Anna’s Movement’s Good Signs

 Dr. Manmohan Vaidya

Anna Hazare led Anti-Corruption campaign has been an unusual experience for Indians nationwide, particularly the young. Anna’s completely non-violent movement that found support from all sections of the society throughout the country was a pleasant experience. Slogans like ‘Bharat Mata ki jai’ and ‘Vande Mataram’ that reverberated through the campaign almost became the catch phrases for citizens filled with a sense of nationalism and patriotism. The campaign coined its own metaphor and has left its own lessons that could serve as reference points for the future.

Connect with the new generation

Many would have believed that the young in India, often described as a 3-F generation are people only interested in the 3Fs ‘Films, Facebook and Fashion’ and bother little about the country’s politics. With Anna’s campaign that opinion stands corrected. Anna’s anti-corruption drive brought these very youngsters out on the streets, armed with the Indian tricolour, shouting ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ quietly underlining a non-violent show of their strength. With this campaign, the youth of the country proved that when thrown a challenge they are willing to stand up and show the power that a united youth commands in India.

The campaign also revealed that when a parliamentary democracy stops understanding popular sentiment and turns apathetic towards the needs of its people, people’s power can show the way, forcing an apathetic government to listen to people’s emotions and understand the sentiments of the populace.

Not just that. Anna’s campaign much like the Youth Against Corruption and Baba Ramdev’s campaign against corruption also established the fact that the people in the country are both seriously worried and agitated over the issue of corruption. It also established that people were no longer ready to sit quiet and accept rampant corruption in the country. They were willing to come out and make themselves heard.

While the country was experiencing a new found awakening, ministers in the government were still arrogant. The government’s attitude towards both Anna Hazare’s movement and Baba Ramdev’s campaign was unbecoming, intolerant and oppressive. Yet, finally it was people’s power that forced an arrogant government to relent, reconsider its decision and chart out a compromise. And this perhaps was the greatest success of Anna’s movement. For it gave the confidence to ordinary people that if they stand united and adopt non-violent means of protest, they can actually bend an unjust government and be heard.

Sangh’s Role in the Movement

A section of people tried dragging the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh(RSS) into a controversy with the Anna Hazare campaign. While the attempt was mostly unsuccessful, the truth is that Anna Hazare has never been associated with the RSS at the organisational level. Given his success quotient and impressed with the developmental work done by Anna Hazare in his village Ralegan Siddhi, the RSS had only sought Anna’s guidance and help in rural development projects. As an attempt to present Anna’s successful rural development model to the country, then Sarkaryavah(general secretary) of  RSS shri  H V Sheshadri had penned a book called ‘Ek Karmyogi Ka Gaon’ on Anna’s own village Ralegan Siddhi back then.  A number of RSS workers had even travelled to Anna’s village at that time, to get a first hand experience of work done by Anna there.

In its National Conclave(ABPS) held in March 2011, RSS had passed a resolution on corruption and discussed various effective ways and solutions to tackle the menace of corruption in the country.  In this resolution the RSS has called upon all Indians to support and participate in all anti-corruption campaigns in the country. Accordingly, the Swayamsevaks of RSS throughout the country had  supported and participated in all anti-graft campaigns including the one lead by Anna.

Worshipping the Motherland

Another good result of the Anna campaign was the fact that slogans like ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ and ‘Vande Mataram’ became common anthems and found wider acceptability with people as they echoed through the campaign. An attempt was also made to malign the two slogans by calling them anti-Islam but the propaganda did not find support from either the common people or the organizers of the campaign. Calling these slogans anti-Islam is a product of communal and divisive thinking. The good part is that the thinking did not find favour even with the Muslims. Few others called ‘Vande Mataram’ an RSS slogan, and  thereby  communal. But since when did respecting the motherland and singing praise for one’s country  become communal? Worshipping the motherland is an age old tradition in India. ‘Vande Mataram’ had become an anthem for the Freedom Struggle all across the country even before 1925 when the RSS was established. That’s the reason why the British had banned the singing of ‘Vande Mataram’ in 1905. In the year1907, as a student of Class X, RSS founder Dr Hedgewar, sang ‘Vande Mataram’ in school as a mark of rebellion against the British ban also proving his utter patriotism.

Dr Hedgewar was duly punished for his defiance.

