November 17, 2008
The President-Elect and India
Martha Nussbaum
President-elect Barack Obama will face many challenges in foreign policy, but forging a productive relationship with India will be high on that list. President Clinton took a keen interest in India, and, especially, in issues of rural development. He visited rural development projects with his usual zest and curiosity, taking a particularly keen interest in the situation of women. After his Presidency, Clinton has continued his work on issues of poverty and development. He was also virtually the only major international leader to stand up right after the Gujarat pogrom of 2002 and publicly condemn the perpetrators.
President Bush, by contrast, focused his efforts on the nuclear deal, more or less neglecting issues of poverty and development. One bright spot in the generally dismal record of his dealings with India, however, was the decision to deny a visa to Narendra Modi, who had been invited to lecture here by a group of Non-Resident Indians (NRI's). The State Department cited his role in the Gujarat pogrom as its reason for denying him a diplomatic visa and revoking his tourist visa. This courageous stance in favor of human rights and against the perpetrators of a genocide was surprising but highly welome to the large number of U. S.-based scholars of India who had petitioned the State Department in this matter.
What course will President Obama choose? Will he, like Clinton, focus on poverty, quality of life, gender equality, and an end to the politics of hate? Or will he follow the lead of the NRI community, focusing on entrepreneurship and nuclear partnership? Much discussion, this week, has focused on Obama's appointment of Sonal Shah to his transition team. I shall not add to the growing volume of commentary on Shah's links to the VHP-A, since she has already issued one statement condeming the politics of hate, and will soon be invited to clarify her position further. Shah personally is involved with only the VHP-A's relief efforts. There is room for concern, however, that someone with such close ties to an organization that has been complicit in terrorist activities against Muslims and Christians should hold such a prominent place. The whole issue deserves the further clarification that it will receive.
Instead of pursuing that question further, however, I should like to focus on a letter written by then-candidate Obama to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, dated September 23, 2008, and published in India Abroad, the October 10 issue. I address these remarks to my former University of Chicago Law School colleague in the spirit of the type of respectful yet searching criticism that I know he will recognize as a hallmark of our faculty workshops and discussions.
The Obama letter has three slightly disturbing characteristics.
First, the letter gives lengthy praise to the nuclear deal, without acknowledging the widespread debate about the wisdom of that deal in both nations. Perhaps, however, this silence simply reflects politeness: Obama is surely aware that Singh has been an enthusiastic backer of the deal, risking much political capital in the process.
Second, the letter speaks of future cooperation that will "tap the creativity and dynamism of our entrepreneurs, engineers and scientists," particularly in the area of alternative energy sources, but never mentions a future partnership in the effort to eradicate poverty and illiteracy. This silence, unlike the first, cannot be explained by politeness, since Singh has devoted a great deal of attention to issues of rural poverty, and it is plausible to think that he could have gotten a lot further had he had more help from abroad.
Third, and most disturbing, the letter commiserates with Singh for the Delhi bomb blasts, but makes no mention of Gujarat or Orissa. Obama offers Singh:
"my condolences on the painful losses your citizens have suffered in the recent string of terrorist assaults. As I have said publicly, I deplore and condemn the vicious attacks perpetrated in New Delhi earlier this month, and on the Indian embassy in Kabul on July 7. The death and destruction is reprehensible, and you and your nation have my deepest sympathy. These cowardly acts of mass murder are a stark reminder that India suffers from the scourge of terrorism on a scale few other nations can imagine."
Obama's use of the word "terrorism" to describe acts thought to be perpetrated by Muslims, while not using that same word for acts perpetrated by Hindus, is ominous. Muslims suffer greatly in India, as elsewhere, from the stereotype of the violent Muslim, and both justice and truth demand that we all do what we can to undermine these stereotypes, bringing the guilty of all religions to justice, and protecting the innocent. (The recent refusals of local bar associations in India to defend Muslims accused of complicity in terrorism, under threat of violence, shows that the rule of law itself hangs in the balance.) Particularly odd is Obama's omission of events in Orissa, which were and are ongoing. His phrase "the scourge of terrorism" is virtually Bushian in its suggestion that terrorism is a single thing (presumably Muslim) and that many nations suffer from that single thing. (Note that it is not even true that most world terrorism is caused by Muslims. Our University of Chicago colleague Robert Pape's careful quantitative study of terrorism worldwide concludes that the Tamil Tigers, a secular political organization, are the bloodiest in the world. Moreover, Pape argues convincingly that even when religion is used as a screen for terror, the real motives are most often political, having to do with local conflicts.)
