TRIBALS Create all the Problems for the Ruling Hegemomy Rejecting the Exclusive Economy of Development and the FARCE of Inclusive Growth!
Fortunately, the Maharashtra OBC Communities, specifiically the Marathas and BAMCEF MULNIVASI are not Glorified with the DEGRADATION of Shivaji Maharaj while Shivsena ICON apologised first to the very BRAHAMINS who sponsered James Lane as SHAMBHAJI Brigade reacted Violently aginst the Centre of BASTARDISATION. As SC and OBC communities have launched an AGITATION , now SHIVSENA has emerged as the Saviour of the MARATHA ICON!
Indian Holocaust My Father`s Life and Time - Four Hundred Twenty THREE
Palash Biswas
http://indianholocaustmyfatherslifeandtime.blogspot.com/
TRIBALS Create all the Problems for the Ruling Hegemomy Rejecting the Exclusive Economy of Development and the FARCE of Inclusive Growth!
My great Journalist friends around complain that the Tribals and aboriginal communities are quite reluctant to be the part of the Mainstream as they are against Industrialisation, Urbanisation, Development, Infrstructure, growth, economy and so on.
One of them only yesterday evening asked my Opinion on this REALITY again and again informing me that he has read the comment in an american journal. I asked him to name the journal , he just could not remeber. By the way, he is a BRAHAMIN.When he insisted on my reply, I had to say that I think the Aryans are responsible for all the Problems that the Divided Bleeding Geopolitics Face. He said that Arayans created Indian CIVILISATION and the Non Aryans were UNCIVILISED. The Journalist is an Extreme advocate of the Developed world which is the CIVILISED world. He ia not ashamed of his hatred for the Aboriginal Black Untouchable landscpae. I must clarify that this is nothing new. Bengali Renaissance greats thinked likewise and even the Gandhian Tara shankar Bandopaddhyaya who had been Memeber of Indian Parliament, GyanPeeth Vijeta and Sahitay Academy President dealt with the Aboriginal World with this Original Arayan vengeance which is ex[pressed in Political Economy as well. I have written already about the Mainstream Brahaminical Literature representing the Human Documentation of Hatred. The Aboriginal tribes described in HANSULI Banker UPAKATA and NAHGINI Kanyar Kahinee hate Urbanisation, Technology and Industrialisation. Their association with the Nature is described as superstions, Taboos. The Imperialism worldwide had been trying to CIVILISE DEVELOP this Aboriginal Landscape worldwide for Centuries. In India, the aboriginal World had been destroyed before Western Imperialism was born. And it is glorified as VEDIC Culture which NEVER Considered the Rituals of Violence Wrong and the Tradition of Ethnic Cleansing is described as Indian Aryan Hindu Culture of Unification which means MONOPOLY and Enslavement, Denial of Human Rights.
I have been a littel Indisposed for afew days due to Diabetes and low Pressure! I ma little bit Inactive and somehow Disillusioned with Power Craving Ambedkarite Movement which does not address the Global phenomenon of Free Market Imperialism associated with Zionist Gloab Hindutva and highly deviate from Ambedkarite Ideology. I have been cancelling my tour programmes for months as the Aboriginal Humanscape in Central India and Himalayan Region are most Neglected by Ambedkarites. The SC and OBC leadership has nothing to do with the Aboriginal tribes and rather do justify the Infinite Persecution and Repression in Aboriginal Landscape. It is just because we have disassociated with our Negroid Aboriginal roots and forgot that the Converted Trabals have been made SC and OBC communities with surgical Precision with all the Magic of the Riddles in Hinduism which is nothing but Brahaminical Religion. Rather we do IDENTIFY ourselves with the Ruling Calss and seek salavation after Death and remain satisfied even being EXCLUDED likewise our aboriginal Brothers and sisters.We Never do Object against the DEMONISATION of the Aboriginal Icons and celebrate Cranivals of Brahaminical rituals of Destructions all round Invoking all the Gods and Goddesses who did Kill our Aboriginal ancestors.
Recently, Maharashtra OBC Communities are Agitated as JAMES Lane assisted by the PUNE Brahamins decalred Indigenous Identity of Chhtrapati shivaji Maharaj as DOUBTFUL and he projected a NOTORIOUS Pune Brahamin as the Biological Father of Shivaji.The Myths of hindu Cste Origin is all about such BASTRADISATION which our People accept with Glory. As in Bengal, the Matua Headquarter is trying its best to Prove Harichand Thakur a MAITHILI Brahamin and Reincarnation of Brahamin Chaitanya Mahaparbhu. Harichand Thakur is the Father of Indian Aboriginal Renaissance who led Indigo revolt and Untouchability Movement in NIETEENTH Century. He denied Brahaminical system and insttute ANTI Brahamin Matua religion. But our People feel glorified to establish his Identity Rootd in Brahamins.Sunday supplement of TMC supporter Pratidin, ROBBAR, edited by Filmmaker Rituparno Ghosh is publishing a Novel which is all about Dalit Movement led by Brahamins and the theme is about the MURDER of Chaitany Mahaprabhu in the Temple of Puri and his Reincarnation as a dalit leader of the Brahaminical Party. The writer is a well known OBC Writer RUPAK SAHA, Professionally a sports Journalist who has written a Novel on Sonagachhi Sex workers titled as LAL MATIR SWARGO.
Fortunately, the Maharashtra OBC Communities, specifiically the Marathas and BAMCEF MULNIVASI are not Glorified with the DEGRADATION of Shivaji Maharaj while Shivsena ICON apologised first to the very BRAHAMINS who sponsered James Lane as SHAMBHAJI Brigade reacted Violently aginst the Centre of BASTARDISATION. As SC and OBC communities have launched an AGITATION , now SHIVSENA has emerged as the Saviour of the MARATHA ICON!
Sc and OBC leaders are rather intereted to strike deal with the Muslim leaders as the Voting Equation demands for it. But No one is Concerned about the Plight of Muslims in India. No one speaks against Human Right Violatiions againt the Muslims and their Problems. The so called Mainstream Parties both Brahaminical and NON Brahaminical are SILENT against the Post Modern Aryan Invasion against the Non Aryan Risilient Aboriginal Tribes.
Meanwhile,the CPI on Saturday appealed to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to take steps to end the "vicious excesses" of police and security forces against the people of Bastar in Chhattisgarh "in the name of fighting Maoists".
Police forces in the name of fighting Maoists are playing havoc in the Bastar region," party General Secretary A B Bardhan said in a letter to the Prime Minister.
Charging Dantewada SSP S R P Kalluri with targeting leaders and cadres of CPI and various mass organisations, he said "this notorious police officer is intimidating and torturing innocent tribals and ultimately pushing them to the fold of the Maoists. The cruelties of the security forces are forcing the tribals to take up arms".
Maintaining that Kalluri had ordered withdrawal of security provided to CPI leader and All India Adivasi Mahasabha President Manish Kunjam, he said the officer had also got several CPI leaders and cadres arrested, accusing them of eliminating the influence of BJP and Congress and spreading the Communist party's influence in Bastar.
PUCL Bulletin, February 2003
The Adivasis of India -
A History of Discrimination, Conflict, and Resistance
-- By C.R. Bijoy, Core Committee of the All India Coordinating Forum of Adivasis/Indigenous Peoples
The 67.7 million people belonging to "Scheduled Tribes" in India are generally considered to be 'Adivasis', literally meaning 'indigenous people' or 'original inhabitants', though the term 'Scheduled Tribes' (STs) is not coterminous with the term 'Adivasis'. Scheduled Tribes is an administrative term used for purposes of 'administering' certain specific constitutional privileges, protection and benefits for specific sections of peoples considered historically disadvantaged and 'backward'.
However, this administrative term does not exactly match all the peoples called 'Adivasis'. Out of the 5653 distinct communities in India, 635 are considered to be 'tribes' or 'Adivasis'. In comparison, one finds that the estimated number of STs varies from 250 to 593.
For practical purposes, the United Nations and multilateral agencies generally consider the STs as 'indigenous peoples'. With the ST population making up 8.08% (as of 1991) of the total population of India, it is the nation with the highest concentration of 'indigenous peoples' in the world!
The Constitution of India, which came into existence on 26 January 1950, prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth (Article 15) and it provides the right to equality (Article 14), to freedom of religion (Articles 25-28) and to culture and education (Articles 29-30). STs are supposedly addressed by as many as 209 Articles and 2 special schedules of the Constitution - Articles and special schedules which are protective and paternalistic.
Article 341 and 342 provides for classification of Scheduled Castes (the untouchable lower castes) and STs, while Articles 330, 332 and 334 provides for reservation of seats in Parliament and Assemblies. For purposes of specific focus on the development of STs, the government has adopted a package of programmes, which is administered in specific geographical areas with considerable ST population, and it covers 69% of the tribal population.
Despite this, and after the largest "modern democracy" of the world has existed for more than half a century, the struggles for survival of Adivasis - for livelihood and existence as peoples - have today intensified and spread as never before in history.
Over centuries, the Adivasis have evolved an intricate convivial-custodial mode of living. Adivasis belong to their territories, which are the essence of their existence; the abode of the spirits and their dead and the source of their science, technology, way of life, their religion and culture.
Back in history, the Adivasis were in effect self-governing 'first nations'. In general and in most parts of the pre-colonial period, they were notionally part of the 'unknown frontier' of the respective states where the rule of the reign in fact did not extend, and the Adivasis governed themselves outside of the influence of the particular ruler.
The introduction of the alien concept of private property began with the Permanent Settlement of the British in 1793 and the establishment of the "Zamindari" system that conferred control over vast territories, including Adivasi territories, to designated feudal lords for the purpose of revenue collection by the British. This drastically commenced the forced restructuring of the relationship of Adivasis to their territories as well as the power relationship between Adivasis and 'others'. The predominant external caste-based religion sanctioned and practiced a rigid and highly discriminatory hierarchical ordering with a strong cultural mooring.
This became the natural basis for the altered perception of Adivasis by the 'others' in determining the social, and hence, the economic and political space in the emerging larger society that is the Indian diaspora. Relegating the Adivasis to the lowest rung in the social ladder was but natural and formed the basis of social and political decision making by the largely upper caste controlled mainstream. The ancient Indian scriptures, scripted by the upper castes, also further provided legitimacy to this.
The subjugated peoples have been relegated to low status and isolated, instead of either being eliminated or absorbed. Entry of Europeans and subsequent colonisation of Asia transformed the relationship between the mainstream communities and tribal communities of this region. Introduction of capitalism, private property and the creation of a countrywide market broke the traditional economy based on use value and hereditary professions.
All tribal communities are not alike. They are products of different historical and social conditions. They belong to four different language families, and several different racial stocks and religious moulds. They have kept themselves apart from feudal states and brahminical hierarchies for thousands of years.
In the Indian epics such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and Puranas (folklores) there are many references to interactions and wars between the forest or hill tribes and the Hindus.
Eminent historians who have done detailed research on the epic Ramayana (200 B.C to 500 B.C) have concluded that 'Lanka', the kingdom of the demonic king Ravana and 'Kishkinda', the homeland of the Vanaras (depicted as monkeys) were places situated south of Chitrakuta hill and north of Narmada river in middle India. Accordingly, Ravana and his demons were an aboriginal tribe, most probably the Gond, and the Vanaras, like Hanuman in the epic, belonged to the Savara and Korku tribes whose descendants still inhabit the central Indian forest belt. Even today, the Gond holds Ravana, the villain of Ramayana, in high esteem as a chief. Rama, the hero of Ramayana, is also known for slaughtering the Rakshasas (demons) in the forests!
