Editorial

Security

Politics

World

Letters

Sports

Obituaries

Archives

by Kuldip Nayar

INDIA does not seem to be conscious of the role it has to play in South Asia in the coming years. It is not about thwarting the Chinese influence against which Jawaharlal Nehru warned the region after the Sino-India war in 1962. India's predicament is going to be how to help the neighbouring countries that are afflicted with one problem or the other.

The biggest challenge is the lack of democracy in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and the Maldives which, along with Sri Lanka and Bhutan, comprise the SAARC. Whatever name the nations may give to their polity, it is deficient in freedom and restricts the people's say. The system is authoritarian in tone and tenor and caters to fundamentalism or other lesser instincts of man to justify itself.

It is not that one was not aware of such distortions, but the half-yearly bureau meeting of the South Asian Human Rights (SAHR) in Delhi a few days ago brought home the truth once again. The bureau members from different countries made no secret of the fear and the sense of insecurity in which they lived. They admitted that their government was all time lessening space for people and imposing ever-new draconian measures to suppress freedom.

In SAHR they have a forum transcending borders and religions to voice their grievances collectively and help one another recover their dignity and liberty. The organization is roughly five years old.

Nobel Prize winner Amritya Sen talks about it in glowing terms in his latest book, The Argumentative India. He says, "these citizens' meetings, whenever organized, tend to attract extensive participation. Just as India and Pakistan seemed to be heading for a violent military confrontation."

At the two-day meeting of SAHR last week, one could feel the participants' intensity of pain as they told their tales of woe. It was the same story in every country - the story of the nexus between anti-social elements and the rulers, between the corrupt and the political bosses.

Still all eyes were fixed on India which they considered an oasis in the desert of their blighted hopes. A Pakistani delegate said: "Good relations with India may bring us back democracy." India's open society, despite the welter of confusion and conflict in which its people lived, made them believe that they could also one day move away from the military or monarch-guided democracy to real democracy.

What was heartening about their anguish was the note of optimism in their observations. The delegate from Bangladesh, who initiated the discussion, singled out two developments for the deterioration of the situation in her country. One, she said, was the rise of terrorism and religious extremism and, two, the incidence of extra-judicial killings.

This was over and above traditional political intolerance, repression of the opposition and the politicization of government servants within the overall environment of widespread corruption.

The Bangladesh delegate said that according to intelligence, police and media reports, there were some 30 religious militant organizations in the country operating since 1989 with the central objective of establishing an Islamic state.

Many of their activists were Afghan and Palestine veterans. Libya reportedly trained about 7,000 of them in the late seventies and the early eighties. After stints in Afghanistan, Palestine and Libya, they returned to Bangladesh and enlarged their network.

Of the 30 leading religious extremist groups, seven operating extensively were: Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh, Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh, Harkatul Jihad, Shahadat Al Hikma, Hizbul Touhid, Hizb-ul-Tahrir and Islami Biplobi Parishad.

The government of Khalida Zia was showing some signs of awakening to the situation, the Bangladesh delegate said. But it was too early to say how seriously the government would actually pursue the extremists because they were the coalition partners of the ruling party. The biggest question facing the government was how to give shape to the relationship with the Jamaat-i-Islami, the major partner. More and more evidence is indicating the Jamaat's links with extremists.

To root out extremism, Khalida Zia would have to strike against the Jamaat. She could not afford to do so when elections were just a year away. Asked if Bangladesh could go Pakistan's way, the delegate said that a Pervez Musharraf could emerge and rule, keeping parliament as a showpiece.

The Pakistan delegate felt that governance by Musharraf would become rather difficult since people felt that the army had failed to provide aid to the quake victims when it was needed most. Musharraf was giving more and more space to the mullahs in order to retain his uniform. The delegate said that people enjoyed no freedom and lately even the press had been under pressure.

The delegation from Nepal quoted extensively from the report of the office of the high commission for human rights. The country had been experiencing "a grave human rights crisis" for a long time.

There were extra-judicial executions, indiscriminate shooting or bombing leading to the deaths of civilians, threats to members of the local population accused of providing the Maoists with food or shelter and the use of civilians under duress as informers, thereby placing them at risk of facing reprisals by the Maoists. "Arbitrary arrest and detention, closely linked to cases of disappearance, were among the most common violations," said the three-member delegation.

The king was seen as a problem, not a solution. New Delhi was accused of playing a double game, giving military assistance to Kathmandu on the one hand and offering assurances to political parties for democratic structure on the other. The delegation conceded that the political parties in Nepal had yet to iron out their differences.

Sri Lanka's representative said that the democracy was dying in his country because extremist elements, among Buddhist monks, were joining politics. It was conceded that the distance between the Sinhalese and the Tamils had not been spanned, although both increasingly felt that they had to live together. India could do a lot and "put pressure on Tamils" said the Sri Lankan delegation while underlining the "indifference of New Delhi. If ever there was any settlement, it would have to be through India."

The Indian delegation admitted that the problem of fundamentalism, terrorism and political opportunism beleaguered them as much as it tormented other countries in the region. It had a free society but it was becoming increasingly lawless because of power politics.

The economic growth of 8.1 per cent had not licked poverty, although a new legislation for full employment assured half of rural India 150 days of jobs in a year.

Discussions at the SAHR bureau conclave did not throw up any collective idea to check the violation of the rule of law or human rights in South Asia. Nor was there any confidence that democracy could be restored in all the countries in the region. Yet, there was a resolve to deepen democracy in South Asia, SAHR's priority till the end of November 2006 when its general body meets in New Delhi.

(Courtesy: Dawn)

| News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security |
| Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries | Junior Observer |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager