. In addition, Rani Rashmoni donated a large estate or zamindari at Salbari measuring 449 square miles in Dinajpur district (now in Bangladesh), as debottar for meeting the expenses out of its income on account of maintenance and daily expenses over the rituals of the shrine. The debottar cost her a sum of Rs 2,25,000. On the day of its inauguration, lo and behold, the zamindar was denied entry into the shrine because of her caste, Kaibartta, who are fishermen and agriculturists by traditional occupation. This shrine had propelled its priest, Gadadhar Chattopadhyay, in his spiritual odyssey to become the Paramhansa Ramakrishna whose prominent disciples included, among others, Swami Vivekananda.

A spirited zamindar and a widow, she had more than once crossed swords with the British. As the landlord, she blocked shipping trade on a part of the Ganges and “compelled the British to abolish the tax imposed on fishing in the river, which threatened the livelihood of poor fishermen”. Rani Rashmoni was credited with numerous charitable activities. She had donated generously to the then Imperial Library (now the National Library of India) and Hindu College (Presidency College, now Presidency University, Calcutta).

The wealthy zamindar and merchant, Prince Dwarkanath Tagore, grandfather of Rabindra-nath Tagore, had mortgaged a part of his zamindari, situated in the present South 24-Parganas district, to Rani Rashmoni for his passage to England. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_Rashmoni)

Romain Rolland observed that saint and seer Ramakrishna Paramhamsa (1836-1886) was “very strict in all questions relating to caste”. (Romain Rolland, The Life of Ramakrishna, Calcutta, sixth edition, 1960, p. 27) Coming as it does from the French Nobel Laureate, Ramakrishna's strictness in all questions relating to caste assumes great significance and dimension. Rani Rashmoni was not an ordinary person. The seer's strictness about all aspects of caste arguably implies that he was endowed with prejudice, orthodoxy and vice against those low in the social hierarchy. Caste furnishes the code for entitlements for all Hindus. Rani Rashmoni, being an untouchable, was not entitled to entry into a temple even though she was its builder. And the norm of caste dictated the ban against her entry in the shrine of the Dakshineshwar Kali temple. And though 161 years have glided by after Rani Rashmoni, India has not moved an inch ahead in matters of caste. Today in 2016 a Gujarati sarpanch has invited humiliation and disgrace on herself by building a temple for the worship of Shiva in the same way as it happened at Dakshineshwar.

Bengal had witnessed in the nineteenth century the renaissance which the intellectual class tirelessly lauded as the harbinger of modern outlook and enlightenment through education, philosophy, rationalism, brotherhood etc. But in truth it was limited to a minuscule upper crest of the society. That enlightenment did not embrace the masses at all.

Caste in Hinduism empowers anybody higher in hierarchy to humiliate, harass and disgrace any in the ladder below without any rhyme and reason. This is the unique cultural landmark of Indian civilisation. This keeps weakening the social bondage and solidarity.

Caste Disgraces India, None to Stop It

Rarely do Indian political leaders crown them-selves with the international media's approbation by virtue of their glorious achievement and performance. In 2012 Bhupinder Singh Hooda had thrust himself into the foreign media by his administrative incompetence or connivance in not stamping out atrocities against Dalits in the State though he was at the helm of its affairs. A British newspaper, The Daily Mail, October 7, 2012, ran a banner headline “Haryana's rape shame: Registered cases show two women are attacked in State every day”. To enlighten its readers, the daily quoted an official information that between January and August (2012), “455 women were raped in Haryana, the equivalent to two each day”. Pointing specifically to districts, Daily Mail noted: “Hisar police range, with no fewer than 94 rapes, tops Haryana's ignominious list, followed by the Karnal (92), Rewari (89) and Rohtak (87) police range, which covers the home town of Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda”. (A.K. Biswas, “Is India the Most Dangerous Place (for Dalit Women?”, Mainstream, Vol. LI, No 8, February 9, 2013)

