Corruption - India 11-01-26

Rooting-out Corruption is Good, but

Parallel Government is Injurious to Democracy

Mirza A. Beg

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Indian Express, Delhi, August 26, 2011

http://blogs.expressindia.com/showblogdetails.php?contentid=837637#

Milli Gazette, Delhi, August25, 2011

http://www.milligazette.com/news/2136-india-rooting-out-corruption-is-good-but-parallel-government-is-injurious-to-democracy

Anna Hazare has captured the imagination of the Indian body politic. His clarion-call to end the exponentially growing, endemic corruption in India has been reverberating and gathering supporters with each passing day. The news media in India has become his megaphone.

The corruption has been increasing over the decades in magnitude as well as pervasiveness. The developing economy, increasing disposable income of the middle class and much larger workforce provide more opportunities for bribes. At the top levels of the government the bribes have grown from thousands to tens of millions of Rupees.

On my visits to India, I enjoy asking probing social and political questions in conversations with a wide spectrum of very friendly and talkative fellow travelers. Everyone is against corruption as a simple nebulous principle. But the answers get clouded and muddled when it benefits their lives.

The Indian Government finally realized that the evil of corruption has reached the tipping point and drafted a legislation to create an independent office of Lokpal (ombudsmen) to watch over various agencies with independent, but limited authority. It would have the power to investigate. Based on evidence, it would recommend and direct the judicial system to take action. Obviously it would take time for such a system to mature and work. Unfortunately the judicial system is not beyond corruption either.

The office of Lokpal would be similar to the office of the Election Commissioner, which has worked rather well, notwithstanding all the ills of the society. Indian elections are by and large fair and have successfully changed the government many times.

Yet the corruption at all levels including the legislature has grown, because the most important driving force for voting for a candidate is not honesty, but sectarianism – a substantial majority votes based on religion, cast and regional advantages. Political parties put up candidates based on these considerations. Once elected, they distribute economic largess as well as jobs and contracts to their most important supporters and casts in their constituency. Ironically, it is not considered corruption by a large majority of the populace.

Anna Hazare and his companions proposed a much stronger and aggressive office of the Lokpal (ombudsman). They insist that all the branches of the government would be under its authority including the Prime Minister. It would have independent police and judicial powers. In effect, it would be akin to a parallel unelected government, and would have minimal check on its authority.

When aroused, people like simple and fast remedies. Anna Hazare’s remedy of cut ting the Gordian knot in one strike is simplistic and very appealing. To force his ideas on the government, he first threatened and then took up a fast unto death. It sounds enticing, especially coming from a person who has put his life on the line and has a long record of service to the poor and personal honesty.

Taking advantage of the situation, all sorts of people have jumped on his band wagon for their own purposes, while many opposed to him have unearthed records, where he appears to have supported unsavory ideas and people. Many in the minority community want to join him but are weary of some of the Anna’s unsavory backers. No one is perfect, and he has some explaining to do.

I applaud his taking a stand and galvanizing the placid electorate to demand reform. One needs to look at it not from sectarian perspective, but a long range national perspective. Means and ends should be carefully considered. They do matter. Democracy is not easy to nurture. A system that changes with the changing wind of public opinion does not last very long. An unaccountable parallel government is an idea fraught with danger. Impetuously designed laws with the best of intentions have unintended consequences. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That is why most stable democracies have a bicameral legislature, so that a part of the legislature, called the upper house or senate --is protected from the immediacy of the impetuous public emotions.

Democracy by its very nature is inefficient. The system of checks and balances is an impediment to quick solutions of long festering social problems. Simplistic and draconian solutions against an evil are easy to understand and support. Anna Hazare has projected himself as a leader in the Gandhian tradition. But there is a difference.

Gandhi Ji agitated and fasted to give voice to the people, against an unelected imperial colonial government. Hazare is holding hostage, a legitimately elected government of the people. With his popularity growing by the day, the government is being held on ransom with a false choice of Hazare’s bill or widespread chaos.

In a democracy, the government is only as good as the people vote for. If the electorate really wanted honesty and integrity, they could have voted for them as beacons. But they did not, they vote for personal aggrandizement on the basis of cast etc. Impetuous quick solutions often bring unintended consequences. Thoughtful people should take time to bring in change without injuring the constitution and the essence of democracy. The start has been made to check corruption. Anna Hazare should compromise to get a good bill instead of throwing the country in to chaos.

Mirza A. beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or mirzasmusings.blogspot.com

Bigotery in Election 11-6-20

Republican Debate - Stealth Agenda of Gingrich and Cain

Mirza A. Beg

Saturday, June 20, 2011

Counter Currents June 23, 2011

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg230611.htm

Media Monitor Network, June 23, 2011

http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/87349

Tuscaloosa News, Sunday, June 26, 2011

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20110626/NEWS/110719975

OEN OpEdNews.com, June 28, 2011

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Republican-Debate--Stealt-by-Mirza-Beg-110624-554.html

The Republican debate of June 13^th moderated by John King of CNN was generally a collegial affair. It was essentially a “Knock Obama” rally, with understated minor differences among the candidates.

Except, when CNN moderator John King asked former Godfather Pizza magnate, Harman Cain, “You recently said you would not appoint a Muslim to your cabinet and you kind of backed off a little bit and said you would first want to know if they’re committed to the Constitution. You expressed concern that, quote, “a lot of Muslims are not totally dedicated to this country.” Are American-Muslims as a group less committed to the Constitution than, say, Christians or Jews?”

Cain backpedaled a bit and said,” I would not be comfortable because you have peaceful Muslims and then you have militant Muslims, those that are trying to kill us. And so, when I said I wouldn’t be comfortable, I was thinking about the ones that are trying to kill us, number one. Secondly, yes, I do not believe in Sharia law in American courts. I believe in American laws in American courts, period. There have been instances –“

John King turned to other candidates and asked their views on the subject. Some candidates were uncomfortable, but not former speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.

Trying to resuscitate his dying campaign, stridently he said, “Now, I just want to go out on a limb here. I’m in favor of saying to people, if you’re not prepared to be loyal to the United States, you will not serve in my administration, period.” He added “We did this—we did this in dealing with the Nazis and we did this in dealing with the communists. And it was controversial both times, and both times we discovered after a while, you know, there are some genuinely bad people who would like to infiltrate our country. And we have got to have the guts to stand up and say no.”

For those who do not know, Gingrich was approvingly referring to the Red baiting campaign of early 1950s by the Republican senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin and his cohorts. It has been widely condemned as the most shameful period in modern US history. It lives in infamy as McCarthyism. As Gingrich says, there were “some genuinely bad people”- but it is opposite of the way he construes. The bad people were, Senator McCarthy and his minions, who maligned and tried to destroy decent Americans by innuendos, as Gingrich does.

Yes, a few Muslim citizens have engaged in terrorism against the US, but an overwhelming majority of Muslims are productive and loyal citizens. It is no secret that Muslim bashing is popular among some in the Republican Party. They conveniently forget that some of the plots were thwarted by Muslims contacting the police.

Sadly not one candidate on the podium admonished Cain and Gingrich, as they would have, if such a sweeping statement was made to malign other minorities such as Jews or Blacks. Even sadder yet, it did not elicit much comment in the popular media either.

Not too long ago some Republicans did stand up to challenge such remarks, but the party has changed.

In 2007 Republican debates, while others remained quiet, John McCain condemned Mitt Romney’s remark that he will not appoint any Muslim to his cabinet. McCain said, “I’m proud of the Muslims who are currently serving in the United States armed forces and my sense is that if they can serve in that manner, they can serve in any position of responsibility in America.”

In December 2002, an intemperate remark by Senator Trent Lott cost him the leadership of the Republican Party in the Senate. Celebrating the 100^th birthday of South Carolina Senator Strom Thurmond, Senator Trent Lott, the Republican leader in the Senate said, “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.”

Those remarks were construed as racist, because in 1948 Strom Thurmond broke with the Democratic Party on the issue of enforcement of civil rights legislation and ran for the Presidency as a State’s Rights Party candidate.

The US Constitution is secular. Thankfully our laws are not based on religious preference. Although when not in conflict with the civil laws, in some jurisdictions it has accommodated people, who by mutual agreement wanted their personal disputes settled by arbitration by religious tribunal. Courts have enforced the result of such arbitration in case of Jewish, Mormon and other religions as in contract law.

The spurious injection of Sharia in the debate is a “Red Herring” to divert attention and garner cheap popularity from the considerable weight of the xenophobic wing of the Republican Party. There is no monolithic Sharia law. These laws were developed by different schools of thoughts in the 9^th century to check the creeping autocracy of the rulers. They are open to debate, and have evolved on diverse lines through the ages.

The irony is that most rightwing Republicans are opposed to the idea of separation of “Church and State” notwithstanding the first amendment. That is why Rev. Pat Robertson found so much traction in the Republican primaries in the 1980s. Rev. Charles Kimball writes in his book, “When Religion Becomes Lethal “ that Ralph Reed, the head of the Christian Coalition, famously referred to the practice of running “stealth candidates” where the radical agenda would be hidden from voters by focusing on hot button issues such as abortion or homosexuality. By the time the voters knew what victorious candidate really advocated, they would not know what hit them.

Some of the 2012 Republican aspirants are not much different. Some want the United States to be under the Biblical laws, while others in an effort to dupe them are stealthily raising a bogus threat from the Sharia laws. To protect all, multi-religious as well as irreligious citizens, would it not be better to, honestly adhere to the principle of “Separation of Church and State”, no lying, no ifs and no buts?

Instead of the loyalty test for ordinary law abiding citizens of any faith or no faith, the electorate should reject stealth candidates whose support for the US Constitution is dubious. If elected they would have to take the oath of office with fingers crossed.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Dr. Siras Suspended! 10-02-22

The Suspension of Dr. Siras For Moral Turpitude
Misconstrued Collision Of Principles

By Mirza A. Beg

22 February, 2010
Countercurrents.org

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg220210.htm

Dr. Shrinivas Ramchandra Siras, reader and chairman of Modern Indian Languages at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) was suspended for the moral turpitude of consensual homosexuality within the privacy of his home.

From early reports, is seems that the suspension of Dr. Siras may be quite popular. Religions do not agree on all moral principles. That is the reason for adoption of a secular constitution in a pluralistic democracy. If popularity was the yardstick of morality, some of the minorities would have no place in states dominated by sectarian forces in India. The essential questions are, was Dr. Siras flouting his life-style; was the evidence procured by legal means, admissible in a court of law and if not, should the illegally obtained evidence of “sin” be prosecutable in secular courts?