The Journey of Vande Mataram

Vande Mataram was written by Bankim Chandra Chatterjee on November 7, 1876. It was included in the famous novel Anandmath in 1882.  In 1886, Rabindranath Tagore sang Vande Mataram in the Congress Convention held in Kolkata. Dakshranjan Sen got Congressmen to practice collective singing of  Vande Mataram in the 1901 Congress Convention. In the Banares Congress Convention held in1905, Rabindranath Tagore’s niece Sarladevi sang Vande Mataram despite the ban put by the British government on the singing of the song.

The same year, when the British proposed the division of Bengal, Vande Mataram became the anthem of that movement that opposed the division. As Hindus and Muslims sang Vande Mataram together, in the face of relentless opposition, the British withdrew their proposal for the division of Bengal in 1911. After the Bengal success, Vande Mataram became the anthem for patriotism and the battle cry for freedom struggle. From 1915 onwards, the singing of Vande Mataram became a regular feature at all national conventions of the Congress. At that time, Vande Mataram was considered neither anti-Islam nor communal. At that time, Hindu -Muslims would not just sing Vande Mataram together but Vande Mataram also became the last words uttered by many freedom fighters that the British punished by hanging to death.

Communal-Divisive Thinking

However in 1921, when the Khilafat Movment found support from the Congress, hardliners amongst the Muslims gained importance and prominence. This is when hardliners started opposing Vande Mataram calling it anti-Islam and communal. In 1923, in the Kakinada National Convention of the Congress, the party’s then president, Mohammad Ali overtly opposed Vande Mataram. Under pressure from the hardliners and communally inclined people within the Muslim community, the Congress stopped singing Vande Mataram at its conventions. While there are hardliners in every society, it’s best for every national representation and awakened society to ignore such hardliners. Unfortunately, since 1921, this communal and divisive approach gained strength. As a result, despite the lack of inclination from the entire national leadership of the Congress, they had to accept India’s partition.

For vested political gains, hardliners and those with a communal mindset kept getting importance even after the partition. After the Emergency of 1975, communal and divisive forces were allowed to become  more powerful in the guise of secularism. Given that background, Anna’s movement was the first time after Independence that the society as one kept communal and divisive forces aside and maintained one national voice.

Everyone’s Bharatmata

There were many who also tried to drag the RSS into a controversy over the issue of Bharatmata. The first leg of Anna Hazare’s Anti-Corruption movement held at Jantar Mantar had a picture of BharatMata in the background. The picture had not been kept there by the RSS. Yet it was said that the BharatMata picture at Anna’s stage was a picture popularised and presented by the RSS.  Does Bharatmata belong only to the swayamsewaks of the Sangh? Bharatmata belongs to every Indian in India. The tradition to  eulogize  India as one’s ‘Maatribhoomi, Karmabhoomi and  Punyabhoomi’ has been an old one.

In 1897, when Swami Vivkeanand came back to India from America, he got off the ship he was travelling back in and prostrated on the sea shore as a mark of respect to the motherland and sprinkled  sand on his body . As he got up, the wet sand of the seashore had got stuck to his clothes, prompting the many bystanders to ask him why had he done so? To which Swami Vivekanand responded by saying, ‘‘I have stayed away from the motherland  in America for four years, from 1893  to 1897. During this time if I have acquired any bad habits then this touch of the motherland will cleanse me of all that.’’ In a public speech later, he called upon all Indians, urging them to keep aside their personal Gods and Goddesses for the next 50 years and only worship one Goddess-Bharatmata. Was Swami Vivekananda communal? In fact by this he had appealed all countrymen to rise above the petty differences of caste, creed, religion and language and unite as children of one motherland to fight for the freedom of the country as one united people.

Learn From History

It is true that even the RSS has been successful in its attempt to unite people with the common emotional thread of  ‘this is our Bharatmata, all of us her children and therefore brothers’, helping them rise over their caste, creed, language and religious differences.  How can it be called divisive or communal? In fact this is the only sure shot cure for communalism and divisiveness.

In the second leg of Anna Hazare’s Anti-Corruption movement, the picture of Bharatmata was missing. Bharatmata’s picture had been replaced by a picture of Mahatma Gandhi. Could the organizers not have placed both the pictures of Bharatmata and Mahatma Gandhi there, together? It is true that the decision to place a particular picture on the stage rests with the organizers of the movement. It is also true that even if Bharatmata’s picture was replaced by Mahatma Gandhi, the movement led by Anna Hazare does not become less important. But to remove Bharatmata’s picture over the argument that it belongs to the Sangh and therefore communal is very unfortunate and alarming. This would be against India’s age old tradition of conduct and thought and proof that we haven’t learnt our lessons from history.

