Daily Excelsior... Editorial

EDITORIAL

By Omkar Dattatray
Eversince the unfortunate division of the country and the birth of theocratic State of Pakistan in August 1947 due to the pro-Mulsim fervour of Late Jinnah ..more

Pakistan : The Mohajir -Sindhi feud

By Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri
The fierce ethnic hostilities that broke out in Karachi and other parts of Sindh on August 28, although a recurrent phenomenon in Pakistan, have once again brought ..more

Ayurvedic research :
Need of the hour

By Jabina Bano
Ayurvedic Research is as old as Vedas. The full vedic studies will reveal all the methods of maintaining our health. We are now in the 21st Century, but still have miles to go ahead in Ayurvedic.....more

EDITORIAL

BROADBASED

Even before the proposed dialogue with some secessionist and militant groups get underway, there are many heart-burns manifesting abundantly. There are some who question the desirability of dialogue with those who have brought the State to present sorry pass. There are others who are hurt since they have borne the major brunt of insurgency all these years in terms of elimination of their cadres and leaders. There is another section that has strong reservations of falling in the trap that could take the State to the situation as it prevailed in 1989-90 when Kashmir was almost lost. Within the defence forces there are murmurs due to escalation in their casualty rate during the month of ceasefire with all the concomitant problems. Within the Hurriyat itself there are hawks and moderates, the former not ready to yield even an inch as regards its stance for merger with Pakistan. In fact, prominent Hurriyat leader Mr Geelani has gone to the extent of blaming it all on so-called 'secularist' forces. But for their role, there would not have been Kashmir problem implying that Kashmir would have gone to Pakistan all the same. Even when it comes to constitution of delegation to visit Pakistan, Hurriyat leadership is unable to decide and likes to throw the ball back in the court of the Central Government.

As on now the official line is that those who sincerely want peace in Kashmir and seek resolve of 53 year old issue should be encouraged. This is tantamount to isolating the hawks i.e. pro-Pak elements who believe that talks and even talk of peace is a sell-out. Obviously common man is puzzled asto what all this is about. Who is talking to whom and for what. And where are the talks by the way? If such be the confusion even on the mention of talks, one really does not know where such talks would lead to if at all it makes some headway. Such dilly-dallying on every body's part creates apprehensions in the minds of the people. It happens at a time when they need strong leadership that can guide them properly. When leadership itself is confused and know not which way the wind is likely to blow, predicament of the common man can indeed be gauged. They begin to feel that talks or no-talks situation refuses to improve. Going through the front page slots of all the dailies, it is certain that violent acts of the militants have escalated. This emboldens them to take their war right into the national capital and elsewhere in the country. Incidentally all this happened, call it deterioration, at time when large successes were being logged by the security forces. It emboldened the ruling hierarchy to claim that they have gained upper hand and ordered ceasefire from position of strength. One begins to doubt such claims now. Those gains stands frittered away without making any headway towards dialogue.

At this stage it is as well open to question asto real intentions of Hurriyat, divided as it is between hawks and moderates. Could such a divided mission succeed in Pakistan? The mission has objectives of pursuading Pak rulers to allow peace a chance and seek ultimate resolve of the Kashmir imbroglio. The reports from other side of LoC are however quite disturbing. First, 15-outfit Jehad Council mocks at the very idea of peace and talks and say that ceasefire means nothing to it. They in fact vow to accelerate attacks and terrorist acts. Musharraf says he can control his army but not these 'Tanzeems' (terrorist outfits). Lashkar-e-Toiba claims possession of Chinese made ground to air missiles already positioned in the State. After jaish-e-Mohammad, it is the turn of Al Badr Mujahideen to order more attacks. Jehad Council has also ordered replacement of pro-peace Hizb commanders with pro-war ones. Will they listen to Hurriyat delegation? In fact, they will not even talk unless Geelani is also part of the delegation whose pro-Pak intentions are no secret. He pronounces these everyday.

With the above contours and limitations, there is now the ingress of various shades of opinion who do not wish to be sidetracked or kept in the dark about the envisaged talks. It is certain that they have got to be part of any meaningful dialogue. You can bracket them all as 'pro-India' elements who cannot be ignored. Be it the ruling National Conference or the mainstream national parties like the BJP and Congress or the KPs or any other regional outfit like PDP. All of them have large stakes in any talks. As on date there is mention of talking to only those who have been pro-Pak all these years. There is also that mention of who represents the people in this wretched State. Surely, these are the elected representatives who cannot be sidetracked. In fact, Home Minister Advani has mentioned that there will be wide-interaction and consultation with all those who matter in the State. He also stated that Hurriyat cannot be the sole representative of the people. It is so because they have never participated in electoral process. In fact, they are privy to edicting boycott of elections. Even now under pressure from Hizbul Mujahideen they have done the same thing as regards Panchayat elections. It clearly shows their mindset based on pro-conceived notions. In fact many of them have become prisoners of their own conscience knowing not which way to go- with the people, with Pakistan or with India. That is sufficient reason for a very broadbased dialogue rather than keeping it confined to some hand-picked which would yield nothing but chaos.

''VISION''

Yet another document titled 'Vision' has been released at the 88th Indian Science Congress. It is by far the most hopeful document as regards making India poverty-free by the year 2020. It makes some suggestions in technical terminology which are beyond the understanding of common man asto how this target can be realised. It thus poses more questions which have defied answers all these post-independence years. The first question is what India could not achieve during the last 53 years under mostly single party stable rule, how it can do it in next 20 years in an era of coalition culture which is full of contradictions. 'Vision' talks of synergisation of Science and technology, organisations and public policy. Such synergisation has been totally lacking even on vital issues like liberalisation, empowerment of women, enactment of law on the pattern of TADA etc. The latest is road connectivity programme whence every village with a population of 500 and above is to be connected with pacca road in next 7 years. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister fires a two-page missive to Prime Minister opposing the same tooth and nail in as much as identification of such villages and implementation is concerned. He wants all this to be left to the respective States which means money should be placed at the disposal of States. Other States would demand similar treat. Thus, this Rs 60,000 crore programme gets bogged down in Centre-State relations. Next comes the literacy drive which is prelude to removal of penury and other ills that afflict the society. Except working papers nothing tangible has emerged. Same is true of National Population Policy. With all these contradictions and individual aberrations, removal of penury from India by 2020 is a far-fetched 'Vision'. At best one can hope it by 2045 when population stability is expected. Removal of unemployment is also directly co-related to population control. In its absence no 'Vision' can succeed.

LoC as the International Border

By Omkar Dattatray

Eversince the unfortunate division of the country and the birth of theocratic State of Pakistan in August 1947 due to the pro-Mulsim fervour of Late Jinnah that country has been at logger heads with India. The cunning tactics of British and their covert support to Muslim leaders culminated into creation of Pakistan much against the wishes of the Congress. Thus started the seeds of bitterness and enemity between the two states. Basically, the short sightedness of Nehru and his mishandling of the Kashmir while the unification of the princily states lead to the emergence of Kashmir problem. Not only this, due to his wrong policy the problem became an international one. After a lapse of more than fifty years since independence the two neighbouring countries are still staring at each other territory and are virtually big foes in sough Asia. Pakistan has thrusted three full scale wars on India on 1947, 1965, 1971 respectively but each time that country had to eat a humble pie as they were miserably defeated. They want to annex Kashmir but could not do so by resorting to wars and thus they engineered Islamic fundamentalism, religious bigotry, militancy and terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir from last over a decade. In the name of so-called Jihad they incited and trained Kashmiri youth to fight a war with the rulers of India and thus liberate Kashmir. Much human blood has been spilled all these years of turmoil and this dance of death, destruction and devastation still continues. Economic development, educational prosperity and communal harmony came to a grinding halt due to decade long trouble instig-ated and actively supported by the ISI of Pakistan. Rape, loot and plunder is going on in the Valley without any forceable halt. Besides, Pakistan resorted to Kargil misadventure with an eye on Kashmir and in that they miserably failed and were diplomatically isolated in the world community. All the wars, Kargil misadventure and proxy war has eaten into the economic vitals of India and Pakistan and their defence budgets are mounting year after year. Diversion of funds towards unproductive defence needs in both the countries is depriving their people of the basic necessities of life. The result is that India and Pakistan are still counted as the backward nations in the globe. Enormous human, material economic, social, cultural, educational and even technological and scientific loss has accrued to India and Pakistan due to Kashmir dispute which remains unresolved. India being the apostle of peace and non-violence wants good and friendly relations with Pakistan but our hand of friendship, goodwill and peace has always been negated by the successive rulers of Pakistan. Even the names - sake democratic dispensation of Pakistan has never responded, positively to our offer of peace and goodwill.

