A Strategic Partner Above Moral Grounds by Simi Sunny

After two long decades of a repressive military regime, Myanmar took the road to democracy with the November 7^th elections. The validity of the election results are already considered dubious with the junta-backed USDP declared the winners garnering 76.5% of the votes. Many were skeptical of the election process from the beginning itself because of the ban on many of the important parties like NLD (National league for Democracy) headed by Aung San Suu Kyi and parties representing ethnic minorities but still the formation of parliament after 22 years is being looked up by most of the world as a move towards reform. Even the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, who was under house arrest for more than fifteen years, on November 13^th was welcomed by the world especially the West. This isolated nation has been an interesting facet of south East Asian politics. Myanmar has had one of the most repressive and abusive regimes in the world and constantly faced scrutiny for gross human right violations since years. Despite so it has got a varied response in the international policy from the world nations.

The U.S has been one of the biggest critiques of the policies of the nation since the military coup of 1962. It has till recently followed a policy of complete non engagement and imposed sanctions on the country time and again. It was under the pressure of U.S and United Kingdom that the Myanmar issue was first taken up in the Security Council of the United Nations for the first time in 1995. Myanmar’s nuclear programme with the support of Russia has also been one the contentious issues between the two nations. Concerns were also raised about high prevalence of drug trafficking in the country. Thus U.S and Europe has had a history of strained relation with Myanmar and always urged a move towards Democracy and release of the political prisoners.

But the failure in this regard has been the full commercial engagement of two of the biggest nations in Asia- China and India. China has been an ally of the junta regime since 1988 due to its strategic significance. Myanmar not only provided China the much needed trading outlet to the Indian Ocean but also was large resource of oil and natural gas. It was of vital military importance safeguarding the trade routes and could also act as a check on India’s growing influence in the region. Around 1993 India in its effort to counter the growing alliance between the two countries revaluated its pro-democracy stance to enter into several bilateral trade agreements and state visits by heads of the state. Since then India has built major roads, highways, ports and pipelines in the region to increase its influence in Indo-China peninsula.

There have been many critics of the policies of both China and India for ignoring its moral responsibility for its trade profits, the most recent one being President Obama who condemned India for remaining silent in face of violent suppression of the democratic movements in Myanmar. China has come under immense pressure from both the ASEAN and the UN to encourage a democratic government in the country. But both the countries have continued to ignore them. Myanmar has been ravaged by mass killings and brutal economic policies of the junta recording the worst GDP rate. Sanctions have failed to make an impact and India and China’s crude economic and political cooperation makes it even more difficult for the people of Myanmar to see the light of a peaceful regime.

Saare Jahaan Se Achcha by Ramya Patnaik

A Manipur Protest

What is it about men who see fit to poke a barrel into young chests without apparent emotion, and with this single act, alienating them from the democratic process, inflicting anguish and injustice? More importantly, what keeps those who claim to understand the situation fully well from diluting the quagmire with real solutions and not blinkered laws?  An India that never falters to raise allegations of cross-border terrorism and undemocratic functioning at a neighbouring country becomes the proverbial ostrich, ducking its head into voluntary ignorance, hoping its own grave domestic problem will just go away.

The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act has become a dirty word in media speak. No longer is its futility shrouded by the official line on perceived perpetual security threats in the North East and Jammu and Kashmir. Yet, the process of ironing out the security concerns in order to do away with the Act and put into place a semblance of normal life has few takers in the government or public discourse. The issue has largely been relegated to some episodes of archival or documentary material on the evening news or boxed items on an obscure page of the ‘National’ section. Thus, it isn’t rocket science to guess that an average Joe wouldn’t be able to make sense of the bulk of antecedents to the issue.

The story of AFSPA takes on a double trajectory in two regions of the country synonymous with civil conflict and governance anomalies. Introduced in September 1958 to the “disturbed areas” of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura, it was later extended to Jammu and Kashmir in July 1990. In its alacrity to quell insurgent voices, the Indian government has blurred its ability to discern between what can be termed as a ‘national threat’ and what simply an exercise of basic free speech is. One does not seek to dissect the ideological stand of various separatist groups in both parts of the country with as much gusto as making an appeal in the name of those caught in the crossfire. Granted, the crushing squalor of a few thousand mothers or the existentialist angst of young blood may seem paltry pitted against the billions worth of trade and infrastructure development; but as children, we are taught the vitality of dealing with problems head on, instead of sitting on them to exacerbate them irreparably.

Irom Sharmila

The watermark of Gandhi is the most circulated image in the country. But are his values hollow and uninteresting to a nation that never knew him beyond school exams? Was textbook Satyagraha never the pivot of our freedom movement? Irom Sharmila Chanu was 28 when she realized what never hits many of us in an entire lifetime- that resolution to act doesn’t have a doctrine or an ideology discrete from righteousness. Her unparalleled 10 year-long fast would put Mr. Gandhi to shame but it doesn’t seem to move Delhi at all. It all boils down to this one simple fact- how would one feel if ones colony or city or state was under constant surveillance? Wouldn’t it pinch to be stopped and checked at every turning? Wouldn’t the occurrence of all this on an everyday basis frustrate one to the point of madness? Why is it then, so difficult for those in power to realise that the prolonged imposition of this Act or at least certain sections of it breeds further unrest? The unbridled rage and anguish of the 30 women who protested in front of the Assam Rifles Headquarters with banners of “Indian Army rape us too” after Manorama Devi’s raped and tortured body was found in a ditch is nowhere near being appeased. If security concerns are to be met, those in power need to separate it from civil life in a permanent and non-interfering manner. The people have cried themselves hoarse for long enough. If another security ‘concern’ takes shape in the near future, the answer to whose fault it is wouldn’t be difficult to answer.

The Naxalite Movement In India by Angira Chaudhury

[Reuters/UNI photo]

The recent violent killings of hundreds of people including large number of security forces by Naxal troops in Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Maharashtra etc. have drawn the attention of the Indian media which has highlighted these events as acts of ‘terrorism’. However, a section of intellectuals and human right workers, most notably, Arundhati Roy has differed from such opinion. In my opinion, terrorism may have individual following but it has no mass base. Naxalism is quite different from terrorism as it has ideological mass base in many areas of the country. The genesis of ‘Naxalism’ is very interesting. It is a product of long ranging ideological differences within the Indian communist movement.

The Communist International (Comintern) was set up by Lenin in 1919, just after the October Revolution of 1917. The main aim of Comintern was determined to expand communist ideology and help establish communist parties wherever they did not exist. In this way Comintern also talked of International revolution. Lenin, aware of possible violent ideological thinking in the International communist movement wrote the famous book titled ‘Left Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder’, cautioning communist leaders who believed in armed revolution.

However, there were always two currents in the Indian Communist Movement. The success of China’s communist revolution in 1949 after the Second World War had a deep impact on Indian Communist leaders. A section of the Movement started believing that an Indian revolution would be successful through armed struggle, as seen in China. Due to ideological differences of left and right, The Communist Party of India split in 1964 leading to the formation of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPI (M).

When left front formed the coalition government in West Bengal in 1967, the ideological differences became very sharp within CPI (M). Incidentally, around the same time a tribal youth named Bimal was attacked by his landlord and his hoodlums as he tried to till his land after getting a judicial order for the same in Naxalbari, West Bengal. The local leaders of CPI (M) like Charu Majumdar, Kanu Sanyal and Khokan Majumdar etc., took out a procession in protest of the landlord’s actions on 25^th May 1967. The gathering of mostly tribal people was attacked by the police, initially killing 7 woman and two children. The event marked the beginning of the Naxalite movement.

The aforementioned local leaders of Siligudi came out with slogans of capturing state power through armed struggle. For this purpose, Charu Majumdar and Kanu Sanyal pledged to follow techniques of Guerilla warfare. Such was the popularity of the slogans that the Chinese media highlighted them too. This is how the ideology of armed struggle found a new base in West Bengal.

The movement spread towards Debra- Gopiballabhpur area of Midnapore district of Bengal and Mushari area of Bihar. Considering growing ideological base Charu Majumdar with the help of other local leaders of CPI (M) formed an organization known as All India Coordination Committee of Communist Revolutionaries.

