Desicritics Category: Politics: South Asia

The Opium Eaters - The Roads Between

Harold Bergsma — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 00:07:59 EDT

We are the opium eaters; we are the consumers of the 6,500 tons of opium produced in Afghanistan and Pakistan with an export value, according to the United Nations, of about $3.1 billion. While we fought the war against terror and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, against the Taliban, the war against opium growing and trafficking was neglected, went soft. A virulent opium trade has flourished in Afghanistan and Pakistan since 2004, a time when the Taliban had all but eradicated poppy growing. Now, ninety percent of the world’s opium is produced in the region of southern Afghanistan and border areas of northern Pakistan. But the world continues to have a tremendous need for opium products to be used for legitimate medical purposes. India is a producer of licit opium for the pharmaceutical market, however, the farmers are paid so little to grow approved amounts of opium that they have also learned how to subvert the system and receive ten times the amount for their crops on the illegal market. There is a shortage of raw opium for medical uses, while the illegal trafficking of opium continues. Efforts to eradicate opium in the fields as it is grown have been ineffective. Graft, bribery and corrupt political forces have protected the growers; only a tiny proportion of the entire opium 2007 crop grown was destroyed. The fields that were destroyed with weed cutters were frequently those of the poor peasant who did not have the support of a landlord or a war lord. Aerial spraying of poppy fields has been prevented by those in high authority in Afghanistan. Supply and demand, that is, the need we, a drug culture, express for opium, is what moves the trade of this narcotic, and move it does, by the hundreds of metric tons annually.

Amazingly, America through its international clout exerts controls in many other sovereign territories it avoided many years ago. Remember The Monroe Doctrine? What is that? What we may remember is President T. Roosevelt’s statement, “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” Now we speak loudly, explosively, and carry huge economic sticks and massive military ones but the opium trade goes on, seemingly ignoring the international sanctions, the military presence of the United States, and in the past of England, in Afghanistan, and their tanks rumbling on paths right through the middle of the bright and beautiful fields of poppies growing in Kandahar or in Nangahar along the Baluchistan border where the greatest increases in opium production have occurred.

De Quincey’s famous book, Confessions of an English Opium Eater, 1822, is a classic rendition of one who used opium and who experienced the “...extreme euphoria initially,” as well as the hellish results of addiction in the later stages, “...the darkness and nightmares.” In the late eighteen hundreds, at the time of the Monroe Doctrine which spoke of American autonomy and non-involvement in European wars, and in the early nineteen hundreds, opium was consumed widely and openly in Europe, England and the United States. It could be purchased in the local chemist shops or drug stores as we call them; women took laudanum drops in a glass of water for the ‘vapors’ or other ailments. We were a nation of opium ‘eaters’, however, in terms of actual volume, more opium is now consumed in various forms illegally in the United States than during that early period.

“The State Department’s bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) plays a key role in carrying out the President’s National Drug Control Strategy by leading the development and implementation of U.S. International drug control efforts. INL manages a diverse range of counter-narcotics programs in 150 countries throughout Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia, Africa and Europe. These bilateral, regional and global initiatives aim to fight the cultivation of drug crops at their source, disrupt the trafficking of drugs and precursor chemicals, and help build host-nation law enforcement capacity.”

(Nancy J. Powell, Acting Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, July 12, 2005, Washington D.C.)

The efforts of the US government to get a handle on the drug and opium problem, continues world-wide. Since more than ninety percent of the opium of the world is grown in Afghanistan and Pakistan, special efforts are made there to slow down opium growing, because its sale, transport and processing, provide the very ones we are fighting in our world against terror with the financial means to carry out their activities. Taliban and Al Qaeda receive some of their financial backing from such drug trafficking. Corrupt officials at every level have their hands out for bribes to allow the growth of the opium poppy, the transport of opium and processing of it, and this trade is growing.

A blind eye. It seems there are many along the way when it comes to opium. Such blindness pays off very well. So well in fact, that the small business man has learned that huge profits can be made by becoming part of the purchase and sale of opium; much like we buy stocks, they buy shares in its purchase, transport and sale. Many of these actors are not huge investors by international standards. Sixty thousand rupees may seem a vast sum to many Pakistanis, however, $6000 may not be a huge investment in other parts of the world. But it is small investors like this who make it all happen, make the opium flow freely across international borders to Iran and on to Europe and the States. We in the western world are the eventual buyers which make it all possible. We are the consumers, the infidel opium eaters.

I talked with a few opium growers in NWFP, the small-fry types, and asked if this was not an activity proscribed by their religion. They were surprised at my question, “Of course not, the growing, sale and dealing with opium is business, a way for a man to make a living by growing a crop.” They were amazed at my placing an immoral connotation on the activity. But when it comes to talking about foreigners in their country who are trying to manipulate them, to destroy them if they do their business, then the strong ‘moral and immoral’ words fly, shaitan, words of condemnation and frustration, oaths calling on Allah to destroy the infidel invaders. Americans, by Nancy Powell’s own words, are involved in 150 countries carrying out anti-narcotic activities; involved in an equal number of military programs, carrying out our nation’s efforts to control and fight against our enemies, terrorism and anti-democratic activity. “While undermining the narcotics industry through successful eradication and interdiction, we are also helping extend democracy and strengthen security...by building democratic institutions that provide security and justice.” (Counter-narcotics Programs, 5/23/2007)

The small man in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt or Iran looks at this monster and sees the big infidel bully that is pushing around, getting its way in the world through the power of money and the might of armed force. Hatred! Why? Hatred is focused against this force that is such a powerful agent for change; hatred is the strong emotional undercurrent to undermine it. Drugs, opium and the power of it on the international market has provided the little man, the student of truth, the Taliban, with tools to undermine our world-wide efforts of domination, albeit extending democracy. The more we buy opium, the stronger their cause. Our appetite for opium means the Taliban will prosper. Their strength is surprising. President Karzai was their target for assassination in April of 2008. He did not die, but others around him did. Puppets are hated as vehemently as the one who holds the strings. Puppets, whether they be leaders ‘nominated’ by America in Iraq, leaders who are supported in Israel, or even those wearing the green robes of aristocracy in Afghanistan are looked at in distaste; but it is really the string pullers who are the target of hatred, the demon puppet master.

Our threats in Jan. 2008 to go after ‘them’ in Pakistan from our already compromised ‘puppet’ base in Afghanistan drew surprisingly strong words from President Musharraf during his hay day. If I may paraphrase it, “Don’t mess with your troops and anti-terrorist programs on Pakistani soil. The terrain is terribly rough out there, you won’t like it.” (Italics mine) We are not used to having ‘sovereign nations’ react like this, particularly Islamic nations who accept our foreign aid to the tune of a billion dollars of American taxpayer money in AID, a great deal of which is used for their military purposes.

The little guys, thousands of them, support the ‘opium eaters’ through their moving opium on the back roads from Afghanistan, through Pakistan and to the markets beyond. Opium is the livelihood of thousands of farmers, thousands of merchants and truck drivers, thousands of shippers. These actors on a small stage in Pakistan say their lines in the play on drugs with halting voices, but keep the play alive.

I have walked on small paths in the opium fields on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and talked to the farmers. They make so little from their sales of raw opium; it is those who buy it and move it that reap the huge financial benefits. I have talked to the farmers about trying alternative crops; they smile and say, yes, yes, sahib. Stretching out in front of me were vast acres of white and red blossoms, another harvest of opium getting ready for the opium eaters. I have on my computer screen a wonderful picture of Afghani men harvesting opium, standing in their fields as British and American tanks rumble by on the dirt roads, oblivious to the harvesting activity around them, and carefully staying on the roads between the poppy fields. That picture is the metaphor for opium eaters.