This time around the most eloquent New York Times, August 3, 2016, has devoted a full 431-word editorial under the caption “Modi and India's Dalits”. While the Dalits are unknown to its readers in the US, the Prime Minister is not. The NYT has done a singular service to highlight the vulnerability of Dalit communities of Indian much to the chagrin of their privileged and oppressive countrymen. “A protest in the Indian State of Gujarat's largest city, Ahmedabad, on Sunday by thousands of Dalits—members of India's lowest castes—has brought to a head the contradiction between Prime Minister Narendra Modi's promise of economic opportunity for all and a politics of division driven by the Right-wing Hindu ideology.” Thus went the first paragraph of the editorial. Pointing at the reason, it added: “The protest was called after four Dalits skinning a dead cow—a scorned task relegated to the long-oppressed group—were set upon by cow-protection vigilantes on July 11 near Una, Gujarat. The gang stripped the Dalits to the waist, chained them to a car, and beat them for hours while the police and others looked on.”

While elaborating, the editorial incorporated details of some highlights that propelled the Dalits into the protests inviting the NYT's attention to the Indian Prime Minister. “Members of India's low-caste Dalit community protested last month in Gujarat, after four Dalit men were attacked by cow-protection vigilantes. The result is lawless vigilantism. Last September, a Muslim man, whose family was suspected of eating beef, was killed by a mob. In March, two cattle traders were lynched in the State of Jharkhand.”

What has become a standing shame and disgrace for the country has been detailed in the editorial. “Dalits have refused to handle dead animals, whose rotting carcasses are piling up, until they are given assurances that they will not be attacked and that their longstanding oppression will be addressed. Though aspirations and educational levels have risen among Dalits, they still face terrible prejudice. In January, a Dalit Ph.D student committed suicide after caste-based hounding.” The ousted HRD Minister too has come for some ‘compliment' for her clandestine role in provoking academic communities in India and abroad.

Finally it did not forget to note: “In 2014, Mr Modi, who ran Gujarat for over 12 years, won India's national election by a landslide on a promise to transform all of India on the Gujarat model of economic development.” Gujarat, little do we say or focus, has a dirty, stinking and obnoxious underbelly. Of course that underbelly has a gloss applied straight from the pages of scriptures which is in no way edifying for human dignity.

Pertinently we may note, the US Senate had adopted a concurrent resolution [H. Con. Res. 139: 110th session] in 2007 whereby the august House of Representative had expressed a sense of revulsion over India's untouchability which is an unmitigated crime against humanity. The elaborate resolution is by and large unknown to the Indians at large as our media found it too embarrassing to publicise or focus on the contents as it is tantamount to a galling indictment of our countrymen. [A.K. Biswas, Letter to President Obama, Mainstream, Vol XLVIII, No 42, October 9, 2010, http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article2370.html] A similar resolution was also adopted in the European Assembly on India's untouchability.

The author, Dr A.K. Biswas, is a retired IAS officer and former Vice-Chancellor, B.R. Ambedkar University, Muzaffarpur, Bihar. He can be contacted at biswasatulk[at]gmail.com for comments and observations, if any.

by Suparna Sanyal Mukherjee

The Indian Forest and its natural phenomenon attracted people from time immemorial. The forest was a treasure, pleasure and its overwhelming beauty touched the inner sense of every individual. The potentiality of life sustenance influenced the closer acumen for shelter, having abode in its deep enclosure and fringes.

The forest dwellers, specially the tribes who are aboriginals, resided in the forest where the time-scale had no specification. The tribes are akin to nature; kinship with the nature taught them life sustenance in their own way. They were born and grew up in the forest, breathed in it, smelt it, unfolded themselves as creation expanded.

The forest was a privilege for all concerned who enjoyed it, protected and maintained it by their indigenous technology. The then feudal power also provided prime attention towards the forest and its never-ending resources. Thus there was a mutual cohesion between the feudal power and the forest dwellers including tribes. Late 17th and early 18th century did not allow any change in the erstwhile status.

The East India Company was exploring India during the era. They were allured by the forest and its gigantic scale. In 1760 they took charge of India as British India.

