People's Democracy

SENIOR Hindi journalist Ram Sharan Joshi, at present PVC of the Makhan Lal Chaturvedi National University of Journalism, recently delivered this year’s Jasbir memorial lecture on the anniversary of Jasbir Singh’s martyrdom. Jasbir Singh was president of the Haryana SFI and a brilliant post graduate student of economics at Kurukshetra University, when he was done to death by some anti-socials masquerading as student leaders and enjoying political support.

Speaking at the Jasbir Memorial in Rohtak on the problem of global terrorism and the US attacks on Afghanistan, Joshi began by asking a question: How come the all-powerful USA came to know of the existence of global terrorism only after September 11 while many parts of the world were reeling under its impact?

Joshi also pointed out sarcastically that for the last one decade and a half, India is subject to a low-intensity war by terrorists being sent from across the border. But the US never paid any heed to it. And now the same USA, blinded by an all-consuming revenge, is not hesitating to target even the innocent Afghans who are groaning under a barbarian Taliban rule.

Joshi said he had an opportunity to cover Afghanistan during the reign of President Najibullah when the Mujahideen were waging a war against him. He found that most Afghans held liberal views. Business and trade in Kabul and Kandahar were almost completely in the hands of Hindus and Sikhs. Land reforms were being implemented at a fast pace and agrarian relations changing swiftly. Women worked in factories and other places in substantial numbers. For two hours in the evening, after work, discussions on socialism would take place. An attempt was being made to change Afghanistan from a medieval tribal society into a modern nation state. But thanks to the US, all that could not succeed. Today, Afghanistan has been pushed back to medieval times. The Mujahideen received all-out support from the US against Najibullah, as imperialists feared that Najibullah could consolidate his hold in the country. Hence the US propped up the Mujahideen through Pakistan. But the US could not get along even with those Mujahideen. Once again, therefore, the US and Pakistan helped Taliban --- products of madrassas in Pakistan --- to acquire control over Afghanistan.

Joshi also wanted an answer to the question: Who is to blame for the rise of terrorism? He alleged that nobody had more information than the USA about terrorist organisations and their activities in different part of the world during the last 50 years. But it kept silent, watching the fun. Rather it used many of the terrorist groups for its own purposes. It engineered several unsuccessful attempts to kill Fidel Castro, leader of the Cuban revolution. The US cannot absolve itself of the crime of engineering a coup against the democratically elected president of Chile, Salvador Allende. The US got him killed and installed in his place the military dictatorship of Pinochet who kept the Chilean people in indescribable terror for over 20 years.

Joshi asked: Doesn’t Bush’s statement that he has ordered his forces to fish out bin Laden and kill him, amount to state-sponsored terrorism? Today the world is seething with rage against Laden. But the US has not shown any proof to hold him guilty for the September 11 events.

Regarding the US interest in the Middle East, Joshi said most Asian countries have adopted a modern democratic form of government that has modified the thinking of their people. But, while the Arab countries have gone high-tech with their oil wealth, they retain a feudal mindset. This suits the Americans who formed, trained and nurtured bin Laden’s and other terrorist outfits. Had the US been really committed to democracy, as it claims, it would have opposed the Arab feudal mindset and exerted pressure in favour of a democratic set-up there.

According to Joshi, one of the main causes behind the rise of terrorism is the strident march of globalisation. Today, without going anywhere, 2 trillion dollars make a notional round of the stock markets of the world at a single command of the computer, and badly shake them up. This huge capital is completely idle: it has no role to play in the production process but is solely concerned with profit making. This has exacerbated the existing disparities. Even a World Bank report conceded that globalisation has further widened economic disparities between the nations and within nations. And yet the US, leader of this finance capital, hopes that terrorism may not flourish! Joshi asked the audience to ponder if merely killing Osama would wipe out terrorism from the world while the socio-economic disparities persist.

To Joshi, the September 11 incidents have put a question mark before the unipolar world. Ironically, the unipolar world came into existence in 1991 when George Bush was the American president and today, ten years later, the same unipolar world is facing a powerful challenge when his son is the US president. The speaker warned --- if the US attempts to hegemonise the world are not immediately thwarted by establishing a multipolar world and reviving the non-aligned block, no one knows not how many more September 11 type attacks would take place. Terrorism cannot be tackled unless viewed in totality. New Delhi must not hang on to Washington’s apron strings but assert that the command of the war against global terrorism must be handed over to the UN. The US, that has gone berserk, must be bridled.

Answering questions, Joshi said the American design is to instal a puppet regime in Afghanistan with an eye on the huge oil reserves of Central Asia. The American approach to tackle terrorism is selective. It wants to keep alive that terrorism which serves its interests. Nobody should harbour the illusion that American action in Afghanistan would end terrorism in India or that the regime in Pakistan that sponsors cross-border terrorism would be dismantled. Joshi warned that if the war in Afghanistan is prolonged, it might turn into a war against Islam, causing an explosion of violence across the national boundaries.

On the political situation in Pakistan, the speaker said even if Musharraf does not remain in power, it is not going to make any difference. Political power there is wielded by a clique of the Wadhera landlords, drug mafia and the army. No party can stay in power without army support. It might sound ironical that Nawaz Sharif was the only prime minister of Pakistan who could be called a representative of the modern bourgeoisie though he won elections on the platform of Muslim League, a communal party. What happened to Sharif is known to the whole world. This underlines that medieval issues need to be put in the cold storage. It is clear that fundamentalist terrorism would drench the country in blood if Ayodhya is made an issue in UP polls to cause communal polarisation for electoral gains. But the people holding important positions in the government don’t seem to realise it.

Besides other measures to end terrorism, Joshi suggested rehabilitation of former terrorists to bring them into social mainstream. He regretted the role of media in the post-September 11 phase. Today the images of Afghan infants killed or wounded by American bombs are not creating any indignation. Rather the frequency of commercial breaks during reportings on Afghanistan has gone up. It is seen as an opportunity to make money. Joshi blamed this callous insensitivity on the cynical attitude of the media. Being a journalist himself, he felt all the more hurt that Indian news channels were acting like marketing agents for American and French weapons systems. Free publicity is shamelessly being given to warplanes of these countries. He described the American president’s appeal to the media for "selective reporting" in national interest as a laughable irony, coming as it did from the president of a country that swore by the freedom of the media.

Replying to a young mediaperson’s question whether a reporter should be patriotic or fair, Joshi asked who is to decide what is patriotic. Should mediapersons take a certificate of patriotism from the likes of Brajesh Mishra who denounced the criticism of Pokhran II as unpatriotic? Joshi said so long as ‘patriotism’ and ‘nationalism’ do not become subjects of discourse, there could be no objective view on them.

In his brief comment, Jasbir Memorial Committee chairman R S Hooda warned that the BJP’s attitude that Muslim pride must be rubbished in order to restore Hindu pride, was fraught with serious consequences for national unity. It would only strengthen Islamic fundamentalism. Hindu fundamentalists must be told that Bharat means the people of India. Loyalty to the whole people, and not of any particular religion, is what patriotism stands for. Acceptance of this concept of patriotism alone will enable India to face the threats to national unity.

Committee secretary Virender Malik thanked the chief guest for his informative lecture in a befitting homage to Comrade Jasbir.