Obama's letter was written during a campaign. Perhaps it reflects awareness of the priorities of NRI's who were working hard in that campaign. At this point, however, he can start with a clean slate and decide how to order his priorities regarding India. Let us hope that, like Bill Clinton, he will give the center of his attention to issues of human development (poverty, gender equality, education, health), and that, when discussing the issue of religious violence, he will study carefully the violence in Gujarat and Orissa, learn all he can about the organizations of the Sangh Parivar, and adopt a policy that denounces religious violence in all its forms. To mention one immediate issue, it would be a disaster for global justice if Obama, as President, were to heed the demands of the diaspora community to grant Narendra Modi a visa -- especially since the Tehelka expose has made so clear the cooperation of the government of the state of Gujarat in those horrendous acts of violence.
President Obama has repeatedly shown a deeply felt commitment to the eradication of a politics based upon hate. Can we have confidence that he will carry that commitment into his relationship with India, even when the demands of powerful leaders of the NRI community make that difficult? I certainly hope so.
Martha Nussbaum is the Ernst Freund Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at The University of Chicago, and the author of The Clash Within: Democracy, Religious Violence, and India's Future.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 03:10 AM | Permalink
Comments
Dear Professor Nussbaum,
Thank you for taking the time to write this needed, very clear-headed advice to the President-Elect for 3QD.
Obama's appointment of Sonal Shah, a former member of the right-wing Hindu VHP-A, has been troubling us as well (see this, for example), and I certainly hope that you are justified in your confidence that her appointment will receive "further clarification."
Your salutary reminder that poverty and religious violence are issues of the utmost importance in India is much appreciated.
Thanks again.
Yrs,
Abbas
Posted by: Abbas Raza | Nov 17, 2008 4:29:43 AM
As stated above by Abbas, this is very clearly written and is somewhat disturbing. I am quite confident, however, that President-Elect Obama's very clear thinking, and balanced outlook on most issues will also reflect in the final appointments he makes and policies he pursues in South Asia, which will promote peace and harmony, rather than build one country over other smaller ones in the region, particularly Pakistan which has had a difficult relationship with India.
Thank you Professor Nussbaum for this post.
Posted by: Tasnim | Nov 17, 2008 6:47:29 AM
Dear Dr. Nussbaum,
I have been one of your diehard admirers for many years. Such is the effect of your writing on me that as soon as I finished your fantastic book "Upheavals of Thought," I went back and re-read "Wuthering Heights" and listened to all of Mahler's symphonies again. The great works were the same, but thanks to you, I had new eyes and new ears. After Antonio Damasio’s “Descartes’ Error”, it was your book which consolidated my views of accepting emotions for what they are rather than being alien forces. In 2001, as I was reading “Upheavals of Thought”, I was also dealing with the terminal illness of my husband (he died in early 2002). Your description of how you were affected by your mother’s terminal illness and the aftermath, was a great source of solace and strength to me at that time. For example, at one point, you said, “…she need not turn her thoughts away from the messy impure elements of her life: she need only take up a new attitude toward the same life, making it an object of intellectual understanding. The crucial fact that she must realize is that mind as such is free; its power cannot be checked by nature’s influences.” (page 507-8). Somehow, your book helped me find an anchor and grounded my emotions in a way that allowed me to calm down and deal with the tragic daily routines. For that, I thank you. And by the way, for a year after “Hiding from Humanity” was published, it was my favorite gift to friends and family.
I am delighted that you have contributed this thoughtful piece for 3quarksdaily today. There will be constant new challenges for Mr. Obama in the years to come, and suggestions or critical analysis of his decisions coming from a respected colleague and someone of your stature will be more meaningful for his team than any old Op Ed page polemics. With this note, I would like to respectfully request on behalf of your many admirers that because your writing is so compelling for some of us, and because 3quarksdaily has a special but wide readership, that you consider writing a column regularly on this blog. Thank you again, and keep up the great work you are doing.
Azra Raza.
Posted by: Azra Raza | Nov 17, 2008 7:34:02 AM
This is a well-argued piece and hopefully the advisors to the President-Elect will take note.
It is odd, however, that Prof. Nussbaum would praise the entirely symbolic and immaterial attentions of Pres. Clinton and ignore the many development-related consequences of the Bush-era nuclear deal. Remember that there is a cascading series of sanctions and trade prohibitions that are disappearing now that the deal has been finalized. New trade agreements are going to impact everything from information technology to mangoes (which alone may be worth all the uranium India wants http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10057780)
My guess is that the nuclear deal will have many more long-term benefits for development and poverty relief than any of the weddings or social events that highlighted Bill Clinton's engagement with India.