They have flouted and disobeyed with impunity the much about Simla Pact of 1972, Delhi declaration and the much praised Lahore Declarations and even all norms of civilized behaviour as was seen during Kargil incursion of Pakistan. Simla agreement aimed at peaceful settlement of the Kashmir issue bilaterally between India and Pakistan without the intervention of any third party. The problem of Kashmir remains elusive and is taking a heavy toll of human lives and the security lives on both sides. Time has come when both India and Pakistan should stop nursing false hopes and expectations. They should not cloud their reason and logic with passion and should desist from exploiting the masses in the two States. Both the countries should think rationally and logically and come to a negotiating table for a viable and practical solution of the Kashmir mess. Utopian and illusory dream of Pakistan and India harm the people in both the countries. The fact remains that neither India nor Pakistan will surrender an inch of the land under their occupation to either. It follows that they will never allow to alter their political maps. So within these ground realities, the practical, viable and workable solution has to be found to solve the core issue between the two States. The present peace initiative in the form of cease fire operation should pave the way for a lasting solution of Kashmir issue. It is a healthy sign that Pakistan has for the first time responded somewhat favourably by asking its rangers to exercise maximum restraint, along the line of actual control. But it is not enough for making atmosphere conducive and desirable for a meaningful political dialogue. What is required is that they should ask their Jehadies to respect cease fire initiative and stop killing in the Valley. It is hoped that Pakistan will reciprocate more positively by stopping terrorism in J&K as the movement in the State has been hijacked by Pakistan and the local youth have no significant say in resolving the trouble. In such a situation our cease fire initiative should get a more positive nod from Pakistan. But for any meaningful settlement of the ticklish issue of Kashmir, it is imperative that the parties to the dispute must see the writing on the wall and resume talks with each other. The only practical solution lies in converting of line of actual control into permanent international border in which lies the good of the people of both sides. Much water has flown eversince the accession of J&K to the Indian Union and the people of J&K State have used their right of franchise which in fact is their expression of assent on the finality of their accession to India. Pak occupied Kashmir is meted with discrimination and disdain by the Pak rulers. It is incumbent upon Pak rulers to address to the genuine demands of the people of the occupied Kashmir. The right of self determination of Kashmiris and the much controversial plebiscite as well as Indian resolution of the vacation of PoK by Pakistan are all outdated and impractical proposals and thus need not to be pursued by either parties for the genuine settlement of the problem. Thus plebiscite and liberation of PoK are utopian and only political stunts to pressurise each other. Besides, they are the vote catching devices in the two countries. Both the countries keep Kashmir Card boiling just to divert the attention of the gullible masses in their State from the pressing problems which matter and demand topmost attention of the establishments. The need is that both Pakistan and India should raise above petty consideration and should bury the enmity of last half a century and should start meaningful and practical parleys for solving the complex problem. The Kashmir ulcer has in fact become fatal and concerous and so there should be no laxity in addressing to this disease otherwise, it will consume both the nations. The Chief Minister, Dr Farooq Abdullah has rightly favoured a solution of Kashmir problem by converting the LoC into permanent international border. He is the great advocate of this alternative to solve the problem. In the face of the ground realities in the two countries, it is necessary to negotiate round the practical theme of converting the Line of Actual Control into permanent border to salvage both the countries from men, material and human losses. In this lies the future of two nations. Let us resolve to live like brothers as being the inheritors of the great Ganga Jammana Tahzeeb.

Pakistan : The Mohajir -Sindhi feud

By Satyabrata Rai Chowdhuri

The fierce ethnic hostilities that broke out in Karachi and other parts of Sindh on August 28, although a recurrent phenomenon in Pakistan, have once again brought into focus the failure of the military junta to find a solution to the long-standing problems and grievances of a large section of population- the Mohajirs. These problems are linked with larger issues of economic justice and political autonomy. Until and unless problems are honestly addressed, peace will never return to this province and amity among different ethnic groups will remain a chimerical goal.

The Mohajirs were in the forefront of the movement for Pakistan, but unfortunately for them, the land of Islam, as envisioned by them, was formed elsewhere in the north-east and north-west of erstwhile British India, not in the Muslim minority provinces where this movement was spearheaded. Imbued with immense political aspirations, the Muslims of these provinces migrated from India to live in the land of their dreams, which was nurtured and created by them. Though they were termed as refugees, they were actually migrants since there was no compulsion for them to leave their home other than the objective of living in their ''holy state'' created by them. They had never any objection to their reference as ''Mohajirs' because this term was associated with the 'hijrat' or migration of Prophet Mohammad from Mecca to Madina. The Mohajirs took great pride in this term that had a religious connotation and was, thus, legitimate and contextually appropriate in a country created on the basis of religion.

The Mohajirs who migrated to Pakistan in search of greener pastures were mostly bureaucrats, businessmen, and rich landlords who expected to retain their predominant position in Pakistani society and politics. In the initial phase, they were coopted by the dominant Punjabi feudal class in their struggle for power and a place in the newly created political structure. Within a short time they not only sidelined other minion but also were politically predominant due to their role in the creation of Pakistan

Almost all the Mohajirs migrated to Karachi which being the capital of the newly created State could provide all the benefits and opportunities that are associated with a capital city. Karachi was not only the power centre of the new State but also a port city and the businessmen among the Mohajirs wanted to settle there because of the transportation and business facilities. In 1948, Karachi was separated from Sindh as the capital thus providing the Mohajirs with a territorial identity to their hitherto political identity.

The Mohajirs, along with the Punjabis, became well entrenched in the emerging power equation of Pakistan and their position was further strengthened with the declaration of Urdu as the national language.

Thus the new State had a dominant power elite confined to a particular section of society firmly rooted in ethnicity. The Mohajirs were well educated civil servants and were politically more articulate along with the Punjabis and thus were at the helm of affairs in Pakistan's administrative structure. They were urbanites in contrast to the predominantly rural population of the State. The political articulation of the Mohajirs became evident in the movement against Ayub's regime in 1968-69, the Pakistan National Alliance (PNA) movement of Bhutto, and the Movement for Restoration of Democracy (MRD) against Zia.

Soon the interests of the Mohajirs, comprising 24.2 per cent of the population of Sindh, came into direct clash with those of the Sindhis who comprised 55.7 per cent of the population. This Sindhi-Mohajir divide was based on the competition for the ethnic control of economic benefits through access to employment and education. Most of the Sindhis were landless tenants dependent on big landlords for their sustenance and survival. Due to half-hearted and inadequate land reforms, they had no escape from the socio-economic reality of deprivation. The landless Sindhis, in their quest for employment in the governemnt, faced stiff competition from the urbanite Mohajirs who had strong linkage in the bureaucracy which was important given the level of corruption. As ethnicity only strengthened such linkages, the struggle for employment embittered the relations between the ethnic communities.

