Tweet
LISTENING TO GRASSHOPPERS-GENOCIDE, DENIAL AND CELEBRATION
Arundhati Roy
Etalaat
http://www.etalaat.net/english/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=172 :listening-to-grasshoppers-genocide-denial-and-cel ebration&catid=54:dimension&Itemid=80
Feb 13 2008
India
In the state of Gujarat, there was genocide against the Muslim
community in 2002.
I use the word Genocide advisedly, and in keeping with its definition
contained in Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The genocide began
as collective punishment for an unsolved crime-the burning of a railway
coach in which 53 Hindu pilgrims were burned to death. In a carefully
planned orgy of supposed retaliation, 2,000 Muslims were slaughtered
in broad daylight by squads of armed killers, organised by fascist
militias, and backed by the Gujarat government and the administration
of the day. Muslim women were gang-raped and burned alive.
Muslim shops, Muslim businesses and Muslim shrines and mosques were
systematically destroyed. Some 1,50,000 people were driven from
their homes.
Even today, many of them live in ghettos-some built on garbage
heaps-with no water supply, no drainage, no streetlights, no
healthcare. They live as second-class citizens, boycotted socially
and economically. Meanwhile, the killers, police as well as civilian,
have been embraced, rewarded, promoted. This state of affairs is now
considered 'normal'. To seal the 'normality', in 2004, both Ratan
Tata and Mukesh Ambani, India's leading industrialists, publicly
pronounced Gujarat a dream destination for finance capital.
The initial outcry in the national press has settled down. In Gujarat,
the genocide has been brazenly celebrated as the epitome of Gujarati
pride, Hindu-ness, even Indian-ness. This poisonous brew has been
used twice in a row to win state elections, with campaigns that
have cleverly used the language and apparatus of modernity and
democracy. The helmsman, Narendra Modi, has become a folk hero,
called in by the BJP to campaign on its behalf in other Indian states.
As genocides go, the Gujarat genocide cannot compare with the
people killed in the Congo, Rwanda and Bosnia, where the numbers run
into millions, nor is it by any means the first that has occurred
in India. (In 1984 for instance, 3,000 Sikhs were massacred on
the streets of Delhi with similar impunity by killers overseen by
the Congress Party.) But the Gujarat genocide is part of a larger,
more elaborate and systematic vision. It tells us that the wheat is
ripening and the grasshoppers have landed in mainland India.
It's an old human habit, genocide is. It has played a sterling part
in the march of civilisation. Amongst the earliest recorded genocides
is thought to be the destruction of Carthage at the end of the Third
Punic War in 149 BC. The word itself-genocide-was coined by Raphael
Lemkin only in 1943, and adopted by the United Nations in 1948, after
the Nazi Holocaust. Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines it as:
"Any of the following Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole
or part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to
members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions
of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole
or part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
[or] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Since this definition leaves out the persecution of political
dissidents, real or imagined, it does not include some of the greatest
mass murders in history. Personally I think the definition by Frank
Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn, authors of The History and Sociology of
Genocide, is more apt.
Genocide, they say, "is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a
state or other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and
membership in it are defined by the perpetrator." Defined like this,
genocide would include, for example, the monumental crimes committed
by Suharto in Indonesia (1 million) Pol Pot in Cambodia (1.5 million),
Stalin in the Soviet Union (60 million), Mao in China (70 million).
All things considered, the word extermination, with its crude evocation
of pests and vermin, of infestations, is perhaps the more honest,
more apposite word. When a set of perpetrators faces its victims, in
order to go about its business of wanton killing, it must first sever
any human connection with it. It must see its victims as sub-human,
as parasites whose eradication would be a service to society. Here,
for example, is an account of the massacre of Pequot Indians by English
Puritans led by John Mason in Connecticut in 1636: Those that escaped
the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others rune
throw with their rapiers, so they were quickly dispatchte, and very
few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this
time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyre, and
the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke
and sente thereof, but the victory seemed a sweete sacrifice....
And here, approximately four centuries later, is Babu Bajrangi,
one of the major lynchpins of the Gujarat genocide, recorded on
camera in the sting operation mounted by Tehelka a few months ago: We
didn't spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire...hacked,
burned, set on fire...we believe in setting them on fire because these
bastards don't want to be cremated, they're afraid of it.... I have
just one last wish...let me be sentenced to death...I don't care if
I'm hanged...just give me two days before my hanging and I will go
and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs of these
people stay...I will finish them off...let a few more of them die...at
least 25,000 to 50,000 should die.
I hardly need to say that Babu Bajrangi had the blessings of Narendra
Modi, the protection of the police, and the love of his people. He
continues to work and prosper as a free man in Gujarat. The one crime
he cannot be accused of is Genocide Denial.