Posted by: Andrew | Nov 17, 2008 8:01:32 AM
I can't but be amazed at your depth and width of knowledge about India; in spite of being "warned" beforehand.
I repeat after a previous comment- please consider writing here.
Posted by: Manas Shaikh | Nov 17, 2008 9:22:25 AM
"This silence, unlike the first, cannot be explained by politeness, since Singh has devoted a great deal of attention to issues of rural poverty, and it is plausible to think that he could have gotten a lot further had he had more help from abroad."
What mechanism are we talking about here? Are there improvements in health and education that were made in Clinton's term that have gone backward or slowed in Bush's term that were made possible by foreign support? Are we talking about foreign pressure, foreign expertise, and/or foreign money?
I also think people should be very careful about smearing people like Sonal Shah through guilt-by-association. This kind of thing has been and will continue to be used against South Asians, Arabs, and Muslims in the US.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Nov 17, 2008 10:39:01 AM
About Shah, I think she had been so close with the group that it's hard to tell whether she was inside or not. Her presence near the administration is particularly damaging to US's image in South Asia.
It will alarm many in India, and it's neighboring countries including Nepal's now leftist government, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh and even China.
While it is not justice to put her in jail her for her associations, she should not be kept in the administration unless it is beyond all doubt that she has nothing in common with them. Which hardly seems to be the case.
She has claimed that she has nothing in common with the VHP's views, but we need to hear exactly what her views are, and why those views stopped her from condemning Gujarat pogrom until her seat in the administration is jeopardized if she didn't.
It also often gets ignored that she joined VHP-A before the earthquake. Did she somehow foresee the earthquake?
Posted by: Manas Shaikh | Nov 17, 2008 11:10:10 AM
Manas,
Everything you said about her could be used against almost anyone who participated in explicitly Muslim financing in the US. Almost anyone. Do you want to disqualify all of those people from a political role in any administration?
A number of Muslims who worked with Obama have already been harassed over their associations and forced to quit his campaign.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Nov 17, 2008 11:21:06 AM
- Clinton did get some nice photo-ops out of his India trip, but I'm can't think of any concrete, let alone significant, impact that he had upon poverty / illiteracy / women's rights in India. Nor is it obvious what he or Obama could do about these problems.
Various aspects of trade policy, like reducing domestic subsidies and opening up the market to agricultural imports, or being less stringent on IP issues, particularly re pharmaceuticals might help a little, but I doubt there's much of a domestic constituency. Reducing certain environmental requirements upon imports might help too (and even less), but won't help with the base.
- India has long ways to rise on the HDI, but it does have significant resources of its own, economic, cultural and human. There's much more to be gained if Western humanitarian / developmental efforts stayed focused on Sub-Saharan Africa.
Also, political capital to spend on global welfare is rather limited. It would be unwise to waste any of it on a country that's seen as taking away American jobs and is growing at 7+% even now.
- Pleasing as the symbolism of denying Modi a visa is, it's not obviously the right policy. A Modi trip, like Ahmedinejad's or Putin's, also offers a powerful opportunity to shine a light upon his deeds. And then, who knows, he just might say there are no Muslims in India, that Hindustan has only Hindus :)
Posted by: D | Nov 17, 2008 11:28:17 AM
"I also think people should be very careful about smearing people like Sonal Shah through guilt-by-association."
I'm unclear about this Hektor. Do you mean:
1) Guilt by association with Modi
2) Guilt by association with the Sangh Parivar (and affiliated groups)
3) Guilt by association with the VHP
4) Guilt by association with the VHP-A?
You could of course believe that there's nothing wrong with the Sangh Parivar, but that's a different discussion. (After all, if there's nothing wrong with them, there's no guilt in associating with them, and there is no smearing.)
It seems that if the VHP-A is objectionable, and it seems to me that it is given its affiliation with the VHP, and the VHP's role in orchestrating pogroms, then her "association" is more than what the phrase "by association" implies. She belonged to it and was in a leadership role. If it weren't the VHP-A but say the Hizb ut-Tahrir, would you have the same response? Would you insist that someone who worked on Hamas' charities, feeding orphans, and yet said that they did not the endorse violence in Gaza, be treated similarly to the way you're suggesting we treat Shah? Wouldn't you want to ask why they would belong to such a charity? It's not like there weren't many, many charities working on the Gujarat earthquake.
She may be naive, or careerist, or pulled into the Sangh Parivar out of odd family connections, etc., but it shows severely bad judgment, unless, again, you think that there's nothing really wrong with closely affiliating with the VHP.
The many defenses of Shah--many of which simply step aside the Sangh Parivar questions--point to the apparently very laudable work she's done. But that's not answering the question but rather changing the subject. Either it's OK to belong the VHP-A or it's not. You can argue that it's OK because even if you disagree with their views and practices, the views and practices themselves aren't unreasonable (say, like most people view the political party on the other side of the partisan divide). But the issue here is there is serious debate about whether the views and practices of the VHP are unreasonable and in fact abhorrent. (I personally find a pogrom abhorrent. You may differ.) If they are then Shah's affiliation is a serious issue.
Posted by: Robin | Nov 17, 2008 11:38:10 AM
Thank you, Professor Nussbaum, for that excellent piece. I only hope, as you suggest, that Obama's letter reflected the circumstances of an intense political campaign and not any actual policy in the works.
And, thank you, 3QD, for such an excellent blog. Professor Nussbaum is a hero of mine, so it was a real treat to find the above piece on 3QD this morning.
Posted by: Belgian Beer | Nov 17, 2008 12:07:16 PM
Robin,
See how easy it is to do this?
"It seems that if the VHP-A is objectionable, and it seems to me that it is given its affiliation with the VHP, and the VHP's role in orchestrating pogroms, then her "association" is more than what the phrase "by association" implies."
"But the issue here is there is serious debate about whether the views and practices of the VHP are unreasonable and in fact abhorrent. (I personally find a pogrom abhorrent. You may differ.)"
Now you're implying that I don't care about pogroms. I don't appreciate that, and I think my posting history on this site should tend to give you the opposite impression.
Let's put it another way. The Congress party of India carried out pogroms against Sikhs after the assassination of Indira Gandhi. Does that mean anyone in the Congress party doesn't consider pogroms acceptable and should be shunned?
Sonal Shah once belonged to the VHP-A. She appears to no longer belong to it. The VHP-A is an arm of the VHP in America that, like all diasporic communities, is more conservative in many ways than those back in the home country. The VHP isn't an organization I would support or endorse, partly because of its association with aggressive nationalism and killings and partly because I'm not Hindu. But I'm not Sonal Shah.
I've read the Vijay Prasad piece, and it doesn't have much against her. She has since put out a strong statement, which is exactly what her critics demanded of her. Now people are reduced to arguing about past associations and whether she is feigning her true beliefs.
I'm going to repeat this again. You could use this kind of chain of association against almost anyone who served on the board of a Muslim charity in the US. In fact, it has been used against them.
There is a politics of personal destruction. You may think you can control the whirlwind, but you can't, and it often ends up pulling in a lot more people than you originally expected.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Nov 17, 2008 12:08:32 PM
I agree with Hektor Blim on the issue of Ms. Shah, and I find it disturbing that Prof Nussbaum chose to bring her up in her advice. Also, Mr. Bush has done a lot more for better relations with India (nuclear power actually has some tangible benefits, like access to electricity for more people) than Mr. Clinton did, and most Indians prefer this.
Posted by: krishna | Nov 17, 2008 12:22:22 PM
Robin -
I think that it matters a great deal which of associations 1-4 Shah has, and to what extent in each case.
At this point supporting Modi essentially involves (as in, there's no getting around it) either egging on or ignoring his genocidal bloodthirst because he seems to make the trains run on time. Supporting the VHP isn't as extreme, it means that you in-effect support his efforts from a remove by not dissociating from him fully. Or maybe you Deplore that particular "excess" but get very worked up about "pseudosecularists" or "forced religious conversions."
Moving further away, maybe you just enjoy getting worked up about "pandering to the minorities" and think the Hajj subsidy is an insanely important thing. By the time you're such a one as votes BJP, it need be little more than a sense that a uniform civil code is a Good Thing. A VHP-A member - a minority in a foreign, alien land - need have nothing in mind more than wanting to be in a certain sort of culturally conservative, home-like ambiance.
Then again, a VHP office-bearer very possibly has deeper connections than that. Shah so far admits only to having done charitable work of a non-controversial sort for the VHP-A. It matters a great deal where in this frothy layer cake mix she really is, and obviously she is going to hide something no matter where she stands.
Simply excluding anyone who has any dubious associations whatsoever is too much though...by that logic Chomsky is Stalin's right hand man and Obama himself (via Wright via Farrakhan...) supports Hamas. Six degrees is a fun game, no more.
(I personally find a pogrom abhorrent. You may differ.)
That has to be the most enjoyable parenthetical I've read in months. I think Jon Stewart once said something of the sort (I think it was about something someone or the other said re stem cells):
Juicing babies for their sweet, sweet nectar, is wrong!
Posted by: D | Nov 17, 2008 12:28:59 PM
I don't think I'm going to convince Robin, but I'm still interested in the other part of the comment.
