Dear Friend,
In a scathing denouncement of CAA, the lawmakers have drafted a formal five-page resolution to be tabled during the plenary session of the European Parliament starting in Brussels next week
Kindly support honest journalism to survive. https://countercurrents.org/subscription/
If you think the contents of this news letter are critical for the dignified living and survival of humanity and other species on earth, please forward it to your friends and spread the word. It's time for humanity to come together as one family! You can subscribe to our news letter here http://www.countercurrents.org/news-letter/.
In Solidarity
Binu Mathew
Editor
Countercurrents.org
154 European Union lawmakers draft stunning anti-CAA resolution
by Mala Jay
In a scathing denouncement of CAA, the lawmakers have drafted a formal five-page resolution to be tabled during the plenary
session of the European Parliament starting in Brussels next week
In a scathing denouncement of CAA, the lawmakers have drafted a formal five-page resolution to be tabled during the plenary session of the European Parliament starting in Brussels next week
India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) could trigger the “largest statelessness crisis in the world and cause widespread human suffering”, a powerful group of 154 European Parliament members have warned.
In a scathing denouncement of CAA, the lawmakers have drafted a formal five-page resolution to be tabled during the plenary session of the European Parliament starting in Brussels next week.
The proposed resolution not only describes the CAA as “discriminatory and dangerously divisive” but also a violation of India’s “international obligations” under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other Human Rights treaties to which New Delhi is a signatory.
The 154 lawmakers belong to the ‘S&D Group’ – a progressive forum of MEPs from 26 EU countries, recognised as the second-largest political caucus in the European Parliament. They are committed to upholding social justice and democratic values such as Equality, Diversity and Fairness.
Significantly the draft resolution also refers pointedly to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, to which India is also bound.
This is in the context of their observation that the adoption of the CAA “has sparked massive protests against its implementation, with 27 reported deaths, 175 injured and thousands arrested and reports that the Indian government has ordered internet shutdowns, imposed curfews and placed limits on public transportation to prevent peaceful protests”.
Moreover, “reports have emerged of hundreds of protesters being beaten, shot, and tortured, in particular in Uttar Pradesh”.
The draft resolution notes that on January 5, 2020, the campus of Jawaharlal Nehru University, where students were protesting against the CAA and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), was attacked by a masked mob that injured over 20 students and teachers from the University.
It says various media reports and students have alleged that the police stood witness to the attack and refused to control and arrest the mob, about which the international community, including the UN, has already expressed concerns regarding the CAA and the violence that it has sparked. It quotes the spokesperson for the UN High Commission for Human Rights as having expressed concern that the CAA is ‘fundamentally discriminatory in nature’.
The S&D Group has pointed out that CAA was amended ostensibly to enable irregular migrants to acquire Indian citizenship through naturalisation and registration. However the CAA restricts eligibility to only Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who entered India on or before 31 December 2014. “The CAA is explicitly discriminatory in nature as it specifically excludes Muslims from having access to the same provisions as other religious groups”, it says.
Further, whereas the Indian Government has stated that the countries listed in the CAA are Muslim-majority countries where minority religions are more likely to face persecution in their home countries, thus using this as justification for fast-tracked citizenship, but India shares a border with Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burma, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka – “yet the CAA does not bring Sri Lankan Tamils under its purview, who form the largest refugee group in India and who have been resident in the country for over thirty years”.
Moreover, CAA also excludes Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar, who have been described by Amnesty International and the United Nations as the world’s most persecuted minority; and also ignores the plight of Ahmadis in Pakistan, Bihari Muslims in Bangladesh, and the Hazaras of Pakistan, all of whom are subject to persecution in their home countries.
According to the S&D Group, the CAA contradicts Article 14 of India’s own Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality to every person and protects them from discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
In effect, the amended law “undermines India’s commitment to uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ICCPR and the Convention for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, to which India is a State party, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of racial, ethnic or religious grounds”.
The draft resolution states that the CAA was enacted during the Government’s push for a nationwide citizenship verification process (the NRC). “The Government’s statements revealed that the aim of the NRC process was to strip Muslims of their citizenship rights while protecting those of Hindus and other non-Muslims” and “whereas Muslims who are not included in the NRC will have recourse to the Foreigners’ Tribunals that have been established to determine the right to citizenship, these tribunals have been internationally condemned for failing to protect the right to a fair trial and human rights guarantees”.
It notes that although the Indian Government has stated that it is yet to start a nationwide NRC, this exercise was recently concluded in Assam and “resulted in the exclusion of more than 1.9 million people and has been used to label them as illegal migrants, who now face an uncertain future and possible deportation”.
Several Indian States have already announced that they would not implement the law and the Government of Kerala, in its petition to the Supreme Court, called the CAA ‘a violation of the secular nature of the Indian Constitution’ and accused the federal Indian Government of ‘dividing the nation on religious lines’.
The draft resolution “denounces the fact that India has incorporated religious criteria into its naturalization and refugee policies … and calls on the Indian Government to address the legitimate concerns raised over the NRC, which may be used to target marginalised groups”.
It also calls on the Indian authorities to ensure the right to peaceful protest and to guarantee the life and physical integrity of those who choose to demonstrate and also to ensure that the security forces comply with the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.
Originally published in National Herald
Seven Decades Of The Decaying Republic: Indian Democracy Unmasked
by Dr KS Sharma
https://countercurrents.org/2020/01/seven-decades-of-the-decaying-republic-indian-democracy-unmasked
Let us not forget, the Second Independence struggle has commenced. Let us take it to its logical end.
( Text of a Plenary Lecture at ISSA by Dr. KS Sharma is given below, on the eve of 70 years of Indian Republic. 43rd Indian Social Science Congress was held, by the Indian Social Science Academy-ISSA, January 17-21, 2020, at Bengaluru Central University, attended by hundreds of scientists and social scientists from all over India.
It was held with the Focal Theme, Current Science Of Nature-Human-Society In India.
The ISSA believes all sciences are social, and division between social and natural sciences is artificial, as they are indivisible.
This Paper was presented by Dr.K.S. Sharma, who was a past President, Indian Social Science Academy, as a Plenary Lecture on January 19, 2020. )
*** ***
This Paper is being presented on the eve of the Indian Republic stepping into the 71st Year on 26th January 2020, and is aimed at expounding what happened during the past seven decades of the Republic and is entitled: “A Critique: Seven Decades Of The Decaying Republic: Indian Democracy Unmasked.”
The title may appear a little harsh, but portrays the hard and incontrovertible facts that have transpired in the last seventy years after the Constitution of India was promulgated on 26th January 1950.
This paper, begins with a peep into pre-1950, with a view to enable a clear understanding of the origin of the Indian Constitution, which only would help us to understand the character of the Constitution and throw new light on the actual on-goings in this country, and then make a quick survey into the farce encompassing the Five goals incorporated in the Preamble of the Constitution, I.e., Secular, Socialist, Democratic, Sovereign, Republic, and then expound three other concepts Nationalism or Fascism, Left Opportunism, Erosion of Constitutionalism presenting A Blue-Print for the Future.
Thus this Paper makes a ten-fold presentation under the following heads:
[1] Making of the Indian Constitution
[2] Transfer of Power – 15th August 1947 – called as “Independence.”
[3] Sovereignty or Servility?
[4] Democracy or Serfdom ?
[5] Socialism or CRONY Capitalism ?
[6] Secularism or Communalism ?
[7] Nationalism or Fascist Jingoism ?
[8] Republic or Neo-Colonialism ?
[9] Erosion of Constitutionalism, and
[10] A Blue-Print for the Future.
Let me concisely expound these concepts.
- 1. Making of the Indian Constitution
I have given a detailed analysis relating to the history of “Making of the Indian Constitution” in the work entitled Indian Constitution Unriddled, which I have co-authored with a veteran Scholar, Sri S.G. Nadgir, and published by Purogami Sahitya Prakashan, Hubli in 2015. In this Paper I only give the salient aspects. They are as follows:
[a] The Constituent Assembly, which finalised the Constitution of India, 1950, was formed on 9th December 1946, under the authority of the Govt. of India Act, 1935, which has itself a very dubious history. Mark the most important fact that the Constituent Assembly was constituted more than eight months before 15th August 1947, when India was supposed to be declared independent.