Soon this movement found its base in the Telangana region of Andhra Pradesh. As a result Charu Majumdar and his followers decided to form a political party to lead armed revolution in India. In 1969, the anniversary of Lenin’s birthday, a new party was formed named Communist Party of India Marxist/ Leninist in Kolkata. After the formation of CPI (ML) Charu Majumdar provided a slogan to boycott elections in 1969.  He also called for a cultural revolution calling students to boycott the capitalist education system and burning libraries and laboratories; also dismantling the statues of national leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose etc.

In the matters of foreign policy Naxalite leaders emulated Chinese foreign policy in declaring the Soviet Union as a social imperialist nation. They also came out with a slogan ‘China’s chairman is our chairman’. Charu Majumdar also provided a slogan of individual annihilation of the class enemy. Individual killings would later become a rampant feature of the Naxalite Movement.

It is interesting to note that the movement has seen numerous splits throughout its history. In spite of all these weaknesses Naxalite groups have succeeded in spreading their mass base in different tribal areas of the country like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Telangana and Orissa. At present, most of their activities are concentrated on killing central police and other security personnel. They have also adopted a policy of holding people for ransom. In this way their leadership has been converted into different groups of bandits.

Ashim Chatterjee, one of the leading figures of the bloody Naxalite revolt of the late 1960s, spoke to prokeralanews.com in April 2010 criticizing the present lot of Maoists, for only relying on arms and operating from the jungles by ignoring people and the doctrine of class struggle.

"Firstly, the conditions which set the stage for a revolutionary movement are absent in India. Secondly, these Maoists have not cared to build up class struggle. And when you fight against the state without caring to build up class struggle, it amounts to social terrorism. The blood that is being shed is meaningless," he said.

Their original ideologies have been lost in the wilderness; this is why voices from many corners are being raised to treat Naxalism as on par with terrorism. However, there is another opinion that the Naxalites have spread their mass base in areas where particularly tribal people suffer from lack of land reform, education and employment. Therefore, in dealing with the issue, the various individual causes and contextual details of the Naxalite revolution must be taken into consideration. 

BJP’s Pendulum Policy: Moderate Government; Extremist Opposition by Angira Chaudhury

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) draws elements of its political philosophy from the erstwhile Bharatiya Jana Sangh. RSS (Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh), a cultural organization with common roots, has undeniably acquired a reputation for indulging communalism in mainstream Indian politics, for the realization of their ultimate ideology- cultural nationalism. The position of the BJP on such behavior has never really been critical. In practice, the party hasn’t held back from doing the same and has been criticized on occasions for its communal vote-bank politics.

Initially, the BJP was a party that followed a broader ideological path than the Jana Sangh. It is unique to note that in the 1984 Lok Sabha elections BJP could win only 2 seats in the Parliament with its ideology of Gandhian socialism. However, the Shah Bano Case of 1985 and the Faizabad district court order regarding the unlocking of Babri Masjid premises of 1986 marked a shift in ideology for the BJP. The issue of ‘Ram Janmabhoomi’ was raised on a mass scale. L.K.Advani, the leader of BJP, launched many so-called ‘Rath Yatras’ from Somnath and travelled throughout north India, communalizing the atmosphere on religious line. As a result, ‘kar sevaks’ identified as members of RSS and BJP along with its satellite organizations like Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal demolished the Babri Masjid on 6^th December 1992 leading to widespread communal disharmony across parts of the country.

The demolition of the Babri Mosque polarized people on religious line. India had never seen such a division among the people after independence since Partition. BJP began to instigate people in the name of Hindutva to get political support in the elections. As a result, in due course of time BJP captured power in many states of north India like U.P., Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra etc. Its growing strength forced many regional parties to join its front which brought BJP to power at the centre in 1998.

When Atal Behari Vajpayee became Prime Minister of India, BJP adopted a dual policy. Since a combination of about two dozen parties had brought BJP in power, it became a moderate party leaving all controversial issues aside like building of Ram Temple in Ayodhya and abolition of Article 370 which provided special status to Jammu and Kashmir etc. However, in which ever state BJP had captured power on its own it began to follow a hard-line Hindutva policy based on intimidating minorities like Muslims and Christians. Its most dangerous example can be found in Gujarat where Narendra Modi became a symbol of hard-line Hindutva after the 2002 Godhra Riots. It was typical of BJP to project Vajpayee as a true secularist and liberal politician with the political capability of integrating ideologically heterogeneous political forces while encouraging Narendra Modi as a lion of Hindutva forces at the same time. Thus Modi became the true ideologue of RSS.