Genocide Denial is a radical variation on the theme of the old,
frankly racist, bloodthirsty triumphalism. It was probably evolved as
an answer to the somewhat patchy dual morality that arose in the 19th
century, when Europe was developing limited but new forms of democracy
and citizens' rights at home while simultaneously exterminating
people in their millions in her colonies. Suddenly countries and
governments began to deny or attempt to hide the genocides they
had committed. "Denial is saying, in effect," says Professor Robert
Jay Lifton, author of Hiroshima and America: Fifty Years of Denial,
"that the murderers did not murder. The victims weren't killed. The
direct consequence of denial is that it invites future genocide."
Of course today, when genocide politics meets the Free Market,
official recognition-or denial-of holocausts and genocides is a
multinational business enterprise. It rarely has anything to do
to with historical fact or forensic evidence. Morality certainly
does not enter the picture. It is an aggressive process of high-end
bargaining, that belongs more to the World Trade Organisation than
to the United Nations.
The currency is geopolitics, the fluctuating market for natural
resources, that curious thing called futures trading and plain old
economic and military might.
In other words, genocides are often denied for the same set of
reasons as genocides are prosecuted. Economic determinism marinated
in racial/ethnic/religious/national discrimination. Crudely, the
lowering or raising of the price of a barrel of oil (or a tonne of
uranium), permission granted for a military base, or the opening up
of a country's economy could be the decisive factor when governments
adjudicate on whether a genocide did or did not occur.
Or indeed whether genocide will or will not occur. And if it does,
whether it will or will not be reported, and if it is, then what slant
that reportage will take. For example, the death of two million in the
Congo goes virtually unreported. Why? And was the death of a million
Iraqis under the sanctions regime, prior to the US invasion, genocide
(which is what Denis Halliday, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator for
Iraq, called it) or was it 'worth it', as Madeleine Albright, the US
ambassador to the UN, claimed? It depends on who makes the rules. Bill
Clinton? Or an Iraqi mother who has lost her child?
Since the United States is the richest and most powerful country in
the world, it has assumed the privilege of being the World's Number
One Genocide Denier. It continues to celebrate Columbus Day, the
day Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas, which marks the
beginning of a Holocaust that wiped out millions of native Indians,
about 90 per cent of the original population. (Lord Amherst, the man
whose idea it was to distribute blankets infected with smallpox virus
to Indians, has a university town in Massachusetts, and a prestigious
liberal arts college named after him).
In America's second Holocaust, almost 30 million Africans were
kidnapped and sold into slavery. Well near half of them died during
transportation. But in 2002, the US delegation could still walk
out of the World Conference against Racism in Durban, refusing to
acknowledge that slavery and the slave trade were crimes. Slavery,
they insisted, was legal at the time. The US has also refused to
accept that the bombing of Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and
Hamburg-which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians-were crimes,
let alone acts of genocide. (The argument here is that the government
didn't intend to kill civilians. This was the first stage in the
development of the concept of "collateral damage".) Since the end of
World War II, the US government has intervened overtly, militarily,
more than 400 times in 100 countries, and covertly more than 6,000
times. This includes its invasion of Vietnam and the extermination,
with excellent intentions of course, of three million Vietnamese
(approximately 10 per cent of its population).
None of these has been acknowledged as war crimes or genocidal acts.
'Union' (racial/ethnic/religious/national) and 'Progress' (economic
determinism) have long been the twin coordinates of genocide.
Armed with this reading of history, is it reasonable to worry about
whether a country that is poised on the threshold of "progress" is also
poised on the threshold of genocide? Could the India being celebrated
all over the world as a miracle of progress and democracy, possibly
be poised on the verge of committing genocide? The mere suggestion
might sound outlandish and, at this point of time, the use of the
word genocide surely unwarranted. However, if we look to the future,
and if the Tsars of Development believe in their own publicity, if
they believe that There Is No Alternative to their chosen model for
Progress, then they will inevitably have to kill, and kill in large
numbers, in order to get their way.
Advani's chariot of fire: And so the Union project was launched in
bits and pieces, as the news trickles in, it seems clear that the
killing and the dying has already begun.
It was in 1989, soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that
the Government of India turned in its membership of the Non-Aligned
Movement and signed up for membership of the Completely Aligned, often
referring to itself as the 'natural ally' of Israel and the United
States. (They have at least this one thing in common-all three are
engaged in overt, neo-colonial military occupations: India in Kashmir,
Israel in Palestine, the US in Iraq.) Almost like clockwork, the two
major national political parties, the BJP and the Congress, embarked
on a joint programme to advance India's version of Union and Progress,
whose modern-day euphemisms are Nationalism and Development. Every
now and then, particularly during elections, they stage noisy familial
squabbles, but have managed to gather into their fold even grumbling
relatives, like the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
The Union project offers Hindu Nationalism (which seeks to unite the
Hindu vote, vital you will admit, for a great democracy like India).