The Indian flora, fauna and its limitless credibility, immanent, attracted them towards the Indian forests. Sensing that they had little knowledge of the intricate contents within it, they were incapable of charging on the forest and forest products which had boundless commercial potentiality, while their rival, the tribal counter-parts, were better acquainted with it, they knew the forest as if it was their palm. Realising this fact and to establish their absolute supremacy over the forest the then government made a rule with law-relating factors; ultimately an Act, the Indian Forest Act, came into force during 1865.

The 1865 Act was a comprehensive law over the Indian Forests in its first attempt. The Act had many lacunae; with all of that it was superseded in 1878 with law regulating factors. The 1878 Act codified the rules, regulations and was applicable to the reserved forests, protected forests and village forests which were constituted legally for the first time. With plenty of legal bound the Act was again superseded in 1927 and finally enacted on September 21, 1927 and identified as XVI of the Indian Forest Act 1927 which is still in force.

The 1927 Indian Forest Act is elaborately laid down in Thirteen Chapters and Eightysix Sections with various Sub-Sections and time to time Amendments which are in vogue. The Protected Forest is dealt in Chapter IV, Sections 29 to 34.

The Chapter IV of Protected Forests, Section 29, Sub-Section (1), states that the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare the provisions in a reserved forest but which is the property of the government or over which the government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the government is entitled. Sub-Section (2) mentioned that the forest land and the waste-lands comprised in any such notification shall be called a “Protected Forest”. Section 30, Sub-Section (C) underlines, prohibiting from a date fixed as aforesaid, the quarrying of stone, or the burning of lime or charcoal, or the collection or subjection to any manufacturing process, or removal of, any forest produce in any such forest, and the breaking up or clearing for cultivation, for building, for herding cattle or for any other purpose of any land in any such forest.

Nevertheless, in the unfolding situation the prevailing condition of the forest dwellers including tribes resulted in they being totally restricted and prohibited by the Act, whereas they had age-old rights over the forest generation-wise.

The tribes were absolutely innocent, faultless and ignorant regarding the law and its implementation over the forest; so their movement, and life sustenance in and from the forest were throttled. Their socio-economic, socio-cultural and socio-religious life was brought to a halt, reaching a dwindled unexpected social phenomenon, where surviving in the unnatural conditions call for a note of interrogation! But whatever the circumstances, they outlived it, proving the survival of the fittest.

The curtain of the British era having come down, India witnessed independence. The Government of India continued with the 1927 Indian Forest Act and made the first Indian Forest Policy in 1952, though the policy guidelines of 1894 continued, emphasising on factors like socio-economic, rural development and environmental development which were enunciated by the British Government in their resolution no-22-F, of 19-10-1894. The policy vested upon various objectives of which the regulation of rights and the restriction of privileges would be justified if the public attitude was in favour. It looked into that the forest rights for the forest dwellers for the absolute benefit of the local people on a long-term basis. But with all of the laid down rules and benefits provided by the policy, local people were suffering from poverty and the benefits were not need-based.

In the 1952 resolution no-13-1/52F, dated May 12, 1952, the Ministry of Food & Agriculture, later the Department of Revenue & Agriculture penned broad outlines of the general policy to be followed in the management of State Forests of the country, formulated on the basis of six paramount needs of the country. The space for forest dwellers was mentioned but the scope of reaching benefits to them was not sufficient. The policy was basically based on forest protection, functional classification, conservation and scientific management.

The 1988 Indian Forest Policy became more pronounced due to rapid changes by way of the socio-economic and rural developmental aspects. Efforts began for formulating the 1988 Forest Policy, where the strategy to be followed was for taking Indian Forestry into the 21st Century.

The principal aim of the policy was to ensure environmental stability, maintenance of ecological balance including atmospheric equilibrium for sustenance of life forms. The derivation of direct economic benefit had to be subordinated to this principal aim.

The life of the forest dwellers, especially tribes living within or its fringe area, the rights and concessions for such class of people should be protected. Their captive consumption of fuel wood, fodder and minor forest produce, construction timber and other allied forest products should be the first charge on forest produce. These or substitute materials should be made available through conveniently located depots at reasonable and affordable prices.

Chronologically it is mentioned in each and every forest policy that protection, concession, rights and maintenance of these men should be in the proper fashion and manner but policy guidelines could not allow them to avail of such boon in their life sustenance. They are still at a loss.