The epic of Mahabharata refers to the death of Krishna at the hands of a Bhil Jaratha. In the ancient scriptures, considered to be sacred by the upper castes, various terms are used depicting Adivasis as almost non-humans. The epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata, the Puranas, Samhitas and other so-called 'sacred books' refer to Adivasis as Rakshasa (demons), Vanara (monkeys), Jambuvan (boar men), Naga (serpents), Bhusundi Kaka (crow), Garuda (King of Eagles) etc. In medieval India, they were called derogatorily as Kolla, Villa, Kirata, Nishada, and those who surrendered or were subjugated were termed as Dasa (slave) and those who refused to accept the bondage of slavery were termed as Dasyu (a hostile robber).
Ekalavya, one of their archers was so skillful that the hero of the Aryans, Arjuna, could not stand before him. But they assaulted him, cutting his thumb and destroying his ability to fight - and then fashioned a story in which he accepted Drona as his Guru and surrendered his thumb as an offering to the master! The renowned writer Maheshwata Devi points out that Adivasis predated Hinduism and Aryanism, that Siva was not an Aryan god and that in the 8th century, the tribal forest goddess or harvest goddess was absorbed and adapted as Siva's wife. Goddess Kali, the goddess of hunters, has definitely had a tribal origin.
History of the Adivasis
Little is known about the relationship between the Adivasis and non-Adivasi communities during the Hindu and Muslim rules. There are stray references to wars and alliances between the Rajput kings and tribal chieftains in middle India and in the North-East between the Ahom Kings of Brahmaputra valley and the hill Nagas. They are considered to be ati-sudra meaning lower than the untouchable castes. Even today, the upper caste people refer to these peoples as jangli, a derogatory term meaning "those who are like wild animals" - uncivilised or sub-humans.
The Adivasis have few food taboos, rather fluid cultural practices and minimal occupational specialization, while on the other hand, the mainstream population of the plains have extensive food taboos, more rigid cultural practices and considerable caste-based occupational specialisation. In the Hindu caste system, the Adivasis have no place. The so-called mainstream society of India has evolved as an agglomeration of thousands of small-scale social groups whose identities within the larger society are preserved by not allowing them to marry outside their social groups.
The subjugated groups became castes forced to perform less desirable menial jobs like sweeping, cleaning of excreta, removal of dead bodies, leather works etc - the untouchables. Some of the earliest small-scale societies dependent on hunting and gathering, and traditional agriculture seem to have remained outside this process of agglomeration. These are the Adivasis of present day. Their autonomous existence outside the mainstream led to the preservation of their socio-religious and cultural practices, most of them retaining also their distinctive languages. Widow burning, enslavement, occupational differentiation, hierarchical social ordering etc are generally not there. Though there were trade between the Adivasis and the mainstream society, any form of social intercourse was discouraged. Caste India did not consciously attempt to draw them into the orbit of caste society.
But in the process of economic, cultural and ecological change, Adivasis have attached themselves to caste groups in a peripheral manner, and the process of de-tribalisation is a continuous one. Many of the Hindu communities have absorbed the cultural practices of the Adivasis. Although Hinduism could be seen as one unifying thread running through the country as a whole, it is not homogenous but in reality a conglomeration of centuries old traditions and shaped by several religious and social traditions which are more cultural in their essence (and including elements of Adivasi socio-religious culture).
Adivasis at the lowest rung of the ladder
Adivasis are not, as a general rule, regarded as unclean by caste Hindus in the same way as Dalits are. But they continue to face prejudice (as lesser humans), they are socially distanced and often face violence from society. They are at the lowest point in every socioeconomic indicator. Today the majority of the population regards them as primitive and aims at decimating them as peoples or at best integrating them with the mainstream at the lowest rung in the ladder. This is especially so with the rise of the fascist Hindutva forces.
None of the brave Adivasi fights against the British have been treated as part of the "national" struggle for independence. From the Malpahariya uprising in 1772 to Lakshman Naik's revolt in Orissa in 1942, the Adivasis repeatedly rebelled against the British in the north-eastern, eastern and central Indian belt. In many of the rebellions, the Adivasis could not be subdued, but terminated the struggle only because the British acceded to their immediate demands, as in the case of the Bhil revolt of 1809 and the Naik revolt of 1838 in Gujarat. Heroes like Birsa Munda, Kanhu Santhal, Khazya Naik, Tantya Bhil, Lakshman Naik, Kuvar Vasava, Rupa Naik, Thamal Dora, Ambul Reddi, Thalakkal Chandu etc are remembered in the songs and stories of the Adivasis but ignored in the official text books.
The British Crown's dominions in India consisted of four political arrangements:
- the Presidency Areas where the Crown was supreme,
- the Residency Areas where the British Crown was present through the Resident and the Ruler of the realm was subservient to the Crown,
- the Agency (Tribal) areas where the Agent governed in the name of the Crown but left the local self-governing institutions untouched and
- the Excluded Areas (north-east) where the representatives of the Crown were a figure head.
After the transfer of power, the rulers of the Residency Areas signed the "Deed of Accession" on behalf of the ruled on exchange they were offered privy purse. No deed was however signed with most of the independent Adivasi states. They were assumed to have joined the Union. The government rode rough shod on independent Adivasi nations and they were merged with the Indian Union. This happened even by means of state violence as in the case of Adivasi uprising in the Nizam's State of Hyderabad and Nagalim.
While this aspect did not enter the consciousness of the Adivasis at large in the central part of India where they were preoccupied with their own survival, the picture was different in the north-east because of the historic and material conditions. Historically the north-east was never a part of mainland India. The colonial incorporation of north-east took place much later than the rest of the Indian subcontinent. While Assam ruled by the Ahoms came under the control of British in 1826, neighbouring Bengal was annexed in 1765. Garo Hills were annexed in 1873, Naga Hills in 1879 and Mizoram under the Chin-Lushai Expeditions in 1881-90. Consequently, the struggles for self-determination took various forms as independence to greater autonomy.
A process of marginalization today, the total forest cover in India is reported to be 765.21 thousand sq. kms. of which 71% are Adivasi areas. Of these 416.52 and 223.30 thousand sq. kms. are categorised as reserved and protected forests respectively. About 23% of these are further declared as Wild Life Sanctuaries and National Parks which alone has displaced some half a million Adivasis. By the process of colonisation of the forests that began formally with the Forest Act of 1864 and finally the Indian Forest Act of 1927, the rights of Adivasis were reduced to mere privileges conferred by the state.
This was in acknowledgement of their dependence on the forests for survival and it was politically forced upon the rulers by the glorious struggles that the Adivasis waged persistently against the British. The Forest Policy of 1952, the Wild Life Protection Act of 1972 and the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 downgraded these privileges of the peoples to concessions of the state in the post-colonial period.
With globalisation, there are now further attempts to change these paternalistic concessions to being excluded as indicated by the draft "Conservation of Forests and Natural Ecosystems Act" that is to replace the forest act and the amendments proposed to the Land Acquisition Act and Schedule V of the constitution. In 1991, 23.03% of STs were literate as against 42.83% among the general population. The Government's Eighth Plan document mentions that nearly 52% of STs live below the poverty line as against 30% of the general population.
In a study on Kerala, a state considered to be unique for having developed a more egalitarian society with a high quality of life index comparable to that of only the 'developed' countries, paradoxically shows that for STs the below poverty line population was 64.5% while for Scheduled Castes it was 47% and others 41%. About 95% of Adivasis live in rural areas, less than 10% are itinerant hunter-gatherers but more than half depend upon forest produce. Very commonly, police, forest guards and officials bully and intimidate Adivasis and large numbers are routinely arrested and jailed, often for petty offences.
Only a few Adivasi communities which are forest dwellers have not been displaced and continue to live in forests, away from the mainstream development activities, such as in parts of Bastar in Madhya Pradesh, Koraput, Phulbani and Mayurbanj in Orissa and of Andaman Islands.
Thousands of Korku children below the age of six died in the 1990s due to malnutrition and starvation in the Melghat Tiger Reserve of Maharashtra due to the denial of access to their life sustaining resource base. Adivasis of Kalahandi-Bolangir in Orissa and of Palamu in south Bihar have reported severe food shortage. According to the Central Planning Committee of the Government of India, nearly 41 districts with significant Adivasi populations are prone to deaths due to starvation, which are not normally reported as such.
Invasion of Adivasi territories The "Land Acquisition Act" of 1894 concretised the supremacy of the sovereign to allow for total colonisation of any territory in the name of 'public interest' which in most cases are not community notions of common good. This is so especially for the Adivasis. The colonial juristic concept of res nullius (that which has not been conferred by the sovereign belongs to the sovereign) and terra nullius (land that belongs to none) bulldozed traditional political and social entities beginning the wanton destruction of traditional forms of self-governance.
The invasion of Adivasi territories, which for the most part commenced during the colonial period, intensified in the post-colonial period. Most of the Adivasi territories were claimed by the state. Over 10 million Adivasis have been displaced to make way for development projects such as dams, mining, industries, roads, protected areas etc. Though most of the dams (over 3000) are located in Adivasi areas, only 19.9% (1980-81) of Adivasi land holdings are irrigated as compared to 45.9% of all holdings of the general population. India produces as many as 52 principal, 3 fuel, 11 metallic, 38 non-metallic and a number of minor minerals.
Of these 45 major minerals (coal, iron ore, magnetite, manganese, bauxite, graphite, limestone, dolomite, uranium etc) are found in Adivasi areas contributing some 56% of the national total mineral earnings in terms of value. Of the 4,175 working mines reported by the Indian Bureau of Mines in 1991-92, approximately 3500 could be assumed to be in Adivasi areas. Income to the government from forests rose from Rs.5.6 million in 1869-70 to more than Rs.13 billions in the 1970s. The bulk of the nation's productive wealth lay in the Adivasi territories. Yet the Adivasi has been driven out, marginalised and robbed of dignity by the very process of 'national development'.
The systematic opening up of Adivasi territories, the development projects and the 'tribal development projects' make them conducive for waves of immigrants. In the rich mineral belt of Jharkhand, the Adivasi population has dropped from around 60% in 1911 to 27.67% in 1991. These developments have in turn driven out vast numbers of Adivasis to eke out a living in the urban areas and in far-flung places in slums. According to a rough estimate, there are more than 40,000 tribal domestic working women in Delhi alone! In some places, development induced migration of Adivasis to other Adivasi areas has also led to fierce conflicts as between the Santhali and the Bodo in Assam.
Internal colonialism Constitutional privileges and welfare measures benefit only a small minority of the Adivasis. These privileges and welfare measures are denied to the majority of the Adivasis and they are appropriated by more powerful groups in the caste order. The steep increase of STs in Maharashtra in real terms by 148% in the two decades since 1971 is mainly due to questionable inclusion, for political gains, of a number of economically advanced groups among the backwards in the list of STs.
The increase in numbers, while it distorts the demographic picture, has more disastrous effects. The real tribes are irretrievably pushed down in the 'access or claim ladder' with these new entrants cornering the lion's share of both resources and opportunities for education, social and economic advancement.
Despite the Bonded Labour Abolition Act of 1976, Adivasis still form a substantial percentage of bonded labour in the country.
Despite positive political, institutional and financial commitment to tribal development, there is presently a large scale displacement and biological decline of Adivasi communities, a growing loss of genetic and cultural diversity and destruction of a rich resource base leading to rising trends of shrinking forests, crumbling fisheries, increasing unemployment, hunger and conflicts. The Adivasis have preserved 90% of the country's bio-cultural diversity protecting the polyvalent, precolonial, biodiversity friendly Indian identity from bio-cultural pathogens. Excessive and indiscriminate demands of the urban market have reduced Adivasis to raw material collectors and providers.
