Indian Press on Rwandan Media, Political Wind In Pakistan And Jihadist Movement In India: New Age Islam's Selection, 26 October 2020
By New Age Islam Edit
Bureau
26 October
2020
• Boycott Channels That Spread Prejudice, Hate
By Karan Thapar
• Political Winds Take a New Direction in
Pakistan
By Mehmal Sarfraz
• Pivotal Myanmar ~I
By P K Vasudeva
• India Does Have A Jihadist Movement That Must
Be Confronted As French President Has Done
By Tavleen Singh
-----
Boycott Channels That Spread Prejudice, Hate
By Karan Thapar
Oct 24,
2020
Now,
if we stop watching, corporations will have an additional reason to stop
advertising. It’s our eyeballs they’re after but if we’re watching something
else, the advertisers are also likely to relocate. (Hindustan Times)
-----
Let me
start by giving credit where it’s due — to Rajiv Bajaj, the managing director
of Bajaj Auto, and Avay Shukla, a former Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
officer, whose recent blogs have been riveting reading. They’ve suggested a way
we can tackle news channels that deliberately provoke prejudice and hate to
increase their viewership. It could be very effective provided we are united
and determined. In fact, what they’ve proposed is something we could have done
at any point of time if only it had occurred to us.
Bajaj took
the first step when he announced “a wise but simple decision” to stop
advertising on channels that spread hatred. “A friend told me that you can do
something about this,” he said. “Stop funding this hate”. So Bajaj literally
put his money where his mouth is.
Bajaj Auto
is a major advertiser and withdrawal of its advertisements will hurt the
offending channels. Encouraged by this example, Parle followed suit. However,
it plans to go one step further. “We are exploring possibilities wherein other
advertisers can come together and sort of put a restraint on their advertising
spends … so there’s some clear signal to all news channels that they better
change their content,” Parle’s Krishnarao Buddha told Mint.
Avay
Shukla, in a piece for The Wire, has compiled the names of the advertisers on
three channels that are perhaps the most offending. Their patronage determines
whether the farrago of hate that’s embittering our society and dangerously
dividing us continues or abates.
I don’t
know how Indian companies will respond but Shukla recalls the principled manner
in which their counterparts in the West have acted. When Facebook refused to
curb racist comments Adidas, Diaggeo, Ford, Honda, Hershey’s, Coca Cola and
Hewlett-Packard withdrew advertising. Separately, an American group called
Sleeping Giants convinced 4,000 companies to boycott Breitbart, a website that
spreads racism and hatred.
In fact,
something similar has happened in India. A campaign launched in France by
Indian Alliance, a diaspora group, has persuaded Renault to boycott two Indian
TV channels since May. Are we capable of persuading companies, whose products
we buy and whose profits depend on our custom, to reconsider their patronage of
offensive channels?
This is
where you and I come in. All we have to do is stop watching the channels. This
should not be difficult because many of us profess to dislike them. So if you
really don’t approve, don’t switch them on. It’s literally as simple as that.
Now, if we
stop watching, corporations will have an additional reason to stop advertising.
It’s our eyeballs they’re after but if we’re watching something else, the
advertisers are also likely to relocate.
Rajiv Bajaj
and Parle have set a moral example, but we can do more than just wait to see
how many other industrialists follow their lead. We can encourage them to do
so. This second part is, therefore, a critical test of our conviction. Do we
really mean what we say when we loudly proclaim our dislike of and aversion to
these channels? And, then, do we have the strength to act? Or are we hypocrites
who say one thing but do another?
In the 1970s
and 1980s, when South African apartheid provoked strong emotions, many people
in Britain refused to buy the country’s products. Consequently, several
department stores refused to sell them. Those who continued faced huge protests
from the anti-apartheid movement. Soon major retailers such as Marks and
Spencer and popular grocers such as Tesco and Sainsbury’s caved in.
As a
result, between 1983 and 1986, British imports of South African textiles and
clothing fell by 35%. An opinion poll in June 1986 found that 27% of British
people were boycotting South African products.
So the
power to act is in our hands. Bajaj and Parle have done what they can. Will the
rest of us do what’s in our power? Or will we continue to complain but fail to
act?