What did Singh have planned to improve literacy and health outcomes that would benefit from foreign engagement? I'm genuinely curious what that would be.
Posted by: Hektor Bim | Nov 17, 2008 12:52:25 PM
For: "(I personally find a pogrom abhorrent. You may differ.)"
my sincere apologies; that was rude of me.
On the issue of Congress role in the pogroms against Sikhs. If someone was affiliated with that Congress party, certainly, questions should be raised. On the question of the pogroms and the current Congress, the parallel doesn't quite hold. Here, the issue is that the VHP's ideology and espoused views are often unreasonable. Look, Hizb ut-Tahir hasn't killed anyone (yet, anyway), but its views are deeply objectionable. Membership itself is an issue, and as D suggests it does at the least need to be explored.
Posted by: Robin | Nov 17, 2008 12:55:57 PM
Dear Professor Nussbaum,
Thank you very much for writing this focused analysis of Obama's letter to Monmohan Singh. Obama's language not only about "terrorists" but also about Pakistan and Afghanistan over the course of the campaign has been a dark and difficult underside-- particularly as a Pakistani-American volunteering for the campaign--of a candidate I have mostly respected and agreed with. It was for Obama's sake, after all, that my brother and cousin and I introduced ourselves as Janie, Justin, and Alex instead of Anjuli, Jaffer, and Asad while canvassing around the country. The memory of those young women in headscarves who were asked to move out of the line of an Obama rally camera shot was not yet far enough in the past. Obama has been so much ahead of what Americans are perceived to be prepared for that the way he deals with both Islam and Gay rights has been a great disappointment. It has been my sincere hope as well that once elected, this rhetoric would reveal itself to be campaign strategy, and would fall away accordingly. So thank you for advocating for a more fair approach to diplomacy with India.
Thanks, too, for writing in this forum. The centrality of the blogosphere and online news and discussion sites in motivating and organizing the young participants in Obama's campaign has created a new, more permanent readership that is energetic and ready to figure out what to do next. As such, it is this kind of precise and reasoned critique that can help us to learn about not only the specific policy questions whose outcome will color Obama's administration, but also the methods for arriving at such recommendations.
I am in my second year of teaching as a doctoral candidate at Columbia, and my class is now writing papers responding to your "Women's Bodies" capabilities essay. We'll be reading this short piece tomorrow and discussing what connections can be made between the two. Hopefully it will yield good papers and, more importantly, the kinds of readers who can look at a letter between statesmen and suggest that perhaps not all that must be addressed is receiving its due. I'll let you know if any good papers emerge!
Yours,
Anjuli Raza Kolb
Posted by: Anjuli Kolb | Nov 17, 2008 1:42:22 PM
Hektor-
Certain forms of association demand an explanation, and Ms. Shah's statement does not explain some of the troubling aspects: namely, her deep association with N. Modi in visiting her family home multiple times (presumably she was there), and leading an organization that accepted awards from him (post-Massacre!).
Here are the questions that I would like to see her address:
1) What is her stance on N. Modi, and his denial of a US Visa?
2) What has her work done to assist in the conduct or in the aftermath of the communal violence orchestrated by family friend Modi?
3) Presumably these associations will influence her work on the Obama transition team. Will this be a green light to the VHP/RSS types to come aboard, and blocking via extra vetting of candidates that were against the Modi visa?
Obviously, the associations are not enough to prove intentions one way or the other, but they are enough to necessitate a closer look. Modi is such a fringe character that loading up the change agent administration with his cronies is not a good idea.
Posted by: sifta | Nov 17, 2008 7:28:01 PM
I think Nussbaum's focus as well as the many posts focus on religious violence and Modi is misguided given the size,poverty and educational levels in India.The American role in promoting material prosperity and educational levels in East Asia is the model that has the most potential for resolving communal harmony and improving India-Pakistan relations.An added benefit could be bringing Afghanistan and the Tribal region into the modern world.Unfortunately given the current economic crisis freer trade between the U.S. and South Asia is unlikely.Obama has correctly identified Pakistan as the country that needs the most help in the war on terror and hopefully will not take Nussbaum's distracting advice too seriously.
Posted by: Sumant Rawat | Nov 17, 2008 8:09:58 PM
This guilt by association is extremely pernicious. One can make similar arguments about many Pakistani-Americans who have ties to people(especially prominent ones in government) in Pakistan, given that state's sponsorship of terrorism.
I have seen no evidence, except innuendo, that Ms. Shah has explicitly supported any violent activity. I find it very disturbing that this is being pushed by this blog and Prof. Nussbaum.
