A Pyrrhic Victory

The LTTE might be on the cusp of defeat, but no viable solution to the ethnic conflict is in the offing.

Not very long ago, commentators on the Sri Lankan conflict were hinting that the latest set of sieges by the Sri Lankan Army were doomed to be interminable as it was assumed that there was no way that the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) could be defeated militarily in the harsh terrain of the Vanni in north-east Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan army might have belied those expectations by managing to take Kilinocchi, the administrative headquarters of the LTTE, but the costs at which the Sri Lankan government has achieved this target beg the question whether the victory is indeed what the government claims it to be.

The LTTE, now cornered in a few square kilometres of the Mullaitivu forests, has vowed to continue the fight. Even as the Sri Lankan army entered Kilinocchi, it found the town deserted, pointing to the fear and distrust of the Sri Lankan government that the much traumatised and victimised people of the Vanni harbour. The government has of course promised to proffer a political solution to the conflict once the LTTE is completely vanquished. The displaced Tamils in the Vanni have been used as cannon fodder, subjected as they were to forced recruitment and conscription by the LTTE. And yet, they have betrayed no trust towards the “invaders” from the south. Such is the predicament of the Tamils caught in the humanitarian catastrophe that is the civil war in the north of Sri Lanka.

Why have the Tamil people of the Vanni opted to take refuge in areas under the thrall of an intransigent terrorist organisation facing defeat? Why has the Sri Lankan government not been able to win the trust of the displaced people despite the iron-fisted administration by the LTTE in the northern regions of Sri Lanka? The answer lies not just in the years of ethnic conflict and “majoritarian” impulses that have characterised the Sri Lankan polity but in the refusal of Sri Lankan governments in the present and the recent past (irrespective of the party in power) to sincerely address the federal question in the country. For all the lip service paid to devolution and recognition of minority rights, the facts on the ground – inhuman treatment of the minority population in Sinhala majority areas, a ruthless military campaign which cared little for the lives caught up in the conflict in the north-east, and continuing refusal of the Sri Lankan polity to think beyond a framework of the nation which privileges the majority population over the minority – suggest that the grievances that were at the root of the decades long civil war persist and fester.

During the present phase (the last two years) of the civil war, the Sri Lankan government has taken recourse to stifling dissent over the course of murderous actions that it has embarked upon. Journalists have been prevented from reporting from the war zone in the north, and a cult of violence and murder has pervaded the country, attacking anyone seen as a dissenting voice. The brutal killing of respected journalist and editor of the newspaper Sunday Leader, Lasanth Wickramatunga, a known critic of the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency and of the war trajectory followed by the government in the north, is just one inglorious example. Wickramatunga, in a poignant “posthumous” editorial, published in the Sunday Leader after his death, left no doubts about who was the real reason for the cult of violence that would eventually take away his life – the Rajapaksa regime. Wickramatunga's death follows a series of incidents targeting dissident media voices, such as the attacks on the premises of the television channel Sirasa TV early this year, or the multiple threats, detentions and abductions of dissident journalists (both Tamil and Sinhala writers). It is no wonder that Sri Lanka was recently rated at the bottom in press freedom in any democratic country in the world by the organisation, Reporters Without Borders.

Indubitably, the Sri Lankan government's endeavour to use “war to establish peace” – arguing that vanquishing and obliterating the LTTE is the first step to re-establishing a peaceful democracy – has ensured that violence as a means has now been ingrained as an end in itself in a country that has just celebrated its sixtieth year since independence. There remains no excuse for the Sri Lankan government now to refrain from offering a genuine federal solution to the ethnic conflict that has ravaged the country, now that the intransigent LTTE is seen to be on the verge of defeat. But the means adopted for the objective, a reliance on unremitting violence – inflicted even on civilians caught in the crossfire of the conflict or those who question this strategy – suggests that a return to a liberal regime of rights for the much harassed minorities or indeed a rule that respects civil liberties and democratic dissent remains impossible under the existing regime.

That the other major political parties, the opportunist United National Party, which has boycotted an all-party representative committee constituted to suggest a package of devolution, the ultra-nationalist Janata Vimukti Peramuna, and a blatantly supremacist Jathika Hela Urumaya have no viable alternative to offer, suggests how degenerate the Sri Lankan polity is today.

Editorial written for the Economic and Political Weekly

A leftist take on Barack Obama and foreign policy vis-a-vis India and the world.

One of the much asked questions to this "political analyst" is, "So, is new US president Barack Obama going to be good for India"? I suppose it is not a question worth answering for a leftist who would find that such a question is redundant or at best s/he should ask back, "Which India are you asking about"?

Anything else would be a statist response. But assuming that a leftist is asked to provide a statist response, the leftist has to weigh as to what indeed would be a response from a statist perspective; in other words from an "international relations" perspective that takes states for given - as irreducible units in interaction among each other in the system of states. That is precisely the kind of fare that the average strategic affairs analyst gives you - indeed, he is among a slew of beings who are a dime-a-dozen in New Delhi in mandarin circles, in thinktanks and who get some good chunks of real estate in newspapers and in the electronic media (especially since the Great Nuclear Deal Debate). But lets not digress.

Most Indian strategic affairs analysts, taking a contrarian position to heck..the world, actually felt that the maverick, the Straight Talk Express and the "Bomb ..bomb..bomb.. Iran" guy, John McCain was "good/better for India" (check.. here and here for examples) than The One, as many have started terming Barack Obama these days for his celebrity status throughout his presidential campaign as also after his election whence he has been enjoying nearly 80% approval ratings in the USA.

The primary reasons for the strategic analysts love for Republicans, in particular George Bush (as so pathetically articulated by Manmohan Singh who told Bush that he was "loved by Indians") however flows from the worldview that these folks have and share in common with the hard realist imperial Republicans, in particular the neoconservatives. The Neocons in their quest for a Great American century, believed (and still believe) in a Kenneth Waltzian hard power argument, and an arrangement of the world which is not quite an arrangement, but a derangement that requires the superpower to bring sense to it (for IR buffs, one only has to check out the Stag Hunt analogy by Waltz that makes this point). The American exceptionalist argument that drives the neocons is simple, "Power flows from the barrel of a F-16" (sorry Mao!).

It is this belief that drove the Republicans of the 1980s to fund and support the jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and to take up sides with the Islamic fundamentalists in Pakistan. It is this belief in power that condoned the AQ Khan profileration network, supported the apartheid regime in South Africa, killed Allende in the 1970s in Chile, and did whatever they did all across the world. End'eth the cold war, neoconservatism is born, an enhanced version of the hard realism of the Cold War era.

The neoconservative project in the 2000s identified (and correctly according to the paradigm) that China, with its growing clout as the manufacturing base of the world, was re-emerging as a hard power and it was necessary to contain its rise. Hard power could not be used as Chinese and American interests were intertwined through the complex, intricate set up of economic relationships between the countries over the years. Enter the new logic of stopping the Chinese dragon on its tracks - containment through "balancing". How to go about it? Engage the services of the other "growing tiger" in the continent - India. Ergo - the Indo US Nuclear Deal.

The Indian strategic community understands the motivations of the Hard Right in America and their goals for sustained hegemony in the world. They see a "correlation of interests" between a domineering United States and an India finding its place through pitching its elites' interests on to the forefront as its national interest. That explains the love affair between the most neocon of all regimes- the Bush regime and the strategic community and its minions in government in India all along.

Why does the Indian strategic community refuse to accord the same love to the Democrats (and by extension- Obama) now? One has to delve into the Weltanschaung of the Democrats (in Marxist terms - liberal imperialism) vis-a-vis the world. The Democrats in contrast to the Republicans are not quite neoconservative (although it is not as black and white as I would want it to be - different Democratic administrations take a mixture of the hard right and the liberal imperialist positions). Thus, the emphasis of the Clinton administration on south Asia was focused on greater engagement with China and consequently with Pakistan, resulting in the whole "hyphenation" argument that drove US foreign policy in the subcontinent. The aggressive posturing on the Kashmir issue by the Clinton administration was never appreciated by the strategic community in India and they expect more of the same in an Obama administration.