Identify, Expose and Defeat this Danger

Three different incidents, the same mentality

Identify, expose and defeat this danger

By Dr Manmohan Vaidya

The midnight crackdown on non-violent, peaceful and sleeping satyagrahis by Delhi police at the instance of Central Government at Ramlila Maidan on the night of June 4 was condemned by one and all. The satyagraha, organised by leading yoga guru Baba Ramdev had received unprecedented support from all sections of the society. The use of tear gas and brutal lathicharge on unarmed and sleeping satyagrahis and that too at midnight exposes the Nazi mentality of UPA government led by Congress Party. The security forces of this suppressive and cruel government did not even spare the helpless women, children and aged people. The condition of Rajbala is said to be very critical. Even if she survives she may not be able to stand on her feet in rest of her life. The truth of police brutality was evident from the heaps  of slippers and luggage of the satyagrahis scattered here and there in the Ramlila Grounds. The media successfully aired this news across the world.

Union Home Minister P Chidambaram, in his statement issued on June 9 which was widely displayed by the media, justified the suppressive police action saying that the organisations like Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad were supporting the movement. Does the Home Minister want to say that the brutality was justifiable because the movement against black money and corruption was supported by the RSS? Is it  anti-democratic  if the countrymen, disturbed over the acute failure of the government in curbing corruption, try to make the government realise its constitutional duty through peaceful and non-violent means? Was the satyagraha by Baba Ramdev an undemocratic act? Is it democratic as well justifiable to commit brutality over the peaceful and sleeping agitators at night, and also to forcefully prevent the people who tried to put off the fire caused (or  deliberate) on the dais? Can this type of brutality and inhuman activity be justified just by saying that it was supported by the RSS? This whole episode exposes the fascist mentality of the Congress-led government.

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh by has passed  a resolution at its Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha organised in March in Puttur, Karnataka,  had drawn the attention of the entire nation to the menace of growing corruption and had called upon the countrymen to join any activity, agitation or movement conducted for curbing corruption. The RSS, through media, had also widely circulated this message. It was no secret. The statement of the Home Minister claiming that it had been decided at the RSS meeting that Baba Ramdev would leed the agitation, not only shows his ignorance and ill-will towards the RSS but also is an attempt to undermine  the strength of lakhs of supporters who are lined up behind Baba Ramdev.

Fascist Mentality

The second incident is a little older. The fast unto death organised by noted Gandhian and social activist Shri Anna Hazare at Jantar Mantar on April 5 for a Jan Lokpal Bill, had also received unprecedented support from different sections of the society. Many organisations, individuals and associations had extended full support to that agitation. Sarkaryavah of RSS  Shri Bhaiyaji Joshi had also sent a letter of support to Shri Hazare supporting his initiative for curbing corruption. Shri Hazare had broken his fast after an assurance from the government. But after some time, Shri Hazare publicly said thathe felt cheated by the Central Government. He had also warned and  cautioned Baba Ramdev  publically to be careful while dealing with the UPA government. The media did a commendable job by covering the  agitation and educating the people on that issue.  Many dignitaries and common people extended their support to Shri Anna Hazare. Some of them could physically reach there and several others supported in silence from their  respective places.

The Hindustan Times on June 14 carried an article by self-styled social activist Harsh Mander who is also a member of Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC). The title of that article was “Why I didn’t go to Jantar Mantar?” Only Harsh Mander knows it better what difference  does it make by  his going to Jantar Mantar and supporting the agitation of Anna Hazare.  And why should he find it necessary to give public clarification for it? I started reading his article curiously expecting a major point of difference  in principle with  Shri Hazare. But  I was disappointed. The three of the four reasons that he cited in his article for his not going to Jantar Mantar included (first) he saw there the influence and presence of people like Baba Ramdev  who had supported Ayodhya movement. The fact is that Baba Ramdev had made his presence at Jantar Mantar on last day i.e. in the afternoon of April 8 only. The second reason that he cited was that RSS leader Ram Madhav was welcomed at the dais there. In fact it being a peoples movement the dias was open to all. Some RSS leaders including Shri Ram Madhav had gone to Jantar Mantar with the support letter from RSS Sarkaryavah Shri Bhaiyaji Joshi on April 8 i.e. on the fourth and last day of the fast.   Who stopped Harsh Mander going there in first three days? The third reason that he cited was that Shri Anna Hazare praised the developmental initiatives of Gujarat Chief Minister Shri Narendra Modi. This he did  only after the fast was over. The question that arises in the mind of even an ordinary person is that all these incidents happened only on last day of the fast. Then what prevented Harsh Mander from  going to Jantar Mantar during the initial three days?