So firstly, the Constituent Assembly, which framed the Constitution for India, was constituted by the British imperialists, while they were ruling India.
Secondly, it was constituted under the Govt. of India Act, 1935, a British made Law.
Thirdly, it is very important to analyse the composition of the Constituent Assembly.
[i] Constituent Assembly was a body elected by the Provincial Assemblies, which were constituted under the Govt. of India Act, 1935, which was enacted by the British Parliament.
[ii] The Provincial Assemblies were elected on the basis of the Communal Award and the Poona Pact.
[iii] These Provincial Assemblies were elected on the basis of limited franchise and not adult franchise.
To put it concisely,
[i] Provinces were to elect 292 members,
[ii] Indian States (I.e., Princely States) were allotted 93 Seats.
[iii] Seats in each province were distributed among three main communities, Muslims, Sikhs and General, in proportion to their population.
[iv] It was elected by a limited franchise, by tax-payers or the educated, and constituted only of the upper classes (landlords, capitalists, and the Princes).
[v] The entire Electorate was about 11% of the Population.
Such is the Constituent Assembly which gave India the Constitution Of India, and this Constitution which was promulgated on 26th January 1950, in The Preamble states :
“We The People Of India give to ourselves this Constitution.”
What a farce and what a paradox?
Could 11% population who elected the Constituent Assembly, who made this Constitution, be called “People Of India?” Could the Constitution adopted by the Constituent Assembly, which comprised Members elected on communal basis, and by the Nominees of Princely States, and by the big feudal landlords, the educated and Tax Payers…Can this be the People’s Constitution of India?
Indian Constitution is neither Sovereign, nor that of the People of India, it was a Constitution framed by representatives of the elite, communal representatives and the nominees of the Princes of India.
These facts about Making of the Constitution shall not be forgotten.
Further mark the criticisms of “Constituent Assembly” by the Congress, by Nehru, and other leading lights.
Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya, President of the Congress, said “It will be tyranny of one community over another and it is this despotism which the Communal Award seeks to entail.”
Congress also had said “The Cooperation with the Govt. of India Act, is a betrayal of India’s struggle for freedom and strengthening of the hold of British Imperialism”.
Nehru had said then that when India became independent, we will have a new Constituent Assembly, elected through adult franchise, which will frame a New Constitution for India. He had called the Govt. of India Act 1935, a Charter of Betrayal.
All these statements were flouted by the very leaders who made them, and the Constitution of India framed by the Constituent Assembly, a product of the “Charter of Bondage” is in place from 26th Jan. 1950, and has completed 70 years! What a tragedy and what a paradox !
- 2. Transfer of Power – 15th August 1947, called as “Independence”
Let me present a few historical facts, which will bewilder you, about what happened on, before and after 15th August 1947 which is called as “Declaration of Independence,” The question is, was it declaration of Independence? Let us examine.
Let us examine the Title of the Indian Independence Act, 1947. It reads as follows:
An Act to make provision for the setting up in India of two Independent Dominions, to substitute other provisions for certain provisions of the Govt. of India Act, 1935, ……………………..” (18th July 1947)
The New Dominions:-
[1] As from fifteenth day of August nineteen hundred and forty seven, two independent Dominions shall be set up in India, to be known respectively as India and Pakistan.
[2] The said Dominions are hereafter in this Act referred to as “the New Dominions” and the said fifteenth day of August is hereafter referred to as the appointed Day.”
- This Act got the Royal assent on 18th July 1947.
- Sovereignty or Servility?
Please Note the Oxford Dictionary meaning of “Dominion”. It says – “Dominion (historical) is a self governing territory of British Common Wealth.”
Hence India and Pakistan the Two Dominions, were set up as India and Pakistan, in British India.
These two New Dominions would have a common Governor-General and Lord Mountbatten would stay in this capacity. Both would have a Common Boss.
Further, the Indian Army continued to be under the Supreme Command of the British Commander-in-Chief, General Boucher for two years from August 15, 1947.
The same Bureaucratic Administrative structure continued, the same Parliamentary Model continued and the same Judiciary System also continued. A last nail in this transfer of power needs to be marked.
This is an extract from the Viceroy’s personal report dated 16th August 1947 – marked as “Top Secret and Personal”. It says:
“At 6-00 p.m., the great event of the day was to take place – the salutation of the NEW DOMINION FLAG. This programme had originally included a ceremonial lowering of the Union Jack, but, when I discussed this with Nehru, he entirely agreed that this day they wanted everybody to be happy, and if the lowering of the Union Jack in any way offended British Susceptibilities, he would certainly see that it did not take place, the more so as the Union Jack would still be flown a dozen days a year in the Dominion.”
Further, new India led by Nehru promised India would continue to be part of Common Wealth, led by the British Crown. Indian continues to be so till date.
Can we call 15th August 1947, as “Independence Day?” India only emerged as the “Dominion” of British India, continued to be a member nation of the British Common Wealth with the King or Queen as Head of the Common Wealth.
What happened on 15th Day of August 1947, was only a Transfer of Power from British Imperialists to the Indian Ruling Classes, the Bourgeois and the Land Lords, and the entire Legacy of British continued whole-sale in India.
Thus we have no alternative than to say that India did not emerge as a SOVEREIGN Power but emerged as a Dominion of British Common Wealth, with total servility.
Under this head, Let me also make a brief statement on the nature of the Constitution of India, promulgated on 26th January 1950, seventy years ago.
The Constitution of India, which had 395 articles, copies either verbatim or with slight changes, 250 articles from the Govt. of India Act, 1935, which was called by Nehru as the Charter of Bondage. That means 60% of the Govt. India Act, 1935, became part of the Constitution of India, 1950. How could such a constitution be sovereign?
I quote here what G.D. Birla, the outstanding leader of Indian big bourgeoisie – one of the mentors whom, as Gandhi said, “God has given me” – said about the Indian Constitution:
“We have embodied large portions of the 1935 Act, as finally passed, in the Constitution, which we have framed ourselves, and which shows that in it, the 1935 Act, was cast the pattern of our future plans.”
This statement reveals beyond an iota of doubt that the British imperialists and the Indian Bourgeoisie were in collision even since 1935, and the Constitution of India, 1950, put a final seal of approval on the “Transfer of Power” from the British Imperialists to the Indian Ruling Classes.
Let me place on record, a very important statement of Ram Manohar Lohia, in his book Guilty Men of India’s Partition, wherein he said Nehru and Patel conspired with Mountbatten by agreeing for Partition of India, by keeping Gandhiji in the dark, and both the leaders persuaded Gandhiji to consent to their agreement with Mountbatten. This again needs to be remembered.
- Democracy Or Serfdom ?
India adopted “Parliamentary Democracy” as a mode of Governance under the Constitution of India. At the outset, I shall quote Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, who went on record in 1943, about his candid views on Democracy. He said: “Parliamentary Democracy is not the best form of governance. If India adopts Parliamentary Democracy it would lead to hereditary ruling classes ruling the hereditary ruled classes.”
When we analyse the Seven Decades of Indian Democracy in practice, we are aghast to find how prophetic was Dr. Ambedkar.
Let us analyse the developments concisely.
As there are Business Houses, after the birth of the Indian Republic in 1950, ushering in electoral politics as the bed-rock of parliamentary democracy, Political Houses have taken birth, as we pointed out ling ago, and are flourishing. It started with the oldest Political Party, the Congress, turning hereditary : Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Sanjay Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi etc. While this is a continuing phenomenon, almost every party without exception, including the BJP, which day in and day out lashes out at the dynasty politics in Congress, is no exception to dynastic politics.
In the North, to quote a few examples, Lok Dal, BKD, BJD, JDU, SP, RJD, Apna Dal, Akali Dal…and in the South, JD(S), DMK, AIDMK, PMK, NCP, Shiv Sena, TDP, TRS, YSR Congress etc. etc. These parties are also led by billionaires (not millionaires). All of them are controlled by the new Political Dynasties.
BJP has its own share in Dynasty politics
Let us probe with BJP’s Dynasty politics to establish that it is not a Party with a difference, as it claims to be. Let us list the political families of BJP, Scindias, Fadnavis, Pramod Mahajan etc.
Lok Sabha Data shows, BJP has a number of “dynasts” among the elected Parliamentarians. From 1952, India’s list Parliament, the bio-datas of 4807 Parliamentarians have been analysed. (India Spend analysed data compiled by researchers of Harvard University and University of Mannheim, Germany.)
Here is a glimpse:
In 1999, Congress had 36 dynastic MPs elected, BJP has 31 from dynasties. In 2009, Congress had 11% MPs from Dynasties and BJP had `12% MPs from dynasties.
In U.P, of the 51 dynasties – 17 belonged to BJP, 15 belonged to Congress, 4 of BSP, besides that of Mulayam Yadav and others.
BJP has its own political Houses of Vasundhara Raje etc. Most of the BJP CMs, Deputy CMs and Ministers have their Political Successors.
BJP’s allies have full of political dynasties. Like Badals in Punjab, Thackreys in Maharashtra (now the alliance is broken), Paswans in Bihar, Nitish Kumar’s family in Bihar , Mufti’s family in Kashmir etc.
Modi’s Cabinet at the Centre is a Centre of Dynastic Leaders. Ex: Piyush Goel, Ravishankar Prasad, Maneka Gandhi & Varun Gandhi, Kiran Rijiju, Jayant Sinha, Dharmendra Pradhan are only examples. So who is not a Dynast?
With scores of dynasties ruling India, it is feudal democracy.
It is only a democracy in name, but, in practice, Moneyocracy, Mafiacracy, Dynastyocracy . See the following data of the in the current Loka Sabha: Out of 539 MPs, there are 475 Crorepathies, meaning 88% crorepathies. Out of 539 MPs, 233 declared Criminal cases against them. Hence 43% have Criminal antecedents. 25% of MPs hailed from Dynastic background.
Not a genuine representative democracy:
“Electoral democracy in India is anything but democratic. It is a mockery of democracy. The claim of mandate is hypocrisy.
The “record mandate” claimed by BJP in recent past, i.e., 2019, is backed by a vote lower than the vote polled by Indira’s Congress in her worst period.
In 1977, Indira Gandhi was defeated by a combined opposition, anti-Congress alliance, which was called as Janata Party. Congress led by Indira won 153 seats and got 189 seats including her allies. Congress got 34.5 percent and the alliance got 41 percent of the polled vote. In 2014, Modi-led BJP got 31.4 percent and the NDA (with all Allies of BJP) got 38 percent vote. The above statistics show that Modi–led BJP in 2014 got votes less than Indira–led Congress in 1977, when the latter was routed.
In 2019, BJP polled 37.4 percent and NDA polled 45 percent. Modi in Varanasi polled 63.6 percent votes out of 59% votes polled, which accounts for only 38.4% of the total votes in Varanasi. It is universally acknowledged that a mandate is said to be won if a clear 50% of polled votes are obtained.
By this standard, MODI neither had a mandate in 2014 nor in 2019, as BJP never scored 50% of polled votes either in 2014 or in 2019. No party or alliance in India ever polled above 50 percent votes.
Hence Electoral Democracy is not a genuine Representative Democracy and hence a mockery of Democracy.
Mark Dr. Ambedkar’s words:
“Parliamentary Democracy has never been a government of the people or by the people and it has never been a government for the people.
Indian Democracy can be well described as, “Crorepathyocracy; It is a government of the Crorepathies, by the Crorepathies, for the Crorepathies.” It is also, A Rule by criminals and a rule by dynasts. Real people’s democracy is only an illusion in India.
- Socialism or CRONY Capitalism ?
The Preamble of the Constitution of India, incorporates “Socialism” as one of its goals. This concept was added to the Preamble by the 42nd amendment of the Constitution of India during Emergency (1975-77) by Mrs. Indira Gandhi. In this context it is important to recall what transpired during the Constituent Assembly Debates.
Minoo Masani proposed that the prefix Socialist shall be added to India and will you believe who among our national leaders opposed this proposal ? It was none other than Jawahar Lal Nehru, the one who became the first Prime Minister of India, and this explains, the so-called efforts he made to introduce Socialism in India during his tenure as Prime Minister. When the group of Socialists within the Congress were becoming more vocal and when Communists were gaining hold in India. In Avadi (1955) Session of the Congress, Nehru declared his commitment to usher in “a Socialist Pattern of Society.” Indeed this was a mask in order to preserve the Vote Banks of the Congress Party. When the group of Socialists within the Congress became vocal. In Awardi Congress he declared “Socialist Pattern of Society”.
How can any one forget the incontrovertible fact of history, that when his daughter, Mrs. Indira Gandhi was President of All India Congress, on her advice, he superseded the first-ever elected Communist Govt. of the World, under the Chief Ministership of EMS Namboodiripad, and introduced Governor’s Rule there : A blatantly undemocratic Act by misusing Indian Constitution. Later, Mrs. Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minister of India, by overthrowing the veteran Congress leaders, vertically splitting the Congress and forming Congress (Indira). She set up V.V. Giri as Presidential Candidate, not only got him elected but retained power for her minority government with the direct support of the Communist Party of India. She even succeeded in winning over some leading Communists to join Cong(I). The Communists like Rajini Patel, Mohan Kumar Mangalam secretly said, we will establish Socialism in India, by usurping power from within. These so called Leftists even supported the Emergency declared by Mrs. Gandhi in 1975, and the result was 42nd Amendment to the Constitution by adding “Socialism” and “Secularism” to the Preamble of the Indian Constitution. Mrs. Gandhi also went ahead with the Nationalisation of Banks, abolition of Privy Purses, which were considered as “Solcialist reforms”. She used the slogan “Garibi Hatao” to win over the Socialists and the Communists and to regain Congress Vote Banks.
The paradox of all this was that Emergency during which all the fundamental rights including the Fundamental Right to Life were suspended, only helped the comprador Industrial Capitalists to increase their production and grow richer, as industrial strikes were banned. The question was, was “Socialism” her goal or consolidation of power her avowed objective? This Black and Despotic Rule of Mrs. Gandhi, set off the Nav Nirman Movement led by Jaya Prakash Narayan, and when the General Elections were declared to Lok Sabha, after revocation of Emergency in 1977, the bringing together of all anti-Congress Parties, from extreme right Jan Sangh to the left CPI and CPI(M), led to the utter defeat of Mrs. Gandhi-led Congress(I), and the emergence of the first non-Congress Govt. at the Centre in India, under the Prime Ministership of Morarji Desai.
This was a turn to the Right, and with the pre-mature and engineered fall of Janata Govt, we saw the emergence of the first BJP-led NDA under Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Prime Ministership. It is curious but interesting to learn that even A.B. Vajpayee was tempted to declare that his Govt. would bring in “Gandhian Socialism.” Thus was also only a part of Vote Bank Politics. After the fall of Vajpayee Govt. We saw the resurgence of Mrs. Indira Gandhi again.
From Nehru to Vajpayee Via Mrs. Indira Gandhi, there were at least pronouncements of “Socialism” by the Powers that be, though they were only SHAM and were all so–called Socialism behind the MASK of so–called Democracy. The Congress(I) regime that followed under the Prime Ministership of P.V. Narasimha Rao, and with Dr. ManMohan Singh as Finance Minister, spread a Red Carpet welcome to the trio of Globalisation, Privatisation and Liberalisation (LPG). This was hitting the last nail in the Coffin of “Socialism” and the ushering in of neo-liberalisation and neo-colonisation under the hegemony of the Super-Power, United States of India.
Thus came the ultimate burial of so-called Socialism, even as a slogan by Indian Ruling Classes. It was through a continuation of opening the doors to a flood of foreign Capital and multi-national corporations (MNCs) to India. What began, thus in India in 1990, has reached its climax from 2014 to 2020, with the coming to Power of Narendra Modi as Prime Minister of India. His slogan “Make in India,” as distinctly opposed to “Made in India” marks the marked ascendency of “comprador crony capitalism” in India, though India continues to be a Semi-Feudal and Semi-Colonial country.
Let us mark the ultimate result of Seven Decades of the Indian Republic.
A Survey by the well-known OXFAM states as follows:
“India’s top 1% of the Population now holds 73% of the wealth (it was 58% an year ago), while 67 Crore citizens comprising of the country’s poorest half saw their wealth rise just by 1% . “Top 9 billionnaires of India have wealth equal to that of bottom 50% of Indian population.”
- Secularism Vs. Communalism
Now let us proceed to deliberate on the next Head, “Secularism Vs. Communalism.”
It may be recalled that the 42nd Amendment to the Indian Constitution effected during the Emergency regime of Mrs. Gandhi, added “Secularism” to the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.
What is to be marked is that with the launching of the “Rath Yatra” by Veteran BJP Leader Lal Krishna Advani, followed by the demolition of Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on 6th December 1992, we saw the ascendancy of Hindutva and the intensification of Communalism in India. Narendra Modi, fueled by post-Godhra pogrom, assuming Power as Prime Minister of India in 2014 and getting re-elected in 2019 with a “thumping majority” and occupying the Seat of Power for the Second Innings, led to the Climax of Hindutva Politics. This has been assuming various notorious and nefarious forms.
Hindutva Politics : From Hidden to the Brazen
To cite a few examples :
[1] SAVE THE COW Campaign, leading to mob lynchings, accusing particularly Muslims and Dalits as either eating beef or keeping beef at home.
[2] Compelling Minorities, to chant Jai Sriram and on the plea that they refused to do so, LYNCH them to death.
Thus the Sangh Pariwar unleashed its foot soldiers as “Go Rakshaks” and “Ram Sena” to take law into their own hands and massacring the Muslims and Dalits.
Uttar Pradesh under the Chief Ministership of Yogi Adityanath, has witnessed more than 3,000 Encounter killings, police were given a free hand to shoot and kill, and such policemen were rewarded with promotions.
Particularly the Modi 2.0 regime, with Amit Shah as the Home Minister of India, has used the Lok Sabha Majority to arbitrarily abrogate Article 370, to split and reduce the State of Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories, J&K with its own Assembly and Ladakh as an UT without Assembly. This is part of the hidden agenda of Hindutva politics, ripened and open. There is in Kashmir, for the last Five and a half months, total ban of Inter-net, continuous clamp of Section 144, crippling the life of the People of Jammu and Kashmir, and putting under house custody top leaders of National Conference, like Abdullahs (father and son), and other Political Leaders and totally balkanising Jammu & Kashmir.
This has been followed by the passage of Citizen Amendment Bill by both Lok Sabha, and managing to get it passed in Rajya Sabha also, even though BJP is in a minority there, by engineering the support of non-NDA regional Parties. With President’s assent Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is now in force. There has been a spate of agitations throughout the Country.
In the Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University campus, the Police have trampled on the students in their library and unleashed violence against them. In the Aligarh Muslim University students protesting CAA have been subject to violent attacks by the Police. JNU Campus has been literally the vortex of Protests. It is reported that the VC in collusion with the Police has allowed masked goondas to attack the protesting students’ leaders in the Campus.
Vast sections of the people, more so of the student community, are now on rebellion against the CAA -NRC etc. While the protests against CAA are snow-balling, the entire government and the BJP under the stewardship of Prime Minister Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have launched an out-reach programme, even planning house-to-house Campaign, to assert that CAA does not take away citizenship but it only gives citizenship. This evidences that the Modi Govt. is shaken and shocked at the increasing protests and is on an out-reach to save their power.
BIP, during Modi-2 has come out openly to implement the Hindu Raj Pronouncement of V.D. Savarkar. Communalism’s upsurge has unleashed nation-wide rebellion. This is the scenario of Secularism Vs. Communalism, and Divisive Politics Of Hindutva Cohorts is destroying the formal secular fabric of the Indian Republic.
- Nationalism Vs. Fascist Jingoism
Now let us take up the next head “NATIONALISM Vs. JINGOISM”.
Nationalism and Patriotism have been marketized and Corporatized.
The slogan now is any one who speaks anti-Modi, or anti-Shah are anti-national and pro-Pakistan. A Central Minister said anyone who is anti-Modi be shot dead like dogs. The Home Minister Amit Shah says, we will Jail those who are anti-National, meaning anti-Modi. We are reminded of D.K. Barooah, the Congress President during Indira’s rule who gave the slogan Indira is India, during emergency, then opposed by Sangh parivar too.
Now the trend is Modi is India; forget not, this is undeclared emergency.
49 intellectuals who wrote an open letter requesting PM Modi to intervene and stop mob lynching by Hindu Zealots, who lynch those who refuse to say Jai Sri Ram were issued non-bailable warrants and charges of sedition by a Patna Court.
Let us note that 106 top Ex-Bureaucrats, including IPS and security officials, have “appealed to Citizens” to oppose CAA-NRC-NPA. Are they all anti-nationals?
These are all steps to establish a HINDU RAJ as conceived by V.D. Savarkar. In th name of Cultural Nationalism, HINDU Nationalism is being equated to Patriotism. This is fascism and jingoism of the day. Anything said against MODI AND SHAH is anti-National. Such people are either booked for sedition and put behind bars or the police shoot them down in the name of encounters.
It is pertinent to note here the classical statement of Karl Marx who said as follows: Bourgeois Nationalism and Proletarian Nationalism are the two kinds of Nationalism. Bourgeois Nationalism is nothing but Bourgeois Dictatorship. This has to be slightly amended: We have in India to-day under MODI-SHAH, Religious cum Bourgeois Nationalism, and is nothing but Bourgeois-Religious–Fascism. This is also a variant of jingoism.
- Republic or Neo-Colonialism ?
I have illustrated the birth of a Dominion called India, which was born on 15th August 1947, under “An Act of 1947 to confer Dominion Status to India and Pakistan” , and on 18th July 1947 got British Royal assent. Thus India became a Dominion of British Commonwealth and it was continuation of Colonialism In a New Form. On 26th Jan. 1950, when the Constitution Of India, was promulgated this Indian Constitution by adopting 250 Articles of Govt. of India Act, 1935, of the 375 Articles of the Indian Constitution, continuing as Member of British Common Wealth, and adopted all the British made laws before 1947, to continue as the Laws of India establish beyond doubt continuation of British Colonialism in India. After 1950, India continued under the neo-imperialist Super Power America, as a Junior Partner. With the adoption of Globalisation-Liberalisation-Privatisation as India’s policy in 1990, Indian Republic which was already a British Colony surrendered to American Super Powers neo-Imperialism and became a neo-colony of America. Thus India to-day is not a Republic but a neo-Colonial State under the aegis of Neo-Imperialism.
- Erosion of Constitutionalism
The analysis presented supra, while presenting the five goals of the Constitution of India, i.e., Socialism, Secularism, Democracy, Sovereignty and the Republic, established beyond an iota of doubt the title of my presentation, Seven Decades Of The Decaying Republic and thus showed how the Erosion of Constitutionalism is taking place. Indeed all these goals have been almost buried and the Constitution of India is becoming almost non-existent.
Under this Head I am only adding some of the recent developments which further establish its erosion.
[i] The recent enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act, is an added dimension of anti-Constitutionalism. This is the first amendment which is based on religion and is discriminatory of Art 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It eliminates the Muslims from the purview of “fast track” grant of citizenship, while it includes Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh, in granting citizens after Six Years of stay instead of eleven years as provided in the Citizenship Act. The United Nations Human Rights Commission has called CAA ultra-vires the Constitution of India.
In the U.S. Congress, a resolution has been passed demanding the U.S. Govt. to ban Amit Shah from entry into U.S. for mooting the Citizenship Amendment Bill which is anti-minority and religion-based.
The European Union has condemned the CAA as ultra-vires the Indian Constitution.
Similarly, the OIC, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, has condemned the CAA as anti-Muslim and hence unconstitutional.
In all 87 countries of the world have opposed the CAA.
There are two State Assemblies, in Kerala and Punjab, that have passed resolutions demanding the withdrawal of the CAA as unconstitutional and against federalism. Kerala has filed a petition under Art. 131 of the Constitution of India. Punjab is likely to follow suit.
There are already 61 Petitions filed before the Supreme Court challenging the CAA, and praying for the declaration of CAA as ultra-vires the Constitution.
Now the question is, will the Supreme Court hold the CAA ultra-vires the Constitution? Let me conjecture a guess based on the recent judgments of the Supreme Court : one, in the Rama Janmabhoomi Case and the Second, in the Petitions challenging the indefinite ban on Internet in Jammu & Kashimir after abrogation of Art. 370, and the indefinite clamping of Sec 144.
In the Rama Janma Bhoomi case the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court headed by CJI K.Ranjan Gogoi, after day to day hearing of the case for 41 days, gave a unanimous Judgment. It was unprecedented in a way because the Judgment though unanimous did not disclose the name of the Author of the Judgment. Even the Appendix to this Judgment which detailed the issue of Rama Janma Bhoomi did not carry the name of the Author.
All of you are aware of the Judgment. The entire area of nearly 2.5 acres, where the Babri Masjid stood in AYODHYA and was demolished by Hindu Kara Sevaks, was allotted to build the Ram Mandir. An alternate site anywhere else in Ayodhya was to be given to Muslims to build the Mosque. While some critics have called this Judgment “pragmatic”; other critics said the judgment is influenced by the “majoritarian rulers”.
In the Judgment related to indefinite Internet Ban and indefinite Clamping of Sec 144 in J&K, the three Judge Bench presided over by Justice Sri N.V. Ramana, ruled that Indefinite ban on Internet violates the fundamental right of speech, expression and trade etc. And regarding Sec 144 it held that reasons should be given for clamping Sec 144 which would facilitate a “Judicial Review”. The Court gave directions to the Govt. to review the Ban on Internet use within the Week. But mark this, the Supreme Court did not set aside any of the orders, which have been in vogue for more than five and a half months! What do these Judgments point to?
I would say regarding the 62 Petitions before the Supreme Court, that the litmus test would be not by the way it decides the Constitutional validity of CAA. But whether the Judgment it would give in these cases would be in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of India?
WE will have to wait and see. But don’t forget that S.C has warned: no hearing of these cases till violent protests against CAA!
In this context I would conclude this Head “Erosion of Constitutionalism” with a statement made by Dr. Ambedkar in the Rajya Sabha on September 2, 1953. He said:
“People always keep saying to me, “Oh you are the maker of the Constitution. My answer is, I was a HACK. What I was asked to do, I did much against my will.”
[Oxford Dictionary meaning of HACK – a person hired to do routine work].
He further said: “You want to accuse me of your blemishes? Sir, my friends tell me that I have made the Constitution. But I am quite prepared to say that I shall be the first person to burn it out. I do not want it. It does not suit anybody.”
[10]. A Blue Print for the future
Let me come to the last Part of this Paper:
As I am presenting this Paper to the cream of the intelligentsia of this country, attending this 43rd Congress of the Indian Social Science Academy, I only leave a few suggestions for your considered contemplation.
[1] I quoted the latest report of the OXFAM which stated:
“India’s top 1% of the population now holds 73% of the wealth, while 67 Crore citizens, comprising of country’s poorest half, saw their wealth rise by just 1%”
“Top 9 billionaires of India have wealth equal to that of bottom 50 percent of Indian Population”. This is India’s achievement in the seven decades of the Republic!
Does it not deserve to be described as a “DECAYING REPUBLIC?”
[2] Unless rural poor, who constitute 70 percent of India’s population are mobilized, there is no solution; without them, no revolution can succeed in India. Agrarian revolution is imperative, with abolition of landlordism and land to the tiller as its axis. All other solutions are supplementary to that.
[3] CAA-NRC-NPA are at the door steps of every Indian. Protests from people, protests from students and youths, are galore. There is Goebbels propaganda unleashed by MODI-SHAH regime, and draconian measures are hanging like a Democle’s sword on every body’s necks. Fascist-Autocracy is reigning in India, which smacks of Hitler And Mussolini. What is the role of the Intelligentsia? What is the role of the working class and the peasantry?
Intellectuals shall awaken and come out to support help and guide these revolts. There shall be people’s movements. The only panacea to save this country and the exploited, suffering masses of this country, is to defeat and bury fathoms deep the Fascist Autocratic Rule that is carrying on its demonish rule.
I appeal to the Intelligentsia to guide and take lead and the students and the suffering and exploited to rise in revolt.
Let us not forget, the Second Independence struggle has commenced. Let us take it to its logical end.
Thank You,
- K.S. SHARMA
BENGALURU:- 19-01-2020
About the author
Dr KS Sharma, born 1934, is an activist-Professor still active at 86: a retired and renowned Professor of Law, based at Hubli, Karnataka. He did his doctorate in political science, after retirement, on Indian State- From a Marxian Perspective.
He has been a leader of working class for over 45 years now, focused on unorganized labor, and as Founder- President of Karnataka State Govt. Dailywage Employees Federation, successfully organized one lakh dailywagers of Govt of Karnataka who got regularized after 30 years of struggle that included street battles and legal battles going upto Supreme Court.
Some of them were regularized, by a special enactment, in spite of an adverse judgment by a Five-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court.
He is a great teacher, poet, writer, dramatist, literary critic, columnist, publisher, orator, and an activist-social scientist who was a Vice-President, then a President of ISSA , Indian Social Science Academy, for sometime.
He is the Founder President of a group of Institutions including an ITI, Institute of Naturopathy and Yoga, an Ayurvedic College cum Hospital, Dr. Da Ra Bendre (Jnana Peeth Awardee) Research Institute, Indian Institute of Marxist Theory and Practice, FMRRC- Fluorosis Mitigation Research and Resource Centre all located in Vishwa Shrama Chetana campus, Hubli.
Several of his writings were published in countercurrents.org, the journal he values and supports.
He may be contacted at : kssharmaji@rediffmail.com,
and kuvalaya_hubli @rediffmail.com.
This Fight is for Democracy against a Fascist Government
by Akhilendra Pratap Singh
It is the historical responsibility of the people who emerged from civil society to tie this entire movement into a political thread, because non-politics cannot fight fascist politics for a long time. The liberals who keep their expectations in the Congress will have to let go of them
A Tale of Two Fires
by Sandeep Banerjee
Two fires were on the headlines not long ago, though they were
taking place at countries one-third of the world circumference apart (about 14,000kms) – Brazil and Australia. And one architect of those, who was given the Title of “Captain Chain-Saw” as the destroyer of the Amazon rainforest by the big media houses like Telegraph (of the UK) or Bloomberg (of the USA) – Mr Jair Bolsonaro, President of Brazil, is the Chief Guest in India’s Republic Day Celebration this year (at the invite of other fire-stained leaders)
Two fires were on the headlines not long ago, though they were taking place at countries one-third of the world circumference apart (about 14,000kms) – Brazil and Australia. And one architect of those, who was given the Title of “Captain Chain-Saw” as the destroyer of the Amazon rainforest by the big media houses like Telegraph (of the UK) or Bloomberg (of the USA) – Mr Jair Bolsonaro, President of Brazil, is the Chief Guest in India’s Republic Day Celebration this year (at the invite of other fire-stained leaders) [[1]]!
