Tag Archives: congress

Demands Fundamental Rights of the People’s Self Determination and Autonomy

by: Khalid Hashmani, McLean, Virginia, USA

One must admire World Sindhi Congress (WSC) for its continuous efforts to live up to the objectives of their charter. Relentlessly, this organization has struggled for the rights of Sindhis on many international fronts. Their diligent pleas, presentations, and persuasive arguments have resulted many Europeans to become familiar with the plight of Sindhis.

Continue reading Demands Fundamental Rights of the People’s Self Determination and Autonomy

Civil-Military Rift in Pakistan Over US Aid

by Omar Ali, USA

Lets see what happens. My guess is that the US embassy will do what the US president does with congress, bribe them by increasing the unmonitored goodies (announced or unannounced). But will the army bite? On past performance, one would guess they will. Its hard to see how a rift with their paymasters and a revival of jihadism will help the property values in sector E-7, but one must keep in mind that these are generals who think of themselves as amazing trapeze artists who can fly through the air and grab that handhold at the last possible moment. They may be calculating that Obama has absolutely no choice in this matter since a face-saving exit from Afghanistan depends mostly on ISI cooperation. This perception has probably been bolstered by Obama’s very public wavering over Afghanistan, but the problem I see is that even if they are correct and Anne Patterson gives them their India-specific Jihadis and even their “good taliban”, it is the jihadists who will not stick to the script. In the long run, this extortion is a recipe for disaster (some would argue that so is meek acceptance of the American plans, but we may have to compare disaster to disaster and see which nasty medicine tastes a shade better)….

I can hear some people saying “China will bail us out” or “Saudi Arabia will take up the slack”. Well, we will see. I don’t think so…

If anyone has any doubts left about who is orchestrating the opposition to the Kerry Lugar bill, they should read Kamran Khan’s column. It seems the main sticking point is not the Kashmiri Jihadis or even the blessed “good Taliban”. Its the fact that bloody civilians may try to “interfere” in the army that is supposedly subservient to the same “bloody civilians”. Unfortunately, the short sighted Mian brothers have opted for the politically expedient and suicidal route of supporting the corpse commanders on this issue….

Courtesy: CRCP yahoo groups

SAPAC Inaugural becomes Congressmen’s Town Hall Meeting and Sindhi Katchahry (Gathering)

By Khalid Hashmani

Washington DC, September 16, 2009 – Sindhi American Political Action Committee (SAPAC) was inaugurated in Washington DC. This is a milestone step for the Sindhi American community that community hopes will help in restoring and preserving Sindhi Rights. The inaugural session was very well organized and in fact turned into a Congressmen’s Town Hall meeting and Sindhi Katchahry, which is a traditional village gathering where village elders and town folks share their hopes, concerns, and sorrows. The meeting was held at the Washington Court Hotel near the US Capitol Bulling. The moot was addressed by Congressman Gary Ackermann, Congressman Brad Sherman, Selig Harrison, and Marvin Weinbaum. The guests were welcomed by Dr. Maqbool Halepota and Munawar Laghari, President Director of SAPAC respectively. After formal addresses, a lively Town Hall meeting (Sindhi Katchahry) was held with Congressman Sherman and Sindhi participants. The meeting was admirably moderated by Leila Agha and Hanne Bursch.

Continue reading SAPAC Inaugural becomes Congressmen’s Town Hall Meeting and Sindhi Katchahry (Gathering)

India’s 2009 general election: Lessons for the left

By Dipankar Bhattacharya, general secretary, Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation

Courtesy: Links International Journal

May 24, 2009 — The results of 2009 elections for the Lok Sabha elections (India’s lower house of parliament) can be described as a string of surprises, not only for many well-entrenched parties and seasoned politicians but also for a host of commonsense notions about contemporary Indian political reality. Of late, it has become customary to look at elections in India through the prism of coalition politics, caste equations and regional diversities. Verdict 2009 has given a serious jolt to this facile view and reasserted the underlying structural dynamics of Indian politics.