The Obama administration in contrast to the Bush's or the hypothetical McCain's, would want a greater engagement with China, in particular to address the US' own financial economic plight as it stands. That would mean that the aggressive moves to use India as a balancer against China, an approach used by the Bush regime would not quite follow. But again, there would be a liberal internationalist zeal in the American foreign policy toward India- perhaps accommodating the rising Indian elites in the global economic clout clique - the G8 or other forums. There would be a return to the hyphenation thing; Pakistan is still important for the theatre of operations in Afghanistan and for the US' withdrawal from this affair (in contrast to a Republican intensification of conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan). This explains the strategic community's angst against Obama and fear about his moves vis-a-vis India. I am not sure if Manmohan Singh would have an interest in expressing India's love for Barack Obama.

Lets get back to the original question. What would a leftist's answer be to the question? The leftist's interest would be divorced from the elite interest. For the leftist, "national" interest would automatically mean an anti-imperialist interest, in solidarity with the struggles against imperialism all across the world. What does Obama offer on that account - atleast from his statements and positions that have been on record so far? The Obama administration offers putative engagement with "adversaries", and other forces- say states across the world. This engagement on offer, is welcome (as dialogue is anytime welcome over armed conflict), but not more can be said about this so called engagement without fleshing out the details of the same. If the engagement on offer recognises the validity of the concerns about American exceptionalism, American unilateralism or indeed American imperialism, then it would definitely be real change from the neoconservative past. Say if the US administration under Obama revokes the oppressive blockade against Cuba or decides to forgo the continuing veto of condemnation or halt of Israeli crimes in Palestine - that would be welcome.

Vis-a-vis India, American engagement can be welcome, if the partnership is bound by equal terms of trade and investment and respect for economic sovereignty. Or indeed, if the American initiative on various issues such as terrorism is bound to multilateralism and a genuine intent to forgo the use of instrumentality in fighting terrorism, then it could be welcome. The best way to address terrorism is of course politically, i.e. to reduce the stake of radical tendencies, which take root in areas of disenchantment (I am not assuming that they dont' have any agency whatever though) - which in turn is a result of the nefarious influence of imperialism and its allies in those areas.

This leftist feels that considering the state of affairs that America is - a plutocracy, mind you and a nation that is still ruled by the biggest of the big bourgeoisie and a bourgeois paradise in some senses; such expectations of Obama are going to be belied. An Obama administration would continue the emphasis of using globalisation as a tool for using the terms of trade in the favour of the American big bourgeoisie (with its byproduct of benefits to sections of the Indian elite indeed). It would re-focus on addressing conflict through a liberal internationalist framework, but which would still be driven by a rhetoric that favours the status quo - vis-a-vis Cuba, Iraq, Palestine or indeed in Latin America. The structure and nature of Obama's cabinet - a hangover of the Clinton administration is indicative of this. It is left to Obama to prove me wrong.

The silver lining however, is that the Obama administration, in raising its hopes of "change" and its emphasis of knocking the wax house of neoconservatism, will enthuse those who believe in it genuinely. There would be greater avenues for those in the left to question the motives and the actions of rulers as in America, as elsewhere in the world. The emphasis on internationalism would provide greater relevance to the multilateral institutions such as the United Nations. By suitable groupings, the Non Aligned Movement for e.g. or the get-together of the nations from the third world countries, American and indeed imperialist exceptionalism can be handled hurdles if not completely thwarted.

In that sense, an Obama administration (over a Bush administration) is indeed better for "India".

More on Satyam-Maytas

(More is promised)...

For now...

Praful Bidwai on the Satyam affair. ....

CP Chandrashekar on the same...

Sitaram Yechury on the same.. (forthcoming article in the People's Democracy)

Some sensible opinion on the same..

More articles later..

EPW Special Issue on Thirty years of Chinese reforms

Economic and Political Weekly brought a selection of special articles analysing the thirty years after China announced wide ranging reforms that heralded a transition from the so called, "Maoist" era in the issue dated December 27,2008-January 2,2009. The issues covered included - inequality, class contradictions, property rights, rural industrialisation, the countermovement and so on. Presented are the article links with relevant abstracts from the site:

Inequality and Its Enemies in Revolutionary and Reform China
Ching Kwan Lee, Mark Selden

During the epochs of revolution and reform in China over the past six decades, under what conditions have heightened inequality and perceptions of inequality translated into the discernment of inequity and the stimulus to challenge the order perpetuating it? The paper throws light on the key institutions and mechanisms underlying, structuring and restructuring patterns of inequality, the changing features of popular resistance that inequality has bred, and the contested meanings and discourses of it.

Property Rights and the Social Costs of Transition and Development in China
Carl Riskin

There is considerable ferment over property rights in China today. This paper briefly explores important areas in which social unrest over property rights is currently under way, beginning with a discussion of the general debate about this issue in China, and then moving on to consider such rights in agriculture, intellectual property rights, and property rights in the environmental field. The objective is to indicate how the property rights debate overlaps the argument about social costs of transition, including widening income inequality, environmental devastation, and so on.

Rural Industrialisation and Spatial Inequality in China, 1978-2006
Chris Bramall

This study analyses the impact of rural industrialisation in China on poverty and spatial inequality at the county level between 1982 and 2000. The most positive consequence of industrialisation has been its contribution to absolute poverty reduction, especially in the coastal provinces. Much less clear is whether migration – mainly from west to east and driven by rural industrialisation – has contributed to poverty reduction in the interior. For, remittances have accrued mainly to the relatively well off rather than to the rural poor. More negatively, counties which were large exporters of labour have suffered a skill drain. However, the main adverse effect of rural industrialisation has been its exacerbation of spatial inequality, which has also resulted in a rise of inequalities in per capita gdp among China’s counties.

Double Movement in China
Shaoguang Wang

This paper traces China’s move towards a market economy in the mid-1980s, the near triumph of market forces in the 1990s, and the countermovement this engendered as inequalities between the rich and poor increased and social security networks collapsed. It focuses on the country’s regional and healthcare policies to illustrate how it has dealt with issues of inequality and insecurity over time. The prevailing view now is that the market is necessary but it must be embedded in society. And the state must play an active role in the market economy to prevent a disembedded and self-regulating market economy from dominating society.

A House Divided: China after 30 Years of ‘Reforms’
Robert Weil

The 30 years of Chinese capitalistic “reforms” now exceeds the 29 years of socialist revolution under Mao. A “new” China has emerged, economically powerful, showcased by the Olympics and spurred by nationalistic sentiments. But beneath this shiny surface there is growing polarisation between those with extreme wealth at the top and hundreds of millions in the working classes who have lost power and face a bleak struggle for survival in the global capitalist market. Despite ameliorative measures by the current leadership, there is no fundamental plan to reverse this ever widening divide. In the face of the deepening global economic crisis, these divisions are swelling. China is suffering its most severe downturn in decades, and working class protests are spreading. The Chinese left is re-emerging, but remains largely isolated from these popular forces. Only by beginning to bridge that gap, can China once again find a socialist alternative.


Light and Shadow of an Inarticulate Age: Reflections on China’s Reform
Pun Ngai

This tribute to the resilience of China’s migrant workers is by an academic who lived and worked among them in Shenzhen for seven months, sharing their screams and dreams. It touchingly portrays the plight of young migrant workers, many of them women, who have been caught in the grip of capital’s unscrupulous willingness to sacrifice anything in the pursuit of profit. Their efforts to organise themselves have been at best a partial success.