RSS and BJP claim that they believe in cultural nationalism. In this context it is interesting to note that analyzing post Godhra riots situation in Gujarat, Ashok Singhal the International President of the VHP openly spoke to the effect that people who described it as a riot were mistaken, and the actions of the kar sevaks were spontaneous expressions of cultural nationalism in the true sense.

When BJP lost power at the centre in the Lok Sabha elections 2004 its real dual character emerged. BJP disrupted parliament sessions on many a minor occasion. It tried to combine religious issue with political demand. Another example is the party’s agitation over the Amarnath Yatra in Jammu and Kashmir. It also launched violent protests over the Rameswaram Shipping Project in Tamil Nadu, based on the mythical belief that Lord Rama had built a bridge over the sea, linking India to Sri Lanka on the same spot. The focus of these protests was the matter of people’s ‘astha’ (faith), which cannot be destroyed. In the name of ‘astha’ BJP has tried to foil the basic concept of Indian constitution on numerous occasions.

 It will be interesting to watch BJP in the coming days, leading up to the Ayodhya verdict by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court. RSS/ VHP supporting outfits have already started recruiting cadres for the so-called ‘Ram Sena’ in parts of the country. All these activities indicate that whatever may be its response, the BJP is definitely expected to be in the eye of the storm.

Structure of Success by Tarini Bakshi

The now iconic Hands installation 

During the British era, Indian competency and inventiveness was in a deplorable state as it was looked upon with suspicion and was highly despised. After they relinquished their command, India was left to tumble in the slough of despond characterised by lack of dynamism and self esteem. However today we claim India to be ‘dynamic’ and ‘self confident’. But if we look closely we see India veering blindly without any constraint towards total globalisation and westernisation.

In today s era of open economic borders, there is a sense of ‘dependency’ that we seem to possess. The Indian mentality somehow remains convinced and complacent about the fact that we are incapable of producing anything of real value without foreign dilution. The swanky new terminal 3 at the Indira Gandhi International Airport cited as the 8^th largest in the world, comes loaded with enthralling characteristics. However behind its entire mind –boggling details lies an important fact that Terminal 3 is not wholly an Indian brainchild. The terminal 3 though built in Delhi was designed by American architects and managed by MGF, a Dubai based consortium. It uses tempered glass, a steel frame and aluminium cladding-all shipped from abroad. The Terminal 3 is definitely world class as it is built and conceived by literally the whole world.

The whole country is in awe of the various spectacular venues of the Commonwealth games. However they reveal a similar story. The enrapturing indoor stadium for badminton and squash has been designed by a renowned Australian architecture firm-Peddlethorp. The designs for Thyagraj stadium, the rugby sevens venue at Delhi University and the Yamuna sports complex are conceptualised by Peddlethorp as well. The JNU stadium has been given a facelift by a German engineering firm –Schlaich Bergermann and Partners. India proudly boasts of metro connectivity in its capital city, however, each coach of the metro has been imported from South Korea.

All new projects that aim to adorn Indian image and set new international standards are a manifestation of the aforementioned point of dependency. The Commonwealth games stadiums, the metro, Terminal 3- do depict India’s best architectural foot and are stunning examples of contemporary architectural vocabulary, however they remain diluted as they are results of foreign implants. The only question that remains unanswered is –where is the home-grown talent, Indian wisdom and pride?

