The deepening current Ukraine Crisis is properly linked to the Russian aggression that commenced with a massive military attack against Ukraine on February 24, 2022, and has continued to ravage the country since, including inducing a refugee flow numbering several million. There is a broad consensus around the world that such aggression is a criminal violation of international law, and while noting the irresponsible nature of NATO provocations, it is widely agreed, provides Russia with no legally or morally relevant excuse with respect to accountability for so violently encroaching on Ukrainian sovereign rights and territorial integrity.
At the same time, from the outset of these events there was much more limited international support for the American-led punitive response by NATO featuring harsh sanctions amounting to ‘economic warfare,’ shipment of weaponry to the beleaguered country, dehumanization of Putin and Russo-phobic propaganda, along with silence about recourse to diplomacy. In the background was the related internal struggle within Ukraine between the dominant force in the Western part of the country and the Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the Donbas East.
As Russian military operations proceeded, perceptions of the core conflict began to change. What seemed at first a simple war of aggression, to be followed by belligerent operation, is now becoming a geopolitical war between the United States and Russia, with strategic goals quite apart from the outcome of events in Ukraine, as well as heightening costs of the encounter for the entire world, including the people of Ukraine and especially the extreme poor everywhere. And while Washington bears the main responsibility for this shift, the Russian response by way of veiled threats of recourse to nuclear weaponry emanate from Moscow and Putin. Yet the essential character in this elevation of the war strategy to a geopolitical level of engagement is to care less about bolstering Ukrainian resistance to Russian aggression and far more about inflicting defeat on Russia and the renewal of post-Cold War transatlantic unity by the revitalization and expansion of the NATO alliance with Russia once more the enemy of Western democracy. This geopolitical war has much larger strategic consequences and risks than the initial proxy war between Russia and the United States that concerned the future of Ukraine.
Given such developments, the time has come for civil society initiatives to counter the disastrous global confrontation that is now endangering the world, and indeed even species survival prospects, in the pursuit of these geopolitical goals by the United States disguised somewhat by media complicity that continues to convey the impression that the Ukraine War is still only about the defense of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, the daily war crimes attributable to the Russians, and the heroic and increasingly successful efforts of the Zelensky leadership and the courageous national unity of the Ukrainian people. I believe this is a basically false and potentially dangerous image, including for Ukraine, and even for the main disseminator of hostile geopolitical propaganda, the U.S. Government and the American people. Perhaps, it comes as a disturbing surprise that only the political extremes of right and left are interpreting the Ukraine War as producing a global disaster that begun to spill across the borders of Ukraine, with far worse to come without even taking full account of the growing nuclear dangers. What has also become evident is the helplessness of peace-oriented approaches. Such voices are being shut out by mainstream media platforms, which is reinforced by the inability of the UN to act independently of a geopolitical consensus, and by inter-governmental impotence to safeguard human interest in face of the menacing moves by the most powerful states motivated by contradictory geopolitical motivations.
In light of this line of interpretation, I am proposing the establishment of a civil society tribunal along the lines of the Russell Tribunal that brought independent critical voices to the fore on the Vietnam War in the midst of the Cold War in 1966-67. Although this experience was controversial at the time and of questionable relevance to ending that war, the Russell undertaking inspired many notable efforts along the same lines, most notably organized under the sponsorship of the Basso Foundation in Rome. Perhaps, most notable was the elaborate series of such initiatives in response to U.S. aggression against Iraq in 2003 culminating in the very significant Iraq War Tribunal of 2005. The proceedings of that event, appropriately held in Istanbul, bear careful scrutiny in the present atmosphere. This self-funded event orchestrated brilliantly by a group of Turkish progressive women brought together internationally prominent jurists and moral authority figures including Arundhati Roy who served as the chair of the jury of conscience that sat in judgment.
It is my belief that such a tribunal devoted to passing judgment of the Ukraine Wars, constituted in an atmosphere of urgency, is more important than any of these previous events because the stakes for humanity are higher. The use of the plural is not a typo with reference to Ukraine, but reflects the view explained in my prior articles that the Ukraine Crisis is best interpreted as three interrelated wars with contradictory features: Level 1: Russia vs. Ukraine; Level: 2: U.S. vs. Russia; Level 3: Western Ukraine vs. Donbas Region. For this reason I am proposing here that the tribunal named Peoples Tribunal on the Ukraine Wars.
The case for such an initiative is not only to give expression to views of the Ukraine Crisis that take international law, geopolitical crime, and nuclear dangers seriously, but also in view of the political incapacity of the UN to act effectively and responsibly when geopolitical actors get heavily embroiled in such a violent conflict which threatens world peace generally and causes massive suffering throughout the world, especially in the least developed countries or in societies dependent on import of basic foodstuffs and energy for reliable supplies at affordable prices. Most of the people vulnerable to such a mega-crisis live in states that have hardly any influence in the formation of global policy. At present a normative vacuum exists in response to the Ukraine Crisis. This leaves transnational civil society as the last, best hope to exert a responsibility to act, and indeed seize the opportunity.
Clarifying the Background
First, when it comes to war/peace issues there exist two operational sets of norms with respect to international relations:
(1) International Law, binding of all sovereign states;
(2) Geopolitics that privileges a few powerful states.
The identity of geopolitical actors is not as clearly identified as is that of sovereign states, which is signified by the membership of 193 states in the UN, effectively all. The most influential, yet still misleading, guideline as to geopolitical stature is contained in the UN Charter, taking the form of the right of veto conferred on the five Permanent Members of the Security Council (also known as the P-5) who happened to be the winners in World War II and also the five countries first to acquire nuclear weapons. As the composition of the P-5 has remained frozen in time for more than 77 years it is no longer descriptive of the geopolitical landscape, if it ever was, and for that reason geopolitical identity is currently more blurred and problematic than in the past. Some P-5 members have declined in both hard and soft power since 1945, such as the UK and France, and seem to lack the capabilities and stature to qualify any longer as first tier geopolitical actors. In contrast, countries such as India, Japan, Germany, Brazil, Nigeria, Indonesia, South Africa have increased their capabilities and raised their stature in such ways as to qualify existentially as ‘geopolitical actors’ at least regionally, and in some instances, globally.
From a normative point of view the distinction between international law and geopolitics is fundamental, and again is made clear by the significance of P-5 status within the UN framework designed to keep the peace after World War II. International law is applicable to every state, but is explicitly not obligatory for the P-5, which is what has made the UN so limited in its ability to provide humanity with a globally supervised war prevention system based on compliance with international law. Giving the Western states a veto was tantamount to acknowledging, as true for international relations in prior centuries, that the UN could not be expected to implement its own Charter norms if they collided with strategic interests of the P-5, but that compliance if forthcoming at all would depend on geopolitical self-restraint or the counterforce of adversary geopolitical actors exerted outside the UN. A similar pattern of obstruction existed when Russia was the Soviet Union, yet its participation that was seen as vital in 1945 if the UN was to enjoy global legitimacy premised on universal membership. Granting the USSR the right of veto was also a matter of protecting the country against the possible tyranny of a Western majority. As the decades have shown, the U.S. in particular has used the veto (e.g. to shield Israel) or avoided the UN (as in the Vietnam War and NATO Kosovo War) when it thought its proposed plan of action would be vetoed. The main lesson is that the UN was deliberately disempowered from the attempt to implement compliance with the UN Charter in relation to geopolitical actors, and the existential reality was not dissimilar from the Westphalian structure of and experience with world order since the mid-17th century. Regulation of the Great Powers, as they were formerly called, depended on a mixture of self-restraint and what came to be known as ‘the balance of power,’ redesigned in the nuclear age as ‘deterrence.’ Its nuclear dimensions are under challenge from many non-geopolitical states and world public opinion, most recently in the form of the 2021 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TCNP), but limited in its impacts due to the distressing non-participation of all of the nuclear states and their allies staking their security on ‘the nuclear umbrellas’ provided by geopolitical actors.
A second set of related considerations can be identified as the ‘Nuremberg Exception,’ which means that a geopolitical actor loses its impunity with respect to international law if it is defeated in a major war. This attitude is evident in the course of the unfolding two-level war in Ukraine. The U.S. at the highest level of its government has been condemning the Russian attack as a war crime that should engage accountability of Putin, and others, if the International Criminal Court acts to fulfill its mandate. This can be viewed from one angle as a kind of ‘winner takes all’ feature of geopolitical order, or from another as gross hypocrisy by recourse to this distortion of justice beneath the banner of ‘Victors’ Justice.’ Nuremberg would enjoy somewhat increased jurisprudential credibility if the U.S. had demonstrated post-Nuremberg its own willingness to be held accountable under the frameworks of international criminal law or the codified version of the Nuremberg Principles, which do not acknowledge a Nuremberg Exception exists, despite its persisting reality.
Thirdly, what is missing in this recital of the jurisprudential realities is the availability of a venue capable of normative assessment of the behavior of geopolitical actors whether they are on the winning or losing side in a major war. It is evident that the UN lacks the constitutional mandate and political independence to undertake such a challenge without a thorough overhaul in its authority structure. Such reforms would require the approval of the very actors whose behavior would then become subject to international law, and these actors show no readiness to move in such a direction. It is for this reason that the only way to close the accountability gap is to rely on civil society activism as a legitimate source of normative authority. One such responsive effort, used in the past, has been to convene a tribunal based on the authority of ordinary people as representatives of society to uphold international law in the event of the failure of the UN or governments to do so. In the setting of the Ukraine Crisis such a tribunal could be entrusted with investigating the three levels of the war from the perspective of international law, with the addition of an aspirational norm that extends the reach of the tribunal to the geopolitical domain.
At present, inter-governmentally generated international law not surprisingly fails to criminalize geopolitical wrongdoing. It is not surprising because throughout modern history geopolitical actors have been the principal architects of international law and vigilant about protecting their freedom of action. I believe it has become desirable to posit the existence of a residual civil society legislative capacity somewhat analogous to the residual role of the General Assembly of the UN if at an impasse is present in the Security Council with respect to a serious threat to international peace and security. On this basis a civil society endorsement of the concept of ‘geopolitical crime’ is justified to bring the US/Russia geopolitical war within the ambit of the authority of The Ukraine Wars Tribunal.
There are two obvious weaknesses of this line of thinking that should be acknowledged. First, the Tribunal lacks any formal enforcement capability, although it could call for civil society boycotts and divestments that were effective in exerting transformative pressure on South Africa’s apartheid regime. Secondly, the activist impulses that fund and make operational The Ukrainian Wars Tribunal are themselves self-consciously partisan, which is of course no different than intergovernmental institutions. Such partisanship will be subject to criticism from start to finish, which gives some sense that the nature of its undertaking and belief structures will become transparent through time.
It is evident that this proposal is principally an undertaking whose effectiveness will in the first instance registered symbolically rather than substantively in the sense that nothing immediate will change behaviorally in the prosecution and conduct of the three Ukrainian wars. Symbolic impacts should not be underestimated. The political outcomes in the most salient wars since 1945, including the epic struggles against colonialism, were controlled, often after many years of devastating warfare, by the weaker side if measured by material, especially military capabilities. I recall hearing the American president, Lyndon Johnson, in the mid-1960s boast that there was no way the United States could lose the war to Vietnam, ‘a tenth-rate Asian power.’ Symbolic venues shift power balances due to the commitments of people, and even material interests over time. The struggles against slavery, racism, and patriarchy each manifest this dynamic. What at first seemed futile somehow became history!
In concluding, I hope some readers throughout the world will feel motivated enough to make the Peoples Ukraine Wars Tribunal a reality! It should be thought about as contributing to the formation of A Peace Scenario that challenges the now ascendant Victory Scenario.
The UN Security Council unanimously adopted a statement on Friday supporting the secretary-general’s efforts to search for a peaceful solution to the conflict in Ukraine, in the first such display of unity since February 24. The entire meeting on Friday lasted only about a minute.
Russia’s support for the statement, drafted by Mexico and Norway, shows Moscow’s readiness for diplomacy, Mexico’s permanent representative the UN Juan Ramón de la Fuente Ramírez told TASS.
“The Security Council expresses strong support for the efforts of the secretary-general in the search for a peaceful solution,” says the statement.
The SC also “expresses deep concern regarding the maintenance of peace and security of Ukraine” and “recalls that all member states have undertaken, under the Charter of the United Nations, the obligation to settle their international disputes by peaceful means.”
While the AP says the text of the statement does not contain the phrases “war,” “conflict,” “invasion” or “special military operation,” the SC press release did refer to an “invasion” of Ukraine.
Mexico’s UN ambassador, whose country helped draft the statement, was asked about criticism that it took two months to draft and merely supports the UN secretary general.
Juan Ramon De La Fuente told the AP there has to be a start somewhere and is “a very first initial step but it points on the right direction”.
Other media reports said:
U.S. Intel To Ukraine Is ‘Legitimate, Lawful, Limited’, Says Pentagon
Following is a detail on U.S. officials deflecting questions that U.S. intelligence helped Ukraine kill top Russian generals and sink the Moskva missile cruiser.
The U.S. defence department’s spokesperson, John Kirby, held a press conference on Friday where he was asked about reports that the Pentagon has provided information with Ukraine to help target and kill Russian generals.
Kirby would not corroborate the reports, instead saying Ukraine “makes the decisions” when it comes to how they use U.S. intel and emphasizing the importance of being careful when discussing intelligence-sharing with other countries.
Kirby told reporters:
“We provide [Ukrainians] what we believe to be relevant and timely information about Russian units that could allow them to adjust and execute their self- defence to the best of their ability.”
The Pentagon spokesperson also emphasized that other countries have provided Ukraine with information on Russian troop movements:
“We are not the only sole source of intelligence and information to the Ukrainians. They get intelligence from other nations as well. And they have a pretty robust intelligence collection capability of their own.
And if they do decide to do something with that intelligence, then they make the decisions about acting on it.
The kind of intelligence that we provide them – it’s legitimate, it’s lawful, and it’s limited.”
Kirby also stressed that Ukraine combines intelligence from many countries and the U.S. is “not the sole source of intelligence and information to the Ukrainians”.