Socialism, Capitalism, and Class Struggle: The Political Economy of Modern China
Minqi Li

This essay traces the evolution of the political economy of China from the 1949 revolution up to the triumph of Chinese capitalism in 1992. It first describes and discusses the tremendous achievements in the first quarter century after the revolution, and also the struggles during the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. The essay outlines the context of the tussles that followed the death of Mao, the role of the “intellectuals”, the alliance or the lack of it with the urban working class during Tiananmen 1989 and how the forces represented by Deng Xiaoping were able to impose their writ on the economy and society of China.

China’s Rural Reform: Crisis and Ongoing Debate
Dale Jiajun Wen

Despite China’s dramatic transformation in the last three decades, its countryside is in a state of crisis. This study examines the dark side of the country’s economic “miracle”, looking into the various adverse effects that have followed the break-up of communes in rural areas and analysing their causes. It also examines the contentious issue of privatising landownership, which is favoured by those sympathetic to a neoliberal agenda, and reports on recent grass roots and government efforts to rebuild communities at the village level.

Globalisation Meets Its Match: Lessons from China’s Economic Transformation
Dic Lo , Yu Zhang

The sustained and rapid growth of the Chinese economy in the last three decades has been in sharp contrast to the prolonged stagnation in most parts of the nonwestern world. The persistence of a mixed economic system despite market reforms further contradicts the orthodox doctrines of globalisation. This study argues that China’s economic transformation has been mainly based on productivity improvement and is thus to a significant extent a real development. It has been achieved mainly through a process of “governing the market” by a set of structural-institutional factors that are China-specific but can be of general importance for late development worldwide.

EPW Archives

The Economic & Political Weekly (my organisation) now offers archives on its site. Currently archives are available from 1988 onwards to 1998 (issues from 1998 to 2008 were available on the site). In due time, (hopefully in a couple of months), the entire archives from 1966 (since the birth of EPW specifically, not Economic Weekly - the earlier avatar) will be soon up on the internet.

Needless to say, the archives are a rich source of information for everyone interested in tracing policies, issues, news, analysis, etc that have been tracked in the Economic and Political Weekly for years and have made what EPW has been reputed to be.

This is to humbly encourage all readers of this blog to kindly subscribe to the EPW site online and get a peek and even more of the rich archives of the magazine/journal.

Satyam- beyond incredulity

That the Satyam fraud scam is massive is beyond doubt. Here is a Tier-1 company, one of the top few representatives of the neo-Indian big bourgeoisie, one of the few IT tags-to-riches stories that have defined the Indian liberalisation period, and one of the few perennial contenders/winners for the multiplicity of the bourgeoisie instituted "awards of the year" every year.

Much has been written about it or is still being talked and written about it in the media already. What is unsaid is the level of colossal failure that can be stuck to several authorities who were seen to be unimpeachable in quality and prestige.

Can you imagine it? Here is a promoter/chairman who says that books were fudged to the tune of Rs 7100 crores and no one in the all powerful and independent"Board of Directors" knew a thing about it. And all this seems to have happened under the nose of a supposedly prestigious accounting/auditing firm (a global "powerhouse" at that)- PriceWaterHouse Coopers. And the CAs who are supposed to have colluded or perhaps simply been utterly inefficient in going about their jobs are considered to be the creme-de-la-creme of the Indian literate, having passed their tough CA examinations conducted by the prestigious ICAI. And to beat it all, not a whimper or a whiff of this scam could be noticed or deciphered by the even more powerful overseer of India's official arena of casino capitalism- BSE/NSE - the SEBI. The one letter by Ramalinga Raju has blown up into shreds, any notion of "checks and balances" in the finance capital institutions in the country. Satyam surely is among the many who have been twisting, ignoring or simply breaking the law of the land in its financial transactions in the country.

The ever growing myth of affluence, prosperity, growth and value addition quarter after quarter, built up a institution of such high repute that Satyam received award after award for "corporate excellence", "best employment", "best CEO" and what not, only for one big lie resulting in the crashing down of this edifice resembling the collapse of a pack of trick joker cards.

Several questions need to be raised and thankfully, already being raised - Whats this Maytas story all about? How much of Maytas' contracts and projects got to do with political patronage and plain crony capitalism. How much of a finger in the pie do these Rajasekara Reddys and Chandrababu Naidus have, in the Maytas-Satyam crony capitalist enterprise? What is the nature of the real estate story in the environs in and around Hyderabad? Already real estate has been swarmed and eaten up bit by bit by land sharks all around Hyderabad, leaving shreds for the government to pick and develop for public infrastructure projects and the likes.

I wish, we in the media, have the gumption to dig as deep as possible and possibly bring about a change in the "system" as it stands. The Satyam-Maytas story is now, surely, the tip of the "liberalised" iceberg, nay glacier. It needed a simple spark to heat up this glacier; it requires a bonfire of media activism to melt this mammoth bit of crony capitalist enterprise which has now threatened the well being of even the most upwardly mobile employees in India today - the IT workers.

Watch this space for more on the affair as things descend further into the spiral.

Forty Years since Keezhavenmani

Forty years ago, on the night of 25 December 1968, in the village of Keezhavenmani in what is today Nagapattinam district of Tamil Nadu, 44 dalits, many of whom were women and children, were burnt alive in a hut in which they had taken refuge. The reason: the labourers had the “temerity” to organise themselves and demand better wages for agricultural work. All that they were demanding was six measures of paddy for every 48 harvested on the land of the mirasdars (landlords). In the course of a prolonged struggle for better wages the dalit workers had organised under a communist union. In retaliation, the landowners had formed a paddy producers’ association. It was not just the demand for higher wages that was galling to the landlords; the fact that they were standing up to the all-powerful mirasdar was unacceptable.

A mockery of a court case followed. Ten landlords were convicted to 10 years of imprisonment. But the Madras High Court overturned the judgment citing the convicted’s “respectable statuses as mirasdars” and this was confirmed by the Supreme Court. Justice denied by the law was in a grotesque way delivered by the brutal murder of P Gopalkrishna Naidu, the leader of the landlord association, when he was killed 12 years after the incident.

What is striking about what has transpired through the years since Keezhavenmani is the improvement in the lives of the dalits in the village and in surrounding areas in Nagapattinam district. The flashpoint in 1968 and the court acquittal did not lead to the dissipation of the agricultural workers’ long-standing movement. The political movement for wages became a wider one for justice for the victims of the brutal murders, for emancipation from untouchability and for self-respect. After demanding a mere handful of measures of paddy in the late 1960s, by the mid-1970s the workers had managed to extract substantially higher agricultural wages. The class mobilisation of the dalits and the agricultural workers soon consolidated into a strong political movement, and today 40 years later, the strength of the left parties (the Communist Party of India-Marxist in particular) under the leadership of the dalits in the district is there for all to see, as substantiated by their electoral performance in the area.

Today’s dalits in Keezhavenmani and in Nagapattinam face other issues – the agrarian crisis in the Cauvery delta region, lack of other means of employment beyond agricultural labour, and only a marginal improvement in livelihood indicators. But the deaths of 44 villagers from Keezhavenmani spurred the dalits of the area to reject exploitation and they took up a concerted struggle that built consciousness and forced the governments of the day to acquiesce to their just demands. No longer is the mirasdar the controller of the workers’ destiny or the overlord of economic activity in the paddy fields. Landownership patterns in the Cauvery delta have changed, though much of the land in large quantities is still under the control of temple trusts. Today’s struggles are oriented towards demand for redistribution of such land and house pattas, as announced by the government but not yet implemented.

The 40-year-long journey of the dalits of Keezhavenmani and of the erstwhile east Thanjavur district since the gruesome events of December 1968 stands as an inspiration to the vast numbers of dalits elsewhere in the country who continue to face the twin barriers of social and economic exploitation. As the Karamchedu massacres in Andhra Pradesh in 1985, the Jhajjar lynchings in Haryana in 2002, the Khairlanji murders in Maharashtra in 2006, and the scores of incidents in which the feudal Ranvir Sena have targeted dalit families in Bihar in the 1990s have shown, dalits are still at the receiving end of violence and exploitation across the country. While affirmative action and reservation have provided some relief, they have only been formal ways of enshrining equality while entrenched caste prejudices and economic exploitation remain.