It is a cruel joke that people who can produce some of India's most exquisite handicrafts, who can distinguish hundreds of species of plants and animals, who can survive off the forests, the lands and the streams sustainably with no need to go to the market to buy food, are labeled as 'unskilled'. Equally critical are the paths of resistance that many Adivasi areas are displaying: Koel Karo, Bodh Ghat, Inchampalli, Bhopalpatnam, Rathong Chu ... big dams that were proposed by the enlightened planners and which were halted by the mass movements.
Such a situation has risen because of the discriminatory and predatory approach of the mainstream society on Adivasis and their territories. The moral legitimacy for the process of internal colonisation of Adivasi territories and the deliberate disregard and violations of constitutional protection of STs has its basis in the culturally ingrained hierarchical caste social order and consciousness that pervades the entire politico-administrative and judicial system. This pervasive mindset is also a historical construct that got reinforced during colonial and post-colonial India.
The term 'Criminal Tribe' was concocted by the British rulers and entered into the public vocabulary through the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 under which a list of some 150 communities including Adivasis, were mischievously declared as (naturally) 'criminal'. Though this shameful act itself was repealed in 1952, the specter of the so-called 'criminal tribes' continue to haunt these 'denotified tribes' - the Sansi, Pardhi, Kanjar, Gujjar, Bawaria, Banjara and others. They are considered as the first natural suspects of all petty and sundry crimes except that they are now hauled up under the Habitual Offenders Act that replaced the British Act! Stereotyping of numerous communities has reinforced past discriminatory attitudes of the dominant mainstream in an institutionalised form.
There is a whole history of legislation, both during the pre-independence as well as post-independence period, which was supposed to protect the rights of the Adivasis. As early as 1879, the "Bombay Province Land Revenue Code" prohibited transfer of land from a tribal to a non-tribal without the permission of the authorities. The 1908 "Chotanagpur Tenancy Act" in Bihar, the 1949 "Santhal Pargana Tenancy (Supplementary) Act", the 1969 "Bihar Scheduled Areas Regulations", the 1955 "Rajasthan Tenancy Act" as amended in 1956, the 1959 "MPLP Code of Madhya Pradesh", the 1959 "Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation" and amendment of 1970, the 1960 "Tripura Land Revenue Regulation Act", the 1970 "Assam Land and Revenue Act", the 1975 "Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction of Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act" etc. are state legislations to protect Adivasi land rights.
In Andhra for example, enquiries on land transfer violations were made in 57,150 cases involving 245,581 acres of land, but only about 28% of lands were restored despite persistent militant struggles. While in the case of Kerala, out of a total claim for 9909.4522 hectares made by 8754 applicants, only 5.5% of the claims have been restored. And this is happening in spite of favourable judicial orders - orders which the state governments are circumventing by attempting to dismantle the very protective legislation itself.
The callous and casual manner with which mainstream India approaches the fulfillment of the constitutional obligations with reference to the tribes, and the persistent attempts by the politico-administrative system to subvert the constitution by deliberate acts of omission and commission, and the enormous judicial tolerance towards this speak volumes on the discriminatory approach that permeates the society with regard to the legal rights of the Adivasis.
Race, religion and language
The absence of neat classifications of Adivasis as a homogenous social-cultural category and the intensely fluid nature of non-Adivasis are evident in the insuperable difficulty in arriving at a clear anthropological definition of a tribal in India, be it in terms of ethnicity, race, language, social forms or modes of livelihood.
The major waves of ingress into India divide the tribal communities into Veddids, similar to the Australian aborigines, and the Paleamongoloid Austro-Asiatic from the north-east. The third were the Greco-Indians who spread across Gujarat, Rajasthan and Pakistan from Central Asia. The fourth is the Negrito group of the Andaman Islands - the Great Andamanese, the Onge, the Jarawa and the Sentinelese who flourished in these parts for some 20,000 years but who could well become extinct soon. The Great Andamanese have been wiped out as a viable community with about only 30 persons alive as are the Onges who are less than a 100.
In the mid-Indian region, the Gond who number over 5 million, are the descendants of the dark skinned Kolarian or Dravidian tribes and speak dialects of Austric language family as are the Santhal who number 4 million. The Negrito and Austroloid people belong to the Mundari family of Munda, Santhal, Ho, Ashur, Kharia, Paniya, Saora etc. The Dravidian groups include the Gond, Oraon, Khond, Malto, Bhil, Mina, Garasia, Pradhan etc. and speak Austric or Dravidian family of languages. The Gujjar and Bakarwal descend from the Greco Indians and are interrelated with the Gujjar of Gujarat and the tribes settled around Gujranwala in Pakistan.
There are some 200 indigenous peoples in the north-east. The Boro, Khasi, Jantia, Naga, Garo and Tripiri belong to the Mongoloid stock like the Naga, Mikir, Apatani, Boro, Khasi, Garo, Kuki, Karbi etc. and speak languages of the Tibeto-Burman language groups and the Mon Khmer. The Adi, Aka, Apatani, Dafla, Gallong, Khamti, Monpa, Nocte, Sherdukpen, Singpho, Tangsa, Wancho etc of Arunachal Pradesh and the Garo of Meghalaya are of Tibeto-Burman stock while the Khasi of Meghalaya belong to the Mon Khmer group. In the southern region, the Malayali, Irula, Paniya, Adiya, Sholaga, Kurumba etc belong to the proto-Australoid racial stock speaking dialects of the Dravidian family.
The Census of India 1991 records 63 different denominations as "other" of over 5.7 million people of which most are Adivasi religions. Though the Constitution recognises them as a distinct cultural group, yet when it comes to religion those who do not identify as Christians, Muslims or Buddhists are compelled to register themselves as Hindus. Hindus and Christians have interacted with Adivasis to civilize them, which has been defined as sanscritisation and westernisation. However, as reflected during the 1981 census it is significant that about 5% of the Adivasis registered their religion by the names of their respective tribes or the names adopted by them. In 1991 the corresponding figure rose to about 10% indicating the rising consciousness and assertion of identity!
Though Article 350A of the Constitution requires primary education to be imparted in mother tongue, in general this has not been imparted except in areas where the Adivasis have been assertive. NCERT, the state owned premier education research centre has not shown any interest. With the neglect of Adivasi languages, the State and the dominant social order aspire to culturally and socially emasculate the Adivasis subdued by the dominant cultures. The Anthropological Survey of India reported a loss of more than two-thirds of the spoken languages, most of them tribal.
Fragmentation Some of the ST peoples of Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, W. Bengal, Sikkim, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram have their counterparts across the border in China (including Tibet), Bhutan, Myanmar and Bangladesh. The political aspirations of these trans-border tribes who find themselves living in different countries as a result of artificial demarcation of boundaries by erstwhile colonial rulers continue to be ignored despite the spread and proliferation of militancy, especially in the north east, making it into a conflict zone.
The Adivasi territories have been divided amongst the states formed on the basis of primarily the languages of the mainstream caste society, ignoring the validity of applying the same principle of language for the Adivasis in the formation of states. Jharkhand has been divided amongst Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa though the Bihar part of Jharkhand has now become a separate state after decades of struggle. The Gond region has been divided amongst Orissa, Andhra, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Similarly the Bhil region has been divided amongst Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan.
In the north-east, for example, the Naga in addition are divided into Nagaland, Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh. Further administrative sub-divisions within the states into districts, talukas and panchayats have been organised in such a way that the tribal concentration is broken up which furthers their marginalisation both physically and politically.
The 1874 "Scheduled District Act", the 1919 "Government of India Act" and later the "Government of India Act" of 1935 classified the hill areas as excluded and partially excluded areas where the provincial legislature had no jurisdiction. These formed the basis for the Article 244 under which two separate schedules viz. the V Schedule and the VI Schedule were incorporated for provision of a certain degree of self-governance in designated tribal majority areas. However, in effect this remained a non-starter. However, the recent legislation of the Panchayat Raj (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act of 1996 has raised hope of a radical redefinition of self-governance.
By not applying the same yard stick and norms for Adivasis as for the upper caste dominated mainstream, by not genuinely recognizing the Adivasis' traditional self-governing systems and by not being serious about devolving autonomy, the Indian State and society indicates a racist and imperialist attitude.
The call for a socially homogenous country, particularly in the Hindi Hindu paradigm have suppressed tribal languages, defiled cultures and destroyed civilisations.
The creation of a unified albeit centralised polity and the extension of the formal system of governance have emasculated the self-governing institutions of the Adivasis and with it their internal cohesiveness.
The struggle for the future, the conceptual vocabulary used to understand the place of Adivasis in the modern world has been constructed on the feudal, colonial and imperialistic notions which combines traditional and historical constructs with the modern construct based on notions of linear scientific and technological progress.
Historically the Adivasis, as explained earlier, are at best perceived as sub-humans to be kept in isolation, or as 'primitives' living in remote and backward regions who should be "civilized". None of them have a rational basis. Consequently, the official and popular perception of Adivasis is merely that of isolation in forest, tribal dialect, animism, primitive occupation, carnivorous diet, naked or semi-naked, nomadic habits, love, drink and dance. Contrast this with the self-perception of Adivasis as casteless, classless and egalitarian in nature, community-based economic systems, symbiotic with nature, democratic according to the demands of the times, accommodative history and people-oriented art and literature.
The significance of their sustainable subsistence economy in the midst of a profit oriented economy is not recognised in the political discourse, and the negative stereotyping of the sustainable subsistence economy of Adivasi societies is based on the wrong premise that the production of surplus is more progressive than the process of social reproduction in co-existence with nature.
The source of the conflicts arises from these unresolved contradictions. With globalisation, the hitherto expropriation of rights as an outcome of development has developed into expropriation of rights as a precondition for development. In response, the struggles for the rights of the Adivasis have moved towards the struggles for power and a redefinition of the contours of state, governance and progress.
http://www.pucl.org/Topics/Dalit-tribal/2003/adivasi.htm
BJP favours granting citizenship to Hindus, Sikhs from Pak
ALANDHAR: The BJP has demanded that the government grant citizenship to Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan who have fled to India after facing harassment there.
"Every person who wishes to return to our country, should be granted citizenship, irrespective of the community he or she belongs to," BJP MP Navjot Singh Sidhu said here. He was asked about the demand of Hindu and Sikh families from Pakistan, who have been residing here for over a decade, that they be given Indian citizenship.
"It is my stand and also of my party that they should be granted citizenship," he said, adding there was a need to expedite the process of granting citizenship.
Nearly 200 such families are residing in Jalandhar. The Punjab BJP had set up a committee to study problems of Hindu families which have settled in the state after being driven out of Pakistan.
The three-member committee is headed by Rajya Sabha MP Avinash Rai Khanna who has demanded that the government provide an assistance Rs 4,000 per month to each of these displaces families.
Bumper crop may prompt duty on wheat
17 Jul 2010, 0111 hrs IST,ET Bureau
NEW DELHI: The government could impose duty to discourage cheap wheat imports following a bumper crop and overflowing godowns and could also allow export of some varieties of non-basmati rice.
An empowered group of ministers, or EGoM, will take up the issue late next week. The food ministry has proposed an import tax of 40% on wheat.
"We will review in the next EGoM meet on whether or not to impose tax on wheat imports, and will discuss allowing export of some particular varieties of non-basmati rice," food minister Sharad Pawar said on Friday.
There has been pressure over the last several months on traders from Kerala and Tamil Nadu that the government relax the export ban on matta and ponni varieties, both of which are consumed by expat Indians in the West Asia region and other parts.