The Progress project aims at a 10 per cent annual growth rate. Both
these projects are encrypted with genocidal potential.
The Union project has been largely entrusted to the RSS, the
ideological heart, the holding company of the BJP and its militias,
the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal. The RSS was founded
in 1925. By the 1930s, its founder, Dr Hedgewar, a fan of Benito
Mussolini, had begun to model it overtly along the lines of Italian
fascism. Hitler too was, and is, an inspirational figure. Here are
some excerpts from the RSS Bible, We or Our Nationhood Defined by
M.S. Golwalkar, who succeeded Dr Hedgewar as head of the RSS in 1940:
Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right
up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting
on to take on these despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening.
Then: In Hindustan, land of the Hindus, lives and should live the Hindu
Nation.... All others are traitors and enemies to the National Cause,
or, to take a charitable view, idiots....
The foreign races in Hindustan...may stay in the country, wholly
subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no
privileges; far less any preferential treatment-not even citizen's
rights.
And again: To keep up the purity of its race and culture, Germany
shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races-the
Jews.
Race pride at its highest has been manifested here...a good lesson
for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by. (How do you combat this
kind of organised hatred? Certainly, not with goofy preachings of
secular love.) By the year 2000, the RSS had more than 45,000
shakhas and an army of seven million swayamsevaks preaching its
doctrine across India. They include India's former prime minister,
Atal Behari Vajpayee, the former home minister and current leader of
the Opposition, L.K. Advani, and, of course, the three-time Gujarat
chief minister, Narendra Modi. It also includes senior people in the
media, the police, the army, the intelligence agencies, judiciary and
the administrative services who are informal devotees of Hindutva-the
RSS ideology. These people, unlike politicians who come and go,
are permanent members of government machinery.
But the RSS's real power lies in the fact that it has put in decades
of hard work and has created a network of organisations at every
level of society, something that no other organisation can claim.
The BJP is its political front. It has a trade union wing (Bharatiya
Mazdoor Sangh), a women's wing (Rashtriya Sevika Samiti), a student
wing (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad) and an economic wing
(Swadeshi Jagaran Manch).
Its front organisation Vidya Bharati is the largest educational
organisation in the non-governmental sector. It has 13,000 educational
institutes including the Saraswati Vidya Mandir schools with 70,000
teachers and over 1.7 million students. It has organisations working
with tribals (Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram), literature (Akhil Bharatiya
Sahitya Parishad), intellectuals (Pragya Bharati, Deendayal Research
Institute), historians (Bharatiya Itihaas Sankalan Yojanalaya),
language (Sanskrit Bharti), slum-dwellers (Seva Bharati, Hindu Seva
Pratishthan), health (Swami Vivekanand Medical Mission, National
Medicos Organisation), leprosy patients (Bharatiya Kushtha Nivaran
Sangh), cooperatives (Sahkar Bharati), publication of newspapers and
other propaganda material (Bharat Prakashan, Suruchi Prakashan, Lokhit
Prakashan, Gyanganga Prakashan, Archana Prakashan, Bharatiya Vichar
Sadhana, Sadhana Pustak and Akashvani Sadhana), caste integration
(Samajik Samrasta Manch), religion and proselytisation (Vivekananda
Kendra, Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Hindu Jagaran Manch, Bajrang Dal). The
list goes on and on...
On June 11, 1989, Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi gave the RSS
a gift. He was obliging enough to open the locks of the disputed
Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, which the RSS claimed was the birthplace of
Lord Ram. At the National Executive of the BJP, the party passed a
resolution to demolish the mosque and build a temple in Ayodhya. "I'm
sure the resolution will translate into votes," said L.K. Advani. In
1990, he criss-crossed the country on his Rath Yatra, his Chariot of
Fire, demanding the demolition of the Babri Masjid, leaving riots
and bloodshed in his wake. In 1991, the party won 120 seats in
Parliament. (It had won two in 1984). The hysteria orchestrated by
Advani peaked in 1992, when the mosque was brought down by a marauding
mob. By 1998, the BJP was in power at the Centre. Its first act in
office was to conduct a series of nuclear tests. Across the country,
fascists and corporates, princes and paupers alike, celebrated India's
Hindu Bomb. Hindutva had transcended petty party politics.
In 2002, Narendra Modi's government planned and executed the Gujarat
genocide. In the elections that took place a few months after the
genocide, he was returned to power with an overwhelming majority. He
ensured complete impunity for those who had participated in the
killings. In the rare case where there has been a conviction, it is
of course the lowly footsoldiers, and not the masterminds, who stand
in the dock.
Impunity is an essential prerequisite for genocidal killing.
India has a great tradition of granting impunity to mass killers. I
could fill volumes with the details.
In a democracy, for impunity after genocide, you have to "apply
through proper channels". Procedure is everything. In the case of
several massacres, the lawyers that the Gujarat government appointed
as public prosecutors had actually already appeared for the accused.
Several of them belonged to the RSS or the VHP and were openly hostile
to those they were supposedly representing. Survivor witnesses found
that, when they went to the police to file reports, the police would
record their statements inaccurately, or refuse to record the names
of the perpetrators. In several cases, when survivors had seen members
of their families being killed (and burned alive so their bodies could
not be found), the police would refuse to register cases of murder.
Ehsan Jaffri, the Congress politician and poet who had made the
mistake of campaigning against Modi in the Rajkot elections, was
publicly butchered. (by a mob led by a fellow Congressman.) In the
words of a man who took part in the savagery: Five people held him,
then someone struck him with a sword...chopped off his hand, then
his legs...then everything else...after cutting him to pieces, they
put him on the wood they'd piled and set him on fire; burned him alive.
The Ahmedabad Commissioner of Police, P.C. Pandey, was kind enough
to visit the neighbourhood while the mob lynched Jaffri, murdered 70
people, and gang-raped 12 women before burning them alive. After
Modi was re-elected, Pandey was promoted, and made Gujarat's
Director-General of Police. The entire killing apparatus remains
in place.
The Supreme Court in Delhi made a few threatening noises, but
eventually put the matter into cold storage. The Congress and the
Communist parties made a great deal of noise, but did nothing.
In the Tehelka sting operation, broadcast recently on a news channel
at prime time, apart from Babu Bajrangi, killer after killer recounted
how the genocide had been planned and executed, how Modi and senior
politicians and police officers had been personally involved. None
of this information was new, but there they were, the butchers,
on the news networks, not just admitting to, but boasting about
their crimes. The overwhelming public reaction to the sting was
not outrage, but suspicion about its timing. Most people believed
that the expose would help Modi win the elections again. Some even
believed, quite outlandishly, that he had engineered the sting. He
did win the elections. And this time, on the ticket of Union and
Progress. A committee all unto himself. At BJP rallies, thousands
of adoring supporters now wear plastic Modi masks, chanting slogans
of death. The fascist democrat has physically mutated into a million
little fascists. These are the joys of democracy. Who in Nazi Germany
would have dared to put on a Hitler mask?
Preparations to recreate the 'Gujarat blueprint' are currently in
different stages in the BJP-ruled states of Orissa, Chhattisgarh,
Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka.
To commit genocide, says Peter Balkian, scholar of the Armenian
genocide, you have to marginalise a sub-group for a long time. This
criterion has been well met in India. The Muslims of India have been
systematically marginalised and have now joined the Adivasis and
Dalits, who have not just been marginalised, but dehumanised by caste
Hindu society and its scriptures, for years, for centuries. (There
was a time when they were dehumanised in order to be put to work
doing things that caste Hindus would not do.
Now, with technology, even that labour is becoming redundant.) Part
of the RSS's work involves setting Dalits against Muslims, Adivasis
against Dalits.
Hundreds of thousands have broken faith with the institutions of
India's democracy. Large swathes of the country have fallen out of
the government's control. (At last count, it was supposed to be 25
per cent). The battle stinks of death, it's by no means pretty. How
can it be when the helmsman of the army of Constraining Ghosts is
the ghost of Chairman Mao himself? (The ray of hope is that many of
the footsoldiers don't know who he is. Or what he did. More Genocide
Denial? Maybe). Are they Idealists fighting for a Better World?
Well... anything is better than annihilation.
The Prime Minister has declared that the Maoist resistance is the
"single largest internal security threat". There have even been appeals
to call out the army. The media is agog with breathless condemnation.
Here's a typical newspaper report. Nothing out of the ordinary! Stamp
out the Naxals, it is called.
This government is at last showing some sense in tackling Naxalism.
Less than a month ago, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asked state
governments to "choke" Naxal infrastructure and "cripple" their
activities through a dedicated force to eliminate the "virus". It
signalled a realisation that Naxalism must be stamped out through
enforcement of law, rather than wasteful expense on development.
"Choke". "Cripple". "Virus". "Infested". "Eliminate". "Stamp Out".
Yes. The idea of extermination is in the air. And people believe that
faced with extermination, they have the right to fight back.By any
means necessary.
Perhaps they've been listening to the grasshoppers.
Arundhati Roy
Etalaat
http://www.etalaat.net/english/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=172 :listening-to-grasshoppers-genocide-denial-and-cel ebration&catid=54:dimension&Itemid=80
Feb 13 2008
India
In the state of Gujarat, there was genocide against the Muslim
community in 2002.
I use the word Genocide advisedly, and in keeping with its definition
contained in Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The genocide began
as collective punishment for an unsolved crime-the burning of a railway
coach in which 53 Hindu pilgrims were burned to death. In a carefully
planned orgy of supposed retaliation, 2,000 Muslims were slaughtered
in broad daylight by squads of armed killers, organised by fascist
militias, and backed by the Gujarat government and the administration
of the day. Muslim women were gang-raped and burned alive.
Muslim shops, Muslim businesses and Muslim shrines and mosques were
systematically destroyed. Some 1,50,000 people were driven from
their homes.
Even today, many of them live in ghettos-some built on garbage
heaps-with no water supply, no drainage, no streetlights, no
healthcare. They live as second-class citizens, boycotted socially
and economically. Meanwhile, the killers, police as well as civilian,
have been embraced, rewarded, promoted. This state of affairs is now
considered 'normal'. To seal the 'normality', in 2004, both Ratan
Tata and Mukesh Ambani, India's leading industrialists, publicly
pronounced Gujarat a dream destination for finance capital.
The initial outcry in the national press has settled down. In Gujarat,
the genocide has been brazenly celebrated as the epitome of Gujarati
pride, Hindu-ness, even Indian-ness. This poisonous brew has been
used twice in a row to win state elections, with campaigns that
have cleverly used the language and apparatus of modernity and
democracy. The helmsman, Narendra Modi, has become a folk hero,
called in by the BJP to campaign on its behalf in other Indian states.
As genocides go, the Gujarat genocide cannot compare with the
people killed in the Congo, Rwanda and Bosnia, where the numbers run
into millions, nor is it by any means the first that has occurred
in India. (In 1984 for instance, 3,000 Sikhs were massacred on
the streets of Delhi with similar impunity by killers overseen by
the Congress Party.) But the Gujarat genocide is part of a larger,
more elaborate and systematic vision. It tells us that the wheat is
ripening and the grasshoppers have landed in mainland India.
It's an old human habit, genocide is. It has played a sterling part
in the march of civilisation. Amongst the earliest recorded genocides
is thought to be the destruction of Carthage at the end of the Third
Punic War in 149 BC. The word itself-genocide-was coined by Raphael
Lemkin only in 1943, and adopted by the United Nations in 1948, after
the Nazi Holocaust. Article 2 of the United Nations Convention on
the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines it as:
"Any of the following Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole
or part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to
members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions
of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole
or part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
[or] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."
Since this definition leaves out the persecution of political
dissidents, real or imagined, it does not include some of the greatest
mass murders in history. Personally I think the definition by Frank
Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn, authors of The History and Sociology of
Genocide, is more apt.
Genocide, they say, "is a form of one-sided mass killing in which a
state or other authority intends to destroy a group, as that group and
membership in it are defined by the perpetrator." Defined like this,
genocide would include, for example, the monumental crimes committed
by Suharto in Indonesia (1 million) Pol Pot in Cambodia (1.5 million),
Stalin in the Soviet Union (60 million), Mao in China (70 million).
All things considered, the word extermination, with its crude evocation
of pests and vermin, of infestations, is perhaps the more honest,
more apposite word. When a set of perpetrators faces its victims, in
order to go about its business of wanton killing, it must first sever
any human connection with it. It must see its victims as sub-human,
as parasites whose eradication would be a service to society. Here,
for example, is an account of the massacre of Pequot Indians by English
Puritans led by John Mason in Connecticut in 1636: Those that escaped
the fire were slain with the sword; some hewed to pieces, others rune
throw with their rapiers, so they were quickly dispatchte, and very
few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this
time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyre, and
the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke
and sente thereof, but the victory seemed a sweete sacrifice....
And here, approximately four centuries later, is Babu Bajrangi,
one of the major lynchpins of the Gujarat genocide, recorded on
camera in the sting operation mounted by Tehelka a few months ago: We
didn't spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire...hacked,
burned, set on fire...we believe in setting them on fire because these
bastards don't want to be cremated, they're afraid of it.... I have
just one last wish...let me be sentenced to death...I don't care if
I'm hanged...just give me two days before my hanging and I will go
and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs of these
people stay...I will finish them off...let a few more of them die...at
least 25,000 to 50,000 should die.
I hardly need to say that Babu Bajrangi had the blessings of Narendra
Modi, the protection of the police, and the love of his people. He
continues to work and prosper as a free man in Gujarat. The one crime
he cannot be accused of is Genocide Denial.