Continue reading India’s 2009 general election: Lessons for the left

Quaid-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah: The Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity

Two Sindhis together, Jinnah & Gandhi

Muhammad Ali Jinnah rose to prominence in the Indian National Congress expounding ideas of Hindu-Muslim unity and helping shape the 1916 Lucknow Pact with the Muslim League; he also became a key leader in the All India Home Rule. He proposed a fourteen- point constitutional reform plan to safeguard the political rights of all.
Several Muslim leaders persuaded Jinnah to return in 1934 and re-organise the Muslim League. Jinnah embraced political opponents by the goal of self-governance/ 1940 Lahore Resolution. The full council of Muslim League in the leadership of the founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah had unanimously passed the resolution in 1940 Lahore Resolution later known as Pakistan Resolution. The council of the Muslim league granted only three aspects of governance-currency, foreign affairs, and defense related communication to the federal government and all other aspects to states/ provinces. The League won most Muslim seats in the elections of 1946, the strong reaction of Congress supporters resulted in communal violence across subcontinent. The failure of the Congress-League coalition to govern the country prompted the British to divide the subcontinent.
Unfortunately, after the creation of Pakistan, the 1940 resolution was not implemented in the letter, in spirit to the smaller provinces – Sindh, NWFP and Balochistan – were deprived of all their rights and its people treated as slaves. Due to it, one province of the federation named East Pakistan (Bangladesh) has already seceded from Pakistan.

The doctrine of jihad be denounced as inhuman- The Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC)

MCC shocked at Mumbai terrorist attack “Doctrine of Jihad must be denounced as inhuman”

TORONTO – The Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC), in expressing shock and dismay at the terror strikes in Mumbai has condemned these egregious acts of violence .

In a statement, the MCC said, there is little doubt that which ever jihadi outfit was behind this heinous crime, it was motivated by hate and a want to sabotage the recent thawing of relations between India and Pakistan. The bombings come barely a week after peace overtures by President Asif Zardari who stated he did not see India as an adversary and had called for closer relations.

The MCC statement called on world leaders to confront the scourge of Islamist terrorism by challenging the validity of the doctrine of jihad as laid out by the worldwide Islamist movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood, Al-Qaeda, and a myriad of soft jihadi organizations in the West.

Unless and until this doctrine of jihad is confronted at the ideological level, fighting the war on terror is like shooting individual mosquitoes to combat malaria. Without challenging the Islamist doctrine of armed Jihad, it is futile to confront the jihadis. Just as Canada and its allies waged a war against Nazis as part of the war against Germany, today Canada and its allies should expose the doctrine of Jihad as pronounced by such Islamists as the later Syed Qutb and Syed Maudoodi, as inhuman and unfit for the modern world.

The MCC hopes that Muslims all over the world will unite to fight the curse of extremist and militant ideologies that sully the name of Islam and bring much disrepute to Muslims.

The MCC is also calling upon the Canadian government to do all it can to help get a speedy release of the six Canadian hostages held by militants.

November 27, 2008

SINDH THROWN TO WOLVES

AUGUST 15, 1947 -Sixty one years AGO Sindhis were forced to leave their beloved home and migrated to Indian territory. History has not recorded about the exodus and Sindhi sacrifices. Our third and fourth generations are curious to know of the past history and about our ancestors. Please read sixty five pages of history posted on the web site.

PARTITION Of Sub-continent – SINDH THROWN TO WOLVES – Book – From Sindh Story

By Late Professor Kewal R. Malkani

Submitted By Dial V. Gidwani- Sindhu American

Text verified and edited by Dr. Dur Pathan of Gul Hayat Dokri from his archives

The review by Martin Rubin in New york times of September 27,2007 of two new books” India Remembered ” by Pamela Mountbatten, and and “India summers” reveals that Partition of India was the hasty act of the Viceroy of India, Lord Mountbatten.

