India Govt. Too Chicken To CONFRONT OZ Racism?
Why hasn't the India govt. sent a Special Representative, accompanied by affected family members, to OZ to meet with students to directly hear their trials and tribulations within racist OZ society?
Such a meeting should take place before the full glare of TV cameras. OZ has proved it is a racist society. The victims, our students, don't have to prove anything to the Ozzies, except to prove that their home government in India can and will act to protect them.
Manmohan and his crew need to step up and be counted on this issue. Please don't send mealy-mouthed bureaucrats, diplomats and some recently elected Congress wallahs in the Ministry of External Affairs (at least one name comes to mind), who are too afraid to speak out for fear of jeopardizing their new and unfolding careers in the Congress Party apparatus.
Instead, let the GOI send civil society / human rights activists who have proved their mettle. OZ needs to be told face to face by India that India will not tolerate racist brutal acts against our students. OZ takes our students' money which enriches OZ govt and OZ unis. and then OZ appears incapable to taking strong preemptive measures to protect our students against their homegrown racists?
29 Jun 2009, 1306 hrs IST
--------------------------------------------
Times of India copyright
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/4715044.cms
====================================================================================
Monday, June 29, 2009
Climate Change Bill Passes the House
Comment 82. published on Nytimes.com
EthicalDemocracy
Chennai, Tamil Nadu India
June 29th, 2009
8:31 am
Despite the heavy NO votes by those elected leaders who can't seem to practice thoughtful action on the environment, based on factual evidence, it's hoped we will soon have a LAW after the Senate passes the same.
Let's then implement it for the Greater Collective Good (GCG, economists need to measure this as an outcome).
The Greater Collective Good appears to be an almost alien concept in the US when it comes to global environmental justice. But any step, however small, in this direction, is welcome.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
----------------------------------------------------------
New York Times copyright
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29krugman.html
==================================================================================
EthicalDemocracy
Chennai, Tamil Nadu India
June 29th, 2009
8:31 am
Despite the heavy NO votes by those elected leaders who can't seem to practice thoughtful action on the environment, based on factual evidence, it's hoped we will soon have a LAW after the Senate passes the same.
Let's then implement it for the Greater Collective Good (GCG, economists need to measure this as an outcome).
The Greater Collective Good appears to be an almost alien concept in the US when it comes to global environmental justice. But any step, however small, in this direction, is welcome.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
----------------------------------------------------------
New York Times copyright
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29krugman.html
==================================================================================
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Both India, Pakistan are US Stooges
Both India, Pakistan are US Stooges, trying to outmaneuver each other to gain favor with the US. This failing lose-lose strategy for The Peoples of India and Pakistan only increases the power of the US in our culture area and region.
Pakistan is even more servile than India, the Pakistan govt. is a paid political prostitute of the US since the John Foster Dulles era of the US State Department and the CIA of the '50's , however both India and Pakistan governments are stooges. Both serve US interests more than their respective peoples' interests, and the interdependent collective interests of ALL of the people in the South Asia culture area and region.
Why is India's Defence Minister A.K. Antony moaning and complaining to the US? Why give the US additional power as an intermediary in our region? Both India and Pakistan are ceding power in our region, to the US. Shame on our alleged leaders.
Yes, yes, Antony has a point. BUT it is also equally a fact that India has numerous domestic so-called "terror" groups. The terror label, orchestrated by the United States has now become a catch-all for ALL groups who oppose policies of the STATE, no matter which state it is.
Multiple varieties of the Taliban have proliferated, as a direct result of US activity in the region in the 80's, when the US invented a Cold War confrontation with the Soviets in Afghanistan. In this the US was joined by Pakistan and their old and dependable ally Saudi Arabia -- that beacon of democracy.
India should stop demonizing Pakistan and the Taliban. We need to clean up our own house and stop pointing fingers conveniently across the border. The inconvenient truth is India has plenty of groups attacking the Indian state from within.
Q. Are they ALL terror groups, or are many of them them desperate for economic justice? Do they feel neglected or exploited by the Indian state? The same is true in Pakistan where internal groups are chronically disaffected because they cannot achieve even the bare necessities of life.
It is absolutely true that the feudal and military elites of Pakistan have reaped the whirlwind by fomenting terror in Kashmir. Now terror is biting them in the butt.
However, India is better off concentrating on the grave social, economic and political injustices multiplying within our borders.