To make things worse, the imposition of Urdu as the national language alienated the Sindhis while hightening the cultural pride and superiority of the Mohajirs who never failed to overplay their role in the creation of Pakistan. This is the reason why the Mohajirs' resistance to ethnic assimilation has been so strong that there is hardly any common ground to meet the societal parameter of different communities living in Sindh.

As a result, the social gap between the two predominant communities in Sindh began to widen with the linguistic and cultural difference. According to 1981 census, 52 per cent of the population of Sindh consisted of those whose first language was Sindhi and only 22 per cent spoke Urdu. This reflects on the fallacy of the linguistic policy of the government which alienated the indigenous people in their own province.

The Sindh politics after 1971 was characterised by inter-ethnic competition for power and the Mohajirs found themselves marginalised, given the dynamics of the emerging power equations. As foreign educated groups from the landowing class virtually monopolised privileged positions in the bureaucracy, the Mohajirs' clout with the government began to wane. They did not have the political constituency to fight elections from and they lacked social roots for mass mobilisation. For more than two decades they were junior partners of the military masters who had substantially alienated themselves from the masses with whom they had neither social linkages nor political affiliations.

In 1972, the declaration of Sindhi as the official language of Sindh further constrained the socio-economic aspirations of Mohajirs. All this had resulted in the fact that the Mohajirs were now a disgruntled section of the population of Sindh. With the erosion of the Mohajirs' domination, their discontent and frustration gave rise to mounting tension between the two communities leading to frequent outbreak of violence between them. Sindh thus became a hotbed of fierce ethnic conflict.

The Mohajirs' disenchantment and grievances were reflected on the Charter of Demands presented by the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) to the government. The Quota system in government services is one of the major gievances of the Mohajirs. At present, 10 per cent of the quota is awarded on the basis of merit, 50 per cent for Punjab and 19 per cent for Sindh, of which 11.4 per cent is for rural Sindh and 7.6 per cent for urban Sindh, 11.5 per cent for Sarhad, 3.5 per cent for Baluchistan, and the rest for Pak-occupied Kashmir and federally administered tribal areas (FATA). The grievance of the Mohajirs in Sindh is that these regional quotas need readjustment because the population has increased over a period of time. They also demand to be recognised as a separate nationality and allotted 20 percent quota at the Centre, and between 50 and 60 percent in Sindh, to be shared only by Sindhis and Mohajirs.

Among other grievances, the Mohajirs have taken up the issue of repatriation of the Biharis (stranded Pakistanis in complications. The issue of where these people are going to be settled is an explosive question. The Sindhis will resist their settlement in Sindh because it will strengthen the Mohajirs' clout in Sindh, since both Mohajirs and Biharis have the same political similarity- 'migrants from India'.

The MQM's charter of demands includes: issue of domicile certificates to people who have lived in Sindh for 20 years and the Biharis are to be exempted from such requirements; only locals are to be recruited in the police force; issue of arms licenses, shifting of Afghan refugees to the camps near the border; provision of employment by the government to tackle the influx of people; restriction of voting rights only to the locals; lowering of voting age; job quota to be shared by Sindhis and Mohajirs on the basis of population; recognition of Mohajirs as a sub-nationality in the constitution and the immediate repatriation of the Biharis.

While the Mohajirs are agitating for the fulfilment of their dmands, violence in Karachi and other parts of Sindh are going up unabated with new forces emerging. The feud now involves criminal gangs, Sunni and Shia Muslims, native Sindhis and Mohajirs, and rival factions of the Mohajir community. In this inter and intra ethnic fights sophisticated arms are being freely used. Extortion and illicit drug trafficking are part of normal business and have flourished under the cover of police-crminal nexus. This in turn has added to the violence making it more and more bloody.
PTI Feature