Genocide Denial is a radical variation on the theme of the old,
frankly racist, bloodthirsty triumphalism. It was probably evolved as
an answer to the somewhat patchy dual morality that arose in the 19th
century, when Europe was developing limited but new forms of democracy
and citizens' rights at home while simultaneously exterminating
people in their millions in her colonies. Suddenly countries and
governments began to deny or attempt to hide the genocides they
had committed. "Denial is saying, in effect," says Professor Robert
Jay Lifton, author of Hiroshima and America: Fifty Years of Denial,
"that the murderers did not murder. The victims weren't killed. The
direct consequence of denial is that it invites future genocide."
Of course today, when genocide politics meets the Free Market,
official recognition-or denial-of holocausts and genocides is a
multinational business enterprise. It rarely has anything to do
to with historical fact or forensic evidence. Morality certainly
does not enter the picture. It is an aggressive process of high-end
bargaining, that belongs more to the World Trade Organisation than
to the United Nations.
The currency is geopolitics, the fluctuating market for natural
resources, that curious thing called futures trading and plain old
economic and military might.
In other words, genocides are often denied for the same set of
reasons as genocides are prosecuted. Economic determinism marinated
in racial/ethnic/religious/national discrimination. Crudely, the
lowering or raising of the price of a barrel of oil (or a tonne of
uranium), permission granted for a military base, or the opening up
of a country's economy could be the decisive factor when governments
adjudicate on whether a genocide did or did not occur.
Or indeed whether genocide will or will not occur. And if it does,
whether it will or will not be reported, and if it is, then what slant
that reportage will take. For example, the death of two million in the
Congo goes virtually unreported. Why? And was the death of a million
Iraqis under the sanctions regime, prior to the US invasion, genocide
(which is what Denis Halliday, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator for
Iraq, called it) or was it 'worth it', as Madeleine Albright, the US
ambassador to the UN, claimed? It depends on who makes the rules. Bill
Clinton? Or an Iraqi mother who has lost her child?
Since the United States is the richest and most powerful country in
the world, it has assumed the privilege of being the World's Number
One Genocide Denier. It continues to celebrate Columbus Day, the
day Christopher Columbus arrived in the Americas, which marks the
beginning of a Holocaust that wiped out millions of native Indians,
about 90 per cent of the original population. (Lord Amherst, the man
whose idea it was to distribute blankets infected with smallpox virus
to Indians, has a university town in Massachusetts, and a prestigious
liberal arts college named after him).
In America's second Holocaust, almost 30 million Africans were
kidnapped and sold into slavery. Well near half of them died during
transportation. But in 2002, the US delegation could still walk
out of the World Conference against Racism in Durban, refusing to
acknowledge that slavery and the slave trade were crimes. Slavery,
they insisted, was legal at the time. The US has also refused to
accept that the bombing of Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and
Hamburg-which killed hundreds of thousands of civilians-were crimes,
let alone acts of genocide. (The argument here is that the government
didn't intend to kill civilians. This was the first stage in the
development of the concept of "collateral damage".) Since the end of
World War II, the US government has intervened overtly, militarily,
more than 400 times in 100 countries, and covertly more than 6,000
times. This includes its invasion of Vietnam and the extermination,
with excellent intentions of course, of three million Vietnamese
(approximately 10 per cent of its population).
None of these has been acknowledged as war crimes or genocidal acts.
'Union' (racial/ethnic/religious/national) and 'Progress' (economic
determinism) have long been the twin coordinates of genocide.
Armed with this reading of history, is it reasonable to worry about
whether a country that is poised on the threshold of "progress" is also
poised on the threshold of genocide? Could the India being celebrated
all over the world as a miracle of progress and democracy, possibly
be poised on the verge of committing genocide? The mere suggestion
might sound outlandish and, at this point of time, the use of the
word genocide surely unwarranted. However, if we look to the future,
and if the Tsars of Development believe in their own publicity, if
they believe that There Is No Alternative to their chosen model for
Progress, then they will inevitably have to kill, and kill in large
numbers, in order to get their way.
Advani's chariot of fire: And so the Union project was launched in
bits and pieces, as the news trickles in, it seems clear that the
killing and the dying has already begun.
It was in 1989, soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that
the Government of India turned in its membership of the Non-Aligned
Movement and signed up for membership of the Completely Aligned, often
referring to itself as the 'natural ally' of Israel and the United
States. (They have at least this one thing in common-all three are
engaged in overt, neo-colonial military occupations: India in Kashmir,
Israel in Palestine, the US in Iraq.) Almost like clockwork, the two
major national political parties, the BJP and the Congress, embarked
on a joint programme to advance India's version of Union and Progress,
whose modern-day euphemisms are Nationalism and Development. Every
now and then, particularly during elections, they stage noisy familial
squabbles, but have managed to gather into their fold even grumbling
relatives, like the Communist Party of India (Marxist).