Let us remember that the US is not an ally but a highly self-serving dominant global entity that has destabilized the South Asia culture area and region. The US is continuing the damage that the Brits conducted during the colonial period. DIVIDE and RULE hurts Pakistanis and Indians, and increases the power of the US in our region. So let us persevere to work together, Indians and Pakistanis, despite the impediments of a superpower attempting to gain strategic depth in our region.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------
My comment published on TOI online
Pakistani Taliban a threat to India: Antony
Chithra KarunaKaran Ethical Democracy,NYC,says:Why is India moaning and complaining to the US? Why give the US additional power as an intermediary in our region? Both India and Pakistan are ceding power in our region, to the US. Shame on us. Yes, yes, Antony has a point. BUT it is also equally a fact that India has numerous domestic so-called "terror" groups. The terror label, orchestrated by the United States has now become a catch-all for ALL groups who oppose policies of the STATE, no matter which state it is. Multiple varieties of the Taliban have proliferated, as a direct result of US activity in the region in the 80's, when the US invented a Cold War confrontation with the Soviets in Afghanistan. In this the US was joined by Pakistan and their old and dependable ally Saudi Arabia -- that beacon of democracy. India should stop demonizing Pakistan and the Taliban. We need to clean up our own house and stop pointing fingers conveniently across the border. It is absolutely true that the feudal and military elites of Pakistan have reaped the whirlwind by fomenting terror in Kashmir. Now terror is biting them in the butt. However, India is better off concentrating on the grave social, economic and political injustices multiplying within our borders. Let us remember that the US is not an ally but a highly selfserving dominant global entity that has destabilized the South Asia culture area and region. The US is continuing the damage that the Brits conducted during the colonial period. DIVIDE and RULE hurts Pakistanis and Indians, and increases the power of the US in our region.
So, let us persevere to work together, Indians and Pakistanis, despite the historical and contemporary geopolitical impediments.
25 Jun 2009, 1416 hrs IST
--------------
Times of India copyright
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Pakistani-Taliban-a-threat-to-India-A-K-Antony-/articleshow/4700759.cms#write
NEW DELHI: The Taliban operating in Pakistan pose a "real threat" to India, the region and the world, defence minister A K Antony said on
Thursday.
"The Taliban are a threat to world peace, our region and a real threat to India," he told reporters here on the sidelines of the two-day Unified Commanders Conference that he inaugurated here.
Antony also expressed concern over the situation in Pakistan.
"Pakistan is in turmoil. We are very concerned about it. We are trying to convince Pakistan that they have to take strict action against anti-India elements operating from there," he maintained.
Given this, the minister said India could not afford to lower its guard along its western border, especially in Jammu and Kashmir.
"Of late, there is a decline in infiltration along the border. But we cannot say it is an improvement, since terrorists are still operating from the other side. India can not lower its guard at the border, especially in Jammu and Kashmir. We have to be very vigilant and careful," Antony contended.
He said he would discuss the security scenario in the South Asian region with visiting US National Security Advisor James Jones Friday.
"He is visiting me tomorrow. We will discuss the security situation in the (South Asian) region. When we discuss this, we can not avoid (mention of) Afghanistan," Antony said.
Better coordination and strengthening the war fighting capabilities of the army, the navy and the air force are high on the agenda of the Unified Commanders Conference, being held on the theme "Victory through Jointness".
=====================================================================================
Pakistan is even more servile than India, the Pakistan govt. is a paid political prostitute of the US since the John Foster Dulles era of the US State Department and the CIA of the '50's , however both India and Pakistan governments are stooges. Both serve US interests more than their respective peoples' interests, and the interdependent collective interests of ALL of the people in the South Asia culture area and region.
Why is India's Defence Minister A.K. Antony moaning and complaining to the US? Why give the US additional power as an intermediary in our region? Both India and Pakistan are ceding power in our region, to the US. Shame on our alleged leaders.
Yes, yes, Antony has a point. BUT it is also equally a fact that India has numerous domestic so-called "terror" groups. The terror label, orchestrated by the United States has now become a catch-all for ALL groups who oppose policies of the STATE, no matter which state it is.
Multiple varieties of the Taliban have proliferated, as a direct result of US activity in the region in the 80's, when the US invented a Cold War confrontation with the Soviets in Afghanistan. In this the US was joined by Pakistan and their old and dependable ally Saudi Arabia -- that beacon of democracy.
India should stop demonizing Pakistan and the Taliban. We need to clean up our own house and stop pointing fingers conveniently across the border. The inconvenient truth is India has plenty of groups attacking the Indian state from within.
Q. Are they ALL terror groups, or are many of them them desperate for economic justice? Do they feel neglected or exploited by the Indian state? The same is true in Pakistan where internal groups are chronically disaffected because they cannot achieve even the bare necessities of life.
It is absolutely true that the feudal and military elites of Pakistan have reaped the whirlwind by fomenting terror in Kashmir. Now terror is biting them in the butt.
However, India is better off concentrating on the grave social, economic and political injustices multiplying within our borders.
Let us remember that the US is not an ally but a highly self-serving dominant global entity that has destabilized the South Asia culture area and region. The US is continuing the damage that the Brits conducted during the colonial period. DIVIDE and RULE hurts Pakistanis and Indians, and increases the power of the US in our region. So let us persevere to work together, Indians and Pakistanis, despite the impediments of a superpower attempting to gain strategic depth in our region.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
---------------------------------------
My comment published on TOI online
Pakistani Taliban a threat to India: Antony
Chithra KarunaKaran Ethical Democracy,NYC,says:Why is India moaning and complaining to the US? Why give the US additional power as an intermediary in our region? Both India and Pakistan are ceding power in our region, to the US. Shame on us. Yes, yes, Antony has a point. BUT it is also equally a fact that India has numerous domestic so-called "terror" groups. The terror label, orchestrated by the United States has now become a catch-all for ALL groups who oppose policies of the STATE, no matter which state it is. Multiple varieties of the Taliban have proliferated, as a direct result of US activity in the region in the 80's, when the US invented a Cold War confrontation with the Soviets in Afghanistan. In this the US was joined by Pakistan and their old and dependable ally Saudi Arabia -- that beacon of democracy. India should stop demonizing Pakistan and the Taliban. We need to clean up our own house and stop pointing fingers conveniently across the border. It is absolutely true that the feudal and military elites of Pakistan have reaped the whirlwind by fomenting terror in Kashmir. Now terror is biting them in the butt. However, India is better off concentrating on the grave social, economic and political injustices multiplying within our borders. Let us remember that the US is not an ally but a highly selfserving dominant global entity that has destabilized the South Asia culture area and region. The US is continuing the damage that the Brits conducted during the colonial period. DIVIDE and RULE hurts Pakistanis and Indians, and increases the power of the US in our region.
So, let us persevere to work together, Indians and Pakistanis, despite the historical and contemporary geopolitical impediments.
25 Jun 2009, 1416 hrs IST
--------------
Times of India copyright
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Pakistani-Taliban-a-threat-to-India-A-K-Antony-/articleshow/4700759.cms#write
NEW DELHI: The Taliban operating in Pakistan pose a "real threat" to India, the region and the world, defence minister A K Antony said on
Thursday.
"The Taliban are a threat to world peace, our region and a real threat to India," he told reporters here on the sidelines of the two-day Unified Commanders Conference that he inaugurated here.
Antony also expressed concern over the situation in Pakistan.
"Pakistan is in turmoil. We are very concerned about it. We are trying to convince Pakistan that they have to take strict action against anti-India elements operating from there," he maintained.
Given this, the minister said India could not afford to lower its guard along its western border, especially in Jammu and Kashmir.
"Of late, there is a decline in infiltration along the border. But we cannot say it is an improvement, since terrorists are still operating from the other side. India can not lower its guard at the border, especially in Jammu and Kashmir. We have to be very vigilant and careful," Antony contended.
He said he would discuss the security scenario in the South Asian region with visiting US National Security Advisor James Jones Friday.
"He is visiting me tomorrow. We will discuss the security situation in the (South Asian) region. When we discuss this, we can not avoid (mention of) Afghanistan," Antony said.
Better coordination and strengthening the war fighting capabilities of the army, the navy and the air force are high on the agenda of the Unified Commanders Conference, being held on the theme "Victory through Jointness".
=====================================================================================
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Can Neda in Death Rekindle Iran's Democracy?
The shot that killed 26 year-old Neda Salehi Agha Soltan on Saturday in Tehran was heard around the world. Our hearts hurt for her. According to several reports, not least the stunning I-minute video of her dying moment, Neda was an innocent bystander watching street protests against a flawed election result, when she was shot. Neda, you are an innocent and your immortality in the cause of freedom, justice and Iran's democracy has just begun.
Iran's SELF-STYLED, UNELECTED "supreme leader" which pretty much means 'look at me I'm TOP DOG MULLAH and I am embarrassingly selfpromoting' -- Khamenei-- bears responsibility for Neda's brutal killing.
Ahmadinejad's leadership is dependent of the support of the clerics, (all male no surprise), and NOT the electorate. Ahmadinajad cannot succeed because his victory is bloodstained by the dying gasp and the rolling eyes of an innocent. Ahmadinejad's victory was not accomplished by ethical means, necessary for the full expression of participatory democracy.
But wait -- both Khamenei and Ahmadinajad are effective in controlling US neo-imperial designs in the West Asia region. That's important.
Neda's death has lent a bloody clarity, as well rendered more complex the internal and external geopolitics of Iran:
People everywhere who support the ethical development of civil societies in all nation-states, regions, culture areas and spaces, had hoped that Iran's elections would be fair. We had hoped that Iran's ancient civilization and staggering contribution to world culture would be vindicated by a vibrant and authentic expression of the people's aspirations. Instead, Iran's election have proven to be highly irregular, if not outright fraudulent.
3 million more votes were "cast" than there were registered voters! Did dead people vote? Did non-existent people vote? Did certain people vote multiple times? What an unholy mess for this self-described Islamic Republic.
Could Iran learn a lesson in electoral politics and vote counting from secular democratic India which recently conducted a massive and fair election; has more followers of Islam than Iran; and has more followers of Islam than any country except Indonesia? Yes Iran can.
Yes, Iran take a page out of India's flawed but fair election Lesson Plan. Iran, Be open, transparent, take responsibility for discrepancies in the vote count. Show that you can be discursive, not prescriptive. Discussion that bends towards Justice and in fact leads to Justice is the cornerstone of Ethical Democracy.
Obviously, the first strategic step that both Ahmadinejad and MirHossein Moussavi should have jointly taken is to call, in a televised joint appearance, for a vote recount in disputed constituencies and a rejection of illegal ballots.
Instead, Ahmadinejad defended the result and proved himself by his actions to be ever more inclined to be a dictator rather than an elected leader. He was supported by Iran's self-proclaimed Supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, who predictably promised a bloody suppression of peaceful street protests against the flawed ballot result. It was precisely that bloody suppression that so heartbreakingly claimed the life of Neda Salehi Agha Soltan. She is a slain innocent in the perilous journey towards Iran's democracy.
Iran's needless, mindless self-sabotaging suppression of The People's ballot has given the US, (a state sponsor of terror in West Asia and South Asia), an opening to assert itself as a champion of freedom and liberty in West Asia. The US is not. All the evidence proves the US is not. Iran therefore played right into the hands of the US. Instead of conducting a fair election, Iran chose to be brutally repressive of its own people. In fact Iran caused an internal division of its own electorate by pitting Moussavi's supporters, generally more educated, more female and more affluent, against Ahmedinajad's more traditionalist, more religious and more male supporters. The stolen election has unnecessarily caused disharmony among the fascinatingly diverse and divergent elements of the Iranian public.
The theocratic government of Iran created this dangerous wedge between its own people and Iran gave the US an opportunity to assert itself as the champion of freedom and civil liberties in West Asia. The US plays the Democracy card while invading, occupying, droning, displacing civil societies across regions. The US has been the main culprit in destabilizing democratic processes in Iran over several decades, beginning with the overthrow of Mossadegh, the propping up of the Shah and the support of Iraq against Iran in a bloody decade long war. The US continues to be a major force for destabilization throughout West Asia, which the US from its neo-imperial vantage point of dominant power calls the Middle East.
It remains to be seen whether Neda's brutal death will ignite and rekindle Iran's dormant democracy. It remains to be seen whether Iran's civil society will resist equally the 1) forces of Iran's repressive state apparatus, and also 2)turn its back on US attempts to gain strategic depth in Iran, by pretending to be a voice for civil rights and democracy in West Asia.
Q. If Iran's govt cannot accurately count electoral ballots, can Iran be trusted to safeguard the nuclear weapons it is developing?
A point to ponder -- the answer appears to be a qualified NO.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
-------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757.html
Washington Post copyright
The Iranian People Speak
By Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty
Monday, June 15, 2009
The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin -- greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.
This Story
While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.
Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, preelection polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organizations from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our preelection survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.
Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.
The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.
Some might argue that the professed support for Ahmadinejad we found simply reflected fearful respondents' reluctance to provide honest answers to pollsters. Yet the integrity of our results is confirmed by the politically risky responses Iranians were willing to give to a host of questions. For instance, nearly four in five Iranians -- including most Ahmadinejad supporters -- said they wanted to change the political system to give them the right to elect Iran's supreme leader, who is not currently subject to popular vote. Similarly, Iranians chose free elections and a free press as their most important priorities for their government, virtually tied with improving the national economy. These were hardly "politically correct" responses to voice publicly in a largely authoritarian society.
Indeed, and consistently among all three of our surveys over the past two years, more than 70 percent of Iranians also expressed support for providing full access to weapons inspectors and a guarantee that Iran will not develop or possess nuclear weapons, in return for outside aid and investment. And 77 percent of Iranians favored normal relations and trade with the United States, another result consistent with our previous findings.
Iranians view their support for a more democratic system, with normal relations with the United States, as consonant with their support for Ahmadinejad. They do not want him to continue his hard-line policies. Rather, Iranians apparently see Ahmadinejad as their toughest negotiator, the person best positioned to bring home a favorable deal -- rather like a Persian Nixon going to China.
Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent, with the grave consequences such charges could bring, they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the reelection of President Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted.
Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism. Patrick Doherty is deputy director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The groups' May 11-20 polling consisted of 1,001 interviews across Iran and had a 3.1 percentage point margin of error.
For more on polling in Iran, read Jon Cohen's Behind the Numbers.
=================================================================================
Iran's SELF-STYLED, UNELECTED "supreme leader" which pretty much means 'look at me I'm TOP DOG MULLAH and I am embarrassingly selfpromoting' -- Khamenei-- bears responsibility for Neda's brutal killing.
Ahmadinejad's leadership is dependent of the support of the clerics, (all male no surprise), and NOT the electorate. Ahmadinajad cannot succeed because his victory is bloodstained by the dying gasp and the rolling eyes of an innocent. Ahmadinejad's victory was not accomplished by ethical means, necessary for the full expression of participatory democracy.
But wait -- both Khamenei and Ahmadinajad are effective in controlling US neo-imperial designs in the West Asia region. That's important.
Neda's death has lent a bloody clarity, as well rendered more complex the internal and external geopolitics of Iran:
People everywhere who support the ethical development of civil societies in all nation-states, regions, culture areas and spaces, had hoped that Iran's elections would be fair. We had hoped that Iran's ancient civilization and staggering contribution to world culture would be vindicated by a vibrant and authentic expression of the people's aspirations. Instead, Iran's election have proven to be highly irregular, if not outright fraudulent.
3 million more votes were "cast" than there were registered voters! Did dead people vote? Did non-existent people vote? Did certain people vote multiple times? What an unholy mess for this self-described Islamic Republic.
Could Iran learn a lesson in electoral politics and vote counting from secular democratic India which recently conducted a massive and fair election; has more followers of Islam than Iran; and has more followers of Islam than any country except Indonesia? Yes Iran can.
Yes, Iran take a page out of India's flawed but fair election Lesson Plan. Iran, Be open, transparent, take responsibility for discrepancies in the vote count. Show that you can be discursive, not prescriptive. Discussion that bends towards Justice and in fact leads to Justice is the cornerstone of Ethical Democracy.
Obviously, the first strategic step that both Ahmadinejad and MirHossein Moussavi should have jointly taken is to call, in a televised joint appearance, for a vote recount in disputed constituencies and a rejection of illegal ballots.
Instead, Ahmadinejad defended the result and proved himself by his actions to be ever more inclined to be a dictator rather than an elected leader. He was supported by Iran's self-proclaimed Supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, who predictably promised a bloody suppression of peaceful street protests against the flawed ballot result. It was precisely that bloody suppression that so heartbreakingly claimed the life of Neda Salehi Agha Soltan. She is a slain innocent in the perilous journey towards Iran's democracy.
Iran's needless, mindless self-sabotaging suppression of The People's ballot has given the US, (a state sponsor of terror in West Asia and South Asia), an opening to assert itself as a champion of freedom and liberty in West Asia. The US is not. All the evidence proves the US is not. Iran therefore played right into the hands of the US. Instead of conducting a fair election, Iran chose to be brutally repressive of its own people. In fact Iran caused an internal division of its own electorate by pitting Moussavi's supporters, generally more educated, more female and more affluent, against Ahmedinajad's more traditionalist, more religious and more male supporters. The stolen election has unnecessarily caused disharmony among the fascinatingly diverse and divergent elements of the Iranian public.
The theocratic government of Iran created this dangerous wedge between its own people and Iran gave the US an opportunity to assert itself as the champion of freedom and civil liberties in West Asia. The US plays the Democracy card while invading, occupying, droning, displacing civil societies across regions. The US has been the main culprit in destabilizing democratic processes in Iran over several decades, beginning with the overthrow of Mossadegh, the propping up of the Shah and the support of Iraq against Iran in a bloody decade long war. The US continues to be a major force for destabilization throughout West Asia, which the US from its neo-imperial vantage point of dominant power calls the Middle East.