Posted by: krishna | Nov 18, 2008 1:56:29 AM
"Also, Mr. Bush has done a lot more for better relations with India (nuclear power actually has some tangible benefits, like access to electricity for more people) than Mr. Clinton did, and most Indians prefer this."
<- Its lovely to what people equate the majority too. How exactly do most Indians prefer this?
Nuclear people is expensive and requires extensive infrastructure as well. Thinking that it would go beyond the posh and affluent areas in the short and mid term is ludicrous. The civilian benefits of the nuclear deal are, and will continue to be, hogwash.
Posted by: Abhishek | Nov 18, 2008 4:23:27 AM
Nussbaum is the only main stream person who picked up on Vijay's courageous article.
Shah could have worked with many other charities but she chose the Hindu Ku Klux Klan.
I can't believe there is so much support for a VHP sympathizer. Maybe if I was Krishna I would support her also.
Posted by: Tihmur | Nov 18, 2008 5:07:05 AM
"Nuclear people is expensive and requires extensive infrastructure as well. Thinking that it would go beyond the posh and affluent areas in the short and mid term is ludicrous."
Even stipulating that this is true, your argument wants to go in a very different direction to Nussbaum's. To say that nuclear power helps only the wealthy is to say that India shouldn't compromise national sovereignty for the sake of some luxury good.
This is emphatically different from linking the nuclear deal to proposals to limit India's military nuclear program or push forward non-proliferation, which presumably is what Nussbaum is after. That idea, unless I'm terribly mistaken, has only marginal support in India.
Posted by: D | Nov 18, 2008 6:10:51 AM
Wanted to see whether comments are moderated or not
Posted by: Just | Nov 18, 2008 11:01:58 AM
Tasnim says:
(balanced outlook on most issues will also reflect in the final appointments he makes and policies he pursues in South Asia, which will promote peace and harmony, rather than build one country over other smaller ones in the region, particularly Pakistan which has had a difficult relationship with India)
Tasnim, Barack Obama will treat India as a partner, in business as well as in other fields, and will treat Pakistan as the location of Al Qaeda and other Jihadi terrorist organisations and infrastructure, as well as the ideological hub of the movement that seeks to kill as many innocent people in America and elsewhere in the West. There can be no 'balanced' relationship as you would like to see it. Pakistan would have to be an entirely different country, in which jihadism was not so central, in order for that to be the case.
Also, the relationship between America and the nations of South Asia was completely unbalanced for fifty years. Until a decade ago, Pakistan was built up at the expense of India. It was during this period that the Pakistani state became midwife to the Taliban and the Jihadi culture that bore fruit on September 11th. I think President Obama understands this clearly.
Posted by: billy | Nov 19, 2008 9:14:55 AM
http://www.khabrein.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18574&Itemid=58&limit=1&limitstart=1
STILL HAVE DOUBTS, PEOPLE?
Posted by: Manas Shaikh | Nov 20, 2008 9:46:03 AM
Manas, the short answer to your question in all-caps is: Yes.
I hear your concern and frustration but I urge you to remain judicious. As I wrote on the other post, Sonal Shah's past ties with the VHP raise serious questions and we are right to push for answers. But remember that there is still no evidence of wrongdoing or active support of VHP's agenda on her part. On the contrary, her work with IndiCorps and the testimonies of its volunteers and others like Larry Brilliant should give us pause. By all means we should ask questions, but we shouldn't jump to unwarranted conclusions.
The khabrein.info article has in its title "criminal case of Sonal Shah". It records the show of support from random VHP folks in India in an attempt to prove her culpability. This is unhelpful. The entire story seems squishy and inconclusive ("if I remember correctly..."). So yes, doubts remain.
Notice Nussbaum's judicious tone: "There is room for concern ... the whole issue deserves further clarification ..." Lots of complaints have been rightfully made, the cost of VHP affiliation raised, and she will be under scrutiny in the future. Keep the watch on but based on current data, there are good reasons to withhold condemnation.
Posted by: Namit | Nov 20, 2008 7:24:16 PM
Thanks Namit.
Posted by: Manas Shaikh | Nov 20, 2008 8:50:07 PM
Martha Nussbaum,
As predicted your anti-Hinduism
is so obvious from your article. But then what else have you ever written about Hindus. No wonder, Muslims
are sending you letters of praise.I guess, anti-Hinduism
is your response towards the
excesses of anti-Semitism.
No chance that you will wake up!
Posted by: S.M. Bawa | Nov 20, 2008 11:30:45 PM
Bimbo Nussbaum says that Hindus carried out "a pogrom" in 2002; but at least they had a reason to do so, namely:
The burning alive of over 50 men, women, and children by a Muslim mob.
Now the question is why did these Muslim fanatics burn those Hindus alive in the first place???
Posted by: Chrissy | Dec 1, 2008 2:01:12 AM
I think Obama will bring revolution to this economic hit to world due torecession
Posted by: Namrata | Jan 25, 2010 4:53:42 AM
Kind Attention
To,
The Incharge, Indian Law Department.
Please help me. If required please send this mail to appropriate authorities. Mr. Shankar Kumar Samanta S.B.I. Officer purchased local Police, Please help me.
Respected Sir,
100% now I believe that if you have money then you can get anything, every thing is possible by you. If you are a poor then you can’t get anything, every thing is far and beyond possible to you, also you get poor judgment and poor comportment in all aspects of life, in our country INDIA. For example 1. I. I went to Police Station more than 100 times, made 5times entries (complaints) into G.D. but Not even a microscopic actions took place against the alleged bodies. On the contrary Sandip Samanta, S/O. Shankar Kumar Samanta (S.B.I. OFFICER Ph. No. 9830366834, Branch: 24B, Nimtala Ghat Street, Jorabagan, Kolkata- 700006, West Bengal, India, Bank Ph. No. 033 25308337) he has much more and enough money so they purchase all police personnel's and some political leaders, some Dada. Etc. Only I used to get many letters and many phone calls which all seem to me needs to be thrown in the trash, as it all are valueless, toothless and only simply a solace to the poor. What an undone boy I am! Woe is to me! My wife and her family, Sandip Samanta and his family harassed me and my family, they are torcher me physically and mentally.
We got married 05/03/2002, and have a daughter who took birth on 09/07/2005. My wife and her family lodged a case 498A/34 IPC, FIR NO.276, date 31/08/2009, P.S.: BAGUIATI, against me and some of my family members it’s a fabricated, baseless, legless, toothless and doesn’t have any commensurate to the fact. My wife is engaged and having an illicit affair with a boy (Sandip Samanta, S/O. Shankar Kumar Samanta S.B.I. Officer Ph. No. 9830366834, Branch: 24B, Nimtala Ghat Street, Jorabagan, Kolkata- 700006, West Bengal, India, Bank Ph. No. 033 25308337) just opposite to my house, all the matters are known to every person in my village, and also they have certified me written about my fresh character and nature. When my wife left form my house with Sandip Samanta taking many vory gold and cash 1.20 lack Indian rupees. What a demon she is! She didn’t take our only daughter (only four years old) who is now in my house having severe asthma supported by inhaler. My wife filed the 498A case dated 31/08/2009 and I was arrested on 06/09/2009,The Learn" ed court granted me on bail on 19/09/2009. Barasat court. I have lots of irrefutable evidences, (20 pcs. Adult S.M.S., Adult picture with the boy and a c.d.) with me where it is cleanly reveals which translates my wife and the boy that they are in illicit relations. Believe me I and my family would love very much (which is very rare seen in our society) to my wife and never any kind of love lost didn’t happen. They (My wife family) are very very poor and live in a bosti Address: 70/H/8 Manicktolla Main Road, Kolkata – 700054, Beside 5 Star Club, my mother saw 1st time and she arranged my marriage. Before marriage my family did not see the pedigree of my wife’s family, now we understood also realized that they hailed from a worst status. My wife, her family and (Sandip Samanta, S/O. Shankar Kumar Samanta) all they are misusing this law. Now my wife’s family knows all the affair-related matter. My wife left our only solitary daughter to me who is 4 years old having severe "Asthma Disease, depends on INHALER, here political Hide and seek, ducks and drakes and lots of unfair means are going on and the father of the parents (THE FATHER OF THE BOY WHO HAS ILLICIT RELATIONS WITH MY WIFE) are rich, so they are spending money to everywhere with a view to be escaped. Now I decided that in no way I can’t accept that demon wife. I hired a lawyer his name Mr. Kamelash Nandi. I don’t know what will be happened next? It’s an utterly a huge and a palpable offence subsequent to which the boy deserves severe and examplanary punishment so that no one can dare to abuse this law. My mother is a sugar present shies sugar is now 400. If possible please help me. Please investigate the matter thread barely and save me and my family. I leave here one question to every one that in this die-straits situation whom do I take care to myself (TRAGEDY), my daughter, or my mother(severe Diabetic)?. My wife filed another case me U/s. 125 Cr. P. C. Case NO.167/2009, date 16/12/2009.I am millions miles away from the genuine and authentic investigation and inquiry. No inquiry ,investigation were executed against the F.I.R lodged by my wife. It is very painful, lamentable as well as heart rendering, breath taking affair to me and my family. My heart bursts into guffaw when I see the nature of the inquiry and investigation. One thing is as clear as crystal to me that the law and the task of the law enforcing agencies vary from man to man. A new proverb is going to take birth very soon that "Justice for the rich and Injustice is for the poor" A rich reserves the right to indulge in any kind of heinous business but the poor is restricted to involve in any type of excellent deeds" To see all these my heart is about to come in the mouth and the ground under my feet gets shook. In a word all types of Law are for the poorest and the richest will enjoy the richest judgments from all quarters.