Pakistani and Indian Madrasas - A Fine Balance?

Harold Bergsma — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 09:15:46 EDT

Have the political environments of madrasas in two different countries affected their programs and curricula? Has the development of madrasas in India, under a secular constitution since Partition, created religious education programs which have a different emphasis and intent from those across the border in Pakistan where these have developed under an Islamic state?

Recent news reports from Pakistan about madrasas appear to center on whether these schools are supporting Islamic militancy and training young people to become involved with the Taliban. News reports from India about madrasas hint at another concern, how to remain viable institutions whose primary mission is to provide religious training to support the growth of Islam as a word religion within a secular political/social environment which allows for and protects any expression of religious belief for its citizens.

My first personal experience as an adult with Islamic religious schools began in 1984 in Sukkur, Pakistan. During the early morning hours, after the first call to prayer, my colleague, a professional sociologist working with the Department of Agriculture, were invited to an Islamic school for young boys. The school was not far from the Indus River near the famous Mir Ma’Sum Sha Minaret Minaret.

I will call the teacher Alhaji Mohammed. He sat on a mat in the shade under a mango tree. Twenty children sat in front of him on the hard-packed ground. Alhaji Mohammed held a long narrow cane in his right hand and appeared to be half asleep. The boys were reciting, pointing to the Arabic words written out on their chalk boards, Surah 4, vs. 74. Let those who fight in the way of Allah… sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward. (Translation into English by Mohammed M. Picthall, 1953, Karachi.)

All the voices chanted in unison, pointing to the words with their index fingers, their bodies swaying backwards and forwards. One child, a skinny little lad, began to fall asleep and his finger sagged in front of his slate, his eye lids drooped. The long slender cane held in Alhaji’s hand snaked forward and tapped the hand smartly. The boy awakened, and now crying, pointed to the Arabic words. The children next to him raised their voices and sang out the words more vigorously, reinvigorated by the tears.

In the background the second call to prayer of the day sounded from the short minaret. Alhaji Mohammed rose to his feet and with much flourish, adjusted his loose flowing robe, set his embroidered Quetta style hat on his head and walked across the street, followed by the children. At the mosque they all began the ritual washings, hands, feet, face and ears. The teacher set the example and the boys all followed suit. He took a handful of water and slurped it into his mouth, swished the water around, turned and spat onto the soil behind him. The boys rinsed their mouths and spat.

After namaz the group dispersed. I asked Alhaji to tell me about the lesson the boys were learning. “What is the meaning of the Surah the boys were learning today?” I asked in Urdu.

He turned to face me abruptly, (his orange colored beard signaling that he had made the haj to Mecca) and frowning, repeated the Surah in Arabic. Then feeling satisfied, he said, “That’s it.”

I persisted. “Tell me in Urdu what the meaning is so I can understand what the boys were repeating and memorizing.”

“It only has real meaning in Arabic, the language of Allah. To say the holy words of the Prophet, peace be unto Him, in another language, removes the meaning from the Surah. The boys learn the Arabic. After some years of learning, they feel and understand and believe the meaning when their Arabic improves.”

“Do they get classes in the Arabic language as well, so the meaning of the Arabic words they are reading makes sense to them?”

“Yes. At the end of the day when it is cool, I teach them some Arabic. I will teach them the word fight today. Then tomorrow when we once again repeat the Surah they will understand the meaning. First the holy words in Arabic, not in Urdu, then later the meaning.” He now smiled and I got the feeling that I was being dismissed.

Growing up in northern India near the North West Frontier Province, was my first introduction to Islamic schools, most of which were connected to mosques. Entering such places required that we take off our sandals. The stone floors against our bare feet was pleasant as we walked about, led proudly by the Imam. The stone steps leading up to the top of the high minaret of the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore were cool against our bare feet. From the top we could see the huge open area where thousands came to pray. In one shaded corner a group of boys and their teacher were having a lesson from the Koran. Their high voices carried up to us as they repeated a surah, over and over again, learning by rote the verse of that day, in Arabic.

I had not heard the word madrasas until after September 11, 2001. Then the frequency of its usage made it a household word and a concern for those involved in formulating U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Madrasas came into focus when it became known that several Al Qaeda members and Taliban leaders had developed their rather radical political views at madrasas in Pakistan. Words such as Islamic extremism, militancy and terrorism and Taliban were frequently used in conjunction with madrasas. I learned that Taliban meant student in Arabic. Then we heard that one such school in Pakistan near the Afghan border had been bombed by American forces, and there were pictures of Pakistanis holding up signs in protest against George Bush and America. (A fictional account of such a bombing appeared in my novel One Way to Pakistan) That madrasa was located in the Bajaur tribal region. Reports in the USA indicated that 80 militants were killed in the 2006 air strike. The reaction in Pakistan to this military violation of their territory was immediate and strong. Anti-American feelings ran high. They also ran high yesterday when it was reported that Pakistani people were killed in a raid on the Afghanistan border with Pakistan. Such incidents feed the fervor against one who is called the Great Satan.

In Pakistan, most madrasas offer free education to their students. Thus, many poor families are eager to send their sons to such schools, which in large measure, are supported by alms-giving, known in Arabic as zakat. In some instances, little is provided to the students, who are told to go and beg to help support themselves through the gifts of others who consider giving alms to such children a good deed.

A small number of madrasas are for girls, although I have never personally seen one. I recently read Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson which commented about Islamic religious schools, madrasas, and their financial support from foreign sources. The approach taken by Mortenson through his efforts to develop 55 schools in Pakistan, primarily for girls, was a means to fight extremism and terrorism. I found the first part of his book inspiring. To educate young women gives them a window on the world through literacy, writing and dealing with numbers, it provides them with improved means for keeping healthy and rearing children and this is a most positive effort toward promoting peace, one school, one girl at a time.

In Pakistan there are over 12,000 madrasas. (See the CRS Report for Congress,”Islamic Religious Schools, Madrasas: Background” by Christopher Blanchard, Jan.23, 2008)

“In an economy that is marked by extreme poverty and underdevelopment, costs associated with Pakistan’s cash-strapped public education system have led some Pakistanis to turn to madrasas for free education, room and board.”

This report states that some madrasas have been used as incubators for violent extremism. Some foreign students were enrolled in Pakistani madrasas. In 2006 there was a report that Pakistani authorities would deport 700 of the remaining foreign students unless they got permission from their own governments to remain in Pakistan with appropriate visas.

Many of the 12,000 madrasas in Pakistan teach only Islamic studies. In September of 2007, according to the CRS report mentioned, “…many Pakistani madrasas have taught extremist doctrine in support of terrorism.” The curriculum, if it is only Islamic in nature, does not provide students with contemporary knowledge about the world outside Pakistan, about its neighboring state India from which Pakistan emerged after partition or other nearby non-Islamic countries. One teacher in such a school said, “The aim of our religion is to reach god.” The CRS report quoted Samuel Haq who said, “We only impart religious education here. The students later take up arms on their own.”

Though it is matter of conjecture of what is actually taught by religious teachers in Pakistani madrasas, since none of us will sit and hear what the teachers teach, their own statements are that these schools impart religious information only. This is of sufficient concern to many in the world at large. A curriculum which teaches that there is only one right way and this is based on religious belief, which by its nature is exclusive of other ways of thought, of other belief systems, exclusive of others who live out their lives in the greater modern world, this fundamental religious stance can produce graduates whose world and life view is conservative and focused on intolerance.

Reportedly, some Pakistani madrasas teach subjects other than religion. Some teach computers and local languages, however, their mainstay is religious training. Some madrasas in other countries are seeking government approval for awarding bachelor and master’s degrees in Islamic religious studies, or as one stated, Islamic Religious Science.

If the truth can only be learned in Arabic from religious documents such as the Koran and the madrasas’ curricula rejects secular information based on scientific enquiry and holds it to be suspect or dangerous, it is logical that such students will form highly conservative social understandings, including negative consideration and respect for other religions or ideas such as the emancipation of women. Militancy, extremism, crusades and/or jihad frequently emerge from rigid belief systems.

In Pakistan, twelve thousand madrasas are teaching youngsters in schools which have funding from other Islamic states, including Iran. As hundreds of young men leave these schools each year, they merge into society at large and seek work and life causes with religious zeal and philosophical underpinnings that, from this writer’s point of view, bodes ill for their participation in the development and support for a liberal, secular and democratic society. Madrasas are proliferating in many Muslim states, including Bangladesh and Afghanistan, and nearby neighbor, India, but there are differences, both in curricula and emphasis.

There has been a long debate about madrasas in India going as far back as 1947. The volume of literature about this is large and experts from within the madrasas system, as well as social critics about the system, have and are continuing to speak out about the need for reform of the madrasas’ curriculum. Such dialogue, which emerges out of Indian religious diversity, is healthy and keeps alive the issues. Dialogue, forces conservative elements to constantly review their programs and their teaching approaches in order to bring these more in line with modern secular-political needs which are in support of freedom of religion as expressed in the Indian Constitution. Madrasas enjoy this freedom to express their religious beliefs and teach these in Indian madrasas.

R. Upadhyay’s article published in Feb. 2003 presents an interesting review which leans toward reform and change, "Madrasa Education in India"

Is it to sustain medieval attitude among Muslims? “A recent circular of Government of India to keep watch on the anti-national activities of madrasas raised many eyebrows in the country. But if we look back to the historical developments of madrasas in India this Islamic system of education has all along been playing a prominent role in keeping the movement of Muslim separatism alive in this country. The British also suspected them. Contrary to it the Post-colonial India for reason best known gave special constitutional privilege for the autonomy of madrasas. But the manner in which the madrasas promote medieval attitude among the Indian Muslims at the cost of secular education needs to be checked. In fact, orthodoxy, religious conservatism and obsession to medieval identity remained the main focus of Madrasa education in India.

Muzaffar Alam’s article, Modernization of Madrasas in India, The Hindu , April 23, 2002 reviews how various changes are being made to bring madrasas up to modern standards, yet still remaining true to their basic principles of training youth in the fundamentals of their faith. This same debate is well presented in the book Bastions of Believers: Madrasas and Islamic Education in India by Yogender Sikand, New Delhi, Penguin 2005. The book utilizes a historical research perspective to describe the growth of this institution and summarizes what the stated intents of madrasas have been.

The debate centers on the words modern and liberal vs. medieval and radically conservative. One writer speaks of new trends in madrasas as being efforts to teach the youth Islamic ‘science’, which made me smile, thinking of the Christian Science Church movement in the United States which is a distinct form of religious fundamentalism with an approach that is far from what is globally considered to be scientific. (However, to be fair, the Latin, scio, from which our word science came, simply means, knowledge in the fullest sense of the word.) But still, the terms science and religion seem to grate when put side by side in this context. Some writers debate whether Islam and democracy are compatible with each other. One thing is certain, the madrasa movement is growing and moving south through India to Sri Lanka and Indonesia. It is a grass roots movement supported and fed by funds from Iran, Saudi Arabia and local donations.

How many young men and women are being taught in Indian madrasas? That seems to be a hard question to answer. Many such schools are not registered and what is taught in them is not monitored nor approved by government, thus counting them or defining what they are is a difficult task. One source suggests that there are 1.5 million children and young adults in Indian madrasas. Another source says there are between 25,000 and 40,000 madrasas scattered across India. (Consider that in Pakistan there may be only 12,000 of them.) I found the blog by Yoginder Sikand, “Islam and Democracy: Lessons from the Indian Muslim” interesting. He debates whether or not Islam and democracy are compatible with each other. Sikand presents Ali Naswi’s point of view this way.

In contrast to Muslim liberals, and echoing the views of the Islamists, he insisted on the need for an Islamic order in order to implement the laws of God. However, he stood apart from most Islamists by arguing that the Islamic political order could come about in India only in some remotely distant future. Rather than directly struggling for it at the present, he believed that the Muslims of the country should accept the secular and democratic Indian state as it was and focus their energies in trying to build what he saw as a truly Islamic society, on the basis of which alone could an ideal Islamic political order come into being.

Madrasas in Pakistan emerged from within an Islamic religious state are not a mirror image of those in India. There is a point of view that many of these madrasas are hotbeds for the training of radical religious elements and this is expressed almost daily in Pakistan newspapers. Many of the Indian madrasas have expanded their curriculum to include a wider number of what could possibly be termed secular subjects, however, all are taught with the intent of understanding and giving meaning to the teachings of Islam. What could be called the ‘core curriculum’ is the Holy Koran. Hopefully, madrasas in India will be influenced by the various religions around them, by the secular political nature of India and by the great philosophical and religious tolerance that embodies Hinduism.

With the growth of dynamic and expansive secular democracy in many parts of the world there appears to be a concomitant growth of more dynamic and radical religious teaching opposing the ‘heretical secularism’ and its perceived dangers. The ‘Great Satan’, America and its war with Afghanistan and Iraq have polarized religious attitudes and have created responses of hatred for the ‘enemy of Islam’. Madrasas are one of the few places that young people can be taught to uphold and struggle, make a jihad against secularism. Though the word jihad has a few meanings, one is certainly to stand up and fight in a cause for the truth as perceived by Islamists. Ali Naswi’s point of view is to wait, and this differs from many in Pakistan.

I can still hear Alhaji Mohammed’s voice. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him shall We bestow a vast reward.

Sexing Up Disasters

Dianne Sharma-Winter — Mon, 9 Jun 2008 01:35:21 EDT

Last week the US Navy ships, frustrated by the stonewalling of the military junta to bring aid to the estimated 2.5 million Burmese, slipped quietly out of the waters off cyclone ravaged Burma. Tailgating their ships were the British and the French fleets.
The Burmese once again have been left to suffer in silence, in the same way as their democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi has so eloquently demonstrated in her 13 years of house arrest.

I wonder if the people of Burma are still waiting for the help that sat off shore for four weeks during the diplomatic dithering that went on while they starved, shivered in torrential rains and attempted suicide out of the kind of despair that those who held their fate in their hands will never know.

Smugglers from the Bay of Bengal smuggled what they could into the area. They didn’t wait for international approval, they didn’t dick around with diplomatic double speak. Their response may have been a drop in the vast ocean of despair that swamped Irrawaddy basin, but it was heroic and human all at once.

The media, those able to make their way into the area or those already there continued to report, mostly anonymously for fear of military reprisals. The rest of the media reported from Bangkok rooftops and other places off shore, but there was a sense that they too were ready to leap into the fray if and when they received permission to enter Burma.

While the world waited, I thought about other natural humanitarian disasters in recent years. The tsunami of 2004, the earthquake that affected Pakistan, Afghanistan and India in 2005 were two that sprang to mind. I happened to be in Tamil Nadu that Boxing Day and for a month or so afterwards, so I was able to see first hand the sexing up of that disaster by the media who had an absolute field day.

I remember seeing helicopters carrying obscure Hollywood has beens to the distraught and displaced fishing people of that coast. I remember seeing fights between the displaced and those unaffected by the tsunami who equally received aid from whoever was handing it out. Worse still, I remember the unshakeable feeling that the headcount of those lost was somehow more “sexy” to the media by the huge amount of foreign tourists who were also taken that day.

As information filtered through to those of us foreigners on the coast of Tamil Nadu, it became apparent that what was to us a local tragedy was rapidly becoming an international tragedy. One Irish man who had a cell phone and who was in contact with the outside world reported at one gathering that “The Swedes seem to be the most affected.” In fact they lost around 62 citizens while ten thousand people were never heard of again in Tamil Nadu.

Less than a year later when a devastating earthquake hit the disputed area of Kashmir, the media response filtered through to me safe at home in the shaky isles of New Zealand. Having visited that area previously I had an understanding of the difficulty of even bringing aid to an area where roads and basic infrastructure didn’t exist. The media reported from where they could get to and we got a lot of reports of the situation in Balakot.

I do remember seeing one report from New Zealander Mike McRoberts who had walked for three days into the mountains to report on something other than was what becoming common fare. Looking at his dusty clothes, hearing his breath straining in the high mountain air rapidly chilling with the approach of winter I thought, “Good on ya, mate.” I was proud of him for doing what I expected reporters to do, to search out the human truth of what we call the news.

In the case of the Pakistan earthquake, the story died as winter approached and people suffered and froze in the harsh climate of the Himalaya and the even harsher climate of disaster in a politically sensitive area. But was it the political or the geographical landscape that delayed relief efforts? India was the first country to offer aid to her warring partner and for that I had to say another (if slightly more cynical) “Good on ya, mate.”

India and Pakistan at least talked and finally agreed on opening up entry points for relief aid in the Pakistan controlled area known as POK and relief, although slow in coming, eventually made an appearance. They talked and that’s the point here. There was some communication which resulted in aid reaching some of the affected. It may not have been a perfect solution but it was a nod in the direction of humanity.

While I am pondering the history of disaster politics, Mother Earth revealed another weapon of mass destruction. The earthquake in China’s Sichuan province has devastated millions of people of a scale that is yet to be fully appreciated. But I was left with the uncomfortable feeling that the many international media hounds who were baying at the shores of the Irrawaddy delta simply turned tail and camera and headed for the hills and valleys of Sichuan in order to bring us the news.

The few brave media souls who stayed in Burma are now the odd cry in the wilderness of the sexing up of disasters in the media. Disaster sells. Quiet suffering doesn’t. When the monks took the streets last year in Burma, images were splashed across the world. “This is a momentous time,” reported the BBC’s Andrew Harding in hopefully authoritative tones. But nothing changed, the monks got bashed and beaten and gassed and things went back to abnormal.

Aung San Suu Kyi quietly entered her thirteenth year of house arrest during this time, no doubt feeling even more isolated from her people and the world than ever before given the circumstances they now face. I wonder if from the window of her house she watched the Americans slinking away with their aid relief.

Now I am left scratching my head wondering how it is that America could invade Iraq on a raft of sexed up charges that were later proved to be false, can deny the truth of the suffering of the Burmese people?

Then words of another BBC reporter rang hollowly in my ears from five years earlier when reporting on the invasion of Iraq. “There is no doubt,” said Matt Fry, “that the desire to bring good, to bring American values to the rest of the world and especially in the Middle East is increasingly tied up with American military power.”

Then I cheered myself up with the thought that all that unused relief aid sailing out of South East Asia might get diverted to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people who are without such basics as clean water, medicine and food. After all they have been waiting five years now for their liberation with no end in sight.

Sorry Burma seems you just weren’t sexy enough.

Book Review: Tarbela Damned - Pakistan Tamed

Harold Bergsma — Sun, 8 Jun 2008 01:43:51 EDT

It is the little details, the exhaustive research, the encyclopedic knowledge of his subject, the Tarbela Dam, which makes Tarbela Damned, the first novel of C.N. Anand not only exciting but a very good read.

This novel brings together fictional individuals in the Indian Intelligence services (RAW) as well as the Mossad of Israel, and the Irish Republican Army who all work secretly to set up a plan to strike at one of Pakistan’s most sensitive structures, and of course one in which they take great pride, the Tarbela Dam. The major characters, interestingly, an Indian Jew and his classmate from IIT Madras and now an officer of RAW, share an ambition to bring Pakistan “to heel” by striking the massive earth dam, thus crippling Pakistan. The plot is complex as the protagonists set up their plans, and this makes the book a page turner. Chewers of pan and drinkers of expensive Irish Whiskey will smile at the author’s use of these devices in the plot as social bonding ‘agents’ to help lubricate and carry off the “mother of all sabotages.” What could secret agents do unless they were well lubricated with only the best of Irish brews?

The very thought of the possibility of using the massive Tarbela earth dam as a means to bring a nation to its knees, or “tamed” as the author states, is earth shaking. Imagine the volume of water that would flow from the huge lake behind the dam, and the loss of lives and farm land. It is the largest earth-filled dam in the world and is critical in its ability to supply hydroelectric power to Pakistan as well as providing water for massive irrigation projects.

The major idea of destroying this magnificent structure, galvanized this reader from page one; tension, suspense and international intrigue are strong motivational literary themes, and they are well employed. Being personally familiar with the dam, having served on agricultural development water irrigation projects in Pakistan, the idea of the possible destruction of the Tarbela Dam was mind boggling for me, especially in its impact on common folk, farmers, many of whom I visited and with whom I broke bread. It is hard for me to imagine the negative political fall-out of such an act internationally and the possible repercussions and retaliations that could follow on similar sensitive Indian structures. The water behind the dam forms a huge lake of 95 square miles. The Tarbela supplies the water through one of the world’s most massive and complex irrigation systems, providing more than 50% of the water for agriculture that feeds the nation. “Tamed”, the concept used by the author in the title made me hold my breath to see how the plot would play out.

The book’s surprise “international” ending, makes it a must read.

The White Tiger & Superstar India : An (Un)likely Duo

Swarna S — Sun, 1 Jun 2008 10:52:37 EDT

A couple of weeks ago, I read two books back to back. Aravind Adiga's The White Tiger and Shobhaa De's Superstar India.

I finished reading the two books within five days, in between work and the usual processes of living. And I must say, they made an interesting reading combination.

Given below are my thoughts on Adiga's first book and De's 15th or 16th (?) book. I was just done reading the books and realised they do make for a combined review and to my mind, they were talking to a common theme.

My one line review of the two books?

One (The White Tiger) is a comment on India from a servant's point of view while the other (Superstar India) from the master's point of view.

Well, thats my one liner for those with short attention spans. The others (still here? yay!) - read on.

One is fiction, the other a memoir (or rather "A very personal story", as De puts it). Neither does justice to their actual intended form (fiction, memoir). What we have instead is the viewpoint, thoughts and opinion of the writers pouring forth through the narrative, and in a very engaging and articulate way.

I am not a big thinker or reader. What I am - to any book or film is - an unbiased audience. The ultimate intent listener to any story teller with a good yarn to spin. I can suspend disbelief.

Well, I guess, thats my own convoluted way of saying, I dont think too much and read with a certain laziness. If the book is not good enough to grab me, I usually give it up.

I didn't throw these books away, both are very readable. De, especially, is a sparkling writer! She had me smiling, laughing and cheerful by the time I finished her book. She is completely deliriously optimistic about India. She also sounded like she was finally relieved that she didn't have to be apologetic for her glamour and wealth anymore. :) Her book is a summary of all that is urban India today - the good, the bad and the ugly. Minus the statistics and similar such.

