Hello, everyone. Good morning, afternoon or evening, and welcome to this edition of Notes from South Asia. You can find all the articles in the series here (along with my other diaries).
In today’s piece, we have a long video on politics in India, updates on elections in Pakistan and a piece on the lack of investigation into election violence in Bangladesh.
India
A Political Viewpoint
Prashant Kishor was an election consultant (now retired) who has worked for many politicians across India including Prime Minister Modi. Since 2022, he has been travelling across Bihar on foot to figure out how to establish a party that would cater to the people and win elections. He is at present of the mind that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is ruining India, but he still believes that what they practice is everyday electioneering. This I think is a major problem with his and many others commentators (and voters’) thinking. Even so, he is well informed, and his answers, including in the Q&A with the audience, would give you a fair idea about politics in India.
Now onto criticisms I have on his perspective. Before that, let me list the point of views that I disagree with.
- Mr. Kishor believes that the current BJP dominant system is a mirror image of the earlier Indian National Congress (INC) dominant system. He thinks that the voters realise this and that is why they consistently vote against BJP in state elections; because they are against centralisation of power. He says that BJP has only 38% vote share as per 2019 elections and their dominance have reduced in state elections, and thus, even if they win 2024, which he deems likely, he does not think that would indicate a threat to democracy. He seems to believe that the fear of India becoming a Hindu Nation by constitution post 2024 is overblown. Note: He also said that India will not turn into one of those countries in Africa that became a dictatorship. Indicates the sad state of ignorance about Africa and anti-Black racism among South Asians, I think. Not that Africa did not have coups and dictatorships. But a better comparison in terms of politics would have been to Nazi Germany (a common one among scholars and activists), to Sri Lanka, or to Israel (natural affinity in ideology).
- He said that welfare matters over identity and rights.
There are a few other things I disagree with (such as his belief that revolutions don’t work and his conflation of revolutions with movements—they are not the same) but these are the major ones.
On the first point, you would see that many of his own points counter what he believes.
- First, he points out that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which he calls the Sangh, and their affiliates are now in complete harmony with the BJP (the political arm) unlike in the days of Prime Minister Vajpeyee. This is because the RSS has a long term vision of changing society to suit its Hindu supremacist agenda and a BJP dominant system is giving the RSS space to expand without much difficulty. That long term is worsening India’s social fabric.
- Second, Mr. Kishor says that the next BJP leader will be a hardliner. That is, the pressure on Modi is from the right while the pressure on Ms. Gandhi was from the civil liberty people and her own history (she participated in the anti-colonial struggle and was clearly attached to her democracy loving dad). This means, that whereas Indira Gandhi nationalised banks, Modi might change the constitution to make India, Hindu. He is not taking this difference into account. Note: I am not supporting Ms. Gandhi by any means. She was brutal in her crackdown of civil liberties and perceived opponents. Plus, she set the country on its current course with her support for the Sikh hardliner Bhindrenwale against the more moderate leaders in Punjab.
- Third, Mr. Kishor says 62% of Indian population does not support BJP but he does not mention that that is the vote share for all of India. South Indian and East Indian resistance to BJP is causing that split. BJP dominance in states such as Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh is far higher. That is a cause for worry because these are large states that contribute more members of parliament (think of California going right). It is also a cause for worry because a significant percentage of Muslims live in these states and are subject to state sanctioned terrorism every day. The same applies to Dalits (former untouchables) although the discriminatory attitude towards them is more covert.
- Fourthly, it does not matter that 62% voters are independent if BJP wins and changes the constitution now, would it? They have already been making structural changes to the law that gives second class status to Muslims and Christians (and women, Dalits and Adivasis): for example, anti-conversion law, criminalisation of certain Muslim personal laws (which are, yes, misogynist but do not deserve criminalisation), and jailing Muslim dissenters disproportionately. Beyond that, as Mr. Kishor pointed out himself, after each win, Modi has done something audacious to hold onto power. After 2019, they both set the stage for the Ram temple and abrogated article 370 that gave Jammu & Kashmir semi-autonomous status. Worse, they demoted J&K from the status of state and split it into union territories (less autonomous). Now, they have been laying the ground work for pitting the saffron flag against the national flag in Mandya, Karnataka. They have been talking about the constitution being a colonial document. They are testing the ground and will likely make their move post 2024 (either within months or after a bit of a wait).