Stop Leak, Says Biden
Biden urged top intelligence and defense officials to stop leaks about the U.S. providing key information to aid Ukrainian forces.
In a call with top defense and intelligence officials, Biden called for fewer leaks about U.S. intelligence sharing with Ukraine.
NBC News reports:
On the phone with CIA Director William Burns, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Biden’s message was that such disclosures “distract from our objective,” one official said. The other official said Biden conveyed that the leaks should stop.
The CIA and the Office of the DNI declined to comment. The Pentagon and the National Security Council did not respond to requests for comment.
U.S. officials previously confirmed claims that U.S. intelligence helped Ukrainian forces, aiding both in the killing Russian generals and the location of the Russian warship Moskva, which was sunk last month.
Close U.S. Intel Support To Ukraine
The Guardian’s Dan Sabbagh wrote that confirmation of the information sharing around the Moskva is a “a fresh demonstration of the close intelligence support Kyiv is receiving from Washington”:
It is unclear how far the U.S. intelligence helped Ukraine launch an accurate double missile strike on the Moskva, and the U.S. officials briefing the information insisted the targeting decision was a matter for the Ukrainians alone.
But the fact that the U.S. was willing to confirm it had at least some involvement, three weeks after the Moskva went down on 14 April, shows how far Washington is willing to acknowledge its critical backseat role in the 10-week-long war, even at the risk of openly antagonizing Moscow.”
It appears now that the U.S. President is uncomfortable with the reports. Administration officials have expressed fears that the close association and intelligence sharing could provoke Putin into an escalation. Despite the reports, the Administration denied claims that the U.S. was involved in the attack on the Russian ship and that information was aided in targeting the Russian generals.
Western Intel To Ukraine Won’t Thwart Its Goals, Says Russia
The Kremlin said on Thursday that the U.S., Britain and other NATO countries were “constantly” feeding intelligence to Ukraine but this would not stop Russia from achieving its military objectives there.
“Our military knows well that the United States, Britain and NATO permanently supply the Ukrainian army with intelligence data and other parameters. This is well-known,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters. “At the same time, [such actions] are unable to prevent the achievement of the special military operation’s goals.”
Peskov’s comments come one day after a report by The New York Times said U.S. intelligence was assisting Kyiv with tracking Russia’s top military leaders in Ukraine.
Information provided by Western nations combined with Ukrainian intelligence has reportedly helped Ukrainian forces target Russian positions with artillery strikes and other types of attacks.
The Ukrainian government has claimed that a dozen Russian generals have been killed since the war began 70 days ago, but U.S. officials have not confirmed this figure.
Peskov said Russia is doing “everything necessary” to counter intelligence sharing, Russian media said Thursday.
Russia has accused the West of waging a proxy war against Moscow by supplying Ukraine with billions of dollars worth of defensive aid.
The U.S., NATO and other allied nations have vowed to continue arming Ukraine as Russia doubles down in its deadly campaign in eastern and southern parts of the country.
Back Kiev
The latest U.S. military aid package to Ukraine, announced by U.S. President Biden on Friday, is worth $150m, U.S. secretary of state Antony Blinken confirmed.
The latest tranche of assistance includes 25,000 155mm artillery rounds, as well as counter-artillery radars, jamming equipment, field equipment and spare parts.
With the latest $150m U.S. security aid package to Ukraine, U.S.’s military assistance to Kyiv since the Russian invasion began has reached around $3.8bn, Blinken said.
Howitzer systems provided by the U.S. required training for Ukrainian soldiers, and Kirby told reporters 220 have received training and 150 more are currently being trained.
U.S. lawmakers additionally took steps last week to revive a World War II-era policy that would ensure that not only would Ukraine gain faster access to U.S. arms, but also all nations in Eastern Europe affected by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war would.
The policy was agreed to just days after Russia suggested it would also set its sights on Moldova.
The UK government has said it will give Ukraine 287 mobile generators in addition to 569 generators it had donated earlier.
Biden And Trudeau Like To Hold Russia Accountable
US President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, in a phone call on Friday, underscored their commitment to holding Russia accountable for its invasion of Ukraine and discussed efforts to provide security assistance to Ukraine, the White House said in a statement.
Poland Might Be A Source Of Threat, Says Kremlin
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that there was hostile rhetoric coming out of Poland, and that Warsaw could be “a source of threat”.
Poland has led calls for the EU to toughen sanctions and for the Western NATO alliance to arm Ukraine as it tries to resist Russian forces that have poured into its east.
Stanislaw Zaryn, a spokesman for the Polish security services, said that Russia has been conducting a coordinated disinformation campaign against Poland for several days, including suggestions it could be a threat to Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
Polish Environment and Climate Minister Anna Moskwa said on Monday that “Poland is proud to be on Putin’s list of unfriendly countries.”
POW Exchange
Over 40 Ukrainian soldiers and civilians captured by Russia, among them 11 women and a cleric, have been freed in a new prisoner exchange, Kyiv said.
“Another prisoner exchange has taken place: 41 people, including 11 women were brought home,” Deputy Prime Minister Iryna Vereshchuk said in a statement on Telegram.
Among those released were 28 soldiers and 13 civilians, one of whom was a member of the clergy of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church.
She did not say how many Russians were released in exchange.
Ukraine’s Wheat Harvest May Fall By 35%, Raising Fears Of Global Shortage
A Guardian report said:
Wheat production in Ukraine is likely to be at least a third lower than in normal years, according to analysis of satellite images of the country.
Ukraine is one of the world’s biggest exporters of wheat, but the war is taking a toll on the country’s agriculture and food supplies, sparking fears of shortages or higher prices around the world.
Last year, Ukraine produced about 33m tonnes of wheat, of which it exported about 20m tonnes, making it the sixth-largest exporter globally. This year, with the situation as it stands, the country only has the potential to produce about 21m tonnes of wheat, down about 23% on the average of the previous five years, according to analysis published on Friday by the satellite analysis company Kayrros.
But with more disruption from the war extremely likely, and fighting concentrated in the east where the main wheat-growing regions are found, Kayrros estimates that the wheat harvest is likely to be down by at least 35% this year compared with 2021.
Ukraine has already moved to ban exports of grain and many other food products, in an effort to preserve its own food supplies. Transport is also difficult, with Russia blockading the country’s Black Sea coast.
Global wheat prices leapt by 20% in March, owing to the direct impact of the war on wheat production, as well as higher energy and fertiliser prices around the world. These costs were already rising before Russia’s invasion, but have been sent soaring further as countries have moved to cut imports of oil and gas from Russia.
While wheat prices have since slipped back slightly from record highs, analysts at Rabobank predict they could rise again due to the war in Ukraine, where it is predicting production could fall by slightly more than 20%, as well as sanctions on Russia and dry and hot conditions in other wheat-producing nations including the U.S. and India.
Carlos Mera, an analyst at Rabobank, said prices would remain high as it was unlikely leading global producers would be able to increase production significantly, because of high fertilizer prices and pressure to grow other crops where prices were also rising.
