Monday, February 8, 2010

Why ban on SIMI and for how long? By Abu Zafar Adil Azmi - English translation from Urdu article in Afkar e Milli, New Delhi

http://twocircles.net/2010feb02/why_ban_simi_and_how_long.html


Why ban on SIMI and for how long?


By Abu Zafar Adil Azmi

It’s been eight years since the central government imposed ban on Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Till date the government has failed to produce any concrete evidence against it. During these eight years dozens of youths arrested in the name of SIMI have been acquitted by the court. Yet there has been no change in government’s attitude against the SIMI. Government produced evidences in court to impose ban on SIMI on 27 September 2001. These very same evidences have been repeated the second, third and the fourth time! When the a term of proscription is about to expire, the police and intelligence agencies become active in the whole country and the name of SIMI once again features in the headlines of the newspapers. This continues till the ban is enforced anew.

After each ban the government sets up a legal tribunal and usually this tribunal endorses the government action. The ban on 7 February 2008 was the fourth one. However, this time the Judge of the Tribunal Justice Geeta Mittal quashed the ban. The very next day the central government applied in the Supreme Court for a stay against the Geeta Mittal judgment. The Supreme Court acting on an oral petition of the central government extended the stay for yet another fourteen days without ever listening to the SIMI’s arguments. Later this stay was further extended till the final decision. Consequently, even after fourteen months the stay on SIMI continues. In the Supreme Court itself the cases of first, second and third prohibition are still pending, although, the first case against the banning was filed more than seven years ago

On the one hand a welfare organization of Muslim youths is a victim of state terrorism without any evidence. The government appointed tribunal overturns the banning by the government; the government fetches the stay overnight. While on the other hand the preachers of hate in the country, those who distribute trishuls and harass the Muslims and other minorities of the country are roaming scot-free. No one is there to ask for their head. The Naxalites and Maoists have unleashed a wave of terror in several states of the country. The government has offered to talk with them terming it to be internal crisis. It is even refraining from calling as terrorist activities the bomb blasts in trains and police stations carried out by Maoists. One of the most depressing aspects of the whole episode is that neither the secular intellectuals nor the Muslim leadership is willing to come forward in this SIMI’s matter.

“Basically, SIMI is an ideology-based organization whose main agenda is social issues. Neither it is a fundamental nor is a terrorist organization. It was formed to achieve superior objectives. RSS and Bajrang Dal are fanning communalism in the country. There is a dire need to ban. them. Ban on SIMI is not justified. Government must take a re-look in SIMI’s case. We will talk to party’s officials. ” ---Reeta Bahu Guna Joshi,
President of All India National Congress.U.P
“Imposing ban on any organization is absolutely wrong. The ban on SIMI was neither right nor can it be justified now. The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act is undemocratic because it provides for arbitrary arrests based on opinions only. I am also against banning Maoist. Yes it imperative to contain violence. We cannot curtail the freedom of expression. ”
--- Justice Hosbet Suresh, FormerChief Justice of Mumbai High Court.

In 2008 the English weekly Tehelka published a comprehensive report titled ‘SIMI Fiction’. This report contained detailed information regarding the brutalities and atrocities carried out on SIMI in the country. This report had a profound impact on the secular circles. But then, there was an array of continuous intense charges of bomb blasts against the SIMI that this effort like the effort of Justice Geeta Mittal soon lost its sheen. As a matter of fact the quantum of brutalities and excesses carried out in the name of SIMI during the past eight years is on such a high scale that it requires a huge amount of paper to record them but these would also fall short. The Afkar in this context, has strove to discern the opinion, about these alleged atrocities, of the country’s secular representation as well as of Muslim leadership and Muslim intellectuals.

Today, the situation is very precarious. Every now and then, a Muslim youth(s), here or there, is picked up by the intelligence agencies and the security forces in the name of SIMI. Earlier, it was not that easy to become a member of SIMI. The aspirant had to undergo strenuous tests before being enrolled as a member of the organization. There are very clear-cut and detailed guidelines for becoming a member of SIMI. These are inscribed in its constitution. Besides, a long list of reading material, it also emphasizes for a positive character and conduct report. These conditions stress for activities and punctuality. However, now the police and administration, irrespective of these conditions, does not hesitate to label each and sundry as the member of SIMI. Anyone who fancies them becomes member of SIMI whether or not s/he is aware of the full name of SIMI. Earlier, the list of new members of SIMI used to be published in SIMI’s organ, but now, the names of SIMI’s members are announced in the charge-sheet and affidavits filed by the government in the courts. Now the situation has reached to such an extent that those children who were aged nine or ten in September 2001 (first banning), the government terms them as members of SIMI. If this malicious drive continues then, it is feared that children born after September 2001 would also be considered as ‘members’ of SIMI.



It is worth pondering that how can such an organization – whose headquarters are housed in the heart of the country and its branch/sub-offices are spread in state capitals and major cities of the country, whose office-bearers organize press conferences, issue statements which are published in government approved mouthpiece and periodicals in different languages of the country – picks up weapon? That too, against a same state with whose permission it is carrying out all of these activities.

Well, how come an organization, which is limited to students only and for almost quarter a century not even a single case of terrorism was registered against it and all of whose activities are confined to only speeches, printed material and meetings can pick up weapons? This fact is also unfathomable that an organization – which is knocking at the doors of the court for seeking justice continuously for the past eight years, whose counsel visits the whole country along with the Tribunal Counsel and appears in the High Court and other sub-courts – carries out bomb blast? That too, on the same or a day before hearing!

A few years before the banning SIMI became a very hot topic of discussion. However, despite this its monthly activities could not occupy more than a few pages in its monthly organ ‘Islamic Movement’. The intriguing question is how come after the ban its activities had increased to such a huge extent that the government has to file an affidavit comprising four to five hundred pages. The atrocities against the SIMI is not limited to police and administration but axe also falls on those who unfailingly consider themselves as secular and free from any sort of bigotry or bias.

“I have attended SIMI’s meetings. It is a welfare organization of Muslim youths whose objectives are set. SIMI is working towards Islamic awakening and awareness in the new generation. It is atrocious to clamp a ban on any such organization. Government must immediately lift the ban” ---Maulana Mohamad Salim Qasmi, Vice-president of All India Muslim Personal Law Board, Principle of Darul-Uloom Deoband “It is unfair to outlaw SIMI. Now there is no question of continuing it. SIMI was never involved terrorist activities. Congress government, like the BJP government, is proving communal. The Congress-supported department of IB has been instrumental in affecting a ban on SIMI and the judiciary has also come under the influence of Congress and IB” ---Ilyas Azmi, Former Member of Parliament (B.S.P)
“It is completely wrong to ban the SIMI. When the High court of Delhi cancelled the ban, it was not right for Supreme Court to make a stay on it. Judiciary is also continuing to be fanatic. People can not dare to oppose it openly because a large proportion of society is growing to be communal. ” ---Parshant Bhushan, Advocate Supreme Court

Even before the Fajr prayers on 27 September 2001 dozens of SIMI activists were arrested in state of Uttar Pradesh and other parts of the country and several offices were sealed. Most of the arrested were those whose relatives have testified that they (the arrested persons) were not even remotely related to SIMI. This calamity struck even to those whose ages were well above double the age of retirement as a SIMI member i.e. thirty years. A senior citizen whose age was around sixty years was arrested in a village in Azamgarh on a frivolous charge that he was shouting slogan glorifying Osama Bin Laden.

A cursory look at all of the charge sheets filed in Uttar Pradesh points towards a one single master plan; only the characters, places and, at times, the timings differ. The sections are also almost similar albeit some minor variations. Yet another weak link is that although the ban on SIMI was affected at 4 O’clock in the evening of 27th September 2001, however, the nationwide drive of arresting SIMI activists/members had started in the wee hours of 27th September itself. Consequently, dozens of Muslims all over the country were sent behind the bars even before the dawn. The police records showed them arrested in the afternoon/evening on charges of pasting posters, making inflammatory speeches and shouting slogans. If, after the imposition of ban on any organization, if an individual carries out activities in its name, then he/she is liable for legal action. On the contrary, in the SIMI’s case, the unending cycle of arrest commenced before the declaration of ban.

In the views of the legal experts under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1967 (under which a ban was clamped on SIMI) after the imposition of ban on organization it is mandatory that the copies of the notification must be: pasted at a prominent place on the headquarters of the organization; handed over to the office-bearer(s) of that organization or announce about the activities of the banned organization in the concerned area through the public address system. According to the then President of SIMI Shahid Badr, we came to know about the ban through the evening TV news whereas the phone lines of our offices in the country were disconnected in the morning itself. In different states of the country including Uttar Pradesh, the arrests had already been made before dawn. Shahid Badr further tells that in the night of 27th September 2001 at 12:40 am police barged into SIMI central office breaking the door and abusing and arrested us. Till then we had not received any sort of notification, whatsoever.

The greatest hue and cry was made in Maharashtra where the Congress is in continuous power for the past several years. After the imposition of ban on SIMI a bomb blast took place in a bus at Ghatkopar in 2002. The Mumbai police termed it an act of SIMI and accused 16 persons under POTA. It (Mumbai police) produced Dr. Mobeen and Saqib Nachen and others as key accused. Saqib Nachen and eight others were arrested by the police in 2003; nevertheless, inside one year’s period in 2004, all of them were discharged. Later, rest of the other accused were also acquitted by the court. But, the government presented same case in September 2003 to impose ban on SIMI once again. Similarly, in the case of bomb blasts in Milind, Ville Parle and Mumbai Central sixteen persons were arrested. In this also Saqib Nachen was produced as a key accused. This case was also registered under POTA. However, after two years in 2005, the Prosecution passed a written judgment that several key accused including Saqib Nachen have no direct link in preparing or possessing the bomb as well as conspiring to carry out bomb blasts. Yet this is sub judice in Supreme Court.