----
Karan Thapar is the author of Devil’s Advocate:
The Untold Story
https://www.hindustantimes.com/columns/boycott-channels-that-spread-prejudice-hate/story-Ljc5HrsdSYdP1tyChpoIgO.html
-----
Political Winds Take A New Direction In
Pakistan
By Mehmal Sarfraz
26.10.20
Supporters
of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) hold up masks depicting their leader
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, chairman of the PPP, during an anti-government protest
rally organized by the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM), an alliance of
political opposition parties, in Karachi, Pakistan October 18, 2020.
-----
October has
been quite a roller-coaster ride for political buffs in Pakistan. Last month,
the Opposition parties made an alliance called ‘Pakistan Democratic Movement’.
On October 16, the PDM held its first jalsa in Gujranwala, Punjab. Gujranwala
being a stronghold of the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz), it was expected to be
a show of power by the Opposition alliance. The chairman of Pakistan Peoples
Party, Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, was there as well as Nawaz Sharif’s daughter,
Maryam Nawaz, Maulana Fazlur Rehman and several others. The former prime
minister, Nawaz Sharif, addressed the rally through a video link. Earlier this
month, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority had banned the
broadcast of speeches, interviews and public addresses by absconders and
proclaimed offenders on television. Thus, Nawaz Sharif’s speech was not shown
on television. Despite the television ban, Nawaz Sharif’s aggressive speech was
discussed by the prime minister, cabinet ministers and other members of the
ruling party. The Gujranwala rally was seen as a successful event by the
Opposition even though government representatives dismissed it as a failure.
The PDM
rally in Gujranwala set the tone for the anti-government movement. Two days
later, the PPP hosted a PDM rally in Karachi, Sindh. The PPP rules the Sindh
province. It was a grand show with a massive crowd. This time though, Nawaz
Sharif did not address the rally. However, the success of the Karachi rally was
marred by the arrest of Maryam Nawaz’s husband, Captain (retd) Safdar, in the
early hours of the morning from their hotel room in Karachi. The arrest was due
to a first information report filed against him for trespassing into the
restricted area surrounding the grave of Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and
raising political slogans at his mausoleum. This was in violation of laws that
prohibit political activities at the founding father’s mausoleum. Safdar’s
arrest would not have garnered so much attention had it not been for the way it
was carried out. Around seven in the morning, Maryam Nawaz tweeted that the
police broke into the room of the hotel where they were staying and arrested
Captain Safdar. The Sindh government denied any involvement in the incident and
even the PDM leadership, including Maryam Nawaz, did not blame the PPP or the
Sindh government. Rumours began about an incident regarding the Sindh police
chief that led to the arrest of Safdar. Those rumours were reinforced when the
police chief and many other officers submitted leave applications the next day.
As a result, Bilawal Bhutto had to address a press conference asking the army
chief to investigate what had actually transpired. The army chief ordered an
immediate inquiry into the matter. The Sindh police then tweeted that the
department is “immensely grateful to the Army Chief for realising the sense of
hurt that prevailed within a uniformed force, and for promptly ordering an inquiry
into the matter” and that the police chief had deferred his own leave and
ordered his officers to set aside their leave applications for 10 days “in the
larger national interest, pending the conclusion of the inquiry”.
While all
this was going on, some Indian media outlets took it upon themselves to spread
false news about a civil war in Karachi after ‘clashes between the police and
the army’. All of this was obviously untrue. There was no violence at all, let
alone clashes between the two institutions. While Pakistani Twitterati had a
field day mocking the Indian media for their absurd and baseless claims about
‘civil war’ and ‘clashes’, one wondered why some of these Indian media outlets
chose brazenly not to report facts. One senior Indian journalist told the BBC
that a quick study of Twitter handles tweeting this misinformation will show
that most of them are supporters of or affiliated to the ruling Bharatiya
Janata Party. It is unfortunate but understandable that media groups that are
tilted in favour of the BJP or Twitter handles supporting India’s ruling party
would be accused of spreading misinformation about Pakistan. Ethics or
factually correct reporting are not really their priority.