The Indian Forest Act did not allow any kind of rights and concessions for the forest dwellers, not even any charges of minor forest produces. According to the 1927 Act, collection, gathering, clustering of any kind of forest produces were absolutely banned and this is still in vogue in the chapter pertaining to Protected Forests along with Amendments.

Thus, it is inferred that the 1927 Indian Forest Act never supported and had no provisions for supporting any policy guidelines. The policy made was not subsequently backed by the law within the framework of the relevant Act. A policy is a suggestion or framework of future guidelines and actions which without the support of law is meaningless. In accordance with the law these policies are ineffectual, have no connection with the concerned Act and its application in legality is a far cry. Thereby, the forest dwellers, specially the tribes, were sandwiched between the Act and Policies. The Act rests on its own privileges while Policies also follow their own methods of nomenclature without the support of any legal background.

It is viewed that the Act laid down by the British was essentially tilting towards the facilities and benefits which could be acquired by the Monarchical Power whereas the Indian Policies had a Democratic approach. As such the Act and Policies were based on separate isms, one supporting the Monarchy and the other Democracy. Thereby, it is evident that since the inception they formed parallel lines which never coincided with each other.

The poor, innocent, illiterate, ignorant tribes were sandwiched between the Act and Policies, and suffered immensely in the process.

Dr Suparna Sanyal Mukherjee, M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D, is Secretary and Head of Education of Howrah Suparna, an NGO registered with the Niti Ayog (formerly the Planning Commission) and the National NGO Portal of the Government of India. She is also the Chairperson and Managing Director of a Multiple Project at Salboni, West Bengal. She can be contacted at e-mail: drsuparnasanyalmukherjee@gmail.com

This week marks a historic milestone in independent India's diplomatic history. The Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) is to be signed in Washington on August 30.

The LEMOA provides for the armed forces of the two countries to use the other globally for supplies, spare parts, services and refuelling. Effectively, the US armed forces could operate out of Indian bases on a simple basis.

India has never allowed foreign powers to operate out of its military bases. It rejected the ‘bloc' mentality and treasured ‘strategic autonomy'.

Notionally, LEMOA allows India also to operate out of American bases ‘globally', but in reality, though, projection of power in such proportions lies in the womb of time, if at all, for the Indian Navy, which can barely cope with the country's 7500-kilometre coastline.

It is useful for the US to gain access to the tremendous Indian bases without having to build facilities virtually up from the ground. The ‘pivot' to Asia and the plans to deploy 60 per cent of its surface ships in the Asia-Pacific, arguably, makes LEMOA a useful platform.

However, the US may not really need to operate out of Indian bases. For projection of power into Pakistan, Central Asia, Xinjiang or Iran, American bases in Afghanistan serve the purpose. Besides, US military bases are littered all over the Persian Gulf, which are home, collectively, to hundreds of fighter and other aircraft, dozens of naval ships, including aircraft carriers, and tens of thousands of military personnel.

The US keeps a base in Djibouti, too. Then, there is the secretive base at Diego Garcia, which enables the US to keep a close watch on the major trade and energy SLOCs from and to China, and is used to keep watch over South Asia. In the Asia-Pacific also, there are dozens of US military bases—Singapore, the Phillipines, Australia, South Korea and Japan.

So, what is the raison d'etre of LEMOA? Why is it that Washington pulled all stops to get the Narendra Modi Government of India to the signing ceremony on August 30? First and foremost, LEMOA is a ‘foundational agreement'.

It means the US is putting one toe inside the Indian tent. Once inside the tent, life can always be made more comfortable. This is one thing.

Second, LEMOA is a key way-station on agreements still to come—Communications and Information Security Memorandum Agreement (CISMOA) and Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geospatial Intelligence (BECA).

Simply put, the US and India are navigating their journey through the LEMOA to the ultimate destination—CISMOA and BECA.

Once they reach the destination, India can either buy or use cutting-edge American military technology for its Air Force and Navy—and the US can sell such technology to India.