May be that the fourth reason (or the first in his article), was the most important reason which prevented him from going to Jantar Mantar. Citing that reason, Harsh Mander writes that the stage  was decorated with a picture of Bharatmata, almost identical to that propogated by RSS.   Now this seems to be  the prime reason which really prevented Harsh Mander from  going to Jantar Mantar and which existed  there since the first day of the fast. It  was the picture of Bharatmata. He, however, did not make it clear in his article whether he accepts  or not  the concept of Bharatmata, and  there will hardly be any worthy son of Bharatmata who does not  believe in the concept of Bharatmata.. It means thatMr  Mander does accept the concept  of Bharatmata  but because the picture of  Bharatmata on the stage had resemblance with the Bharatmata propogatedby  RSS he could not join the agitation. Can this be a justifiable reason strong enough to keep a patriot away  from joining patriotic public movement?  This reveals the fascist mentality of such persons which should be condemned in strongest words.  I agree that there could have been many reasons for  not supporting this agitation. Some may not agree with  the leadership of Shri Anna Hazare; some may have apprehensions about the objectives of the movement; some may disagree with the demands raised during the movement or some may have objection to  the methods adopted for the agitation. Even , some may have objection to the galaxy of  supporters in team of  Shri Anna Hazare. Any of these reasons could have been justifiable for not supporting the movement as everybody has freedom of opinion  in democracy. But it is beyond one’s comprehension that resemblance of  the picture of Bharatmata on the stage with one propogated by  RSS can be reason to boycott a peoples agitation. It is an insult to the entire ethos and concept of India as a  nation  and reveals  a fascist mentality.

Despicable mentality

The third incident is very old.  However it came to my knowledge just recently. I was at a place near Hubli in north Karnataka for attending the summer training camp of RSS in the end of April. I came to know about  this incident there only. The first Prant Sanghachalak of RSS Karnataka  Shri Appa Saheb Jagajinni was also a Congress activist. In those days, despite being a Congress activist some people used to be office bearers of Hindu Mahasabha or RSS also. After the Partition, the Congress Government banned the RSS alleging its hand in the unfortunate assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948. Following baseless propaganda and poisonous campaign on the part of the then Congress government, some people were instigated to attack and vandalize RSS offices and  the houses of RSS swayamsevaks. The then RSS Sarsanghachalak Shri Guruji had officially dissolved the RSS soon after the ban was imposed and he had appealed to all the swayamsevaks to remain unprovoked and not to react, saying “Be calm at all costs” . The most violent vandalizing attacks were reported from southern part of Maharashtra i.e.Kolhapur, Sangali and Belgam. The only incident of burning four people alive was reported from this area only. A violent mob of some youth attacked the Belgam Sangh Karyalaya. Since there was no reaction from the swayamsevaks, the outraged  attackers had free hand and  after breaking the door of the Sangh Karyalaya they started throwing the things outside and started smashing them under their feet. This type of violence continued for some time. There were some  pictures of  great personalities of Bharat in the Sangh Karyalaya. These pictures too were met with the same fate stumbling and smashing under feet. One picture among them was of Mahatma Gandhi. The attacking mob in the madness of fury did not even spare the picture of Mahatma Gandhi.  Before smashing Gandhiji’s picture the mob had a thought for a moment and then declared that though  a Gandhiji’s picture as is from RSS office it deserves to be smashed and stumbled upon. This was the reaction of the violent mob outraged by unfortunate assassination of the great worshipper of nonviolence. This incident also exposes the same fascist and despicable mentality.

The timings and people associated with above  three incidents may be  different. But despite being different in nature, the same intolerant and fascist mentality seems exhibited in all  these incidents. This is the reason why a non-violent and peaceful public movement becomes worth treating inhumanly if it is supported by the RSS and  because  the picture of Bharat Mata decorating the stage of hunger strike of  Shri Anna Hazare resembles with Bharatmata propogated  by RSS, the whole public movement becomes worth boycotting and   Mahatma Gandhi though is highly revered but  his picture if  found in a Sangh Karyalay deserves to be stumbled and smashed  under feet. This  intolerent and fascist mentality which was exposed in these three incidents is the  real danger for the  pluralistic and democratic tradition  of India. This dangerous mentality must be identified, exposed and opposed by nationalist forces. The basic tenets of democracy are  being violated and strangulated in the name of democracy itself. It is need of the hour to identify, expose and defeat this dangerous mentality.

(The writer is Akhil Bharatiya Prachar Pramukh of RSS)

The Fight Against Jihadi Terrorism : How Serious Is The Government?

The Fight Against Jihadi Terrorism

How Serious Is The Government?

Manmohan Vaidya

July 13, 2011. Three consecutive blasts in the heart of Mumbai shook the nation. Twenty-four innocent lives were lost bringing the nation’s security preparedness and the effectiveness of intelligence agencies under the scanner once again. Investigative agencies were put on the job of finding out who executed the blasts. The government reiterated its stand on terrorism, promising to deal with it sternly. But despite all the claims made by the government, is it really serious about fighting terrorism? Sadly, there seems to be a huge gap between what is being said and what is being done at that level.

One of the main reasons why the government has been unable to tackle terrorism is the Indian National Congress party, leading the UPA government at the centre. For long now the Congress party has not been able to shake off the mantle of divisive politics that it indulges in.   Reason why it looks at everything related to terror through the communal prism of Hindu-Muslim and Majority-Minority community. It is this approach that makes divisive and communal politics and forces in the country more powerful. It is also this divisive approach is covered under the garb of  words like ‘secularism’ . While Pak imported terror was only plaguing the Kashmir valley all this while, in the last two decades terrorists inspired, trained and sustained by Pakistan have wrecked havoc all over the country. The time has come when the government looks at terror as an ‘act against the nation’, an anti-national activity instead of looking at  all terror activities as communal.

On 26 November, 2008 a ruthless terror attack killed 166 innocent people in Mumbai. Investigating agencies put on the job had found clear and ample evidence of ISI’s (Pakistan’s secret agency) involvement in the 26/11 attack. While the probe was still on, 6 December 2010, the national capital saw the release of an Urdu book titled ‘The Truth of 26/11- An RSS plot?’ On 27 December the same year a Hindi translation of this book was released in Mumbai. The book had been authored by Ajiz Burney, the then editor of Rashtriya Sahara, Urdu and had 25,000 copies of both the translations printed in the first lot itself. While that was surprising, what came as a shock was the fact that both the Urdu and Hindi version of the book were released by Congress General Secretary Digvijay Singh. The book’s attempt was to say that Mossad, CIA and RSS were behind the 26/11 attack in Mumbai. Did Digvijay Singh agree with the contents of the book? Why was RSS being linked to the Mumbai attacks when investigative agencies were repeatedly talking about ISI’s direct involvement in the Mumbai attack? On January 28, 2011, Rashtriya Sahara printed an apology on the front page of the newspaper after Ajiz Burney was served a legal notice for making baseless allegations about the RSS’s involvement in the 26/11 attack. While that happened, few questions remain unanswered: Why did Burney write such a factually incorrect book? Who financed the publication of 25,000 copies each of both Hindi and Urdu versions? Where were these books distributed or sold? What was Burney doing in Karachi on November 26, 2008 when Mumbai was under the terror siege and innocent lives being lost in a brutal attack? Who was Burney meeting in Karachi? These are questions that must be probed by a national investigative agency. Why did the Congress General Secretary, Digivijay Singh release the book in two separate places? With such support, it isn’t surprising that the book was widely discussed in the Pakistani media. If that wasn’t enough, almost as an award for his efforts at maligning the RSS, Burney was appointed as an advisor in Union minister Kapil Sibal’s ministry. Perhaps the appointment was made only to appease a particular community and nothing else. It is all of this put together that makes one doubt the government’s very intention to fight terrorism, making it clear that the government is not serious enough.