The PDM’s
third rally took place yesterday, this time in Quetta. The Opposition rallies
are gaining momentum but we still do not know what the end result will be. The
Opposition says it will get rid of the government by the end of this movement
in a few months but how it will achieve this goal is yet to be revealed. Some
analysts say that the government is quite confident that it is not going
anywhere; some others say that there is panic in the government ranks. But it
is too soon to speculate. The government may be facing a tough time due to
rising inflation and a slow economy but whether these factors lead to some sort
of mass movement on the ground remains to be seen. The Opposition may be
banking on public sentiment but whether the people themselves are ready for
political instability is something that only time will tell. However, I do feel
that civilian governments should complete their five-year tenure in order for
democracy to be genuinely strengthened in Pakistan. The government should sit
and talk with the Opposition and start a national dialogue. It would go a long
way in helping Pakistan’s nascent democracy.
On an
aside, October 24 was World Polio Day. Pakistan and Afghanistan are the only
two countries that are left with this preventable disease. It is time for us to
put an end to all conspiracy theories related to polio and ensure that like the
rest of the world and, more recently, like Africa, we too would be polio-free
soon. Pakistan has been quite successful in dealing with Covid-19. We can
hopefully be successful in eradicating polio in the coming years.
https://www.telegraphindia.com/opinion/political-winds-take-a-new-direction-in-pakistan/cid/1795618
------
Pivotal Myanmar ~I
By P K Vasudeva
October 25,
2020
China’s
intention to make inroads into the Bay of Bengal had become clear with
President Xi Jinping’s visit to Myanmar in January. The intention was not just
to boost infrastructure projects in Myanmar but also increase China’s influence
in the region. Among the 33 agreements signed during the visit, the development
of a deep-sea port in Kyaukphyu on the shores of the Bay of Bengal, a railway
project to connect the Chinese province of Yunnan to Myanmar’s coastal cities,
an inland-waterway through the Irrawaddy river and a mega-hydropower dam
project are the most prominent. These projects are expected to re-energise the
rather staid progress made under the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC) so
far.
Xi’s visit
to Myanmar, the first by a Chinese president in almost two decades, was aimed
at drastically altering regional geopolitics in the Bay of Bengal. Several
domestic and geopolitical reasons underline Beijing’s outreach to Myanmar and
its strategy to use it as a conduit to the Bay of Bengal. It will boost China’s
presence in the Indian sub-continent. The deep-sea port project is intended to
cement China’s geostrategic footprint in the Bay of Bengal. China’s dependence
on oil has been increasing by 6.7 per cent each year and the demand is set to
increase further, given the trade war with the US. Therefore, the Bay of Bengal
will be an alternative route for China.
Being the
conduit between the Western Indian Ocean and South China, the Bay of Bengal
enjoys immense geostrategic influence in strategies of Asia’s rising powers. It
is also a lynchpin of any successful Indo-Pacific strategy. If the Quad
countries ~ the US, India, Japan and Australia ~ continue to push for a loose
alliance against China’s increasing maritime power both in the Pacific Ocean
and the Indian Ocean, China’s maritime ambitions could be easily thwarted.
Beijing would like to pre-empt any such attempt by the Quad countries.
Establishing its presence in the Bay of Bengal is, therefore, fundamental to
sustain China’s inroads in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). Cultivating Myanmar
as a strategic partner serves three major objectives in China’s Indian Ocean
strategy.
First,
China’s development of Kyaukpyu port will entrench its naval presence in the
IOR. On the pretext of developing infrastructure and connectivity under the
Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), Beijing has developed a myriad of naval posts
across IOR ~ from Gwadar port in Pakistan to Djibouti in Africa and the most
recent naval outpost in Cambodia. However, the militarisation of the Kyaukpyu
port will be a game-changer as China will get a military foothold in the Bay of
Bengal. Though the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy is highly active in the
waters of the Bay of Bengal, it still lacks military infrastructure and
logistics support in the region.
Second, the
Andaman Sea and Bay of Bengal are fast becoming new flashpoints in the
Sino-Indian strategic maritime competition. In the last two years, PLA Navy
entered the Bay of Bengal on several occasions with the most recent incident in
December 2019 when a Chinese vessel entered India’s special economic zone
without permission. The frequency of Chinese submarine patrols in the IOR has
almost tripled in the last two years. Although the past interventions were
criticised as violations of the United Nations Convention for the Law of the
Sea, China will now have a legitimate reason to be present in the Bay of Bengal
because of its presence in Myanmar.
