Joginder Jaswant Singh, the Indian Army Chief, who assumed charge in January this year, is a man on a mission. He wants to transform the blood dripping image of the Indian Army, in Kashmir and the Indian North East, into a benign reflection. It is not out of any consideration for the welfare of the traumatized and battered population but an initiative driven by objective operational considerations. Indian Army’s no holds barred operations, duly legitimized by protective legislations like the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA), have created a strong backlash and stiffening of the fighters’ resolve to seek retributions for the brutal Indian tactics. The result is that indigenous militancy in the insurgency struck areas, all over India, has shown increased virulence despite the fact the infiltration into these areas by outside volunteers has virtually come to a trickle.
To sustain his image building exercise, Indian Army has launched a campaign – Operation Sadhbhavana - for winning the hearts and minds in the insurgency infested areas by undertaking welfare projects – building roads, schools, arrange vocational training etc to nurture goodwill and confidence of the local populace. But this exercise in soft image building has ground to a halt much sooner than expected. Repeated disclosures of fake encounters by the Indian troops involving killing of innocents in cold blood, rampant cases of custodial killings and rape have crashed any hopes for this heart winning venture to succeed. ‘A leopard can’t change its spots overnight’ and it is equally improbable that Indian army can rid itself of its trigger happy callous, time hardened ways for the benefit of mere image building.
The PR campaign received two blows in quick succession. On 21 July 2005 a youth, who was helping out his father with watering the paddy fields, was shot dead by a patrol of the 55 Rashtriya Rifles. The boy and his father were chased as they returned home. The youth who sought shelter among his family was pulled out and shot in the nearby fields. The second incident, even more chilling and heart rending , occurred on 23 July when an ambush party of the 6 Rashtriya Rifles shot dead three innocent boys of the Bangargund village; Bilal Ahmad Sheikh, 15; Wasim Ahmad Wani, 12; and Shabbir Ahmad Shah, 10; as they returned from a marriage party.
As if this was not enough to sink final nails into the coffin of Sadhbhavna, during the month of August reports emerged of cold blooded shooting of four local porters in Lolab Valley by soldiers of the Rashtriya Rifles, who claimed to have killed them in an ‘encounter’. Reportedly, the practice is wide spread. Frequent reports are doing the rounds that to embellish operational records of Units as well individual commanders, locals are being recruited as porters and then killed in fake encounters as insurgents from across the borders. The fact that head money is offered for killing ‘terrorists’, the monetary inducements are turning Indian soldiers in IHK as assassins who find the units’ civilian porters easy game. 2 Rashtriya Rifles, deployed in Kulgam area of District Anantnag, was recently reported to be resorting to this practice.
Indian Army would like to keep these skeletons in her cupboard away from public scrutiny but the wide spread practice is bound to leave behind an inevitable trail of blood. In a recent development the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has found four officers of 7 Rashtriya Rifles guilty of killing five Kashmiri Muslims in a fake encounter in Pathribal in Southern Anantnag District in March 2000. Indian Army had labeled the slain men as foreign mercenaries who had been allegedly involved in the massacre of 35 Sikhs at Chattisinghpura. The massacre of Sikhs on the night 24 /25 March had coincided with the visit of President Clinton to the Sub-Continent, who was apparently convinced by the Indian propaganda that the incident was attributable to the “cross-border-terrorism”. But soon the local villages erupted in protest, claiming that slain ‘terrorists’ were in effect locals who had been shot in a fake encounter. Only once eight protesters were killed by the police that the state government ordered an enquiry leading to conducting of DNA tests. The inquiry was handed over to the CBI once it became known that the DNA tests had been fudged. The inquiry has proven beyond doubt that Colonel Ajay Saxena, Major D P Singh, Major Suresh Sharma and Captain Amit Saxena were involved in the unlawful arrest and killing five villagers in fake encounter at Pathribal. The CBI has recommended that the officers be arrested under Sections 302 (murder), 201 (destroying evidence), 120-B (criminal conspiracy) and 182 (fake documents) of the penal code.