Indeed, India is one of the world's biggest buyers of advanced weaponry—perhaps, the biggest—and the US is the world's number one vendor of weapons. It is a match made in the heavens.

There are several other deals and policies backing up the LEMOA—the US legislating on India being a Major Defence Partner, the US helping India to get on board the Missile Technology Control Regime, etc.—all of which ultimately facilitates the trade in top US military technology.

India gets top-of-the-line military technology, while the US contractors get a much better launching pad to secure highly lucrative multi-billion dollar contracts in India. Lockheed Martin Corporation's offer to shift all of its F-16 manufacturing to India is a case in point.

Lockheed will be killing three birds with a single shot. One, its offer of co-production becomes a key selling point in the company's current lobbying to win an Indian order that may exceed 100 fighter jets; two, it suits Lockheed to vacate F-16 production (with the advent of the stealth F-35 warplane); and, three, co-production is a game-changer for US-India defence ties.

However, the bottom-line concerns the geopolitics of LEMOA. This needs some explaining. Ever since the Bill Clinton Administration shed in the mid-nineties the Cold-War era prejudices vis-à-vis India, Washington has been nudging New Delhi to jettison its non-aligned policies and harmonise with the US' global strategies.

Through the past quarter century, the US assembled a local Indian brigade of foot-soldiers to incessantly keep fighting to create an opinion favouring the US-India strategic alliance. India's so-called think-tankers and mediapersons who take American tutelage played a big part.

On the other hand, the Left has greatly shrunk as a political force in India and more recently, the systematic vilification campaign has been let loose on former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and everything he stood for in India's foreign policy—especially, his doctrine of non-alignment.

The stunning paradox is that even influential voices within the Hindu nationalist camp, who domestically espouse the ideology of Akhand Bharat (‘Fortress India'), appear to have succumbed to the charms of the lone superpower.

Suffice it to say, the Narendra Modi Government is all set to take the leap of faith. Despite the backdrop of a New Cold War, India is shifting away from Russia, its Cold War ally, toward the new alliance with the US.

Unsurprisingly, the US is being pragmatic, pandering to the vanities and phobias of the present-day ruling elites—‘catching-up' with India as a military power, undoing the Partition of 1947 leading to the creation of Pakistan, etc.

To be sure, Uncle Sam is fixated on promoting highly lucrative arms exports to the Indian bazaar, which is reportedly worth $ 150 billion in a near-term alone. But then, the US cannot be unaware that India is also a bundle of contradictions: at one end, the Modi Government is eager to inherit the Lockheed's phased-out production line for F-16, while at the other end, India can qualify as a failing state.

The ‘catching-up' with China will in all probability turn out to be a pipe-dream. But the damage will be done during the reign of the starry-eyed Hindu nationalists. The spectre of a US-Indian alliance is goading China and Pakistan to transform their ‘all-weather friend-ship' into a regional alliance.

Clearly, if the new US-Indian proximity in the mid-nineties was principally about the economic transformation of India with American help, the locus has dramatically shifted.

The US is unable to help India with its development agenda. Anywhere around 600-700 million Indians live without a hope on earth. New Delhi is left with no alternative today but to try to undermine China's $ 46 billion investment projects in Pakistan as the only way to prevent that country galloping away, shaming India's economy.

The Modi Government is determined to ‘normalise' with China and/or Pakistan only from a position of strength. It estimates that the LEMOA opens the door to India's emergence as a military superpower, riding on the wings of advanced American technology. But this delusionary thinking may only fuel regional tensions.

If there is anything Turkey epitomises today, it is the dangerous game the US played by encouraging the ascendancy of political Islam in that country in the post-Cold War era with a view to subsume the secular nationalism that ‘Kemalism' represented. Once the genie of religious nationalism gets out of the bottle—Islamist or Hindu alike—all the Joe Bidens of the world cannot get control of it again.

Ironically, Turkey not only has a 20-year old production plant near Ankara for F-16 jets, but it also set up two years ago an engine factory in Izmir to produce engine parts for the US fighter jet F-35, the world's most advanced aircraft. 

(Courtesy: Asia Times)

Ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).