No longer does the judiciary in India show a blatant class/caste bias as it did in the Keezhavenmani judgment. But kangaroo courts, run by caste panchayats, still go about ostracising dalits in the rural hinterland. Without a concerted political movement for rights, political representation has largely resulted in cooption of sections of dalits into the system.

The saga of struggles and steady political mobilisation by the dalits in Nagapattinam district – despite setbacks such as the court rulings on the Keezhavenmani murders and periodical dilution of land ceiling laws in Tamil Nadu – stand out as a success story in the fight against exploitation and casteism in the country. They may be facing newer challenges and newer struggles, but they hold their head high today in reverence to the memory of those who were brutally massacred 40 years ago.

Editorial written for the Economic and Political Weekly

The United Monsters of America

Many a friend of mine or otherwise have questioned my hatred of the US administration or its policies. Many a media magnate and their minions in India are beholden to the US and its policies. Just one bit of news is enough to make these unabashed aficianados of American imperialism atleast think again (if they have the ability): 

This . 

UN resolution release: 

Draft resolution XX on the right to food, approved on 24 November by a recorded vote of 180 in favour to 1 against (United States), with no abstentions, would have the Assembly reaffirm that hunger constitutes an outrage and a violation of human dignity, requiring the adoption of urgent measures at the national, regional and international level, for its elimination.

Vote on Right to Food

The draft resolution on the right to food (document A/63/430/Add.2) was adopted by a recorded vote of 184 in favour to 1 against, with no abstentions, as follows:

In favour:  Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nauru, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against:  United States.

Abstain:  None.

Absent:  Cape Verde, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Seychelles, Uganda. 

Cash for Votes Sham

The cash for votes scam has turned into a cash for votes sham of an investigation.

The display of wads of cash by opposition members of Parliament (MPs) during the trust vote on 22 July was a shameful moment for India’s parliamentary democracy. The findings of an in-house committee, chaired by Congress MP Kishore Chandra Deo, set up to investigate the allegations of payment of bribes are so poorly constructed and the conclusions so perfunctorily drawn that the dishonour of Parliament remains intact.

The allegation of the MPs from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who produced the cash notes in the Lok Sabha, was that they were paid by emissaries of wheeler-dealers from the ruling coalition. Much of the bribe-giving business was caught on tape in a sting operation, televised, albeit belatedly (which is another issue for exploration), by the news channel CNN-IBN. The MPS alleged that the bribes were given by Rajya Sabha member Amar Singh of the Samajwadi Party through intermediaries and that Ahmad Patel of the Congress was also involved. The parliamentary committee gave a clean chit to Amar Singh, and Ahmad Patel was also exonerated for want of evidence. The committee recommended investigation by “appropriate investigating agencies” of three (non-MP) individuals associated with the sting. The Lok Sabha Speaker, in turn, has referred the report to the Ministry of Home Affairs for action.

The prima facie conclusion that one can draw from the “sting video” carried out by a news channel on the allegations is that legislators and associated fellow-travellers belonging to the BJP were trying to set a trap for those willing to pay bribes – one of whom, a Sanjeev Saxena, is caught red-handed in the act. The committee saw it fit to recommend further investigation on the role of operators of the sting while showing little inclination to pursue those who were alleged to have used Saxena as the go-between – on the ground that the allegations on bribe payments could not be established.

That a technicality – a member of the Rajya Sabha cannot be summoned for questioning by a Lok Sabha committee – can excuse one of the prime accused, Amar Singh, from being interrogated by the panel points to the casual arguments used to build a case for eventual exoneration. Due diligence in examining the allegations through a study of phone records, investigation of the cash trail and perusal of other evidence has not been carried out. Surely a case can be made that the allegations of bribe-giving could have been better investigated through the aegis of an independent investigating agency, say, the Central Bureau of Investigation, rather than with the process followed and by the reasoning eventually offered by the parliamentary committee.

Two dissent notes were appended to the findings. Mohammad Salim representing the Communist Party of India (Marxist) and Vijay Kumar Malhotra of the BJP pointed out the flaws in the proceedings and the partial nature of the process adopted by the committee. The reasoning that a committee of this nature was not empowered to launch a full investigation into the scandal then calls into question the very purpose of the constitution of this parliamentary committee.

The “cash for votes” scam is one of the many scandals that have shown Parliament in a very poor light. The working of this particular committee will only add to the growing cynicism over the parliamentary system. Graft, corruption, and abuse of public office are serious offences. That the parliamentary committee was so casual in its investigations and showed no serious interest in getting to the nub of the allegations and finding the real culprits brings out the level of nonchalance among those in positions of power towards issues such as corruption.

Only a truly independent investigation that covers all those allegedly involved in the scam/sting will assure a cynical public that Parliament will not brook such dishonour.

Editorial written for the Economic and Political Weekly

Maoists attack Himal media

The Maoists in Nepal came to power by winning an outright (constituent assembly) election, defeating discredited parliamentary opponents and helping in the overthrow of the hated monarchy. They did this by graduating from a guerilla struggle and by debating their every move to enter into a multi-party democratic system. They opened up to the media, built international bridges with civil society and solidarity organisations in south Asia, who were equally enthralled about the removal of a feudal autocratic institution - the monarchy as much as the ordinary Nepali citizen.

There has indeed been a lot of goodwill for the Maoists and for the democratic community to build a fresh, egalitarian constitution. No one expected that process to be smooth as the contradictions between the polity was bound to be laid out to the fore and each of the parties were to undergo a certain transformation in the new political game. If the UML had to adjust to the presence of a larger left party which was slowly but surely hegemonising their constituency, the Nepali Congress had to accommodate sections of the erstwhile monarchist right among its already hotch-potch coalition of liberal, social democrats and feudal sections. The Maoists, on the other hand had some catching up to do in a new liberal polity, where it had to subordinate itself to the rules of the "competitive game". They had "suffered birth pangs", as was seen in the way there was a disconnect between an accommodative leadership which was keen on fostering a broad coalition of democracy, and an assertive and confrontational mass organisation such as the YCL which was intent on building and retaining the hegemonic space, not to mention the more difficult transformation from a guerilla outfit involved in a people's war to a democratic political party.

At times, this disconnect created a rift between the Maoists and other political parties - in particular, the UML. But for the sake of a longer vision of a constitutional republic, these were in a way sorted out. Even then, time and again, the illiberal character of the mass organisations of the Maoists (admittedly in a chaotic socio-political system) has raised heads. One such incident is the simply unacceptable attack of the Himal media premises in Kathmandu where journalists affiliated to the weekly Nepalitimes, the Himal Khabarpatrika and others in Himalmedia were attacked by people who were identified as Maoist members of their restaurant workers union and others related to YCL (again).

As a report by Prashant Jha who writes a weekly column with Nepalitimes and is a consulting editor with Himal Magazine points out, it is not the case that the magazines have covered the Maoists favourably or indeed they have been objective about reporting on issues that are dear to the Maoists. But that is not a "grievance" to be addressed in this manner - violent targetting of the media offices and their journalists. Or is any other greivance enough to justify or legitimise a violent attack. After all, the modus operandi reminds this Indian journalist about the fascist attack by Hindu right wing groups in India - the Shiv Sena attack on Outlook magazine or the NCP goons' attack on Marathi journalists.

Clearly the "birth pangs" for the democratic Maoist party in a liberal polity, have continued. And this is untenable. Hegemonising public space by violence and intimidation will only backfire as the international community will obviously react with disgust and so too would other members of the media fraternity in the fledgling constitutional republic.

This writer, who has been sympathetic and supportive of the Nepali Maoist project in Nepal to achieve an egalitarian, developed and constitutional republic of Nepal, free from exploitation and international meddling, unequivocally condemns the violent attacks on the press, orchestrated by elements affilated to the Maoists.