The ban on non-basmati rice exports was imposed in April 2008 to cool down food inflation.
Speaking at an award function of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), Mr Pawar indicated that the price of wheat sold in the open market, or open market sale scheme (OMSS), by the government could be slashed further to encourage speedier offtake by states and freeing up of storage space.
White paper on public debt in a month
17 Jul 2010, 0100 hrs IST,ET Bureau
NEW DELHI: The government will, for the first time, unveil a white paper on country's public debt in a month, chief economic advisor to the finance ministry Kaushik Basu said.
The white paper will present the government's total public debt in a transparent manner and outline a road map for its reduction, a promise made by the government in the budget for 2010-11. "The white paper is much on schedule," he said.
"As part of the fiscal consolidation process, it would be for the first time that the government would target an explicit reduction in its domestic public debt-GDP ratio," finance minister Pranab Mukherjee had assured the Parliament while presenting the budget for 2010-11.
The assurance followed the 13th Finance Commission recommendation that the combined debt of the Centre and the states be capped at 68% of the GDP by 2014-15 as part of the fiscal consolidation road map suggested by it.
"I intend to bring out, within six months, a status paper giving a detailed analysis of the situation and a road map for curtailing the overall public debt. This would be followed by an annual report on the subject," the finance minister had said.
The fiscal consolidation path, as prescribed by the 13th Finance Commission, embodies steady reduction in the Centre's debt to 45% of GDP and that of states to less than 25% GDP by 2014-15. The commission's report had projected the Centre's debt at 54.2% of the GDP at the end of 2009-10.
Monsoon deficit up 24%, dry spell seen
16 Jul 2010, 0514 hrs IST,ET Bureau
NEW DELHI: The met department does not expect a significant resurgence in the monsoon next week, potentially damaging the sowing of soyabean and paddy and forcing farmers to replant.
"It will not be a major revival next week," said BP Yadav, director and spokesman at the India Meteorological Department (IMD). The IMD had earlier forecast that rainfall in July would recover to 98% of normal in July after falling 16% short of average last month.
The met's new forecast casts a shadow over crucial kharif crops such as soybean, rice, cotton, sugarcane and corn, over which there are already worries. Likewise, the situation has turned grim for sugarcane too because July is a key sowing month.
The forecast of dry spell comes on the back of rainfall deficit rising to 24% last week. A good monsoon raised the prospect of sustaining the moderation in food inflation for two weeks. But excess rainfall has so far only been registered in the southern meteorological region.
That is bad news on the price front because the annual rate of inflation is stubbornly ensconced above 10% for five months even without the full impact of a recent fuel price rise.
The rain deficit has been the highest in the east and central regions while it has been noticeably lesser in the north and north-western regions. Rainfall in the soybean-growing central state of Madhya Pradesh was barely a third of normal in a week.
"There is still good moisture in soil. But if it does not rain after 7-10 days, then re-planting has to be initiated and initial growth would be retarded," a Soyabean Processors' Association official was quoted by agencies as saying.
IMD officials also maintained that the rain distribution had been fairly well-spread, boosting soil moisture in the first half of July. Analysts expect this to help even if total rainfall is 24% below normal.
Economy will return to a high growth trajectory in FY11: Basu
17 Jul 2010, 0056 hrs IST,ET Bureau
NEW DELHI: A day after China reported a moderation in economic growth, a key finance ministry official said the Indian economy would return to a high growth trajectory in 2010-11, with the first quarter likely to expand at around 9%.
Chief economic advisor to the finance ministry Kaushik Basu also expects food prices to further ease by the end of the month and wholesale price based inflation fall to 5% by March next year.
"Right now I believe growth will be faster than 8.5% this fiscal. In the first quarter it may well be around 9%," said Mr Basu on Friday.
This would be the fastest growth registered by the Indian economy in nearly a year, even better than the 8.6% growth clocked in the last quarter of 2009-10.
The government had earlier projected that the economy would grow by 8.5% in the current fiscal, up from 7.4% in 2009-10. But the International Monetary Fund last week revised the country's GDP growth estimate to as high as 9.5%, from its earlier projection of 8.8% in 2010.
Though the finance ministry is yet to formally revise its forecast, it is confident that the high industrial output will improve the overall economic performance. "The most recent IIP growth figure for May shows an annual growth rate of 11.5%. Within this, capital goods and consumer durables are growing particularly fast. Since these items tend to capture the moods of corporations and consumers, the optimism in these figures speaks well for India's overall growth prospects in the medium to long term," Mr Basu said.
Despite the uptick in economic activities, he cautioned against an abrupt withdrawal from the stimulus, as the world economy is yet to fully recover from the financial crisis of 2008.
The RBI is expected to raise rates, for a second time this month, in its policy review on July 27, in a bid to control inflation. But Mr Basu said any monetary tightening pushes up unemployment. "Sucking out money from the system may curb inflation but hurt growth," he said.
"It is reasonable to predict that food price inflation that will be announced on July 29 will be substantially lower that what it is right now," he said.
Food price inflation inched up to 12.81% for the week ended July 3. Overall inflation for June stood at a higher 10.55%, as against 10.16% in May. Inflation in non-food items continues to be high at 8.6% in June.
Mr Basu said the immediate upward pressure on prices from petrol decontrol has already partly got registered in the June inflation figures, while the rest will be visible in the July data. However, in the long run, a decontrol in fuel prices will be less inflationary, he argued, as it will bring down the government's subsidy burden and trim the deficit.
The Centre's deficit is likely to be lower in the current fiscal, he said, due to the windfall from 3G spectrum auction. "We will not only achieve but probably beat the fiscal and revenue deficit targets for the year." For 2010-11, the Centre's fiscal deficit is budgeted at 5.5% of the GDP, while the revenue deficit is targeted at 4% of the GDP.
Markets ruled firm on FII buying last week; Sensex up 122 pts
MUMBAI: Markets continued to rule firm for the second consecutive week as the BSE benchmark Sensex rallied by another 122 points on stock-specific buying following strong Q1 results and sustained capital inflow from foreign funds.
The Sensex advanced in three out of the five trading sessions boosted by market regulator Sebi's decision to allow physical settlement of stock derivatives.
India's largest realty firm by market capitalisation, DLF, was the biggest Sensex gainer. DLF stocks rose 8.10 per cent to Rs 319.65. Realty shares were in demand on speculation that the government will soon announce a hike in foreign direct investment (FDI) in the real estate sector.
India's largest truck maker by sales, Tata Motors, was the second biggest Sensex gainer. The stock rose 7.92 per cent to Rs 831.6 after its global vehicles sales shot up 46 per cent to 91,608 units in June 2010 over the same month last year.
TCS reported a better-than-expected 24.25 per cent rise in net profit in June quarter. The 50-issue Nifty of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) crossed the 5,400-mark after 29 months, while the 30-share Sensex scaled the 18,000-level during the week for the first time in three months.
The gains were somewhat pared by a less-than-expected industrial production data for May 2010. The NSE Nifty ended at 5,393.90 points after touching a high of 5,453.45, a level not seen since February 6, 2008, when it had hit the 5,470.40 level. It had ended at 5,483.90 on February 5, 2008.
The BSE barometer ended higher by 122.28 points, or 0.69 per cent, to 17,955.82 from its last weekend's close. Among the major indices, the BSE-Realty shot up by 197.17 points, or 6.04 per cent, BSE-CD by 195.24 points, or 3.91 per cent, the Bankex by 335.05 points, or 3.03 per cent, and the BSE-CG gained 357.69 points, or 2.44 per cent.
Small-cap and Mid-cap indices rose 172.83 and 80.63 points, or 1.86 per cent and 1.10 per cent, respectively. Among other gainers ICICI Bank gained 3.54 per cent, State Bank of India 3.05 per cent, Jaiprakash Associates 3.98 per cent, L&T 2.84 per cent and Tata Steel was up 2.68 per cent.
However, M&M dropped 5.38 per cent, RCom 3.18 per cent, Infosys 3.26 per cent, Maruti 3.06 per cent, Bharti Airtel 3.05 per cent, ONGC 2.99 per cent and ACC 2.86 per cent.
Increased buying by foreign funds over the past few days and revival of monsoon also helped the market sentiment. Turnover at the BSE and NSE rose to Rs 21,824.66 crore and Rs 68,364.07 crore respectively from last weekend's level of Rs 18,640.33 crore and Rs 53,528.24 crore. |
SEBI panel wants open offer trigger set at 25%
17 Jul 2010, 1413 hrs IST,Ashwin J Punnen & Reena Zachariah,ET Bureau
MUMBAI: Company takeover rules in India are set to get egalitarian and move closer to global practices, if the market regulator accepts the suggestions of a panel it constituted. ( Watch
Prohibit James Lane from entering in India - CM demands
July 19, 2007
Updates:
- Prohibit James Lane from entering in India - CM demand (Mumbai, 19 Jul 07)
- James Lain's book not for sale : Balasaheb Mohite-Patil (Parbhani, 5 May 07)
Mumbai (Maharashtra): People of Maharashtra are incensed with James Lane, author of the book that has controversial and offensive matter about Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. A demand was made by Shri. Nitin Gadkari, a leader of BJP in the Legislative Council to prohibit James Lane from visiting Maharashtra. His demand was agreed to by the Chief Minister who promised that he would write to the External Affairs Ministry in the matter. Smt. Nilam Gorhe had earlier pointed out that James Lane was interested in paying a visit to Maharashtra.
In the question and answer session, in LC, S/Shri. Sanjay Datta, Govindrao Adik, Dhanaji Sadh, Nitin Gadkari, Pandurang Fudkar had first raised the question. Shri. Sanjay Dutta who was presenting the question duing the session but was stopped in the middle by Shri. Diwakar Raote, the senior MLA of Shiv Sena. He informed Shri. Dutta about the ban on notebooks with pictures of Shivaji Maharaj in Kerala. Shri. Rajendra Shingane, the General Administration Minister of the State said in his reply that it is partly true that book written by James Lane has created furors among the people of Maharashtra.Although Mumbai High Court has lifted the ban on book written by James Lane, Maharsahtra Government approached the Supreme Court and has obtained a 'stay order' on sale of the book. He also said that the Government is making efforts to continue the ban.
James Lain's book not for sale : Balasaheb Mohite-Patil
May 5, 2007
Parbhani: Shri. Balasaheb Mohite-Patil, President of the all India Maratha Mahasangh (Marathwada Region) warned that if someone tries to rub salt on the wounds by selling the book by James Laine, such person will not be spared. He was giving his views on the ban lifted by the Mumbai High Court on the book, "Shivaji: the Hindu King in Islamic India" authored by James Laine.
He said further that Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj is the pride of Hindus. The verdict has gone against us because the State Govt. has failed to properly present its case in the Court. But the book should not be sold in the market. This is a matter related to social and religious issue. Insult meted out to Rajmata Jijau and Chhatrapati Shivaji by presenting untrue incidents is an insult to the true history and will not be tolerated by 'all India Chhava Sanghatana, Maratha Mahasangh and Warkari Mahamandal'. Hindus are very discontented due to such slanderous matter written about their national leader. James Laine should be put behind bars as a traitor.
Shri. Subhash Javale-Patil, a senior leader of Chhava said that people of Maharashtra will not tolerate such mockery of history. Such mockery of history can have adverse effects on the people. Wrong information and message reaching people has to be stopped. History should depict the true picture. So far, the Govt. has been very firm on the issue. The Court should re-examine the facts and bring a ban on the said book.