The Union project offers Hindu Nationalism (which seeks to unite the
Hindu vote, vital you will admit, for a great democracy like India).
The Progress project aims at a 10 per cent annual growth rate. Both
these projects are encrypted with genocidal potential.
The Union project has been largely entrusted to the RSS, the
ideological heart, the holding company of the BJP and its militias,
the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal. The RSS was founded
in 1925. By the 1930s, its founder, Dr Hedgewar, a fan of Benito
Mussolini, had begun to model it overtly along the lines of Italian
fascism. Hitler too was, and is, an inspirational figure. Here are
some excerpts from the RSS Bible, We or Our Nationhood Defined by
M.S. Golwalkar, who succeeded Dr Hedgewar as head of the RSS in 1940:
Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right
up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting
on to take on these despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening.
Then: In Hindustan, land of the Hindus, lives and should live the Hindu
Nation.... All others are traitors and enemies to the National Cause,
or, to take a charitable view, idiots....
The foreign races in Hindustan...may stay in the country, wholly
subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no
privileges; far less any preferential treatment-not even citizen's
rights.
And again: To keep up the purity of its race and culture, Germany
shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races-the
Jews.
Race pride at its highest has been manifested here...a good lesson
for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by. (How do you combat this
kind of organised hatred? Certainly, not with goofy preachings of
secular love.) By the year 2000, the RSS had more than 45,000
shakhas and an army of seven million swayamsevaks preaching its
doctrine across India. They include India's former prime minister,
Atal Behari Vajpayee, the former home minister and current leader of
the Opposition, L.K. Advani, and, of course, the three-time Gujarat
chief minister, Narendra Modi. It also includes senior people in the
media, the police, the army, the intelligence agencies, judiciary and
the administrative services who are informal devotees of Hindutva-the
RSS ideology. These people, unlike politicians who come and go,
are permanent members of government machinery.
But the RSS's real power lies in the fact that it has put in decades
of hard work and has created a network of organisations at every
level of society, something that no other organisation can claim.
The BJP is its political front. It has a trade union wing (Bharatiya
Mazdoor Sangh), a women's wing (Rashtriya Sevika Samiti), a student
wing (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad) and an economic wing
(Swadeshi Jagaran Manch).
Its front organisation Vidya Bharati is the largest educational
organisation in the non-governmental sector. It has 13,000 educational
institutes including the Saraswati Vidya Mandir schools with 70,000
teachers and over 1.7 million students. It has organisations working
with tribals (Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram), literature (Akhil Bharatiya
Sahitya Parishad), intellectuals (Pragya Bharati, Deendayal Research
Institute), historians (Bharatiya Itihaas Sankalan Yojanalaya),
language (Sanskrit Bharti), slum-dwellers (Seva Bharati, Hindu Seva
Pratishthan), health (Swami Vivekanand Medical Mission, National
Medicos Organisation), leprosy patients (Bharatiya Kushtha Nivaran
Sangh), cooperatives (Sahkar Bharati), publication of newspapers and
other propaganda material (Bharat Prakashan, Suruchi Prakashan, Lokhit
Prakashan, Gyanganga Prakashan, Archana Prakashan, Bharatiya Vichar
Sadhana, Sadhana Pustak and Akashvani Sadhana), caste integration
(Samajik Samrasta Manch), religion and proselytisation (Vivekananda
Kendra, Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Hindu Jagaran Manch, Bajrang Dal). The
list goes on and on...
On June 11, 1989, Congress Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi gave the RSS
a gift. He was obliging enough to open the locks of the disputed
Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, which the RSS claimed was the birthplace of
Lord Ram. At the National Executive of the BJP, the party passed a
resolution to demolish the mosque and build a temple in Ayodhya. "I'm
sure the resolution will translate into votes," said L.K. Advani. In
1990, he criss-crossed the country on his Rath Yatra, his Chariot of
Fire, demanding the demolition of the Babri Masjid, leaving riots
and bloodshed in his wake. In 1991, the party won 120 seats in
Parliament. (It had won two in 1984). The hysteria orchestrated by
Advani peaked in 1992, when the mosque was brought down by a marauding
mob. By 1998, the BJP was in power at the Centre. Its first act in
office was to conduct a series of nuclear tests. Across the country,
fascists and corporates, princes and paupers alike, celebrated India's
Hindu Bomb. Hindutva had transcended petty party politics.