It is a shame that India has not won any gold medal in the Olympics. There were great hopes from the largest ever Indian contingent but when it came to the performance, it fell well short of expectations. Hockey, which we taught to the West, is nowhere in the subcontinent. With change of rules, in the name of making the sport more attractive, the West has come to monopolise hockey. But it would be unfair to blame it on the rule changes alone. The bane of the problem with our players is lack of stamina and scientific approach.

Women seem to do better than men but that is in spite of the hard work demanded. In the next few years, our dismal performance will be in sharp contrast to even smaller nations that are mere dots on the world map. Counting by population, India ranks the last in Olympic medal number. There are more reasons for this.

We, in India, have a budget of roughly Rs 250 crores per State apart from the Central Budget of Rs 1500-odd crores. There is sports infrastructure in a few States but they lack maintenance and regular use. The States and the Centre have no holistic approach to sports. The result is that sports are just an item in the Budget but nothing from the point of view of excellence in any particular discipline.

Cricket has come up because the public is crazy about it just as it was about hockey some years ago. This only underlines the fact that there is no proper planning or scientific approach to sports. Hockey was the iconic sport for India until the Moscow Games in 1980 when the country won their last gold medal, for the eighth time. Subsequent to that there was a great decline in the sport as India never reached even the semifinals in any Olympics to this date.

In contrast, India won the first World Cup in 1983 in cricket and since then the sport has started looking up. Today, cricket has thrown up several opportunities and icons which make the game even more lucrative. That explains why cricket is only next to religion in India in terms of frenzy. With the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) making a lot of money, there was never any need for government support.

But, at the same time, too much politics has seeped into sports, including cricket. Leaders of different political parties are holding one post or another in every national federation and cricket is no exception. This has had an adverse effect on the sports as such because of politicians using them for their name and fame.

Unfortunately, the situation prevailing is that some Ministers or top bureaucrats' association is sought by every sport federation in the country for bringing in money to them. In return, these politicians also attain stature and importance by clinging to the posts offered by the federations. In other words, it is a win-win situation for both.

The recent Supreme Court ruling in the aftermath of the Justice Lodha panel report on the BCCI and its functioning is an eye-opener. The recommendations of the panel, to be imple-mented, put restrictions on politicians and bureaucrats occupying any top positions in the BCCI or, for that matter, in the federations. It is an open secret that people like Sharad Pawar, Arun Jaitley, Farooq Abdullah, Rajiv Shukla and many others have been an integral part of whatever the set-up has been. They are primarily there because they have been able to get funds from official and other sources.

Once they vacate, what machinery will the federations have to generate funds in the face of very little financial assistance provided by the state? Corporate funding is too little and too meagre, cricket being the only exception. But the biggest drawback is the absence of sports development in rural India. This is the place where the raw talent is galore but there is no proper way to tap it.

Unfortunately again, India does not have any sports culture. The government has only added to the woes of federations as it has withdrawn whatever little funding they provided for hosting international events in junior sections. How does the government expect excellence without proper support to nurture young talent? Just by allocating Rs 300-odd crores for the Olympians that qualified for the Games under TOPS will not help and that too three months prior to Rio.

Only a sustained effort and consistent funding, spread over years, will help us get medals. Take the case of China. It picks up talent at a very young age and nurtures to the point of seeing the boys and girls winning medals at the Olympics. The moment they are inducted in national centres they become the state subject and they have to worry about nothing, not even education. But in India, we stress on academics at the expense of sports.

In a country starved of medals—we won six medals at London—there are some silver-lining performances like that of Dipa Karmakar, the first ever Indian gymnast to make it to the Olympics and also the final of the vault event. Her fourth position is no less than winning a medal because she had been training with little facilities back home in Tripura.

Looking at the future, India should think of ways and means of achieving glory in the Olympic arena by choosing young talent in fewer disciplines and concentrating fully rather than frittering away precious little funds on all 28 Olympic disciplines. Additionally, the government can make a sport policy—not the one they are insisting on now—that will guarantee a career option to sportspersons. Just giving away piecemeal incentives will not fetch medals. And we should wait until six months prior to the next Olympics to realise that the preparation we started is again late, like it has been the case so far. Let's forget Rio, think about Tokyo and start preparing from today.