After coming form the DumDum Central Jail, I mat with the BAGUIATI POLICE O.C. Mr. Goutam Mitra, and asked him politely: “ SIR I FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THAT I MADE SO MANY ENTIRIES INTO YOUR G.D.E. BUT YET NO ACTION SO FAR HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN FORM YOURSELF” then BAGUIATI POLICE O.C. Mr. Goutam Mitra, went through all my papers (20 pcs. Adult S.M.S., Adult picture with the boy, G.D.E, MANY MANY OTHER PAPERS RELATED TO MY CASE and TWO c.d.). After seeing all my papers he told me that I cannot take any action until and unless you lodge a case against all of them.
Then I Prayed to the Ld. C.J.M at Barasat court to lodge the case, against the alleged person. (the payer to the Ld. C.J.M. is enclosed which is self-explanatory) after filing the case the BAGUIATI POLICE O.C. Mr. Goutam Mitra, and I.O. Mr. Prasenta Kumar Das, Mr. Ajay Kumar Ghosh, in stead of taking not any take proper investigation/ not take any action/ not take any type of query to recover my Cash and Gold form the house of Shankar Kumar Samanta, The BAGUIATI POLICE O.C. Mr. Goutam Mitra, and I.O. Mr. Prasenta Kumar Das, Mr. Ajay Kumar Ghosh, took my case as a Golden Goose, and how much money BAGUIATI POLICE O.C. Mr. Goutam Mitra, and I.O. Mr. Prasenta Kumar Das, Mr. Ajay Kumar Ghosh, has taken is well known to them. Neither he took any take proper investigation/ not take any action/not take any type of query nor he did roundup them against my case.
When I saw that already near by 70-80 days went by “ I went to the BAGUIATI P.S. to know the status of the case then BAGUIATI POLICE I.O. Mr. Prasenta Kumar Das, Mr. Ajay Kumar Ghosh, became outraged me and my mother that if you ask about Shankar Kumar Samanta and his family I will sentence you and your family in the Jail, all their languages is so much filthy dirty which I cannot express front of you.
As I’m 100 percent innocent so I screw up my courage to place my grievances to every body in order to get redress. So I want to let my matter informed all the Indian and others. I wrote my matter to our local P.S., Local Councilor, all M.P., M.L.A., Minister in W.B. and Other States, C.M. in W.B., CBI Department, CID Department, S.P. and Dy.S.P.(N.) 24 Parganas, DGP Bhupindar Singh, All the I.P.S. AND I.A.S. OFFICERS. Governor in W.B, and President in India. P.M. in India, National/International Human rights department, AAP KI KACHEHRI – KIRAN KE SAATH, Kolkata Police, and all police officers in W.B. informed Kolkata Commissioner of Police, Manager S.B.I.-Branch: 24B, Nimtala Ghat Street, Jorabagan, Kolkata- 700006, West Bengal, India, Bank Ph. No. 033 25308337. My nation, all of the news channels, and all press, Talking with some NGO’s: 1. Universal Right and Duty for Human to Abide URDHA, 2. Human Right Commission’s Mr. Ujjal Paul and Mr. Shibaji Dasgupta. 3. Bhatat Bachao Sangathan BBS. 4. Forum for Social Justice and Development FSJD. 5. Ajjtak News Channel’s Miss Menogya. and many more, (anybody can’t help me/ fight for truth /don’t take proper investigation/do not take any action/don’t take any type of query/ Still Now, I see they all are in sound asleep. The reason is best known to them.
I hope you would care to me, your prompt action shall be highly appreciated and deserves to be lauded.
With kindest regards,
Dipak Kumar Adhikari
Tegharia(Dhali Para),NandanKanan. P.S.: Baguiati.
P.O.: Hatiara. Dist.: North24Parganas.
Kolkata-700059 Email: dipakadhikari_59@yahoo.com
W.B. India. PH. 9836149983
Posted by: Dipak Kumar Adhikari | Aug 4, 2010 4:39:19 AM
Post a comment