In 2002, Narendra Modi's government planned and executed the Gujarat
genocide. In the elections that took place a few months after the
genocide, he was returned to power with an overwhelming majority. He
ensured complete impunity for those who had participated in the
killings. In the rare case where there has been a conviction, it is
of course the lowly footsoldiers, and not the masterminds, who stand
in the dock.
Impunity is an essential prerequisite for genocidal killing.
India has a great tradition of granting impunity to mass killers. I
could fill volumes with the details.
In a democracy, for impunity after genocide, you have to "apply
through proper channels". Procedure is everything. In the case of
several massacres, the lawyers that the Gujarat government appointed
as public prosecutors had actually already appeared for the accused.
Several of them belonged to the RSS or the VHP and were openly hostile
to those they were supposedly representing. Survivor witnesses found
that, when they went to the police to file reports, the police would
record their statements inaccurately, or refuse to record the names
of the perpetrators. In several cases, when survivors had seen members
of their families being killed (and burned alive so their bodies could
not be found), the police would refuse to register cases of murder.
Ehsan Jaffri, the Congress politician and poet who had made the
mistake of campaigning against Modi in the Rajkot elections, was
publicly butchered. (by a mob led by a fellow Congressman.) In the
words of a man who took part in the savagery: Five people held him,
then someone struck him with a sword...chopped off his hand, then
his legs...then everything else...after cutting him to pieces, they
put him on the wood they'd piled and set him on fire; burned him alive.
The Ahmedabad Commissioner of Police, P.C. Pandey, was kind enough
to visit the neighbourhood while the mob lynched Jaffri, murdered 70
people, and gang-raped 12 women before burning them alive. After
Modi was re-elected, Pandey was promoted, and made Gujarat's
Director-General of Police. The entire killing apparatus remains
in place.
The Supreme Court in Delhi made a few threatening noises, but
eventually put the matter into cold storage. The Congress and the
Communist parties made a great deal of noise, but did nothing.
In the Tehelka sting operation, broadcast recently on a news channel
at prime time, apart from Babu Bajrangi, killer after killer recounted
how the genocide had been planned and executed, how Modi and senior
politicians and police officers had been personally involved. None
of this information was new, but there they were, the butchers,
on the news networks, not just admitting to, but boasting about
their crimes. The overwhelming public reaction to the sting was
not outrage, but suspicion about its timing. Most people believed
that the expose would help Modi win the elections again. Some even
believed, quite outlandishly, that he had engineered the sting. He
did win the elections. And this time, on the ticket of Union and
Progress. A committee all unto himself. At BJP rallies, thousands
of adoring supporters now wear plastic Modi masks, chanting slogans
of death. The fascist democrat has physically mutated into a million
little fascists. These are the joys of democracy. Who in Nazi Germany
would have dared to put on a Hitler mask?
Preparations to recreate the 'Gujarat blueprint' are currently in
different stages in the BJP-ruled states of Orissa, Chhattisgarh,
Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Karnataka.
To commit genocide, says Peter Balkian, scholar of the Armenian
genocide, you have to marginalise a sub-group for a long time. This
criterion has been well met in India. The Muslims of India have been
systematically marginalised and have now joined the Adivasis and
Dalits, who have not just been marginalised, but dehumanised by caste
Hindu society and its scriptures, for years, for centuries. (There
was a time when they were dehumanised in order to be put to work
doing things that caste Hindus would not do.
Now, with technology, even that labour is becoming redundant.) Part
of the RSS's work involves setting Dalits against Muslims, Adivasis
against Dalits.
Hundreds of thousands have broken faith with the institutions of
India's democracy. Large swathes of the country have fallen out of
the government's control. (At last count, it was supposed to be 25
per cent). The battle stinks of death, it's by no means pretty. How
can it be when the helmsman of the army of Constraining Ghosts is
the ghost of Chairman Mao himself? (The ray of hope is that many of
the footsoldiers don't know who he is. Or what he did. More Genocide
Denial? Maybe). Are they Idealists fighting for a Better World?
Well... anything is better than annihilation.
The Prime Minister has declared that the Maoist resistance is the
"single largest internal security threat". There have even been appeals
to call out the army. The media is agog with breathless condemnation.
Here's a typical newspaper report. Nothing out of the ordinary! Stamp
out the Naxals, it is called.
This government is at last showing some sense in tackling Naxalism.
Less than a month ago, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh asked state
governments to "choke" Naxal infrastructure and "cripple" their
activities through a dedicated force to eliminate the "virus". It
signalled a realisation that Naxalism must be stamped out through
enforcement of law, rather than wasteful expense on development.
"Choke". "Cripple". "Virus". "Infested". "Eliminate". "Stamp Out".
Yes. The idea of extermination is in the air. And people believe that
faced with extermination, they have the right to fight back.By any
means necessary.
Perhaps they've been listening to the grasshoppers.