The author is a veteran journalist renowned not only in this country but also in our neighbouring states of Pakistan and Bangladesh where his columns are widely read. His website is www.kuldipnayar.com

IMPRESSIONS

It is true that India did better in the last Olympics than in this one; just 83 athletes won six medals in London while 117 won two in Rio. But that does not mean that our great country cut a sorry figure before the world. On the contrary. No other country sent its reigning national Sports Minister to Rio to liven up things. The Honourable Vijay Goel and his “aggressive and rude” staff did it so well that the organisers had to warn them of possible expulsion from the arena. None of the other 206 participating countries won this distinction.

Olympics may come and Olympics may go, but Indians will remain Indians. Whether it is Commonwealth Games, Asian Games, or Olympics, the Indian tradition is to give pride of place, not to athletes, but to politicians, sports officials and sundry hangers-on, parasites, pretenders and the sons and nephews and girlfriends of VIPs. National Rifle Association President Ravinder Singh, son of Punjab's former Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh, was the star figure in Rio's parties. Abhay Singh Chautala, son of the former Haryana Chief Minister, was also in Rio, overlooking the small detail that he was out of jail on bail. Chaperoning him was Olympics President N. Ramachandran who, as shooter Abhinav Bindra revealed, never met any Indian athlete in Rio. Haryana's own Sports Minister, Anil Vij, went to Rio to “cheer the athletes”, but correspondents on the scene said he spent his time on the beaches cheering the locals.

This negative culture is reinforced by the polices and attitudes of the government and various sports organisations. Arun Jaitley, a sports enthusiast (if cricket can be considered a sport and not a commercial activity), allotted Rs 1552 crores to sports in his last Budget. This was Rs 50 crores more than his previous Budget's allocation. The small island-nation of Jamaica allotted to sports the equivalent of Rs 3075 crores in 2012 (by the exchange rate of that time). Jamaica is the land of Usain Bolt, India is the land of Shobha De.

It is an all-time shame of India that the various associations that control sports are hellholes of intrigue and infighting. Politicians are known to head them for decades at a stretch. Take boxing. The Indian Boxing Federation was banned by the International Boxing Federation in 2013 for manipulating elections. A new organisation took over, named Boxing India. This was suspended by the international body following an internal war that led to even impeachment.

In a country like India, where government intervention is needed even to construct toilets, sports cannot perhaps progress without governmental assistance. But it has to be assistance provided by sports people for sports people. We need not go to the extent China does—take away little boys and girls from their families and develop them rigorously, even cruelly, as winning machines. But there is something to learn from other countries. Britain, through government and the National Lottery, provides about £ 700 million for programmes that help Olympic athletes. The Canadian Government earmarks about $ 150 million a year for Olympics. Senior athletes get monthly stipends. In West Australia, the government runs an Athlete Travel Subsidy Scheme to help young athletes with travel and accommodation at sports training centres. In the US there is no direct government involvement, but there are organisations that provide various types of assistance to athletes ranging from training and healthcare costs to air fare and lodging during the games.

Our government has a poor record in these matters. What is allotted seldom reaches the athletes. Sprinter Dutee Chand endured a 36-hour flight to Rio in economy class while officials lounged in business class. Deepa Karmakar's physiotherapist was not allowed to travel with her; the Sports Authority of India said that would be “wasteful”. When she qualified for the finals, the therapist was rushed to Rio.

The one hopeful sign in India is that private companies have started playing a role. Steeplechase runner Lalita Babar's is a typical case. The special steeplechase spike costs Rs 10,000, lasts only one month, and has to be imported. Government agencies did not help. Anglian Medal Hunt, a Delhi-based private company, came to her aid. JSW Sports helped O.P. Jaisha among others.

Rio has proved that India has athletes talented and gritty enough to win Olympic golds. If only the sporting climate in the country were a little more helpful, the picture could change overnight. In the prevailing climate, Sakshi Malik and P.V. Sindhu are miracles, pure gold. May their tribe increase.