Russia and Ukraine are also big producers of fertilizer, which has further raised input prices for farmers.
He added: “It is not just a question of how much wheat Ukraine will harvest but how much it will manage to export. Normally 90% of grain exports flow through ports into the Black Sea but we are not going to see that [because of Russian military action].” He said exports via train had also been affected by attacks on railway lines.
Food price rises are now a serious cause of concern around the world. People on low incomes in developing countries were already facing problems because the pandemic had depleted their resources, while conflict has led to countries such as Yemen and Afghanistan teetering on the brink of famine.
The climate crisis is also taking a toll. In recent weeks, a heatwave in south Asia has left millions of people facing heat stress. The heat is likely to reduce crop yields, and could affect India’s wheat harvest.
Last year, heatwaves in Canada disrupted its wheat-growing and led to higher prices for pasta. Australia, another major wheat producer, has had heavy flooding this year.
In the UK, Brexit has added about 6% to food prices, according to the London School of Economics.
Much of Ukraine’s wheat went to the Middle East, forcing countries there to be even more dependent on Russia for grain supplies. Egypt, for instance, which will host the next UN climate summit, Cop27, this November, is reliant on Ukraine and Russia for about 80% of its wheat.
Kayrros uses artificial intelligence combined with data from satellites to monitor commodities, biomass and other environmental concerns such as methane. Antoine Halff, its co-founder, said: “Monitoring geopolitical events in near real-time is critical to understanding them and mitigating their impacts. The impacts of the terrible war in Ukraine can sadly be seen from space, and this data illustrates the specter of rising food prices and hunger the world faces as a consequence of this conflict.”
British Ambassador To Moscow Summoned
The British ambassador to Moscow was summoned to the Russian foreign ministry to discuss UK sanctions on Russian media.
Splintered lies the ethics,
In varying degrees Which both have bent
The Pandavas less, the Kauravas more
Oh, when will this bloodletting end …?
(‘Andha Yug’, Dharamveer Bharati)
1
The Russia-Ukraine war shows no signs of ending. However, there continue to be constant statements, discussions, and write ups from leaders, diplomats, experts, officials, scholars and ordinary citizens on various aspects related to the war.
Whatever the significance of this whole exercise in the discussion of the causes, implications, effects, consequences etc. of war, it has been if little help in exerting any positive influence. It seems that modern violent civilization doesn’t appear to have many options, not only by politicians and diplomats, but also by various experts and scholars who have taken their stand on the war. It can also be said that that they do not perceive modern civilization as violent. The UN general secretary says that the Russia-Ukraine war is an absurdity, an evil in the modern civilization of the twenty-first century. This presumes as if this absurdity or evil has fallen from the skies and has nothing to do with the world order of which he is the general secretary of its central body!
At the beginning of the war, I wrote an article titled ‘Russia-Ukraine War: Why Civil Resistance Doesn’t Work?’. A suggestion has been made in the article that civil society should seriously and holistically contemplate a possible alternative to modern violent civilization. People did not pay much attention to that article. Rather, even a magazine like ‘Mainstream Weekly’ found that article ‘outdated’. I write this present article as a sequel to the first a one mentioned here.
Civil resistance held world over including Russia against the Russia-Ukraine war has been snuffed out. The course of expressing human concerns/condolences on the deaths, sufferings and displacement of the citizens of Ukraine has also faded.
Russia, America, European countries and NATO, the major players of this war, are making claims to establish a lasting peace after the war. They are trying to explain that the manufacture and purchase of more weapons and the steady expansion of NATO is the guarantee of lasting peace. Russia, on the other hand, continues to believe that it has taught the forces behind Ukraine a lesson for the future. Looking only at the last two decades of the twenty-first century, the hollowness of the claims of achieving lasting peace between the wars and strife in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Armenia-Azerbaijan, Ukraine is axiomatic.
Russia has threatened the countries supporting Ukraine in the war to be prepared to face the consequences. Since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine war, there are fears ranging from the threat of a third world war to a nuclear Armageddon. As international relations, especially in economic-trade matters turn increasingly competitive, even a peaceful economy seems an impossibility. If after the Russia-Ukraine war the world is actually going to be bi-polar or multi-polar again instead of uni-polar, that is not going to stop wars and the manufacturing and trading of weapons.
Anti-Americans are quite vocal about the Russia-Ukraine war. Most of America’s opponents are internally victims of ‘Americanism’. Their anti-America stance is driven by a suppressed desire to see some other country as powerful as America. Be America at the top, or Russia, or China – if there are weapons, they will find their wars, and if there are wars, they will find their weapons. In fact, as long as there is supremacy-culture in the world order, there can be no peace at all.
2
It seems that the mind of the masters of modern industrial civilization is unable to comprehend those sincere efforts are the need of the hour to build a non-violent human civilization for lasting peace.
Whether one looks at political, diplomatic, military leadership, or even business leaders or intelligentsia – the ruling-class, living a luxurious life at the cost of the working masses of the world, is willy nilly a vocal or silent supporter of the prevailing violence. Celebrities from different fields like film, sports, fashion, music, dance, literature etc. may also be included in this category. Most celebrities, knowingly or unknowingly, are evolving into the ‘ambassadors’ of today’s violent civilization. The life of modern man would not have been so intensely surrounded from all sides by the competition to produce, sell and use all types of weapons.
In this civilization not only the body but also humankind’s soul is strapped with various types of metals and explosives. And unfortunately, we are led to believe it’s the best stage of human civilization ever! The parts of the world that are left behind in this race, at whose cost this violent civilization is established, are expected and encouraged to continue racing in the direction of achieving that very stage.
Yet the desire for peace of the inhabitants of this modern violent civilization, which runs on two strong wheels of arms and market, is not all that faltering. People affected by external discord are found to take various measures with the aim of achieving inner peace. It has become a big business, which is thriving in this violent civilization. It is claimed in this peace-business that inner peace will bring outer peace. Inner peace is possible only when you keep yourself unaffected by the outside world. (That is, enjoy it to the fullest, but there is no need to challenge or change it.) In this business, the words of many so-called spiritualists and tele-evangelists, philosophers-writers and even some scientists as well are quoted frequently. Along with this, activities like Peace Day, Peace Prize, Peace Conference, Peace Ambassador are organized under the auspices of global organizations, non-governmental organizations and governments.
The strings of operation of these activities are mainly associated with America, whose foundation, not only existence, is based on violence. In the midst of this whole business of peace, wars, civil wars, guerrilla wars, racial wars, terrorist wars go on in different corners of the world. Needless to say, the violent civilization has spread all this business in its defense. People do not understand that lasting peace cannot be an intrinsic attribute of a violent civilization.
3
It is not that the question of violence has not been contemplated under violent civilization. It has done a lot. In addition to violence related to war, many other types of structural violence have been considered and analyzed by several important thinkers. But as there is no concrete thought of non-violent civilization, violent civilization continues to spread despite serious contemplation on the issue of violence. A considerable amount of the post-critique of capitalism and socialism established by adopting capitalist means and processes, as well as the present-day corporate capitalism. But in spite of that the gaping black hole of violent civilization consumes all objects relentlessly.
Violent civilization is not without achievements. It has deep attractions of its own, which have not been so manifest in earlier civilizations. It provides man with an unprecedented world of consumerism while fueling man’s attitudes like greed, hatred, revenge, domination, thrill, adventure etc. It has the expertise that even the oppressed and victim consider themselves to be natural members of violent civilization. They would have hoped that one day they too would dominate/destroy others, and would attain the state of complete consumerism. Capitalism, the leader of violent civilization, descends in the most backward alleyways of the far-flung world in order to cater its public. The roots of modern violent civilization are deep and widespread. Its story is infinite and immense. Perhaps this is the reason that any thinking related to non-violent civilization in the modern or pre-modern eras, does not find fertile ground to grow. Such thinking, as Gandhi said, is one in which economics regulates ethics and ethics regulates economics.
4
There are ample sources of thinking inspired by the creation of non-violent civilizations all over the world. Gandhi’s thinking presents a serious and coherent alternative to modern violent civilization among them. Along with presenting the philosophy of a just human civilization, he has also provided the mode of action to achieve it. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia has described Gandhi’s civil disobedience method of resistance to injustice as the greatest revolution in human history so far. Many activists/leaders of the world have used Gandhi’s methodology in their struggles.
It is Gandhi’s strength, and at the same time weakness, that he was born in a colonized part of the world. Strength, because, despite being born in the colonized country, he could nurture an original thinking opposing colonialism, an initial stage of modern violent civilization. Weakness, because, being a thinker of the colonized land, he could not get the same recognition and importance as the thinkers born in the colonialist countries got.
Along with economic exploitation at the core of colonialism was the belief that it was a divine duty to bring the enslaved populations out of the pit of ignorance. Therefore, Gandhi, a resident of a slave country, could not be accepted as a provider of a perfect alternative civilization. However, several ordinary and prominent people from the colonialist countries accepted Gandhi as an alternative thinker and leader. Many of them also got involved with Gandhi’s struggle for independence.
Gandhi took his sources of thinking from all available sources. The bibliography of ‘Hind Swaraj’ mentions two Indian authors – Dadabhai Naoroji and RC Dutta. The rest of the authors – Tolstoy, Sherard, Carpenter, Taylor, Blount, Thoreau, Ruskin, Mazzini, Plato, Max Nordau – are from outside India. After Gandhi, many important scholars have contemplated towards building a non-violent civilization. There are many neo-Marxists among them. Nandkishore Acharya has written, “Now even the new Marxist thinkers like Meszaros, Leibovitz and Terry Eagleton have started talking about decentralized technology and production system, which is neither controlled by the corporate, nor by the state. Meszaros explains globalization as ‘globalization of unemployment’. Its solution can be found only in the choice of the productive forces, which together with production have also contained solutions to the problem of distribution. In fact, due to indigenous technology and non-violent production relations resulting from it, exploitative centralization of capital is not possible and the ideal of equitable distribution of profits, that is, economic equality, is also automatically implemented to a large extent.
“Truth and non-violence, according to Gandhi, should not only be considered as personal virtues, but their socio-economic return should be reflected not only in the aims but also in the process, that is, not only as an end, but also as a means. ‘Gandhi Hai Vikalp’ (Gandhi is the alternative), Prakrit Bharati Academy, Jaipur, 2021, pp. 49-50)
Therefore, an outline of non-violent civilization can be delineated easily from the thinking of Gandhi’s contemporary and later thinkers. But it is a pity that in all the debate about the Russia-Ukraine war, no attention has been given to that crucial task.
India’s position in this context is very bad. No modern leader in India believed in Gandhi’s critique of modern industrial civilization and his vision of its alternative. They wanted to make India like colonial countries. Even today the situation is more or less the same. Rather, under the rule of the present government, not only blind leaps are being taken in the direction of violent civilization, an entire narrative is being fabricated and spread to justify Gandhi’s assassination. Some people take the strange pleasure of killing Gandhi again and again by firing bullets at his photo. There are many such people in the country today who say that had Gandhi been alive today, they would have shot him.
Obviously, all this does not make any difference to the dead Gandhi. However, it remains to be seen that ‘Gandhi’s India’ remains an arena of multi-level violence. Dr. Lohia wrote, “The first half of the twentieth century produced two novel phenomena, atomic bomb and Mahatma Gandhi, and the century’s second half will struggle and suffer to make its choice between the two.” (Collected Works of Dr. Rammanohar Lohia, volume 3, Anamika Prakashan, Delhi, 2011, p. 246)
Now two decades of the twenty-first century have passed. Has modern man decided to suffer by choosing the atomic bomb? Or is the resolve to establish a non-violent human civilization in one corner of his mind as active as before? If this is so, then there will definitely be victory of life instinct over the death instinct related to violent civilization.
(The writer associated with the socialist movement is a former teacher of Delhi University and a fellow of Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla)
I spoke yesterday with a friend who also lived through the horror period in the aftermath of the camp’s destruction after the Zionist invasion of Lebanon. He told me that he felt he was living in times of terror again when reading this memoir, and indeed these were days of horror par excellence.
The white Mercedes cars of the Zionist intelligence used to enter the camp daily created a great deal of terror.
The people of the camp knew that the white Mercedes cars carrying Zionist intelligence officers. Once a teacher in the camp was standing on the main street when a white Mercedes taking the Zionist invaders’ intelligence passed by him. The car stopped, and the officer asked him to go with them.
He went with them to the headquarters of the military governor, which is the building that was blown up at a later time when the Lebanese resistance began to attack the occupants. Of course, he refused to work with them.
They tried to intimidate him and gave him a day to think and return to them; he fled to Beirut the same day.
The camp was still in a really terrible state. Destruction was everywhere, and worse was the state of terror that we were experiencing literally every hour.
I slept at home, and sometimes I slept at friends’ houses here and there. I only moved into the camp during the day but cautiously.
The militia of the Lebanese quisling General Luhud used to come to the camp and spread terror by shooting and beating the residents.
They sometimes entered the camp alone or with the Zionists. And when they reached the camp entrance, the news spread quickly.
Then the camp’s young men disappeared from public places because everyone was subject to arrest.
One evening, we heard cries that the luhud quisling forces were coming into the camp. I was sitting at home with my neighbor Ramzi. The residents were afraid of the repeating of the Sabra and Satilla massacre.
In this massacre more than 3000 Palestinian civilians were murdered in cold blood by Israeli backed Lebanese right-wing militia under the protection and the supervision of the Zionist forces.
Every man tried to arm himself with a stick, a knife or anything. I took a knife and left the house. On my way, I saw the women and children panicking and running without knowing where to go. I tried to calm them down, telling them not to be afraid.
I will never forget that sight of horror as long as I am alive, seeing women and children in this state of terror. They were running, confused in all directions. I would never forget the view of a woman running in a state of horror, carrying a child in one arm and holding another with the other hand and looking back to be sure the other children are running.
Some young men had hunting rifles carried them, ready to defend the people of the camp. However nothing happened and the whole thing was a cry of a man from the camp who saw armed men from luhud militia backed by the Zionists. This man has lost some of his family in the sabra and Shatila massacre.
When I think of those days, I feel great respect for the people of the camp and the Palestinian people for this extraordinary capacity for endurance that is beyond description. Those, who read me after thirty years or more when the Zionists are defeated, must remember that Palestinians faced them bravely and did not possess anything.
Palestinians confronted Zionists with the absolute faith that they would one day be defeated despite the military arsenal and the unlimited Western support.
Palestinians know that the Zionist coming from the ghettos of Eastern Europe are occupiers whose existence in Palestine depends only on terror. And the balance of force is a changing factor and not forever.
Palestinians know that the Zionist invaders seek to destroy the entire Palestinian existence, and every Palestinian knows that the struggle against Zionists is existential. And despite the state of weakness Palestinians are going through, Palestinians strongly believe that there is no future for the Zionist apartheid project in Palestine and that it must end one day.
Palestinians know they are in the situation of the natives of South Africa in the days of the apartheid regime. The native experienced all sorts of oppression. The cooperation between the Zionists and the apartheid regime in South Africa was close because they belonged to the same type of murderous regimes.
I must admit that it was one of the happiest days of my life to see the collapse of the apartheid regime in South Africa. This is precisely what will happen in Palestine sometime in the future.
Salim Nazzal is a Palestinian Norwegian researcher, lecturer playwright and poet, wrote more than 17 books such as Perspectives on thought, culture and political sociology, in thought, culture and ideology, the road to Baghdad. Palestine in heart.
One has lost count of religious conclaves of Hindu ‘saints’, friendly to RSS, calling for violent cleansing of lawful Indian Muslims. It was not long ago that a senior RSS luminary who also graced the high constitutional office of Governor of Tripura, Tathagata Roy reminded through a tweet that “the Hindu-Muslim problem won’t be solved without a Civil War.” Roy claimed that he was only reminding Hindus of an unfinished task wished by Syama Prasad Mookerji, an icon for RSS cadres ruling India today.[i] In fact, it has been the most favourite theme of RSS since its inception in 1925. India is for ‘Ramzade’ (children of Ram) and out of bound for ‘Babarzade’ (children of Babar) who are also described as ‘Haramazade’ (the illegitimate children).
The RSS and its Hindutva appendages have been demanding revenge for crimes against Hindus in history but have singled out the medieval period only in order to focus on the persecution by ‘Muslim’ rulers. It is really surprising that in a country like India whose civilization is more than five thousand years old, a period of 400-500 years (‘Muslim’ Rule) only is put under the scanner. In order to arrive at truth we need to inquire into about the nature of ‘Muslim’ rule. The most crucial issue is: Why have the common Muslims of today’s India to pay for the sins of the ‘Muslim’ rulers who had friendly and cordial relations (including matrimonial) with the high Caste hierarchy of the Hindu society? We also need to investigate whether ‘Hindu’ history was devoid of religious, social and political persecution.
The Hindutva zealots demanding Muslim-free India must know that all ‘Muslim’ rules survived due to the Hindu high Castes joining the ‘Muslim’ rulers in running their empires. How solid this unity was can be gauged by the fact that after Akbar no Mughal emperor was born of a Muslim mother. Moreover, Hindu high Castes provided brain and muscles to the ‘Muslim’ rulers faithfully. Likewise, Mughal rule established by Babar who was invited by a section of Hindu kings to seize India was the rule of Hindu high Castes also.
Aurobindo Ghose who played prominent role in providing Hindu foundation to the Indian nationalism confessed that Mughal rule continued for over a century due to the fact that Mughal rulers gave Hindus, “positions of power and responsibility, used their brain and arm to preserve” their kingdom.[ii] Renowned historian Tara Chand relying on the primary source material of the medieval period concluded that the from the end of 16th century to the middle of 19th century, “it may reasonably be concluded that in the whole of India, excepting the western Punjab, superior rights in land had come to vest in the hands of Hindus” most of whom happened to be Rajputs.[iii]
Maasir al-Umara a biographical dictionary of the officers in the Mughal Empire beginning from 1556 to 1780 [Akbar to Shah Alam] is regarded as the most authentic record of the high rank officials employed by the Mughal kings. This work was compiled by Shahnawaz Khan and his son Abdul Hai between 1741 and 1780. According to it Mughal rulers in this period employed around 100 (out of 365) high-ranking officials most of them “Rajputs from Rajputana, the midlands, Bundelkhand and Maharashtra”. Brahmins followed Rajputs in manning the Mughal administration so far as the number was concerned.[iv] Interestingly, Kashi Nagri Pracharini Sabha [established in 1893] “committed to the cause of Hindi as official language” published Hindi translation of this book in 1931.
It is nobody’s argument that Aurangzeb did not commit heinous crimes against his Indian subject. It needs to be remembered that his cruelty was not restricted to non-Muslims, his own father, brothers, Shias, those Muslims who did not follow his brand of Islam and Muslim ruling families in the eastern, central and western parts of India faced brutal repression and were annihilated. Aurangzeb executed renowned Sufi saint, Sarmad in the precinct of Jama Masjid of Delhi. It is also true that there were countless cases when Hindus and their religious places were violently targetted during Aurangzeb’s despotic rule. However, there are contemporary records available of his patronizing Hindu and Jain religious places (a living example is the grand Gauri Shankar temple, a stone’s throw away from Lahori Gate of Red Fort, built during Shahjahan’s reign continued functioning during Aurangzeb’s reign).[v] Reducing all his crimes to the repression of Hindus only will tantamount to reducing the gravity of his crimes against humanity.
No sane person can deny that Somnath Temple in Gujarat was desecrated, looted and razed by Mahmud Ghazi (Mahmud Ghaznavi) in 1026. But a fact remains buried that it was done with the active help and participation of local Hindu chieftains. The most prominent ideologue of RSS, MS Golwalkar while referring to the desecration and destruction of Somnath Temple by Mahmud Ghazi added:
“He crossed the Khyber Pass and set foot in Bharat to plunder the wealth of Somnath. He had to cross the great desert of Rajasthan. There was a time when he had no food, and no water for his army, and even for himself left to his fate, he would have perished…But no, Mahmud Ghazi made the local chieftains to believe that Saurashtra had expansionist designs against them. In their folly and pettiness they believed him. And they joined him. When Mahmud Ghazi launched his assault on the great temple, it was the Hindu, blood of our blood, flesh of our flesh, soul of our soul-who stood in the vanguard of his army. Somnath was desecrated with the active help of the Hindus. These are facts of history.”[vi]
These were not ‘Muslim’ rulers only who were defiling Hindu temples. Swami Vivekananda shared the fact that,
“The temple of Jagannath is an old Buddhistic temple. We took this and others over and re-Hinduised them. We shall have to do many things like that yet”.[vii]
It was not an isolated desecration. Swami Dayanand Saraswati who is regarded as a Prophet of Hindutva while dealing with the contribution of Shankaracharya in his tome, Satyarth Prakash wrote:
“For ten years he toured all over the country, refuted Jainism and advocated the Vedic religion. All the broken images that are now-a-days dug out of the earth were broken in the time of Shankar, whilst those that are found whole here and there under the ground had been buried by the Jainis for fear of their being broken.”[viii]
According to ‘Hindu’ narrative of ancient Indian history the last of Maurya dynasty’s Buddhist king (Ashoka being one), Brihadratha was assassinated by Pushyamitra Shunga, a Brahmin in 184 BCE thus ending the rule of a renowned Buddhist dynasty and establishing the rule of Shunga dynasty. DN Jha an authority on ancient Indian history referred to Divyavadana, a Buddhist Sanskrit work from the early centuries which described how Buddhist and Jain religious places were destroyed by Pushyamitra Shunga, a great persecutor of Buddhists.
“He is said to have marched out with a large army, destroying stupas, burning monasteries and killing monks as far as Sakala, now known as Sialkot, where he announced a prize of one hundred dinars for every head of a Shramana (opposed to Vedas).”
Jha also presented evidence from the grammarian Patanjali, a contemporary of the Shungas, who famously stated in his Mahabhashya that Brahmins and Shramanas were eternal enemies, like the snake and the mongoose.[ix]
In the Hindutva narrative the persecution of Sikh Gurus and their followers by Mughal rulers is used to spread hatred against present day Indian Muslims. The Mughal rulers specially Aurangzeb’s armies committed the most heinous and unspeakable crimes against Sikhs. Was it Muslims versus Sikhs? The contemporary Sikh records reject such an interpretation. According to a Sikh site during the last and the most brutal siege of Anandpur Sahib in 1704, “The Muslims and the Hindu hill rajas completely surrounded the city and cut it off from outside supplies.” While trying to escape the Mughal invaders,
“The younger sons of Guru Gobind Singh, Baba Zorawar Singh age 9 and Baba Fateh Singh age 7, were separated from the group in the confusion. They walked through the rugged jungle with their holy grandmother, Mata Gujri ji (mother of Guru Gobind Singh) until they came to small village where they took shelter. An old servant of the Guru’s household, Gangu, heard they were there and came to Mataji. With sweet words he requested that they go with him to his village. He expressed care and concern, but his heart was dark with betrayal. Cold, wet and alone, Mata Gujri gratefully went with Gangu to his house. For a few gold coins, Gangu betrayed their whereabouts to the Moghul army. At dawn, a loud banging came on the door and the soldiers of the evil governor Wazir Khan came to escort the holy family to Sarhind. As they traveled through the city, people thronged to see them pass offering words of encouragement. They shouted curses at the Brahmin and were shocked at the depravity of the Moghul governor”.[x]
Sir Jadunath Sarkar (1870-1958), a renowned historian, held no brief for Islam or Muslim rulers in India. In fact, he is regarded as a narrator of the Hindu history during the Mughal rule. However, his description of the Maratha invasion of Bengal in 1742, too, makes it clear that this army of ‘Hindu nation’ cared least about honour and property of Hindus of Bengal. According to Sarkar, “the roving Maratha bands committed wanton destruction and unspeakable outrage”.[xi]
Sarkar, in his monumental work on the history of Bengal, reproduced eyewitness accounts of the sufferings of Bengali Hindus at the hands of Marathas. According to one such eyewitness, Gangaram,
“The Marathas snatched away gold and silver, rejecting everything else. Of some people they cut off the hands, of some the nose and ear; some they killed outright. They dragged away the beautiful women and freed them only after raping them”.[xii]
Another eyewitness, Vaneshwar Vidyalankar, the court Pandit of the Maharaja of Bardwan, narrated the horrifying tales of atrocities committed by the Marathas against Hindus in the following words:
“Shahu Raja’s troops are niggard of pity, slayers of pregnant women and infants, of Brahmans and the poor, fierce of spirit, expert in robbing the property of every one and committing every kind of sinful act.”[xiii]
The contemporary records prove that Aurangzeb rule was also the rule of Rajputs and Kshatriyas [members of the two of the four Hindu Castes in order of precedence after Brahmins]. Aurangzeb never faced Shivaji in the battle-field. It was his commander-in-chief, a Rajput ruler of Amer (Rajasthan), Jay Singh II (1688–1743) who was sent to subjugate Shivaji. He was conferred the title of ‘Sawai’ [one and a quarter times superior to his contemporaries] chief by Aurangzeb in 1699 and thus came to be known as Maharaja Sawai Jai Singh. He was also given the title of Mirza Raja [a Persian title for a royal prince] by Aurangzeb. The other titles bestowed on him by other Mughal rulers were ‘Sarmad-i-Rajaha-i-Hind’ [eternal ruler of India], ‘Raj Rajeshvar’ [lord of kings] and ‘Shri Shantanu ji’ [wholesome king]. These titles are displayed by his descendants even today. This Rajput chief also gave his daughter in marriage to the son of Aurangzeb who became Mughal emperor after Aurangzeb.[xiv]
We have first-hand account of Raja Raghunath Bahadur, a Kayasth who functioned as Deewan Ala (prime minister) of both Shahjahan, and Aurangzeb.[xv] According to a biographical work penned by one of his direct descendants,
“Raja Raghunath Bahadur having attained to the most exalted rank of Diwan Ala (prime minister) was not unmindful of the interests of his caste-fellows [Kayasths]. Raja appointed every one of them to posts of honor and emoluments, according to their individual merits; while many of them were granted titles of honor and valuable jagirs for their services. Not a single Kayasth remained unemployed or in needy circumstances.”[xvi]
This account shows that despite the rule of Aurangzeb, a ‘bigoted Muslim’ a Kayasth prime minister of his was able to patronize his Caste fellows; all Hindus. Aurangzeb was so fond of this Hindu prime minister that after latter’s death in a letter directed vizier (minister) Asad Khan to follow ‘sage guidance’ of Raja Raghunath.[xvii]
The linking of Aurangzeb or other ‘Muslim’ rulers’ crimes committed in the pre-modern India to his/her religion is going to create serious consequences even for ‘Hindu’ version of history as narrated by the RSS. Take for example, Ravana, the king of Lanka who according to again ‘Hindu’ narrative committed unspeakable crimes against Sita, her husband Lord Rama and his companions during 14 years long vanvaas or exile. This Ravana was a learned Brahman who also happened to be one of the greatest worshippers of Lord Shiva. The epic Mahabharata is a story of a great war between two families known as Pandavas and Kauravas (both Kashtriyas) not between Hindus and Muslims but in which 1.2 billion people were slaughtered. Draupadi was disrobed by Kashtriyas. If like Aurangzeb and other ‘Muslim’ rulers the crimes of Ravana, Kauravas, Pushyamitra Shunga, Jai Singh II, Marathas, Gangu Brahmin etc. are linked to their religion then country will turn into a butcher land. Moreover, if revenge is to be taken from the present descendants of the past perpetrators then beginning must be made from the beginning of Indian civilization; turn of Indian Muslims will come far later!
Another crucial fact which is consciously kept under wrap is that despite more than 500 hundreds of ‘Muslim’ rule which according to Hindutva historians was nothing but a project of annihilating Hindus or forcibly converting the latter to Islam, India remained a nation with an absolute Hindu majority. The British rulers held first census in 1871-72. It was the time when even ceremonial ‘Muslim’ rule was over. According to the Census report:
“The population of British India is, in round numbers, divided into 140½ millions [sic] of Hindoos (including Sikhs), or 73½ per cent., 40¾ millions of Mahomedans, or 21½ per cent. And 9¼ millions of others, or barely 5 per cent., including under this title Buddhists and Jains, Christians, Jews, Parsees, Brahmoes…”[xviii]
These figures make it clear that persecution and cleansing of Hindus was not even a secondary project of the ‘Muslim’ rule. If it had been so Hindus would have disappeared from India. At the end of ‘Muslim’ rule Hindus were 73.5% who now according to the 2011 Census have increased to 79.80%. On the contrary Muslims who were 21.5% have been reduced to 14.23%. India seems to be the only country where despite ‘Muslim’ rule of more than half of a millennium the populace did not convert to the religion of the rulers.
It is sad that RSS-BJP rulers of India who are never tired of talking of a powerful Hindu nation; Hindusthan leading the world are forcing the country into a state of civil war. With them around putting one section of Indians against the other there is no need of any foreign enemy to undo a democratic-secular India.
Shamsul Islam is a former teacher of Delhi University
Link for some of S. Islam’s writings in English, Hindi, Urdu, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujarati and video interviews/debates:
http://du-in.academia.edu/ShamsulIslam
Facebook: https://facebook.com/shamsul.islam.332
Twitter: @shamsforjustice
http://shamsforpeace.blogspot.com/
[i] https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/06/20/tripura-governor-tathagata-roy-tweets-the-hindu-muslim-problem-wont-be-solved-without-a-civil-war
[ii] Cited in Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 3, Publication Division Government of India, Delhi, 1992, p. 162.
[iii] Chand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. 1, Publication Division Government of India, Delhi, 1961, p. 124.
[iv] Khan, Shah Nawaz, Abdul Hai, Maasir al-Umara [translated by H Beveridge as Mathir-ul-Umra], volumes 1& 2, Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1979.
[v] Trushke, Audrey, Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth, Penguin, Gurgaon, 2017, pp. 99-106.
[vi] RSS English organ, Organizer, January 4, 1950.
[vii] The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, vol. 3, 264.
[viii] Sarswati, Dayanand, Satyarth Praksh, chapter xi, p. 347.
[ix] https://caravanmagazine.in/reviews-and-essays/dn-jha-destruction-buddhist-sites
[x] https://www.sikhdharma.org/4-sons-of-guru-gobind-singh/
[xi] Jadunath Sarkar (ed.), The History of Bengal-Volume II Muslim Period 1200 A.D.–1757 A.D. (Delhi: BR Publishing, 2003), (first edition 1948), 457.
[xii] Ibid., 457.
[xiii] Ibid., 458.
[xiv] https://www.indianrajputs.com/view/jaipur and https://www.indianrajputs.com/famous/Jai-Singh-II-Amber.php
[xv] It has been corroborated by the French traveller Bernier who was in India during 1658-1670.
[xvi] Lal, Maharaja Lala, Short Account of the Life and Family of Rai Jeewan Lal Bahadur Late Honrary Magistrate Delhi, With Extracts from His Diary Relating to the Times of Mutiny 1857, 1902.
[xvii] Trushke, Audrey, 74-75.
[xviii] Memorandum on the Census Of British India of 1871-72: Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty London, George Edward Eyre and William Spottiswoode, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office 1875, 16.
[It appeared titled ‘Fallacy of the Hindutva project’ in FRONTLINE. Link for access: https://frontline.thehindu.com/cover-story/fallacy-of-the-hindutva-project-aurangzeb-mughals-islamophobia/article38484103.ece]
People who are sincere and hard-working, simple and quiet should be highly valued for these virtues, yet their simplicity and sincerity are often misused by others.
This can also be said about donkeys, who have much the same virtues and have suffered much the same fate. As they are less protected, in their case the mistreatment often extends to cruelty and worse.
There are over 40 million donkeys in the world, and they are among the least understood and the most mistreated creatures on our planet.
Human beings mistakenly refer to the most stupid members of their own species as donkeys. This is just not correct. In fact behavioral studies of donkeys have found them to be sincere, playful, patient and keen to learn.
Munshi Premchand, the famous writer from India, has captured well the virtues of a donkey—“We have never seen a donkey getting angry…He (she) is resolute and steadfast in situations of gain or loss, joy or distress, reflecting many of the virtues of wise sages. Despite this, if someone calls them stupid, then this is a clear case of disrespect for more important virtues.”
Another famous writer Krishan Chander wrote a series of novellas on the experiences of a wise and good-hearted donkey caught in the middle of the distortions of a very selfish and narrow-minded human world.
Such appreciation and understanding of donkeys is however quite rare among most human beings. What is worse, they often turn a blind eye to the mistreatment of donkeys, or even cruelty towards them. If it is cruelty towards cattle or even a dog, it may lead to intervention or even protest, but in the case of a donkey this may be just neglected.
Donkeys serve very well as pack or load animals. They are used to carry loads of sand or bricks or clothes or any other goods. While covering the Od community known for their special skills in construction of foundations and in quarrying work, I learnt about the important contribution made by their donkeys.
In the Thar desert while reporting on water scarcity, I saw villagers going in search of water with their donkeys carrying several empty cans. When a water source was found, the cans were filled with water and if the villager had to go further ahead, the donkey would sometimes return home with the water-load entirely on its own.
Despite the donkeys fulfilling such useful and trustworthy roles, they are often overloaded resulting in very painful journeys for them. If they stop for rest they are beaten. Sometimes they just collapse due to overburdened walking for a long time.
In fact, donkeys being docile are often a target for beating without there being much reason for this. So the owner when frustrated or angry for reasons having nothing to do with the donkey may yet turn to beating the poor animal.
As donkeys are considered a cheaper animal, they are often underfed and veterinary care for them is neglected too. When too old or weak to work to expected capacity, they may just be left to die.
Their meat is sometimes obtained in very cruel ways, being cut off some body parts for cooking and processing while the animal is still alive and can still feel the pain.
The non-domesticated or wild animal of this species is more frequently referred to as ass. The wild ass is badly threatened, in fact endangered, in several of its natural habitats (mostly in desert areas) in Africa, partly due to being hunted for meat and skin or certain body parts.
Hence there is an urgent need for at least some persons and organizations to take up the more specialized work of protecting donkeys/asses/mules and preventing cruelty to them. As this has been a much neglected work so far, there is scope for very useful to be done here.
My own concern for donkeys started when as an 11 years old school student I participated in an essay contest organized by the Society for Prevention of Cruelty Towards Animals. The participants were asked to write on an animal who needed compassion urgently and I chose to write on donkeys.
Once this essay won the coveted prize, I was asked time and again in school and by neighbors regarding what I wrote. Although my small essay had been written with all the seriousness a child could summon, as soon as I told others about the subject I had chosen they burst out laughing.
This is why before concluding I would like to repeat—Please take this plea on behalf of donkeys seriously. Over 4 million donkeys and asses really need more care and compassion.
Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril and Man over Machine.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.