Continue reading SINDH THROWN TO WOLVES

Amarjit Chandan: A tribute to Harkishan Singh Surjit

For the last two decades, in an era when coalitions have been the norm in Indian national politics, Harkishan Singh Surjeet, who has died aged 92, the general secretary of the Communist party of India (Marxist) for 13 years till 2005, was a major power-broker. It was a role he described as one of the most trying of his life. In 1989 an anti-Congress party coalition came to power, backed by Surjeet’s CPI (M) – but after Congress’s Rajiv Gandhi was assassinated in 1991, a Congress-led coalition took over until 1996. Surjeet’s CPI (M) then backed two fragile Janata Dal-dominated coalitions (1996-97).

CPI (M) leader was a Sikh, and combating communalism – whether by religion, language, caste or region – was central to his beliefs. The BJP led governing coalitions between 1998 and 1999, and from 1999 to 2004.

Surjeet backed the current Congress coalition which came to power in 2004. Indeed, in the vote of confidence debate in the Indian parliament last month on the US-India nuclear deal, Manmohan Singh, the prime minister, thanked him for his support in defeating the BJP.

While Surjeet enjoyed significant influence during his years as party leader, unsurprisingly he described the period as “one of the most trying” of his life. In 1996, there was indeed a moment when the CPI(M) might have supplied the prime minister at the head of the United Front coalition: Basu – at the time chief minister of West Bengal – was the consensus candidate, but the party’s politburo decided not to participate in the government. Basu later described it as a “historic blunder”. Surjeet had voted in favour of Basu.

Born in a small peasant family in Rupowal, a village in eastern Punjab, Harkishan Singh cut his political teeth in a charged atmosphere, when the region was the epicentre of anti-colonial national struggle. Inspired by the revolutionary independence fighter Bhagat Singh, hanged in 1931, Surjeet was imprisoned the following for hoisting the Indian tricolour at the district courts in Hoshiarpur on the anniversary of the execution. He soon came into contact with senior political prisoners and two years after his release, in 1936, joined the CPI.

Surjeet started actively organising small landholders around economic issues like debt and digging irrigation canals. Writing patriotic poetry and working for Punjabi political papers, he acquired the nom de plume Surjeet – conqueror of the gods.

With the outbreak of the second world war, the CPI, following the Moscow line (Stalin had recently concluded his pact with Hitler) denounced the war as imperialist. Leading CPI members were rounded up by the British, including Surjeet, who had gone underground, and detained in Deoli detention camp, Rajasthan. For Surjeet it proved to be an opportunity to study Marxism further.

All were released in 1942, and gave their unqualified support to the British as a way of waging the people’s war. The Ghadr-Kirti party, the rural populist organisation led the firebrand Teja Singh Swatantar, Surjeet’s main rival, merged with the CPI.

Following the 1941 Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, the CPI’s line changed into support for what had now become the “people’s war” and CPI leaders, including Surjeet, were released in 1942. By 1944 Surjeet was propounding his own thesis for a Sikh homeland on the model of the Pakistan being proposed by the Muslim League. But Surjeet’s idea was firmly quashed by Rajani Palme Dutt, the Communist party of Great Britain’s chief ideologue, who for many years supervised the CPI on behalf of Stalin’s Comintern.

In 1952, at the age of 36, Surjeet was elected general secretary of the Punjab section of the CPI, and two years later was elected to the Punjab legislative assembly and again in 1967. He was a member of Rajya Sabha, the upper house of the Indian parliament, from 1978 to 1982.

But in the early 1960s the Sino-Soviet split in global communism triggered a crisis in the CPI. This was exacerbated in 1962 by the six-week Sino-Indian war. Many CPI leaders, including Surjeet, backed China and were imprisoned. In 1964, along with eight other communist stalwarts, he walked out of the CPI and formed the CPI (Marxist) causing a vertical division across the country in the trade unions and other mass organisations. The CPI(M) kept the Stalinist rhetoric, but in practice has been pragmatic. Since 1977 is has led the Left Front in West Bengal, making it the world’s longest-running democratically elected communist government, and has invited multinationals to invest in the other two states where it leads the governments, Tripura and Kerala.

There was further division in the late 1960s, when Maoist fundamentalists

formed the CPI (Marxist-Leninist) after a tribal peasants’ agitation in Naxalbari in the Darjeeling district of West Bengal was ruthlessly crushed by the CPI(M)-led government in the state capital of Kolkata. Nevertheless, in terms of electability, Indo-communism, in whose development Surjeet has had a significant hand, has achieved what Euro-communism could not.

A key issue for Surjeet was keeping the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) out of office. The

After the split in the party, when the main funding from both the Soviet

and Chinese communist parties had dried up due to the CPI(M)’s independent

ideological stance, Surjeet could rely on support from emigrant British and North America Sikh communities.

From the mid-1960s Surjeet visited Britain at least twice a year. In 1966 the CPI(M)-backed Association of Indian Communists was set up in London. He personally supervised its annual elections and those of the Indian Workers Association (Great Britain).

It was as a boy in the early 1960s that I first met Surjeet. As a friend of my father he was a regular visitor to our house in Nakodar in the Punjab. Affable and caring, he never lost his composure even in heated debate: he was a splendid orator in both Punjabi and English.

Three years ago he visited Lahore for the first time after Partition and met with his old Muslim comrades including CR Aslam and Tahira Mazhar Ali. He told Aslam that he had left the keys to the Party headquarters in Fazal Husain building McLeod Road with him in 1947 and now came to Lahore to take them back!

He leaves a party with a national membership of about half a million and 43

seats in a 545-strong parliament; it is the next largest after Congress (145 seats) and the BJP (138), while the Communist Party of India (CPI) has 10. Even after the total reversal in the CPI(M)’s policy towards the Soviet-supporting Congress party, which was one of the causes of the split with the CPI back in 1964, Surjeet was considered the main obstacle to the CPI(M) reuniting with the CPI and his passing may hasten reunification.

He is survived by his wife and two sons and a daughter.

Courtesy and Thanks: Wichaar.com & Guardian

http://www.wichaar.com/news/152/ARTICLE/7977/2008-08-07.html

[An edited version of this obituary was published in The Guardian 6 August 2008.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/06/india]

Criticism of Nuclear Agreement False and Frivolous

by: Ram Jethmalani

For quite sometime critics of the Nuclear Agreement have been frightening the Government that the people of India intensely resent it. This is just not true.

Truth can only be established if the House is dissolved and the deal becomes the only issue at the next election. My own understanding is that this canard emanates from those who are hoping to corner the votes of those who hate America but for reasons totally unconnected with the deal. The Times of India Poll published only this morning fortifies my opinion. 93% welcome the deal. Conceding that the Poll is not conclusive, the criticism by the Left, the BJP and some other parties must be exposed as false, frivolous and vexatious.

The main criticism is based upon the Act of the US Congress called the “Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006”. It is said that this legislation is binding on the US President and it negatives the provisions of the Nuclear Agreement. The US President has explained that most of its clauses are advisory and whatever binding effect they have, is on the U. S. Administration and not India. The latter is only bound by its obligations under the Agreement. The Constitutional relationship between domestic legislation and a treaty entered into by the President is wholly misrepresented out of ignorance or intentional suppression of truth. The position is thus described by well known text book in its latest edition. It needs to be reproduced.

Treatise on Constitutional Law –

Substance and Procedure – Third Edition –

Ronald D. Rotunda John E. Nowak

6.7 Conflicts Between Treaties and Acts of Congress

While treaties as well as federal statutes are the supreme law of the land, the Constitution provides no solution for the dilemma arising when provisions of a self-executing treaty conflict with acts of Congress. In Whitney v. Robertson the Supreme Court addressed the issue of modifying a treaty by subsequent acts of Congress. The case involved a dispute arising between the United States and the Dominican Republic over the terms of a sugar trade treaty to which the two nations were parties.