- As he says, the BJP has been mismanaging the economy. The poor have either gotten poorer or their wages have remained stagnant. Another five years of this would set us back further.
- And finally, Modi is employing state might to loosen environmental laws so that people like Adani can build coal power plants in Tribal lands after destroying ancient forests. Adivasis will be dispossessed; environment will be destroyed. And we will not be able to regain the lives, livelihoods and heritage thus destroyed.
Does any of this mean that the whole of the country will be oppressed? No. What is likely is that there will be oppression in the states around Delhi, militant violence in others such as Maharashtra and Karnataka where BJP power is somewhat fragile, and in Kerala and Tamil Nadu, there will be well, nothing except continual fiscal oppression (the union government making it harder for non-BJP states to get funds).
I don’t think BJP will be able to manage the whole country by dismissing state governments (which is likely where Mr. Kishor and many like him are coming from), and without doing that, the peripheral states will resist. But it will still cause immense pain to Muslims in the Hindi heartland. Well, not just there, but everywhere. There could be a progressive breakdown of law and order in other states as in Manipur too.
People fear balkanisation of India. I don’t know if that is likely, but I know that I don’t know how things might play out. I don’t think anything can be discounted.
On the second point that I disagree with:
- Identity, rights, and well being of people are inter-linked. They cannot be dissociated from each other. It is because of discrimination based on identity that Muslims, Dalits and Adivasis now occupy the lowest stratum of Indian society. And it is because of rights enshrined in the Indian constitution that many of them have been able to make the advances that they have in India’s brahminical/Hindu hegemonic system. However, he seemed open to learning and respectful of Dalits and underprivileged groups, so I hope he changes his mind in time.
Note: He says in the Q&A that Dalits don’t like being called “Dalit”. I think he might be referring to the feeling among some former “untouchable” caste groups that “Dalit” is a status of victimhood and oppression. However, I don’t know if that is a widespread belief among the community and Ambedkarites and Dalit parties still use it. So, I am going to go with that for now though I will use whichever title a community itself uses when I see them using it. Same for a person.
The Path to a Civil Society
Mr. Prashant Kishor says that what despairs him about India is the lack of concern that the middle class and the rich have for poor in India. On that note, Mr. Asim Ali wrote a piece for the Hindu a few days back that I think is worth sharing.
B.R. Ambedkar had framed the Preamble in terms of heralding a “way of life, which recognizes liberty, equality, and fraternity as the principles of life and which cannot be divorced from each other: Liberty cannot be divorced from equality; equality cannot be divorced from liberty. Nor can liberty and equality be divorced from fraternity. Without equality, liberty would produce the supremacy of the few over the many. Equality without liberty would kill individual initiative”.
Equally, he refused to harbour naive presumptions about the self-perpetuating character of these constitutional principles. In his essay, ‘Buddha and the future of religion’, he wrote, Buddha also “did not believe that law can be a guarantee for breaches of liberty or equality...In all societies, law plays a very small part. It is intended to keep the minority within the range of social discipline.” Since the majority is constrained not by law but by morality, Ambedkar held that “religion, in the sense of morality, must therefore, remain the governing principle in every society”.
It might be instructive to juxtapose Ambedkar’s plea for a transcendent civil morality with Gandhi’s conception of swaraj or ‘self-rule’. In the monograph, Unconditional Equality: Gandhi’s Religion of Resistance (2016), historian Ajay Skaria explains that ‘Swaraj’ for Gandhi did not confine itself to a mechanistic self-rule, but a creative process of self-realisation through which one might reach out towards a more secure and substantive plane of freedom and equality. The means to achieve Swaraj was thus ‘satyagraha’ (defined as “truth force” and “love force”). “For him (Gandhi), sovereign power is not exemplified only in the state. Rather, every self is deeply fissured, and sovereignty is ubiquitous, always exercised everyday by the self,” Skaria wrote.
Therefore, Gandhi’s practice of ‘ahimsa’ cannot be divorced from his insistence on recognising a deeply fissured self. The politically fabricated wholeness or boundedness accorded to the self (whether ‘Hindu Self’ or ‘Muslim Self’), mirroring the colonising Europe’s axioms of national sovereignty, has led to much bloodshed in the subcontinent in the last century.
The folly of mimicking the imperialists’ arrogance wrecked other countries as well, not least the militaristic Japan of the first half of the 20th century. The book, Japan’s Orient: Rendering Pasts into History (1995), uncovers how Japanese violent militarism was built on the fundamental assumption of a perfected modern self. This construction of this supremely confident self necessitated the reflexive displacement of the western Orientalist category of a ‘backward Other’ from itself onto other subordinated peoples. According to Tanaka, Japan’s historians constructed their own backward Orient, defined by the “Asiatic culture... Asiatic nature was characterized by its gentleness, moral ethics, harmony, and communalism; Japan’s genius lay in its ability to adapt creatively only those Asiatic characteristics that were harmonious with its own nature; and Japan thus became the possessor of the best of Asia”.
The entire piece is worth a look. So, I will share the e-paper clipping here.
Note that Ambedkar was very critical of Gandhi’s approach to caste. Hence, Dalits are very critical of Gandhi especially for the pain he caused them. However, Gandhi constantly evolved his view points and his philosophy has significant ideas that are worth engaging with (and there are indeed Gandhian Dalits who believe he was instrumental in shifting privileged caste view points on untouchability and caste discrimination). Just remember that he comes from a privileged caste point of view if you read him.
Education is a critical part of what makes for a pluralist civil society. Dr. Anandini Dar, Associate Professor, School of Liberal Studies, BML Munjal University, Haryana, writes about the importance of liberal arts.
A liberal arts education seeks to enable students and future leaders to understand contemporary social problems in context. This is to suggest that to understand and respond to any situation, we must engage with the historical, sociological, economic, and psychological contexts. Such an approach would necessitate openness, require an ability to comprehend a problem from multiple perspectives, and recognise the complexity of the issue at hand. No quick answers or solutions would be possible. Another important aspect of a liberal arts education is to learn how to historicise our contemporary problems. This can enable us to have a view of the present in a way that does not ignore the past but instead teaches us how historical events have led to contemporary crises. [...]
People’s identities are intrinsically linked to regional, national, religious, gender, and other markers. There is nothing reductive about recognising identities of people. No social scientist or historian or economist is, as often labelled as doing so, trying to reduce identities to characteristics. This would be a grave misunderstanding of these liberal disciplines. Instead, recognising identities means acknowledging difference, which is innate in human society. How can we forget the history of human evolution, the formation of societies, cultures, and groups, and speak from a naive position of “simply being human”?
In making sense of conflict between two groups, a student of the liberal arts would instead first ask the question ‘when and why do national identities matter?’ Does the erasure of identity of some lead to the dominance/flourishment of other identities? If identities did not matter, then why do passports matter when we travel? Why do nations not open up their borders to all religious and national subjects?
In aiming to answer these questions, the role of power in societies can be recognised as being extremely significant. Liberal arts education allows students to learn that power is a central vector in understanding contexts and crises. Incorporating the role of power in any analysis does not denude it of nuance, as Allison Schrager argues in a ‘premium’ media online article of December 3, 2023, “There is an economic case for redefining liberal arts education”. Rather, it deepens the engagement with contemporary crisis situations. Ignoring power relations and hierarchies between identities often leads to flat, homogenised narratives that are hardly of use in the real world. It would be naive and ignorant to deny the role of power in war, or in societies at large.
Mr. Kishor says that as per data, the youth vote has been falling away from BJP even if individual perception is different. This made me hopeful.
Pakistan
Irrelevant Elections?
The counting is not yet done but for now, as per Dawn tracker, PTI backed candidates have provisionally won in 28 seats, PML-N (Nawaz Sharif’s party) 26, PPP(P) in 18 seats and others in seven seats. Dawn tracker is rather cute. 79 of 134 seats announced. Provisional results as announced by ECP.
On the voting, here is the AP story from the Hindu.
Pakistanis braved cold winter weather and sporadic violence to vote for a new Parliament on Thursday, a day after twin bombings claimed at least 30 lives in the worst election-related violence ahead of the balloting.
Tens of thousands of security forces were deployed at polling stations and authorities suspended mobile phone services across the country to prevent disruptions and flash protests. Pakistan’s Interior Ministry said the decision was made to maintain law and order. It did not say when the suspension would be lifted.
There were a handful of attacks that appeared aimed at disrupting the vote. In the northwestern district of Dera Ismail Khan, gunmen set off a bomb and then opened fire at a police van, killing five officers and wounding two others, local police officials said. The officers were assigned to security duty during the elections.
No one claimed responsibility for the attack but the area is a former stronghold of the Pakistani Taliban who often target police forces.