There are many principles, religious and secular at stake here, and they are not in conflict.

1. In most religions homosexuality is considered to be a sin, condemned by the society. Though homosexuality has always existed in all societies, but by and large has been tolerated as a private matter, if not flouted.

2. Blind Puritanism is discouraged, because it leads to widespread intolerance and discord. Religions and societies choose equanimity in social discourse for stability and peace.

3. Islam enjoins believers to respect the inviolable privacy of home. Muslims are enjoined not to gossip or brazenly expose private failings of others. Muslims are exhorted to be introspective and tolerant with humility in the belief that God is the ultimate all knowing judge. Social responsibility is to condemn only lewd public behavior.

4. Democracy and civil society also follow this Islamic principle. Private behavior and public acts are separate realms. Violation of privacy of the home is against the law. Even the state may not search a home, without a warrant from a judge.

The idea of tolerance and personal space is not a western import, Indian and most eastern cultures have lived by these principles more harmoniously in the past than the West.

I remember an incident from my high school years. A teacher was rumored to be homosexual. My father overheard a remark from one of my visiting classmates. Later he asked me if that particular teacher was a good teacher. I said yes. He admonished me that knowledge is all I needed from the teacher. He emphasized that it was not only unseemly, but also un-Islamic to indulge in gossip.

The idea that democracy is good, and civil rights are essential for democracy to function, are easy to parrot, but forbearance is difficult to practice. If we do not protect the rights of the weakest members of the society, the rights naturally gravitate to accrue only to the powerful.

Tolerance of those with whom we disagree or dislike, protects minorities. Social mores change with time. There are hundreds of examples of what was considered abominable, has become acceptable and what was barely acceptable, has become popular. The most obvious example is the rise of stars in the film industry, from allegations of being little better than courtesans to the new royalty ruling the hearts of millions.

Changing mores are not necessarily good or right. The function of leaders is to lead, nurture and guide the society in the direction they deem to be healthy, through a civil dialogue to change the laws they disagree with. Violating the law to entrap or assault those who are on the margins of the society, religion or popular culture is injurious to the basic principles of a civil democracy.

The notion that in pursuit of “good” unlawful means are permissible, is irreligious and unethical, and leads only to evil. Societies and countries that take such short cuts pay a heavy price and often fall to sanctimonious dictatorships that bring only repression.

In almost all civil societies, evidence procured illegally by corrupt means is inadmissible in a court of law. Often ill-informed people rail against the inadmissibility of misbegotten evidence, because at times they let the criminal go free. But it is an important principle. It forces the law-enforcement agencies to be honest. It requires due diligence and proscribes the protectors of the law from becoming violators of the law. It is much more dangerous for power to be used by corrupt means than for a thief to go free.

The function of an institution of higher education is to educate students not only in their chosen subjects, but also in morality and ethics of citizenship and the boundaries on the use of power. It is shameful when the government or educators of young minds violate these bedrock principles, thoughtlessly to appease the majority.

Essentially what we know of the circumstances of the charges leveled against Dr. Siras and his consequent suspension by the AMU administration is troubling. I wonder what the professors in the AMU law faculty would say about its probity. Dr. Siras’ duty was to be a good teacher and respect the norms and traditions of an educational institution. His life style within the privacy of his home, even if “sinful” was no one’s business.

There are laws that protect the society from predators preying on minors, women and the weak. They are not always easy to enforce, that is the challenge and requirement for the sustenance of a civil society. Muslims ought to be sensitive towards the violation of the civil rights of a minority despised by many. They have suffered enough by the police and those in the positions of power, who despise them.

The religiosity, ethics and respect for the laws are strengthened, when we defend those with whom we may strongly disagree, but stand to uphold their civil and legal rights

Morality is when one adheres to principles, even when no one is watching; and courage is when one protects the rights of the weak and even despised, when it is widely unpopular. India and most functioning democracies, particularly the minorities in these countries owe a debt of gratitude to those who courageously adhere to this principle.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Shahid Azmi Murder 10-02-12

Murder of Shahid Azmi,

Assault on the Heart of the Indian Democracy

Mirza A. Beg

February12, 2010

Counter Currents. February 14, 2010

http://www.countercurrents.org/beg140210.htm

Indian Muslims, February 12, 2010

http://indianmuslims.in/murder-of-shahid-azmi-assault-on-the-heart-of-the-indian-democracy/

Thirty-two years old, Shahid Azmi, the defense counsel to the accused, framed by the police in the Malgaon case in Maharashtra, was gunned down in his office by a five member assassination squad in broad daylight. In his very young career he became the voice of the downtrodden and defenseless, because he had suffered the heavy hand of the corrupt state police as a young boy of fifteen.

He reported to the police, many times, to no avail, about the threats he received from those who manipulate the justice system for sectarian purposes and kill those who get in the way.

Shahid Azmi, the defense attorney’s murder is more detrimental to the Indian democracy than many other terribly egregious murders that are in themselves the bane of Indian democracy and civil society.

All injustices, particularly murders are injurious to the functioning of a civil society. Even more detrimental to the functioning of democracy is state terrorism or the state turning a blind eye to the murder of citizens who try to keep the state honest. Injustices and mayhem perpetrated by the state against the minorities, as in Gujarat, under Chief Minister Mr. Modi, is almost universally known. There are many other states where political heavy weights run a parallel government through open intimidation, irrespective of the political party in power. Mr. Bal Thakery of Maharashtra is well known to wield such evil supra-state power.