The Court stated that constitutionally treaties and legislative acts are equal, both being the supreme law of the land. When the treaty and statute relate to the same subject, the courts will always endeavor to construe them so as to give effect to both, if that can be done without violating the language of either, but if the two are inconsistent, the one last in date will control the other…

Acts of Congress passed after the date of the treaty, the Court held, control over the treaty terms. Similarly, a self-executing treaty is valid as domestic law and takes precedence over a federal law enacted earlier. The last expression of the will of the sovereign controls.

This puts an end to most of the arguments conjured up by the not too honest critics. The Act doubtless reiterates the Non-Proliferation policy of the Government of the United States of America. The Nuclear Weapons Power have persuaded all the countries of the world except four to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The Act is a bold attempt to make an exception for India. The reasons for making this singular and extraordinary exception are clearly spelt out by the Act. These are –

1. India has demonstrated responsible behaviour with respect to the Non-Proliferation of technology related to nuclear weapons and the means to make them;

2. India has a functioning and uninterrupted democratic system of government;

3. Agreement for civilian cooperation will strengthen the Non-Proliferation mechanism in place and restrain the making and spread of nuclear weapons.

4. That the cooperation to be extended to India will isolate and weaken the States that sponsor terrorism and terrorist groups which are on the look out for nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.

5. Strong bilateral relations with India are in the national interest of the United States.

6. The two Nations share common democratic values and the potential for increasing and sustaining economic engagement.

7. Commerce in civil nuclear energy with India has the potential to benefit the people of all countries.

8. The cooperation to be extended to India represents a significant change of American policy relating to business with States which have rejected the NPT.

9. Indian democracy should feel flattered by this magnificent statement of reasons for exceptional treatment of India. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has accused the termination of long period during which we were treated as international outcasts with whom no nation will trade in nuclear fuel and technology sorely needed for its economic growth and industrial survival.

It is true that India has agreed to dissuade and prevent Iran from acquiring weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons capability and the capability to enrich uranium or reprocess nuclear fuel. It is certainly not in the interest of India and the world at large that a government which openly declares as its objective the destruction of a Member of the United Nation which has been granted full recognition by India should acquire the power to carry out its diabolical designs. Search for vote banks should not blind our politicians to the stark reality that half of the worlds organized terrorism, represented by Hizbollah is created and financed by ruling clerics of Iran. Iran has an ancient civilization and India is a friend of the people of Iran but the current government is an international horror.

Besides Iran is a signatory to the NPT and without a serious breach of International Law it cannot renege on its obligations. This part of the bargain is our constitutional duty under Article 51 of our basic law. This is not subservience to the U.S.A.

Dr. P. K. Ayanger, the former Chairman of Atomic Energy Commission seizes on Article 2 of the Nuclear Agreement which reads as under:-

Article 2 : “The parties shall cooperate in the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this agreement.

Each party shall implement this agreement in accordance with the respective applicable treaties, national laws regulations and license requirements, concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.”

He concludes, and in this he is joined by my dear friend Arun Shourie, that we have bound ourselves by the Hyde Act, this is manifestly absurd. The Article only provides that each party shall implement the Agreement in accordance with the respective applicable treaties national laws etc. etc. As explained above the treaty overrides the national law. Moreover the Hyde Act is not the national law of India. Even if the Hyde Act were to bind India, the Article speaks not of the entire Act but only its provisions concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Incidentally Dr. Kakodkar, the current Chairman of the A.E.C. and Dr. Chidambaram, the Principal Scientific Advisor to the Government have made no such criticism and raised no such absurd inference from Article 2. India has no intention to violate any provision concerning use of nuclear energy only for peaceful purposes. It is time we clearly understand what we intend to achieve by this Agreement. We are admittedly starved of nuclear fuel and new technology for production of the fifty thousand megawatt of electricity which are needed to light our homes and offices and run our industries and public services.