EPW Commentaries on the Mumbai terror incidents

At a time, when jingoism is the ruling the roost both in the Indian intelligentsia and also predominantly in the rather obtuse television media, EPW offers a set of rational and sane commentaries on the aftermath of the terror attacks in Mumbai.

A Call for Sanity

A catastrophe awaits if the government takes military action against Pakistan.

The Dead of VT

For the 56 working poor who were mowed down by two murderers at VT station in Mumbai.

Manufacturing Confusion

It is clearly time for television news channels to turn the judgmental gaze inward.

Moment of Truth for Pakistan’s Elected Government
Haris Gazdar

To the disadvantage of the elected government in Pakistan, Mumbai has brought forward the moment of truth for the country’s tentative transition to democracy. We may not have long to wait to see which way the matter settles. India too has a role to play. A diplomatic, legal and institutional approach can help pin down the culprits, and may even help the transition in Pakistan.

Terror, Force and Diplomacy
Srinath Raghavan

“Limited war” or “surgical strikes” in retaliation for the Mumbai terror will be a senseless course of action, not the least because they will take India on the path of escalation and rather than achieve any of the desired ends, could have disastrous consequences in a nuclear neighbourhood. The struggle against terrorism requires us not only to keep our nerves but also to keep our heads. A far more productive approach would be bilateral, multilateral and United Nations-sanctioned diplomatic pressures on Pakistan to act on domestic terror groups. How the US and UK followed up on the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 and forced Libya to abandon state-sponsored terrorism is a relevant example. The options offered by UN Resolution 1373 constitute a related approach.

Governance Failures and the Anti-Political Fallout
Kalpana Sharma

The terror attacks in Mumbai that began on 26 November revealed a failure in governance on many fronts. The city has been victim to a string of disasters and crises in recent years, yet the emergency response was once again abysmal. A multiplicity of agencies was handing out information which was often incorrect. The people of Mumbai are very angry, but unlike in the past this anger shows little sign of being channelled into serious debate that will lead to constructive action. Instead the anti-political rhetoric that is being drummed up by the media will have a negative fallout and threatens to open the door for fascist tendencies.

Mumbai, Militarism and the Media
Sukumar Muralidharan

The media has encouraged talk that the Mumbai terror events of 26 November are India’s equivalent of the 11 September 2001 attacks in the United States. There are indeed vital lessons to be learnt by India from the US experience with “9/11”, though not of the kind widely imagined. By stoking the anger of handpicked guests and unsubtly suggesting where the direct responsibility for the Mumbai outrage lies, the electronic news media, in particular, have seemingly predetermined whatever strategic choices may be available to India.

The BJP Worsted

There may have been no clear overall victor in the recent elections to five state assemblies, but there was certainly one clear loser, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The BJP having worsted the Congress in a series of state elections over the past two years was confident that it had the latter on the mat, and saw the elections as a dress rehearsal for its return to power in New Delhi in the Lok Sabha polls that are to be held in the first half of 2009. Inflation and the year-long terror attacks across the country that culminated in the Mumbai horrors appeared to the BJP as the Congress having handed victory on a platter. In the end, the BJP has had to perforce turn humble. It won in only two states while the Congress came on top in three. (The results for a sixth state, Jammu and Kashmir, will be known on 28 December.) More important, the electorate has wisely not fallen for the BJP’s campaign that whipped up the issue of terrorist violence.

The BJP had been in power in three of these six states and it had comfortable majorities in the previous elections, while the Congress was seeking a third term in Delhi. The Congress was able to retain power in Delhi, triumphed in Mizoram and snatched victory in Rajasthan by coming ahead of an unpopular Vasundhara Raje-led BJP. The saffron party retained power comfortably in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.

The Congress won in Mizoram by defeating the Mizo National Front (MNF), which had been in office for 10 years. The MNF’s unpopularity stemmed from its poor handling of the food and famine situation (related to the flowering of bamboo) and the Congress was able to win a two-thirds majority by stressing widespread corruption and mal-governance in the state.

Polling in Rajasthan, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh was held after the terror attacks between 26 and 28 November in Mumbai. The BJP had made terrorism and security a major plank in the polls and had expected to gain leverage in at least Delhi and Rajasthan (states which had suffered terrorist violence over the past year). Yet, the success of the Congress in both these states revealed the failure of the BJP strategy, with the electorate possibly seeing this as a collective problem rather than one that could be put at the doorstep of the Congress.

The perception of Sheila Dikshit’s government in mostly metropolitan Delhi as focusing on development and good governance helped the Congress trump the BJP. In Rajasthan, Vasundhara Raje’s government was seen to have been a failure, hopping from one controversy to another (the handling of the peasant movement for water in northern Rajasthan, the Gujjar agitation, widespread corruption and communalisation of governance). The Congress benefited from this strong antipathy towards the BJP government, which faced criticism from within the BJP as well for Vasundhara Raje’s disastrous leadership.

In Madhya Pradesh, the BJP had to force three changes over the past five years in the chief ministership of the government, after a revolt by Hindutva leader Uma Bharati, who then left the party to start her own Hindutva organisation. Intelligently shifting emphasis from Hindutva to development and giving the appearance of (if not actual) better governance, the low profile Shivraj Chauhan has taken the BJP to victory. Chief Minister Chauhan’s projection of an everyday and down to earth image helped the BJP resist anti-incumbency, even as Uma Bharati’s party tasted heavy defeat with its leader herself biting the dust in the assembly elections. The Congress, divided as is its wont and unable to offer a steady alternative, was not able to narrow the huge gap in the electoral vote in the previous elections.

In Chhattisgarh a populist Raman Singh-led BJP won again on the back of such measures as the subsidised rice scheme for the poor. That the Congress offered no better alternative on the other prominent issue – Maoism in the state – and that both the Congress and the BJP have supported the unpopular Salwa Judum exercise ensured that the opposition party could not supplant the BJP.

In many ways, the results of these elections put paid to the “anti-incumbency” theory, which has been the chant of commentators who are unable to explain the voting out of governments that are unpopular everywhere other than in the TV studios and the editorial pages of newspapers. Development and grass roots work have helped ruling parties overcome the opposition, particularly when the other side is divided, does not offer a credible alternative, is plainly communal or is opportunistic. However, voting behaviour and outcomes are far too complex to be explained even in terms of “good governance”.As the result in Madhya Pradesh shows, even an intelligent packaging of a government that seems to care can swing voters away from the opposition, even if there is no true improvement in people’s welfare. A better understanding is needed of how local, regional and national factors affect election outcomes at all levels.

The Congress and the United Progressive Alliance need not now suddenly turn over-optimistic of their chances in their 2009 Lok Sabha polls. Exactly five years ago, in the same states, the Congress was routed everywhere other than in Delhi. That emboldened the National Democratic Alliance to launch its “India Shining” campaign and call elections a few months earlier than scheduled. The assembly election results of 2003 were no harbinger of the Lok Sabha elections of 2004.

Editorial written for the Economic and Political Weekly

Attack on "Everyday India"

This is a draft I wrote for EPW on the terror attack at VT (CST), Mumbai.

Attack on "everyday India"

The tragic deaths of victims of the terror attack at Mumbai's busiest railway station gets scarce coverage by an elite-driven media.

The senseless and horrific carnage at the Chattrapati Sivaji Terminus (CST) on November 26^th , which killed 56 people (and counting) and injured scores of others, preceded the 62 hour siege of the Taj, Oberoi and Nariman House in the terrorist attack saga in Mumbai. Even as visuals in the mass media were focussed at the dramatic siege and military action in the hotels, many attacked at the iconic CST were dying of bullet wounds in hospitals, joining the ranks of others who died instantly at the location.

CST is an iconic structure that serves as a major landmark and junction for the arterial local (central) railway system in the city. CST is also the station where most people entering or leaving Mumbai disembark/embark. The first blast of bullets from the terrorists' guns - AK-47s, were fired at hapless passengers waiting to embark onto many of the long distance trains leaving Mumbai such as the Mahanagari Express leaving at midnight, the Siddheshwar Express at 2220 and the Husainsagar Express at 2150. Following this was indiscriminate firing at waiting passengers, railway workers, poorly equipped security guards, ticket counters and shops in the station.Grenades were also lobbed at the structures in the station. A bomb was also set up, but which failed to go off and was defused by the police a week after it was kept in the station.

The time of attack, peak travel hours for the citizenry of Mumbai, was chosen to inflict maximum damage. The targets were picked to massacre the people of “everyday India”- office goers, workers, day-labourers, traders, migrants, shopkeepers and all of whom who have made Mumbai the cosmopolitan hub that it is today. Among the many victims were the Walliullah family from Nawada in Bihar, who lost six of their members and computer engineer Upendra Yadav who is survived by injured wife Sunita and infant daughter Sheetal, still being treated for greivous wounds. Shivshankar Gupta, a hawker, four members of taxi driver Zahur Ansari's family, the yet to be identified people who succumbed to wounds in St.George's hospital, Janardhan's (of Jharkhand) two children, Ajaz Dalal's uncle, home guard Mukesh Jadhav, were also victims of the horror. Utensils seller Bharat Naodiya who ensured that his children, Viraj and Anjali were safe, even after he was shot and was bleeding profusely and who lost his wife Poonam, and many others; all of them were gunned down by bullets which were fired at them randomly, but deliberately. They joined the scores of other randomly targetted victims of bomb blasts which blew up trains and buses in Mumbai in the past in 2003 and 2006, for the simple fault that they were going about their daily lives.

The investigators of the terror attacks, the security and ruling establishments have claimed with certainty that the attackers were Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) trained terrorists. The LeT claims itself to be a jihadi organisation that endeavours to establishing Islamic rule over south Asia and for whom therefore the secular Indian state is a professed enemy. That its intended targets included many who professed their beliefs in Islam (atleast 22 of the 56 people confirmed dead in CST were Muslims) points out to the farcical fanaticism of the radical jihadi groups claiming to act in the name of religion. The terrorists who attacked CST went on to inflict more horror and deaths at the Cama hospital and nearby the Metro cinema, killing more defenseless and innocent people in the process.

The world was outraged at the acts of terror, but seemingly the focus was kept on the more spectacular attacks in the luxury hotels and the siege on Nariman House, where a hapless Jewish family was murdered. The victims at the CST were more or less afterthoughts - surely this is because the media (particularly the hysterical television media) were more concerned for the elite than the everyday Indian. The prominent coverage of the attacks and the victims at CST was reduced to flashing the images of terrorists - later "revealed" to be Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasab (the lone terrorist in custody) and Abu Dera Ismael Khan, captured by circuit television camera installed at the station. Indeed, the lack of adequate coverage of the travails of those affected by the attacks at CST, points out to the indifference to the ordinary Indian for the mass media today, a stigma that has been much commented upon already.

The incidents slowly coming to light from the CST saga are heart-rending - brave policemen battling with inadequate weaponry, the presence of mind of the railway announcer Vishnu Zende and constable Jullu Yadav who prevented the deaths of even more people by warning them to stay inside the trains and not to alight when the station was being attacked and people acting as shields to save their kin and dying in the process. There could have been even more deaths - precisely what the terrorists wanted, but lives were saved and who would go on to tell more about the tragic incidents at "everyday Mumbai's hub". They may have been ordinary people who never caught the eye of the flash-bulbs or subjected to thrust microphones, but they were witness to probably the worst terrorist attack in India's cultural melting pot - Mumbai.

The terrorist attacks at the CST, the Taj, the Oberoi-Trident, Nariman House were following up a sequence of such attacks and bombings that has maimed the citizenry of Mumbai for the past few years. All of them were aimed at tearing up the communal fabric in the country. That those who died themselves belonged to various communities and identities, points out to the tragedy and farce of identity and communal politics, which are the basis and wellspring of terror committed in the name of identity.

A much modified but more poignant version of this was published as an EPW editorial here .

Some sane and rational voices from Pakistan

even if I dont' fully endorse what is being said in these articles; there is a lot of sense being made in these voices from Pakistan:



The above is a video featuring Prof. Tariq Amin Khan in The Real News Network.

And here is an article by Haris Gazdar in The Hindu.

Obama and his "changed" imperialist team..

I am leaving it to Pepe Escobar to say it best:

"There is not a single certified anti-war personality in the Obama's natural security dream team"

"Exit the megalomaniac neocon dream and enter the hawkish pragmatists! Take your pick - Empire Classic or Empire Lite"

Terror in Mumbai and responses

Fight against terrorism is one for the long haul, even as the perennially terror affected Mumbai citizens say, “Enough is Enough”.

The recent terror attacks in Mumbai, a city that has been subject to bomb blasts, riots and underground violence for years now, mark a qualitative difference in the scale, magnitude and the modus operandi of the operations. If bomb blasts in unsuspecting civilian areas, particularly crowded ones – suburban trains, bus stations, market places was the order of the previous attacks, this one featured a full scale urban guerilla attack, schemed and planned to precision and to invite maximum attention and exposure.

The targets chosen by the attackers revealed much about their inclinations and ideology. The symbolism of Chatrapati Sivaji Terminus – a hub for nearly every working Mumbaikar (Mumbai resident) is apparent; CST represents secular and working India, a point where people of all classes and sections confer for their daily travel purposes. The choice of the Taj, Trident-Oberoi hotels were made to ensure that foreign tourists from the United States and Britain could be targeted, while the attack in Nariman House was on Israeli citizens and Jews. Other structures of everyday Mumbai and India – Metro Cinema, Cama Hospital were targeted to make the point that India is as much the hated enemy and part of the axis that features the US, Britain and Israel.

That these attacks were carried out by terrorists acting in the name of radical Islam is very clear, from the inputs and findings of the security agencies engaged in investigating the attacks. These terrorists were brainwashed and fed on propaganda based on millenarian ideologies and religious fundamentalism which feeds on discontent in the Islamic community about the happenings in Palestine, Kashmir and other parts of the world. The viciousness of the attacks and the randomness of the murders point out to how dangerous is the propaganda that has been fed into these attackers. From all indications, most of these attackers seem to have come from Pakistan, trained by the fanaticist Lashkar-e-Toiba, it is speculated. The co-ordination and material help came from erstwhile or present state actors in the security set-up of Pakistan, it is suggested. The terrorists had used the sea route from Karachi, by hijacking a mother ship in the waters and using rubber dingies to reach Mumbai's shore, before branching off to various targets. That India's coastal security is lax is for all to see, but the security agencies' excuse is that the coastline is too large to be manned and made non-porous. We shall get to the security and policing part later.

After indiscriminate firing at CST and other public places, which killed among other civilians, three prominent police officers, the scene of action was at the hotels, where hostages were held captive by the terrorists. This in turn was greeted by a security response intent upon neutralising the terrorists and regaining control over the hotels. Admittedly, the security forces – police and later special commandos of the National Security Guard and Marine commandos were left with little choice with the scrutiny that were subjected to and they bravely went about extinguishing the threat by killing the terrorists and flushing hostages as many as were possible. But the question remains if all the steps in the counter-terrorism manual for hostage situations were followed. The terrorists took a number of people hostage in the hotels, prominently foreign tourists with British, American and Israeli nationalities and most definitely that hostage taking was intended for negotiation. The ideal strategy for the counter-terrorist forces should have been to exhaust the terrorists while engaging in negotiation and keeping avenues open for safe exit of many of the hostages, but the way things panned out, the losses were heavy as more than 100 tourists (the count is still on) died in the process even as most of the terrorists were killed in the special operations.

Why was it that the security forces had to go on the offensive from the word “go”? Was it because the administrative structure – the Maharashtra government and the Indian central government, both led by the Congress– felt that anything less than decisive action would have been a sign of weakness, an allegation about the ruling parties that has been used time and again by the rightist opposition led by the Bharatiya Janata Party? As events pan out, we would certainly come to know about this. Having said that, the unremitting hostility and fidayeen nature of the attack perhaps was part of the terrorists' gameplan. It could have been part of their calculus to engage in a protracted siege, and that the killing of their hostages would attract maximum attention, an exposure that would force the Indian public to demand immediate retribution and accept strict laws in order to minimise the risks of yet another catastrophic terrorist attack. The terrorists' game plan therefore was to force the Indian government to adopt hard-line measures, and draconian laws targeted at cutting down of civil liberties and public rights, which would invariably have focused on the minority community and revealed the fissures between them and the state and at worst, leading to increased communal violence.

That leads us to the response of the government. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh pointed the needle of suspicion to Pakistan indirectly, having been convinced of the latent evidence. He also talked about stricter laws and penalties, paving the way for what the terrorists exactly had in mind. Surely, this must be playing into the hands and the intent of those who have managed this terrible saga. We all know where draconian laws such as POTA and TADA led to – repression, unfair targeting and miscarriage of justice. These laws sowed more seeds of discontent than ever before and gave a lifeline to the growth of fundamentalist and radical ideologies that mirror the terrorists' intentions and beliefs, within India itself. In other words, the government would be scoring an own goal by doing exactly what these terrorists wanted. The question then to be asked is what is to be done to prevent such attacks again?

It leads us to two aspects – strengthening the security, policing and intelligence infrastructure that can predict and nip such threats in the bud. And the other focusing on destroying the seeds that lead to the sprouting of the millenarian ideologies that are represented by such fundamentalist groups. One may ask as to how much the levers the Indian government can have against an international menace that persists in Pakistan and in west Asia under the umbrella denominations of Al Qaeda, the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Jaish-e-Mohammad and other myriad groups.

Pakistan is also bearing the brunt of the regular terrorist violence (the recent Marriot Hotel attacks in Karachi were very much the precursor to the incidents in Mumbai), which was the consequence of years of patronage to radical Islamic and fundamentalist sections by the Pakistani ruling classes and establishment. There is an elected government in Pakistan today, after perhaps the most free and fair elections in the country after decades. There is greater pressure from the international community which sees Pakistan as the wellspring of terrorist violence with the presence of fundamentalist groups in north-west Pakistan (in Waziristan) and the sprinkling of terror camps all across the country, which were responsible for many a catastrophic event such as the Lal Masjid incident, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto and most recently, the Marriot bombings. There is great hatred for these groups among the Pakistani public themselves, who have become tired of the years of patronage provided by the ruling establishment under the control of the Army and that explains the resounding defeat of Pervez Musharraf's supporters in the recent elections.

It is a ripe enough moment for the Indian government to engage with the democratically elected government in Pakistan, with added impetus from the international community to purge the radical, fundamentalist and crazy elements that are entrenched in its security apparatus – in the ISI and in the Army. The Indian government can now force the new Pakistani government to act immediately and tough against the radical outfits such as the LeT and JeM which operate under various names impudently, as the gaze of the international eye is fixed firmly upon Pakistan.

At the same time, domestically, Indians should repudiate the very basis that forms the ideological thrust of the radical jihadis – that the Indian state and its citizens are the enemy of people of their basic faith and that the Indian state is an appendage of the imperial world. The re-affirming of the secular nature of India's democracy and the strengthening of the edifices of welfare democracy will serve as a strong answer to any fundamentalist questioning of the partiality of the Indian state. The solidarity of the Indian state toward anti-imperialism will break the backbone of any reasoning that ties up the Indian state within the imperial axis. That means that the Indian state should repudiate any intention that serves imperial interests in south, west and central Asia; meaning that the occupation of Iraq and Palestine should be unequivocally condemned and India should desist from acting for imperial interests in Afghanistan where discontent against NATO bombing and American actions is very high.

As for the short-term and immediate ways of handling the menace, there are enough ways of intercepting and quelling plans for sabotage and terrorism. From surveillance of financial transactions, creation of a central co-ordination body against terrorism, extensive databases about sleeper cells of terrorist outfits operating in the country, effective penetration and neutralisation techniques, better border security, there are quite a few security avenues available for such action.

The people of Mumbai in the meantime have had enough. Bomb blasts in 1993 following religious riots, a long spell of underground violence which took years for the police to control and eradicate, blasts in the Ghatkopar suburb and more blasts near the Gateway of India in 2003, the serial bomb blasts in trains in 2006 and now these attacks in November 2008; all of them have been conducted to destroy the spine of India's most populous city. More than any other, these attacks stand out. The people of Mumbai showed resilience in returning back to their quotidian lives, rejecting attempts to foment communal divides and more violence in the past. But this time around, the wounds have scarred them enough to make them fear about the unknown. Mumbai was not back to normality after the sieges.

Traffic was still loose on the normally busy streets and many offices were still shut. Anger is slowly engulfing the public, who have chosen to blame the broad polity for their travails. There is also enough anger against Pakistan for being the source of this recent menace and it is clear that any lowering of commitment toward ensuring justice for those affected by these incidents by both the Indian and Pakistani governments will not go down passively with the people of the city.

Regional exclusivist and chauvinist groups such as the MNS and the Shiv Sena have already held Mumbai to ransom with violent acts against north Indian citizens of the city. The ruling parties have been no better in fanning the waves of chauvinism. That security personnel drawn from all parts of India led from the front in sanitising the city's terror affected locations from marauding terrorists, is a slap in the face of these chauvinists. The popular sentiment among the citizens of Mumbai is a sense of gratitude for the bravery of the security persons who risked their lives in ending the sieges and a sense of angst and anger against the failed right wing politics in the city. There would be no non-chalant return to the quotidian for the average Mumbaikar anymore, but the determination remains to dispel any attempts to destroy the fabric of this remarkable “Maximum City”. One sincerely hopes that this continues to remain the case, for that would be a fitting reply to those terrorists and their ideology of fanaticism.

Guest post..: My brother writes

My brother, Srivathsan Ramani, works for the Indiabulls Group and his office is based out in Colaba, south Mumbai. He couldn't go to work yesterday and the day before yesterday, because of the chaos owing to the terror attacks in that area. Today, he managed to go to work and he has this to say of what he saw in the area:

After two days i went to office today. The curfew was lifted from the area where my office is..My office is in colaba, very very near to the Taj and Nariman House. The office was empty.. i thought now i had a chance to go and look at the Taj.. I went there... When i went near the place i could feel the smell of taj burning... i saw the top of Taj fully black... smoke still billowing out of the roof... I couldnt go any further because the policemen there didnt allow me too... I always go through the taj and the gateway to catch a taxi from office... this was the first time i saw such a ghastly sight...

Next i went to Nariman House... I thought it might be a posh area or something which wasnt to be.. it was very near to the market.. I went quite close to the building and saw that the building was demolished to a great extent.. I saw the neighbours still crying in there... Suddenly i heard a blast... and then another... i was taken aback... i crouched and to my amazement saw people near me werent reacting at all... then i came to know that the terrorists had left some bombs and the NSG was defusing them.. sigh of relief for me...

From there i went to Leopold Cafe where the cowards first struck.. this again was in the next road to my office... it was closed... i saw some blood and bullet marks in that place.. the wall with lots of holes... Suddenly a women came to me and showed me a photo and asked me whether i had seen the person in that...she was crying ... a chill ran down my spine...i didnt know what to say... a simple answer was no.. but i couldnt say it.. i just couldnt... i just stood there...She took it as a no and went to another person asking him the same

From there i went to Oberoi Hotels...I just saw the building from a distance so cannot say much....

after that i decided to go home.. boarded the train.. reached our station and just was about to go to the road where i had parked my bike when to my amazement the road was totally empty!! policemen all around that road!! the road was totally barricaded.. i asked a policement standing there and he said that there has been a bomb kept there and they dont know whether its a hoax or not....unbelievable!!

i have heard bomb blasta which had taken place in our area but this was horrible... Lets pray for the departed. May their soul rest in peace...

More thoughts on Mumbai Terror

Even as the Mumbai terror saga has slowly started to come to an end with the closing down by force of the sieges by terrorists at major hotels such as the Taj and the Oberoi Trident and at Nariman House, reactions to the horror have started registering in the media from civil society (well..if one could call spiel by advertisors, cine-actors and others such as that). And apart from the understandable anger at the failure of intelligence agencies, government and law enforcement to anticipate an attack of this scale, calls have been made for stricter laws, restriction of rights, and for an "appropriate" and hostile response to the neighbouring country, Pakistan - which is seen as the wellspring of all this horror.

While there is no question that in the immediate steps must be taken to strengthen intelligence gathering, co-ordination and to prepare responses for such horrific contingencies, the other "recommendations" which pertain to curtailing of rights and the talk of silencing the critique of law agencies' misuse of power are very much misplaced.

Let us assume that the current theory of terrorists being trained in Pakistan and sent across to Mumbai is indeed true. The apt and proper response of the Indian government is to co-ordinate with the Pakistani establishment to take prompt and palpable action against elements in both their security apparatus as well as their polity which have nurtured ties and links with the radical terrorist groups. Pakistan has also seen the brunt of terrorist violence and continuing impact of radical jihadi groups in the country. By exerting pressure on the Pakistani government to act tough and decisively against the rotten elements of their security setup as well as other non-state actors through international co-ordination and dialogue, the Indian government can help prevent a situation where any jingoism will only strengthen the hands of the very same elements that the government wishes to be curbed and eliminated. As I write this, I hear that the ISI head from Pakistan has been summoned by the Indian prime minister and thats good news in the sense that they are striking a right note about what is to be done about engaging the Pakistani establishment (democratically elected, it must be said) to act on radical terrorist elements ensconced in the country.

Domestically, such crisis and horrific terror moments are used as levers to establish stringent laws, which more often than not - owing to the nature of the predominant right-wing polity- are misused to wreak havoc on innocents. Examples such as the Hyderabad detentions and torture and other incidents of misuse of draconian acts such as POTA and TADA are there for all to see. One can actually make a case that such misuse and branding of innocents have resulted in further alienation and indignation, creating even more a fertile ground for breeding terror within India. Vis-a-vis the acts of law and provision of justice, investigation and punishment (if necessary) must be based on fairness and the pursuit of truth. There are enough instruments that a state can use without recourse to violence and prejudice to adjudigate guilt and there requires no suspension of rights of those who are accused of guilt.

The solution lies therefore in handling the situation not only from a security ground but also on political grounds. The Indian government should have to re-assert that the civil conduct of affairs, rule of law, secular governance and amity among communities will be the order of the day. Beyond symbolism, agencies of the Indian state should ensure that it would work toward removing any grievance that may exist among disgruntled sections among whom seeds of radicalism are sown.

That would mean that all prior acts of violence perpetrated and all pending acts of delivering justice such as those still left to implement - the Srikrishna Commission's findings, the Gujarat Pogrom cases should be pursued with alacrity and determination. This should be done side-by-side with investigations into the multiple bomb blasts that have wrecked the nation in the past few months.

More than that, there is also the need for a political response to the menace of radical terror. The nature of such a political response has to be oriented toward the goal of inclusion and rejection of the notion of the 'other' that seems to have permeated the consciousness of the ordinary citizen due to the relentless driving of the communal agenda by various political outfits which include the Sangh Parivar. Mere lip-service to secularism and rejection of a broad political agenda of progressivism is the response that the mainstream polity has offered to counter the threat of communalism. Of what use is the slogan of secularism, if the issuers of that slogan are corrupt and have sold their souls at the altar of opportunism? For example, the Congress can go about bandying its commitment to secularism, but their pandering to big capital at the cost of the poor or continuing poor administration will not help in defeating communalism.

A political battle against terrorism is one for the long haul. It is centered on the notion of "inclusion", dedicated to defeating the stigma of marginalisation and is situated in the edifices of the modern welfare state. This means that all alienated minorities, marginalised identities are provided not just representation but rights and dignity; valued as contributing citizens in society. This requires dedicated action in addressing the problems of poverty, skewed development, and inequality irrespective of community, by an increased role of the state in this endeavour. In essence the fertile grounds for breeding terror are made barren.

I had written two and a half years ago, that the best way of fighting terror was to focus on two strategies- one for the short term and the immediate and one for the long term - both at the same time. The short term strategy involved preparation for prevention and the long term involved destruction of the structures that gave grounds for terror as a means of registering protest. Neither of them have happened in the years gone by since I wrote about it.

In the past two years, by openly praising and seeking the strategic friendship of fiends such as George W. Bush, the Indian central government has invited the antipathy of many a citizen (including those from the minority community) against it. By refusing to prosecute those adjudged guity in the Bombay riots cases via the Srikrishna commission, the Maharashtra government has help nurture the grounds of even more discontent and anger against the partial law enforcement of the state. Despite much improvement in relations with neighbouring countries, there has been no attempt to demand from the Pakistan government, a commitment to act upon the promises to eradicate dangerous radicalism, through concerted engagement with the Pakistani civil society and the establishment. In India, meanwhile the communal opposition has kept up the festering politics of exclusion and exclusivism.

Intelligence gathering, policing and security co-ordination still lies in tatters. What has changed so much that such an attack could not have happened again? Nothing much and the attack did happen.

There is only the sincere hope that we as a secular society will have the gumption to act now.

Terror in Mumbai - Quick Thoughts

Mumbai has been attacked..and has faced perhaps the most audacious attack against secular India. There is much to be written or said about it. I will definitely do that, but for later. When I get the fullest details and when the siege of hotels end and when un-falsifiable information filters in. But for now, I want to focus on what can be easily gleaned from the mode, method and targets of the terrorists. 

First things first. This is out and out a fidayeen attack involving terrorists acting in the name of radical Islam. Why can't it be radical Hindutva extremists, one would ask, considering that ATS chief Hemant Karkare was killed, barely a few days after he was threatened for probing a high profile investigation of the Malegaon blasts involving Hindutva extremists? One look at the targets and the evidence is enough to disprove the theory that it can be Hindutva extremists. 

The targets have been Taj Hotel, Trident Hotel, Nariman House apart from Metro Cinema, Cama hospital and good old CST (it pains me terribly to think about the scores of people being killed while being completely defenseless). 

Hindutva extremists will not dare to touch the symbols of big capital in India. There is too cosy a link between Hindutva forces and big capital in the country and there is no contradiction between these. Whereas, radical Islam and jihadi forces always had a problem not only with secular symbols but also had a great problem with the market as represented by neoliberalism and even modernity. The siege of the Taj and Trident clear points out to the antipathy that is already established in jihadi terror against big capital. 

Nariman House with its Jewish linkages is another planned and selected target by the jihadis. While the other areas attacked are simple symbols of secular India's day-to-day existence, a complete antithesis of the jihadi outlook of the non-separation of the ummah and the nation-state. 

The picking and choosing of British and American tourists/ businessmen in the Taj/Trident are pretty much evidence of the anger of the radical jihadis against the "imperialists". 

Just as 9/11 was all about targetting the radical jihadis' most hated symbols (American capitalism  represented by WTO and American military power represented by the Pentagon), these targets in India are all symbols that are the most abhorred by these elements. 

Now who are these jihadis. Are they home-grown? Are they recruits from the radical Islamic outfits based in Pakistan and which have been nurtured by rogue elements of the erstwhile Pakistani establishment such as the ISI? These will be revealed by investigation. But the symbols and the answers to what were the motives and reasons for the targetting are very much clear.