From N.C.'s Writings

After forty years of the foundation of our independent republic, the Frankenstein has appeared again—the monster that is out to destroy democracy and plunge this nation into civil war that shall rend asunder thousands of towns and villages of this great country.

The term communalism does not convey the gravity of the crisis that confronts us today—let it be bluntly stated that what we face today is the demon of Hindu-Muslim hatred. Over a large part of this land, particularly in the northern States, straddles today this monstrous hatred of the majority Hindu—the Muslim must be subjugated and, if unbending, then liquidated. In response to that, the minority Muslim, in deadly despair, tries to hit back as a means of survival.

The map of India today is dotted with bloodstains—bloodstains of brothers fighting brothers. Bhagalpur, Bijnore, Hyderabad, Aligarh and Kanpur have today turned into not only the disgrace points but danger signals for India's nationhood. The rule of the knife and the bomb has taken over from the so-called guardians of law and order. At every one of these places—and many others like Varanasi and Meerut are also coming under the spotlight of the media—frenzied hatred has been spread with cynical design to arouse the flames of insensate violence in which neighbours of yesterday have butchered one another and the administration itself got involved in the orgy.

It does not require any academic research to point the finger at the agitation over the temple-mosque controversy at Ayodhya for having polluted the political environment in which communal antipathy has become the order of the day. And once the winds of hatred spread, the flames of violence have caught on unimpeded. The BJP leaders plead innocence, that their plea was for the building of the Ram temple only, but they cannot exonerate themselves from the responsibility of having unleashed forces that have taken to murder and loot. Inevitably, the minority community, faced with such a grim situation, has at places hit back, which has only provided impetus for the fundamentalists in their camp. Hence, mutual hatred spread far and wide.

The time is over for the ideologues of the BJP to come out with the thesis that Islam does not fit into the national mould. They have to realise that the ponderous labour spent in building up such a thesis is being put to good use by those indulging in killing and looting in the frenzy of communal violence. This has also helped the bigots in the Muslim community in their communal campaign. All the prattle about pseudo-secularism has only added grist to the mill of those who are wielding the long knife in the dark night that has descended over a large stretch of this beautiful land of ours.

For leaders of major political parties, too, this is the hour of truth. The hands of many of them can hardly be regarded as clean as they too in the past have sometime or the other indulged in pampering communal urges to secure votes, and quite a few in their respective camps are ready to do so again, once the elections are on the agenda. That is a matter for them to settle with their conscience. What matters today above everything else is that the beast of communal hatred has been let loose and is playing havoc. If this ghastly apparition is allowed to roam about unchecked, there shall be no question of democratic functioning, no elections to legisla-tures and Parliament, no civil liberties, but the drum-beat of communal fury with goose-step marching of the hatchet-gangs out to destroy civilised conduct of public life.

The disintegration of this republic of ours threatens us in a manner never seen before. The Valley of Kashmir and the fertile fields of Punjab have virtually come under the grip of secessionists. The political base camp of patriotic elements in Kashmir has been swept away by the avalanche of bitter alienation for which all parties in power in the past have to share equal responsibility. In Punjab, all the official assurances about Khalistani terrorists being on the run, has turned out to be so much poppycock as one finds the terrorist killer literally gagging the media even to the point of silencing the government's radio and television news in Hindi.

This threat of imminent disintegration can be rebuffed not just be despatching the Army but, more importantly, by mobilising the entire nation for a determined endeavour to win back the trust and confidence of those alienated. The responsibility for summoning such a national mobilisation rests irrevocably on the wisdom and patriotism of leaders of all political parties.

At this crossroads of India's destiny, we put this question to our leaders of all parties, those in office and those outside: Can you not bury your hatchets and join hands to stir the vast multitude of this great nation so that the fiendish forces of communal hatred are put down and chased out of our public life for good? This is the moment when your patriotism needs to be tested. Let all other differences and squabbles, allergies and misunderstandings, be set aside, and all, really all, together come forward at the call of the nation.

For heaven's sake, join hands and march shoulder to shoulder to fight the enemy that has entered the gates. Mother India beckons us all.

(The Telegraph, December 16, 1990)