Also in the northwest, gunmen fired on troops in the town of Kot Azam, killing a soldier, a police official said. Again, no one immediately claimed responsibility for that attack.
Unidentified assailants threw hand grenades at two polling stations in restive southwestern Baluchistan province, where twin bombings hit separate election offices on Wednesday, killing at least 30 people. The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for both bombings.
Pakistan suspended mobile internet services on election day. There was sporadic violence. A day before, there was terrorist attack in Balochistan that killed thirty people and injured many others. Islamic State claimed them. Dawn edit on the suspension of internet and mobile services.
IN blatant disregard of the sanctity of democracy, the caretaker government, abetted by a conspicuously passive ECP, suspended mobile and internet services on election day, citing security threats.
The move rendered thousands of voters clueless as to where their polling stations were, as the ECP’s 8300 SMS service could only be operated on mobile networks. The decision not only defies court orders mandating uninterrupted internet connectivity during the polls, it raises a glaring question: how does snapping communication channels deter terrorism?
The rationale is mind-boggling.
Terrorism, which predates the internet, cannot be effectively combated with such indiscriminate shutdowns. Instead, these actions hinder critical communication among citizens and emergency services, potentially compromising rather than enhancing security. The decision is part of a broader pattern of behaviour by the caretakers and ECP that smacks of bias.
Salman Rafi Sheikh writes for Himal Mag: With an unfree and unfair election, Pakistan prepares to repeat its past
The military and the caretaker government’s attitude towards Balochistan tells a story of continued political repression. Since late December, Baloch protesters, led by the young doctor Mahrang Baloch, spent more than a month in Islamabad demanding a response to the enforced disappearance of thousands of Baloch people and justice for the extra-judicial killings of Baloch youth, allegedly at the hands of the military. The caretaker government has called the issue of missing persons and the protest movement against them part of a foreign-funded conspiracy to destabilise Pakistan. On 24 January, the protesters decided to end their sit-in and return to Balochistan, where they received a historic welcome from tens of thousands of people, signalling a growing distance between the Baloch people and the Pakistan state that may soon become too wide to be bridged.
Reinforcing the state’s apathy towards Balochistan is its electoral engineering in the province, a political project designed to keep even moderate Baloch ethno-nationalists out of power. In 2018, members of the PML–N from Balochistan defected and formed the military-backed Balochistan Awami Party (BAP). Between 2018 and 2023, the BAP – which includes many Baloch leaders and tribal sardars with very close ties to the military and strong opposition to Baloch nationalism – was a key player at both the national and provincial levels. It was an important member of the Imran Khan-led coalition that took power in 2018, and also controlled the provincial administration in Balochistan. The BAP’s decision to leave the coalition provided the opening for the April 2022 vote of no confidence that deposed Khan. The party then joined the new coalition government led by the PML–N that stayed in power between April 2022 and August 2023. For 2024, many BAP leaders have already joined the PML–N, a development that neatly aligns with the military establishment’s support for the PML–N at the national level.
All these factors promise more of the same for Pakistan. While the PML–N is projecting its anticipated return to power as heralding Pakistan’s entry into a new era of development, its formation of a new government will only mirror the past. It will be no different from when Khan’s government signalled Pakistan’s move to a hybrid civilian-military regime – one in which democratic exercises like elections were carried out with continued autocratic political repression in the background. Moreover, with the recent changes to the Army Act, the legal regime has also changed. The army is now a legally recognised political and economic player in Pakistan. The PML–N-led government made these changes in 2023, and the upcoming PML–N government, or any other administration, will have to operate within this hybrid martial-law framework.
Pakistani American Mohammed Taqi writes for Dissent Today why yesterday’s elections are “totally irrelevant”
That’s where the similarities between Suhrawardy and Imran Khan end though. Suhrawardy was an intellectual and political giant who stood firmly for parliamentary democracy, a pluralist nation state, and refused to endorse military rule. Imran Khan, on the other hand, is an authoritarian demagogue who was handpicked, groomed, installed into the high office, and sustained there by the army till they fell out. In addition to imposing a martial law four times, the Pakistan Army has ruled indirectly for most of the country’s existence. To that end, the junta has manipulated the political process by creating or coopting what it deemed ‘patriotic’ and pliant individuals and parties. The army’s chosen politicians, however, have invariably spun out of its orbit like former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and some even locked horns with the brass, like Nawaz Sharif. [...]