We will be able to trade and, by ordinary commercial activity, acquire what we need from the U.S. as well as the forty five countries that constitute the Group of suppliers. This is being done on the assumption that India is not going to detonate a nuclear bomb in the foreseeable future. But India has not given up this right in perpetuity. If and when the changed International Scenario compels this action we can exercise our sovereignty. The other party in exercise of its own sovereignty may well decide to terminate the exceptional business relationship forged by the Agreement. At that moment we will be in the same situation in which we are today or perhaps a much better situation because we would have sufficient reserves to see us through the remaining life of our reactors or we might have already solved our energy deficit problem.

I have no doubt that a situation in which we are compelled to explode one or more nuclear devices is not likely to arise at all. We expect no nuclear attack from Pakistan nor indeed from China.

It is well to draw the attention of the Left to the Joint Declaration issued by the Governments of India and China during the visit in November 2006 of President Hu Jintao of China. It is a long document and, therefore, reference may only be made to two extremely important paragraphs No. 27 and 39:-

“27. Considering that for both India and China, expansion of civilian nuclear energy programme is an essential and important component of their national energy plans to ensure energy security, the two sides agree to promote cooperation in the field of nuclear energy, consistent with their respective international commitments. As two countries with advanced scientific capabilities, they stress the importance of further deepening cooperation bilaterally as well as through multilateral projects such as ITER and enhance exchanges in the related academic fields……

39. Energy security constitutes a vital and strategic issue for producing and consuming countries alike. It is consistent with the common interest of the two sides to establish an international energy order, which is fair, equitable, secure and stable, and to the benefit of the entire international community. Both sides shall also make joint efforts, bilaterally as well as in multilateral fora to diversify the global energy mix and to increase the share in it of renewable energy sources. Global energy systems should take into account and meet the energy needs of both countries, as part and parcel of a stable, predictable, secure and clear energy future. In this context, international civilian nuclear cooperation should be advanced through innovative and forward-looking approaches, while safeguarding the effectiveness of international non-proliferation principles.”

This declaration evoked no criticism from the Left or any body else and yet the declaration records that India is under an obligation not to breach or dilute the effectiveness of the International Non-Proliferation infrastructure that the nuclear powers including China have created for the rest of the world.

The Chinese secured from us a written promise not to manufacture or to explode a nuclear bomb. If this involves surrender of sovereignty we were deprived of it by the Chinese in November 2006. It is immoral to attribute it to the USA in July 2007.

We can rest assured that if India is faced with the danger of nuclear aggression any bomb that we explode will be a legitimate act of defence which doubtless is a peaceful purpose by reason of the 51st Article of U N Charter.

Scientist P.K. Ayanger then treats us to another absurd ipse dixit. He declares that the Agreement is a total gain for the Non-Proliferation lobby and India gets nothing except a big Zero. Then like a megalomaniac he claims that the Indian Scientists have much better technology than the Americans. We can help them rather than that they help us. This to me sounds like the thirteenth stroke of a clock which not only discredits itself but tells us that the mechanism of the clock has gone hay wire.

The greatest gain is coming together of the two great democracies of the world. We are now partners not merely in a war against terrorism because two years ago we decided on expansion of the frontiers of democracy and the rule of law. However, because of the terrible mistakes on both sides India and United States which should have been friends and allies had drifted apart. Both countries have significantly changed their foreign policy by harmonizing it with the values of their domestic Constitutions. As partners we have a right to offer sage advice to each other. We both might accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, sign and carry forward the Kyoto protocols, give up the Security Council veto cut back on military spending and substantially increase social spending. Jointly we might fulfill the dream of Gandhiji that India will be the conscience of humanity relying on its arsenal of spiritual force rather than weapons of mass destruction.

Courtesy: Sindhishaan magzine, 30th August 2007