Tough situations require tough decisions just as extraordinary times need extraordinary measures. Dealing with a tough situation like terrorism requires tough decisions from the government. What is mandatory in this entire process is the fact that those found guilty of participation and facilitating terror activities should be strongly punished for their acts, serving as an example and a deterrent to others who might want to emulate them. But that’s an aspect that the government has so far shied away from. Perpetrators of the December 2001 Parliament attack are yet to be punished by the government. Afzal Guru, an accused in the Parliament attack who was awarded death penalty by the Supreme Court through a court order on August 4, 2005  is yet to be executed. . Why is the government silent on the issue? Six years since the Supreme Court order,only a  month ago, on 27 th July, 2011,  the government  has  taken a decision on his mercy petition and forwarded it to  the President of the India. On 12 December 2002, a full year after the Parliament attack, the Delhi Sessions Court ordered capital punishment for Afzal Guru for conspiracy to attack Parliament on December 13, 2001, waging war against the country and murder.  A year later, on 22 October 2003, the Delhi High Court, hearing the case once again upheld the Sessions Court order of capital punishment. On 4 August 2005, the Supreme Court rejected Afzal Guru’s plea for mercy, upholding the High Court order for capital punishment, one more time. Yet the government has done nothing to bring the perpetrators of terror to book. While it took the courts just four years to complete investigation and come to a conclusion, it has taken six years for the government just to move Afzal Guru’s mercy plea from the Home ministry to the President’s office. What is worth pondering over is that the issue is still inconclusive.

Strangely, the Congress party has not been upfront with its view on the Afzal Guru death penalty issue. A year after Afzal Guru had been sent to the gallows, Gulam Nabi Azad, then the Chief  Minister of Jammu and Kashmir had told according to Times of India newspaper that the , ‘central government must rethink death penalty given to Afzal Guru.’ Was this the view of the Congress? If not, then why did a Congress chief minister ask the government to ‘rethink’? Does the Congress chief minister not trust the country’s investigative agencies? Or is he mistrustful of the judiciary of the country? Clearly, what has driven this opinion is the Congress’s basic attitude of looking at terror through the prism of communalism. This is the reason why, the Congress party cannot look at an act of terror simply as an act of terror. It must always communalise the whole issue and debate of terrorism. A case in point could be Gulam Nabi Azad’s subsequent statement where he insisted that in case the government pursued the court’s order then, ‘Afzal Guru must not be hanged during the month of Ramzan.’ Does this statement not reek of Congress’s politics of communalism and Majority-Minority divisiveness, aimed at appeasing its own vote bank?

More recently, even as investigative agencies were struggling to probe the July 13, 2011, bomb blasts in Mumbai, a Congress General Secretary, often described as the ‘PM in waiting’ by his own party men, declared that ‘it is impossible to prevent every terror attack.’ Does a statement like this not undermine the government’s very intention to tackle terrorism? Does it also not rub salt on the wounds of nation suffering at the hands of ruthless and relentless terror attacks? Another Congress general secretary, often dubbed as the ‘mentor’ or ‘political guru’ of the ‘Congress’s PM in waiting’ went a step further, stating that the Mumbai blasts could be an act of ‘Hindu terror’ and must be probed accordingly. While Digvijay Singh’s statement found huge resonance in the Pakistani media, an apolitical Aam Aadmi casually said to me, ‘It would have been surprising if Digvijay Singh had not made such a  statement.’ However what needs to be asked is:  Does Digvijay Singh run an investigative agency of his own? If he has any incriminating proof to substantiate his statement then he should give it to the investigative agencies instead of making random statements to the press. A much- thought- out delayed clarification was  issued by Singh later saying that he was misunderstood. But he did not quote what exactly he had said.

Interestingly, Singh’s statements over the last three or four months have generated all sorts of responses. Some say that Singh has lost his mental balance. Others more scathing in their opinion have suggested that he should admit himself to the mental hospital near Pune and seek medical help. Few others have even suggested that Singh’s statements are a result of the huge international and national pressure being exerted on him to say so. Many also believe that Singh and his statements are not taken seriously by anyone in his own party. That aside, the fact remains; Singh is not just any ordinary person. Singh is the general secretary of the oldest political party in the country. It is this profile that makes his statements important and significant. Given the direction the investigation is going in, it seems Singh is making an effort to appease the minority community, trying to tell them that ‘we are concerned about you.’ And this vote bank politics is what explains the statements of the Congress’s General Secretary best. Singh’s penchant for vote bank and divisive politics is what made him question the credentials of slain Police officer Mohan Chand Sharma in the Batla House encounter. It wasn’t good enough for Singh that Sharma had been awarded the Ashok Chakra for his act of bravery by the President of India. Singh pursued the fake encounter theory only to serve his own purpose of vote bank politics.  Singh’s ridiculous statements on issues of terror sound astoundingly similar to the spokesperson of anti-national organisations like SIMI. And in that scenario, just who is bothered about the fight against terror?

It is unfortunate that the principal party in power at the centre is not serious about fighting terrorism. Even as the police and other security forces strive hard and loose precious lives of our security forces to combat terrorism in this country Congress politics fails their effort. Congress’s vote bank politics is lending power to the divisive forces in the country. The only sure way to tackle terrorism today is to ensure that patriots in all political parties including the Congress  come together to fight terror, leaving aside their political interests and incentives. A concerted effort to the save the harmonious and nationalist fabric of the country needs to be made by politicians across party lines. After all these politicians must remember that their politics and political careers are possible only if the national unity ,social harmony and democratic norms  remain intact. There will be no politics without the country!

 

Appeasement is Never Good for a Nation

http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/aug/06guest.htm
Appeasement is never good for a nation
Lalit Koul | August 06, 2008 | 15:48 IST
10,000 forest trees are chopped down to build the Mughal road in Kashmir. No one makes a noise.
Acres of land in the Kashmir valley are given to install mobile phone towers. No one screams.
Acres and acres of land in the Kashmir valley are allotted to lay sewage and drinking water pipes. No one objects.
But when 40 hectares of uninhabitable land is handed over to the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board to provide better facilities to the Amarnath Yatra pilgrims, all hell breaks loose.
Why? Because the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board caters to Hindu pilgrims who want to visit the Amarnath shrine in the valley of Kashmir. It is as simple as that.
Politically correct politicians, policy-makers and administrators might try to tell you that it is not about religion, but the fact of the matter is that it is all about religion. It is a design by communal forces within the valley to completely Islamicise the valley by removing every symbol of Hinduism and other faiths from the valley.
Today, these communal forces are preventing the setting up of facilities for the yatra, tomorrow they will even go to the extent of banning the yatra altogether.
The land transfer fiasco has already consumed the Ghulam Nabi Azad-led Congress government and is on its way to now adversely damage the state's economy. The fear psychosis has already resulted in a sharp decline of tourists to the valley. Counter-strikes and bandhs announced by the pro-land-transfer parties within the Jammu province have paralysed the life in that part of the state as well.
So far it has been a win-lose situation in favour of communal forces in the valley.
Let us take a hard look at the arguments presented by the locals who opposed the transfer of land:
1. The allotment would have adversely affected the environment around the area. One wonders where these tree-hugging environmentalists were when the same government allowed the felling of 10,000 forest trees to build the 89 km-long Mughal road.
40 hectares of land that was going to be used to provide temporary shelters and night-time facilities to pilgrims was in fact going to help in proper maintenance of the current day waste that actually pollutes the environment. But who can argue with senseless politicians who instigate people to come out on the streets?
2. The allotment is the government's ploy to settle Hindus from outside the state to change the demographics of the valley. Look, who is talking! One has to only go back 18 years in the history and check who changed the demographics of the valley.
Islamic terrorists changed the demographics of the valley by ethnically cleansing Kashmiri Hindus from the valley. I wonder where these we-do-not-want-to-change-demographics-folks were when Kashmiri Hindus were slaughtered and the valley's demographics were altered.
One would like to ask a few questions: a. Is 40 hectares of land enough to settle so many Hindus that it would change the demographics of the valley?
b. By putting this argument of demographic change, are the valley's Muslims implying that Hindus are not welcome in the valley anymore?
And I do not mean the Hindus from outside Kashmir. I mean the Hindus from the state of Jammu & Kashmir itself.
What if the Hindus, who hold the state subject certificate of J&K state and are legally allowed to purchase land in any part of the state want to purchase land in the area around the Holy Amarnath? Are the valley's Muslims saying that those Hindus cannot buy the land there and settle down? Is that what they are implying? Are they trying to protect the environment by preventing the Hindus from settling in the valley?
Another argument Kashmiri Muslims present is that the land cannot be allotted to the Shrine Board because Article 370 does not allow anyone outside of J&K to own land. Their argument is that since the J&K governor is the chairman of the board and he is an outsider, this transfer of land is illegal.