(Congratulations to the Hindu organizations for promptly registering their protests against the attacks on national heroes. If Hindus always remain alert, the religious lassitude can be easily removed - Editor)
Source: Daily Sanatan Prabhat
Related HJS campaign
> Defamations: Abuse on Hinduism
Related Articles
» Shiv Sena targets cyber cafe to protest Orkut
» HJS protest: IBN-7 declares to remove the denigrating advt
» Arrest warrant against Dera chief!
» Anti-Hindus desecrate statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj
Notice: The source URLs cited in the article might be only valid on the date the article was published. Most of them may become invalid from a day to a few months later. When a URL fails to work, you may go to the top level of the source's website and search for the article.
Disclaimer: The news published are collected from various sources and responsibility of news lies solely on the source itself. Hindu Janajagruti Samiti or its website is not in anyway connected nor is it responsible for the news content presented here.
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/2063.html
State to seek extradition of 'Shivaji' author
TNN, Mar 23, 2004, 02.03am IST
MUMBAI: The controversy over American scholar James Laine's book Shivaji: Hindu king in Islamic India took a new turn on Monday with Maharashtra's home minister and state NCP president R R Patil deciding to seek Interpol's help in arresting and bringing the author to Mumbai.
The book is alleged to contain derogatory references to Chhatrapati Shivaji and his mother Jijamata.
Patil told newspersons that the state government would urge the CBI to seek Interpol's assistance in bringing the Texas-based scholar to Mumbai for prosecution.
Simultaneously, the state police will also try to ascertain the people whom Laine met in India to gather material for his book, which is now banned in Maharashtra.
Patil also criticised Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee for not apologising for his earlier opposition to the ban on the tome.
While addressing an election rally in Beed, Marathwada, on Saturday, Vajpayee had, however, revised his stand and endorsed the DF government's ban on the book.
He did not, however, apologise for his earlier stand, as demanded by the NCP.
The state BJP has accused the NCP of fanning passions over this sensitive issue on the eve of elections "so that people's attention could be diverted from the serious issues confronting the state".
Maharashtra BJP general secretary Vinod Tawde said in a statement that Patil should do some introspection before criticising the PM.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/576118.cms
Shiv Sena activists held for vandalising news channel office
KOLHAPUR (Maharashtra): A Shiv Sena legislator and eight party workers were arrested on Saturday on charges of vandalising the office here of a news channel and assaulting a Kannada leader, police said.
Legislator Rajesh Kshirsagar and his party workers on Friday ransacked the office of Zee 24 Taas, a Marathi news channel. They also assaulted Kannada Rakshana Vedika leader Syed Mansoor.
"We have arrested Kshirsagar and eight workers of Shiv Sena for vandalising and destroying private property of the news channel and assaulting a person," senior police inspector Gyaneshwar Munde said.
The mob was angry about a live show on the channel on the Maharashtra-Karnataka border issue. They shouted slogans against the channel for inviting guest speakers from Karnataka and also damaged Mansoor's vehicle.
"All nine have been presented in the local court," Munde said.
Maoist copter price |
| SUJAN DUTTA |
New Delhi, July 16: The UN has informed India that it will have to bear the cost of withdrawing its air force contingent and helicopters from Africa for counter-Naxalite duties if it wants to pull out immediately, a senior officer told The Telegraph. This is likely to delay the withdrawal of the Indian Air Force with its helicopters from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan up to the middle of next year, unless the government decides that the demands of internal security are so pressing that it can risk its commitment to the UN and foot the cost of the pullout that will run into millions of dollars. India deploys its military for UN duties not only to enhance its international prestige — and buttress its claim for a permanent seat in the Security Council — but also so that its soldiers may earn handsome amounts in dollars for short-term duties that could take them years to earn in the country. A pullout immediately will mean not only not getting paid by the UN — whose dues to India run into millions of dollars — but also losing precious foreign exchange. India committed its air force contingent, which includes the air force special forces called the Garud, and 25 helicopters because no other country was ready to meet the force requirement projected by the UN Department of Peace Keeping Operations (UNDPKO) for its mandates in Congo and Sudan. But after Naxalite-hit states mounted pressure on the Centre to deploy greater numbers of helicopters for troop transportation, surveillance and casualty evacuation and the Union home ministry asked the defence establishment for assistance, the IAF sought permission to withdraw its helicopters. The UNDPKO has informed India that in its "Letters of Assist" for the missions in Congo and Sudan, India had committed the Mi-17 multi-utility helicopters and the Mi-35 gunships for specific periods up to the middle of 2011. The IAF contingent with its assets were transported to the operational areas in Africa at UN cost. But if the IAF has to pull out now, it will have to pay the cost of the pullout and cannot ask for UN subsidies. Flagging off another contingent that is replacing the troops in Congo on Thursday, the deputy chief of air staff, Air Marshal N.V. Tyagi, said the withdrawal from Congo and Sudan would be a "progressive phaseout". He said the helicopters pulled out of Congo would not necessarily be deployed for counter-Naxalite operations but may be used for the other responsibilities of the air force – like air maintenance of forward posts in high altitude on the borders – but that would allow for other hardware to be redeployed."Our main tasks have been air maintenance and general tasks. The Maoist problem is recent in origin and whatever the requirements are would be met from the assets available," Tyagi said.He added that 17 MI-17s and 8 MI-35 helicopters would be withdrawn by mid-2011. The first contingent to be withdrawn would bring back with them five MI-17 and four MI-35 helicopters. The Indian Air Force's role in Congo has changed since this month. "Our contingent's basic purpose was peace keeping but from first July it has changed to stabilisation operations. Their primary role is to provide mobility to the (UN) forces and to take actions against those trying to destabilise peace," Tyagi said. The contingent that was flagged off on Thursday is the fifth rotation of IAF personnel to the DRC. The contingent of 285 personnel is led by Group Captain Pradip Waman Ambekar. It will be posted along Congo's borders with Rwanda and Uganda operating out of Kivu and Ituri. |
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100717/jsp/frontpage/story_12694465.jsp |
JUSTICE AND THE ADIVASI - The tribal predicament and the genesis of the Maoist problem | |
| Ramachandra Guha | |
In the summer of 2006, I travelled with a group of scholars and writers through the district of Dantewada, then (as now) the epicentre of the conflict between the Indian State and Maoist rebels. Writing about my experiences in a four-part series published in The Telegraph, I predicted that the conflict would intensify, because the Maoists would not give up their commitment to armed struggle, while the government would not be able to "put the interests of a vulnerable minority — the adivasis — ahead of those with more money and political power". Thus "in the forest regions of central and eastern India, years of struggle and strife lie ahead. Here, in the jungles and hills they once called their own, the tribals will find themselves pierced on one side by the State and pressed on the other by the insurgents". That my forecast appears to have come true does not give me much satisfaction. The scholar was obliged to draw a melancholy conclusion, but the citizen still hoped that one side would give up arms and the other more sincerely implement the provisions of the Indian Constitution. In the wake of continuing attacks by Maoists on security forces, and the killings of Maoist leaders in illegal 'encounters', it is even harder for hope to win over cynicism. However, even if one cannot see a resolution of the problem any time soon, one can still seek a deeper understanding of its genesis. This can be had through two recent works of scholarship that take the tribal predicament as their point of departure. Out of this Earth, co-authored by the anthropologist, Felix Padel, and the activist, Samarendra Das, provides a comprehensive analysis of the social and environmental impacts of the mining boom in Orissa. The authors show how companies split tribal communities by bribes and coercion, such that a division emerges between 'accepters' and 'refusers'. They document the extensive collusion, between politicians and bureaucrats on the one hand and private companies on the other, which has forced tribals off the land they own but below which valuable ores are to be found. As Padel and Das point out, the autonomous and non-violent resistance to destructive mining has been misrepresented by the State, corporate interests and even at times by the media as a "Maoist threat". This latter label is then used "to crush all kinds of indigenous opposition based on the people's refusal to be displaced, to allow their land to be snatched away and their communities to be torn apart". The Padel-Das work may be read in conjunction with a study conducted by the Institute of Rural Management, Anand. Closely researched and soberly argued, the study — whose principal authors are Ajay Dandekar and Chitrangada Choudhury — examines the workings of the Panchayat (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act. Passed in 1996, PESA conferred on tribal communities the ownership of non-timber forest produce, the power to prevent alienation of land to non-tribals, the power of prior recommendation in granting mining leases, and the right to be consulted in land acquisition by the government. Assessing the impact of the legislation a decade later, the report found that "in most states, the enabling rules for the gram sabha's control over prospecting of minor minerals, planning and management of water bodies, control and management of minor forest produce, [and] dissent to land acquisition are not yet in place, suggesting reluctance by the state governments to honour the mandate of PESA". The IRMA study passes strictures on the abdication by governors of their responsibilities. Although they have been "accorded limitless power by the Constitution to ensure the upholding of PESA", the governors of different states "have slowly but surely been neglecting their duties towards the law, and towards tribal communities". Tribal activists told the IRMA team that "Governors have not responded in a single instance to their petitions for interventions in crises that threaten them, such as deepening clashes over land, mining or police excesses". The Dandekar-Choudhury study speaks of the widespread transfer of tribal lands into non-tribal hands through fraud and forcible occupation. Despite a long-standing promise to repeal or amend it, the colonial-era Land Acquisition Act of 1894 is still being used, or misused, to acquire land owned by households and communities and hand it over to the corporate sector. In the process, the State has sparked a series of bitter conflicts throughout eastern and central India. "When it comes to acquiring mineral resources for industry," notes the study, "the stakes are… loaded against the functioning of the PESA.… [T]here is still no legal framework in place for communities to dissent in such activity in their area if they so desire, or to secure a direct stake in the earnings, through instruments such as jobs or debentures." In one village in Orissa, the researchers found that a large police station had recently been constructed, whereas in the past five decades, the state government had not bothered to build a hospital or public health centre. The reason for this bias was immediately obvious — in the shape of a new aluminium factory that had come up near the village. "Do our people need better police facilities or better health care?" asked the village headman. "What is the administration's priority?" he continued, before supplying this answer: "This is being done only because the company wants police stations, which can beat us if we ever protest against land acquisition." In the past decade, it is in tribal districts that the Maoists have made the greatest gains, in good part because of the State's own short-sighted and exploitative policies. The IRMA researchers are no sympathizers of the methods of the Naxalites. They see them (in my view, rightly) as a threat not just to Indian democracy, but to democratic values in general. They quote an activist who notes that while the Maoists might have, in the beginning, fought for greater economic and social rights for tribals, over the years they have "become corrupt, power hungry and intolerant of any difference[s]". The insurgents are also deeply hypocritical; thus "while denouncing the 'loot of adivasi resources', the Party takes money from the mining industry to fund its operations". If, despite the brutality of their methods, the Maoists have yet gained ground, it is because the Indian State has treated its tribal citizens with condescension and contempt. A course correction would take the form of "implementing PESA with political will, urgency, and creativity". The IRMA researchers suggest that memoranda of understanding with factories and mining companies "should be re-examined in a public exercise, with gram sabhas at the centre…." Each industrial or mining project in tribal areas should be preceded by an environmental impact assessment conducted by qualified and independent experts. More broadly, through "financial and juridical devolution to gram sabhas, a model of participatory and community-centred development should be nurtured", to replace the current model of top-down, industry-centred, resource-exploitative form of development being imposed on tribal areas. Ironically, although it had commissioned this assessment of PESA, the ministry of panchayti raj has thus far refused to allow it to be printed. If the ministry is sincere about its mandate, it should have this study read by all its officials. The officials of the home ministry and the prime minister's office would profit from reading it too. Perhaps four people in particular should closely read and digest its contents: the prime minister, the home minister, the Congress president, and the youngest of the Congress general secretaries. The IRMA study quotes an activist saying, "The government might not be interested in talking to the Maoists without certain pre-conditions. But what stops it from talking to its own people and understanding their pain?" Mahatma Gandhi once walked through the riot-torn districts of Bengal and Bihar — it may be too much to ask the leaders of today to walk through Dantewada, or Koraput, or Narayanpur, or Gadchiroli, or any of the other areas of tribal suffering and discontent. | |
|
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100717/jsp/opinion/story_12678165.jsp
State anti-rebel force on Greyhound lines | ||
| PRONAB MONDAL | ||
Calcutta, July 16: The state government has set up an exclusive anti-Maoist force that will not only gather intelligence on the rebels but also engage them in battle, much in the style of the Greyhounds in Andhra Pradesh. The Counter Intelligence Force (CIF) will be headed by an inspector-general (IG) of police. The IG will co-ordinate with a CRPF officer to chalk out strategies before and during an anti-Maoist operation. "The CIF will function like the Greyhound force in Andhra Pradesh," said director-general of police Bhupinder Singh. "Vivek Sahay has been appointed its inspector-general. He will supervise all operations against the Maoists." Sahay was earlier the inspector-general, armed police. The move to set up a dedicated force to deal exclusively with the Maoists was initiated after the government faced difficulties in co-ordinating between the state and central forces during operations in Lalgarh. "Currently, the CRPF and the state forces in the three Maoist-affected districts of West Midnapore, Bankura and Purulia function under three different superintendents of police. An uninterrupted co-ordination between the three SPs is needed to fight the Maoists. However, this was missing on a number of occasions," a home department official said at Writers' Buildings today. "The CIF will now lead all the major anti-Maoist operations in the state. Only one person, IG Sahay, will co-ordinate with central forces during the operations. It would not be necessary for him to inform the three SPs. The new wing will function independently and it will be accountable only to the state DGP and the chief secretary," the official added. Another official said that during operations, the CIF would be free to draw men from the state forces as well as the CRPF. The raids, however, will be conducted under the supervision of the IG, CIF. The CIF currently has a strength of 250. The personnel have been trained in jungle warfare by the army and the Border Security Force. "The strength of the CIF will shortly go up to 700. Several are still undergoing training," the home department official said. "Training camps are being set up and more men will be inducted gradually." The government has decided to set up three training centres of 250 to 300 acres each. The centres will be set up at Salua in West Midnapore, Taldangra in Bankura and Matigara in Siliguri with financial assistance from the Centre. "Once these units are ready, we will recruit young men for training. We will engage retired armymen and BSF personnel to train them in jungle warfare," the official said. Officers of the rank of deputy inspector-general of police will be in charge of the training. | ||
|
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100717/jsp/bengal/story_12694230.jsp
Cops raid Umakanto meet, kill 1 |
| OUR CORRESPONDENT |
Midnapore, July 16: A Maoist was killed and two arrested after police raided a village in West Midnapore where one of the Jnaneswari Express sabotage masterminds was supposedly holding a meeting with his aides early today. The police raided Jaybandhi village near Jhargram after receiving information that Umakanto Mahato, Saheb Ram Murmu alias Jayanta, accused of being involved in the Eastern Frontier Rifles camp in Shilda attack, Gautam Rana, a rebel released on bail, and their accomplices were holding a meeting there. "The Maoists started firing at us when we reached the outskirts of the village. We retaliated," said Mukesh Kumar, the additional superintendent of police (operations). One of the Maoists, Bikram Mahato, 40, was killed in the half-an-hour gunfight, Kumar said. He said the Maoists retreated into the village after realising that they were outnumbered. The police, with the help of villagers, then raided several houses and arrested Nepal Patra and Ranjit Rana, Gautam's brother. The police said Umakanto, Gautam and the other Maoists escaped into a nearby forest. |
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100717/jsp/bengal/story_12691807.jsp
James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India
and the attack on the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
Background - Chronology - Reactions
For more information, please also see in this issue of the crQ:
- the Editors, the complete review |
Introduction
On 5 January 2004 a group calling itself the Sambhaji Brigade attacked the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) in Pune, in the state of Maharashtra, India. There was considerable damage done to the holdings of this significant cultural repository, including to irreplaceable and unique objects of historical and literary importance. While not on the same scale, it was a catastrophe comparable to the recent destruction and looting of libraries in Sarajevo and Iraq, or the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan, a devastating blow to contemporary civilization and to the preservation of what remains of previous ones.
The attack was the preliminary culmination in a series of increasingly disturbing and destructive events that were triggered by the publication of James W. Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India (Oxford University Press, 2003). Laine's book sparked controversy in India, leading Oxford University Press India to withdraw it from the local market in November 2003. This did not sufficiently appease those upset by the book. American professor Laine had done some of the research for his book at BORI, and he thanked the institute and some scholars affiliated with it in his acknowledgements; the institute and its members were then targeted by those angered by the book. In December 2003 one of those thanked by Laine, historian Shrikant Bahulkar, was assaulted, his face blackened by Shiv Sena activists. Then, in January, came the attack on the institute itself.
While the attack was widely condemned, and over 70 of the participants were arrested, Laine and his undertaking continue to be denounced. Shivaji has now been banned, and Laine has been charged by the authorities and appears to be subject to arrest if he returns to India. Laine and his book -- and BORI -- continue to be used in what appears to be an increasingly politicised debate.
These events are particularly disturbing because, unlike most other recent incidents of large-scale cultural vandalism, they occurred in a country at peace, and in a democracy -- a system that depends on a tolerance for a plurality of opinions and on free expression to properly function. Also striking -- and worrisome -- is that the conflict has been framed as one centred around questions of historical (in)accuracy and and (ir)responsibile scholarship, but there has been little interest from many of those challenging Laine's book to debate these questions, as they have answered them with mob-rule and violence instead of counter-argument.
There has been much discussion about these events in India, but, despite the supranational issues at stake, as well as the roles played by an American professor and the world's largest -- and one of the most respected -- university presses, international press coverage has been very limited. The conflict is a complex one, and it is both politically and religiously highly charged, centred around an historical figure -- Shivaji -- who is not well known outside India.
In this introductory overview we try to present the necessary background information to allow some understanding of the events that have taken place. Other pieces in this edition of the complete review Quarterly devoted to the subject are Bhalchandrarao C. Patvardhan and Amodini Bagwe 's essay on James Laine's Controversial Book and our commentary, Attacking Myths and Institutions: James Laine's Shivaji and BORI
- Return to top of the page -
A guide to what's at issue
Shivaji
Chhattrapati Shivaji Maharaj (also known simply as Shivaji or Sivaji) lived 1627/1630 to 1680. A Maratha leader, he was fiercely opposed to the Mughals that at that time controlled much of what is now India, and was instrumental in establishing Marathi independence. Crowned the first Maratha king in 1674, he is a founding-father figure who is still highly revered in India, especially in the state of Maharashtra (major cities: Mumbai (Bombay) and Pune); see, for example the official Maharashtra state site, where a page is devoted to Shivaji: the Maker of the Maratha Nation
Shivaji is also perceived as a specifically Hindu hero, having established a Hindu empire in opposition to the Mughals (who were Muslim, and foreign). While widely revered in India, Hindu-nationalist groups have been particularly vociferous in allowing no criticism of the man, his accomplishments, and the legends around him.
His name, of great symbolic value, is often invoked, especially in recent years as a Hindu-focussed nationalism (and political polarization) in India has been resurgent. So, for example, Mumbai (formerly Bombay) airport has apparently been re-named: Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport.
For additional information, see:
- Chhatrapati Shivaji - The Legend
- Shivaji at Wikipedia
- Shivaji at Freeindia.org
- The Complexities of Shivaji by Vijay Prashad, at Proxsa (also at HVK.org, where -- scroll down -- there is a response from Bhalchandrarao C. Patwardhan)
James W. Laine
James W. Laine is the Arnold H. Lowe Professor and Chair of Religious Studies at Macalester College; see his faculty page. He got his B.A. from Texas Tech, and his M.T.S. and Th.D. from Harvard.
James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India
James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India was published by Oxford University Press; see the complete review's review. It apparently appeared in the US and the UK in early 2003, and was then published in India in the summer of 2003.
In describing the book Oxford University Press writes:
The legends of his life have become an epic story that everyone in western India knows, and an important part of the Hindu nationalists' ideology. To read Shivaji's legend today is to find expression of deeply held convictions about what Hinduism means and how it is opposed to Islam.
They also suggest:
Different sub-groups, representing a range of religious persuasions, found it in their advantage to accentuate or diminish the importance of Hindu and Muslim identity and the ideologies that supported the construction of such identities. By studying the evolution of the Shivaji legend, Laine demonstrates, we can trace the development of such constructions in both pre-British and post-colonial periods.
It appears that Laine's focus on a shifting legend -- rather a fixed-in-stone image of the man some groups insist upon -- and the notion that the legend has been adapted for other purposes is among the aspects of the book that has proved most controversial. (Ironically, reactions by some groups that tolerate only their current notion of the legend would appear to support at least Laine's underlying thesis.)
The statement in the book that appears to have provoked the greatest outrage is the mention that it has been suggested that Shivaji's father was not Shahaji, Laine writing: "Maharashtrians tell jokes naughtily that Shivaji's biological father was Dadoji Kondeo Kulkarni" (quoted, for example, in The Telegraph, 18 January). This statement -- indeed, even the mere suggestion -- is apparently considered an outrageous insult and defamation of Shivaji, Shahaji, and Shivaji's mother, Jijabai (all highly revered). The claim is also widely considered unfounded and gratuitous; apparently this particular 'naughty joke' is not familiar to most Maharashtrians (or at least none appear to have come forward acknowledging that they've heard this sort of banter).
In his acknowledgements Laine thanked numerous people, writing also:
In India, my scholarly home has been the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute in Pune, and there I profited from the advice and assistance of the senior librarian, V. L. Manjul. I read texts and learned informally a great deal about Marathi literature and Maharashtrian culture from S. S. Bahulkar, Sucheta Paranjpe, Y. B. Damle, Rekha Damle, Bhaskar Chandavarkar, and Meena Chandavarkar. Thanks to the American Institute of Indian Studies and Madhav Bhandare, I was able to spend three productive periods of research in Pune.
Laine's thanks were apparently interpreted as a declaration of scholarly complicity, and those named were among those targeted by the groups opposed to Laine's work -- despite the fact that several scholars attached to BORI distanced themselves from the book and were among those demanding that OUP India withdraw the book.
Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India has not been widely reviewed (in part likely because it is a scholarly work of the sort generally mainly reviewed in academic journals, many of which take longer to review titles than the mass media does). Among the few reviews is V.N. Datta's in The Sunday Tribune (7 December), An image that might be disturbing
For additional information see:
- The OUP-USA publicity page ((Updated - 29 March): The book is no longer listed in the OUP-USA catalogue)
- The OUP publicity page ((Updated - 29 March): The book is barely listed in the OUP catalogue)
- A sample chapter
- V.N. Datta's review, An image that might be disturbing (The Sunday Tribune, 7 December)
- Danny Yee's review at Danny Yee's Book Reviews
- To purchase Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India
- from Amazon.com
- from Amazon.co.uk
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute
The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute is located in Pune. It was founded in 1917 and is a leading repository of Indological manuscripts and a renowned centre for scholarship.
For additional information see:
- BORI at virtualpune.com
- A learning house with a world-wide appeal, at the Times of India
Sambhaji Brigade
A small, previously little known group affiliated with the Hindu-nationalist organisation, Maratha Seva Sangh
- Return to top of the page -
Chronology
(Based on Ketaki Ghoge's chronology in his article, Rape of culture leaves city in shock (Indian Express, 5 January), and other mentioned sources. See also Anupama Katakam's article, Politics of vandalism in Frontline (issue of 17-30 January) for a good overview (and pictures).)
- June, 2003: James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India published in India by Oxford University Press India.
- November, 2003: Scholars affiliated with the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI), historians (including Jaysinhrao Pawar, Babasaheb Purandare, Ninad Bedekar, and Gajanan Mehendale), and others (including city MP Pradeep Rawat) called for the withdrawal of the book. (See Scholar destroys own work on Shivaji, Manjiri Damle, Times of India, 27 December)
- 21 November 2003: Oxford University Press India apologised and withdrew the book from the Indian market. (The book continued to be listed in the OUP India catalogue until mid-January, but has since been removed. The book remains in print and available outside India.)
- 22 December 2003: Shiv Sena activists confronted and attacked scholars attached to BORI over their role in assisting Laine with his book. Sanskrit scholar Shrikant Bahulkar was physically assaulted and his face blackened (an act meant to shame him). (See Scholar destroys own work on Shivaji)
- 25 December 2003: Gajanan Mehendale, who had previously called for the withdrawal of Laine's book, went to the Shiv Sena offices to demand an apology for the assault on Bahulkar. When none was forthcoming he destroyed several hundred manuscript pages of his own unpublished biographical study of Shivaji. (See Scholar destroys own work on Shivaji)
- 28 December 2003: Shiv Sena leader Raj Thackeray personally apologised to Bahulkar. The Times of India reported (29 December) that:
- Raj assured Bahulkar that such incidents would not be repeated and that Sena activists would have to get a "clearance" from the toprung leaders before embarking on such "aggressive campaigns" in the future.
- late December, 2003: James Laine faxed a statement apologising to some Pune scholars. The Times of India reported Laine says sorry for hurting sentiments (30 December), quoting:
- "It was never my intention to defame the great Maharashtrian hero. I had no desire to upset those for whom he is an emblem of regional and national pride, and I apologise for inadvertently doing so," he said in a faxed message to some city scholars. "I foolishly misread the situation in India and figured the book would receive scholarly criticism, not censorship and condemnation. Again I apologise," the American author said.
- 5 January, 2004: Over 150 activists from the Sambhaji Brigade attacked BORI, ransacking the building, defacing books and artworks, and destroying property. The extent of the damage is not clear at this time -- especially regarding the irreplaceable manuscripts and historical artefacts -- but appears to be considerable . Seventy-two of the hooligans were arrested. (See also: 'Maratha' activists vandalise Bhandarkar (Times of India), Helping Laine: Books, powada, poem (Express News Service), and Mob ransacks Pune's Bhandarkar Institute (Rupa Chapalgaonkar, Mid-Day))
- 6 January: Mid-Day published Pune institute's desecration shocks author, in which Laine comments on events and explains, inter alia:
- My goal was not to establish my version of the true history of Shivaji, but to examine the forces that shaped the commonly held views. In so doing, I suggest that there might be other ways of reading the historical evidence, but in making such a suggestion, I have elicited a storm of criticism. I am astonished.
- 7 January: In the Indian Express Shailesh Gaikwad reports MSS chief's clout keeps govt away. Illustrating the government's disturbing priorities (and a continued interest in appeasing populist elements) State Home Minister R.R. Patil is quoted as saying:
- We condemn the attack and also distorting of the history of Chhatrapati Shivaji. The government is seeking legal opinion to ascertain if any action can be taken against the author and also whether the book can be banned.
- 9 January: At a press conference Sambhaji Brigade spokesman Shrimant Kokate is reported (in the Times of India) to have expressed pleasantries such as:
- "In fact, scholars should be happy that Bori is still intact," he remarked. Kokate said that the brigade was "most unhappy" that scholars who had helped Laine were "still alive" and demanded that they face an inquiry or be handed over to the Brigade. Kokate expressed his displeasure about the fact that the media had labelled them as goons. "We will deal with the media later," he threatened.
- In another report (Express News Service) he is quoted as saying:
- Those who fed him [Laine] with the offensive information should be hanged by the government. If the government is unable to do so they should be handed over to us.
- Kokate was apparently not arrested for these inflammatory remarks. Instead:
- 9 January: Charges were filed against James Laine and OUP India by the Deccan Gymkhana police. The charges are registered under Sections 153 and 153(A) of the Indian Penal Code. (As A.G. Noorani notes in Chhatrapati or bust (Hindustan Times, 27 January), Section 153A has frequently -- but selectively -- been invoked over the past decade and more, writing: "Section 153A is not invoked to suppress the VHP or the Shiv Sena's hate campaign but to suppress scholarly books unacceptable to them.".) These sections read:
- 153. Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot (...)
- 153A. Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony
- (See also Case against Laine, OUP (Express News Service) and Pune police book American writer Laine (Times of India))
- 12 January: James Laine published a commentary piece, In India, 'the Unthinkable' Is Printed at One's Peril in The Los Angeles Times; it is, unfortunately, not freely accessible on the Internet. In it he describes his interest in Shivaji, his book, early reactions to it, and then the events that unfolded. He relates how, initially, the book "even ranked up with Hillary Rodham Clinton's in the local list of English-language bestsellers in Pune", and mentions:
- Back in Pune this summer, I saw a couple of bland but positive reviews in the Indian papers. I thought, "As long as they don't get to the last chapter."
- He concludes the piece:
- The vast majority of Indians are appalled at what happened in Pune. And yet no one has stepped forward to defend my book and no one has called for it to be distributed again. Few will read it for themselves. Instead, many will live with the knowledge that India is a country where many thoughts are unthinkable or, if thought, best kept quiet.
- 13 January: Mid-Day reports -- in an article with a very understated headline -- OUP asked to shut Pune office. As the article explains:
- Maratha organsisations supporting Sambhaji Brigade have now forced the Oxford University Press showroom in Pune to down shutters. (...) They told the employees there that (...) they should down their shutters or else face consequences.
- No arrests were reported.
- 14 January: Despite the fact that OUP had already withdrawn Laine's book from the Indian market two months earlier, the Maharashtra government moved -- eventually successfully -- to have Laine's book banned, again citing Sections 153 and 153A of the Indian Penal Code. (See reports from the Times of India (14 January) and Reuters (16 January).)
- 16 January: Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee admirably spoke out against the book-ban. The Times of India reported PM shoots from the hip, upsets Shiv Sena, NCP, and quotes the Prime Minister as sensibly stating:
- He said the "right way" to express disagreement was through discussion. "Countering the views in a particular book by another good book is understandable," Mr Vajpayee said, adding that he did not approve of the ban on Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India by American writer James Laine.
- The Express New Service report, PM flags off Mumbai campaign, opposes ban on Shivaji book, had it a bit differently, quoting the PM as saying:
- "If you do not like anything in a particular book, then sit and discuss it. Banning a book is not a solution, we have to tackle it ideologically ... If differences of opinion remain after a issue is discussed, the best way would be to come out with another good book on the subject"
- As the Times of India report also notes: "Ironically, the PM made this observation at a function to unveil a majestic statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji in the Sahar airport precincts."
- Vajpayee's comments were immediately denounced, including by groups allied with the PM's party. Indifferent to principles, at least one person shifted the focus to what is really at issue:
- "He should have kept mum, especially since elections are round the corner," a senior Sena leader present at the function told TNN.
- (See also PM not happy with ban on book on Shivaji in Mid-Day)
- (Updated - 29 March): Unfortunately, once election time rolled around, Vajpayee began singing a different tune; see entry of 20 March.
- January 18: Politicians continued to seek to outdo one another in their defence of Shivaji. Express News Service reports Antulay calls for legal action against Laine (17 January), as senior Congress leader A.R.Antulay attacked Laine, "urging the government to take all necessary legal steps to punish him." He is also quoted as saying:
- "How can a dialogue be held if somebody is abusing your father and mother ?" Antulay asked. (...) He said Shivaji was the pride of India and Indians should not tolerate any humiliation of their heroes.
- Meanwhile, The Hindu reported (18 January) that Chief Minister Sushilkumar Shinde: "said it was 'not fair' to write such 'bad things' about Shivaji."
- 19 January: The Times of India reported (20 January) that MSS threatens more attacks on BORI: apparently the Maratha Sewa Sangh warned that: "the 'Sambhaji Brigade', would resort to more attacks if students were made to collect money for rebuilding Bori." Despite such threats, no arrests were reported.
- 21 January: The Times of India reported that Maratha group flays Sambhaji brigade, describing a newly-formed group, Maratha Yuvak Parishad (MYP), opposed to the use of Shivaji by activists "to further their own political ends".
- 22 January: The Times of India reported that Maratha outfit files petititon against BORI. Maratha Vikas Sangh has apparently set its sights even higher, having:
- filed a petition in the Bombay high court demanding that all documents at BORI be seized by the union government. Refusing the let the James Laine controversy die down, MVS has also demanded censorship on all books that would be written on historical figures.
- (This demand for a quasi-Soviet approach to ensure that the historical record is kept ... straight apparently has not been widely embraced; nevertheless, despite suggesting such a thing, the MVS is, amazingly, still taken seriously.)
- 28 January: The Times of India reports 'Silent' majority lodges protest at BORI:
- On Republic Day, inspired by a chain e-mail circulated over the last two weeks, citizens made a beeline for the institute to register a silent protest against the vandalism. This, despite a police warning against gathering at the institute on R-Day. Every protestor dropped a rupee coin in specially placed urns, as a token contribution towards the restoration of the institute.
- March: Oxford University Press apparently withdraws all references to Laine's book from all its online catalogues (previously information had been available both at OUP-USA and the main OUP site). It is unclear whether this is a move to remove the book from the market entirely (including the US and the UK), or merely a defensive legal maneuver (to preclude any liability claims).
- 16 March: Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani bravely maintained: "that he was against banning any controversial publication". (See Advani against banning controversial books (The Hindu, 16 March) and Advani against ban on Laine's book on Shivaji (at NDTV).) This, of course, led to:
- 17 March: The Times of India reported of the Uproar in house as DF defends 'Shivaji' ban:
- Proceedings in both houses of the state legislature were stalled for over two hours on Wednesday after the opposition Shiv Sena-BJP members objected to the ruling coalition members' suggestion that Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Deputy Prime Minister K Advani should apologise for disapproving of the state's ban on the controversial book Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India, penned by American scholar James Laine.
- 20 March: The pressure -- and election politics -- finally got to Prime Minister Vajpayee as he kicked off the BJP election campaign in Maharahstra, as he suddenly decided the government ban on Laine's book was a pretty darn good idea after all. Not only that: he also felt it necessary to assure his listeners: "We are prepared to take action against the foreign author", and that this was "a warning to all foreign authors that they do not play with our national pride".
- See reports in Mid-Day (Shivaji is my ideal, says Vajpayee) and Newindpress.com (Vajpayee kickstarts campaign with warning to foreign authors).
- late March: Seeing how well the fervent pro-Shivaji attitude played to the crowds, and seeking to outdo all those who were satisfied with merely bashing James Laine, state BJP president Gopinath Munde decided he could profit by going after bigger fish closer to home and:
- demanded a ban on Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's classic Discovery of India on the ground that a 1986 edition of the book contains remarks highly derogatory of the Maratha king.
- (See Ban Nehru's Discovery of India: State BJP, The Times of India, 19 March).
- Unfortunately, the overeager Munde apparently never looked at the book in question: as The Times of India reported (21 March), Nehru's book: "contains no such derogatory remark."
- A few days later even Munde had to admit as much -- excusing his zeal on the grounds that: "I am a politician and not a scholar". But, just so nobody would think he was going soft, he added: "there is no change in my party's stand -- it will not tolerate any insult to national heroes like Shivaji". (See: Munde wriggles out of Nehru gaffe, The Times of India, 25 March).
- late March: Another crowd-pleasing, debate-stifling stunt: Pune police commissioner D.N.Jadhav:
- told reporters today that he was writing to Laine to summon him to India for questioning. If Laine refuses the "request," the police chief plans to move court. And if Laine ignores the summons, the police will seek the help of CBI and Interpol, Jadhav said.
- (See Day after showing off liberal face, Cong hounds US professor, The Indian Express, 23 March.)
- This at least got some international attention -- see the BBC's report, India seeks to arrest US scholar -- and again seems to have played very well in India, where everybody seemed to get really excited about possibly involving Interpol (despite the fact that Laine's whereabouts are well-known); see, for example, State to seek extradition of Shivaji author (The Times of India, 23 March)
- Unfortunately, as Vijay Singh noted at Rediff (27 March): Bringing Laine back: Easier said than done. (In fact, it is clear that Laine has not been charged with any extraditable offense.)
- As usual, there was far more bluster than action: by 25 March the headline was: No letter to Laine as yet (Indian Express, 25 March), as (sensibly):
- Police Commissioner D N Jadhav today said the police will not be sending a letter to James Laine, the author of Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India asking him to come to India till April 5 since a petition has been filed in the Bombay High Court.
- See also: Criminal action stayed against Laine (Mid-Day, 27 March).
- 9 July 2010: As widely reported, the Supreme Court in Maharashtra denied a state government plea to ban the book; see, for example Laine's book on Shivaji okay: SC in The Economic Times.
- Return to top of the page -
Reactions
Almost no attention has been paid to the controversy surrounding Laine's book or the attack on BORI outside of India. Laine's opinion piece, In India, 'the Unthinkable' Is Printed at One's Peril, in the 12 January issue of The Los Angeles Times, and an article by Martha Ann Overland ("Vandals Attack Research Center in India in Retaliation for Help It Gave to American Scholar") in the Chronicle of Higher Education (issue of 23 January), neither of which is freely available on the Internet, and a Star Tribune article by Mary Jane Smetanka, Macalester professor's book incites a riot a world away ((Updated - 29 March): now only available at WCCO), were among the very few mentions in the American press.
((Updated - 29 March): With the calls for Laine's arrest at the end of March there has again been some international coverage, most notably Scott Baldauf's article, How a US historian sparked calls for his arrest - in India, in the Christian Science Monitor (29 March). See also Sara Rajan's A Study in Conflict (Time (Asia), 5 April).)
What reactions there have been in the academic community do not appear to have made any impact or found any resonance outside those limited circles. There also appear to have been no calls to withdraw Laine's book, or ban it, anywhere outside India.
In India , the attack on BORI has been widely (though far from universally) condemned. The destruction of property, especially that which is unique and of historical significance, and the threats against scholars have been denounced in the press and in public. Prime Minister Vajpee's approach, as reported in the Times of India, seems to be the preferred one: "He said the "right way" to express disagreement was through discussion" -- though even some of his political allies denounced him for these statements and his opposition to the book-ban.
Disturbingly, a significant minority has been willing to excuse even the attacks on BORI as justifiable under the circumstances, and while 72 of those responsible were arrested and charged, there have been continued threats (both legal and physical) against BORI, scholars associated with it, and against author James Laine.
As Laine noted in his 12 January piece in The Los Angeles Times:
The vast majority of Indians are appalled at what happened in Pune. And yet no one has stepped forward to defend my book and no one has called for it to be distributed again.
Indeed, most of these events took place after Laine's book had officially been withdrawn from the Indian market, i.e. essentially no longer existed. The banning of the book and the attacks on BORI and various scholars were thus clearly aimed not only at this specific case, but at the whole enterprise of scholarship, and of freedom of expression. Concerns about this have been raised in the media, but Laine's book has received little support: there still appear to have been almost no calls for it to be made available in India again.
Surprisingly, there has also been almost no criticism of Oxford University Press' self-censorship and withdrawal of the book from the Indian market. A rare mention can found is in the "Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)", People's Democracy, who properly note (25 January):
The media have criticised the Shiv Sainiks' pranks but not the hastiness of the Oxford University Press in withdrawing the book even before the matter became public or the government for banning the book even before the matter was discussed in public fora.
There have been numerous opinion pieces regarding these incidents. Among the disturbing trends they make note of is the uneven use of Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code to limit expression, and the politicising of what should be academic debates.
Among the opinion pieces are:
- Dileep Padgaonkar on Myth against history (Times of India, 25 January), who finds these events: "drive home the point yet again that in this country it is myth, not history, that ignites popular imagination."
- A.G. Noorani's Chhatrapati or bust (Hindustan Times, 27 January), where he writes of what happened: "It was not an aberration. It is part of a practice, connived at and condoned, during the past decade and more."
- Ananya Vajpeyi's Everything Foul and Unfair (The Telegraph, 19 January), where he suggests the most critical question is: "(A)re we prepared to defend acts of violence perpetrated in the name of our identity, our beliefs and finally, our sentiments ?"
- An editorial in The Indian Express (7 January), in which the authors argue: "We cannot have the mob write our history for us. Every time we compromise on this principle, every time a publishing house allows itself to recall a book, every time the authorities fail to punish the vandals, every time politicians seize such issues for narrow political gains, every time the barbarian at the gate is accommodated, we fail not just our academics but our historical legacy of open scholarship."
- Rajeev Dhavan's Burn, Burn, Destroy (available at the Outlook India site, 23 January), where he notes: "In the last decade or so, new emerging patterns of social censorship seem to have eclipsed the framework of legal censorship that has been bequeathed to India by the British."
- Nalini Taneja on Politics of Rightwing Sectarianism (People's Democracy, 25 January), arguing: "In what has been happening today by way of policing and censorship of culture, and to history teaching and research, by way of verbal and physical attacks on democratic expression, our state and media have a very definite role to play."
- Sandhya Jain on Demeaning Shivaji, denigrating dharma (The Pioneer, 27 January, published here at HVK.org), who finds: "Having purchased and read James Laine's Shivaji: Hindu King in Islamic India only after it was officially withdrawn by the publishers, I cannot view the events at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) as totally unjustified."
- Swapan Dasgupta on Reclaiming the Hindu Gods (The Telegraph, 30 January), who reports that: "Beginning sometime last year, American Hindus have mounted a spirited attack on the bastions of Indology in the North American universities" and believes: "The battle to reassess Indian heritage in keeping with the achievements of Indians involves a long haul. It will not be won by bans on offensive texts or McCarthy-ite purges of the infuriatingly perverse. It has to be fought with civility, argument, rigour and a sense of strategy."
- Manu Dash, wondering: Feel-shame factor, anyone ? (The Statesman), noting: "Our country has time and again failed to stay true to its credential of tolerance."
- Vaishnavi K. Sekhar finding: Historians rue attack on freedom of expression (The Times of India, 24 March), noting that: "The casualty of cultural censorship may be scholarship".
(Note that in considering reactions in India we are limited to English-language material that is freely accessible via the Internet. It should be clear that this material may well not be representative of broader opinion, or even of media opinion. The Hindu and Marathi language press may well have responded entirely differently.)
Bhalchandrarao C. Patvardhan and Amodini Bagwe's piece, James Laine's Controversial Book, published in this issue of the complete review Quarterly, offers a somewhat different perspective, focussing on what exactly it is about Laine's book that many find so upsetting.
There has also been some coverage of these events on weblogs, most notably at Kitabkhana and Ryan's Lair (as well as at the Literary Saloon).
http://www.complete-review.com/quarterly/vol5/issue1/laine0.htm#intro
Unified command no solution to fight Naxals: Aiyar
Bringing to the fore the difference of perception within the Congress over tackling the Maoist problem, Congress MP Mani Shankar Aiyar on Thursday said the unified command of armed forces might not be the solution.
Asked his views on the unified command, Aiyar told mediapersons a unified command of participatory development of the poor tribal regions could be the answer to the problem. He was here after he returned from Bangladesh with a delegation that explored the possibility of business development between the two countries.
Asserting that better rail, road and port connectivity would ensure development in Bangladesh, West Bengal and Northeastern states, the MP said the proposal to construct a bridge on Padma river would develop direct railway connectivity with Dhaka and Kolkata. There was enough scope to develop connectivity between Kolkata, Haldia, Paradip port and Chittagong and Mangala port in Bangladesh which would help expand trade and business between the two countries.
Regarding BSF firing on the Bangladesh border, Aiyar said he would bring it to the notice of the Home Ministry as such acts result in casualties.
Rebel leader in Delhi for talks - Muivah push for Pandey power boost | ||
| NISHIT DHOLABHAI | ||
New Delhi, July 16: NSCN (I-M) general secretary Thuingaleng Muivah wants more powers for Centre's interlocutor R.S. Pandey to accelerate the 13-year-old Naga peace talks. The Naga rebel leader, who arrived here last night with at least eight deputies for the next round of peace talks, would like to meet Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and home minister P. Chidambaram to convey this request, among others, before the official dialogue begins. "Their wish to meet the Prime Minister and the home minister has been conveyed," a home ministry source said. Sources said the peace talks between the Centre's representative R.S. Pandey, home ministry officials and a nine-member delegation of the outfit could be held next week. The last round of talks was held in Kohima on June 1 after the crisis triggered by the Manipur government's stand on not allowing Muivah to enter the state to visit his native village, Somdal. Muivah had then expressed disappointment, even anger, at the Centre for not pressing Manipur chief minister Okram Ibobi Singh to allow him to visit Ukhrul. Sources said Muivah had shed his "anger" and cordial talks were expected with the government. NSCN (Isak-Muivah) sources told The Telegraph that the group's primary task would be to get more powers for Pandey as he could not go beyond a point every time a dialogue was held with his inadequate mandate. The outfit had accepted Pandey, a former chief secretary of Nagaland, as the Centre's interlocutor after former Union home secretary K. Padmanabhaiah took up another government assignment. Pandey had visited Nagaland as the Centre's interlocutor, along with home secretary G.K. Pillai, during the recent crisis. This will be the first time the outfit's leaders will hold a dialogue with the Centre on the Naga peace process after the economic blockade in Manipur ended with the Centre's intervention. During this round of talks, the Centre is certain to convey to the rebel group that its activities during the ceasefire should not affect inter-state relations. There is a growing belief that the NSCN (I-M), with corresponding politicking from Manipur, has fomented communal feelings in the region. Sections in the Union home ministry believe that the root cause of militancy in Manipur has been the Centre's engagement with the Naga rebels. Militancy in the Meitei-dominated Imphal Valley gained momentum only in the late nineties after the NSCN (I-M) entered into a ceasefire and began talks with New Delhi. Muivah has repeatedly refused to involve any Meitei group in the dialogue where his principal demand has been integration of Naga-inhabited areas in Manipur, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland under a single administrative unit. The most violent of protests against this demand has been staged in Manipur, a fact that the Centre is wary of and one which affects both politics and security in the frontier state. | ||
| http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100717/jsp/frontpage/story_12694104.jsp |
Opinions and Editorials
Source: http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/2010/07/tribals-create-all-problems-for-ruling.html
1 nhận xét: on "TRIBALS Create all the Problems for the Ruling Hegemomy Rejecting the Exclusive Economy of Development and the FARCE of Inclusive Growth!"
AatmaBharat is a very famous and useful site for those who want to get uptodated with the trending news. it's a kind of blogging site, visit aatmabharat for more details.
Post a Comment