I read a blog post on De's book somewhere - where the blogger had said something to the effect: if you are an Indian - you would know all of this. Don't know why Ms De spent time writing it all down. I somewhat disagree. A fairly well read urban Indian is most likely going to come away with that thought. But I think it is the book causes this 'I already am aware' feeling. It's also kinda cool to have it all in one book and to have such an articulate cheerleader for India - poised and shining.

What little I have read about urban India has always been a bit on the negative and quite dry. In contrast, De's book is cheerful, pulls your focus to all the good that's happening, cheers on about the democracy we take for granted. She does point out the ills and painfully neglected aspects of India - but moves on - says she has faith in India and we shall overcome! :)

So, I guess those who want to come away with some vague intellectual befuddlement and feel 'challenged' will be sorely disappointed by Ms. De. Here is a woman to whom India has been good and she reciprocates with her appreciation.

The downside is De's book is a collage of articles. The invisible thread one follows in any book is missing. It's not Superstar India as much as it is Superstar Urban India. Even when she is not sharing her 'know' about the rich, she is still the urban middle class. She herself confesses to the 'outsider' feeling when she ventures into rural India.

There was one phrase in her book about her driver, "He kept his eye on the road and his mouth shut. Exactly the way I trained him".

The word "trained" - it took me to Aravind Adiga's book which dwells at length on the living, breathing, passionate human being who is broken into a successful invisible servant - testimony to a master's good training. And centuries of oppression, of course.

The format of the book is - a series of or one long email to the premier of China outlining the protagonist's life and times in India. In his voice. About his journey from rural India to the urban, from a servant to an entrepruener.

It is interspersed with commentary on life in rural India, the northern cities and Bangalore with its IT boom.

A commentary on the growing disparity in wealth and opportunity, about how there is a rage brewing in India and the day is not far when the oppressed class will break out and grab their share of India - and that's what the Naxal movement is going to bring about. ( De says, she has been hearing of such an uprising for the past 15 years and is yet to happen. And thats what my friend and colleague SP said - twenty years was his number).

A line I read in both books and hear very often - there are many Indias. Same way, may be there will be a million small mutinies and looking for one big coordinated rebellion is missing the point. Adiga has a valid comment - well worth paying heed to.

But, Adiga's book is not great fiction, not that it takes anything away from the point or newness of his work. Its an "I" narrative but not a great one. I read it more like how it was designed: an electronic essay with some quote-unquotes thrown in.

The intended audience of this e-essay is the visiting Premeir of China.

I had a thought that with so many people in India still living in oppressed circumstances and not having the 'democratic' chance to better their lives, perhaps we are in no different life circumstances than that of the Chinese as a people. Did Adiga intend to make this point? Maybe in that way, despite democracy, on some levels China and India are not very different?

De also talks about China and how 'sweeping under the carpet' appears to be the strategy there, what with sprucing up for the Olympics, demolishing settlements to make way for the new buildings and so on. While India 'lets it all hang out' - especially with respect to the urban poor.

She thinks, and I agree, this is the power of being a democracy - we are forced to face up to it. Optimistically, we will soon be forced to fix it!

Contrasting with China, De talks about India and exults about how we take our democracy for granted and treat the right to vote as an absolute birthright! And then Adiga talks about the "Dark" India where 12 elections go by and a man in rural India has voted in all of them without ever having seen the inside of a voting booth!

The rural man wonders aloud about the "other" India where people get to actually cast their votes by themselves!

Overall, for me, Adiga's book was a much more sober read. It was an important view point for me to understand. It was also a book of hope for me - because - for the Darkness that is India - there is also Light in India. People are finding their way towards it.

The urban grind in today's unlive-able cities is taking its toll - obesity, mindless hedonism, crime and what have you. De's book makes you take note of it.

The lack of jobs, oppresive ruling classes, abject poverty is breaking the villages too - starvation, ruptured families and smouldering rage. Adiga's book takes note of this.

There is a long dark shadow cast by the shining and poised India across the urban and rural. Demons lurk in the shadows. All is not well for India as a whole - both agree. De in a serious but optimistic tone. Adiga - in a serious and somewhat brooding tone.

However, Adiga also ends on a cheerful note. There is light in India. There is choice. The rich better share that choice with the poor, or the poor will step forward and grab that choice, sooner or later. All at once or more likely, bit by bit.

I thought De made a related point when she said that the future belongs to Mayawati and the faster the rest of India learn to deal with it the better.

As for me, I am glad I read these books within the same 'time unit'. Both are good books and well written. It helped for an interesting perspective. I came away thinking all is not well in India and we still have a long way to go. If we are not careful, there are oh-so-many ways we can mess up this progress thats come our way.

Rather than getting worried or being broody about it, I guess being cheerful and optimistic a'la De would not be such a bad way of living the life that is India!

Supreme Court Reiterates "No Goons For Collections"

Somik Raha — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:00:52 EDT

The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement on Thursday reiterated its earlier stand that banks cannot deploy musclemen for recovery of loans from defaulters thus forcing them to end their lives.

"We deem it appropriate to remind the banks and other financial institutions that we live in a civilized country and are governed by the rule of law," a bench comprising Justices Tarun Chatterjee and Dalveer Bhandari said.

This is indeed a landmark judgment. I have heard from time to time that banks have forced debtors to sell their kidneys in order to pay back their loans. While urban legends abound, the fact that the banks of India are unimaginative in their debt-collection practices is a cause of great concern.

However, there is light at the end of the tunnel. In an article that appeared in the Indian Express two years back, we learned about a company called "Adhikrut Jabti Evam Vasuli" with a website - vasuli.com. This company is headed by a team of women, and they write about their recovery operations in the following manner:

Managed by TEAM OF YOUNG WOMENS came into operation in the year 1998 and has a distinction of being first private agency of the country engaged in recovery on behalf of Govt. & Nationalized banks in structured manner. We believe firmly in Recovering Public Money remaining in four corners of LAW.

The most interesting part of their website is their transparent policy of collection:

* Dignity and Respect to customers is our Debt Collection Policy and we do not follow policies that are unduly coercive in collection of dues.
* Our Office of Adhikrut Jabti Evam Vasuli's dues-collection policy is built on courtesy, fair-treatment and persuasion.

By customers, they mean the customers of the banks who have defaulted. They will first contact these customers while maintaining their privacy and try ordinary means of communication to resolve the situation. When customers have closed all doors of communication, then they use unique methods to shame them. For example, a restaurant owner who had defaulted and refused to pay back saw people sitting with placards outside his restaurant informing customers that he was a defaulter. He settled that evening.

Perhaps it had to be a team of women entrepreneurs who wouldn't think like men to be able to come up with a humane and intelligent mechanism of debt collection. I would give my kudos to Vasuli for showing that we don't need bullies and violence to get the job done - a little imagination and sensitivity goes a long way. And I applaud the Supreme Court for coming down heavily on banks that cannot think beyond violence in debt-collection. ICICI Bank would do well to hire Vasuli for their services if they want to keep the trust of the people they serve.

Salman Rushdie and Freedom of Speech

Somik Raha — Sat, 10 May 2008 02:20:22 EDT

Noted and controversial writer Salman Rushdie gave a talk at Stanford University recently. The Stanford Daily report covers important parts of his talk but misses out on the ending. Rushdie, towards the end, pointed to the fundamentalism displayed by the Hindu right toward M. F. Hussain. He said that M. F. Hussain had painted goddesses in the nude, who had "always been depicted that way," and, Hussain had been hounded out of India for committing this transgression as a Muslim. Now, Hussain lives in London and Dubai, and is about to open an art museum in Dubai. India will lose the art works of its greatest artist.

Rushdie's support for free speech is well-known. I spoke to some close Muslim friends and tried explaining how much I liked Rushdie's talk. To highlight Rushdie's support for a Muslim artist, I mentioned M. F. Hussain. Immediately, my Muslim friends (who are not from India) quizzed me on what Hussain had done. When I mentioned the painting of Indian goddesses in the nude, the reaction was of immediate disgust, and I could not get my Muslim friends to support M. F. Hussain. They felt that Hussain had been highly insensitive and should never have done something like this.

I tried hard to explain that I wouldn't send my kids to Hussain's art gallery, but I would defend his right to paint whatever he liked as long as he didn't use taxpayer money. In the end, my friends reluctantly agreed that Hussain should not have been kicked out of India, but that was because both my friends don't like government interference in public life, like me.

This conversation was remarkable in many respects. While discussing Rushdie, one friend pointed out that Muslims ought not to waste their time with such things, for the Prophet had clearly asked his followers to ignore those who abused his teachings - it was better to do good in the world than waste one's energy to counter such people. Somehow, I find all my Muslim friends to have such an open and liberal attitude, and this isn't just at Stanford.

Moving on, I think freedom of speech by itself does not pass scrutiny. I wouldn't like someone to come into my home and talk about topics that were uninteresting or disgusting to me. I do have the right to ask people to get off my property. Then, freedom of speech is the prerogative of the property owner. In this context, it becomes much easier to tackle situations that seem like violations by examining the property rights of the individuals concerned. In Hussain's case, whose property was he on when he made and displayed the paintings? As long as the property owner is fine with it, no one else's opinions can have legal standing.

Finally, as Indians, we would do well to recognize that our forefathers really meant "freedom" when they fought for freedom. This means that people have a right to be jerks in their own homes or outside as long as they don't physically hurt or defraud anyone else. Those that get offended have the option of shutting their eyes, not buying books, turning off the television, etc. We need to attach ourselves to a much higher ideal of freedom. I would like to end with a reminder of such an ideal, from Tagore's immortal poem on the subject.

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high,
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action–
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father,
Let my country awake.

Cosmetic Changes in Islamabad

temporal — Thu, 1 May 2008 09:11:55 EDT

Pakistan's Moment: We will fight terrorism -- our way appeared under the byline of Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani. Since his name is on the mast, I will assume that he takes full responsibility for this article. He writes:

It is important for Pakistan -- which has transited from an authoritarian regime to democratic governance -- that the message of this first critical post-election period be bold and clear. Like newly elected governments in other democratic societies, we intend to set the tone and agenda. We want to show the world that our nation is back in business, with an overwhelming mandate from our people.

It has been thirty days since he and his cabinet took oath. What does he have to show for the past thirty days? Please keep in mind that his party (PPP) and his coalition partners, PML-N, ANP and JUI had nearly six weeks to prepare an agenda before this oath taking.

Inflation is unchecked, prices for rice, flour, petrol and other commodities are still escalating. Law and order is still in a mess. The ministers travel in motorcades and the traffic is still diverted and blocked as it was under the previous administration.

The Judiciary issue is used as a lightening rod and a smokescreen simultaneously to deflect the attention and scrutiny away from the pressing problems facing the nation. The irony is, while the issue is being debated in Dubai between Asif Zardari the interim co-chairman of PPP and PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif, Mr Gilani is not even a member of the participating teams.

I find nothing bold and clear nor any attempts to set the tone and agenda.

Mr Gilani describes Benazir Bhutto as "Pakistan's quintessential democratic leader" ...facts and history speak otherwise.

My government is a coalition of modern, moderate, innovative, progressive democratic forces determined to jump-start the economy and to rebuild the social fabric of Pakistan.

We saw many of these "modern, moderate, innovative, progressive democratic forces" in the previous two terms each of PPP and PML-N. And the Pakistanis have not forgotten why both the PPP and PML-N were turfed out a total of four times.

We understand that unemployment, inflation and poverty are corrosive elements that, if left unaddressed, can create hopelessness and ennui that undermine authority.

The people of Pakistan did not elect him and his coalition to "understand" - they elected him to act quickly to alleviate these issues. Other than playing the blame-the-previous-government his administration has done nothing substantive.

He writes of "smuggling of Pakistani wheat across our borders."

Does he realise how impotent this sounds when read by the US readers? It reads as an confession of his Administration's inability to exercise control within his territory. This is going to raise eyebrows in the foggy bottom. The Pakistani detractors bring up the issue of Nuclear Weapon's safety and control every other week. If Pakistan cannot effectively control her side of the border how can he cite this weakness as a raison detre for smuggling?

Now we are negotiating from a position of strength.

The proof is in the pudding. This is what I have written here in Zardarigate: Who's Afraid of Judiciary:

Witness these recent developments from the new coalition government of Raza Rabbani:

* The coalition accepted the appointment of Maj Gen Jay Hood (of the Qur'an desecration infamy) in the US Embassy at Islamabad.

* The coalition recalled Gen. Mahmud Ali Durrani, a protege of Shirin Taher-Kheli and a colleague on Balusa, as Ambassador to the Court of St. Bush and appointed him National Security Adviser to the PM Raza Rabbani (Shirin is also a neocon and knows Hussain Haqqani, Ayesha Siddiqua and others through IDSA and other fora.)

* The coalition appointed Hussain Haqqani, first as Ambassador-at-large and then as Ambassador-designate to the Court of St. Bush. Last week Blogger Pakistan ran a long, rambling article by Moin Ansari - Husain Haqqani:-Dangerous 5th Column or Selfish opportunist? which tried to establish Hussain Haqqani as a neocon at best and a neoconzix at worst. * Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has "detached himself" from the Balusa Group according to Mariana Babar.

The parachuting of Washington's dream team means status quo remains unchanged in Islamabad. And the criticism and bunking of President Musharraf's US tilt is self serving lip service. Playing His Master's Voice (no pun) does not indicate a "position of strength."

Yousaf Raza Gilani is in an unenviable position. He cannot tell people to eat cakes. He has to act boldly, clearly, firmly and quickly: which means refraining from blame-game and delivering results.

Tibet - The Myth of Shangri-La

C R Sridhar — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:46:42 EDT

‘We ought not suffer ourselves to be deluded by unfounded theory or specious argument.’ -Abbe Felice Fontana.

The recent uprising in Tibet, which was crushed by China, reopened old wounds of the Tibetan struggle for independence from China. The international media was quick to highlight the traumatic events of the Chinese crackdown in 1959 in Tibet, which led to the exile of Dalai Lama to India. The international condemnation of the tough action taken on the Tibetan protesters was embarrassing to China as she was to play the host in the Beijing 2008 Olympics. The bad publicity came at an inopportune time and blunted the PR exercise mounted by China as an emerging Super Power.

The international coverage of the uprising was to a large extent uniform expressing moral outrage at the Chinese oppression but simplified the complex historical events of the Sino-Tibetan struggle. In the simplification lay the romantic notion that the Lamas (the priestly class) ruled wisely and with compassion. As the Dalai Lama himself stated that "the pervasive influence of Buddhism" in Tibet, "amid the wide open spaces of an unspoiled environment resulted in a society dedicated to peace and harmony. We enjoyed freedom and contentment.”¹

Hollywood version of Tibet

The romantic notion of idyllic Tibet where men, women and children lived in perfect harmony was reinforced in the West by Hollywood movies produced by talented directors such as Bernardo Bertolucci's Little Buddha (1993) and Martin Scorsese's Kundun (1997) and Jean-Jacques Annaud’s Seven Years in Tibet. In these excellently directed and lavishly produced films there are powerful messages suggesting ‘exaggerated reverence, with heavy-handed depictions of Tibetans, especially Tibetan monks, as solemn, holy and kind instead of as ordinary people who quarrel and joke around.’ The Western World also idealized Tibetan culture as pure and otherworldly. As Jamyang Norbu, a Tibetan immigrant and writer living in Tennessee, said: ''In the West, the response to Tibetan culture is so worshipful and romantic. There are elements in Tibetan culture that have all this magical, medieval stuff that Westerners love. The New Age thing. The Tibetan thing has style -- the color, the costumes. To a great extent, we exist only in the imagination of Western fantasists.''²

The slavish adoration of all things Tibetan finds articulation in the novel Lost Horizon, written by James Hilton who popularized Shangri-La – a place of perfect serenity. The novel tells a story of some Englishmen whose plane crashed in the Himalayas found peace and tranquility in the company of lamas who engaged them with philosophical conversation over endless cups of tea. This myth of Tibet – a veritable Shangri-La - entered Western consciousness and struck a sympathetic chord. This impression of Tibet as a Utopian world untainted by greed or corruption excited the imagination of western people and formed the basis of public opinion supporting the Tibetan struggle against China.

Exploitative class structure

But did the popular opinion about Tibet as a Shangri-La have any basis in reality? Were there any historical records to support the claim that it was Shangri-La ruled by the wise lamas? A careful and scrupulous reading of Tibetan History reveals a radically different picture. Far from being a Shangri-La Tibet was crushed from within by a viciously exploitative class structure. “Until 1959, when the Dalai Lama last presided over Tibet,” writes Michael Parenti, “ most of the arable land was still organized into manorial estates worked by serfs. “³ Even a writer sympathetic to the old order allows that "a great deal of real estate belonged to the monasteries, and most of them amassed great riches . . .. In addition, individual monks and lamas were able to accumulate great wealth through active participation in trade, commerce, and money lending."⁴

In old Tibet, there were a number of small farmers who eked out a living under extremely difficult circumstances. These were the lucky ones as they were free peasants. The middle class was in the region of ten thousand comprising small traders, merchants, and shopkeepers. Thousands were beggars and some slaves who owned nothing. But staggering parts of the population - some 700000 out of 1250000 were serfs.⁵ The serfs and other poor peasants had no education or medical care. They slaved for the lama and the secular landed aristocracy. They had no rights and were subject to the whims of the lords. The plight of the serfs is chronicled in the Timely Rain: Travels in New Tibet and also in other scholarly books such as Tom Grunfeld’s The Making of Modern Tibet, M.E. Sharpe, 1996; Anna Louise Strong, Tibetan Interviews, Peking New World Press, 1929.

Hell on Earth

The exploitative regime of the Lamas was enforced through terror and wide spread use of torture. For runaway serfs and thieves the summary punishments were given such as eye gouging, the pulling out of tongues, hamstringing, and amputation. Notes Parenti “ In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, and breaking off hands. There were instruments for slicing off kneecaps and heels, or hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling.”⁶ The testimonies of the victims of torture are heart rending as they are enduring chronicles of man’s inhumanity to man.

The religious teaching of Karma was used to keep the iniquitous social order in place. The pernicious doctrine taught that the poor had themselves to blame as they justly suffered for their sins committed in past lives. The rich enjoyed the affluence and prosperity as a reward for their virtuous deeds in the past. This religious dogma prevented any challenge to the social order and preserved a status quo for the benefit of the Lama elites.

Enter the Red Dragon

In 1950 the Chinese communists occupied Tibet and crushed the ill-equipped Tibetan army. In 1951 the Seventeen Point agreement was signed and Tibet was officially incorporated into the People's Republic of China. Dalai Lama was given self- government in Tibet with the Chinese government retaining control over military and foreign relations. In Eastern Kham and Amdo (Quingai) considered being outside the purview of the Tibetan Government, the Chinese initiated land reforms. Most lands there were taken away from noblemen and monasteries and re-distributed to serfs. This aroused resentment among the landed class in Tibet. The Chinese accusation was that Tibet under the Dalai Lama was regressive in nature and opposed all attempts to modernize a serf society. The Chinese abolished serfdom and introduced social reforms by reducing usurious interest rates and built hospitals and roads. “Contrary to popular belief in the West," writes Goldstein, the Chinese "took care to show respect for Tibetan culture and religion. No aristocratic or monastic property was confiscated, and feudal lords continued to reign over their hereditarily bound peasants.”⁷

Meanwhile the relationship between the Dalai Lama and the Chinese communists worsened. In Eastern Kham and Amdo(Qinghai) the landed class with the monks started a rebellion in June 1956, which eventually spread to Lhasa. The Chinese crushed the Tibetan resistance with extreme violence in 1959. After the Lhasa rebellion in 1959, the Chinese government lowered the level of autonomy of Central Tibet, and implemented full-scale land redistribution in all areas of Tibet.

Tibet as a pawn in the Cold War

The American involvement in the Tibetan struggle arose due to geopolitical concerns about the ideology of communism that was hostile to interests of capitalism. American foreign policy strategists, less inspired by thoughts of benevolence, saw a golden opportunity to halt the spread of communism by actively supporting Dalai Lama. The CIA involvement with the bands of Tibetan fighters dates back to 1956 when the Tibetan fighters attacked the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army. The CIA gave this group military training, support camps in Nepal and supply of arms. A propaganda unit called the American Society for a Free Asia – a CIA front- espoused the cause of free Tibet.

The Dalai Lama’s eldest brother, Thubtan Norbu, played an active role in this society.⁸ The CIA bankrolled the exiled Tibetan community throughout the sixties to the tune of $1.7 million a year according to the documents released by the State Department in 1998. The CIA also gave the Dalai Lama annual payments of $186000. These facts were reported in the Los Angeles Times (15-9-1998) and also in New York Times (1-10-1998) by the publication of the article ‘CIA Gave Aid to Tibetan Exiles in '60s, Files Show’ written by Jim Mann. The documents released by the State Department are also analysed in a book written by Morrison titled The CIA's Secret War in Tibet.

The armed resistance movement petered out in 1972 when the CIA abruptly withdrew support. Both President Nixon and Dr. Henry Kissinger saw that rapprochement with China served US geopolitical interests. The Tibetans were left high and dry. There is another important reason, not discussed in mainstream media, why the resistance failed: because large sections of Tibetan society who were serfs did not join the armed struggle against the Chinese. Unlike other liberation struggles against imperial invasions, the Tibetan resistance was confined to the land owning aristocracy and monks who lost the most during the Chinese occupation. The non- involvement of the class of peasants/ serfs spelt the death knell of the resistance.⁹

The bitterness of the 14th Dalai Lama was evident, as he knew that the US involvement in Tibet was a game to thwart the expansion of Communist China. It had nothing to do with the plight of the Tibetan people. While thanking the CIA for its support in the Tibetan struggle he told John Kenneth Knaus, an ex-CIA official, that “the U.S. Government had involved itself in his country's affairs not to help Tibet but only as a cold war tactic to challenge the Chinese.''

Today the financial support for Dalai Lama flows from the National Endowment for Democracy and other conduits. The US Congress has allotted annually a sum of $2 million for Tibetans in India with additional budget of millions for the democratic activities for the Tibetan Exile Community. Heather Cottin, in "George Soros, Imperial Wizard," CovertAction Quarterly no. 74 (Fall 2002) has also alleged that the Dalai Lama also gets money from financier George Soros, who now runs the CIA-created Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and other institutes.

Writing on the Wall

Beneath the smiling face of the 14th Dalai Lama that we see on TV interviews and at public functions there is a worried man. The worries of Dalai Lama are founded on painful realities confronting Tibet. In recent times the Han Chinese constituting 95% of the immense Chinese population have settled in large numbers dominating the Tibetan economy. The Han Chinese views the Tibetans with contempt. The economic levers are in the hands of the Chinese, which has aroused the antagonism of the local Tibetans. The culture of Tibet is in danger of being effaced by the demographic shift in favour of the Han Chinese.

The dark shadow cast by China as an emerging super power has blunted the bargaining power of Tibet in her quest for independence. In recent times China has meshed with the globalised economy as a supplier of low cost goods to US and the world. With US slipping into recession and real wages declining, the flood of cheap goods to meet declining purchasing power in US may stem the consumer protest in that country. Hence, apart from posturing and making rhetorical speeches, the US establishment may find no reason to rock the Chinese boat. The US occupation of Iraq against international law, which has cost precious lives, has turned public opinion against military intervention in general. Moreover, the financial crisis in US and declining dollar has limited the capacity of US to militarily intervene in Tibet. The Government in exile of Dalai Lama has no support in US to overthrow the Chinese from Tibet and risk the prospect of a third world war.

The option of Dalai Lama is restricted to negotiate with China for autonomy while being a part of China. The conciliatory efforts made by the Dalai Lama to the Chinese leadership in Beijing would be the best step forward to ensure that the freedom of worship and human rights are restored in the best traditions of democracy.

“For every complicated problem,” said Mencken, “there is a solution that is simple, direct, understandable, and wrong.” For the people who support the Free Tibet movement the myth of the Shangri-La must be laid to rest and there must be international pressure to model Tibet as a democracy. Few Tibetans would like the return of the corrupt aristocratic clans who fled with the Dalai Lama in 1959. Many Tibetan farmers would not like to give up the land distributed to them during the Chinese land reforms. Slaves who suffered terribly under the feudal overlords would not like the return to slavery. These voices must be heard and respected. Otherwise the freedom loving people of Tibet would be replacing the yoke of Chinese Occupation with the yoke of theocratic despotism of the Lamas. A fate that must be avoided at any cost.

----------

1 Dalai Lama quoted in Donald Lopez Jr., Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West (Chicago and London: Chicago University Press, 1998), 205.

2 Tibet (Hold the Shangri-La)- BARBARA STEWART Published: March 19, 2000- the New York Times.

3 Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth- Michael Parenti.

4 Pradyumna P. Karan, The Changing Face of Tibet: The Impact of Chinese Communist Ideology on the Landscape (Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky, 1976), 64.

5 Stuart Gelder and Roma Gelder, The Timely Rain: Travels in New Tibet (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1964) page 110.

6 Anna Louise Strong, Tibetan Interviews (Peking: New World Press, 1929) quoted in Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth.

7 Melvyn C. Goldstein, The Snow Lion and the Dragon: China, Tibet, and the Dalai Lama (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), page 52.

8 Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison, The CIA's Secret War in Tibet (Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 2002); 9 Hugh Deane, "The Cold War in Tibet," CovertAction Quarterly (Winter 1987).

The South Asian Water That Is Indian

Diganta — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 01:15:14 EDT

It's been long since I have written about Farakka - the barrage on the Ganges just before it enters Bangladesh. There has been no permanent treaties between India and Bangladesh on the water sharing at Farakka. However, there is a 30 year agreement between India and Bangladesh that ends after 2020. As per the agreement, India ensures 35000 cusec water for Bangladesh at even the driest possible season. The dam was supposedly for supplying more water to the dying Kolkata port, which has already died its' natural death and handed over its responsibilities to Haldia port - a new and better one.

If you Google the term Farakka, you will encounter a lot of documents and articles about Indian unilateral water withdrawal. Some of them are written on a factual basis but some of them are not. So far, I have found an excellent paper written by Mikiyasu Nakayama from Utsunomia University, Japan. This is an excellent analysis of the entire proposal and its history.

I was delighted to find that both the proposals I raised in my previous article were indeed discussed between India and Bangladesh. It was my pleasure to know that the proposal that I stressed on, was indeed put forward by the Robert McNamara, the President of World Bank in 1976. He proposed that dams and water reservoirs should be built in Nepal to solve the long term water crisis in the Ganges. The dams could be on the tributaries of the Ganges (map), preferably on Kosi and Gandak. It was supposed to release water during dry season and to store during monsoon. Canada and World Bank both agreed to fund the project. It was not only for the storage, it would have created huge amount of hydro-electricity for both Nepal and India. Bangladesh also agreed to the proposal. But India did not.

India rejected the idea since it was going to 'internationalize' the issue and will involve a third party (Nepal). Indian policymakers stuck to the point that they'd help Bangladesh to construct a canal from Brahamaputra to the Ganges. Bangladesh opposed with the claim that it would involve displacement of a huge population in a densely populated country and also the Brahamaputra river might not have enough water during dry season. And I don't see Bangladesh was wrong in that. Brahamaputra water is also diminishing (though better than the Ganges).

The other point India cited was the possible earthquake in Nepal could destroy thousands of life if the water breaks out of the dam. The same hold true for counter-Indian proposal to build a water-reservoir in upstream Arunachal to augment the lower supply in Brahamaputra. Either of these two is a probably bitter truth - a dam in either place can carry destructive effects downstream should there be an Earthquake. However, how else can we get extra water?

Nakayama noted that since India was not hungry for World Bank loans in 1970s, they actually did not even bother to care about the proposal. In 1950s, the situation was different when India and Pakistan signed the Indus Water treaty. The other notable observation was India basically stuck to the same pattern that it was successful with Pakistan - get total ownership of a few rivers and ask others to interlink (with compensation of cost of canals ) - something that Pakistan did after the Indus Water treaty. But, it is clear to me that Indian policymakers lacked 'out-of-the-box' thinking and were more committed to stick to their position and never thought in terms of development of the whole region.

What would have possibly happened if Nepal was made a party to Ganges agreement? Indian policymakers could have thought from both political and technical point of view. They viewed it as an agreement where Nepal would come to the driver's seat having the storage capacity. Also, they might think that it would be difficult to tackle both the countries instead of one at a time. The other point could be serious. A possible earthquake in Nepal would devastate high populated Indian areas including Uttar Pradesh. Well, that's always a possibility with a water reservoir and we already have a lot of them all though out the country.

Instead of adding extra water to the supply, India and Bangladesh are still vying for water, from Teesta (another Indian river that enters Bangladesh) and the Ganges. It is noted that India gets 39% of water from Teesta and more than 50% of the Ganges. However, the upper-riparian withdrawal is generally restricted to 20-25% in all resolved water disputes till date including Indus water treaty and the Nile river water sharing treaty between Sudan and Egypt.

The paper also noted the unwillingness of lower-riparian states to gain popularity. I was personally very critical of that in case of Bangladesh where political parties do make politics out of this issue but showed little commitment towards solving it. He ended his opinion with a few possible reasons of failure including the mediation of an effective and neutral third party. ICJ interfered in only a single case on record - with Hungary and Slovenia on river Danube. That seems to me the last place for arbitration.

It is said that "better late than never". Even if after 30+ years of bad policies towards Indians and Bangladeshis, some of Indian policymakers get rid of casual attitude towards development - it will be a bonus for the majority of Indians. It should be noted that the extra water could not only solve the dry season water crisis, but also could fix the diminishing ground water levels and the lower growth in agriculture for last couple of decades. In an era when the food prices are doubling every year, it's worth taking a fresh look at the age-old problem. After all, what's wrong if we have a few dams in Nepal?