Third,
Myanmar is a key influencer for China’s ambitions in the Indian Ocean. It is
not only a gateway to the Bay of Bengal but is also a strong member of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). While the Western nations
continue to isolate Myanmar on its human rights track record, China’s policy of
non-intervention in Myanmar’s domestic politics has helped it to cultivate
goodwill in Nay Pyi Taw. China also provided military support to Myanmar. By
keeping Myanmar on its side and by building such economic dependencies, Beijing
hopes not only to keep India on its toes but also enhance its influence within
Asean.
For New
Delhi, securing the Indian waters is of utmost priority which otherwise would
intensify the maritime security dilemma. Yet, India has been complacent in
confronting this new geostrategic reality ~ lack of economic might.
Recognising
this, New Delhi is partnering the Quad countries to boost maritime security in
the Bay of Bengal. Japan has been funding infrastructure projects, including
port development in Myanmar and Bangladesh with India. The US and India jointly
held the Malabar naval exercise in the Indian Ocean in 2019. Washington laid
out a clear military roadmap in the Indo-Pacific to not only boost military
activities in the IOR but also to build India’s maritime security capabilities.
Additionally, New Delhi could rekindle maritime ties with Asean. This will
reduce the collective concerns regarding the security of the Bay of Bengal and
the Indian Ocean. Some time ago, India, Singapore and Thailand held a joint
trilateral maritime exercise for the first time to cooperate on security and
maritime issues in the Bay of Bengal. However, Asean and India can do more by
partnering with Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippines.
While the
governments of Myanmar and China hailed the Xi visit as a tremendous success,
many other key stakeholders issued statements expressing reservations. More
than 50 civil society groups published an open letter to Xi, urging him to
permanently cancel the controversial Myitsone Dam project. The Myanmar
government in 2011 halted construction of this mega-dam, located at the
headwaters of the Irrawaddy River, after environmental, social and national
security concerns sparked nationwide protests.
Key
political parties, including the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy,
voiced similar perspectives, urging the CMEC to respect traditional land rights
and demanding that all CMEC projects receive approval directly from communities
in addition to the Union government.
Representatives
of Myanmar’s ethnic armed groups voiced some of the most serious objections.
The Arakan Army (AA), which has clashed several times with the Myanmar army in
Rakhine state since the beginning of 2020, released a statement the day before
Xi’s visit asserting that it would “recover land and resources taken from the
Rakhine people … and wage a war for the liberation of the Rakhine nation.”
China’s
leaders recognize that they need to do more to win broad-based support for
their various initiatives, and they have placed greater emphasis on public
relations. For example, in advance of Xi’s visit, the operator of the
Sino-Myanmar Pipeline, the China National Petroleum Company, released a new
“Corporate Social Responsibility” report, noting that it has delivered $500
million of benefits to Myanmar. And in his open letter, Xi stressed China’s
commitment to projects that will improve the livelihood of the Myanmar people.
Two
possible initiatives stand out as potential solutions: In China, leaders have
promised to greatly enhance transparency, accountability, and environmental
sustainability of future BRI projects. Instruments such as the Beijing
Initiative for the Clean Silk Road were released in April of 2019, but it
remains unclear how these principles have been implemented on the ground in a
BRI host country like Myanmar. Going forward, China is trying its best to cater
for the needs of opposition parties, ethnic nonstate authorities and civil
society by making a good-faith attempt to fulfill the promises it made last
year.The Myanmar government, for its part, has made efforts to subject projects
to a strict review process incorporating social and environmental impacts
assessments. Dubbed the “Project Bank,” this plan has not yet been implemented,
due largely to a lack of donor support. With the proper resources, political
will and emphasis on how various projects might affect the causes of conflict,
Myanmar’s government can respond more robustly to the needs of other
stakeholders and renew efforts to build peace in the country.
(To be
concluded)
-----
P K Vasudeva is retired Senior Professor,
International Trade, and member of the Vivekananda International Foundation,
New Delhi
https://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/pivotal-myanmar-i-1502931607.html
-----
India Does Have a Jihadist Movement That Must
Be Confronted As French President Has Done
By Tavleen Singh
October 25,
2020
The
beheading of Samuel Paty did not make headlines in India. Nor did the French
President’s moving tribute to this teacher at his state funeral last week.