It remains to be seen whether Neda's brutal death will ignite and rekindle Iran's dormant democracy. It remains to be seen whether Iran's civil society will resist equally the 1) forces of Iran's repressive state apparatus, and also 2)turn its back on US attempts to gain strategic depth in Iran, by pretending to be a voice for civil rights and democracy in West Asia.
Q. If Iran's govt cannot accurately count electoral ballots, can Iran be trusted to safeguard the nuclear weapons it is developing?
A point to ponder -- the answer appears to be a qualified NO.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
-------------
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/14/AR2009061401757.html
Washington Post copyright
The Iranian People Speak
By Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty
Monday, June 15, 2009
The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin -- greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.
This Story
While Western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.
Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, preelection polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organizations from May 11 to May 20 was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighboring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our preelection survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasized his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.
Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the Internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the Internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.
The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.
Some might argue that the professed support for Ahmadinejad we found simply reflected fearful respondents' reluctance to provide honest answers to pollsters. Yet the integrity of our results is confirmed by the politically risky responses Iranians were willing to give to a host of questions. For instance, nearly four in five Iranians -- including most Ahmadinejad supporters -- said they wanted to change the political system to give them the right to elect Iran's supreme leader, who is not currently subject to popular vote. Similarly, Iranians chose free elections and a free press as their most important priorities for their government, virtually tied with improving the national economy. These were hardly "politically correct" responses to voice publicly in a largely authoritarian society.
Indeed, and consistently among all three of our surveys over the past two years, more than 70 percent of Iranians also expressed support for providing full access to weapons inspectors and a guarantee that Iran will not develop or possess nuclear weapons, in return for outside aid and investment. And 77 percent of Iranians favored normal relations and trade with the United States, another result consistent with our previous findings.
Iranians view their support for a more democratic system, with normal relations with the United States, as consonant with their support for Ahmadinejad. They do not want him to continue his hard-line policies. Rather, Iranians apparently see Ahmadinejad as their toughest negotiator, the person best positioned to bring home a favorable deal -- rather like a Persian Nixon going to China.
Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent, with the grave consequences such charges could bring, they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the reelection of President Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted.
Ken Ballen is president of Terror Free Tomorrow: The Center for Public Opinion, a nonprofit institute that researches attitudes toward extremism. Patrick Doherty is deputy director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation. The groups' May 11-20 polling consisted of 1,001 interviews across Iran and had a 3.1 percentage point margin of error.
For more on polling in Iran, read Jon Cohen's Behind the Numbers.
=================================================================================
Monday, June 22, 2009
Sri Lanka Crimininalizes and Punishes its Own internally displaced persons
The Sri Lanka Govt. has blocked entry of a ship carrying relief supplies for its own internally displaced persons. Shame on Rajapaksa and his crew for this inhumane act.
Sri Lanka is masquerading that it is a democracy. It is also making a mockery of Buddhist principles. Successive SL govts. have long treated Tamils as second class citizens denying them basic rights. Now it has decided that these hapless refugees who were caught in the crossfire of a govt vs. LTTE military showdown, should be punished by denying them essential relief supplies. Women, children and men are suffering daily in refugee camps, to which media organizations have been denied access.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy as Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
-------------
Times of India copyright
MV Captain Ali — a ship on a mercy mission to Vanni in Sri Lanka has been anchored of the coast of Chennai. The ship carrying 884 ton of food,
medicine and other relief materials for internally displaced Sri Lankan Tamils was turned away by Lankan Navy.
Relief laden — MV Captain Ali was sent to Vanni by an NGO called 'ACT Now' a strong representative of the Tamil diaspora. However, the Lankan government has accused the NGO of aiding LTTE and hence has snubbed the relief ship.
The in charge of the ship, Kristjan Guomontsson spoke exclusively to TIMES NOW and said that he has no clue as to why the aid was turned down.
Guomontsson, an Iceland national, was a part of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) which includes Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Finland and Sweden. The SLMM was set up in 2002 under the terms of cease fore agreement. Guomantsson was one of the monitors- and the SLMM was slammed by the Lankan government to be sympathetic to LTTE.
According to the Lankan Navy, the ship was turned away on the ground that it violated internationally accepted formalities followed by merchant ships seeking to enter Lankan waters and that it did not conform to the International Ships Port Facility Security (ISPS) code.