West Bengal, where a party that dubs itself miles away from communalism is in power for so long (more than three decades), no less drama was staged in the name of SIMI. A fifty eight year old man Yaseen Kabeer along with five others was arrested in Malda district in 2001. They were charged with pasting SIMI’s poster, making inflammatory speeches and shouting slogans. Yaseen Kabeer expired in jail after two years. The Session Court acquitted the four of the accused after four years. One of the accused was sentenced to two years imprisonment. Interestingly enough all of the four accused had already spent four years in jail.
In the Murshidabad district of West Bengal, the police arrested yet another eighteen persons including a 75 year old Islamic Scholar Maulana Ashraful Haq. He had also been charged with pasting posters and sloganeering. In the same district the police arrested the owner of Molin Hotel Abul Qasim (65 years), however, later the court acquitted him. The police made a case against him that when in 2001 the then President of SIMI Shahid Badr came to Murshidabad in connection with a conference then, he stayed in his (Abul Qasim’s) hotel.

On 15 August 2006 an organization by the name Islamic Movement of India organized a seminar on ‘The Muslims Role in India’s Independence’ in Panjikollam town of Kerala. The government termed it a secret meeting of SIMI and registered cases against five persons. Surprisingly enough, this seminar was being held in the heart of the city in an auditorium with a seating capacity of five hundred. The arrested persons spent more than two months in jail after which, they were released on bail. Till date no charge sheet has been filed in this case. However, ten more persons were arrested in the same case in 2008.

“SIMI did not teach violence how much I know. It was an Islamic organization and Islam is faith that is completely free from violence. It is not right to ban such organization. They have made a mountain out of a molehill in the name of SIMI and arrested Muslim youths with a great extent. But it is the fact that the truth has won the battle whether it has taken a long time. But a noble organization looses its reputation in this battle which is totally unacceptable. Judiciary has also not treated in proper way. Therefore it becomes obligatory to make reforms in judiciary” --- Minakshi Ganguly, Human Rights Watch “Ban on SIMI is a communal agenda of Government by which it wants to amuse a particular proportion of people. We have been opposing this ban since the first day. On one hand Government pulls its leg to act on the report of Shri Krishna Commission and on another hand it looks sharp and active to fetch a stay order on SIMI after being lifted the ban. The silence among Muslim organizations regarding issues of SIMI is unbearable. A eminent organization like Jamee-at-ul-ulema in his ceremony in Ram Leela Ground could not raise voice against this atrocity. All national organizations and pro-democratic people must demand to lift the ban unanimously and there should be organized a particular conference on this topic. ” ---
Mufti Muhammad Mukarram, (Shahi Imam, Fatehpuri Mosque, Delhi)

Madhya Pradesh police has accused Safdar Nagauri of organizing a terrorist training camp at a place called Waghman in the Kottayam district of Kerala. The police version points out that the SIMI activists/members had undergone weapons training there and also participated in swimming exercises. On the contrary, it is a tourist spot so how can weapons training be possible there? Another fact is that this place is devoid of any lake or swimming pool so how can swimming exercise be possible? The police has also accused Safdar Nagauri of running camp in Madhya Pradesh as well. Nonetheless, the Chief Editor of English fortnightly Milli Gazette Dr. Zafarul Islam Khan revealed that when he sent his reporter at this place the locals disclosed that two days ago policemen had themselves planted bombs there.

The Delhi Police arrested two persons including Yaseen Patel in May 2002 in the name of SIMI. They were accused of pasting provocative posters on the walls of Jamia Millia Islamia. Talking to Afkar-i-Milli Yaseen Patel told that he was arrested a night before. When his wife filed Habeas Corpus in Delhi High Court then, the Delhi Police forged the fake case of pasting posters on the walls of Jamia Millia Islamia. The alleged ‘poster’ was actually a sticker that was published by SIMI in 1996. Actually, the police enlarged that sticker by computer and presented it as a poster. Witnesses were only police persons. Police informed the Court that from afternoon till the evening no witness could be secured. The Prosecution also told the Court that generally people are afraid of testifying in such types of terrorist activities.

Looking at the poster the POTA Judge exclaimed, “This (poster) is even more dangerous than AK-47”. Although, no one objected to this sticker when it was published by SIMI, for the first time, in 1996.
This is not an isolated incident of Court’s strange attitude in SIMI’s case. There have been complaints against the biased attitude of courts. All the same, there has been a phenomenal rise in such behavior in the recent past. Human Rights activists of Madhya Pradesh Mr. Vineet Tiwari divulged that after the arrest of Safdar Nagauri and others in March 2008, no lawyer is ready to fight their cases. After much persuasion one lawyer agreed to fight the case, however, he was brutally beaten up by other lawyers in front of the judge, but, the judge did not take any action against them. Describing yet another incident, Mr. Vineet Tiwari mentioned, that the father of a youth who was languishing in jail for almost two years, after being dejected on all fronts, handed over the case to a lawyer of RSS mentality. When that particular lawyer appeared before the judge, the judge remarked, “Would you like to turn every nook and corner (of this country) into Godhra by freeing the accused”.


Acquitted SIMI persons in different States:



States
No of persons
Maharashtra 65
UP 24
WB 21
Delhi 16
Kerla 14
Karnatka 5
Tamil Nadu 4

When on 05 August 2008 Justice Geeta Mittal quashed the ban, the SIMI (mis) took it as a bright sunlight. But the euphoria was very short-lived. This reprieve was again over-shadowed by dark clouds. The very next day a two-member bench of Supreme Court stayed the Justice Geeta Mittal order. The former counsel of SIMI Mobeen Akhter expressed his dismay over the fact that the Supreme Court granted stay only on an oral petition by the central government and no written request was made and no affidavit was filed by it.

Although, earlier the three-member Bench of the Supreme Court had observed that without any written plea no stay can be granted. Before granting the stay the Supreme Court did not even bother to listen to the stand of the second party (SIMI). The former President of SIMI Shahid Badr terms it as a ‘Murder of Justice’ whereas a renowned Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan describes it as a ‘Wrong Attitude’ of the Supreme Court. Advocate Mobeen Akhter believes that unless and until the judges are free from political pressures, the politicians would continue to take advantage of such cases. Mobeen Akhter told that the Court had repeatedly asked the government to present the list of the SIMI members but the Public Prosecutor had said that the government does not want to do so. Mobeen Akhter says that had that happened then it would have been difficult for the police to frame innocent people who were not even aware of SIMI. However, it is conspicuous that the intentions of the government with regards to Muslim youths are not clear. Which is why even if there is firecracker SIMI is being blamed.

When in the year 2001 SIMI was banned for the first, the Congress also targeted the NDA government. But when it came to power, it over-stepped all of the limit of decency. Nonetheless, the Chief of Anti-Communal Forum (a Forum formed by the Congress government) Amresh Mishra firmly holds the view that the ban is absolutely illegal. He also agreed that the Congress is infested with communal elements. The Minister of State for Minorities Affairs in the new UPA government Salman Khursheed had been a Counsel for SIMI.

Recently, speaking at a public programme organized by a Social Organization, he acceded that he argued in the Court against the ban on SIMI and that he personally does not consider this stand of (Congress) Party as correct.

Tehelka’s Editor-at-Large Ajit Sahi is perturbed at the question of court and law as regards SIMI. He (dejectedly) advises that now to expect justice from the courts is an absolute folly. He emphasizes for justice for both Hindus and Muslims. He prophesizes that if justice is not done then this country would wobble into pieces.

Besides the police and judiciary, the fourth estate i.e. media is also not far away. The catastrophe is that there is a new trend in the modern media that even before the accused is proved guilty s/he is being branded as a dreaded criminal by the modern media. The fact of the matter is that the media has played a key role in creating hype against the SIMI and presenting it as a terrorist organization. It is against the democratic principles to first shut it mouth by clamping a ban any organization and then make an onslaught of a slew of baseless allegations against it. Advocate Mobeen Akhter maintains that the pace at which the hearings are taking place, it would take at least ten years to finalize the case pertaining to the ban. Till then, would there be any SIMI member below thirty?


SIMI at a Glance

Formation: 25 April 1977, Aligarh
First ban (for two years): 27 September 2001
Tribunal confirmed ban: 26 March 2002
2nd ban (for two years): 26 September 2003
Tribunal confirmed ban: 16 April 2004
Shahid Badr released from jail: 7 April 2004
3rd ban (for two years): 8 February 2006
Tribunal confirmed ban: 8 August 2006
4th ban (for two years): 7 February 2008
Tribunal rejected ban: 5 August 2008
Stay on Tribunal’s judgment: by SC 6 August 2008


Details about cases and accused in some important states:


State Cases before 8 Feb 2006 Cases from 8 July 2006 till July 2008 Number of Arrested Status
Maharashtra 185 11 937 ..
Madhya Pradesh 76 8 238 76 cases are pending trial
Gujrat 12 2 192 All cases are pending trial
West Bengal 10 - 58 5 cases are pending trial
Kerla 17 1 37 9 cases are pending trial
Tamil Nadu 15 - 26 ..
Rajastahn 14 - 22 11 cases are pending trial
Delhi 5 2 16 6 cases are pending trial
Andhra Pradesh 14 - 15 ..
Karnatka 4 - 8 ..
Uttar Pradesh 40 -
.. 22 cases are pending trial

Note: - This table does not consist of the number of those persons who were arrested for the charge of being involved in bomb attacks in 2008.


(The article was published in the November 2009 issue of Afkar-e-Milli Urdu monthly. The writer is Special Correspondent of the periodical and can be contacted at abuzafar@journalist.com)

Saturday, February 6, 2010

How not to catch a terrorist - By Maseeh Rahman - The Indian Express, Mumbai

 
 
 

How not to catch a terrorist

Maseeh Rahman Tags : Batla House, Mumbai, Digvijay Singh, IndiaPosted: Saturday , Feb 06, 2010 at 0203 hrs

The Delhi Police Special Cell has been indicted in the past for organising fake “encounters”. But clearly Batla House was a genuine one — a top inspector was killed, besides two alleged IM terrorists, Atif Amin and Sajid Hassan. Yet despite a public outcry there was no magisterial inquiry, while the National Human Rights Commission produced a dodgy report. As a result controversy still swirls around the Batla House encounter. So how does one explain some of the lacunae pinpointed by human rights activists in the police version of events?
Even though the IM had bombed several cities from 2005 onward, in no state had police been able to crack the urban terrorist group. The lucky break came after the July 2008 Gujarat bombings. A car that had failed to explode in Surat had been stolen from Navi Mumbai. The Mumbai Police Crime Branch nabbed the car thief, who revealed the identity of the stolen car’s buyer. But there was a problem — the guy was holed up in a village in Gujarat. Lacking local contacts, the Crime Branch sleuths realised the target could escape if there was a blind raid on the village. So they asked for assistance from the Intelligence Bureau (IB), which has a national network.
After the Mumbai Police picked up the stolen car buyer, the first genuine IM member to be nabbed, they got leads on others. Atif was one of them. A Crime Branch team was sent to Delhi to arrest him. Once again the cops lacked local resources, and felt it would be foolhardy to raid an unfamiliar, congested locality. But they had another lucky break. During a phone intercept, they overheard Atif arrange to see a film with a woman friend. This seemed like a golden opportunity. The Mumbai cops decided to grab Atif and his companion at the cinema theatre, and grill him for details about the Batla House flat: its layout, the number of people staying there, who among them were IM members and who were just students, where the weapons were stored, the escape routes, and so on. Since Atif was out with a woman, the cops believed his flat-mates wouldn’t get alerted if he didn’t return home in time. The plan was to raid Flat 108, Building L-18, Batla House in the wee hours of the night when everyone would be fast asleep.
But while this was going on, tremendous pressure was being mounted on the Delhi cops to move quickly. Someone from IB tipped off the Delhi Police about Atif and the Mumbai Police operation. It was hurriedly decided that the Special Cell should pre-empt the Mumbai Crime Branch. But the Delhi Police had few details — just Atif’s name, telephone number, and the flat address — and no ground-level intelligence.
So on the day the Mumbai cops were poised to grab the alleged IM bomber at the cinema in the evening, a Special Cell team showed up in the Batla House area around 11 am. It tried to do everything all at once — confirm the phone owner, identify the flat occupants, and arrest the IM suspects at an hour when everybody was awake and fully alert. The odds that something would go badly wrong were high. And it did.
This is an object lesson on how not to conduct a counter-terror operation. Contrast it with the way the Mumbai Police quietly and effectively picked up IM suspects from several locations around the country. When they finally announced the arrests four days after the Batla House encounter, they publicly thanked the Muslims of the Cheetah Camp slum for their help and cooperation in the arrest of Sadiq Sheikh, another alleged IM bomber. Local Muslims had alerted the Crime Branch on Sheikh’s movements. No Muslim or human rights group protested after the Mumbai arrests.
But the Delhi Police’s slambang action had two serious fallouts. It alerted other IM members. As a result, many are still at large. And it raised questions that made Muslims suspicious and angry. In Batla House, if you ask anyone about the encounter, they are all convinced it was fake, that Atif and Sajid were innocent, even though the IM group did not belong to the locality. What is worse, Muslims across the country see it as another instance of police highhandedness and brutality against their community.
Yet no one in government appears to take notice.
After Mumbai 26/11, aren’t we supposed to be developing a more sophisticated counter-terrorism doctrine? Is it enough for officials to just go on insisting that Batla House was a genuine encounter? What is being done to clear the doubts, even if misplaced, of ordinary Indian Muslims?
Though he has denied it, Digvijay Singh reportedly said in Azamgarh that he would ask the PM to order an inquiry by the newly created National Intelligence Agency. This isn’t a good idea. The Delhi Police will strongly oppose it, justifiably worried that it could turn into a witch-hunt.
There’s a better precedent. After the 1993 Mumbai blasts, there were accusations of indiscriminate arrests and even extortion against the city police. Maharashtra handed over the case to the CBI, which conducted its own investigations and dropped charges against nearly two dozen accused. The rest were tried in court. So: transfer the entire IM case to a central agency, to be dealt with as those skilled CBI officers did then. If Shahzad had nothing to do with the IM and was en route to Australia to join a flying course, then he will be let off. If not, he will be tried. Ditto for all the other accused.
But the larger lesson is that there’s a world of difference between counter-terrorism and anti-underworld operations. Many policemen seem to confuse the two. Indiscriminate arrests and needless shoot-outs may turn nondescript officers into instant media celebrities. But they subvert the faith and support of local communities, an absolute necessity in the battle against urban terrorism.
Maybe police “conscientisation” programmes can include a study of a real police hero, the Mumbai Anti-Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare, who fell to terrorist bullets on 26/11. A few months before he died, some of his over-zealous officers provoked anger by misbehaving during raids in Muslim colonies in northern Mumbai. Karkare visited the areas during Ramzan, broke iftar bread with Muslims, apologised for the mistakes, promised it wouldn’t happen again, and asked for cooperation. “It was amazing to witness the transformation,” says human rights activist Teesta Setalvad, who accompanied him. “At one moment, the Muslims were resentful and angry. At another, they were excitedly promising Karkare they would do their utmost to help him nab terror suspects.”
Shrewdness, and not just bravado, will win the battle against terror.
The writer is a Delhi-based journalist

Friday, February 5, 2010

Q+A - Why has India offered talks to Pakistan? By Matthias Williams - Reuters



Q+A - Why has India offered talks to Pakistan?



Fri Feb 5, 2010 2:14pm IST

Photo
1 of 1Full Size






By Matthias Williams

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India has offered to hold official-level talks with Pakistan, 

signalling a return to bilateral dialogue suspended after the 2008 Mumbai attacks.



New Delhi blames the attacks, which killed 166 people, on Pakistan-based militants 

and wants Islamabad to act against them. The talks will be held at the level of the 

top diplomats of the two countries.



WHAT'S BEHIND INDIA'S MOVE?



New Delhi's earlier tough line -- no official talks with Pakistan until its neighbour gets serious

about tackling anti-India militants on its soil -- has not produced results more than a year after   

the Mumbai strike.



India may now feel a more nuanced approach that boosts the credibility of 

Pakistan's civilian government is preferable than making tough demands, which 

could be used as ammunition by hawks in the Pakistan government and the army.



Washington is also eager for improved India-Pakistan ties, as tension after the 

Mumbai strike diverted Islamabad's attention from fighting insurgents in 

Afghanistan and Pakistan.



WHAT'S AT STAKE IN THE TALKS?



Meaningful progress towards improved relations between India and Pakistan would 

be a relief for the United States, as it continues to pour money and troops into the 

region.



It would also calm nerves over a series of border skirmishes in recent weeks 

between India and Pakistan, who have been to war three times, twice over the 

disputed region of Kashmir and once over the founding of Bangladesh. Though a 

serious escalation is unlikely, the exchanges fuelled tensions between the two 

nuclear-armed rivals.



Having blamed some state agencies in Pakistan for having a hand in the Mumbai 

attacks, official level talks could lead to, in India's eyes, a stronger commitment   

from Pakistan to crack down on militants who want to train their guns on India.



IS SUCCESS LIKELY?



Though official-level talks are a big step-up from an earlier deep freeze on  

relations, any progress is likely to be slow.



There is no quick fix on Kashmir, which lies at the heart of their rivalry and which 

still remains a rallying cry for Kashmiri and Pakistan-based militants.



A further militant attack on Indian soil could send confidence levels into freefall 

once again. As if to underline the point, the U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates 

warned India might lose patience with Pakistan over another attack. 



WHAT IS THE POLITICAL FALLOUT FOR INDIA?



The Indian public and political opposition groups are sensitive to any hint of an 



Indian sellout towards its foe, and New Delhi's latest move has already sparked a 

backlash from some quarters.



The main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party has slammed the offer as premature, 

arguing Pakistan has done too little to earn India's generosity.



Though it grappling with a slew of domestic issues, most notably price rises, India's 

Congress-led government still has a lot of political capital to expend after a 

comfortable victory in last year's federal election.



WHAT'S AT STAKE FINANCIALLY?



Closer ties between India and Pakistan will be greeted positively by investors, but 

would not have a significant short-term market impact.



(Editing by Krittivas Mukherjee)

Thursday, February 4, 2010

The rot in Maharashtra By Pratap Bhanu Mehta - The Indian Express, Mumbai

 
 

The rot in Maharashtra


Pratap Bhanu MehtaTags : pratapbhanumehta, column
Posted: Friday , Feb 05, 2010 at 0104 hrs


Although there is growing opposition to the abominable grandstanding of the Shiv Sena on everything from the rights of migrants to Shah Rukh Khan, we are still not grasping the depth of the crisis we face. The crisis has several dimensions. Machiavelli once said, in his own inimitable way, that we should esteem a man who is liberal, not a man who decides to be so. Part of the difficulty is that the odour of opportunism vitiates the credibility of the opposition to Shiv Sena. The BJP has helped nurture the monster it is now trying to free itself from. The Congress has consistently been pusillanimous in confronting, if not complicit in, so much of the Sena’s rhetoric. And the NCP is, at one level, even more insidious than the Sena. Its style of political equivocation blocks
any effective action against the Sena’s agenda.
These trends also represent a profoundly deep crisis in Maharashtra politics. At one level, Maharashtra should have been a beacon of progressivism. It has dynamism, talent, extraordinary economic advantages. But to put it somewhat gracelessly, Maharashtra politics has become an ominous combination of crony capitalism and nativism. The two may be related. We often think of Maharashtra politicians, from Sharad Pawar to Shinde to the Thackerays as, in a sense, organic products of different social constituencies in the state. This may have been true at some point. But at this juncture they are all grasping at political straws. And this is so for a particular reason. Most political parties and their leaderships in Maharashtra now derive their power not from social forces, but from their ability to create a state-business nexus. Their power to mobilise political funds is immense, and most of them are focused largely on occupying that perch. Maharashtra has consistently had mediocre state governments at best, a fact disguised by the immense advantages of the state.
Pawar, once a politician of considerable promise, has proved to be one of the biggest spoilers in modern Indian politics. The Congress’s stewardship of the state wrecked a lot of the capacity in the state. And you have to wonder if it is any accident that the two most moribund ministries at the Centre are agriculture and power. In short, the political game in Maharashtra is leveraging the state for creating immense networks of power, wealth and influence, not imaginative governance.
In such circumstances, politicians are floundering for electoral platforms. The Sena at least had an ideology. The rest are in a precarious position. They do not have the confidence of performance or a social base. So in the face of the Sena upping the ideological ante, they stand paralysed. Their refusal to consistently take on the Sena is a tacit acknowledgement of their own complicity and weakness. Some appeal to nativism to disguise their sheer opportunism. Others are unable to resist it because their own track records don’t give them a leg to stand on. So there is nothing to break the default equilibrium of politics in the state.
The second dimension of this crisis is the blot it represents on our freedoms. We tend to see each episode of Sena mania in isolation: sometimes it is taxi drivers, sometimes Shah Rukh Khan. The Sena may be a weakening electoral force. But the price it extracts on our freedoms is immense. Its power to curtail discourse is extraordinary. What kind of a democracy will we be, if historians cannot freely write books on Shivaji? What does the tearing down of Shah Rukh Khan posters, the attempt to muzzle his voice, the intimidation of movie hall owners, not to mention the beating up of taxi drivers, represent? It is an attempt to subvert democracy in the most insidious way: intimidate public discourse. To be fair, the Sena is not alone in doing this; we have excused in several state governments similar attempts to muzzle public discourse.
The third dimension of the crisis is social. Elites set standards in any society. And the extraordinary social respectability, if not downright obsequiousness, with which the Sena leadership has been treated over the years has sent out the wrong message twice over. It has legitimised the illegitimate, and it has probably led people to overestimate the Sena’s power. Power is always odd, in that you have it if other people think you have it. The minute others stop believing it dissipates. We have let the Sena get away with this illusion by not standing up to it. No single political group or powerful social force in Maharashtra wanted to call the Sena’s bluff. It makes you wonder how many of us are liberals by conviction or how many are deciding to be so.
The final aspect of this crisis is the breakdown of state institutions. Banning books and publications is almost never a good idea, but in the context of Maharashtra one question needs to be asked. This is a state that bans books with dangerous alacrity, even books of genuine scholarship. Why the double standards when it comes to publications promoting enmity? The issue is not bans, the issue is the impartiality of the state. Second, the state cannot be trusted to provide even standard protections that ordinary citizens deserve, like being protected from intimidation. In such circumstances, small groups can have disproportionate effects in creating a climate of fear.
The Sena’s hold on the popular imagination is exaggerated. It is a consequence, not a cause, of our inability to stand up to it. Liberal values are seldom subverted because of the strength of popular opinion against them. They are subverted because well-meaning people in positions of power equivocate. And elements of discourse elsewhere legitimise what the Sena is doing: targeting artists and writers has been staple sport in states ranging from West Bengal to Gujarat. The drive towards creating a nativist identity is a temptation in many states that have nothing else to go on. Expressing local and vernacular identity is one thing. Converting it into small-mindedness quite another. The very innocent move towards renaming cities and states has not been a harbinger of cultural expression; it has rather been a signifier of shrinking horizons.
The good news is that sociological trends suggest that most citizens are rejecting nativism; they want access to a wider world, whether it is through language or mobility. But it has not stopped politicians from playing that card. Maharashtra
is important not because the Thackerays can break India. They cannot. But it is important because its politics can be one possible future for India, an India where liberal values are in jeopardy.

The writer is president, Centre for Policy Research, Delhi

Vitol - Masefield AG - Sonia Gandhi $16.8 m

http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:3BJhf5KJrvkJ:intellibriefs.blogspot.com/2005_11_06_archive.html+The+Indian+Fraternity+Forum,+Doha+Qatar+%2B+Hasan+Chogle&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=in



NOVEMBER 11, 2005

Vitol - Masefield AG - Sonia Gandhi $16.8 m

Oil or grease? Vitol - Masefield AG - Sonia Gandhi (one million barrels $16.8 m)
Here are the key contact details for Vitol. In the chart appended to the Deccan Chronicle report (Nov. 12, 2005), Volcker report cites the LCs assigned by BNP Paribas SA for each oil lift, and information sourcd through SECO.



Volcker report Table 4 notes two contracts and two LCs.


1. Contract No. M/10/57 (LC N 731924); and Table 3 provides details of Non-contractual beneficiaries. On this LC, VOlcker report claims Masefild AG lifted oil against contract M/10/57 for a non-contractual beneiciaty it claims was the CONGRESS.
2. Contract No. M/09/54 (LC D726806); and Table 3 of Volcker Report claims Masefild AG lifted oil against contract M/09/54 for a non-contractual beneficiary it claims was former external affairs minister NATWAR SINGH.

Now the questions to be answered by Antonia Maino (aka Sonia Gandhi, President of Congress Party) are:

1. When did Congress Party register with Govt. of India as a oil-dealer or oil-broker?

2. Why is Congress Party interested in acquiring oil?

3. Is it unhappy with the likes of Reliance or IOC or other oil companies operating in Bharat?

4. Is Congress Party a public or private limited or privately-held company?

It is one thing to claim comraderie between Baathist Party and Congress Party as two parties representing two great civilizations (assuming that the representation is true); it is quite another to follow up the two letters Sonia Gandhi (aka Antonia Maino, President of Congress Party) wrote to Saddam Hussein with special meetings between Natwar Singh (and his comrades) with Tareeq Aziz and Saddam Hussein.

What benefit did Bharat receive from this international dealing by Congress Party without getting prior permission from the 'executive' branch of the then government in powe in Bharat to meet foreign dignitaries in Iraq?

Sonia, aka Antonia, come clean. There is a lot of cleaning-up called for. Pathak commission or inquiry authority will not be this clean-up.

5. Why hasn't an FIR beeen lodged against the President of Congress Party in this act of financial impropriety causing loss to the nation's exchequer?

6. Answer this simple question of fact: did Congress Party did or did not receive the benefit cited in Volcker Reprot as a non-contractual beneficiary, through Masefield AG/Vitol financial link-up? (We are assuming that oil did get delivered by the Congress Party).

7. What oil? What grease?



Vitol Asia Pte Ltd., India Liaison Office
617 Maker Chambers V, 6th Floor, 221 Jamnalal Bajaj Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 India
Tel (91 22) 2288 5615
Tel (91 22) 2287 5069
Tel (91 22) 2283 1843
Fax (91 22) 2287 5070
Tlx 1183786

A VITOL CLUE


New Delhi, Nov. 11: The Volcker Committee report on the Iraq-oil-for-food programme has alleged that a global oil trading company named Vitol is the "underlying financier" for the oil barrels allegedly lifted by Masefield AG of Switzerland.


Masefield is the company that the Volcker report claimed had lifted oil for the Congress and former external affairs minister K. Natwar Singh, who it listed as "non-contractual beneficiaries" in the Iraq oil-for-food programme.


The UN-ordered probe report defines "underlying financier" as the "entity or party assuming financial responsibility for letters of credit (LC) used to buy oil in the programme..." A letter of credit links a company to the recipients of moneys.


Vitol is a global company involved in physical oil marketing with offices in many countries. It has an India liaison office at Maker Chambers V, Nariman Point, Mumbai. When the Vitol India liaison office was contacted by this newspaper in Mumbai on Friday, a Mr Sumeru Hattiramani there said he knew nothing of this matter and referred this newspaper to their Singapore office.


The office of Vitol Singapore Pte Ltd, when called, said it would not comment on anything and asked for a written set of questions to be faxed to them. This was done on Friday and this newspaper was awaiting a response from them at the time of going to press.


Both, the Congress and Mr Natwar Singh, have repeatedly denied any connection to the Iraq oil-for-food programme. The Volcker report has said the persons or entities who made surcharge payments may not have been aware that their payments were in contravention of the UN guidelines for the oil-for-food programme.


Table 3 of the Volcker report, titled "Non-Contractual Beneficiaries", has given contract number M/10/57 for the transaction it claimed involved Masefield AG and for which it alleged the Congress party was the "non-contractual beneficiary". In the case of its allegations against Mr Natwar Singh, the Volcker Committee says one of two contract numbers for the oil transactions was M/09/54. Both contract numbers next appear in Table 4, titled "Known Underlying Oil Financiers", and are listed under "Underlying Financier VITOL". The entries in Table 4 also mention Masefield AG as the "contracting company".


Table 4 claims Vitol was the "underlying financier" for the contracting company Masefield AG for "contract number M/10/57". Against this, it lists letter of credit number N731924 for the lifting of 1,000,896 barrels of oil for LC amount $16,808,457. This is the same contract number as that listed under the Congress party's name (against Masefield AG) in Table 3 of non-contractual beneficiaries.
Against contract number M/09/54 it lists letter of credit number D726806 for contracting firm Masefield AG for the lifting of 300,000 barrels of oil for LC amount $5,669,919. This contract number is the same as that listed under Mr Natwar Singh's name (against Masefield AG) in Table 3 of non-contractual beneficiaries.