Emmanuel Macron said, “Samuel Paty became on Friday the face of our republic, of
our determination to break terrorists, to diminish Islamists, to live as a
community of free citizens in our country.” He added that if France’s
foundational values of liberty, equality and fraternity were not taught to
children in schools it would not be possible to keep them alive.
It was for
trying to teach them, in a school in a Paris suburb, that Paty was killed by a
Russian Islamist. While telling his students about the importance of freedom of
expression he showed them those cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad that were
published in the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo five years ago. Before
showing them to his class he said he was happy to allow Muslim students to
leave if they found them objectionable. News of what happened soon appeared on
social media, and this enraged his 18-year-old killer enough to come looking
for him. He beheaded him publicly and posted pictures of his severed head
online.
The reason
why this story is important for us in India is that something similar happened
to a teacher in Kerala some years ago. His hand was severed by our homegrown
jihadists because they objected to a lesson he taught about the Prophet of Islam.
It is also important for us because our own foundational values are under
threat from both Hindutva fanatics and Islamists. At the risk of being called
Islamophobic, I believe that the jihadist threat is more organised and more
dangerous. It has to be fought but it has to be fought in the arena of ideas.
Not by retaliatory violence.
So far, all
we have seen is retaliatory violence not just by Hindutva fanatics but by the
state. We saw this most recently when the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh
claimed after the Hathras horror that there was an ‘international conspiracy’
to defame his fair name. Four young Muslim men were arrested ostensibly for
being part of this mysterious plot. Earlier this year, when Muslims took to the
streets to protest against CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act), Muslim students,
poets, journalists and dissidents were arrested. The Shaheen Bagh protest was
depicted as a Pakistani plot.
In the course
of all this what has been forgotten is that India does have a jihadist movement
and it must be confronted in the way that the French President has just done.
Indian political and religious leaders must stand up for what India stands for.
Instead of allowing Hindutva fanatics to spew hatred and violence in the
streets and on social media, the Prime Minister needs to state clearly what it
is about Islam that clashes with the foundational values of India. He needs to
say that the primitive idea of blasphemy does not exist in any of India’s
religions. He needs to say that the Sanatan Dharma does not make a distinction
between believers and unbelievers, so those Muslims who subscribe to ideas of
this kind must keep them at home.
There is no
point in pretending, as too many leftist historians have, that Muslim
conquerors did not do terrible things or that they did not destroy temples to
build mosques. They did and the wounds still exist but they need healing. Not
hatred and revenge. It is time to deal with them as South Africa did with its
wounds through a Truth Commission. I have suggested before that the Dalai Lama
would be the best person to bring together religious preachers of all religions
to discuss how these wounds of history can be healed. My own humble suggestion
is that a beginning could be made by urging the Muslim community to give up the
Idgah that looms over the dungeon in which Krishna is believed to have been
born, and the mosque that looms over the Vishvanath Mandir in Varanasi. The
last thing we need is another movement of the Ayodhya kind.
What we do
need is to find out which organisations are responsible for spreading jihadist
ideology across India so successfully that schoolgirls these days are seen
wearing hijabs in classrooms. As someone who is charged with ‘appeasement’
every time I write about the rising tide of Hindutva, I would like to make
clear once and for all that I believe that the jihadists have an ideology that
could rightly be described as the Nazism of today. Hindutva in its current
incarnation is an ideology based entirely on hatred but less dangerous because
it does not have religious sanction.
Jihadists
take their inspiration from the Quran that says blasphemy and apostasy are
crimes against Allah. So, after Samuel Paty was beheaded, Sheikh Ali Al-Yousuf
of the International Union of Muslim Scholars said that his beheading was in
accordance with Shariat law but that this should have been done by the Islamic
State. In India, there is no room for either the Islamic State, its evil
ideology, or for ‘scholars’ who talk such rubbish. Our religions and the
foundational values of our nation do not sanction primitive concepts like
blasphemy and apostasy. It is sad that our leaders do not make this as clear as
the French President did last week. And, this is why leadership has passed into
the hands of fanatics.
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/france-teacher-killing-islamism-tavleen-singh-6873382/
-----
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism