BY JONATHON HOWE - Manawatu Standard Last updated 12:00 12/01/
Thirty five Bhutanese refugees will call Palmerston North home from next month and Refugee Services wants locals to help make their transition to Manawatu life a smooth one.
Eighteen people have volunteered to help with the next refugee intake, which arrives on February 26, but 12 more are needed to make the service effective, Refugee Services volunteer co-ordinator Lorna Johnson said.
Volunteers assist the integration of refugees into the community by helping them with day-to-day tasks such as finding a school, doctor, bank or supermarket.
About 10 families are expected in the intake, so three volunteers were needed to commit to a family for six months. During the first six weeks, volunteers could dedicate six to eight hours a week to the refugee family, Mrs Johnson said.
"But many remain in contact for a long time after that. It starts as the volunteer helping the family achieve certain things but once they are achieved, then it changes into a friendship and a social role."
Volunteers require about 17 hours training and receive a NZQA certificate.
Flexibility and commitment were two qualities people needed to be volunteers, she said.
"These are people that have been let down in the past, so we want somebody who's going to be there for the whole time, not somebody who'll do it for a few weeks and then push off."
Refugee Services co-ordinator Kevin Petersen said language was the biggest barrier for the older refugees, who predominantly spoke Nepali. "The younger ones have spent many years living in a refugee camp and in the camps they've been exposed to a fair amount of English."
Being displaced from their homeland was also a tough pill to swallow, he said.
"They're here, not because they want to be here, the majority of them are still dedicated to their homeland. It's ironic because they've been kicked out of Bhutan."
Donations of furniture, such as beds, couches and tables, would be welcomed. Anyone wanting to volunteer or donate items can contact Palmerston North Refugee Services on 355 1415.
* 126 Bhutanese refugees have been relocated to Palmerston North since 2006.
The Sorry Saga of Bhutan's North
Click over the map to know the differences
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Bhutanese mists: 'Within the Realm of Happiness' by Kinley Dorji and 'Becoming a Journalist in Exile' by T.P. Mishra January 2010
By: Carey L Biron
Within the Realm of Happiness
by Kinley Dorji
Kuensel Corporation, 2008
Becoming a journalist in exile
by T P Mishra
TWMN-Bhutan, 2009
Two books present the dichotomy of Bhutan's image - from one perspective, the progressive-though-traditional idyll, to another, the authoritarian-to-dictatorial regime.
On 4 December, the royal government of Bhutan undertook perhaps its most high-profile discussion ever of the country’s human-rights record, in Geneva at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). Simultaneously, a group of resettled Bhutanese refugees in Europe were likewise undertaking perhaps the most high-profile public demonstrations ever to highlight that same rights record. The occasion was Thimphu’s official handover of a report on its human rights to the HRC’s new Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a mechanism created in 2006 that will look at the rights records of all UN member states on a four-yearly basis. Despite decades of positioning itself as a leader of a new form of citizen-first policymaking – dubbed Gross National Happiness by the former king – the exercise in Geneva constituted the first time that Thimphu had ever engaged in an international exploration of its record on human rights, triggered both by this fresh imperative and pride in the country’s status as the world’s newest democracy.
As officials were drawing up this first-ever report, however, many observers have been angry that Thimphu was still not treating the exercise with due diligence. Although the criticism has not been from Europe alone, in Geneva the refugees gathered to allege that, despite extending to more than 11,000 words and covering a broad synopsis of recent Bhutanese history, the report included little information about the many serious accusations that have been levelled against the royal government over the past two decades. These have ranged from charges of ‘ethnic cleansing’ against the Nepali-speaking Lhotshampa community of southern Bhutan during the late 1980s and early 1990s (more than 100,000 of whom subsequently lived for years in camps in southeastern Nepal); to more recent allegations of restricting the voting rights of the some 80,000 Lhotshampa that still live in Bhutan during the country’s first-ever elections, held in early 2008.
In fact, contrary to the initial suggestions (including some subsequent reporting), the Bhutanese document does indeed include analysis of the Lhotshampa situation, albeit from a perspective that does little to address the underlying concerns. Under the heading of “Illegal immigration”, the report contextualises those tens of thousands who were kicked out of the country as having illegally emigrated to Bhutan during the 1950s; blames the “political turmoil” of the late 1980s on vested political interests; and explains the subsequent situation surrounding the refugee camps in Nepal as due to a lack of “any screening procedures”. (The “Illegal migration” section is followed by an ominous “Terrorism” section.) As correctly noted by the Geneva protestors, however, the report has nothing to say about more recent allegations, particularly those of day-to-day repression of Lhotshampa (and other minorities) of Bhutan, as well as those of many being denied the right to vote in the historic 2008 polls.
The media response to the Geneva events was telling. In Nepal, the day before the protest in Geneva was scheduled, the country’s largest-circulation English-language daily, the Kathmandu Post, published a front-page story on the rationale for the demonstration. In Bhutan, on the other hand, none of the major English papers included any mention of what was taking place in Europe – on neither the report nor the protests. Two weeks earlier, the former state-run Kuensel newspaper had published a piece on the upcoming report for the UPR under the tantalising headline, “Bhutan in the hot seat”. But the article’s first line instead included pat references to how “When Bhutan presents its national report for the universal periodic review ... the country’s delegation will be commended on the successes and also have to provide clarity on, among others, some largely inaccurate claims and allegations.” And so the grounds were set for what could have been a new page in dialogue over a notoriously contentious, if little discussed, issue: the dichotomy between Bhutan’s positioning of itself as a progressive-though-traditional idyll, and the serious criticisms of the country’s authoritarian-to-dictatorial political set-up.
Beautiful blinders
This disparity has been highlighted at the Himal office in recent months as well, as two essentially self-published Bhutan-related books have been sitting – together yet uneasily – on the editorial desk. The first of these is an achingly lyrical series of day-to-day semi-fictional vignettes written by an acclaimed former editor of Kuensel and current Information Ministry secretary; the second is a do-it-yourself handbook in the activist vein, written by a young Bhutanese journalist living in exile in Nepal. As can be adduced by their equally leading titles, as ‘companion’ pieces these two works stare in diametrically opposite directions, each in its own way digging a surreptitious elbow into the other’s soft midriff.
Becoming a Journalist in Exile is a worthy work for a very tiny readership, aimed at motivating and offering some ethical (and sometimes shrill) media guidelines for young Bhutanese both in and out of Bhutan. In addition to a few chapters of textbook-like content, this work by exile journalist T P Mishra (described as a ‘permanent resident’ of Dagana District, in southern Bhutan) also includes some smattering of pieces by journalists and media activists from other parts of the region and world. By and large, however, the book does not seem to have been written with an eye to broadening its appeal. For instance, it gives only a cursory history of the nascent Bhutanese media in exile in Nepal (though the few pages that are included are easily the most energising section of the book, giving an overview of the dozens of publications that have come and gone within the camps-based diaspora and beyond); nor is it structured so as to function as a media handbook for other exile communities.
And that is okay. While Mishra’s work descends in places into pamphleteering, the fact of the matter is the Bhutanese journalism in exile (almost exclusively in Nepal) remains active, functional and, perhaps most importantly, relevant and relatively effective – this despite significant hurdles, economic, legal and otherwise, that come with working under refugee conditions. Its pretensions to objectivity notwithstanding, after all, this is activist journalism at its most imperative. It is worth noting that exile journalists have also been functioning freely for a decade longer than have their counterparts in Bhutan, where private media was proscribed until 2006.
Can Kinley Dorji’s Within the Realm of Happiness also be termed a work of proselytising? On the surface, it would certainly not seem to be. Everything about this work is beautiful – quaint, minimalist and introspective – from the textured cover to the content, from the odd haiku-like double-spacing throughout to the author’s personal inscription in this particular copy: “Here’s hoping that Bhutan is able to preserve the last of its past,” Dorji wistfully wrote on the frontispiece. Indeed, the following 13 pieces contain all of the backward-looking nostalgia and forward-looking anticipation that one would expect from a seemingly progressive Bhutanese intellectual – Dorji seems like a great teacher and friend, and this reviewer was more than happy to follow him down the mist-enshrouded stone steps of his semi-fictional childhood. (Although the work follows the stories of different ‘characters’, all seem to be thinly veiled versions of the man himself.) But why is there a constant sense of propaganda lingering at the margins?
The answer probably begins with the title. Inevitably, and unfortunately, perfectly upstanding ideas are regularly taken over and occupied by interest groups; recall only former US President George W Bush’s repeated usage of the word freedom. Likewise, the idea of Gross National Happiness seems to hold some excellent lessons for state structures around the world; but repeating that concept ad nauseum will not only tend to grate, but will also make onlookers apprehensive about what this constant rhetoric could be covering up. If nothing else, the author’s use of ‘happiness’ as a regular motif violates an old writing-school rule: Show, don’t tell. Instead, his title page leads into his preface (“it struck me that His Majesty the King had taught us a supreme lesson in impermanence,” he writes about the 2006 announcement of the country’s transition to democracy), which finally leads to his last chapter, where the pretension finally seems to drop entirely: “[Gross Domestic Product] was a broken promise ... Representing a holistic approach to the transformation of society, [Gross National Happiness] was soon to inspire other countries as a higher goal for human development.” How true both of those statements, and how unfortunately lacking in credibility in this context.
Of course, there is far more to Druk Yul than the issue of what took place to those tens of thousands of citizens who were kicked out of the country two decades ago – far more, even, than the ethnic discrimination that continues to take place within the country today. Dorji and other writers are correct in seeking to highlight these many other uniquely Bhutanese aspects, of history and culture tradition, of beauty and pain and growth. But to carry water for a nationalistic cause under the banner of ‘the realm of happiness’, even while refusing to grapple with issues that do not fit that matrix, unfortunately tarnishes both the nationalist project and the issue it is without doubt trying to sell – in this case, the truly powerful idea of Gross National Happiness.
Through the course of Dorji’s stories, there is no mention made of any of the issues that were brought up surrounding the Universal Periodic Review reporting in Geneva. That a journalist of Dorji’s stature and insight would have nothing to say about such monumental issues in the course of his country’s modern-day evolution denotes, at best, a specific decision in favour of elision. Others, however, are keenly interested. In Geneva, the Bhutanese delegation tabled its report before 43 delegates from other member countries, and a significant percentage of them proceed to ask pointed and probing questions on issues of refugees, citizenship and repatriation. Yet according to reports, the Bhutanese delegation members’ only responses revolved around two issues: the king’s structured transition of the country to democracy, and Gross National Happiness. In such a dynamic, with Bhutan on one side of the table and the questioning delegates on the other, it is clear where T P Mishra and Kinley Dorji would have been sitting.
Carey L Biron is the desk editor for Himal Southasian.
Within the Realm of Happiness
by Kinley Dorji
Kuensel Corporation, 2008
Becoming a journalist in exile
by T P Mishra
TWMN-Bhutan, 2009
Two books present the dichotomy of Bhutan's image - from one perspective, the progressive-though-traditional idyll, to another, the authoritarian-to-dictatorial regime.
On 4 December, the royal government of Bhutan undertook perhaps its most high-profile discussion ever of the country’s human-rights record, in Geneva at the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). Simultaneously, a group of resettled Bhutanese refugees in Europe were likewise undertaking perhaps the most high-profile public demonstrations ever to highlight that same rights record. The occasion was Thimphu’s official handover of a report on its human rights to the HRC’s new Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a mechanism created in 2006 that will look at the rights records of all UN member states on a four-yearly basis. Despite decades of positioning itself as a leader of a new form of citizen-first policymaking – dubbed Gross National Happiness by the former king – the exercise in Geneva constituted the first time that Thimphu had ever engaged in an international exploration of its record on human rights, triggered both by this fresh imperative and pride in the country’s status as the world’s newest democracy.
As officials were drawing up this first-ever report, however, many observers have been angry that Thimphu was still not treating the exercise with due diligence. Although the criticism has not been from Europe alone, in Geneva the refugees gathered to allege that, despite extending to more than 11,000 words and covering a broad synopsis of recent Bhutanese history, the report included little information about the many serious accusations that have been levelled against the royal government over the past two decades. These have ranged from charges of ‘ethnic cleansing’ against the Nepali-speaking Lhotshampa community of southern Bhutan during the late 1980s and early 1990s (more than 100,000 of whom subsequently lived for years in camps in southeastern Nepal); to more recent allegations of restricting the voting rights of the some 80,000 Lhotshampa that still live in Bhutan during the country’s first-ever elections, held in early 2008.
In fact, contrary to the initial suggestions (including some subsequent reporting), the Bhutanese document does indeed include analysis of the Lhotshampa situation, albeit from a perspective that does little to address the underlying concerns. Under the heading of “Illegal immigration”, the report contextualises those tens of thousands who were kicked out of the country as having illegally emigrated to Bhutan during the 1950s; blames the “political turmoil” of the late 1980s on vested political interests; and explains the subsequent situation surrounding the refugee camps in Nepal as due to a lack of “any screening procedures”. (The “Illegal migration” section is followed by an ominous “Terrorism” section.) As correctly noted by the Geneva protestors, however, the report has nothing to say about more recent allegations, particularly those of day-to-day repression of Lhotshampa (and other minorities) of Bhutan, as well as those of many being denied the right to vote in the historic 2008 polls.
The media response to the Geneva events was telling. In Nepal, the day before the protest in Geneva was scheduled, the country’s largest-circulation English-language daily, the Kathmandu Post, published a front-page story on the rationale for the demonstration. In Bhutan, on the other hand, none of the major English papers included any mention of what was taking place in Europe – on neither the report nor the protests. Two weeks earlier, the former state-run Kuensel newspaper had published a piece on the upcoming report for the UPR under the tantalising headline, “Bhutan in the hot seat”. But the article’s first line instead included pat references to how “When Bhutan presents its national report for the universal periodic review ... the country’s delegation will be commended on the successes and also have to provide clarity on, among others, some largely inaccurate claims and allegations.” And so the grounds were set for what could have been a new page in dialogue over a notoriously contentious, if little discussed, issue: the dichotomy between Bhutan’s positioning of itself as a progressive-though-traditional idyll, and the serious criticisms of the country’s authoritarian-to-dictatorial political set-up.
Beautiful blinders
This disparity has been highlighted at the Himal office in recent months as well, as two essentially self-published Bhutan-related books have been sitting – together yet uneasily – on the editorial desk. The first of these is an achingly lyrical series of day-to-day semi-fictional vignettes written by an acclaimed former editor of Kuensel and current Information Ministry secretary; the second is a do-it-yourself handbook in the activist vein, written by a young Bhutanese journalist living in exile in Nepal. As can be adduced by their equally leading titles, as ‘companion’ pieces these two works stare in diametrically opposite directions, each in its own way digging a surreptitious elbow into the other’s soft midriff.
Becoming a Journalist in Exile is a worthy work for a very tiny readership, aimed at motivating and offering some ethical (and sometimes shrill) media guidelines for young Bhutanese both in and out of Bhutan. In addition to a few chapters of textbook-like content, this work by exile journalist T P Mishra (described as a ‘permanent resident’ of Dagana District, in southern Bhutan) also includes some smattering of pieces by journalists and media activists from other parts of the region and world. By and large, however, the book does not seem to have been written with an eye to broadening its appeal. For instance, it gives only a cursory history of the nascent Bhutanese media in exile in Nepal (though the few pages that are included are easily the most energising section of the book, giving an overview of the dozens of publications that have come and gone within the camps-based diaspora and beyond); nor is it structured so as to function as a media handbook for other exile communities.
And that is okay. While Mishra’s work descends in places into pamphleteering, the fact of the matter is the Bhutanese journalism in exile (almost exclusively in Nepal) remains active, functional and, perhaps most importantly, relevant and relatively effective – this despite significant hurdles, economic, legal and otherwise, that come with working under refugee conditions. Its pretensions to objectivity notwithstanding, after all, this is activist journalism at its most imperative. It is worth noting that exile journalists have also been functioning freely for a decade longer than have their counterparts in Bhutan, where private media was proscribed until 2006.
Can Kinley Dorji’s Within the Realm of Happiness also be termed a work of proselytising? On the surface, it would certainly not seem to be. Everything about this work is beautiful – quaint, minimalist and introspective – from the textured cover to the content, from the odd haiku-like double-spacing throughout to the author’s personal inscription in this particular copy: “Here’s hoping that Bhutan is able to preserve the last of its past,” Dorji wistfully wrote on the frontispiece. Indeed, the following 13 pieces contain all of the backward-looking nostalgia and forward-looking anticipation that one would expect from a seemingly progressive Bhutanese intellectual – Dorji seems like a great teacher and friend, and this reviewer was more than happy to follow him down the mist-enshrouded stone steps of his semi-fictional childhood. (Although the work follows the stories of different ‘characters’, all seem to be thinly veiled versions of the man himself.) But why is there a constant sense of propaganda lingering at the margins?
The answer probably begins with the title. Inevitably, and unfortunately, perfectly upstanding ideas are regularly taken over and occupied by interest groups; recall only former US President George W Bush’s repeated usage of the word freedom. Likewise, the idea of Gross National Happiness seems to hold some excellent lessons for state structures around the world; but repeating that concept ad nauseum will not only tend to grate, but will also make onlookers apprehensive about what this constant rhetoric could be covering up. If nothing else, the author’s use of ‘happiness’ as a regular motif violates an old writing-school rule: Show, don’t tell. Instead, his title page leads into his preface (“it struck me that His Majesty the King had taught us a supreme lesson in impermanence,” he writes about the 2006 announcement of the country’s transition to democracy), which finally leads to his last chapter, where the pretension finally seems to drop entirely: “[Gross Domestic Product] was a broken promise ... Representing a holistic approach to the transformation of society, [Gross National Happiness] was soon to inspire other countries as a higher goal for human development.” How true both of those statements, and how unfortunately lacking in credibility in this context.
Of course, there is far more to Druk Yul than the issue of what took place to those tens of thousands of citizens who were kicked out of the country two decades ago – far more, even, than the ethnic discrimination that continues to take place within the country today. Dorji and other writers are correct in seeking to highlight these many other uniquely Bhutanese aspects, of history and culture tradition, of beauty and pain and growth. But to carry water for a nationalistic cause under the banner of ‘the realm of happiness’, even while refusing to grapple with issues that do not fit that matrix, unfortunately tarnishes both the nationalist project and the issue it is without doubt trying to sell – in this case, the truly powerful idea of Gross National Happiness.
Through the course of Dorji’s stories, there is no mention made of any of the issues that were brought up surrounding the Universal Periodic Review reporting in Geneva. That a journalist of Dorji’s stature and insight would have nothing to say about such monumental issues in the course of his country’s modern-day evolution denotes, at best, a specific decision in favour of elision. Others, however, are keenly interested. In Geneva, the Bhutanese delegation tabled its report before 43 delegates from other member countries, and a significant percentage of them proceed to ask pointed and probing questions on issues of refugees, citizenship and repatriation. Yet according to reports, the Bhutanese delegation members’ only responses revolved around two issues: the king’s structured transition of the country to democracy, and Gross National Happiness. In such a dynamic, with Bhutan on one side of the table and the questioning delegates on the other, it is clear where T P Mishra and Kinley Dorji would have been sitting.
Carey L Biron is the desk editor for Himal Southasian.
Dal student named volunteer of the year
Halifax News Net
By Jon Tattrie – The Weekly News
A Halifax resident has been named Nova Scotia’s Volunteer of the Year by the non-profit development agency CUSO-VSO.
Dalhousie University student Sunisha Neupane got the honour for her “commitment and passion,” said CUSO-VSO’s Sean Kelly.
“She just jumped into it and was effervescent and committed. She helped volunteer, helped come to events and was part of our Stand Up Campaign (in October), which was to draw attention to global issues,” Kelly said. He noted it’s part of a family tradition for Neupane, as her father volunteers with CUSO-VSO in Guyana, working with micro credit and offering small-business advice.
Neupane, who is taking a double major in international development and chemistry, is from Nepal, giving her a clear perspective on how to help developing nations. With a population of 27 million, Nepal is the poorest country in South Asia and ranks as the twelfth poorest country in the world.
“When you’re in the Third World, it’s like you’re waiting for someone else to come and help … I’m not waiting anymore. I am that someone,” she told DalNews. “Here, we have too much of everything. In Nepal, we lack everything … I think the place to start is with awareness. We have to learn more about how other people live.”
Interviewed by The Weekly News, Neupane was quick to point out that anyone can help developing countries, but that she may have a special insight when it comes to grasping the issues first-hand.
“I think the difference comes when talking about volunteering in Third World countries. I think I understand quickly (and may be understand better sometimes) because I have seen the needs of people as I grew up in Nepal,” she said.
Neupane remembers a time when she and her father went to a rural area near Katmandu, where she grew up. She was “shocked” by the health post, which had some medication, but no medical professionals. Sick residents had to take a risky, arduous trip to the city for help.
Neupane was modest about her achievement, saying she helped CUSO-VSO “whenever they need anything done here in Halifax.” She also volunteers as an interpreter for Metro Immigration Settlement Association and helps foreign students learn English at Dalhousie’s International Student and Exchange Centre.
On top of that, she pitches in to help patients at meal time in the QEII Health Sciences Centre every Sunday.
She’s especially excited about the life skills support training she’s working on now at MISA, an organization that helps newcomers settle into life in Canada. “These facilities are for Nepalese-Bhutanese refugees who come to Halifax,” she explained. “I just love helping people. Even if a single person can benefit or feel helped, loved by my work, I get really satisfied.”
After completing her undergraduate degree, Neupane has plans to become a doctor. Her work will keep her based in Canada, but her roots in Asia will keep her heading home.
“I shall never forget my obligation toward Nepal. I plan on dividing my time among both countries,” she said.
jon@jontattrie.ca
By Jon Tattrie – The Weekly News
A Halifax resident has been named Nova Scotia’s Volunteer of the Year by the non-profit development agency CUSO-VSO.
Dalhousie University student Sunisha Neupane got the honour for her “commitment and passion,” said CUSO-VSO’s Sean Kelly.
“She just jumped into it and was effervescent and committed. She helped volunteer, helped come to events and was part of our Stand Up Campaign (in October), which was to draw attention to global issues,” Kelly said. He noted it’s part of a family tradition for Neupane, as her father volunteers with CUSO-VSO in Guyana, working with micro credit and offering small-business advice.
Neupane, who is taking a double major in international development and chemistry, is from Nepal, giving her a clear perspective on how to help developing nations. With a population of 27 million, Nepal is the poorest country in South Asia and ranks as the twelfth poorest country in the world.
“When you’re in the Third World, it’s like you’re waiting for someone else to come and help … I’m not waiting anymore. I am that someone,” she told DalNews. “Here, we have too much of everything. In Nepal, we lack everything … I think the place to start is with awareness. We have to learn more about how other people live.”
Interviewed by The Weekly News, Neupane was quick to point out that anyone can help developing countries, but that she may have a special insight when it comes to grasping the issues first-hand.
“I think the difference comes when talking about volunteering in Third World countries. I think I understand quickly (and may be understand better sometimes) because I have seen the needs of people as I grew up in Nepal,” she said.
Neupane remembers a time when she and her father went to a rural area near Katmandu, where she grew up. She was “shocked” by the health post, which had some medication, but no medical professionals. Sick residents had to take a risky, arduous trip to the city for help.
Neupane was modest about her achievement, saying she helped CUSO-VSO “whenever they need anything done here in Halifax.” She also volunteers as an interpreter for Metro Immigration Settlement Association and helps foreign students learn English at Dalhousie’s International Student and Exchange Centre.
On top of that, she pitches in to help patients at meal time in the QEII Health Sciences Centre every Sunday.
She’s especially excited about the life skills support training she’s working on now at MISA, an organization that helps newcomers settle into life in Canada. “These facilities are for Nepalese-Bhutanese refugees who come to Halifax,” she explained. “I just love helping people. Even if a single person can benefit or feel helped, loved by my work, I get really satisfied.”
After completing her undergraduate degree, Neupane has plans to become a doctor. Her work will keep her based in Canada, but her roots in Asia will keep her heading home.
“I shall never forget my obligation toward Nepal. I plan on dividing my time among both countries,” she said.
jon@jontattrie.ca
Non-Profits Help Nepalese Refugees Settle in the Area
by KYW’s Michelle Durham
Several local social service agencies are helping Nepalese refugees settle into new lives here in the Delaware Valley after fleeing political and social injustice in their native country.
Program Director of Lutheran Children and Family service Janet Panning says her job is to help these people, who come into the country with refugee status, assimilate relatively quickly:
"We help them get social security cards, documentation for eligibility for employment, help get children registered in school. We help people get medical exams and we help to make sure that they have safe sanitary housing, furnishings, clothing, transportation to job interviews; all kinds of things in the first 30 days."
With just a small stipend from the state department, Panning says they couldn't provide all that they do without the help of the e community:
"We just had a tremendous group of people in Lansdale from the Hindu temple; people from the Indian community and Nepali community that worked to assist a Bhutanese family that was also Hindu."
KYW NEWSRADIO 1060
Nepalese and Sri Lankans join Blacktown’s multicultural community
newsPeople14 Jan 10 @ 09:32am by Christine O'Maley
A multicultural Christmas party at KU Childcare Centre Blacktown shows the diversity of new migrants.
AFRICAN refugees might be the most visible on Blacktown’s streets but it was people from Nepal and Sri Lanka who dominated humanitarian settlement in the city in 2009.
According to the Department of Immigration a total of 2152 newcomers called Blacktown home last year.
While the department couldn’t provide a breakdown of where the refugees came from, a local service provider could fill in the gaps.
According to ACL, which works with consortium partner Macquarie Community College to deliver two programs to migrants in Blacktown (the Adult Migrant English Program and
the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy), the top five intake of refugees in 2009 were of Nepalese, Tamil, Iraqi, African and Burmese backgrounds.
ACL government programs general manager Michael Cox said the refugee and humanitarian influx hadn’t changed much in recent years.
``The increase in (the arrival of) Nepalese and Bhutanese people has been happening over the past two years in the area,’’ he said.
``There have been Bhutanese in the area for some time and connecting with existing communities is an important aspect of settlement.’’
As there had also been a long established Iraqi community in Sydney the Federal Government had sent refugees to areas where they had the best chance of resettling, Mr Cox
said.
Although many had come from wartorn nations and may bring with them long-term conflicts, he said ``most people welcomed the opportunity to make a new home’’.
``Their feedback is extremely positive in terms of the openness and willingness of Blacktown communities to welcome them and accept them into the community.’’
ACL also runs AMEP through Macquarie Community College on Main St, Blacktown, offering new residents the chance to learn or improve their English.
In 2009, the program was mostly attended by Chinese, Indian, Iraqi, Sudanese and Sri Lankans.
The KU childcare centre downstairs offered the children of migrants the opportunity to learn about their new home while their parents practised English upstairs.
At the end of the year the KU childcare centre hosted a multicultural Christmas party.
As you can see from the photos, the next generation of Blacktown residents come from a diversity of cultures.
Advocate
A multicultural Christmas party at KU Childcare Centre Blacktown shows the diversity of new migrants.
AFRICAN refugees might be the most visible on Blacktown’s streets but it was people from Nepal and Sri Lanka who dominated humanitarian settlement in the city in 2009.
According to the Department of Immigration a total of 2152 newcomers called Blacktown home last year.
While the department couldn’t provide a breakdown of where the refugees came from, a local service provider could fill in the gaps.
According to ACL, which works with consortium partner Macquarie Community College to deliver two programs to migrants in Blacktown (the Adult Migrant English Program and
the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy), the top five intake of refugees in 2009 were of Nepalese, Tamil, Iraqi, African and Burmese backgrounds.
ACL government programs general manager Michael Cox said the refugee and humanitarian influx hadn’t changed much in recent years.
``The increase in (the arrival of) Nepalese and Bhutanese people has been happening over the past two years in the area,’’ he said.
``There have been Bhutanese in the area for some time and connecting with existing communities is an important aspect of settlement.’’
As there had also been a long established Iraqi community in Sydney the Federal Government had sent refugees to areas where they had the best chance of resettling, Mr Cox
said.
Although many had come from wartorn nations and may bring with them long-term conflicts, he said ``most people welcomed the opportunity to make a new home’’.
``Their feedback is extremely positive in terms of the openness and willingness of Blacktown communities to welcome them and accept them into the community.’’
ACL also runs AMEP through Macquarie Community College on Main St, Blacktown, offering new residents the chance to learn or improve their English.
In 2009, the program was mostly attended by Chinese, Indian, Iraqi, Sudanese and Sri Lankans.
The KU childcare centre downstairs offered the children of migrants the opportunity to learn about their new home while their parents practised English upstairs.
At the end of the year the KU childcare centre hosted a multicultural Christmas party.
As you can see from the photos, the next generation of Blacktown residents come from a diversity of cultures.
Advocate
Bhutanese dissident: democratic government akin to absolute monarchy
by Nirmala Carvalho
In the country there are still violations of human rights, little freedom of press and political prisoners. Over 90 thousand refugees expelled in the 90s waiting to return.
Mumbai (AsiaNews) - "The constitution of Bhutan provides the foundation for democracy. But the activities of the new democratic government still reflect those of the old absolute monarchy. " This is the statement of Karma Dupto secretary of Druk National Congress, the Bhutanese political movement in exile in New Delhi. Despite the fact that the first democratic elections took place in 2008 there are still many unresolved issues in the country: political prisoners are still in prison, freedom of press and association is still lacking, but most importantly the condition remains unchanged for 90 thousand refugees who have been penned in refugee camps in 'UN on the border with Nepal since 1990.
Bhutan is a small town in the Himalayan region, caught between China, India, and Nepal, and until 2007 was ruled by an absolute monarchy. In 2008, the ascent to the throne of 28-year old King Jigme Khesar brought new hopes of opening the country and a possible way out for the refugee population in Nepal. These were expelled from the country between 1977 and 1991 during the campaign of nationalization promoted by King Jigme Singye Wangchuck. But to date the new Bhutanese government refuses to allow their return to their homeland and Nepal has never granted them citizenship. In January 2009, U.S., Australia and other Western countries gave asylum to 25 thousand refugees. This is to avoid a humanitarian crisis due to lack of funds of the World Food Program.
"For the Druk National Congress - says Dupto - the international community including India, should fight for the repatriation of refugees." In fact the 90 thousand refugees still live in camps, thousands have refused to emigrate to foreign countries in hopes of returning to their villages. For the leader the only solution is to force the government to restore citizenship to the deported Bhutanese.
Dupto says that the people residing in Bhutan undergo continuous human rights violations.
"People - says Dupto - live in continuous fear of repression and never expresses their opinions." "Freedom of speech and expression - says the leader - are guaranteed by art. 7 of the new constitution. " He also explains that the government continues to prohibit the publication of policy documents made by the Bhutanese in exile who want a full democracy and prohibits foreign journalists from visiting the areas near refugee camps. "The media - continues Dupto - are under the control of the government that has banned the vision of foreign channels considered violent and obscene."
According to the dissidents hundreds of political prisoners are still in jail awaiting release. "Independence and efficiency of the judicial system is indeed questionable – he claims - few efforts have been made to reform the Supreme Court and make it free of government influence." According to the government newspaper Kuensel as of November, the Court is guided by a single judge, the only one able to sign the documents required for release of dissidents.
ASIANEWS.IT
In the country there are still violations of human rights, little freedom of press and political prisoners. Over 90 thousand refugees expelled in the 90s waiting to return.
Mumbai (AsiaNews) - "The constitution of Bhutan provides the foundation for democracy. But the activities of the new democratic government still reflect those of the old absolute monarchy. " This is the statement of Karma Dupto secretary of Druk National Congress, the Bhutanese political movement in exile in New Delhi. Despite the fact that the first democratic elections took place in 2008 there are still many unresolved issues in the country: political prisoners are still in prison, freedom of press and association is still lacking, but most importantly the condition remains unchanged for 90 thousand refugees who have been penned in refugee camps in 'UN on the border with Nepal since 1990.
Bhutan is a small town in the Himalayan region, caught between China, India, and Nepal, and until 2007 was ruled by an absolute monarchy. In 2008, the ascent to the throne of 28-year old King Jigme Khesar brought new hopes of opening the country and a possible way out for the refugee population in Nepal. These were expelled from the country between 1977 and 1991 during the campaign of nationalization promoted by King Jigme Singye Wangchuck. But to date the new Bhutanese government refuses to allow their return to their homeland and Nepal has never granted them citizenship. In January 2009, U.S., Australia and other Western countries gave asylum to 25 thousand refugees. This is to avoid a humanitarian crisis due to lack of funds of the World Food Program.
"For the Druk National Congress - says Dupto - the international community including India, should fight for the repatriation of refugees." In fact the 90 thousand refugees still live in camps, thousands have refused to emigrate to foreign countries in hopes of returning to their villages. For the leader the only solution is to force the government to restore citizenship to the deported Bhutanese.
Dupto says that the people residing in Bhutan undergo continuous human rights violations.
"People - says Dupto - live in continuous fear of repression and never expresses their opinions." "Freedom of speech and expression - says the leader - are guaranteed by art. 7 of the new constitution. " He also explains that the government continues to prohibit the publication of policy documents made by the Bhutanese in exile who want a full democracy and prohibits foreign journalists from visiting the areas near refugee camps. "The media - continues Dupto - are under the control of the government that has banned the vision of foreign channels considered violent and obscene."
According to the dissidents hundreds of political prisoners are still in jail awaiting release. "Independence and efficiency of the judicial system is indeed questionable – he claims - few efforts have been made to reform the Supreme Court and make it free of government influence." According to the government newspaper Kuensel as of November, the Court is guided by a single judge, the only one able to sign the documents required for release of dissidents.
ASIANEWS.IT
What Bangladesh should ask of India
Nazrul Islam
PRIME Minister Sheikh Hasina's recent India visit has generated considerable discussion. The main outcome of the visit has been the expression of Bangladesh's unequivocal commitment to stop insurgency abetting activities carried out using her land against India. Broadly, this stand applies to all types of terrorist and criminal activities. The commitment has been reciprocated by India, resulting in the agreements signed during the visit. This step has established goodwill and a level of trust that can now influence positively other spheres of Indo-Bangladesh relationship.
Another important development during the visit has been expression of Bangladesh's willingness to allow her ports for use by neighbouring countries, not only India, but Bhutan and Nepal as well. By doing so, Bangladesh has responded to another important Indian need, namely alleviation of the semi-land locked situation of her north-eastern states.
The question many have asked is what Bangladesh has gained in return to these steps. On the issue of security, the commitment is mutual, so that the question of additional gain to be had by Bangladesh in a sense may not apply. However, many have seen the Indian offer of $1 billion credit, the opportunity to buy electricity from her, etc as indirect reciprocal steps.
Regarding ports, allowing ports for use by other countries of the region can be a mutually advantageous step for Bangladesh too. From being national sea ports of Bangladesh, Chittagong and Mongla can now become regional ports, enjoying many benefits of entrepot trade, as do Hong Kong, Singapore, and other such regional ports.
The regional status can be particularly helpful for Mongla, which is generally regarded as underutilised. Of course, Bangladesh has to carefully negotiate the modalities of use of her ports by neighboring countries, so that her legitimate interests are protected and due economic gains are maximised.
However, many think that Bangladesh should get more from India in return for her cooperation in meeting India's security and economic needs and have put forward many additional demands, such as:
removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers to Bangladesh export to India,
halt to killing of Bangladeshis by Border Security Force (BSF) of India,
transit facility to Nepal and Bhutan, etc. Many of these are justifiable demands that Bangladesh should indeed put forward to India and press upon. The joint communique suggests that Bangladesh is indeed doing so.
However, the most important thing that Bangladesh should ask from India is "undiminished river flow." The communique indicates that Bangladesh did raise this issue. In fact, press reports suggest that Bangladesh tried to reach an agreement during the visit on sharing of the Teesta river. However, it did not materialise, and the communique mentions the intention of both nations of continuing the negotiation on this issue.
Actually, Bangladesh needs to adopt a completely different position on the issue of rivers. Now that Bangladesh has secured the goodwill of India, Bangladesh can make this position more prominent and ask India to accept it. Instead of asking for a part of the river flow, which negotiations on "sharing of the rivers" imply, Bangladesh should ask for "undiminished river flow."
Bangladesh can justify this position on the ground of her right to "prior and customary use" of river flows. The international norms and conventions with regard to trans-boundary rivers support this right. India knows that the entire economy, society, and culture of Bangladesh have developed over thousands of years based on flows of the rivers that pass through her. Any diminution of these flows violates Bangladesh's inalienable rights on her rivers.
India has already done a gross injustice to Bangladesh by constructing the Farakka barrage that has done irreparable damage to the rivers and ecology of southeastern Bangladesh. India has done similar injustice by diverting Teesta flow through its Gazaldoba barrage. It is of utmost concern that India has similar diversionary plans with respect to other common rivers. Just as the security threat was poisoning Indo-Bangladesh relationship from Bangladesh side, so is water diversion poisoning this relationship from India's side.
Just imagine how electrifying the effect on Bangladesh people's attitude toward India and thereby on Indo-Bangladesh relationship would be if India announced that it would decommission Farakka! Such a proposition is not unreasonable at all. Long thirty-six years of its operation has shown that Farakka has not brought much benefit to India (West Bengal). It has not qualitatively changed the situation of Kolkata port. On the other hand, Farakka has become a source of flooding in many parts of Bihar and West Bengal. More importantly, Farakka has led the Ganges to change its course so that in future the river is likely to bypass the barrage making this huge structure redundant. That being the case, is it not advantageous for India to do what nature seems to be already set to do, and yet derive the dividends in terms of further warming her relationship with Bangladesh? The same may be said with regard to the Gozaldoba barrage.
Letting the flow of rivers undiminished is also in India's interest from another long term, strategic point of view. This is related to climate change. India knows very well that submergence of a significant part of Bangladesh may render millions of people as climate refugees. Where will these people go? Obviously, India is at risk. No barbed wire is going to withstand the thrust of millions of people. Hence it is in India's interest to help Bangladesh counter the submergence effect of climate change.
Land accretion through sedimentation caused by river flow is the most important protection that Bangladesh has against rising sea level. About 2 billion tons of sediment used to be carried by rivers into Bangladesh. Unfortunately, this sediment volume is decreasing due to India's diversion of river flows. By stopping this diversion, India can help Bangladesh counter the sea level rise.
Thus, there are many reasons why India should agree to the demand for undiminished river flow. However, Bangladesh has to raise this demand, make the arguments clear, and win over both the Indian public and the Indian government. Other things, such as trade opportunities, are important, but not as important as river flow. Trade is something that Bangladesh can do with other nations too. But, for undiminished river flow, Bangladesh has only India to turn to. Undiminished river flow is therefore the most important thing that Bangladesh can ask from India in return for her goodwill gestures and steps.
Dr. Nazrul Islam is the Global Coordinator of Bangladesh Environment Network (BEN) and Vice President of Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (BAPA).
PRIME Minister Sheikh Hasina's recent India visit has generated considerable discussion. The main outcome of the visit has been the expression of Bangladesh's unequivocal commitment to stop insurgency abetting activities carried out using her land against India. Broadly, this stand applies to all types of terrorist and criminal activities. The commitment has been reciprocated by India, resulting in the agreements signed during the visit. This step has established goodwill and a level of trust that can now influence positively other spheres of Indo-Bangladesh relationship.
Another important development during the visit has been expression of Bangladesh's willingness to allow her ports for use by neighbouring countries, not only India, but Bhutan and Nepal as well. By doing so, Bangladesh has responded to another important Indian need, namely alleviation of the semi-land locked situation of her north-eastern states.
The question many have asked is what Bangladesh has gained in return to these steps. On the issue of security, the commitment is mutual, so that the question of additional gain to be had by Bangladesh in a sense may not apply. However, many have seen the Indian offer of $1 billion credit, the opportunity to buy electricity from her, etc as indirect reciprocal steps.
Regarding ports, allowing ports for use by other countries of the region can be a mutually advantageous step for Bangladesh too. From being national sea ports of Bangladesh, Chittagong and Mongla can now become regional ports, enjoying many benefits of entrepot trade, as do Hong Kong, Singapore, and other such regional ports.
The regional status can be particularly helpful for Mongla, which is generally regarded as underutilised. Of course, Bangladesh has to carefully negotiate the modalities of use of her ports by neighboring countries, so that her legitimate interests are protected and due economic gains are maximised.
However, many think that Bangladesh should get more from India in return for her cooperation in meeting India's security and economic needs and have put forward many additional demands, such as:
removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers to Bangladesh export to India,
halt to killing of Bangladeshis by Border Security Force (BSF) of India,
transit facility to Nepal and Bhutan, etc. Many of these are justifiable demands that Bangladesh should indeed put forward to India and press upon. The joint communique suggests that Bangladesh is indeed doing so.
However, the most important thing that Bangladesh should ask from India is "undiminished river flow." The communique indicates that Bangladesh did raise this issue. In fact, press reports suggest that Bangladesh tried to reach an agreement during the visit on sharing of the Teesta river. However, it did not materialise, and the communique mentions the intention of both nations of continuing the negotiation on this issue.
Actually, Bangladesh needs to adopt a completely different position on the issue of rivers. Now that Bangladesh has secured the goodwill of India, Bangladesh can make this position more prominent and ask India to accept it. Instead of asking for a part of the river flow, which negotiations on "sharing of the rivers" imply, Bangladesh should ask for "undiminished river flow."
Bangladesh can justify this position on the ground of her right to "prior and customary use" of river flows. The international norms and conventions with regard to trans-boundary rivers support this right. India knows that the entire economy, society, and culture of Bangladesh have developed over thousands of years based on flows of the rivers that pass through her. Any diminution of these flows violates Bangladesh's inalienable rights on her rivers.
India has already done a gross injustice to Bangladesh by constructing the Farakka barrage that has done irreparable damage to the rivers and ecology of southeastern Bangladesh. India has done similar injustice by diverting Teesta flow through its Gazaldoba barrage. It is of utmost concern that India has similar diversionary plans with respect to other common rivers. Just as the security threat was poisoning Indo-Bangladesh relationship from Bangladesh side, so is water diversion poisoning this relationship from India's side.
Just imagine how electrifying the effect on Bangladesh people's attitude toward India and thereby on Indo-Bangladesh relationship would be if India announced that it would decommission Farakka! Such a proposition is not unreasonable at all. Long thirty-six years of its operation has shown that Farakka has not brought much benefit to India (West Bengal). It has not qualitatively changed the situation of Kolkata port. On the other hand, Farakka has become a source of flooding in many parts of Bihar and West Bengal. More importantly, Farakka has led the Ganges to change its course so that in future the river is likely to bypass the barrage making this huge structure redundant. That being the case, is it not advantageous for India to do what nature seems to be already set to do, and yet derive the dividends in terms of further warming her relationship with Bangladesh? The same may be said with regard to the Gozaldoba barrage.
Letting the flow of rivers undiminished is also in India's interest from another long term, strategic point of view. This is related to climate change. India knows very well that submergence of a significant part of Bangladesh may render millions of people as climate refugees. Where will these people go? Obviously, India is at risk. No barbed wire is going to withstand the thrust of millions of people. Hence it is in India's interest to help Bangladesh counter the submergence effect of climate change.
Land accretion through sedimentation caused by river flow is the most important protection that Bangladesh has against rising sea level. About 2 billion tons of sediment used to be carried by rivers into Bangladesh. Unfortunately, this sediment volume is decreasing due to India's diversion of river flows. By stopping this diversion, India can help Bangladesh counter the sea level rise.
Thus, there are many reasons why India should agree to the demand for undiminished river flow. However, Bangladesh has to raise this demand, make the arguments clear, and win over both the Indian public and the Indian government. Other things, such as trade opportunities, are important, but not as important as river flow. Trade is something that Bangladesh can do with other nations too. But, for undiminished river flow, Bangladesh has only India to turn to. Undiminished river flow is therefore the most important thing that Bangladesh can ask from India in return for her goodwill gestures and steps.
Dr. Nazrul Islam is the Global Coordinator of Bangladesh Environment Network (BEN) and Vice President of Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (BAPA).
Jaquemet new UNHCR representative in Nepal
REPUBLICA
KATHMANDU, Jan 13: The newly appointed UNHCR representative in Nepal Stéphane Jaquemet on Wednesday presented the letter of credentials to Deputy Prime Minister Sujata Koirala.
According to a statement issued by the UNHCR, Jaquemet earlier served as the UNHCR Representative in Lebanon. “I am happy to be in Nepal, such a beautiful and cultured country, and work for one of UNHCR´s largest resettlement operations in the world,” the statement quoted Jaquemet as saying.
Since late 2007, UNHCR has helped more than 25,600 refugees from Bhutan to start new lives in the United States, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and New Zealand. Some 85,863 Bhutanese refugees have been living in seven camps in eastern Nepal.
“We will continue working with the international community and the Governments of Nepal and Bhutan to find solutions for these refugees, including repatriation to Bhutan and resettlement to third countries,” said Jaquemet in the statement.
Published on 2010-01-13 21:55:38
KATHMANDU, Jan 13: The newly appointed UNHCR representative in Nepal Stéphane Jaquemet on Wednesday presented the letter of credentials to Deputy Prime Minister Sujata Koirala.
According to a statement issued by the UNHCR, Jaquemet earlier served as the UNHCR Representative in Lebanon. “I am happy to be in Nepal, such a beautiful and cultured country, and work for one of UNHCR´s largest resettlement operations in the world,” the statement quoted Jaquemet as saying.
Since late 2007, UNHCR has helped more than 25,600 refugees from Bhutan to start new lives in the United States, Canada, Australia, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and New Zealand. Some 85,863 Bhutanese refugees have been living in seven camps in eastern Nepal.
“We will continue working with the international community and the Governments of Nepal and Bhutan to find solutions for these refugees, including repatriation to Bhutan and resettlement to third countries,” said Jaquemet in the statement.
Published on 2010-01-13 21:55:38
Good neighbours?
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Ikram Sehgal
Unless there is lasting peace between Pakistan and India, there is no hope for hundreds of millions in the two countries. The Jang Group and The Times of India had the vision and the courage to launch "Aman ki Asha." The prime prerequisite of good-neighbourliness is a "live and let live" policy. Unfortunately, India has a marked inclination for the latter in dealing with the nations on its periphery, particularly Pakistan.
Vast tracts of Bangladesh will become desert if India goes through with its plans to harness upstream the two great rivers that flow through the delta country. The India-friendly Hasina Wajed government notwithstanding, why does Bangladesh field almost seven Infantry divisions, not including division plus paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), double the fighting strength of the Pakistani armed forces in East Pakistan in 1971? Elaborating why "Peace should break out in South Asia" at the Bangladesh National Defence College in Dhaka about two years ago, I was repeatedly admonished during the "Q&A" session by the two dozen senior Bangladeshi officers (as well as a Nepalese, two Sri Lankans and a Pakistani) doing the National Defence Course that I was dangerously naïve if I thought India would ever have peace with the neighbours over whom it wants to establish hegemony. India has given enough reason to evoke such raw hatred.
The world is conveniently comfortable with a memory lapse on terrorism. "Suicide bombings" were perfected by the Tamil Tigers trained in over a dozen training camps run by India's Research Analysis Wing (RAW) in Tamil Nadu. Rahul Gandhi says his father, Rajiv Gandhi, personally presented psychopath Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran with his own bullet-proof jacket. Prabhakaran returned that favour by presenting him with a garland of explosives. In the 1980s, the Sri Lankan army was seething with resentment at the Indian Peace-Keeping Force (IPKF) landing in Sri Lanka uninvited (the protocol legitimising their presence was signed after their arrival on Sri Lankan soil) to rescue the Tamil Tigers from absolute defeat. The Tamil Tigers were finally cornered and eliminated.
India dominated Nepal totally for decades. The Nepalese monarchy showed sustained flashes of independence until the blatantly pro-Indian King Gyanendra ascended to the throne after a mysterious and brutal tragedy eliminated his brother King Birendra and his entire family. Widespread anti-Indian feeling is pervasive throughout Nepal. The country is increasingly looking to deepen its relationship with China.
The Maldives and Bhutan have been dominated so totally by India they do not matter as independent nation entities anymore. China claims Arunachal Pradesh (formerly NEFA) as its own. China overran NEFA in a brief war fought with India in 1962 within days, later withdrawing unilaterally, preferring to negotiate the territorial dispute through peace rather than through war. It is no secret that India, which would revel in being "non-aligned," has been assiduously built up by the US as a regional power to contain China (Ambassador Galbraith's Memo of May 25, 1965).
When the Indian parliament was attacked by terrorists in December 2001, India threatened Pakistan with war. The two opposing armies staying eyeball to eyeball throughout 2002. The terrorists did not have state connections, but India still blamed Pakistan as it did again after the 26/11 Mumbai incident. The ability of terrorists to use our soil as a base is nothing for Pakistan to be proud of. Having sowed the wind in the early 90s we are reaping the whirlwind, paying a heavy human price for misplaced adventurism in now having to engage terrorists across the country in counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism. However, to blame Pakistan, as a state, for third-party interventions is unfair. To threaten war for their atrocities is downright madness. Is India trying to blackmail Pakistan with war, or blackmail the world with the possible effects of a nuclear one? This attitude gives an open invitation to anyone to create trouble.
India's constant targeting comprises a deliberate, myopic and obnoxious state policy of cutting Pakistan down to size in all ways possible, tarring and feathering the country as a responsible entity among the comity of nations. Pakistan is beset by many problems, the most serious being terrorism. We need Indian understanding and support, not the pouring of fuel on the fire.
While the roots of terrorism's incubation and growth are imbedded in Kashmir, the Afghan problem has exacerbated and complicated the situation: we are host to three million uninvited refugees. Almost one-third of the Pakistani army's fighting strength is deployed to deal with the insurgency. Terrorist cells have infiltrated and proliferated, and that has put our entire society under virtual siege. We are in a state of clear and present danger.
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates enunciated our dilemma best during his recent visit. "Pakistan is not threatened by India." In almost the next breath, he said, "If another terrorist attack originates from Pakistani soil, it would be difficult to contain Indian reaction." In countering the insurgency, the reserves meant for the eastern borders are depleted. Thus weakened, we are in danger of being attacked.
Mr Gates now wants us "to do more" in opening another front in North Waziristan. For an army doing 90 per cent of the fighting and dying in the "war against terrorism" in this region, one must be grateful the US has allocated $1 billion approximately. The disparity, with the Afghan National Army (ANA) which is not even 10 per cent engaged in all the fighting by Coalition forces getting $16 billion from the US, is mind-boggling.
The element of hypocrisy is palpable. India's fingerprints are all over Swat and FATA. The Indians have been actively stoking the fires in Balochistan. India must behave responsibly with the countries on its periphery, particularly Pakistan. The water issue has dangerous and ominous overtones. Tens of millions will starve to death without the rivers. The Indians are violating the Indus Basin Treaty. What option will we have except to fight if we face desertification?
The silver lining of the counter-insurgency operations is that our army has recovered from the debilitating 2003-2007 period. If the Indians decide to test Pakistani gun-sights they will find a battle-hardened entity. India campaigned assiduously to eliminate and isolate Pakistan from world cricket by ensuring the World Cup was taken away from it, followed by banning of all international cricket from our soil. With its cricket economic power, India's venom was on full display in its ensuring that not one Pakistan player was picked for the IPL. Our under-19 youngsters gave us back some pride by eliminating India from the Cricket World Cup in a tense semi-final in New Zealand.
India's economic success relative to Pakistan's more pedestrian progress is to be admired. Unfortunately, total US support coupled with economic boom has inculcated unbridled arrogance. One does not expect humility from India, but certainly understanding and tolerance thereof. Approximately one-third of Pakistan's population, about 60 million, can be said to be really poor. The sobering thought is that India has 10 times more than that, 600 million. The media-hype perception of "Incredible India" has to contend with the reality of uplift of hundreds of millions to the lifestyle that their more affluent upscale fellow compatriots are used to. Let alone Pakistan, can India ever hope to accomplish this if, instead of peace, war breaks out with Pakistan? It is vitally important to foster "Aman ki Asha" (desire for peace), rather than "Jang ki Bhasha," the dialogue of war.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com
Ikram Sehgal
Unless there is lasting peace between Pakistan and India, there is no hope for hundreds of millions in the two countries. The Jang Group and The Times of India had the vision and the courage to launch "Aman ki Asha." The prime prerequisite of good-neighbourliness is a "live and let live" policy. Unfortunately, India has a marked inclination for the latter in dealing with the nations on its periphery, particularly Pakistan.
Vast tracts of Bangladesh will become desert if India goes through with its plans to harness upstream the two great rivers that flow through the delta country. The India-friendly Hasina Wajed government notwithstanding, why does Bangladesh field almost seven Infantry divisions, not including division plus paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), double the fighting strength of the Pakistani armed forces in East Pakistan in 1971? Elaborating why "Peace should break out in South Asia" at the Bangladesh National Defence College in Dhaka about two years ago, I was repeatedly admonished during the "Q&A" session by the two dozen senior Bangladeshi officers (as well as a Nepalese, two Sri Lankans and a Pakistani) doing the National Defence Course that I was dangerously naïve if I thought India would ever have peace with the neighbours over whom it wants to establish hegemony. India has given enough reason to evoke such raw hatred.
The world is conveniently comfortable with a memory lapse on terrorism. "Suicide bombings" were perfected by the Tamil Tigers trained in over a dozen training camps run by India's Research Analysis Wing (RAW) in Tamil Nadu. Rahul Gandhi says his father, Rajiv Gandhi, personally presented psychopath Tamil Tiger leader Velupillai Prabhakaran with his own bullet-proof jacket. Prabhakaran returned that favour by presenting him with a garland of explosives. In the 1980s, the Sri Lankan army was seething with resentment at the Indian Peace-Keeping Force (IPKF) landing in Sri Lanka uninvited (the protocol legitimising their presence was signed after their arrival on Sri Lankan soil) to rescue the Tamil Tigers from absolute defeat. The Tamil Tigers were finally cornered and eliminated.
India dominated Nepal totally for decades. The Nepalese monarchy showed sustained flashes of independence until the blatantly pro-Indian King Gyanendra ascended to the throne after a mysterious and brutal tragedy eliminated his brother King Birendra and his entire family. Widespread anti-Indian feeling is pervasive throughout Nepal. The country is increasingly looking to deepen its relationship with China.
The Maldives and Bhutan have been dominated so totally by India they do not matter as independent nation entities anymore. China claims Arunachal Pradesh (formerly NEFA) as its own. China overran NEFA in a brief war fought with India in 1962 within days, later withdrawing unilaterally, preferring to negotiate the territorial dispute through peace rather than through war. It is no secret that India, which would revel in being "non-aligned," has been assiduously built up by the US as a regional power to contain China (Ambassador Galbraith's Memo of May 25, 1965).
When the Indian parliament was attacked by terrorists in December 2001, India threatened Pakistan with war. The two opposing armies staying eyeball to eyeball throughout 2002. The terrorists did not have state connections, but India still blamed Pakistan as it did again after the 26/11 Mumbai incident. The ability of terrorists to use our soil as a base is nothing for Pakistan to be proud of. Having sowed the wind in the early 90s we are reaping the whirlwind, paying a heavy human price for misplaced adventurism in now having to engage terrorists across the country in counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism. However, to blame Pakistan, as a state, for third-party interventions is unfair. To threaten war for their atrocities is downright madness. Is India trying to blackmail Pakistan with war, or blackmail the world with the possible effects of a nuclear one? This attitude gives an open invitation to anyone to create trouble.
India's constant targeting comprises a deliberate, myopic and obnoxious state policy of cutting Pakistan down to size in all ways possible, tarring and feathering the country as a responsible entity among the comity of nations. Pakistan is beset by many problems, the most serious being terrorism. We need Indian understanding and support, not the pouring of fuel on the fire.
While the roots of terrorism's incubation and growth are imbedded in Kashmir, the Afghan problem has exacerbated and complicated the situation: we are host to three million uninvited refugees. Almost one-third of the Pakistani army's fighting strength is deployed to deal with the insurgency. Terrorist cells have infiltrated and proliferated, and that has put our entire society under virtual siege. We are in a state of clear and present danger.
US Defence Secretary Robert Gates enunciated our dilemma best during his recent visit. "Pakistan is not threatened by India." In almost the next breath, he said, "If another terrorist attack originates from Pakistani soil, it would be difficult to contain Indian reaction." In countering the insurgency, the reserves meant for the eastern borders are depleted. Thus weakened, we are in danger of being attacked.
Mr Gates now wants us "to do more" in opening another front in North Waziristan. For an army doing 90 per cent of the fighting and dying in the "war against terrorism" in this region, one must be grateful the US has allocated $1 billion approximately. The disparity, with the Afghan National Army (ANA) which is not even 10 per cent engaged in all the fighting by Coalition forces getting $16 billion from the US, is mind-boggling.
The element of hypocrisy is palpable. India's fingerprints are all over Swat and FATA. The Indians have been actively stoking the fires in Balochistan. India must behave responsibly with the countries on its periphery, particularly Pakistan. The water issue has dangerous and ominous overtones. Tens of millions will starve to death without the rivers. The Indians are violating the Indus Basin Treaty. What option will we have except to fight if we face desertification?
The silver lining of the counter-insurgency operations is that our army has recovered from the debilitating 2003-2007 period. If the Indians decide to test Pakistani gun-sights they will find a battle-hardened entity. India campaigned assiduously to eliminate and isolate Pakistan from world cricket by ensuring the World Cup was taken away from it, followed by banning of all international cricket from our soil. With its cricket economic power, India's venom was on full display in its ensuring that not one Pakistan player was picked for the IPL. Our under-19 youngsters gave us back some pride by eliminating India from the Cricket World Cup in a tense semi-final in New Zealand.
India's economic success relative to Pakistan's more pedestrian progress is to be admired. Unfortunately, total US support coupled with economic boom has inculcated unbridled arrogance. One does not expect humility from India, but certainly understanding and tolerance thereof. Approximately one-third of Pakistan's population, about 60 million, can be said to be really poor. The sobering thought is that India has 10 times more than that, 600 million. The media-hype perception of "Incredible India" has to contend with the reality of uplift of hundreds of millions to the lifestyle that their more affluent upscale fellow compatriots are used to. Let alone Pakistan, can India ever hope to accomplish this if, instead of peace, war breaks out with Pakistan? It is vitally important to foster "Aman ki Asha" (desire for peace), rather than "Jang ki Bhasha," the dialogue of war.
The writer is a defence and political analyst. Email: isehgal@pathfinder9.com
Visit of great value: Nepal
•First high-level visit since fall of Maoist govt
ANIL GIRI
KATHMANDU, JAN 13 -
India’s External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will on Friday start his three-day visit to Nepal. The visit is being seen here as New Delhi’s effort to address Nepal’s call for reciprocity in high-level bilateral visits.
The visit, which begins on Jan. 15, will be his first to Nepal since he assumed office in May. Accompanying him will be senior South Block officials, including Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and Joint Secretary Satish Mehta.
“This is one of those rare visits where the Indian foreign minister and secretary are travelling together,” said a senior foreign ministry official. “That gives the visit strong political symbolism. India’s concerns in Nepal are widespread and deep.”
The visit will deal with a range of bilateral issues but is aimed primarily at giving Nepal-India ties a further boost with a message that Nepal remains a very important partner for India, the official said.
The visit will provide the Indian political leadership the opportunity to take first-hand stock of the state of the peace process in Nepal, he said.
To many, the visit will hold special significance to see how New Delhi-Maoist relation shape up after the visit. It is the first high-level visit by seniormost Indian diplomats since the fall of the Maoist government in May. “Especially interesting will be to see how Indian officials treat the Maoists,” said Hari Rokka, a Constituent Assembly member and analyst with close ties with the UCPN (Maoist). “It will be closely followed how the Indian leadership approaches the border issue raised by the opposition and the current state of political stalemate.”
Krishna will also meet Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal at a time when the party is in the midst of its campaign to safeguard “national sovereignty”.
Krishna is likely to hold talks with his counterpart Sujata Koirala on close to a dozen issues. “This is a follow-up visit to the prime minister’s visit to Delhi in August,” said an official. “The two will assess the progress made.”
Issues of Indian compensation for Gandak flood victims and extension of two new cross-border rail links will be taken up.
Delay in construction of the Indian-assisted Naumure hydro project (240mw), early implementation of the Bagmati Civilisation Project and Indian assurance for import of LPG from Haldiya port will be taken up. Koirala will also discuss effective management of Nepal-India border. Nepal will ask for more scholarships for Nepali students in India, construction of Mahendranagar-Tanakpur link road and assistance for two suspension bridges in the Far-Western region.
“Nepal will also request Indian support in persuading Bhutan to repatriate refugees,” said the official.
ANIL GIRI
KATHMANDU, JAN 13 -
India’s External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna will on Friday start his three-day visit to Nepal. The visit is being seen here as New Delhi’s effort to address Nepal’s call for reciprocity in high-level bilateral visits.
The visit, which begins on Jan. 15, will be his first to Nepal since he assumed office in May. Accompanying him will be senior South Block officials, including Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao and Joint Secretary Satish Mehta.
“This is one of those rare visits where the Indian foreign minister and secretary are travelling together,” said a senior foreign ministry official. “That gives the visit strong political symbolism. India’s concerns in Nepal are widespread and deep.”
The visit will deal with a range of bilateral issues but is aimed primarily at giving Nepal-India ties a further boost with a message that Nepal remains a very important partner for India, the official said.
The visit will provide the Indian political leadership the opportunity to take first-hand stock of the state of the peace process in Nepal, he said.
To many, the visit will hold special significance to see how New Delhi-Maoist relation shape up after the visit. It is the first high-level visit by seniormost Indian diplomats since the fall of the Maoist government in May. “Especially interesting will be to see how Indian officials treat the Maoists,” said Hari Rokka, a Constituent Assembly member and analyst with close ties with the UCPN (Maoist). “It will be closely followed how the Indian leadership approaches the border issue raised by the opposition and the current state of political stalemate.”
Krishna will also meet Maoist Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal at a time when the party is in the midst of its campaign to safeguard “national sovereignty”.
Krishna is likely to hold talks with his counterpart Sujata Koirala on close to a dozen issues. “This is a follow-up visit to the prime minister’s visit to Delhi in August,” said an official. “The two will assess the progress made.”
Issues of Indian compensation for Gandak flood victims and extension of two new cross-border rail links will be taken up.
Delay in construction of the Indian-assisted Naumure hydro project (240mw), early implementation of the Bagmati Civilisation Project and Indian assurance for import of LPG from Haldiya port will be taken up. Koirala will also discuss effective management of Nepal-India border. Nepal will ask for more scholarships for Nepali students in India, construction of Mahendranagar-Tanakpur link road and assistance for two suspension bridges in the Far-Western region.
“Nepal will also request Indian support in persuading Bhutan to repatriate refugees,” said the official.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)