Sri Lanka is masquerading that it is a democracy. It is also making a mockery of Buddhist principles. Successive SL govts. have long treated Tamils as second class citizens denying them basic rights. Now it has decided that these hapless refugees who were caught in the crossfire of a govt vs. LTTE military showdown, should be punished by denying them essential relief supplies. Women, children and men are suffering daily in refugee camps, to which media organizations have been denied access.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy as Lived Practice
http://EthicalDemocracy.blogspot.com
-------------
Times of India copyright
MV Captain Ali — a ship on a mercy mission to Vanni in Sri Lanka has been anchored of the coast of Chennai. The ship carrying 884 ton of food,
medicine and other relief materials for internally displaced Sri Lankan Tamils was turned away by Lankan Navy.
Relief laden — MV Captain Ali was sent to Vanni by an NGO called 'ACT Now' a strong representative of the Tamil diaspora. However, the Lankan government has accused the NGO of aiding LTTE and hence has snubbed the relief ship.
The in charge of the ship, Kristjan Guomontsson spoke exclusively to TIMES NOW and said that he has no clue as to why the aid was turned down.
Guomontsson, an Iceland national, was a part of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) which includes Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Finland and Sweden. The SLMM was set up in 2002 under the terms of cease fore agreement. Guomantsson was one of the monitors- and the SLMM was slammed by the Lankan government to be sympathetic to LTTE.
According to the Lankan Navy, the ship was turned away on the ground that it violated internationally accepted formalities followed by merchant ships seeking to enter Lankan waters and that it did not conform to the International Ships Port Facility Security (ISPS) code.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
USCIRF has no authority in India or in any other sovereign state
USCIRF -- The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom has absolutely no authority in India or any other sovereign nation-state. Therefore, it is almost laughable that USCIRF was ready to arrive in India on June 12, but were stopped because The Indian Government did not issue visas in time for their planned visit.
Why was the Indian government cowardly and fumbling on this issue? Why did the GOI not issue a press statement that USCIRF's visit was not acceptable at this or any other time? This is not a visa issue, it is an issue of sovereign state rights. Is India a client state of the US? Does it take orders from Washington?
The Government of India should have been proactive and directly informed the US govt. that USCIRF (ostensibly authorized by the US Congress to MONITOR religious rights worldwide), cannot visit India to monitor our religious rights. No entity of the US govt. or ANY govt. of ANY nation-state has authority to monitor the religious rights or any other civil society rights /conditions/ situations prevailing in ANY other sovereign nation-state.
Second, it is up to US President Obama to ask Congress to disband the USCIRF. The USCIRF was established by Republicans who are no longer in power. It's over, you guys. Your opinion, especially when it interferes with the political and civil society conditions prevailing in sovereign nation-states, no longer counts and never did count. You have no authority over other states even though you may exercise such authority and power over occupied states (Iraq), weak client states (Pakistan) and satellite states (example Israel) the latter in the process of developing (illegal)sovereign authority over contested legally unsupportable settlements/ borders.
You in the US congress or the White House have no mandate outside of your own finite borders. Stop playing Global SuperCop and mind your own business, which as we all know is in total disarray and is continuing to cause economic upheavals in other sovereign nation-states. The US govt. has enough on its plate for the next eight years without blatantly and illegally interfering in the ongoing development of responsible nation-states. Has the USCIRF recently monitored religious rights in Saudi Arabia or is SA exempt because of its petrodollar connections? Will USCIRF reeceive visas from Iran? Did the US CAUSE religious and ethnic frictions in Iraq which they invaded and still occupy? WHO WILL MONITOR THE US? Certainly the UN has shown itself incapable of doing so, because it is a client of the US, where it is headquartered.
Last, the Indian government does not need to rely on the counsel of private religious leaders like Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati who has expressed opposition to the USCIRF visit. He is a private citizen and he has the right to express his views on USCIRF or anything else. But the Government of India has responsibility as elected leaders of a SECULAR democracy, to steer its own course as a SECULAR sovereign nation-state. Religious leaders do not dictate the policy, foreign or domestic, of sovereign nation-states, who are avowedly secular and democratic. As India is.
Why was the Indian government cowardly and fumbling on this issue? Why did the GOI not issue a press statement that USCIRF's visit was not acceptable at this or any other time? This is not a visa issue, it is an issue of sovereign state rights. Is India a client state of the US? Does it take orders from Washington?
The Government of India should have been proactive and directly informed the US govt. that USCIRF (ostensibly authorized by the US Congress to MONITOR religious rights worldwide), cannot visit India to monitor our religious rights. No entity of the US govt. or ANY govt. of ANY nation-state has authority to monitor the religious rights or any other civil society rights /conditions/ situations prevailing in ANY other sovereign nation-state.