The snowballing of incidents of fake encounters has forced the Indian army to seek correction of its rotten image beyond cosmetic measures proffered by Operation Sadbhavna. According to the Pioneer, General-Officer-Commanding-in-Chief Northern Command has announced launching an inquiry into the Lolab fake encounter in which four porters (three from Jammu and one belonging to Pathankot in Punjab), were killed in cold blood by the Indian army in April 2004. The General has promised taking the inquiry to its logical conclusion but if precedence is any guide nothing substantive is expected to come out of it, nor would anybody is likely to be held responsible for the tragic loss of life. The very fact that eighteen months have lapsed since the killings occurred before the event was even acknowledged by the Indian army is reflective of the prevailing realities.
In his attempt to win the Kashmiri hearts General Joginder Jaswant Singh has also asked the India Army to do away with the inhuman practice of brutalizing the dead bodies of the freedom fighters while projecting the same as war trophies, much in vein of the barbarians of the yore. The practice is in marked contrast with the soldierly ethos and is indicative of the poor collective moral fiber of the Indian Army. The directive enjoins upon the Indian Army to desist from the practice of flaunting bodies of the ‘terrorists’ as trophies which is akin to the “exhibition of wild animals killed by the shikaris.” The desecration of the Mujahedeen bodies is abhorred by the local population which acknowledges the slain freedom fighters as martyrs and treats their mortal remains and graves with much veneration and respect. The General has also asked the Units to refrain from publicizing the “kills” as measure of military accomplishments. Obviously the order has been prompted by the deteriorating image of the Indian Security Forces and the hatred and backlash these practices are generating among the local population.
Over a decade and a half indulgence of operating beyond any fear of accountability and getting accustomed to engaging in no holds barred acts of grave human rights violations has eaten into the moral fiber of the Indian Army. The number of “kills” notched up on personal and unit records have become an acknowledged indicator and a tangible measure of gauging the professional prowess and combat skill of a military unit and its commander at various tiers. That is the reason ambitious commanders are resorting to using fake encounters to buttress military careers. This inhuman and immoral practice, over a period of time, has become ingrained in the Indian military culture. Unless Indian Army takes concrete measures to check the wanton ambitions of its officers’ cadre – who as a class have stooped to the level of mercenary killers- the goal of winning the Kashmiri hearts and minds shall remain a distant dream.

Sri Lanka poll: Impossible promises politicians make
Ameen Izzadeen

AN ONTARIO judge early this year said that anyone who expected politicians to be accountable for their campaign promises was naive about the democratic system. He made the remark when the Canadian Taxpayers Federation tried to sue the Ontario Liberal government for breaking their no-new-taxes campaign promise. The law in many countries, including vibrant democracies, is silent about holding candidates accountable for promises they make during election campaigns. But it is an undeniable fact that political accountability is an essential characteristic of democracy. To state one set of policy during the campaign and implement totally another in power is to violate the principle of political accountability and undermine fundamental principles of democratic government.
Yet, in many democracies, politicians at election time make rash promises which they jolly well know they cannot keep once they come to power. Sri Lanka is no exception. With the presidential election campaign reaching fever pitch in Sri Lanka, the two main contenders are raining promises on the voters, who, many politicians apparently think, are gullible. Voters, on the other hand, think they are politically mature enough to take informed decisions notwithstanding the promises the politicians make. Yet the irony is that it is the promises of the candidates that make the difference at elections. The election history of Sri Lanka has recorded many celebrated promises. The Sri Lanka Freedom Party-led alliance won the 1970 parliamentary elections on the strength of a promise that every person would get two measures of free rice per week. When asked how they would implement the promise, the leaders of the alliance said they would even go to the moon and get the rice. But once in office, they only saw stars because there were not enough funds in the treasury to implement their promise.
The United National Party won the 1977 elections on a promise that every person would get eight kilograms of grain per week. The promise was not fulfilled. The UNP won the 1989 election, against all odds, by promising to pay a monthly allowance of Rs2,500 to every poor family. But the actual poverty alleviation programme it implemented was much different from what it promised. Chandrika Kumaratunga in 1994 contested the presidential election saying she would abolish the executive presidency within six months. But instead of abolishing it, she ran for a second term and made an aborted attempt to extend her second term by one more year.
The ongoing election campaign supercedes all the previous election campaigns as far as promises are concerned. The promises of milk, money and honey are simply unbelievable. UNP Presidential candidate Ranil Wickremesinghe pledges to give a daily free glass of milk to every child under the age of five. His rival, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakse, says he will give a Rs200 milk allowance for every child under the age of five. A third candidate, ayurvedic businessmen Victor Hettigoda, who is more known for his balm than his political views, says if he is elected, he will give every family a cow. Among the sunshine promises with which the main contenders are trying to woo the voter are a higher poverty allowance, salary increases and a December bonus to public servants, price reduction of essential items, fertiliser at giveaway prices, generation of one million jobs, maintaining an 8-10 percent economic growth, achieving peace and abolishing dowry. Virtually, there is a promise for everyone in the manifestos of the two main contenders.
With economic indicators not showing much promise, neither of the main contenders elucidates in the manifestos how he will find resources to implement his promises. If an alien lands near a venue of a political meeting here for a brief stopover on his way to another planet, he is sure to think that he has landed on the Planet Earth’s richest country, which does not know how to spend or what to do with its excessive wealth. When politics of promises is mentioned, New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg stands out as a model for all politicians.
Bloomberg was confronted by a civic conscience civilian — Anthony Santa Maria — at a subway station during his 2001 campaign. Santa Maria scoffed at the promises politicians make but the criticism did not make Bloomberg angry. Instead it inspired him to release an annual status report on his 381 campaign promises. According to his 2004 status report, 196 of his 381 promises had been fulfilled and another 130 are being implemented while the rest are being considered. In Sri Lanka, however, we are yet to see politicians of the calibre of Bloomberg. An angry Sri Lankan viewer asked the moderator of a TV show whether there was legislation to take the politicians to court for breaking their promises. The moderator’s advice was for the people to be the judges at elections and reject the politicians who break promises. But at every election, we are lured by new promises and the cycle of making and breaking promises and electing and rejecting politicians continues.

Eid-ul-Fiter: A time to rejoice and reflect
Riaz A. Siddiqui
 
MILLIONS of Muslims throughout the world celebrate Eid-ul-Fiter marking the end of the holy month of Ramadan. The gaiety and festive spirit, however is tempered with the earthquake in South Asia. On this occasion, a perspective on Eid’s historical and religious importance is in order. The Muslims celebrated Eid-ul- Fiter for the first time on first of Shawwal 2 Hijrah (27 March 624 AD) after the Ramadan fasting was declared obligatory. Abdullah bin Abbas (RA) quotes Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as saying: “when the night of Eid-ul-Fiter comes it is called in the heavens as Lailatul Jaza (The Night of Reward) and on the day of Eid, Allah sends down angels on earth who call the praise of Allah, in a voice audible to every creature except human beings. They call upon believers to rush to the House of the Master, who bestows most graciously His blessings and forgives sins.
Allah answers and accepts the prayers and worship by the Muslims performed during the holy month of Ramadan by forgiving their sins and granting them whatever they ask for in the Eid congregation for the Hereafter and their worldly needs. Allah says in the Holy Quran: “I shall have been covering all your shortcomings as long as you remember Me. You (believers) shall not be disgraced before offenders and infidels. And so you return home all forgiven”. However, Allah shall not forgive those who neglect and forget the needy and the poor on this day of rejoicing and festivities. The first and foremost duty of the Day of Eid is to search for the poor people in the vicinity and fulfil their immediate requirements.
Basically Eid is a thanks-giving day. The believers visit their elders, friends, neighbours and relations irrespective of their social status. Also, they should visit the ailing and infirm people. Visiting and entertaining the prisoners is yet another noble way of sharing Eid festivities. Most importantly Eid is the day when petty friction and bitterness, if any, should be sunk once and for all. We must embrace each other with hearts free from malice and rancour.
Socialising on Eid should not be restricted among Muslim friends and relatives but also with friends from other communities. Islam champions and celebrates universal brotherhood of mankind. In modern times, Eid, like all festivals is treated as an occasion of feasting and decorating the houses. However, Islam does not approve of overspending and going to extremes in celebration. Once when people went to greet Caliph Ali (RA) on the occasion of Eid, they found him eating the dry bread of oats. Being reminded of the Eid day, the noble Companion of the Prophet took a deep sigh and said, “when there are many who do not have even such morsels I do not have the right to celebrate Eid by eating sumptuously”. If we look around, there are many who cannot celebrate their Eid and we must share our festivities with them. This Eid, let us spare a thought for our less fortunate brethren around the world. This is the best way to keep the spirit of Ramadan alive.