About Armenian Genocide

Do you know about Armenian Genocide? It happened in present day Turkey. Ottoman Empire, whose official religion was Islam, systematically massacred Armenians in their homeland for years. Armenians were by and large Christians of different sects. How many were killed? 15 Lakh people! First able bodied males were killed and then old people, women and children were asked to march into the desert - so as to die and disappear. Mass killings started in 1915 and by 1923 virtually the entire Armenian population of Anatolian Turkey had disappeared!

You can read more about it on its Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide

Describing Armenian Genocide, Rouben Paul Adalian writes the following in his comprehensive summary of the events at the website: http://www.armenian-genocide.org/genocide.html

"In April 1915 the Ottoman government embarked upon the systematic decimation of its civilian Armenian population. The persecutions continued with varying intensity until 1923 when the Ottoman Empire ceased to exist and was replaced by the Republic of Turkey. The Armenian population of the Ottoman state was reported at about two million in 1915. An estimated one million had perished by 1918, while hundreds of thousands had become homeless and stateless refugees. By 1923 virtually the entire Armenian population of Anatolian Turkey had disappeared.

The Ottoman Empire was ruled by the Turks who had conquered lands extending across West Asia, North Africa and Southeast Europe. The Ottoman government was centered in Istanbul (Constantinople) and was headed by a sultan who was vested with absolute power. The Turks practiced Islam and were a martial people. The Armenians, a Christian minority, lived as second class citizens subject to legal restrictions which denied them normal safeguards. Neither their lives nor their properties were guaranteed security. As non-Muslims they were also obligated to pay discriminatory taxes and denied participation in government. Scattered across the empire, the status of the Armenians was further complicated by the fact that the territory of historic Armenia was divided between the Ottomans and the Russians.

In all, it is estimated that up to a million and a half Armenians perished at the hands of Ottoman and Turkish military and paramilitary forces and through atrocities intentionally inflicted to eliminate the Armenian demographic presence in Turkey. In the process, the population of historic Armenia at the eastern extremity of Anatolia was wiped off the map. With their disappearance, an ancient people which had inhabited the Armenian highlands for three thousand years lost its historic homeland and was forced into exile and a new diaspora. The surviving refugees spread around the world and eventually settled in some two dozen countries on all continents of the globe. Triumphant in its total annihilation of the Armenians and relieved of any obligations to the victims and survivors, the Turkish Republic adopted a policy of dismissing the charge of genocide and denying that the deportations and atrocities had constituted part of a deliberate plan to exterminate the Armenians. When the Red Army sovietized what remained of Russian Armenia in 1920, the Armenians had been compressed into an area amounting to no more than ten percent of the territories of their historic homeland. Armenians annually commemorate the Genocide on April 24 at the site of memorials raised by the survivors in all their communities around the world."

Learning about such events makes us interested in history. Why care about history, in particular about such disturbing parts? I think it is because if we don’t understand history, we risk the same getting repeated in the future…

Bhima Koregaon's myth in Maharashtra

Two hundred years ago, the last battle of the Anglo-Maratha war was fought at Koregaon village on the banks of Bhima river near Pune. The battle marked the firm hold of the British Empire in India. The British erected an obelisk at the battleground in the memory of the dead. It has 49 names, 22 of them are identified by their ‘nak’ suffix as Mahars. It was construed as the testimony to the gallantry of Mahar soldiers, and was rightly used by the first batch of Mahar leaders such as Gopal Baba Walangkar, Shivram Janba Kamble and even Ramji Ambedkar, B R Ambedkar’s father, when pleading the British for the restoration of Mahar recruitment in the British army when it was stopped in 1893. The stoppage of Mahar recruitment was a consequence of the Indian uprising of 1857, after which the British reassessed their recruiting strategies to include only those from ‘martial races’ in the army.

But when Babasaheb Ambedkar painted the Battle of Bhima Koregaon as the battle of Mahar soldiers against their caste oppression in Peshwa rule, he was creating a pure myth. As myths are required to build movements, he perhaps saw its necessity then. But after a century, when it solidifies into a quasi-history and tends to push Dalits deeper into an identitarian marshland, it should become a worrisome matter. Many Dalit organisations recently formed a joint front to observe the 200th anniversary of this battle as a campaign to launch an attack on the new Peshwai, the rising Brahmanic rule of the Hindutva forces. Their long marches culminated into an Elgar Parishad (conference) at the Shaniwarwada at Pune on December 31. While the resolve to fight the Hindutva forces is certainly laudable, the myth used for the purpose may be grossly counterproductive insofar as it reinforces identitarian tendencies whereas the necessity is to transcend them.

As regards history, it is a fact that when the East India Company developed its military aspirations, it recruited Dalits in disproportionately large numbers, perhaps for their unflinching loyalty and faithfulness and also because they were cheaply available. One finds disproportionate numbers of the Namshudras in Bengal, the Parayas in Madras and the Mahars in Maharashtra in its army. If the Dalits wanted to claim significant contribution to the establishment of the British Raj in India, it may not be as such incorrect. But to attribute motive of fighting caste oppression to their soldiery shall be far-fetched and unhistorical.

The East India Company fought and won several battles from the first one in Plassey in 1757 before the last battle of the Anglo-Maratha war. Obviously, all of them were not against the Peshwas. Most of them were not even against the Hindus. They were simply wars between the two ruling powers, which their soldiers fought just as their duty. To make them appear as anti-caste or anti-religion will not only be factually incorrect, but also an erroneous understanding of historical caste. Caste, until after the late 19th century when there was a substantial spread of education among the Dalits, has been the life-world of people. They took caste as a natural order and their oppression as the fate that they had to meekly endure. Therefore, there was no question of any resistance to caste, leave apart physical war against them. Contrary to such myths of bravery, there is no evidence of any militant resistance the Dalits ever posed against the Brahmanic oppression.

With regard to the formation of warring armies, they were not purely composed of communal lines. While the Dalit soldiers may be relatively in large numbers in the British army, it is not that they did not exist in Muslim or Maratha armies. As with communities, all castes existed in all the armies. In the Battle of Koregaon, one of the three wings of the Peshawa infantry was Arabs, which had reportedly fought most fiercely and had most casualties. What could be their motivation? Did they want the Peshwa’s Brahmanic rule to triumph? The fact is that they simply fought as soldiers for their masters, as the Dalits did for theirs. It would be grossly erroneous to attribute loftier motives to them than this.

Before the battle of Koregaon on January 1, 1818, the Peshwas had been reduced to weaklings by the earlier two Anglo-Maratha wars. As a matter of fact, the Peshwa Bajirao II had fled Pune and was attempting to attack Pune from outside. Peshwa’s army comprised 20,000 cavalry and 8,000 infantry, out of which around 2,000 men, divided into three infantry parties each comprising 600 Arabs, Gosains and soldiers, mounted the attack. The majority of the attackers were Arabs, reputed to be the finest among the Peshwa soldiers. The Company troops comprised 834 men, including around 500 soldiers of the 2nd Battalion of the 1st Regiment of Bombay Native Infantry, which was manned predominantly by Mahar soldiers. Although there is no record of their exact number, it is obvious that all of them were not Mahars. Even going by the casualties, the majority of those died in the battle (27 out of 49) were not Mahars. The Peshwa army ultimately withdrew, fearing the arrival of a larger British force led by General Joseph Smith. In view of these factual details, it may be misleading to portray the battle as Mahars’ vengeance against the Peshwas’ Brahmanic rule.

There is no evidence that after the defeat of Peshwai, there was any relief that accrued to Mahars. As a matter of fact, their caste oppression continued unabated. Rather, as hinted earlier, the ungrateful British stopped their recruitment to the army, refusing to acknowledge their past bravery. They ignored their pleas to restore recruitment until threatened by the First World War, in the wake of which they restarted their recruitment. There is no dispute that the British colonial rule brought Dalits numerous benefits, to the extent that the very birth of the Dalit movement may be attributable to it. But it must simultaneously be understood that it was unintended and primarily dictated by their colonial logic. It is unfortunate that Dalits blind themselves to this reality with their identity blinkers.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/bhima-koregaon-s-mythin-maha-reinforces-identities-it-seeks-to-transcend-118010300139_1.html

Pollution in Delhi and Bus Rapid Transit System

The first thing Delhi’s IIT educated CM Kejriwal did after coming to power was to scrap the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor [Ref1] (https://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/bus-rapid-transit-corridor-in-delhi-scrapped-by-aap-government-783729). BRT was an idea of previous Sheila Dixit government to improve the public transportation system in Delhi which had long term benefits by improving traffic and reducing pollution. AAP Government scrapped BRT system purely for political reasons. People loved it since people wanted to use their private vehicles since it is a “status symbol”. Government’s job is to enforce right policies to correct people and encourage responsible behavior. But this was a case where government was doing populist decisions encouraging irresponsible behaviors. And now we are all suffering from pollution breakout in Delhi with no alternative public transport system available.

Encouraged by success of populist but reckless decision in Delhi, AAP also promised to scran Amritsar’s BRT system if it came to power:

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/punjab/community/will-scrap-amritsar-s-brts-project-if-voted-to-power-aap/194288.html

Open Letter to Queen Kangana Ranaut by Sona Mohapatra

Dear Kangana,

I have always cheered loudly, in private & in public for you. Long, long before you turned queen et all but your current run across the airwaves regurgitating personal details of your love life over & over again, washing dirty linen in public & more so as part of a professional PR campaign before your film release is in bad taste. No two ways about it. Also, it does a big dis-service to the cause of feminism & fair play. Wish you well & wish you would rise above this muck & make your point through actions & your work. Your success doesn’t need this tabloid trail. Your well thought out & superbly worded open letters of the past, fearless interviews addressing larger issues, taking a stand, taking legal recourse are welcome. The current ‘circus’, not.

This is just another opinion in the public domain from one working woman to another, from the heart & on an impulse. There is no PR machinery or team guiding me here.

I do believe that there are plenty of feminists in the opposite gender. Men who cheer the cause of outspoken, feisty, fierce & hard working women like you & me. We don’t ‘need’ them as such but let’s not forget them & also the thousands of amazing women who fight the good fight on a daily basis with dignity .

Life might not have been easy but you are in a great place now. More so to influence positive change. That is worthy of a daily celebration.

Also, today is Onam, a thanksgiving festival in the South. The mythology surrounding the festival is significant – it emphasizes the Hindu belief in the cyclical nature of events, that no individual, no ruler and nothing lasts forever, except the virtues and self-understanding that overcomes all sorrow.

So, Happy Onam.

Big love & healing to you.

(P.S To the so called ‘journos’ hankering after this masala & asking those thaka hua questions. )

Sona Mohapatra

Does SRK’s Identity in Raees Mean He is Insecure

There is no doubt that Shah Rukh Khan has donned a distinctly Muslim identity in his latest flick Raees. Do you think it is incidental? He has also taken up a grey character, although it is not new – he has been doing negative roles for long time starting with Darr and surprisingly it has not harmed his hugely popular female fan following (as it is assumed that women do not like crime). But Raees is unique and new.

SRK not only wears a ‘Muslim beard’ but also applies ‘kaajal’ – which all film makers use to make any character appear like a Muslim. He runs on the sand in some Arabian desert. There is an element of Islam in whatever he does. Experts are saying that this means that SRK is desperate – desperate for success! It is especially since some of his recent films have not done well on box office. His hugely anticipated movie ‘Fan’ was an official ‘flop’.

If we look at it from this perspective, it becomes clear how desperate SRK would be for a hit! Surprisingly, other Khans are doing well. Amir is still golden boy and Salman appears fit as his wax statue. But SRK is ageing and growing older day by day. His face is now filled with wrinkles and he looks like a 60 year old man – with lots of hair transplanted on head as the only savior. In this situation, it is only natural that SRK would turn to his core constituency – Muslim movie watchers!

Or is it his rivalry with Salman for attracting most Muslim fans – that he has gone this way?

Whatever be the reason, signs are not good at all! It seems Shah Rukh Khan is finally fading away…

Good bye, you will be missed!

Originally published at: http://blogs.rediff.com/rahulwrites/2017/02/08/does-srks-identity-in-raees-mean-he-is-insecure/

About Controversies in Tamil Nadu and South India

South India is 'trending' and North Indians are looking at them with great curiosity and disbelief. For so many decades, North Indians looked at stereotyped South Indians as professional (due to inability to decipher expressions and nuances), highly educated (since South Indians spoke more English), and unpolitical people (since Northerners did not understand South politics properly). They thought that the large crowds and anarchy were traits of the North alone and South was as clean as the sea appears from a distance. 

In a series of extraordinary events, we are mesmerized with different shades of the South. Our simplistic opinions and stereotyped versions fell apart with each such event.

When Northerners saw people from South adoring Rajinikanth like a cult figure; they thought it was so because he was the biggest from the South. But then Rajinikanth is a Marathi and not a Tamil! Enough to cause confusion!

Then it came to Cauvery water dispute and we saw such angry and violent protests in Bengaluru that we could not believe our eyes. Two Southern states fighting over water? We thought it happened only near our Northern village wells and ponds!

Before and after demise of Jayalalitha the politics over her health, denial of cremation and fight over legacy baffled us. The huge crowds and madness of her supporters baffled us more - if you see her past corruption record. So people from South also love corruption? We thought corruption only happened in Kejriwal's muhalla!

And then comes the latest hash tag of Jallikattu. People from North could not believe that the well educated, civilized Southerners loved their bulls so much! I mean who cares for the bulls now? We though everyone in South was an engineer and won't have time for such things.

Such black swan events are definitely breaking the stereotypes. It is not about appearing better or worse, but it is definitely about appearing real. If Northerners are feeling that South is becoming more like North, it actually means that we are getting to know each other better. 

हम अब सॉफ्ट स्टेट नहीं रहे

तो अंततः हमारे देश की छवि बदल रही है। हम अब 'सॉफ्ट स्टेट' नहीं रहे। ईंट का जवाब पत्थर से देना आ गया हमें। आतंकवादियों को उनके "घर में घुस कर मारो" का नारा अब सार्थक हो गया। फिर भी मुझे चिंता किस बात की है?

सुषमा जी ने पाकिस्तान की ओर ऊँगली उठाते हुए कहा था - जिनके घर शीशे के बने हों वो दूसरों पर पत्थर नहीं फेंका करते। शायद मेरी चिंता यहीं से है? जिस देश की धरती पर सेना के जवान आतंकवादियों से खुद सुरक्षित ना हों, उस देश की जनता क्या शीशे के घर में नहीं रहती? मुम्बई हमले में आतंकी रेलवे स्टेशन पर गोलियों से लोगों को भूनते रहे और एक पुलिसवाला उनपर कुर्सी फेंक कर रोकने की कोशिश करता है। सामान्य रस्ते फुटपाथ की तो छोड़िये, ताज जैसे पाँच सितारा होटल में मौत का तांडव करने आतंकी घुसना चाहते हैं तो घुस ही जाते हैं। तब से आज तक क्या हमारे देश की आंतरिक सुरक्षा इतनी बेहतर हो गई है कि हम अंतरराष्ट्रीय आतंवादी संगठनों को ललकार सकें? तो चिंता की बात तो है ही...

चिंता की बात तो देश की छवि बदलना भी है। हम गाँधी के अहिंसावादी देश के लोग जो कभी युद्ध का प्रथम कदम नहीं उठाएंगे और हमने कभी किसी और देश में घुसपैठ नहीं की, सीमा का उल्लंघन नहीं किया, मासूमों की जान नहीं ली - अब क्या हम ये सब गर्व से कह सकते हैं? माना कि हमारी सेना ने कहा कि सीमा पार सिर्फ आतंकियों को मारा गया पर क्या हम निश्चय से ऐसा कह सकते हैं कि उस ऑपरेशन में बेगुनाहों का खून नहीं बहा? ओसामा को मारने गई अमेरिकी टुकड़ी ने भी घर में एक अन्य महिला को मारा ही था।

तो सीमा से सटे गाँव खाली कराये जा रहे हैं, स्कूल बंद हो गए हैं, ये सब एक बार के लिए तो हो भी जाये पर बार-बार नहीं किया जा सकता। भारत के लोग इजराइलियों की तरह नहीं हैं। "खून का बदला खून" और "उनके घर में घुस कर मारो" ये हमारे राष्ट्रीय नारे कभी नहीं थे। हिंसा किसी समस्या का समाधान हो सकती है पर कश्मीर समस्या का समाधान जरुरी नहीं कि यही हो। धारा ३७० को हटाने से भी काफी समस्या हल हो सकती है।

क्या अपने देश की आक्रामक छवि से चिंतित होना गलत है? क्या टीवी न्यूज़ चैनल्स की "घर में घुस के मारो" के नारों पर शरीर में क्रिकेट मैच जैसा रोमांच पैदा न होना कायरता की निशानी है? क्या बुद्धिजीवियों को जनता की नब्ज समझकर हिंसा को सही ठहराने की कोशिश करनी चाहिए?

क्या अपने घर शीशे के बने हों तो भी दूसरों पर पत्थर फेंकने चाहिए?

Published at: here