The Second Judiciary?? by Simi Sunny

Last summer when the Aarushi Talwar twin murders took place, the whole nation was glued to the news channels. As the drama unfolded, the media and the police transcended even the possible scope of imagination to guess the culprit and introduced their own conspiracy theories. They reported everything from the family’s life style, Aarushi’s habits, to her relationship with her friends. The channels went berserk with the coverage of the case. TRPs sky-rocketed, for it provided all the masala of a saas-bahu soap. The most interesting part was the conspiracy theories of each channel. The state of the marriages of Talwars and Durranis became ‘breaking news’. The media did not even spare the victim and spun stories of a relationship between Aarushi and the servant, Hemraj. The case became disturbing example of to what extent a sensation hungry media can go to cater to the people’s thirst for voyeurism and curiosity. The recent Ruchika Girhotra molestation case was another example of media’s growing obsession with revealing the truth. SP Rathore’s images flashed across channels portraying him as the dangerous devil.

The media has for years gloated over its role in the Jessica Lall and the Priyadarshini Mattoo case. Media activism was indeed the reason for the justice being delivered in these cases. It was the support of the media which turned the tide especially when the suspects belonged to influential families like the son of a former cabinet member and a police officer respectively. The media exposed the lapses in the prosecution and influenced the public to rise up against the court’s decision.

The trial by media has begun a tug of war between two conflicting principles –free press and the free trial. The phenomenon has created a gulf between the two leading public institutions-the media and the judiciary. According to the 17^th Law Commission there are certain restrictions placed on the Freedom of Press granted by Article 19(1)a. It states that material which has a prejudicial impact on the suspects, accused, witnesses and even judges and in general the administration of justice should not be allowed to be published. Such a report can tend to influence or pressurize the judge in delivering prejudiced judgment. It also tends to hurt the position of both the defense and the prosecution.

Implications of a media trial were most obvious in the Noida twin murder case. As Dr.Talwar walked out of the Dasna Jail media realized it had indeed gone overboard with allegations and ended up apologizing for character assassination and defamation. Media which hails judicial activism seeks exemption when it comes to them. It takes up the role of the prosecutor and passes the verdict with such a propaganda-like zeal that the confused nation which listens to every twist and turn accepts it as the ultimate truth. We don’t even try to question the position taken by the media just to be part of the righteous public. Television coverage today raises doubts about the right of an accused to dodge the stigma of conviction even before the trial. It serves what interests the public and not what is public interest.

The media has a responsibility towards the society and it needs to ensure that punishment is delivered to the culprits and the innocents acquitted. But in the rush for business profits and high TRPs, it has failed to rein in its frenzied and irresponsible reporting. It’s time the media accept accountability in its reporting and abide by the ethics of journalism.

The Social Network by Akanksha Narain

Gone are the good old days of letters and pen pals, thanks to the numerous social networking sites cropping up. Status updates, photo comments, wall posts and tags- that’s how the Gen Y does it. The internet has created a new rage of networking and connecting with the world around us.

Every passing day seems to back Marshall McLuhan’s claim that the media would make the world a ‘Global Village’, sites like Facebook being primary examples. Children as young as 5 years old are well versed with the activities that social networking entail- from liking posts to uploading photographs.

Social networking inevitably has returned to the spotlight as an issue of contention with the recent release of “The Social Network” – a film that explores the life and success of shrewd and prodigious Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg. The question inevitably raised in a discussion of this sort is that with the advent of sites like Facebook are we venturing into deep waters? On such sites we unknowingly drop our guard, putting up rather personal information and photographs for the world to see. We put up photographs of ourselves holidaying in Goa while burglars happily see this and rob our houses. How difficult is it to plan a robbery when we ourselves inform the world when it is that we will be returning home?

With the explosion of the phenomenon of the internet, parents began to express extreme worries about their children accessing questionable chat sites and giving out information to strangers who might take advantage of it. We all have heard of numerous cases of kidnappings and children running away with strangers they met on such sites. Social networking sites have definitely aggravated this situation. The recent rape case in Delhi, where the victim met the culprit on Facebook is a fine example.

On such sites we not only expose too much information that could be misused by unsocial elements but also information that could cost us our jobs and marriages. Thanks to Facebook bosses now know that whether you were really unwell or were actually partying with your friends, all thanks to your status updates! Moreover, thanks to social networking sites all your claims of being a teetotaller are quashed. Before marrying anyone parents and the to-be groom/bride go through your profile and pictures to know what sort of a person you really are.

So the next time you go on Facebook set up your security setting and make sure that you do not put information that could be misused by people.