It may sound puzzling – how cutting down of forests, particularly rainforests, may cause forest fire blazing over thousands of hectares. But an easy explanation, and a correct one, was given by the BBC [[2]] which is particularly valid for this year (if we take Bengali year from mid-April 2019 to mid -April 2020). Generally, forest fires start with friction of dry wood or lightning or such natural events, but this year Brazil forest fires started from those ‘clearing’ the forest by cutting logs then then putting fires to the residues to make land for corps or grazing. As such deforestation brings less rainfall which make forests drier and makes it more prone to fire. The Rainforest Alliance explained [[3]]: “The vast majority of the fires in the Amazon and Indonesia are manmade and intentional—the result of illegal deforestation and clearing of farmland. Wildfires are in fact quite rare in tropical rainforests, due to the high humidity. Even in the dry season, the flora is usually too wet for lightning to spark a blaze or for accidental fires (from a burning campfire or cigarette) to take hold.
“Agribusinesses clear vast stretches of pristine, untouched forest to make room for cattle pasture (in Brazil) and cropland (soy in Brazil, palm oil in Indonesia). The cheapest and quickest way to do this in such humid conditions is to cut down the trees and underbrush with chainsaws, let them dry out for a month, and get rid of the debris by burning it.
“The damage does not stop there. Large-scale clearing disrupts the very processes that give the rainforest its name—the ability to absorb, store, and recycle water as rainfall. As the soil dries out and tree cover is lost, the forest shifts from being fire-resistant to fire-prone. “This is one of the most traumatic things you can do to an ecosystem,” explained Nigel Sizer, the Rainforest Alliance’s chief program officer. The thin-barked trees of the rainforest have no natural resilience to fire, so the flames simply consume everything in their path.”
Sometimes, it may seem to be just a regularization of what was already there. Bolsonaro gave legal documents to about 800,000 farmers already doing agriculture illegally in the forest areas, and the president was so keen in this that he fired the ex-chief of land reforms for opposing it [see note [4]]. Bolsonaro’s efforts of clipping down the world’s lungs, the biggest rainforest affecting the biggest drainage system on the earth gave some immediate result which perhaps were already in the making: (i) Brazil beat India or is poised to beat India to become the world’s biggest exporter of beef in the world in 2019-2020 [[5]]. Now 8.7% of Brazil’s GDP comes solely from Beef export [[6]] and only in 4 years, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Beef exports volume in the GDP was less than 8%. So, how important is Beef in Brazil’s economy, and also in Amazon deforestation! (ii) Even before Bolsonaro assumed power Brazil became world’s largest Soy producer beating the USA [[7]] in 2018. What Bolsonaro added to it was extraordinary: “In surprise move, Brazil has removed restrictions on Amazon sugarcane production. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has signed a decree revoking a zoning regulation for the sugarcane industry, effectively allowing for cultivation of the crop in the Amazon and other areas of primary forest. The measure is controversial because it wasn’t requested by the industry, which, under the previous regulation, was permitted to expand onto degraded land and cattle pasture covering six times the area currently planted with sugarcane.” Naira Hofmeister writes in Mongabay on 13 Nov 2019 [[8]]. Now business person in Brazil knows that they can do whatever they want to Amazon and govt. de facto legalised deforestation [[9]]. Brazil produces sugarcane to make sugar, it is second only after India in worlds sugar production, but Brazil is world’s topmost bio-ethanol fuel producer. The fertilised and well-irrigated sugar-croplands are used to feed cars not people. By the way, cattle breeding is a source of Methane production which is produced in cow’s or any ruminant animal’s alimentary system. “Holstein produced more methane (299.3 g/day) than the Crossbred (264.2 g/day). Lactating cows produced more methane (353.8 g/day) than dry cows (268.8 g/day) and heifers (222.6 g/day). Holstein, with greater milk production potential, produced less CH4 per unit of dry matter intake (19.1 g/kg) than the Crossbred (22.0 g/kg). Methane emission by heifers grazing fertilized pasture (intensive system) was 222.6 g/day, greater than that of heifers on unfertilized pasture (179.2 g/day). Methane emission varied as function of animal category and management intensity of production system.” says a 2009 study conducted in south-east Brazil [[10]]. Cattles account for about or more than a quarter of Methane emission from agricultural sector now.
But blaming only Bolsonaro for Amazon devastation is not fair, though Bolsonaro is doing it brazenly.
We can see Brazil’s deforestation in pre-Bolsonaro days from Food and Agricultural Organisation (Rome) statistics as reproduced in the Wikipedia. If that is plotted, we get a graph like below:
Now, from the very start of 2003 to very end of 2010, for this eight years Lula Da Silva of PT, the left party, was I power – there we see that after a high spike in 2004 deforestation was in down curve. Next six years, till 31 Aug 2016 was also PT regime under Dilma Rousseff when deforestation after some ups and downs were showing an increasing tendency. In PT’s 16 years term a total of 161,485 sq. km. of forest was destroyed! That is more than 10000 sq. km/year. Anyway, during Bolsanoro period it is showing tendency to increase not only by some data but also by the attitude and statements of the president.
Apart form deforestation due to land clearing for grazing and agriculture there is another very important reason for deforestation. That is a point where many environmentalists also show dilemma – hydropower generation. Hydel is a great shift away from power generation by fossil fuel burning, but at the same time it is non-renewable as scientists are saying recently. (See the undamming process or dam destruction process that have started in the USA, there is a beautiful book on this: Economics of River Flows: Lessons from Dam Removals in America edited by Bharat Jhunjhunwala [[12]]). Hydel power generation causes a lot of deforestation in the river valleys. This in turn reduces rainfall and thus a vicious cycle opens up. Many hydel plant proposals were chalked in the so-called left regime. In 2010 we heard: “Brazil to build controversial Belo Monte hydroelectric dam in Amazon rainforest. According to the Brazilian energy ministry the dam, expected to start production in 2015, will cost around R$20bn (£6.8bn) and will eventually produce around 11GW of electricity.” [[13]] In 2013 the National Geographic wrote the same story but in detail: “You’ve heard of king coal? Well, in Brazil, hydropower is king. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, a whopping 79 percent of Brazil’s electricity came from hydropower in 2010. (In the U.S. that drops to about 7 percent.)
“But Brazil wants even more hydropower, which brings us to the next chapter in our story.
“Way Down Upon the Xingu River
“You can find the Xingu River on a map in the northeastern corner of Brazil. It runs south to north for about 1,200 miles and drains into the Amazon River. (See related pictures: “A River People Awaits an Amazon Dam.”)
“Brazil has big plans for the Xingu River — more specifically, on the Xingu about 100 miles south of where it meets up with the Amazon. That is the construction site of the Belo Monte Dam, slated to be the third largest hydropower facility in the world behind China’s Three Gorges Dam and the Itaipu Dam operated jointly by Brazil and Paraguay. When completed, the Belo Monte Dam will have the capacity to produce up to 11 million kilowatts.” [[14]] In 2016 The Guardian alerted: “Brazil’s giant dams risk destroying heart of the Amazon, says Greenpeace. Construction of 40 dams in the Tapajós river basin would severely affect indigenous people and is not justifiable economically, says new report” [[15]] in that same year Amazon chiefs, Leaders of the Munduruku people, visited England and also went to British Museum as part of dam-building protest [[16]]. They were afraid that their centuries old civilisation depending on fishing and agriculture will be destroyed by dam building.
Anyway, now Captain Chain-Saw will observe the Republic Day march in Delhi as Chief guest.
Another country with 14 hours difference (if not crossed the international date line, Brasilia, GMT–3 to Canberra GMT+11) is Australia which was recently in news for bushfires. Last Nov 12, Greater Sydney got the highest fire warning: Catastrophic. This means – there should be no open fire henceforth for any reason whatsoever in this region. This Catastrophic signal was first started in 2009. Wikipedia informs from various sources that: As of 14 January 2020, bush and scrub fires this season have burnt an estimated 18.6 million hectares (46 million acres; 186,000 square kilometres; 72,000 square miles), destroyed over 5,900 buildings (including approximately 2,683 homes) and killed at least 34 people. An estimated one billion animals were also killed and some endangered species may be driven to extinction [[17]].
Australia govt. may show some ‘natural’ reasons behind this year’s fire. This year (2019-2020) saw an unprecedented positive Indian Ocean Dipole and Australian side got big drought and high temperature; highest summer temperature (in between 2019 Oct – 2020 till now) reached 41.9°C (120°F) in 18 Dec. On Oct 7 also temp was +2°C above normal. Whereas the opposite side of the Indian ocean, in Africa, they saw 300% more rain and more than 300 died there due to floods. [[18]] But govt of Australia cannot blame Indian Ocean Dipole and wash off their hands. From a 2014 report we know that in the last 100 years (till then) Australia’s average temperature increased by 1°C and it was suggested that in the next 16 years temperature would increase by 1.5°C more. How rainfall is decreasing, heat wave and night temperature is increasing in Australia can be had of from Australia govt reports [see these govt reports [19]].
One of the biggest reasons of Australia’s warming is deforestation due to coal mining by open cut mines. A south African report analysed how open cut mines endanger forests [[20]]. The Guardian warned in 2018 that: ‘Global deforestation hotspot’: 3 million hectares of Australian forest to be lost in 15 years [[21]]. Australia is world’s fourth largest coal producer, after China, India and the USA, but Australia is the largest exporter of coal and also liquified natural gas in the world. Australia once had carbon taxes purportedly for discouraging carbon emission and it did contribute to emission reduction to some extent [[22]], but when the results were just showing, in 2014, Australia repealed the carbon tax and also emission trading! [[23]] (Though emission trading is a bad business and unethical too – but hat is a separate discussion.)
Australia is the driest continent. And if the govt pursues more mining, more industrialisation, more energy use line, Australia will be more prone to fire. Situation is such that climate activist Greta Thunberg requested German engineering group Siemens AG to review its role in helping to develop a coal mine project in Australia for thermal-power. “The Australian government last year approved the construction of a new coal mine in Queensland by Adani that is expected to produce 8-10 million tonnes of thermal coal a year.” [[24]] But Siemens said that they will honour their agreement as because this project is not an environmental threat as per reports received by them. [[25]] A newspaper report says how this is harmful both for Australia and India: “An estimated 500 tankers a year will travel back and forth between Australia and India in the future. Fully loaded with coal, they’ll sail right through the Great Barrier Reef, the largest coral reef in the world, which is already under threat. And that’s just one reason why environmental activists are outraged by Indian Adani Group’s plans for mining coal. Once completed, its Carmichael mine in the northeastern Australian state of Queensland will be one of the largest in the world, emitting 705 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere each year, according to climate protection alliance Fridays for Future.” [[26]] Adani is glad that Indian import of Australian coal (from Adani mines) will increase and Adsani is all set to become India’s largest thermal power player. [[27]]
Indians have lot to worry from these examples. In our country too open cut coal mines have become à la mode. Also, there are more and more hydel projects with large dams Monocropping or single crop agriculture in forest land also endangers forests. Afforestation measures as they are taken now is not an antidote to deforestation, as forests are spontaneous creations which includes not only trees, but herbs, shrubs, undergrowth and much more diversity. They are more resilient if not disturbed by deforestation. Sadly, our govt is not seen to be acting properly taking all these in cognizance. Rather. It did the opposite by inviting Jair Bolsonaro as the Chief Guest. A part of the media is rejoicing and advising govt to make more agreements with Brazil for fossil fuel import. (for example: India’s oil ministry wants IOC, other state refiners to buy oil from Brazil. India’s oil ministry source says purchase from Brazil to help diversify crude sources. [[28]]) Brazil wants India to import more chicken from Brazil diluting import duty and also wants India to make more ethanol from sugarcane with Brazilian know how – so that here also agricultural land can be used to feed cars. Indians have many reasons to protest Bolsonaro’s visit to India and that too as a chief guest in Republic Day ceremony.
[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/02/brazil-criminal-loggers-heed-call-captain-chainsaw-jair-bolsonaro/ or https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-06/brazilian-amazon-destruction-surges-almost-fourfold-in-july or https://www.news.com.au/world/south-america/brazils-president-captain-chainsaw-causes-outrage-as-amazon-burns/news-story/5eaf35dac2e8f99d7b827136f38a1536
[3] Section: Slash-and-Burn Deforestation in https://www.rainforest-alliance.org/articles/why-our-forests-are-burning
[4] The Brazilian president fired the head of INCRA for being against the government’s plan to facilitate the regularization process of about 750,000 land deads by the end of the year. On Oct. 1, army general João Carlos de Jesus Corrêa was discharged as the head of the National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA), a position he held since February of this year. While the Brazilian government did not immediately confirm the decision, Corrêa told local magazine Veja: “I’m leaving with the peace of mind of having done an excellent job with my team.” https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/bolsonaro-legaliza-o-desmatamento-da-amazonia-en/
[7] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-soy-usa/brazil-to-pass-u-s-as-worlds-largest-soy-producer-in-2018-idUSKBN1IC2IW
[8] https://news.mongabay.com/2019/11/in-a-surprise-move-even-to-the-sugarcane-industry-president-bolsonaro-has-removed-restrictions-on-sugarcane-production-in-the-brazilian-amazon-experts-expect-land-speculators-to-benefit/
[10] Emissão de metano ruminal por bovinos leiteiros no sudeste do Brasil by Márcio dos Santos Pedreira et al http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-90162009000600004
[12] Economics of River Flows: Lessons from Dam Removals in America edited by Bharat Jhunjhunwala https://www.amazon.in/Economics-River-Lessons-Removals-America/dp/8178358166
[14] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/great-energy-challenge/2013/forests-fuel-hydropower/
[15] https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jun/15/brazil-giant-hydropower-dams-risk-destroying-amazon-greenpeace-tapajos-river
[16] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/16/amazon-chiefs-visit-british-museum-as-part-of-dam-building-protest
[18] See http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/ then https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50980386 and also https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50602971
[19] http://www.bom.gov.au/state-of-the-climate/2014/ and https://www.csiro.au/en/Research/OandA/Areas/Assessing-our-climate/State-of-the-Climate-2018/Australias-changing-climate
[21] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/05/global-deforestation-hotspot-3m-hectares-of-australian-forest-to-be-lost-in-15-years
[22] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/24/australia-records-biggest-emissions-drop-in-a-decade-as-carbon-tax-kicks-in
[24] https://www.livemint.com/news/india/greta-thunberg-urges-siemens-to-review-adani-s-australia-coal-project-11578750021478.html
[25] https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/siemens-snubs-greta-thunberg-s-appeal-says-will-honor-adani-coal-mine-contract-11578874542177.html
[27] https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/adani-expects-india-coal-imports-to-hit-record-1557467616076.html
[28] https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/oil-and-gas/indias-oil-ministry-wants-ioc-other-state-refiners-to-buy-oil-from-brazil/73552325
Sandeep Banerjee is an activist who writes on political and socioeconomic issues and also on environmental issues. Some of his articles are published in Frontier Weekly. He lives in West Bengal, India. Presently he is a research worker. He can be reached at sandeepbanerjee00@gmail.com
The International Court Of Justice (ICJ) And The Rohingyas
by Dr Chandra Muzaffar
The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) Order to the Government of the Republic of Myanmar to adopt various provisional measures to protect the Rohingya community from “physical destruction” and to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article 11 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide including
killing members of the group and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group” is a decision of tremendous significance.
The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) Order to the Government of the Republic of Myanmar to adopt various provisional measures to protect the Rohingya community from “physical destruction” and to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article 11 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide including killing members of the group and imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group” is a decision of tremendous significance. The Order also urges the Myanmar military as well as any regular armed units which may be directed or supported by (the military) and any organisation or person which may be subject to its control, direction or influence not to commit genocide or be complicit in acts of genocide. The Government of Myanmar is also required in the Order to submit a report to the ICJ on all measures intended to give effect to the Order within four months as from the date of the Order and thereafter every six months until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court.
Needless to say, the Government of Myanmar has rejected the ICJ’s Order. It denies that there has been any genocide against the Rohingyas. However, reports from independent human rights observers and from Rohingyas themselves — many of them refugees living in other countries — tell a different story. It is this evidence adduced by the government of the Gambia especially its Justice Minister, AbubacarrTambadou, which convinced the ICJ panel that the allegations of genocide against the Myanmar Government had a basis.
The world should now use the ICJ’s stand to mount a massive global campaign on behalf of the oppressed and discriminated Rohingya. It should in fact go beyond the ICJ’s Order and address the root cause of the suffering of the Rohingya people. Stripping them of their Myanmar citizenship in 1982 is what is largely responsible for their oppression and marginalisation. This is why the world in endorsing the ICJ’s decision should also plead with the Myanmar government to restore the citizenship of all Rohingyas who qualify for citizenship.
The media both old and new have a critical role to play. It is disappointing that even in their coverage of the ICJ decision most of the media have been somewhat lukewarm. There has been very little support by way of follow-up articles and the like. And yet the ICJ is a mainstream institution with a high degree of credibility.
One hopes the UN General Assembly will also be persuaded to endorse the ICJ decision, reinforced by a call to grant citizenship to the Rohingya people. Perhaps the government of the Gambia should take the lead. It is said that in bringing the Rohingya case to the ICJ, the Gambia was motivated largely by its conscience, specifically the pain and anguish leaders like Tambadou felt when the carnage in Rwanda occurred in the mid nineteen nineties.
As demonstrated by the government of the Gambia, the nine ASEAN governments who share a regional platform with Myanmar should also for once act on the basis of their conscience. They should set aside concerns such as trade and investments, big power politics and geopolitical pressures and focus solely upon the ordeal of a people facing extermination, and act accordingly.
It is not just ASEAN that should respond to the ICJ. What about China? China for geopolitical and geo-economic reasons has become particularly close to the Myanmar government. Can the Chinese leadership rise above these considerations and instead emphasise the vital importance of our common humanity and our human dignity? One can ask the same question of India and of Japan in their relations with the Myanmar government.
Of course, the Myanmar government’s treatment of the Rohingya minority will only change for the better if the majority of the Myanmar people express strongly their disapproval of present policies. They should urge their government to heed the ICJ’s Order. This is not likely to happen in the foreseeable future. It appears that the majority of the populace are attached to a Burman-Buddhist identity that does not really accommodate the non-Burman, non- Buddhist minorities — a notion of identity which the ruling elite with the military at its core espouses. Antagonism towards the Rohingya is part of this notion of identity.
What this means is that if a substantial segment of Myanmar society is going to persuade their government to adhere to the ICJ’s Order, it will be because of external pressure. Hence the importance of accelerating pressure through ASEAN, the big Powers, the UN General Assembly and global public opinion.
Dr Chandra Muzaffar is the President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).Malaysia.
Justice For An Accused Person: What Is Due Judicial Process?
by S G Vombatkere
On January 8, 2020, during a student demonstration within the campus of the University of Mysuru at Manasagangothri, Ms.Nalini Balakumar reportedly displayed a banner which bore the words “Free Kashmir”. For this reason, the Police suo moto registered a case of sedition against her. Whether or not displaying a “Free Kashmir” sign is an offence deserving being booked for sedition under IPC Section 124A, is discussed elsewhere. The present concern is with the report that the Mysore Bar Association (MBA) passed a resolution that no member of MBA should represent Ms.Nalini Balakumar in Court, since she “…was involved in an anti-national activity”. Further, MBA
“… decided that none of us would represent the person who has been booked by the police for sedition”.
An Honest Conservative: Andrew Bacevich’s “The Age of Illusions”
by Romi Mahajan
In the time of Trumpism, we need more people like Andrew Bacevich producing more books like “The Age of Illusions.” A self-labeled conservative, a military man, and a person of faith, Bacevich possesses two elemental qualities – a keen sense of history and a desire to understand and tell the truth- that make his voice both important and clear.
In the time of Trumpism, we need more people like Andrew Bacevich producing more books like “The Age of Illusions.” A self-labeled conservative, a military man, and a person of faith, Bacevich possesses two elemental qualities – a keen sense of history and a desire to understand and tell the truth- that make his voice both important and clear.
In his new book, Bacevich rightly argues that the American elite consensus, irrespective of which particular party is in power, has always been a flawed one- one of arrogance, cupidity, militarism, and cultural and racial normativity. Insofar as this is his argument, Bacevich shares the podium with the Left, though he arrives as his conclusions from a different starting place. As such, he identifies Trump as indeed a malevolent force but also as in some ways the logical culmination of a political structure that has always conceived of exercising its freedom in excess, indulgence, greed and violence — and not in a larger, universal sense. In this way, Trump is certainly partially a creator of duress but he’s for the most part an epiphenomenon.
Bacevich offers an interesting glimpse of post-War US history- with a focus on the last 40 years, and identifies particular trend lines that indicate the ways in which, as the subtitle of the book reads, “…America squandered its cold war victory.” Of note here are four themes that characterize American polity and policy:
1) Routinization of Militarism
2) An increasingly imperial Presidency
3) A bi-partisan , elite consensus supporting neoliberalism
4) A religious belief in the normative goodness of globalization with America at the helm
He dissects each of these, replete with an analysis of the essential continuity offered by the post-cold-war Presidents, despite their putative differences.
Bacevich adduces this line of thinking to suggest that Americans had the post-cold-war opportunity to usher in an era of peace and decency but squandered it at the altar of greed and power. Here, Bacevich shows remarkable flexibility-of-thought for an avowed conservative who voted for Reagan twice (and Obama, twice, as it turns out.) What he hints at, here, is that with the demise of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold-war, the operating narrative of Americana disappeared, to be replaced with banality, narcissism, identity politics, and a turn towards the most corrosive sorts of religious form. He doesn’t, however, simply come out and say it which certainly diffuses the argument and in that respect hurts the book.
Bacevich is acerbic and lexically dexterous when it comes to highlighting elite hypocrisy but indeed often does employ soft-language and elision to exonerate American presidents, the American military, and Americans in general. His unnecessary remarks about George W. Bush’s lack of racism, sexism, or homophobia are examples of this as is his reference to Bush’s “basic decency and amiability.” Here, Bacevich succumbs to the very tone-deafness he laments in others, forgetting the millions of people worldwide who suffered under Bush-The-Younger’s jackboot. Bacevich, though clearly erudite, is also selective in his references- to the detriment of this argument. Nowhere in the book does he take to task Bush-the-elder for his punitive and brutal attacks on Iraq or the murderous sanctions regime started by Bush and continued by Clinton. Such omissions are surprising in analyses such as these, especially by a person of erudition.
Where Bacevich is best is his analysis of inequality in the US and how this is tied to elite warmongering and the remote-control, technology-drenched, hierarchical polity that has come to define America. He notes that the Whole Foods and Aspen crowds were the ones most shocked by the Trump victory.
He argues, also, that Trumpism is separate from Trump and has to be dealt with head on. The way to do this is by creating a new narrative, a new raison d’etre for Americans. Near the end of the book, Bacevich suggests that perhaps Climate Change provides us with just that prime mover.
“The Age of Illusions” is replete with pockets of brilliant analysis and acerbic characterizations of American hypocrisy but at times appears desultory as it flits from theme to theme. Whatever the criticisms, however, they are minor. Honesty needn’t have a political affiliation. Nor should intellectualism.
Romi Mahajan in an Author, Marketer, Investor, and Activist
#ShrineofLOVE…!!
by Sonali Chanda
There a baby would born free with all his persistence,
He would rebuild, he would rebel,
against your violence,He’s a born lover..
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.