The tribal people in Orissa and Chhattisgarh, Dalits in Bihar, Muslims and Christians in many states, particularly in Gujarat have suffered grievously. It has been well documented. The military and police have often been oppressive and brutal in states rife with long term ubiquitous rebellions. They end up feeding the cause that feeds the rebellion rather than being about a solution in states such as Kashmir, Nagaland and Mizoram as well the as the tribal belt of Central India.

Yet, with all these pitfalls and lamentable inadequacies, the Indian democracy has made great strides, because many brave and principled Indians have made great sacrifices to stand up and expose the corruption of power. Such efforts occasionally gather wider support and come to the notice of the Supreme Court of India. The Apex court occasionally feels obliged to intervene for the cause of justice, when the state government apparatus and the lower courts are completely overwhelmed by the sectarian attitudes, as in the case of Gujarat under Mr. Modi.

Indians owe a great debt of gratitude to these brave citizens, journalists and lawyers, the conscience keepers of the Indian democracy. They risk their safely to take up the cause and cases, to uphold the constitution of India that guarantees justice to the hapless accused, boxed in by the corrupt judicial system at the lower rungs of the justice system.

The murder of Shahid Azmi is not a murder of an individual only, it is a brazen effort to intimidate and ultimately obliterate the idea of justice and silence the voice of the Indian conscience. The central government of India should do its utmost to bring the murderers to justice, because it is an assault on the soul of the Indian constitution and state, much more grave than the terrorist that kills individuals or the thief that prowls in the darkness of night.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Nobel Prize-Obama 09-10-08

Nobel for Obama - Perhaps Premature, But Good

Mirza A. Beg

Friday, August 9 2009

The American Muslim, Friday October 9, 2009

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/nobel_for_obama_perhaps_premature_but_good/0017596

Tuscaloosa News, Tuesday October 13, 2009

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20091013/NEWS/910139997/1007?Title=MY-TURN-Obama-deserves-prize-but-has-plenty-of-work-remaining

President Obama was awakened by his press secretary to an announcement from the Nobel committee that 2009 Peace Prize goes to President Obama. Perhaps no one was more surprised than the recipient. Those who have supported Mr. Obama’s ideas, ideals and style are also pleasantly surprised, but some wonder if the recognition is not a bit premature.

In the nine months he has been in office, Mr. Obama has put in motion a very ambitious and much needed plan of action to achieve not only the objectives, spelled out during the presidential campaign, but also had to save the economy from the abyss of depression. He knows that taking on one problem at a time, as the experts would have it, may be seasoned advice, but considering the gravity of challenges he does not have the luxury of putting any of the pressing problems on the back burner.

Perhaps no world leader had inherited so many problems on the first day in office. Even Franklin Roosevelt did not have to contend with what came to be known as the Second World War until late in his second term. President Roosevelt’s main problem on entering the office was the economic depression.

Mr. Obama had to contend with two wars of hubris that his predecessors unleashed and conducted them with such incompetence and ferocity that it has not only killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, but has left the US bleeding in an expensive quagmire from which extrication appears to be elusive. It has weakened American power and prestige around the world and an impression has taken hold that United States knows only the language of bullying, not of cooperation.

Even before taking the office of the president Mr. Obama had to face a complete economic melt down of US economy, with the possibility of a world wide depression, because of decades of irresponsible deregulations allowing the Wall Street gurus to turn it into a gambling casino. He took swift actions that appear to have stemmed the looming tide of economic disaster, but the road to recovery will be long and full of pitfalls.

He has not yet been able to put forward a clear policy to bring peace to Afghanistan and extricate the United States with honor. The Iraq war is still simmering and Israel has cavalierly defied his very modest request to halt the settlement activity and to engage in honest dialogue with the Palestinians.

So none of the pressing problems have been solved yet, but by virtue of his stance and thoughtful policies, the world has again started to put faith in the words of an American President and has taken his extended hand of peace and friendship. The decades of war of words with North Korea and Iran, after an initial flare-up in early 2009, have simmered down leading to initial constructive dialogues.

The Nobel committee recognized this sea-change in American policies and the concurrent change in the attitudes of other countries to award the peace prize to President Obama.

The Nobel citation reads, “President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama’s vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

“Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama’s initiative, the United States is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.”

Even if the Peace Prize is premature, Mr. Obama certainly deserves admiration and support for all he has accomplished so far, with much more heavy lifting to be done for the fruition of his efforts. We have yet to leave the wars and famines of the 20^th century behind to usher a new century of peace and justice. One can not but admire the way President Obama has conducted himself with elegance and grace in the rough and tumble of the political process.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at, mab64@yahoo.com and at mirzasmusings@blogspot.com

Delhi Blasts 08-09-15

Delhi Blasts, Time to go Beyond Condemnations

Mirza A. Beg
Monday, September 15th 2008

The American Muslim, September 16, 2008
http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/india_delhi_blasts_time_to_go_beyond_condemnations/


A series of bomb blasts tore through the busy markets in Delhi on the 13th of September. They are reprehensible, but lamentably not surprising. There have been more than a dozen gory blasts in major cities, including Delhi in the last three years.

After each such episode, there are many customary statements of condemnation. But after so many times, condemnations sound stale and obligatory. It is time to shake our collective conscience and challenge our hackneyed thinking to develop thoughtful and just solutions.

With the exponential expansion of beneficial technology; the technology of mass killing has also made tremendous gains in the military research labs of the nation sates, ostensibly for defense. The unforeseen blow-back is that terrorists eventually get access to these technologies as well to enhance their ability to kill using remote-triggers and more lethal explosives.

India is home to almost all religions and ethnicities, and has more distinct languages and dialects among its vast multitude than any other country in the world.

The process of welding such diversity into a nation has not been easy. There were language riots in late fifties and early sixties, when the central government tried to impose Hindi as a national language. In spite of the pressure from the Hindi language chauvinists, the government wisely relented. More respect for regional languages and the go slow approach worked. Hindi is now accepted as the national link language. There have been endemic ethnic conflicts between local upper casts and lower casts. The police composed of only upper casts was often partial. The induction of lower casts in the police and administration has some what eased the problem.

Rise of sectarian parties to power:

With the increasing literacy, and dwindling secular education, Indians are getting more religiously polarized. This has resulted in the rise of religious-supremacist political parties. So much so that many states elected Hindu chauvinist parties (called Hindutva in Indian parlance) in late 1980s and by 1990s they took power at the central government. In a democracy minority sectarianism, though odious is not lethal. But the majority sectarianism because of the power of votes usually ends up in fascism and destruction of democracy.

Gradually under Hindutva (Hindu sectarianism) leadership the education system has become even more sectarian and the religious divide among the majority Hindus and minority Muslims has become more stark and lethal. A vast majority of Hindus and Muslims are decent law abiding citizens, who have lived with each other harmoniously. They are being polarized by endemic riots, usually engineered just before the elections using fear mongering to garner votes. This has lead to a vicious downward spiral.

Very small religious communities, not affected by sectarianism did not feel the contamination of the society by Hindutva’s incessant propaganda through the governmental agencies. Now even the small Christian community has been targeted by the Hindutva forces, especially in the backward tribal areas where because of evangelical activities many low-cast or castless tribal communities have accepted Christianity.

The birth of terrorism:

There were no terroristic bombings in India before 1993. Though the sectarian riots have been on the rise since 1960s, often the sectarian police being the main culprit, it was the demolition of the 16th Century Mosque (Babri Masjid) in December 1992 that lead to the new era of bombing crowded markets.

The demolition was preceded by a slow deliberate 1,000 miles march of Mr. Advani from Gujarat State in western India to the site of the mosque in sleepy little town Ayodhya in UP, a state in Northern Indian. Two months long slow march with fan-fare and speeches full of venom and misquotation of history whipped up Hindu passions that resulted in many local riots. The march was stopped by the secular Chief Minister of UP state. As a result he was defeated in the next election and the new Hindutva party Chief Minister allowed a frenzied mob to take down the large historic Mosque, brick by brick in the full glare of the television. The Indian Prime Minster of a supposed secular party sat in Delhi cloistered in his office offering inane excuses.

In the wake of the demolition of Babri Masjid there were riots in many parts of India. The riots in Mumbai (Bombay) were particularly gruesome because the Police carried out a massacre of Muslim localities. An inquiry commission under Justice Shri Krishna (a devout Hindu) found the local and national Hindutva parties guilty. Just as many other such commission reports, the Shri Krishna commission report was s also shelved and no cases were brought against the politically powerful culprits.

The heightened sectarianism brought the Hindutva party (BJP) to power at the center in Delhi and Mr. Advani, a criminal became the Deputy Prime Minister. “Ayodhya” episode was milked for a decade by whipping up hate through virulent sectarian grafting of feudalistic medieval history on democratic India to weaken and injure the basic democratic ethos. Threatening demolition of many other historic mosques, worked again and Hindutva party (BJP) won in many states including Gujarat.

The pogrom in Gujarat under the Chief Minister, Mr. Mody in which about 2,000 Muslims were by the mob under police protection throwing incendiary bombs from behind the police lines is well documented, and condemned all over the world and all secular Hindus.

Unfortunately as Muslim felt cornered and unprotected by the government, the Muslim polarization gave rise to underground fringe groups that took it upon them-selves to avenge the massacres. As always when small fringe groups take up arms to avenge, they only do more damage by killing other innocent citizens who had no part in violence and further polarize the populace.

After many such bombing, supposedly by the Muslim fringe groups, many Hindu groups attached to the Hindutva Parties have also sprung up. They have been caught at least on two occasions and couple of times the bombers have blown themselves up while constructing crude bombs.

After each set of bomb blast the police habitually accuse the commonly known Muslim fringe groups and arrest local Muslim youth, usually with no evidence. The police often torture them, but the cases are either not brought to the court or they are thrown out. It simply creates more hatred for the police and the government without any tangible positive result. The cycle goes on.

Way back to sanity of civil and just society:

The road back to sanity after fanning the flames for decades is never easy. The essential glue that holds a nation together is the sense of belonging. Belonging means a common purpose, rooted in equal opportunity and justice for all. A simple concept, but it becomes exceedingly difficult after it has been violated for years.

Four steps are essential for return to democratic sanity.

1. The government has an essential obligation to bring the culprits of bombing to justice, irrespective of their affiliation or religion, not for the sake of revenge or to avenge the innocent, but for the essential concept of justice.

2. But selective justice is no justice at all. To restore the Muslims and the Christian victims of violence in Orrisa and Gujarat states, the investigative reports of the high powered commissions on the major riots, languishing in archives, should be brought back to the light. Those accused should be brought to the bar of justice, as it was done in the case of the massacre of Sikhs in 1984 in wake if the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

3. Teaching of secular values to the children is essential to nurture pluralistic democracy. Primary and secondary education in all schools should have a strong component of secular education. Indians are inheritors of an ancient multi religious civilization. The values from all religions and philosophies should be included as a positive re-enforcement of multi-religious, multi-cultural ethos. This is the most important aspect of raising a better generation.

4. To sustain the secular education and eventually eliminate sectarianism, the police force, the administration and the judiciary should have adequate representation of all religious and ethnic communities. The excuse that the employment is dependent upon the competitive qualifications is a rouge by sectarian forces. No great intellectual prowess is needed to be a policeman, a city clerk, or a low to mid level administrator. The government can not monitor each small office, but the presence of people of all communities integrated in an office setting impedes discrimination and helps assimilation of citizenry to weld a nation, as has been the proven by the assimilation of the lower casts in the power structure.

Mirza A. Beg can be reached at mab64@yahoo.com His writings are at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Burmese disaster 08-05-12

Junta Obstructs Aid While Burmese Die

Mirza A. Beg
Monday, May 12, 2008

The American Muslim Tuesday, May 13, 2008
http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/junta_obstructs_aid_while_burmese_die/0016218

The devastation caused by the forces of nature such as cyclones, tsunamis and earthquakes are well known. We have witnessed their fury many times, particularly in the last three years. What we have not witnessed is the intentional criminal neglect by the government of the country. The Burmese government has not only ignored the plight of the suffering masses, but has done all they can to reject and impede the help that the world is eager to provide.

The cyclone that hit Burma (Myanmar) on the third of May, 2008 devastated the heavily populated, rice farming delta region of the Irrawaddy River, including the largest city and, until recently, the capital Rangoon (Yangon).

People all over the world through their governments and through private charities are aching to help, but have been stymied, by the putative Burmese military junta masquerading as a government.

Unlike tsunamis or earthquakes, the cyclone system moves slowly. Modern weather predictions and satellite tracking allows time for governments to help populations prepare for the impending disaster, and where possible evacuation. There is no evidence that the Burmese junta cared to inform the people in the path of the cyclone. Cyclones are a natural phenomenon, neither good nor evil. The Burmese junta has proven to be not only depraved, but criminal, because it does not allow others to help either, transforming a tragedy into a catastrophe.

The United Nations estimates that as many as 120,000 people may be dead and millions are homeless, in dire need of food, shelter and clean water. With the experiences after the tsunami in Indonesia in December 2004, and the earthquake in Pakistan in October, 2005, the UN and international community learned valuable lessons in large scale disaster relief. The first few hours after a disaster are extremely important for the survival of people barely hanging on to the tenuous thread of life.

The response from the international community was immediate. Supplies were on the way, being stored in neighboring countries and relief ships the same day. All that the government of Burma had to do was, say yes. The relief supplies and equipments along with trained aid workers would have poured in.

The Burmese Junta said no. Later under universal condemnation modified it to “yes but”. They wanted the supplies to be given to them, and obstinately refused the influx of foreign aid workers. They are scared that aid workers would be carriers of humane ideas and democracy. The United Nations and the relief agencies know the modus operandi of the Burmese Junta. They are sure that the aid will be pilfered; diverted to the well-healed generals and the army. Most of it will not reach the hungry suffering victims in dire need.

Cruel military juntas are efficient in the use and mobilization of the army. The Burmese junta was very efficient in the misuse of the army in the brutal suppression of the peaceful demonstration by the monks in September- October 2007, but the army was nowhere to be seen in the devastated regions of the Irrawaddy delta in the wake of the this cyclone. Yet, the government was telling the UN that its army would help distribute the emergency supplies.

On the contrary, while the people in the Irrawaddy delta are dieing, the junta has spent its attention, meager resources, and man power in holding sham elections in the rest of the country to legitimize its rule. The only local organized help that the people have is from the Monks and the shelters in the monasteries.

UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon has expressed immense frustration that after nine days only a trickle of aid has reached the victims. He has not been able to contact the leader of the junta General Than Shwe in the last nine days. Obviously General Shwe does not care.

Unfortunately in this show down, the cruel dictators have had their way. This stand-off has already resulted in the death of thousands, who could have been saved in the immediate aftermath of the cyclone. If the food, water and medicine do not reach the survivors, they will die in large numbers because of malnutrition, diarrhea, malaria and other contagious diseases that can be avoided. Children are particularly vulnerable. The international community has reluctantly started to surrender the relief supplies to the Burmese junta.

How has such dastardly government survived for almost forty-five years? It is the same old story. While the democracies condemn the government and have even imposed sanctions in the last few years, they quietly and often illegally trade with it because of rich mineral wealth of Burma. Burmese rubies and sapphires are the best in the world. China is the biggest beneficiary of such trade. To compete with China, India and other south-east Asian countries have regular trade relations with Burma. The French and other oil companies are engaged in petroleum exploration and production, even the US while imposing trade sanctions quietly allowed Chevron Oil Company to trade freely with Burma up to the last November.

Democracies mostly pay lip service to the idea of democracy, while they surreptitiously support dictatorships for their interests, as in the case of Burma. It is time that the citizens of democracies should expose such nefarious deals. The world super-powers have consistently worked to weaken the UN for their own purposes, as we have seen in the case of the Iraq invasion. It is time to strengthen the UN and other international organizations, so that an above-board united action can be taken against the governments that kill and torture their own citizens and invade and torture others.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com
His writings are available at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/

Passing of Nirmala 08-5-5

The Passing of Nirmala Deshpande

Mirza A. Beg
Thursday, May 1, 2008

Counter Currents, Friday, May 2, 2008
http://www.countercurrents.org/beg020508.htm

The American Muslim, May4, 2008
http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/the_passing_of_nirmala_deshpande/0016195


Nirmala Deshpande, 79, a veteran Gandhian, died in her sleep at her home in Delhi, Thursday morning. It is natural to mourn the passing of a dear friend. Though I did not know her personally, I mourn her passing as if she was a close friend. We knew of her great sacrifice and struggle to keep the flame of humanity and justice alive against powerful winds of hatred and strife around the world, particularly in her homeland, India, the land of Gandhi.

Her being was a source of strength to many who saw and felt her piety. Many took sustenance from her selfless work for the downtrodden and marginalized in a fast changing society, where sectarianism has become entrenched in the halls of power. In that respect she became a dear friend to all who cared. To them she was popularly known as “Didi” (respected elder sister in Hindi).

Her passing is particularly sad, because she was a great soul. She was seventy-nine years old and no one has defied the law of nature to live forever. Her life was a beacon and her death should be a time of reflection. People like her are a gift to humanity by the providence. Fortunately humanity continues to produce people like her in every generation to carry the torch of humane concerns. Democracies, though imperfect, provide secular saints such as Nirmala Deshpande a modicum of sustenance to nudge the conscience of many to uphold the values we often preach, but do not practice.

All freedom and justice-loving Indians loved and respected her. Muslims, Christians and untouchables in India are especially indebted to this frail woman born in a Brahmin family, for her tireless efforts against discrimination and marginalization. Her fearless stand rallied many Indians against the pogrom carried out by the fascistic provincial government of Gujarat against Muslims in 2002, in which about 2,000 Muslims were brutally burned and massacred.

She saw the tyranny of governments cloaked in crass nationalism, used as an excuse to foster hatred. She tried to bring the peoples of India and Pakistan, former brothers, now contentious neighbors, towards understanding and amity. She knew that constitutional safeguards work only when the majority community considers it a duty to protect the minority rights. Therefore she took up the cause of marginalized minorities in India.

In her memory, Muslims all over the world, especially in India and Pakistan, owe it to Islam and humanity to convince the Muslim majorities in all countries to protect the rights of minorities. Thoughtful Muslims in Pakistan and Bangladesh have found their voices in Nirmala’s Gandhian tradition to speak up for Hindu and Christian minorities. Their rights have been violated by some out of visceral hatred or financial gains, especially resulting from seemingly good, though egregious blasphemy laws.

Protecting the minorities is a test of civilization. It protects the rights of all. Looking the other way or ignoring small violations of human rights leads to greater discrimination and injustice.

She adhered to the best of the creeds that humanity offers. Widely known as a Gandhian, she was able to carry the torch of Gandhi Ji’s ideals at a time when Gandhi Ji’s name is reviled by a large section of Indian polity or at best is used only for ceremonial purposes by those who profit from his name, but consider his ideology and humanity to be impractical or at best, quaint.

Of course the Gandhian path that Nirmala Deshpandey traveled is difficult to follow. Gandhi Ji did not live an easy or opulent life. It is certainly much more difficult than succumbing to self interest in the pursuit of wealth and political power to the detriment of the weaker sections of the society.

Humanity has innate potential to rise above its selfish baser instincts, but only a few harness it to help lead their people towards a better tomorrow. She lived in the tradition of the great conscience keepers of their nations.

Mirza A. Beg writings are available at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/
Mirza can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com

Benazir Bhutto Killed 07-12-27

Benazir Bhutto faced death with courage

Mirza A. Beg
Thursday, December 27, 2007

Counter Currents, Saturday, December 29, 2007
http://www.countercurrents.org/beg291207.htm

Indian Muslims, Friday, December 28, 2007
http://indianmuslims.in/obituary-benazir-bhutto-faced-death-with-courage/#more-481

Khabrein Info. India, Friday, December 28, 2007
http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=10399&Itemid=88

My News India, Sunday, December 30, 2007
http://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=1600

Pine Magazine, Atlanta, Wednesday, January 2, 2008
http://pine-magazine.com/content.php?id=1098

The Tuscaloosa News, Thursday, January 3, 2008
http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20080103/NEWS/801030301

Banazir Bhutto, fell victim to the politics of endemic violence in Pakistan. She called herself “the Daughter of Destiny” in her autobiography and often styled herself as the daughter of Pakistan. She had more upheavals in one life time than most can imagine. In her untimely death, she followed her slain father and two brothers.

She was the daughter of former President, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, appointed under emergency rule when former dictator Yahya Khan abdicated in the wake of civil war of 1971. The war was brought on by hubris of Yahya Khan and Zulfiqar Bhutto, resulting in East Pakistan breaking away to form Bangladesh. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto later became the Prime Minister under a parliamentary constitution designed by him. He rigged the next election and was overthrown in a military coup in 1977 by General Zia ul Haq, who hanged him in 1979 for the murder of a political opponent.

With courage and perseverance, twenty-six year old Oxford and Harvard educated Benazir Bhutto became the undisputed leader of her father's Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). The PPP was hounded by General Zia, an ally of the US in the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. After the death of dictator-President Zia ul Haq in a plane crash, she returned from exile to lead PPP to victory twice to become the Prime Minister in 1988 and again in 1993. And twice she was dismissed from office under a cloud of corruption and nepotism in 1990 and 1996 by the ceremonial president.

In 1999, General Parvez Musharraf overthrew the government of her political rival Nawaz Sharif. General Musharraf has ruled Pakistan through some very difficult times in the wake of 9/11 and the US war on Al Qaeda and the Talibans in neighboring Afghanistan.

After eight years of dictatorship, and close cooperation with the United States, Musharraf has not been able to contain the virulent Talibanist ideology that has spilled over among the kith and kin of Afghan Pashtuns in the very porous frontier areas of Pakistan. With regular indiscriminate bombings of Pashtun villages in Afghanistan by the US lead forces and occasional stealth bombings in Pakistan, claiming hundreds perhaps thousands of innocent lives, the Pashtuns have become much more anti-American and anti-Pakistan government than ever before, resulting in Iraq style suicide bombings in civilian areas of Pakistan.

Unable to defeat the Talibanist ideology and unable to safeguard the civilian population in the heartland of Pakistan, Musharraf has become quite unpopular. He found his power slipping and made the mistake of firing the Chief Justice of the Pakistan Supreme Court in March 2007. Unexpected widespread protest followed and Musharraf was forced to reinstate the Chief Justice. It weakened him further.

Over the summer of 2007, the United States brokered a power sharing deal between General Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto to provide a gradual shift in power. Musharraf dropped the pending corruption charges against her and allowed her return to Pakistan after a decade of self exile. She was a candidate for Prime Minister again in the upcoming election on January 8, 2008. On again, off again political maneuvering by General Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto further weakened Musharraf who declared emergency in early November, but was forced to relinquish his military dictator’s uniform to become a newly minted civilian president.

Whatever the veracity of behind the scene deal may have been, Bush took credit for it, trying to shore his sagging popularity in the United States. To the Pakistanis the very idea of Bush meddling and controlling the two top political figures, made Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto appear to be stooges of Bush, who while preaching democracy has a record of supporting dictatorships and bullying other countries. An average Pakistani does not support the Talibanist ideology and feels caught between the devil and the deep sea, unable to decide which is which.

Benazir Bhutto was a polarizing figure in a country that had aspirations of nationhood, but keeps loosing to the vested interests based on many conflicting ethnic, linguistic and economic fissures held together or perhaps suppressed together by the domineering presence of the military. For sixty years, its leaders have gone for quick fixes of military dictatorships rather than let the imperfect civilian institutions grow and mature.

As polarizing leaders often are, she was intensely loved by many and was hated by many others. In the past Benazir Bhutto had political opponents, but this time she had deadly enemies. The bullets of an assassin and the suicide bomber not only killed Benazir Bhutto, but have set Pakistan further back, denying another possible chance for an imperfect democracy to take root.

I was not an admirer of Benazir Bhutto’s political compromises and considered her father to be one of the architects of the dismemberment of Pakistan when Bangladesh broke away in 1971. But criticism aside one has to admire her courage and persistence. She tried to bring sanity to Pakistan's many-sided murky politics choked with a strangle-hold of military on all the intermittent civilian governments, including hers.

Finally she went down fighting courageously trying to do some good for her beleaguered country. She was less than what critics like me would have liked her to be, but then critics have the luxury of not being in the rough and tumble of politics. They do not have to swallow principles and make calculated imperfect or at times far from perfect compromises. As Theodore Roosevelt said,

"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again ... who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly."

Banazir Bhutto knew the dangers she faced. About 150 people died in an attempt on her life when she arrived in Pakistan from exile in mid-October this year. She was not intimidated but pursued on with vigor. She died valiantly fighting for her and Pakistan's future as she saw it. She was cut down in her prime by those who have a very narrow jaundiced view of their religion and no vision of the future. They court death, killing innocent bystanders in ignorance of the ideals of religion and nobility of human spirit.

After six years of war, death and destruction the US should realize that bombing wins battles and destroys some enemies while creating many more, resulting in a heavy blowback price to pay. War of ideas is won by convincing the enemy of a better future. Instead of supporting military dictatorships the United States should invest in better schools, universities, hospitals and infrastructure to help Pakistan alleviate poverty and build a more equitable society.

Pakistan is again at fateful cross roads. It is sixty years late, but not too late, because what else can a people or a nation do, but to take up the fallen standard and persevere. Pakistanis can reject the politics of fear imposed by the quick-fix promises of military dictatorships. They should take up the difficult long journey of slowly building civil institutions of imperfect political give and take to reach an internal cohesion and become a nation at peace with itself and its neighbors.

Mirza A. Beg can be contacted at mab64@yahoo.com or read at http://mirzasmusings.blogspot.com/