Whoever forms the government will be dictated to by the army sitting atop the tutelary commanding heights. History, however, informs us that even the weakest PMs like Muhammad Khan Junejo and Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali ended up having differences with the strongest army dictators, General Ziaul Haq and General Pervez Musharraf, respectively. Nawaz Sharif himself was ousted thrice by the army when he tried to assert his constitutional authority. The power dynamics of the de jure authority and de facto rulers is such that once in the office, the former invariably seeks agency that’s due their moral title. What follows is the replacement of old collaborators with the new ones. And it won’t be any different this time regardless of whether the army plans to consort with the new dispensation for 10 days or 10 years in the so-called Bangladesh model of a diarchal controlled democracy. None of this is lost on Imran Khan’s political opponents and the army with which they have made a common cause. But they still chose to destroy democracy in order to save it from Imran Khan.
Well, even so, Pakistani voters are fighting tooth and nail for their democracy, even if it is by supporting the likes of Imran Khan.
Bangladesh
Election Violence
Kamal Ahmed writes for the Daily Star about Election violence, minorities, and erasure of data
The life of Barun Kumar Ghosh, a supporter of Awami League, met a tragic end on January 9 near his residence in Hamdo Ghoshpara, Jhenaidah. The assailants attacked the 35-year-old, dragging him outside a local shop, where they amputated one of his legs. Despite being rushed to Jhenaidah Sadar Hospital by locals, doctors pronounced him dead. Barun was identified as a supporter of Tahjeeb Alam Siddiqui, the official AL nominee for the Jhenaidah-2 parliamentary seat. Barun's killing has been cited in discussions on electoral violence against minorities.
Reports of violence against minorities during and after the boycott-ridden, controversial election have raised questions against Awami League's claimed commitment to protecting the minorities. At a seminar organised by Arpita Sampatti Pratyarpan Ain Bastobayon Jatiyo Nagorik Samonway Cell on February 2, it was said that at least 13 incidents of torture and attacks on minorities—all election-centric—occurred between January 4 and 13, leaving one person dead and 37 injured. An earlier report by Human Rights Support Society (HRSS) said that there were election-focused attacks on minorities in 12 districts.
The scale and spread of electoral violence against members of minority communities were particularly noticeable in areas where the contest was a factional fight within the ruling party—better described as a competition between official nominees and dummy candidates. Civil society leaders, in unison, have expressed their frustration and anger over the government and the ruling party's failure to prevent such attacks. Media reports have quoted them saying that "it cannot be said that BNP-Jamaat is responsible for these attacks. Awami League cannot avoid their responsibility in minority torture incidents."
Ghosh is Hindu. Apparently, the government deleted the data regarding complaints about electoral violence too.
Rohingya and Neglect
Nazifa Nawar writes for Daily Star: How will Bangladesh keep on sheltering the Rohingya?
Moreover, the World Bank (WB) and Asian Development Bank (ADB) are progressively tightening their financial support, creating a significant challenge for Bangladesh. The country now finds itself in a desperate situation. The diminishing funds allocated for the Rohingya crisis are placing an immense financial burden on Bangladesh, forcing the country to resort to borrowing for the refugees' well-being.
In a groundbreaking move in December, Bangladesh sought a $1 billion loan from the WB and ADB—a financial package consisting of $535 million in loans and $465 million in grants. On January 23, WB Country Director Abdoulaye Seck expressed interest in disbursing an additional $700 million in the form of both a grant and soft loan to Foreign Minister Hasan Mahmud. This funding is earmarked to support crucial socioeconomic development initiatives for both the Rohingya population and the adversely affected host communities.
In an immediate reaction, Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) stated that relying on foreign loans is not a just, prudent, or enduring strategy to address the Rohingya crisis. The statement conveyed profound apprehension at the government's apparent choice and asked it to engage in negotiations with the WB and ADB to obtain a grant instead. Furthermore, it called upon the international community to ensure a just and equitable distribution of the responsibilities associated with this crisis driven by persecution.
In light of the insufficient grants in the Joint Response Plan to comprehensively address the Rohingya crisis, a dual strategy can be adopted: maximising humanitarian aid collection and focusing concerted efforts on the repatriation process. This approach aims not only to alleviate the immediate financial strain but also to ensure a sustainable and effective resolution to the crisis.
That is it for today, everyone. Until next Friday. Stay safe. Be well. Take care. May there be more justice and less strife in this world; and may we all have the capacity to encourage pluralist view points and ethos.