B.RAMAN
On January 27, 2011, Raymond Davis, a member of the staff of the US Consulate-General in Lahore, allegedly shot and killed two Pakistani motorcyclists at a traffic stop in Lahore. He claimed they were armed and about to rob him. A third Pakistani was killed when a U.S. consular car dispatched to help Davis allegedly crushed to death another motorcyclist while speeding along the wrong side of the road. Davis has been detained by the Lahore Police despite his diplomatic immunity and there has been growing public demand in Pakistan---partly spontaneous and partly instigated by anti-US religious elements--- that he should be prosecuted in a Pakistani court and not handed over for trial in the US as would be normally done in such cases. The public anger has been aggravated by the alleged suicide of the wife of one of the Pakistanis killed and by the over-focus of the US State Department on the diplomatic immunity aspect of the case overlooking the human aspect of the case arising from the deaths of three Pakistanis due to the rash and negligent actions of two members of the Consular staff. I have been in receipt of some questions from readers on this subject. I answer them below:
Q. Was Raymond Davis an officer of the USA’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)?
A. It is difficult to say, but my own assessment repeat assessment is that he is probably from the section of the US State Department, which is responsible for the physical security of US diplomatic and consular missions abroad and their personnel. This section does take serving and retired officers on deputation from the CIA and other security agencies. It has often been alleged that it also outsources some of its tasks to private security agencies and gives their staff diplomatic cover (protection ). I tend to believe that the reflexes of Davis and the other officer who rushed to his help were not those of a professional CIA officer. Professional CIA officers are well-trained to maintain their cool under critical circumstances and avoid over-reaction.
Q. Was the US correct in giving diplomatic status to someone who is not performing well-recognised diplomatic functions?
A. Over the years, there have been complaints from many countries that some Governments are in the habit of indiscriminately giving diplomatic status to their officers posted in their foreign missions irrespective of whether they perform well-recognised diplomatic functions or not. Despite this, this practice continues. In the ultimate analysis, it is up to the State Department to decide who among its officers posted in Pakistan will have diplomatic status. In the intitial stages, before the officer leaves for Pakistan, the Government of Pakistan has the right to disagree with the decision of the State Department and refuse to give him a visa on his diplomatic passport to enable him to take up the job. But once the Pakistani Foreign Office gave a diplomatic visa to Raymond Davis and allowed him to join his post in Pakistan, it is bound to respect his diplomatic immunity and cannot wriggle out of this .
Q. It has been alleged that the two Pakistanis killed by Davis belonged to the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Can it be correct?
A. It is difficult to say. From the way they were following Davis, I tend to assess that they were police officers of Pakistan’s Intelligence Bureau (IB), which comes under the Ministry of the Interior, trained in surveillance duties who were probably keeping a mobile surveillance on Davis. They could also be police officers on deputation with the ISI for performing surveillance duties.
Q.What offences has Davis committed under Pakistani laws?
A.He has committed two offences. The first offence is carrying a weapon outside the Consulate premises. It has been reported by the “Express Tribune” of Pakistan that some months ago Rehman Mallik, the Interior Minister, had withdrawn the provision under which foreign diplomats posted in Pakistan were allowed to carry weapons outside their places of work for their personal protection after obtaining a licence from an authorized magistrate. Now, while foreign missions are allowed to keep weapons inside their premises for the protection of the premises, their staff are not allowed to carry weapons outside the premises for their personal protection. They have to seek police assistance if they apprehend any threat to their personal security while moving about outside their places of work. By carrying a weapon even after the withdrawal of the provision, Davis violated Pakistani laws. In my view, a professional CIA officer might not have done this. The second offence committed by Davis was to open fire on the persons following him thereby allegedly killing them.
Q: It has been claimed by the US that he opened fire in exercise of his right of self-defence?
A.It is for the court to decide whether the circumstances of the case justified his opening fire in self-defence.
Q. Whose responsibility it is to investigate and prosecute the case?
A. The responsibility for the initial investigation is that of the Pakistani Police. They are required to investigate irrespective of whether he enjoyed diplomatic status or not. However, they do not have the right to prosecute him before a Pakistani court in view of his diplomatic status.
Q. Can the police subject him to custodial interrogation during the investigation?
A. If diplomatic practices are correctly followed, Davis cannot be kept in police or judicial custody in Pakistan. The normal course would have been to hand him over to the US Consulate with a request that he should remain in Pakistan to assist the investigating authorities and that he should be allowed to leave for the US only after the investigating authorities certify that his presence in Pakistan is no longer required. Under the normal procedure, he would have been interrogated either in the Consulate or in a police station without taking him into police custody. The Pakistani authorities have violated this procedure by detaining him in their custody and by producing him before a court---apparently for seeking his police remand--- without allegedly keeping the US Embassy in the picture.
Q. How has the US State Department handled the case?
A. Badly. The moment the incidents happened the US should have announced a preliminary compensation to the families of the three Pakistanis killed with the promise to consider more after the facts are established. I do not get the impression that this was done. There has been some panic in the US reflexes possibly due to fears that something could happen to Davis in Pakistani custody. This has led to a series of over-reactions such as delaying an already announced visit of President Asif Ali Zardari to the US, the reported cancellation of a meeting between Mrs. Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, and the Pakistani Foreign Minister in the margins of the Munich Security Conference etc. Due to the surge in the US Drone strikes in the tribal belt, there is already some criticism in Pakistan that the US does not respect Pakistan’s sovereignty and that the Zardari regime is not standing up to the US to protect Pakistan’s sovereignty. Such criticism will intensify now. In recent months, there were indications that the post-Lal Masjid raid anger which led to an escalation of jihadi terrorism may be subsiding. These incidents in Lahore and the US mishandling of the sequel could provide fresh oxygen to the anger resulting in a fresh spurt in acts of jihadi terrorism.
Q. What will be the ultimate denouement in the case?
A. The US will stick to its stand that it cannot withdraw the diplomatic immunity of Davis and that he will be prosecuted before a US and not a Pakistani court. The Government of Pakistan knows that in view of its dependence on the US, it has no other option but to accede to the US request to let him go to the US to face a trial. But this has been made difficult by the mishandling by the US State Department and by its over-reactions. In such sensitive cases involving a country where anti-US anger is already high and anti- Zardari suspicion is already strong, undue pressure could prove counter-productive. A complicating factor is the assertive judiciary headed by Chief Justic Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhury of the Pakistan Supreme Court. His enquiries into cases of missing persons---many of them informally handed over to the US by the Musharraf regime for the investigation of their suspected links with Al Qaeda---- have already badly affected mutual legal assistance between the US and Pakistan. Before he took over as the Chief Justice, there were over 200 cases of such informal arrests and hand-over to the US. Sine he took over, there has not been a single case. From his observations and rulings in the court in petitions by relatives of missing persons, it is evident that he feels that Pakistani Governments have been unduly deferential to the US in cases involving the rights of Pakistani citizens. If he or the judges under him insist that by carrying a weapon, Davis has violated the conditions of his diplomatic immunity and hence could be prosecuted in Pakistan, the US and Pakistan will face a serious dilemma in sorting out this case.
Q. It has been alleged that the hitherto strong stand of Islamabad has been motivated by the ISI’s anger over a private complaint filed against Lt.Gen.Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the DG of the ISI, in a New York court demanding his prosecution for his alleged involvement in the 26/11 terrorist strikes in Mumbai? Some have been claiming that Islamabad has been wantonly taking a seemingly strong stand to get more assistance from the US?
A. Present evidence does not support such allegations or claims. ( 9-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Sunday, February 6, 2011
EGYPTIANS WANT RULE OF LAW IN AN ISLAMIC DEMOCRACY, NOT RULE BY CLERICS IN A THEOCRACY : MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
B.RAMAN
The following extracts from two statements issued by Dr.Mohamed Badie, Chairman of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood (MB), on the protest demonstrations since January 25,2011 and from some commentaries on the developments carried by the web site of the MB give an indication of how it views the mass protests and what would be its role in a post-Hosni Mubarak era. The MB projects the mass uprising as a people’s revolution and not an Islamic revolution. It describes the objective of the people’s revolution as a rule of law in an Islamic democracy and not a rule by clerics in a theocracy. It seeks to assure the American people that they have nothing to fear from the success of the revolution. While expressing its readiness to participate in talks to bring about the end of the Mubarak regime, it says it has no desire for political power for itself. It does not want to contest in the elections for a new President. Nor is it interested in joining any interim political set-up. The only demand of a religious nature it makes is that the clerics should have a role in vetting all laws to be passed by the Parliament. It says that what Egypt needs is democracy moulded by historic and sacred values. It points out that the religious faith of the people always plays a role in popular movements even in the US and says one should not worry about any role of the religious faith of the people in the Egyptian revolution.
EXTRACTS
Mubarak should resign immediately if there is to be any constructive dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood. The state of emergency should be abolished and the Shura council and the parliament should be dissolved. They are both illegitimate institutions. The people no longer trust the regime or the ruling party and have had enough of hollow promises and lame speeches. Despite promises that there would be freedom of speech, thugs have taken to the streets attacking peaceful protestors and raiding press and media headquarters in an effort to intimidate the press to prevent coverage. The regime imposes only violence and does not understand the concept of mature and civilised dialogue. Its only solution to the people’s uprising is violence. The MB welcomes dialogue with all political opposition. In fact all groups have agreed on uniting in a call for peaceful political reform that would serve the Egyptians as a whole. The current uprising is not an Islamic Revolution but an Egyptian People’s revolution that included all Egyptians from all sects, religions and political trends. The MB does not seek power and has no intention of nominating any of its members for the presidency or for being part of any interim government.
------- From a statement issued on February 4,2011, by Dr.Mohamed Badie, Chairman of the MB.
2. The January 25 Day of Rage protests have instilled an incredible sense of pride among Egyptians as the world witnesses Egyptians rise from their apathy and fearlessly voice their dissent against a 30-year dictatorial regime. The turnout of over seven million people nationwide on Friday’s Day of Departure will be recorded in history. People continued their call for their most basic rights of living in freedom and dignity, The people have the right to call for the ousting of Mubarak and his corrupt regime. The MB does not seek power and authority nor does it intend to field any of its members for presidency. It welcomes constructive and equal dialogue with all Egypt’s political opposition and respects all sects, demanding that all be treated equally and that the people’s will be unconditionally respected and their demands met. Since the group’s establishment, the MB has worked to achieve comprehensive reform in all fields of political, economic and social development and seeks to restore the people's sovereignty and rights through peaceful strategies. Hence, it is on this note that the MB welcomes open dialogue on the condition that it is genuinely in the best interests of the country and is in accordance with the will of the masses. There should be an outlined agenda and it should be implemented. The people’s and nation’s interests must remain the first and foremost priority. The people are the legitimate decision-makers of their future.
--- Statement of the MB President after the massive demonstrations of February 4.
3.Western analysts and media outlets are deciding whether Egypt 's uprising is a secular demand for democracy, which they would support, or a religious revolution that they believe should be feared and stopped. However, the uprising is complex and if the US is to support the Egyptian people, as it promised, policymakers must first increase their understanding of Egyptian aspirations. The protests are fueled by the Egyptians’ greater sense of self worth and it is based on the people's belief that they should no longer have to endure the daily humiliation of economic and political stagnation. The protesters come from a wide cross section of Egyptian society and they are all demanding justice, calling for Muslim-Christian solidarity. Religiosity is also playing a role in the development and continuance of the demonstrations, just as other uprisings throughout history. Egyptians say that moving toward greater democracy would help Muslims progress, and that attachment to spiritual and moral values would similarly lead to a brighter future. Surveys show that Egyptians prefer democracy over all other forms of government. They also say that religion plays a positive role in politics. The majority of Egyptians wants democracy and sees no contradiction between the change they seek and the timeless values to which they adhere. More than 90 percent of Egyptians say they would guarantee freedom of the press if it were up to them to write a constitution for a new country. Moreover, most Egyptians say they favor nothing more than an advisory role for religious leaders in the crafting of legislation. Egyptians choose democracy informed by sacred values, not theocracy with a democratic veneer. Similarly, from abolitionists to the civil rights movement, American leaders have been inspired by their faith as they pursue justice. Nowadays in the US, many of those who are calling for environmental preservation, an end to torture and eradicating global poverty, are faith leaders as they draw on their ethical traditions and beliefs for the common good. The US is a natural partner to the Egyptian people in their struggle to attain a brighter future because of America 's unique history and struggle for social justice. Surveys have revealed that the majority of Americans and Egyptians believe it is a benefit, not a threat, for Muslims and the West to interact. Although they seek the rule of law, most Egyptians do not support the rule of clerics. US policy makers should not make the mistake of alienating the Egyptian movement by failing to understand its complexities.
---From the MB web site
4.The MB does not and will not accept any efforts at intimidation against any Egyptians. The MB will continue to call for the constitutional rights of men, women, Muslims and Christians alike and for a civil state based on Islamic democracy which respects the freedom of the judiciary, the freedom of speech and the freedom of the media.
—From the MB’s web site
5.A cable of 2007 from the US Embassy in Cairo to the State Department in Washington DC leaked by WikiLeaks said: The US could expect a difficult transition after Mubarak. "Whoever Egypt's next president is, he will inevitably be politically weaker than Mubarak. Among his first priorities will be to cement his position and build popular support. We can thus anticipate that the new President may sound an initial anti-American tone in his public rhetoric in an effort to prove his nationalist bona fides to the Egyptian street." The cable said that any new President will have to bolster his support by reconciling with the banned MB. This is true now that the Egyptians have demanded a say in the matter. The protest is not being fueled by anti-Americanism or radical Islamist sentiments; it's a protest driven by the economic and political needs of Egyptians. Protestors have only showed hostility toward the US because of its longtime support for a tyrannical regime.
Egypt's democracy movement doesn't see the MB as a radical party. "The Muslim Brotherhood has nothing to do with the Iranian movement, has nothing to do with extremism as we have seen it in Afghanistan and other places," El Baradei said over the weekend. He called the Brotherhood a conservative group that favors secular democracy and human rights and said that as an integral part of Egyptian society, it would have a place in any inclusive political process. Israel remains a living example of how a people live in fear when they take what is not theirs and it is looking on aghast as its most important friend in the region tumbles while the US does little to save him. Israel cannot count on Egypt's continued cooperation in imposing an economic siege on Gaza, aiming at unseating the territory's Hamas rulers.
The demonstrations show an Arab public looking to take charge of its own affairs, rather than have them determined by international power struggles. Even that, however, suggests turbulent times ahead for American Middle East policies that have little support on Egypt's streets.
----From the MB’s Web site.
6.For the past ten days Egypt has experienced fear of autocracy, euphoria and fear of chaos. Starting off relatively small, the protests started with a few thousand people on January 25, then escalated to a thrilling climax on February 1, when millions of people assembled in Tahrir Square demanding the removal of Hosni Mubarak. After this the demonstrations deteriorated into violence as pro-Mubarak supporters attacked demonstrators. Despite the violent scenes during the week, the developments in Egypt are welcome. A nation that has been downtrodden for too long is now tasting freedom. The Arab world is buzzing with expectation, as ageing autocrats are suddenly looking shaky. The West is juggling stability and democracy and as they struggle to attain balance, the Arab pro-democratic movement appears disturbing. Fearing a vacuum due to a deterioration of Mubarak's regime, the West fears the Muslim Brothers, the anti-Western, anti-Israeli opposition. The US feels it must redouble its efforts to secure a prolonged managed transition by retaining Mubarak or getting someone else like him at the helm. Despite the fears of the US and Israel, the popular call for Mubarak to step down offers the Middle East the best chance for reform in decades. The West has been calling for democracy for years and if they fail to support Egyptians in their quest for democratic rule, the arguments of the US for democracy and human rights elsewhere in the world will fall on deaf ears. Egypt is also juggling; it is choosing between risk and stagnation. The Egyptian protests are not an 'Islamic' uprising, but a mass protest of Muslims against an unjust, autocratic regime. The only 'Islam' shown throughout the scenes of demonstrators was the peaceful behavior, prayer, determination and resolution of a nation. The result of these protests will certainly not be a perfectly formed democracy as it is likely that there will be disorder for some time. But on the plus side, Egypt, though poor, has a sophisticated elite, a well-educated middle class and a strong sense of national pride and these are indicators that Egyptians can pull order out of this chaos. Fear of the Muslim Brotherhood is grossly overdone as they are respected for their piety, discipline and resilience. The Brotherhood grows with history and is constantly evolving. The movement at the present time cannot be equated with its past. Calling for democracy, the voice of the people, free and fair elections, while not nominating any candidate, and having no desire for leadership or even a place in the interim government, the Brotherhood is the level-headed voice in Egypt. The past few weeks have proved that the Brotherhood is an integral part of Egyptian society and if democracy is to flourish in Egypt, the Brotherhood must be given a voice. The alternative to democracy is a dead end. Egypt under Mubarak has been becoming increasingly repressive, leaving 85m people to live under dictatorship, burdened by a corrupt and brutal police force, the suppression of the opposition, and the torture of political prisoners. This was sufficient fuse to light the uprising. Despite the obvious difficulties, even a disorderly democracy could eventually be a rich prize—and not just for Egyptians. If Egypt becomes democratic it could once again be a beacon to the region, answering the conundrum of how to incorporate Islam in Arab democracies. An Egyptian government that speaks for its people might contribute to a settlement with the Palestinians more than authoritarianism ever could. The US has lost much of its credibility in pursuing stability above democracy and it could turn this negative image around by making amends now. As America still has influence with Egypt’s political, business and military elite, it could help speed the transition from autocracy through chaos to a new order and improve its standing in the region.
----From the MB’s web site. (6-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
The following extracts from two statements issued by Dr.Mohamed Badie, Chairman of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood (MB), on the protest demonstrations since January 25,2011 and from some commentaries on the developments carried by the web site of the MB give an indication of how it views the mass protests and what would be its role in a post-Hosni Mubarak era. The MB projects the mass uprising as a people’s revolution and not an Islamic revolution. It describes the objective of the people’s revolution as a rule of law in an Islamic democracy and not a rule by clerics in a theocracy. It seeks to assure the American people that they have nothing to fear from the success of the revolution. While expressing its readiness to participate in talks to bring about the end of the Mubarak regime, it says it has no desire for political power for itself. It does not want to contest in the elections for a new President. Nor is it interested in joining any interim political set-up. The only demand of a religious nature it makes is that the clerics should have a role in vetting all laws to be passed by the Parliament. It says that what Egypt needs is democracy moulded by historic and sacred values. It points out that the religious faith of the people always plays a role in popular movements even in the US and says one should not worry about any role of the religious faith of the people in the Egyptian revolution.
EXTRACTS
Mubarak should resign immediately if there is to be any constructive dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood. The state of emergency should be abolished and the Shura council and the parliament should be dissolved. They are both illegitimate institutions. The people no longer trust the regime or the ruling party and have had enough of hollow promises and lame speeches. Despite promises that there would be freedom of speech, thugs have taken to the streets attacking peaceful protestors and raiding press and media headquarters in an effort to intimidate the press to prevent coverage. The regime imposes only violence and does not understand the concept of mature and civilised dialogue. Its only solution to the people’s uprising is violence. The MB welcomes dialogue with all political opposition. In fact all groups have agreed on uniting in a call for peaceful political reform that would serve the Egyptians as a whole. The current uprising is not an Islamic Revolution but an Egyptian People’s revolution that included all Egyptians from all sects, religions and political trends. The MB does not seek power and has no intention of nominating any of its members for the presidency or for being part of any interim government.
------- From a statement issued on February 4,2011, by Dr.Mohamed Badie, Chairman of the MB.
2. The January 25 Day of Rage protests have instilled an incredible sense of pride among Egyptians as the world witnesses Egyptians rise from their apathy and fearlessly voice their dissent against a 30-year dictatorial regime. The turnout of over seven million people nationwide on Friday’s Day of Departure will be recorded in history. People continued their call for their most basic rights of living in freedom and dignity, The people have the right to call for the ousting of Mubarak and his corrupt regime. The MB does not seek power and authority nor does it intend to field any of its members for presidency. It welcomes constructive and equal dialogue with all Egypt’s political opposition and respects all sects, demanding that all be treated equally and that the people’s will be unconditionally respected and their demands met. Since the group’s establishment, the MB has worked to achieve comprehensive reform in all fields of political, economic and social development and seeks to restore the people's sovereignty and rights through peaceful strategies. Hence, it is on this note that the MB welcomes open dialogue on the condition that it is genuinely in the best interests of the country and is in accordance with the will of the masses. There should be an outlined agenda and it should be implemented. The people’s and nation’s interests must remain the first and foremost priority. The people are the legitimate decision-makers of their future.
--- Statement of the MB President after the massive demonstrations of February 4.
3.Western analysts and media outlets are deciding whether Egypt 's uprising is a secular demand for democracy, which they would support, or a religious revolution that they believe should be feared and stopped. However, the uprising is complex and if the US is to support the Egyptian people, as it promised, policymakers must first increase their understanding of Egyptian aspirations. The protests are fueled by the Egyptians’ greater sense of self worth and it is based on the people's belief that they should no longer have to endure the daily humiliation of economic and political stagnation. The protesters come from a wide cross section of Egyptian society and they are all demanding justice, calling for Muslim-Christian solidarity. Religiosity is also playing a role in the development and continuance of the demonstrations, just as other uprisings throughout history. Egyptians say that moving toward greater democracy would help Muslims progress, and that attachment to spiritual and moral values would similarly lead to a brighter future. Surveys show that Egyptians prefer democracy over all other forms of government. They also say that religion plays a positive role in politics. The majority of Egyptians wants democracy and sees no contradiction between the change they seek and the timeless values to which they adhere. More than 90 percent of Egyptians say they would guarantee freedom of the press if it were up to them to write a constitution for a new country. Moreover, most Egyptians say they favor nothing more than an advisory role for religious leaders in the crafting of legislation. Egyptians choose democracy informed by sacred values, not theocracy with a democratic veneer. Similarly, from abolitionists to the civil rights movement, American leaders have been inspired by their faith as they pursue justice. Nowadays in the US, many of those who are calling for environmental preservation, an end to torture and eradicating global poverty, are faith leaders as they draw on their ethical traditions and beliefs for the common good. The US is a natural partner to the Egyptian people in their struggle to attain a brighter future because of America 's unique history and struggle for social justice. Surveys have revealed that the majority of Americans and Egyptians believe it is a benefit, not a threat, for Muslims and the West to interact. Although they seek the rule of law, most Egyptians do not support the rule of clerics. US policy makers should not make the mistake of alienating the Egyptian movement by failing to understand its complexities.
---From the MB web site
4.The MB does not and will not accept any efforts at intimidation against any Egyptians. The MB will continue to call for the constitutional rights of men, women, Muslims and Christians alike and for a civil state based on Islamic democracy which respects the freedom of the judiciary, the freedom of speech and the freedom of the media.
—From the MB’s web site
5.A cable of 2007 from the US Embassy in Cairo to the State Department in Washington DC leaked by WikiLeaks said: The US could expect a difficult transition after Mubarak. "Whoever Egypt's next president is, he will inevitably be politically weaker than Mubarak. Among his first priorities will be to cement his position and build popular support. We can thus anticipate that the new President may sound an initial anti-American tone in his public rhetoric in an effort to prove his nationalist bona fides to the Egyptian street." The cable said that any new President will have to bolster his support by reconciling with the banned MB. This is true now that the Egyptians have demanded a say in the matter. The protest is not being fueled by anti-Americanism or radical Islamist sentiments; it's a protest driven by the economic and political needs of Egyptians. Protestors have only showed hostility toward the US because of its longtime support for a tyrannical regime.
Egypt's democracy movement doesn't see the MB as a radical party. "The Muslim Brotherhood has nothing to do with the Iranian movement, has nothing to do with extremism as we have seen it in Afghanistan and other places," El Baradei said over the weekend. He called the Brotherhood a conservative group that favors secular democracy and human rights and said that as an integral part of Egyptian society, it would have a place in any inclusive political process. Israel remains a living example of how a people live in fear when they take what is not theirs and it is looking on aghast as its most important friend in the region tumbles while the US does little to save him. Israel cannot count on Egypt's continued cooperation in imposing an economic siege on Gaza, aiming at unseating the territory's Hamas rulers.
The demonstrations show an Arab public looking to take charge of its own affairs, rather than have them determined by international power struggles. Even that, however, suggests turbulent times ahead for American Middle East policies that have little support on Egypt's streets.
----From the MB’s Web site.
6.For the past ten days Egypt has experienced fear of autocracy, euphoria and fear of chaos. Starting off relatively small, the protests started with a few thousand people on January 25, then escalated to a thrilling climax on February 1, when millions of people assembled in Tahrir Square demanding the removal of Hosni Mubarak. After this the demonstrations deteriorated into violence as pro-Mubarak supporters attacked demonstrators. Despite the violent scenes during the week, the developments in Egypt are welcome. A nation that has been downtrodden for too long is now tasting freedom. The Arab world is buzzing with expectation, as ageing autocrats are suddenly looking shaky. The West is juggling stability and democracy and as they struggle to attain balance, the Arab pro-democratic movement appears disturbing. Fearing a vacuum due to a deterioration of Mubarak's regime, the West fears the Muslim Brothers, the anti-Western, anti-Israeli opposition. The US feels it must redouble its efforts to secure a prolonged managed transition by retaining Mubarak or getting someone else like him at the helm. Despite the fears of the US and Israel, the popular call for Mubarak to step down offers the Middle East the best chance for reform in decades. The West has been calling for democracy for years and if they fail to support Egyptians in their quest for democratic rule, the arguments of the US for democracy and human rights elsewhere in the world will fall on deaf ears. Egypt is also juggling; it is choosing between risk and stagnation. The Egyptian protests are not an 'Islamic' uprising, but a mass protest of Muslims against an unjust, autocratic regime. The only 'Islam' shown throughout the scenes of demonstrators was the peaceful behavior, prayer, determination and resolution of a nation. The result of these protests will certainly not be a perfectly formed democracy as it is likely that there will be disorder for some time. But on the plus side, Egypt, though poor, has a sophisticated elite, a well-educated middle class and a strong sense of national pride and these are indicators that Egyptians can pull order out of this chaos. Fear of the Muslim Brotherhood is grossly overdone as they are respected for their piety, discipline and resilience. The Brotherhood grows with history and is constantly evolving. The movement at the present time cannot be equated with its past. Calling for democracy, the voice of the people, free and fair elections, while not nominating any candidate, and having no desire for leadership or even a place in the interim government, the Brotherhood is the level-headed voice in Egypt. The past few weeks have proved that the Brotherhood is an integral part of Egyptian society and if democracy is to flourish in Egypt, the Brotherhood must be given a voice. The alternative to democracy is a dead end. Egypt under Mubarak has been becoming increasingly repressive, leaving 85m people to live under dictatorship, burdened by a corrupt and brutal police force, the suppression of the opposition, and the torture of political prisoners. This was sufficient fuse to light the uprising. Despite the obvious difficulties, even a disorderly democracy could eventually be a rich prize—and not just for Egyptians. If Egypt becomes democratic it could once again be a beacon to the region, answering the conundrum of how to incorporate Islam in Arab democracies. An Egyptian government that speaks for its people might contribute to a settlement with the Palestinians more than authoritarianism ever could. The US has lost much of its credibility in pursuing stability above democracy and it could turn this negative image around by making amends now. As America still has influence with Egypt’s political, business and military elite, it could help speed the transition from autocracy through chaos to a new order and improve its standing in the region.
----From the MB’s web site. (6-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Saturday, February 5, 2011
THE EGYPTIAN STAND-OFF
B.RAMAN
During a CNN debate on February 5,2011, an Egyptian affairs expert described the present situation in Egypt as a stand-off. It is.
2. President Hosni Mubarak has remained defiant and has refused to quit now. He has told his people that he would quit only in September when his current term ends and a new President would have been elected. He has also totally revamped his National Democratic Party (NDP) executive.Hossam Badrawi, a reformer and top physician, who enjoys the confidence of Mubarak, has been appointed the head of the policies committee, a post held by his son Gamal Mubarak till now, and also the party secretary-general. This revamping, coming on the heels of the earlier reshuffle of the Cabinet, is meant to re-assure the protesters that people associated with the hated policies of his Government and accused of corruption would not stay in office in the run-up to the elections.
3. Mubarak seems to be hoping that the aggravating economic hardships of the poor and middle class people, including the workers, would make them leave the streets and go back to earning their livelihood and that as a result the protesting crowds will be reduced to the elite, including the students, whom he is confident of handling. His defiance is also encouraged by the ambivalence of the army. The Army is not prepared to let itself be used against the protesters to disperse them forcefully. At the same time, it recognises the past services of Mubarak to the country and his role in strengthening the Armed Forces. It is, therefore, not willing to see him humiliated. There is agreement in the party as well as the Army that the time for Mubarak to quit public life has come and that he should go------honourably and not in humiliation.
4.Attempts are being made to reassure the protesters that Mubarak and his supporters would not take advantage of any de-mobilisation of the protesters to go back on his word and stay on in power after September. The dilemma before the protesters is: The increasing hardships make it difficult to maintain for long the present state of high mobilisation. At the same time, any premature demobilisation before there are definitive and irreversible changes in the political status quo could defeat the purpose of the revolution.
5. The reported US attempts to broker a transitional set-up is meant to reassure the protesters that changes in the status quo have already been initiated under international support and pressure and at the same time make it clear to Mubarak and his supporters that the dismantling of the status quo has to start now and not in September.
6. The problem is while the status quo can be easily changed in the ruling party and the unpopular leaders removed from positions of influence, it is difficult to change it in the Governmental set-up under the present Constitution, which clearly provides that if the President quits, the Speaker of the Parliament would be sworn in as the officiating President till fresh elections are held. Neither Lt.Gen.Omar Suleiman, the former intelligence chief who was recently nominated as the Vice-President by Mubarak, nor El Baradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, whom the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the secular opposition parties are prpared to support as the interim head till the elections are held, can officiate as the President because neither of them is an elected member of the Parliament and because of the specific provision in the Constitution that the Speaker would officiate.
7. However, there is a provision in the Constitution under which Mubarak, while continuing to be the de jure President, can delegate the powers of the President to his Vice-President who will thus become the de facto President and could co-ordinate the arrangements for the elections without Mubarak playing any role in it. It is doubtful whether the protesters would agree to such an arrangement because of the close association of Suleiman with Mubarak for nearly two decades and his equally close association with the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). It was he who allegedly fed the report to the CIA about Saddam Hussein's alleged links with Osama bin Laden, which former President George Bush used as one of the excuses to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The report turned out to be false. He has also been closely associated with the suppression of the MB.
8.Thus, the position is: Suleiman is acceptable to Mubarak and his followers and the US as interim head of a transitional Government, but he may not be acceptable to the protesters. El Baradei may be acceptable to the protesters, but he cannot head the tranitional set-up under the present Constitution.
9. The stand-off continues. For how long?
10.In the meanwhile, the Americans seem to feel that the protests reached their high point on February 4 when there was an impressive mobilisation of people and that they may not be able to mobilise any more, any longer.This should explain the changing narrative regarding Mubarak on Februrary 5. In an interview to the CNN , Christiane Amanpour, the US TV journalist, mentioned about the constitutional difficulties in the way of Mubarak quitting before September. Separately, in a video message to the annual Munich Security Conference now being held, Frank Wisner, former US Ambassador to Egypt,who recently visited Cairo as a special emissary of President Barack Obama and met Mubarak and Suleiman, said: "We need to get a national consensus around the pre-conditions for the next step forward. The President must stay in office to steer those changes.I believe that President Mubarak's continued leadership is critical - it's his chance to write his own legacy. He has given 60 years of his life to the service of his country.This is an ideal moment for him to show the way forward."
11.In Washington, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said: "We have great respect for Frank Wisner and we were deeply appreciative of his willingness to travel to Egypt last week.He has not continued in any official capacity following the trip. The views he expressed today are his own. He did not co-ordinate his comments with the US government." Nobody would take seriously the State Department's dissociating itself from the remarks of Wisner.
12. We ourselves want Mubarak to go now, but there could be constitutional difficulties.Let him continue till September. We guarantee that he won't thereafter--- that seems to be the new message to the protesters from Washington DC via Christiance Amanpour and Wisner.
13. Is the apparent US assessment that the protests cannot go higher and should be manageable hereafter correct or wishful-thinking? (6-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
During a CNN debate on February 5,2011, an Egyptian affairs expert described the present situation in Egypt as a stand-off. It is.
2. President Hosni Mubarak has remained defiant and has refused to quit now. He has told his people that he would quit only in September when his current term ends and a new President would have been elected. He has also totally revamped his National Democratic Party (NDP) executive.Hossam Badrawi, a reformer and top physician, who enjoys the confidence of Mubarak, has been appointed the head of the policies committee, a post held by his son Gamal Mubarak till now, and also the party secretary-general. This revamping, coming on the heels of the earlier reshuffle of the Cabinet, is meant to re-assure the protesters that people associated with the hated policies of his Government and accused of corruption would not stay in office in the run-up to the elections.
3. Mubarak seems to be hoping that the aggravating economic hardships of the poor and middle class people, including the workers, would make them leave the streets and go back to earning their livelihood and that as a result the protesting crowds will be reduced to the elite, including the students, whom he is confident of handling. His defiance is also encouraged by the ambivalence of the army. The Army is not prepared to let itself be used against the protesters to disperse them forcefully. At the same time, it recognises the past services of Mubarak to the country and his role in strengthening the Armed Forces. It is, therefore, not willing to see him humiliated. There is agreement in the party as well as the Army that the time for Mubarak to quit public life has come and that he should go------honourably and not in humiliation.
4.Attempts are being made to reassure the protesters that Mubarak and his supporters would not take advantage of any de-mobilisation of the protesters to go back on his word and stay on in power after September. The dilemma before the protesters is: The increasing hardships make it difficult to maintain for long the present state of high mobilisation. At the same time, any premature demobilisation before there are definitive and irreversible changes in the political status quo could defeat the purpose of the revolution.
5. The reported US attempts to broker a transitional set-up is meant to reassure the protesters that changes in the status quo have already been initiated under international support and pressure and at the same time make it clear to Mubarak and his supporters that the dismantling of the status quo has to start now and not in September.
6. The problem is while the status quo can be easily changed in the ruling party and the unpopular leaders removed from positions of influence, it is difficult to change it in the Governmental set-up under the present Constitution, which clearly provides that if the President quits, the Speaker of the Parliament would be sworn in as the officiating President till fresh elections are held. Neither Lt.Gen.Omar Suleiman, the former intelligence chief who was recently nominated as the Vice-President by Mubarak, nor El Baradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, whom the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the secular opposition parties are prpared to support as the interim head till the elections are held, can officiate as the President because neither of them is an elected member of the Parliament and because of the specific provision in the Constitution that the Speaker would officiate.
7. However, there is a provision in the Constitution under which Mubarak, while continuing to be the de jure President, can delegate the powers of the President to his Vice-President who will thus become the de facto President and could co-ordinate the arrangements for the elections without Mubarak playing any role in it. It is doubtful whether the protesters would agree to such an arrangement because of the close association of Suleiman with Mubarak for nearly two decades and his equally close association with the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). It was he who allegedly fed the report to the CIA about Saddam Hussein's alleged links with Osama bin Laden, which former President George Bush used as one of the excuses to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The report turned out to be false. He has also been closely associated with the suppression of the MB.
8.Thus, the position is: Suleiman is acceptable to Mubarak and his followers and the US as interim head of a transitional Government, but he may not be acceptable to the protesters. El Baradei may be acceptable to the protesters, but he cannot head the tranitional set-up under the present Constitution.
9. The stand-off continues. For how long?
10.In the meanwhile, the Americans seem to feel that the protests reached their high point on February 4 when there was an impressive mobilisation of people and that they may not be able to mobilise any more, any longer.This should explain the changing narrative regarding Mubarak on Februrary 5. In an interview to the CNN , Christiane Amanpour, the US TV journalist, mentioned about the constitutional difficulties in the way of Mubarak quitting before September. Separately, in a video message to the annual Munich Security Conference now being held, Frank Wisner, former US Ambassador to Egypt,who recently visited Cairo as a special emissary of President Barack Obama and met Mubarak and Suleiman, said: "We need to get a national consensus around the pre-conditions for the next step forward. The President must stay in office to steer those changes.I believe that President Mubarak's continued leadership is critical - it's his chance to write his own legacy. He has given 60 years of his life to the service of his country.This is an ideal moment for him to show the way forward."
11.In Washington, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said: "We have great respect for Frank Wisner and we were deeply appreciative of his willingness to travel to Egypt last week.He has not continued in any official capacity following the trip. The views he expressed today are his own. He did not co-ordinate his comments with the US government." Nobody would take seriously the State Department's dissociating itself from the remarks of Wisner.
12. We ourselves want Mubarak to go now, but there could be constitutional difficulties.Let him continue till September. We guarantee that he won't thereafter--- that seems to be the new message to the protesters from Washington DC via Christiance Amanpour and Wisner.
13. Is the apparent US assessment that the protests cannot go higher and should be manageable hereafter correct or wishful-thinking? (6-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Friday, February 4, 2011
EGYPT: DRAMA & SUBSTANCE
B.RAMAN
There were three excellent TV programmes on the happenings in Egypt on the night of February 4,2011. The first by the courageous ND TV team headed by Barkha Dutt, its Group Editor, from 9-30 to 10 PM provided from Cairo an Indian eye view of the happenings in Egypt as the massive and peaceful protest demonstration demanding the immediate exit of President Hosni Mubarak was winding up to a close for the day.
2. The second was a Delhi-based debate anchored by Karan Thapar ( " The Last Word" from 10 to 10-30 PM on CNN-IBN), which focussed on what was projected as the belated interest of the Indian media in what has been happening across the Arab world---- beginning with the so-called Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, now the street revolution in Egypt and the fears of copy-cat reactions in other countries such as Yemen, Jordan and Algeria. Why the Indian media was slow to realise the significance of the happenings in Tunisia and Egypt and why the limited coverage by the Indian media of foreign affairs in general ---lack of resources or lack of interest or both? These were the themes.
3. The third was a debate on the significance of the happenings in Egypt and India's belated reaction to it anchored by Nidhi Razdan on the NDTV from 10 to 11 PM under her weekly Friday programme titled " Left, Right & Centre".
4. NDTV and News X were the first to realise the significance of the happenings in Tunisia and Egypt from India's point of view. The people's protests in Tunisia and Egypt broke out at a time when the Indian electronic media was totally engrossed in covering domestic developments such as the multiplicity of scams, the controversy over large amounts parked by Indian nationals in foreign bank accounts etc. The public interest in the domestic developments and controversies was more than that in the gathering storm in Tunisia and Egypt.
5. Despte this, it must be said to the credit of NDTV that Maya Mirchandani, its Foreign Affairs Editor, started focusing on Tunisia and Egypt in programmes exclusively devoted to foreign affairs long before other channels woke up to the people's cries coming from these two countries. So did the foreign affairs division of News X.
6. As the protests in Egypt gathered force, NDTV rushed Maya to Cairo to provide an Indian perspective of what has been going on there. A few days later, Barkha joined her and the two have been covering in tandem---- focusing on the drama as well as the substance. Maya's coverage was very people's friendly----readily and easily mixing with the protesters demonstrating in the Tahrir Square. Those who had watched the coverage on foreign TV channels might have noticed that the reporters of Western channels avoided too close an interaction with the protesters---barring one or two exceptions. As against this, Maya's focus was almost entirely on the people---- highlighting their anger, frustration and determination to bring about an end of the Mubarak regime.
7. Barkha and Maya need to be complimented for avoiding an over-focus on their brutal mistreatment by pro-Mubarak supporters when violence broke out on February 3---- as some other Indian TV journalists did--- and for concentrating instead on the implications of the intervention of pro-Mubarak supporters. Even though the protests have been continuing for nearly 10 days now, one still does not have an answer to the question---Is what we are seeing in Egypt purely an anti-Mubarak uprising or is it a revolution with ideological dimensions?
8. Barkha's programme of February 4 was aptlly titled "The Egyptian Uprising". It reflected her attempts through her interactions with the protesters in the Tahrir Square and elsewhere to understand what has been happening in Egypt and share her understanding with the Indian viewers.It is going to take us a long time to understand the strategic significane of what has been happening in Egypt---for Egypt itself, for the region and for the rest of the world.
9. Certain things can be said about the happenings in Egypt even now. Firstly, it was a spontaneous uprising by a people who had suffered under the dictatorial regime of Mubarak for nearly 30 years. Secondly, the protesters were inspired by the success of the revolt in Tunisia.It was the success of the Tunisian revolt that gave them the courage to come out in the streets. If the Tunisian revolt had been crushed, nothing would have most probably happened in Egypt. Thirdly, it was a leaderless uprising by a mix of various sections of the Egyptian civil society----the poor and middle class people, including trade union workers, angered by economic hardships, and the students and the elite frustrated by the absence of freedom and democracy. Perceptions of widespread corruption were a common trigger factor for all of them.Fourthly, it has had no religious colours till now though there is a lingering suspicion that only the Muslim Brotherhood, with its vast well-motivated and well-disciplind cadres, could have provided the domestic inspiration though it has avoided the limelight.
10.From the interviews of Barkha, it came out clearly that at least some sections of the protesters have worries over the dangers of a confrontation with the Army if the more enthusiastic sections of the protesters prevailed in their demand for a march to the Presidential Palace to force Mubarak to quit here and now. It could be suicidal, one of them told Barkha. It was apparent from Barkha's programme that there are elements which are prepared to wait till September instead of forcing a confrontation now.
11. This has come out from the BBC's coverage also. It is evident from the BBC's coverage that a point of view among sections of the protesters is that now that the world has supported their demand for Mubarak's exit and he has promised to quit when his term expires in September, they should shift from daily to weekly Friday protests to keep up the pressure on Mubarak to honour his word. This is an aspect that needs further exploration.
12. When the pro-Mubarak supporters attacked the journalists and seized or even destroyed their equipment, the TV journalists found themselves without the tools of their profession. Subsequently, when the Mubarak supporters were beaten back by the anti-Mubarak protesters and journalists were once again allowed to go to the Square, the local security authorities ordered that TV journalists should not carry their equipment into the Tahrir Square. Barkha and her team immediately got over the difficulty and made innovative use of their mobile telephones for recording and transmitting telling images along with Barkha's commentary.
13. The protesters in Tunisia and Egypt have been making innovative use of modern communication technologies such as the Internet, the Twitters, the mobile telephone etc to communicate with each other and to guide and encourage each other. Barkha's programme brought out the use of Tweets by the protesters for mobilisation.
14. The Egyptian authorities banned the Internet to prevent the protesters from communicating with each other. Companies like Google tried to give a helping hand by suggesting ways of circumventing this ban by phoning or faxing their messages to their sympathisers in third countries and having them transmitted by the Internet from there. Barkha and her team were innovative in having visuals with commentaries recorded and transmitted to their headquarters by mobile telephones. If the mobiles had also been seized or destroyed and if the mobile networks had been jammed, this might not have been possible.
15. The wave of protests not only in Egypt, but also in the rest of the Arab world is likely to continue for some time. TV journalists would face such difficulties in their coverage. What are the various scenarios involving difficulties in communication that could arise and how they could improvise and innovate in order to overcome them?This is a question that should engage the attention of the technical divisions of our TV channels.
16. A very important point made during Karan Thapar's programme was the absence of strategic thinking and planning in our media headquarters---print or electronic. As a result, they find themselves ill-prepared when important events such as the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt take place. This is an aspect which needs attention. Our media should closely monitor the public reactions in Yemen, Jordan, Libya, Algeria and other countries so that they are not caught napping once again.
17. While the debate organised by Nidhi Razdan covered many significant aspects, it did not focus on the likely economic implications for India if the Egyptian revolt succeeds and spreads to other countries. Two aspects of the developing situation in the Arab world need our attention: What could be the economic implications for India? Will it lead to a further radicalisation of Islam or will it reverse the present process of radicalisation? (5-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
There were three excellent TV programmes on the happenings in Egypt on the night of February 4,2011. The first by the courageous ND TV team headed by Barkha Dutt, its Group Editor, from 9-30 to 10 PM provided from Cairo an Indian eye view of the happenings in Egypt as the massive and peaceful protest demonstration demanding the immediate exit of President Hosni Mubarak was winding up to a close for the day.
2. The second was a Delhi-based debate anchored by Karan Thapar ( " The Last Word" from 10 to 10-30 PM on CNN-IBN), which focussed on what was projected as the belated interest of the Indian media in what has been happening across the Arab world---- beginning with the so-called Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, now the street revolution in Egypt and the fears of copy-cat reactions in other countries such as Yemen, Jordan and Algeria. Why the Indian media was slow to realise the significance of the happenings in Tunisia and Egypt and why the limited coverage by the Indian media of foreign affairs in general ---lack of resources or lack of interest or both? These were the themes.
3. The third was a debate on the significance of the happenings in Egypt and India's belated reaction to it anchored by Nidhi Razdan on the NDTV from 10 to 11 PM under her weekly Friday programme titled " Left, Right & Centre".
4. NDTV and News X were the first to realise the significance of the happenings in Tunisia and Egypt from India's point of view. The people's protests in Tunisia and Egypt broke out at a time when the Indian electronic media was totally engrossed in covering domestic developments such as the multiplicity of scams, the controversy over large amounts parked by Indian nationals in foreign bank accounts etc. The public interest in the domestic developments and controversies was more than that in the gathering storm in Tunisia and Egypt.
5. Despte this, it must be said to the credit of NDTV that Maya Mirchandani, its Foreign Affairs Editor, started focusing on Tunisia and Egypt in programmes exclusively devoted to foreign affairs long before other channels woke up to the people's cries coming from these two countries. So did the foreign affairs division of News X.
6. As the protests in Egypt gathered force, NDTV rushed Maya to Cairo to provide an Indian perspective of what has been going on there. A few days later, Barkha joined her and the two have been covering in tandem---- focusing on the drama as well as the substance. Maya's coverage was very people's friendly----readily and easily mixing with the protesters demonstrating in the Tahrir Square. Those who had watched the coverage on foreign TV channels might have noticed that the reporters of Western channels avoided too close an interaction with the protesters---barring one or two exceptions. As against this, Maya's focus was almost entirely on the people---- highlighting their anger, frustration and determination to bring about an end of the Mubarak regime.
7. Barkha and Maya need to be complimented for avoiding an over-focus on their brutal mistreatment by pro-Mubarak supporters when violence broke out on February 3---- as some other Indian TV journalists did--- and for concentrating instead on the implications of the intervention of pro-Mubarak supporters. Even though the protests have been continuing for nearly 10 days now, one still does not have an answer to the question---Is what we are seeing in Egypt purely an anti-Mubarak uprising or is it a revolution with ideological dimensions?
8. Barkha's programme of February 4 was aptlly titled "The Egyptian Uprising". It reflected her attempts through her interactions with the protesters in the Tahrir Square and elsewhere to understand what has been happening in Egypt and share her understanding with the Indian viewers.It is going to take us a long time to understand the strategic significane of what has been happening in Egypt---for Egypt itself, for the region and for the rest of the world.
9. Certain things can be said about the happenings in Egypt even now. Firstly, it was a spontaneous uprising by a people who had suffered under the dictatorial regime of Mubarak for nearly 30 years. Secondly, the protesters were inspired by the success of the revolt in Tunisia.It was the success of the Tunisian revolt that gave them the courage to come out in the streets. If the Tunisian revolt had been crushed, nothing would have most probably happened in Egypt. Thirdly, it was a leaderless uprising by a mix of various sections of the Egyptian civil society----the poor and middle class people, including trade union workers, angered by economic hardships, and the students and the elite frustrated by the absence of freedom and democracy. Perceptions of widespread corruption were a common trigger factor for all of them.Fourthly, it has had no religious colours till now though there is a lingering suspicion that only the Muslim Brotherhood, with its vast well-motivated and well-disciplind cadres, could have provided the domestic inspiration though it has avoided the limelight.
10.From the interviews of Barkha, it came out clearly that at least some sections of the protesters have worries over the dangers of a confrontation with the Army if the more enthusiastic sections of the protesters prevailed in their demand for a march to the Presidential Palace to force Mubarak to quit here and now. It could be suicidal, one of them told Barkha. It was apparent from Barkha's programme that there are elements which are prepared to wait till September instead of forcing a confrontation now.
11. This has come out from the BBC's coverage also. It is evident from the BBC's coverage that a point of view among sections of the protesters is that now that the world has supported their demand for Mubarak's exit and he has promised to quit when his term expires in September, they should shift from daily to weekly Friday protests to keep up the pressure on Mubarak to honour his word. This is an aspect that needs further exploration.
12. When the pro-Mubarak supporters attacked the journalists and seized or even destroyed their equipment, the TV journalists found themselves without the tools of their profession. Subsequently, when the Mubarak supporters were beaten back by the anti-Mubarak protesters and journalists were once again allowed to go to the Square, the local security authorities ordered that TV journalists should not carry their equipment into the Tahrir Square. Barkha and her team immediately got over the difficulty and made innovative use of their mobile telephones for recording and transmitting telling images along with Barkha's commentary.
13. The protesters in Tunisia and Egypt have been making innovative use of modern communication technologies such as the Internet, the Twitters, the mobile telephone etc to communicate with each other and to guide and encourage each other. Barkha's programme brought out the use of Tweets by the protesters for mobilisation.
14. The Egyptian authorities banned the Internet to prevent the protesters from communicating with each other. Companies like Google tried to give a helping hand by suggesting ways of circumventing this ban by phoning or faxing their messages to their sympathisers in third countries and having them transmitted by the Internet from there. Barkha and her team were innovative in having visuals with commentaries recorded and transmitted to their headquarters by mobile telephones. If the mobiles had also been seized or destroyed and if the mobile networks had been jammed, this might not have been possible.
15. The wave of protests not only in Egypt, but also in the rest of the Arab world is likely to continue for some time. TV journalists would face such difficulties in their coverage. What are the various scenarios involving difficulties in communication that could arise and how they could improvise and innovate in order to overcome them?This is a question that should engage the attention of the technical divisions of our TV channels.
16. A very important point made during Karan Thapar's programme was the absence of strategic thinking and planning in our media headquarters---print or electronic. As a result, they find themselves ill-prepared when important events such as the uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt take place. This is an aspect which needs attention. Our media should closely monitor the public reactions in Yemen, Jordan, Libya, Algeria and other countries so that they are not caught napping once again.
17. While the debate organised by Nidhi Razdan covered many significant aspects, it did not focus on the likely economic implications for India if the Egyptian revolt succeeds and spreads to other countries. Two aspects of the developing situation in the Arab world need our attention: What could be the economic implications for India? Will it lead to a further radicalisation of Islam or will it reverse the present process of radicalisation? (5-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
K.SUBRAHMANYAM---DOWN MEMORY LANE
B.RAMAN
I felt sad by the news of February 2 on the death of K.Subrahmanyam, , the strategic affairs analyst, who made us proud of him. He lost no opportunity to educate us and share with us his assessments of how the situation in the world in general and in our region in particular was evolving. One might not have agreed with all his assessments, but they compelled attention. He was one of the rare experts produced by India on the science, art and techniques of National Security Management (NSM).
2. He was not only a great analyst with no confusion in his mind. He was also a very decent human being. He never put on airs. He was easily accessible to everyone who wanted to meet him to discuss anything. He was courageous and polite in expressing his views---- whether to those in power or to others. He never tried to monopolise discussions in meetings. It was a pleasure to see the way he conducted meetings. He let everyone have a say.
3. He wrote profusely and encouraged others to write equally profusely. It was his encouragement that made me take to writing to give the views of an ex- intelligence officer to the reading public. My first article titled "Human Rights & Human Wrongs" was carried by the "Hindustan Times" a few days after I retired on August 31,1994. I wrote it largely on his prodding.
4. Since then, I must have written about 2000 articles on various subjects. He figured on my Article Alert list. I liked to think he read many of them and not infrequently sent his comments. His last comment on one of my articles was a few weeks ago. He said that he had been bed-ridden for nearly two months, but he was getting interesting articles read out to him by his grand-son and dictating his comments to him.
5.Subrahmanyam came to know of me as an intelligence officer in the late 1970s when Morarji Desai was the Prime Minister. I was posted abroad. He was the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC). The late N.F.Suntook, the then head of the R&AW, had shown him one of my assessments. After reading it, Subrahmanyam wrote to me that it was one of the best intelligence assessments he had read as the JIC Chairman. I met him for the first time after I returned from my posting.
6. In the early 1980s, he was on board one of the planes of the Indian Airlines that was hijacked to Lahore by some Khalistani terrorists of the Dal Khalsa. There was concern in Delhi that if the Inter-Services Intelligence ISI) came to know of his presence on board the plane, it might detain him and subject him to interrogation since even then it was widely known that he was one of the best informed persons on nuclear-related issues. Fortunately, the ISI apparently did not identify him. Nothing happened. He returned to Delhi from Dubai where the hijacking was terminated by the local authorities.
7. He was a well-wisher of the intelligence community. He strongly believed that India needed a top-rate intelligence set-up. He never hesitated to criticise its inadequacies and never failed to highlight its achievements. As the Chairman of the JIC, he strongly backed the R&AW at a time when it was passing under a cloud after the defeat of Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections.
8. In 1998, I wrote an article in "The Stateman" explaining why Smt.Sonia Gandhi, because of her foreign origin, should not become the Prime Minister. The Delhi edition of the paper carried it as the second lead story on the first page. The Calcutta edition carried it as the first lead story. I was told by some of my friends in the R&AW that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) went to town with that article and used it for political purposes.
9. In 1999, the Government of Atal Behari Vajpayee, then in power, appointed the Kargil Review Committee (KRC) headed by Subrahmanyam to enquire into the operational conduct of the Kargil war. One of its reported terms of reference was the performance of the intelligence agencies before and during the war. I wrote a number of articles criticising the composition of the KRC. It was my view that an officer from the intelligence community should have been a member of the Committee. I wrote that the KRC report was unfair to the intellgence community because it had no intelligence officer to defend the performance of the agencies. I felt that while the report contained the criticism of the agencies by the Army, it did not reflect the defence of the intelligence community.
10.Many years later, Subrahmanyam sent me a personal message saying that he was keen that I should be a member of the KRC, but decided against it because he was worried that allegations could be made that I was included as a reward for my article regarding Sonia Gandhi. " I didn't want you to be embarrassed by such allegations," he said.
11. Many of us in the intelligence community were unhappy with the KRC report in general and with Subrahmanyam in particular. We felt that he allowed his judgement to be unduly influenced by the unfounded criticism of the agencies by the Army by taking advantage of the absence of any intelligence officer in the KRC. The media went to town claiming that the KRC had held that there was intelligence failure before and during the conflict.
12. Subrahmanyam, in his media interactions after the release of the report, pointed out that the KRC had not used the expression "intelligence failure" in its report. It was a claim by the media which did not correctly reflect the contents of the report, he said.
13.Among those very unhappy with the report was R.N.Kao, the founding father of the R&AW. He wrote a personal letter to Shri Vajpayee conveying his unhappiness. Shri Vajpayee promptly sent for him for a discussion. Subrahmanyam came to know of this later. It did not affect the high esteem in which he always held Kao.
14. The revamping of the intelligence apparatus by the Vajpayee Government on the basis of one of the recommendations in the KRC report was a tribute to the tenacity with which Subrahmanyam kept pressing for it. The creation of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) was largely the result of his ideas. However, one does not know whether they are fulfilling the purposes for which he wanted them.
15.He wanted a top-class National Security Agency (NSA) on the pattern of the NSA of the US to co-ordinate the collection of all technical intelligence.While his idea was readily accepted, there were considerable differences over how it should be set up and what should be its charter.There were bitter turf-battles involving the R&AW on the one side and others on the other. The end result was that the NTRO as it has come up is a strange creature. It is neither an ass nor a donkey nor a mule. Possibly a mix of all the three plus something else.
16. Subrahmanyam felt that if India wanted to be a major power it should have a strong intelligence collection community and a strong intelligence assessment set-up. He was critical in no uncertain terms of the down-grading of the JIC by the Vajpayee Government when it set up the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) towards the end of 1999. He considered the down-grading a retrograde step and made his views known in strong language when he, as the Chairman of the KRC, testified before the Special Task Force for the Revamping of the Intelligence Apparatus headed by Shri G.C.Saxena, former head of the R&AW, set up by the Vajpayee Government in May 2000. I was a member of this Task Force.His tenacity and pressure on this subject ultimately led to the restoration of the full authority of the JIC as an assessment agency in April 2006, when Shri M.K.Narayanan was the National Security Adviser.
17. Subrahmanyam was a strong critic of the decision of the Vajpayee Government to combine the posts of Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister and the National Security Adviser (NSA). He strongly argued in private as well as in public that national security management would suffer if it did not enjoy the undivided attention of a single individual dealing exclusively with national security. He repeatedly called for the separation of the two posts, but his idea was not accepted by the Vajpayee Government. It was only in 2004 after Dr.Manmohan Singh became the Prime Minister that his idea was accepted and the two posts were separated.
18.He took keen interest in the revamping of the national security management system. Some of his ideas were accepted and some had no takers. Among his long-held ideas which he could not push through during his life-time were the need for a National Intelligence Adviser or Director, National Intelligence, to supervise and co-ordinate the functioning of all intelligence agencies and the need for the early creation of a post of Chief of the Defence Staff. The idea for a National Intelligence Adviser or Director, National Intelligence, has had no support either from the intelligence community or the political leadership. The idea for a Chief of the Defence Staff has had wide professional support, but there seemed to be some reluctance at the political level partly due to a lack of unanimity at the senior levels of the Armed Force as to the need for this post and how to implement the idea.
19.Subrahmanyam often highlighted the poor quality of the area studies capabilities that India has been able to create since its independence. He felt that area studies by non-Governmental institutions and experts did not receive the attention they deserved. He often pointed out the unsatisfactory nature of our area studies capabilities even in respect of Pakistan and China. An idea of his that was readily accepted, but tardily implemented was the importance of having a National Defence University (NDU). Under the Vajpayee Government, he himself led a team of experts that visited the US and China to study the working of their NDUs and submit its recommendations. I don't know what is the present stage of implementation.
20. I had the honour and privilege of serving under Subrahmanyam as a member of the second NSAB in 2000-2001. I retain precious memories of my association with him. Three points which he repeatedly stressed need to be recalled. Firstly, our study of national security management would remain incomplete and unsatisfactory without a less restricted policy on declassification of past documents. Secondly, the quality of the national debate on national security management would remain poor unless documents such as edited versions of the annual reports of the NSAB were made available to the public. Thirdly, the NSAB would not fully serve the purpose for which it was set up unless serving officers readily accepted the important role which the NSAB could play in national security management and took its reports and recommendations seriously.
21. There can be no better tribute to the memory of Subrahmanyam than for the Government to appoint a group to revisit his ideas---those accepted and implemented, those accepted, but not yet implemented and those not accepted--- and recommend what further action needs to be taken on those ideas. Our national security management will benefit immensely from such an exercise.
22. Subrahmanyam valiantly fought against cancer for nearly 10 years. In October,2009, after coming to know that I had been diagnosed with metastatic cancer of prostate origin, he sent me the following message: “ Cancer is defeatable. I know you well. I have no doubt in my mind that you will defeat it.” ( 3-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
I felt sad by the news of February 2 on the death of K.Subrahmanyam, , the strategic affairs analyst, who made us proud of him. He lost no opportunity to educate us and share with us his assessments of how the situation in the world in general and in our region in particular was evolving. One might not have agreed with all his assessments, but they compelled attention. He was one of the rare experts produced by India on the science, art and techniques of National Security Management (NSM).
2. He was not only a great analyst with no confusion in his mind. He was also a very decent human being. He never put on airs. He was easily accessible to everyone who wanted to meet him to discuss anything. He was courageous and polite in expressing his views---- whether to those in power or to others. He never tried to monopolise discussions in meetings. It was a pleasure to see the way he conducted meetings. He let everyone have a say.
3. He wrote profusely and encouraged others to write equally profusely. It was his encouragement that made me take to writing to give the views of an ex- intelligence officer to the reading public. My first article titled "Human Rights & Human Wrongs" was carried by the "Hindustan Times" a few days after I retired on August 31,1994. I wrote it largely on his prodding.
4. Since then, I must have written about 2000 articles on various subjects. He figured on my Article Alert list. I liked to think he read many of them and not infrequently sent his comments. His last comment on one of my articles was a few weeks ago. He said that he had been bed-ridden for nearly two months, but he was getting interesting articles read out to him by his grand-son and dictating his comments to him.
5.Subrahmanyam came to know of me as an intelligence officer in the late 1970s when Morarji Desai was the Prime Minister. I was posted abroad. He was the Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC). The late N.F.Suntook, the then head of the R&AW, had shown him one of my assessments. After reading it, Subrahmanyam wrote to me that it was one of the best intelligence assessments he had read as the JIC Chairman. I met him for the first time after I returned from my posting.
6. In the early 1980s, he was on board one of the planes of the Indian Airlines that was hijacked to Lahore by some Khalistani terrorists of the Dal Khalsa. There was concern in Delhi that if the Inter-Services Intelligence ISI) came to know of his presence on board the plane, it might detain him and subject him to interrogation since even then it was widely known that he was one of the best informed persons on nuclear-related issues. Fortunately, the ISI apparently did not identify him. Nothing happened. He returned to Delhi from Dubai where the hijacking was terminated by the local authorities.
7. He was a well-wisher of the intelligence community. He strongly believed that India needed a top-rate intelligence set-up. He never hesitated to criticise its inadequacies and never failed to highlight its achievements. As the Chairman of the JIC, he strongly backed the R&AW at a time when it was passing under a cloud after the defeat of Indira Gandhi in the 1977 elections.
8. In 1998, I wrote an article in "The Stateman" explaining why Smt.Sonia Gandhi, because of her foreign origin, should not become the Prime Minister. The Delhi edition of the paper carried it as the second lead story on the first page. The Calcutta edition carried it as the first lead story. I was told by some of my friends in the R&AW that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) went to town with that article and used it for political purposes.
9. In 1999, the Government of Atal Behari Vajpayee, then in power, appointed the Kargil Review Committee (KRC) headed by Subrahmanyam to enquire into the operational conduct of the Kargil war. One of its reported terms of reference was the performance of the intelligence agencies before and during the war. I wrote a number of articles criticising the composition of the KRC. It was my view that an officer from the intelligence community should have been a member of the Committee. I wrote that the KRC report was unfair to the intellgence community because it had no intelligence officer to defend the performance of the agencies. I felt that while the report contained the criticism of the agencies by the Army, it did not reflect the defence of the intelligence community.
10.Many years later, Subrahmanyam sent me a personal message saying that he was keen that I should be a member of the KRC, but decided against it because he was worried that allegations could be made that I was included as a reward for my article regarding Sonia Gandhi. " I didn't want you to be embarrassed by such allegations," he said.
11. Many of us in the intelligence community were unhappy with the KRC report in general and with Subrahmanyam in particular. We felt that he allowed his judgement to be unduly influenced by the unfounded criticism of the agencies by the Army by taking advantage of the absence of any intelligence officer in the KRC. The media went to town claiming that the KRC had held that there was intelligence failure before and during the conflict.
12. Subrahmanyam, in his media interactions after the release of the report, pointed out that the KRC had not used the expression "intelligence failure" in its report. It was a claim by the media which did not correctly reflect the contents of the report, he said.
13.Among those very unhappy with the report was R.N.Kao, the founding father of the R&AW. He wrote a personal letter to Shri Vajpayee conveying his unhappiness. Shri Vajpayee promptly sent for him for a discussion. Subrahmanyam came to know of this later. It did not affect the high esteem in which he always held Kao.
14. The revamping of the intelligence apparatus by the Vajpayee Government on the basis of one of the recommendations in the KRC report was a tribute to the tenacity with which Subrahmanyam kept pressing for it. The creation of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) was largely the result of his ideas. However, one does not know whether they are fulfilling the purposes for which he wanted them.
15.He wanted a top-class National Security Agency (NSA) on the pattern of the NSA of the US to co-ordinate the collection of all technical intelligence.While his idea was readily accepted, there were considerable differences over how it should be set up and what should be its charter.There were bitter turf-battles involving the R&AW on the one side and others on the other. The end result was that the NTRO as it has come up is a strange creature. It is neither an ass nor a donkey nor a mule. Possibly a mix of all the three plus something else.
16. Subrahmanyam felt that if India wanted to be a major power it should have a strong intelligence collection community and a strong intelligence assessment set-up. He was critical in no uncertain terms of the down-grading of the JIC by the Vajpayee Government when it set up the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) towards the end of 1999. He considered the down-grading a retrograde step and made his views known in strong language when he, as the Chairman of the KRC, testified before the Special Task Force for the Revamping of the Intelligence Apparatus headed by Shri G.C.Saxena, former head of the R&AW, set up by the Vajpayee Government in May 2000. I was a member of this Task Force.His tenacity and pressure on this subject ultimately led to the restoration of the full authority of the JIC as an assessment agency in April 2006, when Shri M.K.Narayanan was the National Security Adviser.
17. Subrahmanyam was a strong critic of the decision of the Vajpayee Government to combine the posts of Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister and the National Security Adviser (NSA). He strongly argued in private as well as in public that national security management would suffer if it did not enjoy the undivided attention of a single individual dealing exclusively with national security. He repeatedly called for the separation of the two posts, but his idea was not accepted by the Vajpayee Government. It was only in 2004 after Dr.Manmohan Singh became the Prime Minister that his idea was accepted and the two posts were separated.
18.He took keen interest in the revamping of the national security management system. Some of his ideas were accepted and some had no takers. Among his long-held ideas which he could not push through during his life-time were the need for a National Intelligence Adviser or Director, National Intelligence, to supervise and co-ordinate the functioning of all intelligence agencies and the need for the early creation of a post of Chief of the Defence Staff. The idea for a National Intelligence Adviser or Director, National Intelligence, has had no support either from the intelligence community or the political leadership. The idea for a Chief of the Defence Staff has had wide professional support, but there seemed to be some reluctance at the political level partly due to a lack of unanimity at the senior levels of the Armed Force as to the need for this post and how to implement the idea.
19.Subrahmanyam often highlighted the poor quality of the area studies capabilities that India has been able to create since its independence. He felt that area studies by non-Governmental institutions and experts did not receive the attention they deserved. He often pointed out the unsatisfactory nature of our area studies capabilities even in respect of Pakistan and China. An idea of his that was readily accepted, but tardily implemented was the importance of having a National Defence University (NDU). Under the Vajpayee Government, he himself led a team of experts that visited the US and China to study the working of their NDUs and submit its recommendations. I don't know what is the present stage of implementation.
20. I had the honour and privilege of serving under Subrahmanyam as a member of the second NSAB in 2000-2001. I retain precious memories of my association with him. Three points which he repeatedly stressed need to be recalled. Firstly, our study of national security management would remain incomplete and unsatisfactory without a less restricted policy on declassification of past documents. Secondly, the quality of the national debate on national security management would remain poor unless documents such as edited versions of the annual reports of the NSAB were made available to the public. Thirdly, the NSAB would not fully serve the purpose for which it was set up unless serving officers readily accepted the important role which the NSAB could play in national security management and took its reports and recommendations seriously.
21. There can be no better tribute to the memory of Subrahmanyam than for the Government to appoint a group to revisit his ideas---those accepted and implemented, those accepted, but not yet implemented and those not accepted--- and recommend what further action needs to be taken on those ideas. Our national security management will benefit immensely from such an exercise.
22. Subrahmanyam valiantly fought against cancer for nearly 10 years. In October,2009, after coming to know that I had been diagnosed with metastatic cancer of prostate origin, he sent me the following message: “ Cancer is defeatable. I know you well. I have no doubt in my mind that you will defeat it.” ( 3-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
INDIAN STUDENTS TREATED LIKE GUANTANAMO BAY DETENUS
B.RAMAN
Some Indian students---mainly from Andhra Pradesh--- have fallen victims of the Guantanamo Bay mindset of the US authorities which permits them to use demeaning and dehumanizing methods against suspects under investigation or detention in order to prevent them from escaping and to locate them by using the Global Positioning System (GPS) if they manage to escape. We saw the use of such methods against Al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre in Cuba and subsequently against terrorist suspects and Iraqi Prisoners of War in Iraq and then against terrorist suspects arrested in the US. Now, for the first time, these demeaning and dehumanizing methods, which originated from Guantanamo Bay, have been used against some Indian students whose only crime is---if there is any crime--- that they became unwitting accomplices of a university in the State of California which was allegedly making money by helping foreign students get illegal jobs in the US.
2.The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities raided an institution called the Tri-Valley University (TVU) in Pleasanton, California, near San Francisco last week reportedly on receipt of information that it was not a university and that it was allegedly a racket for making money by helping foreign boys and girls legally enter the US for the ostensible purpose of studying and then illegally taking up a job after having legally entered the US.
2. The raid reportedly corroborated their suspicion. They found that the majority of the students were from India and that many of them had illegally taken up jobs after formally enrolling themselves in the university. The ICE authorities ordered the closure of the University and initiated enquiries against some of the Indian students on a charge of their illegally taking up jobs after legally entering the US. They were not formally taken into police custody during the investigation. Instead, they were required to wear GPS anklets to make sure that they did not abscond while the investigation against them was incomplete.
3. The GPS device consists of an anklet, which is also called a radio collar and a tracking device attached to the belt of the person who is required to wear it. Through this, the police control room is able to keep track of his or her movements and sound an alarm if the person wearing the anklet goes outside the jurisdiction of the police or immigration post investigating him.
4. According to some sources, this device was initially attached to the ankles of all Al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre to prevent them from escaping. Possibly since 2004, it is being used by law enforcement authorities of some States in the US to prevent persons arrested for common law crimes from escaping or absconding. It is understood that GPS anklets are also used in the UK against child sex suspects, persons repeatedly indulging in domestic violence and habitual offenders.
5. It is not known whether in the US there are any regulations laying down against whom or under what circumstances the GPS anklets could be used or whether it is left to the discretion of individual officers.
6. The US contention that the fixing of the GPS anklets to the person under investigation does not indicate any criminality is not correct. True, it does not indicate any proved criminality, but it does indicate that the person wearing the anklet is under investigation for a criminal offence. It is an act of humiliation against the person made to wear the anklet and it creates a prejudice against him or her in the minds of all those coming into contact with him or her.
7.The contention of the US authorities that the alternative would have been to keep them in police or judicial custody till the investigation is over shows total insensitivity to the feelings and emotions of young students. The police authorities could have retained their passports in order to prevent them from leaving for India while the investigation was on. The real reason for making them wear these anklets seems to be to prevent them from going to another State and taking up a job illegally. This could have been easily prevented by other means not involving humiliation.
8. In India we have strict regulations regarding the use of hand-cuffs and leg chains. Our police does not use them on women, old people and teen-agers. They do not use them in cases of white collar crime either. They use them only against persons who have committed offences involving violence and against whom there are fears that they might to try escape after using violence. The underlining principle of the regulations regarding the use of handcuffs and leg chains is that these should not be used in a manner tending to humiliate the suspect.
9- The Indian students made to wear the anklets have not committed any crime involving violence. They do not have a previous criminal record. There is no evidence that they are prone to using violence. Their alleged offence of taking up an illegal job is a white collar crime which would not come under the category of serious fraud or serious misappropriation of money, for which some justification might have been made for making them wear the anklets.
10. The university might have also had some non-Indian students on its rolls. Some of them might have also taken up jobs illegally. Is there an investigation against them also? Have they also been requited to wear these anklets? If not, one would be justified in suspecting that the Indian students have been targeted in order to prevent future such instances----- considering that Indian students were in large number in the university.
11. The Government of India should take up the matter strongly with the US authorities directly as well as through human rights organizations. (2-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Some Indian students---mainly from Andhra Pradesh--- have fallen victims of the Guantanamo Bay mindset of the US authorities which permits them to use demeaning and dehumanizing methods against suspects under investigation or detention in order to prevent them from escaping and to locate them by using the Global Positioning System (GPS) if they manage to escape. We saw the use of such methods against Al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre in Cuba and subsequently against terrorist suspects and Iraqi Prisoners of War in Iraq and then against terrorist suspects arrested in the US. Now, for the first time, these demeaning and dehumanizing methods, which originated from Guantanamo Bay, have been used against some Indian students whose only crime is---if there is any crime--- that they became unwitting accomplices of a university in the State of California which was allegedly making money by helping foreign students get illegal jobs in the US.
2.The US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities raided an institution called the Tri-Valley University (TVU) in Pleasanton, California, near San Francisco last week reportedly on receipt of information that it was not a university and that it was allegedly a racket for making money by helping foreign boys and girls legally enter the US for the ostensible purpose of studying and then illegally taking up a job after having legally entered the US.
2. The raid reportedly corroborated their suspicion. They found that the majority of the students were from India and that many of them had illegally taken up jobs after formally enrolling themselves in the university. The ICE authorities ordered the closure of the University and initiated enquiries against some of the Indian students on a charge of their illegally taking up jobs after legally entering the US. They were not formally taken into police custody during the investigation. Instead, they were required to wear GPS anklets to make sure that they did not abscond while the investigation against them was incomplete.
3. The GPS device consists of an anklet, which is also called a radio collar and a tracking device attached to the belt of the person who is required to wear it. Through this, the police control room is able to keep track of his or her movements and sound an alarm if the person wearing the anklet goes outside the jurisdiction of the police or immigration post investigating him.
4. According to some sources, this device was initially attached to the ankles of all Al Qaeda and other terrorist suspects detained in the Guantanamo Bay detention centre to prevent them from escaping. Possibly since 2004, it is being used by law enforcement authorities of some States in the US to prevent persons arrested for common law crimes from escaping or absconding. It is understood that GPS anklets are also used in the UK against child sex suspects, persons repeatedly indulging in domestic violence and habitual offenders.
5. It is not known whether in the US there are any regulations laying down against whom or under what circumstances the GPS anklets could be used or whether it is left to the discretion of individual officers.
6. The US contention that the fixing of the GPS anklets to the person under investigation does not indicate any criminality is not correct. True, it does not indicate any proved criminality, but it does indicate that the person wearing the anklet is under investigation for a criminal offence. It is an act of humiliation against the person made to wear the anklet and it creates a prejudice against him or her in the minds of all those coming into contact with him or her.
7.The contention of the US authorities that the alternative would have been to keep them in police or judicial custody till the investigation is over shows total insensitivity to the feelings and emotions of young students. The police authorities could have retained their passports in order to prevent them from leaving for India while the investigation was on. The real reason for making them wear these anklets seems to be to prevent them from going to another State and taking up a job illegally. This could have been easily prevented by other means not involving humiliation.
8. In India we have strict regulations regarding the use of hand-cuffs and leg chains. Our police does not use them on women, old people and teen-agers. They do not use them in cases of white collar crime either. They use them only against persons who have committed offences involving violence and against whom there are fears that they might to try escape after using violence. The underlining principle of the regulations regarding the use of handcuffs and leg chains is that these should not be used in a manner tending to humiliate the suspect.
9- The Indian students made to wear the anklets have not committed any crime involving violence. They do not have a previous criminal record. There is no evidence that they are prone to using violence. Their alleged offence of taking up an illegal job is a white collar crime which would not come under the category of serious fraud or serious misappropriation of money, for which some justification might have been made for making them wear the anklets.
10. The university might have also had some non-Indian students on its rolls. Some of them might have also taken up jobs illegally. Is there an investigation against them also? Have they also been requited to wear these anklets? If not, one would be justified in suspecting that the Indian students have been targeted in order to prevent future such instances----- considering that Indian students were in large number in the university.
11. The Government of India should take up the matter strongly with the US authorities directly as well as through human rights organizations. (2-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
THE JIHADI BARBARITY
B.RAMAN
In our exitement over the revolution from nowhere sweeping across the Arab world and in our preoccupation with trying to understand what has been happening in Egypt, we should not fail to highlight and protest against the utter barbarity of the cold-blooded murders of two young Kashmiri Muslim girls at Sopore in Jammu & Kashmir by three suspects believed to be from the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on February 1--- two of them suspected to be locals and the third suspected to be a Pakistani.
2. Such jihadi barbarity has been known in the past and continues in the present. Public opinion ought to be shocked and outraged not only by the act of barbarity that put an end to the lives of two innocent and young Muslim girls, but also by the deafening silence of large sections of the population of the Valley in general and by many---if not most--- of the separatist leaders in particular.
3. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and Sajjad Lone, the dissident leader, need to be complimented for strongly coming out against this barbarity. The almost total silence of many others in the face of the courageous articulation by leaders like them of their outrage should not be a matter of suprise either. It had happened in the past and it continues to happen in the present.
4.These silent people never hesitate to condemn and protest every time there are allegations of excesses by the security forces. They never hesitate to come out in their hundreds and thousands and demonstrate in the streets against the security forces.
5. But they seem to have lost their voice, conscience and courage when innocent civilians were deliberately and barbarically killed by the jihadi terrorists. Their silence not only speaks of their physical and mental cowardice. Worse still, it also speaks of their willingness to tolerate and white-wash jihadi barbarity . Jihadi barbarity is understandable. That seems to be their view.
6. Silence in the face of barbarity amounts to complicity in the commission of barbarity. Not only is the cold-blooded murder of these two girls barbaric, the cold-blooded silence of these people is equally barbaric. Those who murdered these girls are guilty of barbarity in action. Those who remain silent are guilty of barbarity in mind.
7. One has not yet seen any strong reaction from roof-top liberals such as Arundhati Roy and her ilk to the barbarity perpetrated at Sopore. One should not be surprised if they come out with double-edged words to rationalise the act of barbarity while seeming to deplore it.
8. Our electronic media has done well in highlighting the barbarity and the accompanying criminal silence. They should keep it up. It should not be just a proforma outrage. It should be a real outrage.(2-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
In our exitement over the revolution from nowhere sweeping across the Arab world and in our preoccupation with trying to understand what has been happening in Egypt, we should not fail to highlight and protest against the utter barbarity of the cold-blooded murders of two young Kashmiri Muslim girls at Sopore in Jammu & Kashmir by three suspects believed to be from the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LET) on February 1--- two of them suspected to be locals and the third suspected to be a Pakistani.
2. Such jihadi barbarity has been known in the past and continues in the present. Public opinion ought to be shocked and outraged not only by the act of barbarity that put an end to the lives of two innocent and young Muslim girls, but also by the deafening silence of large sections of the population of the Valley in general and by many---if not most--- of the separatist leaders in particular.
3. Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and Sajjad Lone, the dissident leader, need to be complimented for strongly coming out against this barbarity. The almost total silence of many others in the face of the courageous articulation by leaders like them of their outrage should not be a matter of suprise either. It had happened in the past and it continues to happen in the present.
4.These silent people never hesitate to condemn and protest every time there are allegations of excesses by the security forces. They never hesitate to come out in their hundreds and thousands and demonstrate in the streets against the security forces.
5. But they seem to have lost their voice, conscience and courage when innocent civilians were deliberately and barbarically killed by the jihadi terrorists. Their silence not only speaks of their physical and mental cowardice. Worse still, it also speaks of their willingness to tolerate and white-wash jihadi barbarity . Jihadi barbarity is understandable. That seems to be their view.
6. Silence in the face of barbarity amounts to complicity in the commission of barbarity. Not only is the cold-blooded murder of these two girls barbaric, the cold-blooded silence of these people is equally barbaric. Those who murdered these girls are guilty of barbarity in action. Those who remain silent are guilty of barbarity in mind.
7. One has not yet seen any strong reaction from roof-top liberals such as Arundhati Roy and her ilk to the barbarity perpetrated at Sopore. One should not be surprised if they come out with double-edged words to rationalise the act of barbarity while seeming to deplore it.
8. Our electronic media has done well in highlighting the barbarity and the accompanying criminal silence. They should keep it up. It should not be just a proforma outrage. It should be a real outrage.(2-2-11)
( The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute For Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: seventyone2@gmail.com )
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)