How dumb does one have to be to understand that the land is transferred to the Shrine Board which is an institution based in the state of J&K and created by the J&K government. The land is not transferred to the chairman or the CEO of the board per se.
Having touched upon the outlandish arguments of those who oppose the allotment of land, let us look at some facts and the real story:
It was during the first three years of the Mufti Mohammad Sayeed-Ghulam Nabi Azad coalition government that the original proposal of land transfer was initiated and cleared. It was under Mufti Sayeed's leadership that his forest minister Qazi Mohammad Afzal and law minister Muzzafar Hussain Baig originally cleared the proposal. It just so happened that due to red tape, the proposal was finally approved by the cabinet when Azad had taken over as chief minister during the second three-year part of the six-year term.
The same PDP led by Mufti Sayeed was originally okay with this proposal. But as soon as the PDP smelt that terrorist outfits like the Hizbul Mujahideen were not in favour of the allotment of land and realised that it could become a polarising issue to whip up sentiments to garner votes in the upcoming assembly election, it backtracked.
Since it is an election year, the National Conference and other smaller political parties would not let the PDP cash in on this opportunity alone. They jumped into the fray and whipped up sentiments by fooling the local Kashmiri Muslims. And that leaves the Congress.
How could the Congress not try to cash in on this polarising issue in an election year?
Azad did not waste any time and revoked his cabinet's decision to appease the Kashmiri Muslim vote bank. He did not just stop there. In addition to revoking his own order, he also effectively disbanded the Shri Amarnath Shrine Board. Now that is some level of appeasement!
That is the real story behind the story.
It is an issue created by Mufti Sayeed to polarise the vote banks. It is his design of playing politics with the religious sentiments of lakhs of Hindus from all over the country.
Now that we know the real story behind the story, how about the Hindu pilgrims who want to visit the shrine and what about their fundamental rights to practice their religion with complete security, dignity and honour?
Isn't it a shame that Hindus living in India, where 80 per cent of population is Hindu, cannot freely visit the shrine and expect better facilities? It is only in India that the majority community has to make all the sacrifices in favour of minorities because our politicians believe in appeasing Muslims at the cost of Hindus.
National Conference leader Omar Abdullah on a television debate on this issue asked why there is a need for land and new facilities when the pilgrimage has been going on for many years.
Does Omar Abdullah mean to say that there is no need to improve the facilities provided during the treacherous pilgrimage? Is he implying that if the yatris were okay for so many hundred years, then why change and improve the facilities?
I have never heard him say such things with regards to the Haj pilgrimage. Every year Muslims from Kashmir and the rest of the country want better facilities and subsidies for Haj pilgrims. But when it comes to providing better facilities to Shri Amarnath pilgrims, it becomes a sore point for Kashmiri Muslims and their leaders.
Heavy rains, snowstorms, landslides and hostile environment took away
256 lives during the yatra in 1996. And Omar Abdullah has the audacity to promote the status quo!
Some of you might argue that it was not the valley's Muslims, but the political parties and terrorists who opposed the land transfer order and forced people to come out on the streets.
I can buy that argument, but that does not absolve the valley's people from their responsibility? They cannot always support these fundamentalist forces and then at the same time claim innocence.
They did the same in 1989 and in the early 1990s when they either stood as mute spectators or as vocal supporters while Kashmiri Hindus were ethnically cleansed. As a good citizen, it is incumbent upon them to raise their voice against these dreaded forces and stop this madness.
If they sincerely believe in peace, then they need to stand up and reject these terrorist outfits and their masters. Conversely, if they don't, then they are as much party to the madness as the principals and thus need to be held accountable.
Appeasement policies are never good for a nation, particularly for a nation like India that is so diverse in ethnicity and culture. Whether it is amending the Constitution during the Shah Bano case, releasing terrorists during the Rubaiya Sayeed kidnapping case, freeing dreaded terrorists during the IC-814 hijacking or continuing the temporary Constitutional provision of Article 370, all such policies will one day result in the nation's doom.
It is incumbent upon the leaders of the nation as well as the citizenry to be on guard and not allow such appeasement policies to take effect in a nation that is based on the concept of secularism, democracy and fairness to one and all.
Lalit Koul is the President, Indo-American Kashmir Forum, a US-based advocacy group. He can be reached at editor@kashmirherald.com