Second, it is up to US President Obama to ask Congress to disband the USCIRF. The USCIRF was established by Republicans who are no longer in power. It's over, you guys. Your opinion, especially when it interferes with the political and civil society conditions prevailing in sovereign nation-states, no longer counts and never did count. You have no authority over other states even though you may exercise such authority and power over occupied states (Iraq), weak client states (Pakistan) and satellite states (example Israel) the latter in the process of developing (illegal)sovereign authority over contested legally unsupportable settlements/ borders.
You in the US congress or the White House have no mandate outside of your own finite borders. Stop playing Global SuperCop and mind your own business, which as we all know is in total disarray and is continuing to cause economic upheavals in other sovereign nation-states. The US govt. has enough on its plate for the next eight years without blatantly and illegally interfering in the ongoing development of responsible nation-states. Has the USCIRF recently monitored religious rights in Saudi Arabia or is SA exempt because of its petrodollar connections? Will USCIRF reeceive visas from Iran? Did the US CAUSE religious and ethnic frictions in Iraq which they invaded and still occupy? WHO WILL MONITOR THE US? Certainly the UN has shown itself incapable of doing so, because it is a client of the US, where it is headquartered.
Last, the Indian government does not need to rely on the counsel of private religious leaders like Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati who has expressed opposition to the USCIRF visit. He is a private citizen and he has the right to express his views on USCIRF or anything else. But the Government of India has responsibility as elected leaders of a SECULAR democracy, to steer its own course as a SECULAR sovereign nation-state. Religious leaders do not dictate the policy, foreign or domestic, of sovereign nation-states, who are avowedly secular and democratic. As India is.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
US Plays Divide & Rule in South Asia Culture Area
The current visit of US Undersecretary of State William Burns bearing a "private" (according to Holbroke) letter from President Obama to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh ,underscores what we already know:
For over FIVE Decades, the United States has practiced a neoimperial policy globally.
Our South Asia culture area is no exception to this US policy of global economic dominance and military adventurism.
The postcolonial dependency mindset of our feudal elites and our political classes, who were already weakened by the British divide and rule policy that resulted in Partition in 1947, has now fully succumbed to the US neoimperial strategy.
India and Pakistan consistently fail to work together because they have accepted US dominance of the South Asia culture area.
The US has succeeded, over a span of 50 years, in getting Pakistan's governments, whether military dictatorship or fragile democratic processes, to use arms against its own people. The vast internal displacement of Pakistanis is the most recent proof of the success of US neoimperial, anti-civil society policy in South Asia Pakistan as a nation--state is weak, as never before. But its feudal elites (which include the military classes at the higher echelons) are enriched daily by US infusions of money and weaponry.
The concept of region has supplanted the more basic and important concept of culture area.
The prevailing offensive of "strategic depth" has allowed the US to gain a ground advantage in South Asia, obviously in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
We the People of South Asia cannot rely on our political elites, military elites and our landed elites. They are complicit with this neoimperial policy and have much to gain from continued collusion with the US.
Only We the People, the civil societies of Afghanistan, Bangladesh,India, Pakistan, Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka, can work together to create solidarity and prosperity for ALL the people of the South Asia culture area.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
For over FIVE Decades, the United States has practiced a neoimperial policy globally.
Our South Asia culture area is no exception to this US policy of global economic dominance and military adventurism.
The postcolonial dependency mindset of our feudal elites and our political classes, who were already weakened by the British divide and rule policy that resulted in Partition in 1947, has now fully succumbed to the US neoimperial strategy.
India and Pakistan consistently fail to work together because they have accepted US dominance of the South Asia culture area.
The US has succeeded, over a span of 50 years, in getting Pakistan's governments, whether military dictatorship or fragile democratic processes, to use arms against its own people. The vast internal displacement of Pakistanis is the most recent proof of the success of US neoimperial, anti-civil society policy in South Asia Pakistan as a nation--state is weak, as never before. But its feudal elites (which include the military classes at the higher echelons) are enriched daily by US infusions of money and weaponry.
The concept of region has supplanted the more basic and important concept of culture area.
The prevailing offensive of "strategic depth" has allowed the US to gain a ground advantage in South Asia, obviously in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
We the People of South Asia cannot rely on our political elites, military elites and our landed elites. They are complicit with this neoimperial policy and have much to gain from continued collusion with the US.
Only We the People, the civil societies of Afghanistan, Bangladesh,India, Pakistan, Maldives, Nepal, Sri Lanka, can work together to create solidarity and prosperity for ALL the people of the South Asia culture area.
Chithra KarunaKaran
Ethical Democracy As Lived Practice
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)