Survivors have had little justice. Only 20 people have been convicted for the killings

Thousands of Sikhs were orphaned, widowed and made homeless in the riots. Justice has been delayed: a handful of people have been convicted in half a dozen murder cases. Some compensation has been paid to the families of victims.

Homes and businesses owned by the Sikhs were targeted and burned down by mobs all over the city.

Officially, 2,733 Sikhs were killed over three days of rioting. The unofficial toll was 3,870.

Indira Gandhi’s son, Rajiv, who took over as the new PM, said: “When a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it does shake a little.” Authorities dithered and the army was deployed several hours after the killings began.

Nearly 3,000 members of India’s Sikh community were massacred after the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her two Sikh bodyguards on 31 October 1984. Rahul Bedi, one of the first journalists to reach the affected areas in the capital, Delhi, recalls events.

The 25th anniversary of Indira Gandhi’s assassination revives stark memories of some 3,000 Sikhs killed brutally in the orderly pogrom that followed her killing.

The wave of ethnic cleansing which raged unhindered across the country, especially in Delhi, after Mrs Gandhi was shot dead ended only with her cremation on 2 November.

During these three days droves of Sikhs were determinedly hunted down by Hindu mobs from their homes, corralled and slaughtered like animals.

The trigger for Mrs Gandhi’s killing was the storming of the Golden Temple in Sikhism’s holy city Amritsar four months earlier to flush out Sikh militants fighting for an independent homeland of Khalistan or Land of the Pure. 

But the 1984 Delhi riots rocked the world, more so for the state’s direct involvement and public justification of the blood-letting.

Sikh shops and establishments were targeted and burnt

The heavily-armed militants - many of them former soldiers - had barricaded themselves inside the temple and were dislodged only after three days of bitter fighting. Some 1,000 people, including women and children pilgrims and about 157 soldiers, died.

Tanks too were employed to end the siege, leaving Sikhs highly aggrieved.

The eventual and possibly avoidable storming of the Golden Temple generated a wave of violence leading to Mrs Gandhi’s assassination, the anti-Sikh riots and a vicious insurgency across Punjab that was eventually stamped out by the military around 1993, although not without widespread human rights abuses.

But the 1984 Delhi riots rocked the world, more so for the state’s direct involvement and public justification of the blood-letting.

‘Earth shakes’

Reacting to the continuing Sikh killings in Delhi and other places, newly appointed Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi declared at a massive rally in the capital that “once a mighty tree falls, it is only natural that the earth around it shakes”.

One of the worst massacres took place in two narrow alleys in the city’s poor Trilokpuri colony where some 350 Sikhs, including women and children, were casually butchered over 72 hours.

The charred and hacked remains of the hundreds that perished in Trilokpuri’s Block 32 on the smoky and dank evening of 2 November 1984 were stark testimony to the unimpeded and seemingly endless massacre.

Soon after news of Mrs Gandhi’s killing by her Sikh bodyguards spread, Hindu mobs swung into action - like they did elsewhere in the city armed with voters’ lists - in Trilokpuri against the low caste Sikhs inhabiting one-roomed tenements on either side of two narrow alleyways barely 150 yards long.

With local police connivance they blocked entry to the neighbourhood with massive concrete water pipes and stationed guards armed with sticks atop them.

For the next three days marauding groups armed with cleavers, scythes, kitchen knives and scissors took breaks to eat and regroup in between executing their bloodthirsty mission.

Sikhs were killed in the main railway station (Photo: Ashok Vahie)

When as a reporter then with the Indian Express newspaper I along with two other colleagues visited the area on the eve of Mrs Gandhi’ funeral, both lanes were littered with bodies, body parts and hair brutally hacked off, forcing us to walk precariously on tip-toe.

It was impossible to place one’s foot flat on the ground for fear of stepping on either a severed limb or a body.

Earlier in the day two policemen on a motorcycle had emerged from Block 32 and reassured us that shanti or calm prevailed inside it and no untoward incident had occurred.

A few hours later on returning to the spot we saw that the entire area was awash with blood, a large proportion of it black coagulated mounds over which flies buzzed lazily.

Abject terror

It was also piled high in the open drains on either side of the tenements, never efficient at the best of times, alongside other human remains.

As we walked through this implausible slaughter in the light of hurricane lamps provided by some residents, the complete silence despite the large mob surrounding us was eerie.

No one spoke and nothing, except the bizarre, dancing shadows moved during this surrealistic interlude.

Even one of the only survivors - a young polio-afflicted mother - holding her new born in her arms gazed sightlessly upon us.

Her blank look momentarily changed into one of abject terror as we bent down to take her child to whom she fiercely clung.

She probably took us to be the butchers who had massacred her entire family piled up high in the room behind her.

A whimper led us to a barely conscious young Sikh, hiding under a heap of bodies, his slashed stomach wrapped crudely around with a turban.

All he wanted was water, parched after over 36 hours of concealing himself under the mound of corpses and bleeding steadily. He died soon after in hospital.

Some doors down a two-year-old girl, unmindful of the bodies, walked lazily over to us holding out her arms asking to be taken home.

Unfortunately, she was home; but one littered with the bloated bodies of her parents and siblings killed two nights earlier.

Police arrived in Trilokpuri 24 hours later when the Indian Express revealed the horrific massacre.

Sadly, there were no Sikhs left to protect.

Two inquiry commissions and seven investigative committees into the 1984 Sikh riots later no one has been held guilty for the Trilokpuri killings.

Of the 2,733 officially admitted murders, only nine cases have so far led to the conviction of 20 people in 25 years; a conviction rate of less than 1%.

But Manmohan Singh’s elevation to India’s prime minister in 2004 was looked upon by the flamboyant Sikh community as the vindication of its destiny of being born to rule.

Previous transgressions by his Congress party were forgiven but not forgotten and his casually tied trademark blue turban represented a collective crown for the enterprising but persecuted Sikh community.

Mr Singh, they said, was king. 

NEW DELHI: At least 60 Christians have been killed over the past two months in eastern India in a brutal backlash to the murder of a revered Hindu holy man, a national bishops’ body said Friday.

The figure is nearly double the official toll of 35 given by government authorities in the eastern state of Orissa. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of India said scores of Christians were still fleeing their homes in Orissa and called for action to stem the religious violence in the state’s troubled Kandhamal district.

‘Christians are afraid to return to their villages as threats of death have forced many of them to flee to the forest or live in dehumanising conditions,’ the organisation said. ‘The fear that has driven thousands into the forests for shelter and safety is a living reproach to those who should provide safety and security and not leave the law and order situation to mob rule,’ the organisation added.

The comments came less than a week after Pope Benedict XVI renewed his condemnation of attacks on Indian Christians. The bishops’ group also demanded a federal probe into the rape of a Catholic nun in Kandhamal, the epicentre of the violence.

According to AFP, there was no immediate reaction to the figures from Orissa state government officials. The Orissa government, administered by a political party aligned to India’s main Hindu nationalist grouping, says it has deployed enough troops to quell the violence.

Reference: http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/60+christians+murdered+in+india+in+two+months++awk

A Must Watch Documentary, lasting 2 Hours and 46 Minutes.

Open In Seperate Page - Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3829364588351777769

Chronology Of Events: http://www.onlinevolunteers.org/gujarat/reports/pucl/vv_annexure2.pdf

Investigations:

1. http://www.tehelka.com/story_main35.asp?filename=Ne031107gujrat_sec.asp
2. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1071026/asp/nation/story_8474936.asp
3. http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2003/05/18/stories/2003051802751000.htm

Wailing Woes By Aaliya Anjum

Women in Kashmir suffer rape, molestation, kin’s disappearances, psychological trauma and torture, while the much-hyped slogan of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh proclaiming ‘zero tolerance’ towards human rights abuse stares him in the face!

Inspite of the fact that the violations of human rights in Kashmir are in direct disregard of the principles of international human rights and humanitarian law including the Geneva Conventions and the protocols additional thereto, no attention has been directed to address the issue at national and international levels. An appropriate response is necessitated by the fact that the violations of human rights in Kashmir’s armed conflict have had a direct bearing on its civilian population. Civilian victims, mostly women and children, often outnumber casualties among the combatants [1]. But women suffer in both differing and complex forms. They suffer directly by being subject to rape, molestation and torture and others whose relations are subject to atrocities suffer because of being related to them. It therefore becomes imperative to try and analyse the impact that the past 18 years of conflict have had on Kashmiri women. More so, because there needs to be an awareness and understanding that armed conflict and its impact affect women physically, psychologically, socially and economically [2]. The International Committee of The Red Cross (ICRC) places the impact of armed conflict on women under eight themes: Displacement, security, sexual violence, missing persons, detention, access to medicare, access to food and other assistance and protection under international humanitarian law [3].

Rape cases
A study done by Medecins Sans Frontieres in mid 2005 reveals that Kashmiri women are among the worst sufferers of sexual violence in the world. It further mentions that since the beginning of the armed struggle in Kashmir in 1989, sexual violence has been routinely perpetrated on Kashmiri women, with 11.6 per cent of respondents saying they were victims of sexual abuse. Interestingly, the figure is much higher than that of Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka and Chechnya. The state home department has no specific data in this regard for the last 17 years. This serves as a telling comment on the plight of women and on the indifferent attitude of the state towards addressing the issue. Cases of rape and molestation abound in Kashmir and many go unreported because of the fear of social stigma, and of reprisal by state agencies. And even in those cases, where the victims manage to transcend these fears and report the matter to police, they achieve little or no justice. More often, police refuses to lodge an FIR against the troops.
In Kunan Poshpora, a small village in Kashmir, the soldiers of fourth Rajputana Rifles allegedly raped about 30 women on the night of February 23, 1991, during a search operation while men were taken away from their homes and interrogated. The ages of women raped ranged from 13 to 80 years. According to newspaper reports, on June 17,1994, troops of Rashtriya Rifles accompanied by two officers Major Ramesh and Major Rajkumar entered into village Hyhama and allegedly raped and molested seven women. In another incident, troops raped a mentally ill old woman in her house in Barbarshah in Srinagar on January 5, 1991. Medical reports confirmed rape and locals lodged an FIR with the concerned police station, but the police did no investigation. She later died in 1998 while the FIR still awaits action from the state government. In another gruesome incident, an army Major in Badra, Handwara, raped Aisha, a 29-year-old woman and her 10-year-old daughter, Shabnum. These being just a few examples, incidents like these are plenty in Kashmir and ironically pass unheeded for.
Due to immunity of troops from prosecution and their own court martial proceedings, which are far from being unbiased, they are left free to do as they please. Dr Maiti, a professor of political science at Rurdwa University, West Bengal, explains, “Rape continues to be a major instrument of Indian oppression against the Kashmiri people while the majority of victims are civilians. This concept stands fortified by a report of ICRC dated March 6, 2001, where it has been mentioned that women are raped in order to humiliate, frighten and defeat the enemy ‘group’ to which they belong. Rape in a war is not merely a matter of chance; it is rather a question of power and control, which is ’structured by male soldiers’ notions of their masculine privilege, by the strength of the military line of command and by class and ethnic inequalities among women [4]. One of the reasons given by Radhika Coomaraswamy for sexual violence in armed conflict is that violence against women may be directed towards the social group of which she is a member because ‘to rape a woman is to humiliate her community’. Complex and combined emotions of hatred, superiority, vengeance for real or imagined wrongs and national pride are engendered and deliberately manipulated in armed conflict. For the men of the community, rape encapsulates the totality of their defeat; they have failed to protect their women [5]. The Special Rapporteur appointed by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in former Yugoslavia termed rape as not only as an instrument of war but as a method of ethnic cleansing intended to humiliate, shame, degrade and terrify the entire ethnic group [6].

The Geneva Convention related to The Protection of Civilian Persons In Times Of War, 1949 and Additional Protocols of 1977 provide that women shall especially be protected against humiliating and degrading treatment; rape, enforced prostitution or any form of indecent assault [7]. The Vienna Declaration and Programme Of Action adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights in Situations of Armed Conflict states that violations of human rights of women in situations of armed conflict are violations of the fundamental principles of international human rights and humanitarian law. Even though states are under an obligation to make grave breaches of Geneva Conventions and protocols additional thereto subject to the jurisdiction of their own courts and punishable by severe penalties. The domestic courts do not peruse the law laid down under the said convention for rape trials in conflict areas like Kashmir. However, rape is not explicitly listed as a grave breach of Geneva Convention, although acts willfully committed and causing great suffering or causing grave injury to body or health do constitute breaches.
The fact that rape has been systematically committed against Kashmiri women and that justice has not been delivered in these cases makes rape in Kashmir eligible for an appropriate legal response at the international level. The state has to be held for breach of its obligations under various relevant treaties and customary international law.
The prosecution of individuals alleged to have committed rape should be done by the international criminal tribunal on the precedent of Nuremberg as the domestic courts and military court-martials have failed to deliver justice in these matters and are motivated by a state centric approach [8]. The focus of the tribunal should be to punish the wrongdoers, not on providing compensation and support to the victim.
The International tribunals are unique in that, they can be established during the continuation of the conflict and therefore they are untainted by the notions of ‘victors justice’. Prosecutions must be brought against the alleged perpetrators and those higher up in the chain of command [9].
Rape is a grave crime as its consequences extend beyond the actual commission, often lasting for the rest of the life of a woman [10]. The social stigma associated with rape renders a raped woman unmarriageable, deprived of respect in the society and traumatised for the rest of her life. In some cases women become unacceptable even to their own families. The necessity to bring the perpetrators of rapes in Kashmir to justice can be understood from the fact that parties to conflict often rape as a tactic of war and terrorism [11].

Half-widows of the Valley
Enforced disappearance is one of the most harrowing consequences of the armed conflict in Kashmir. During the last 18 years of conflict, the Association Of Parents Of Disappeared Persons (APDP) [12], an organisation of the relatives of people who have disappeared after custody, claims more than 10,000 people have been subject to enforced disappearance by state agencies and were mostly picked up by the troops. Of the disappeared persons, between 2000-2005 a majority were married males. Although men have been subject to disappearance largely, but women have been adversely affected because of being related to them as daughters, mothers, sisters and wives. In the absence of any information about the whereabouts of the disappeared men, their wives have acquired the title of ‘ half-widows’. These half-widows apart from other relatives of disappeared persons are left without any entitlement to land, homes, inheritance, social assistance and pensions. Most of these women also suffer from harassment by
the troops.

Fahmeeda Bano, 37, lives in a remote Kashmir village of Kupwara and 14 years back the Indian army picked up her husband. She has gone from pillar to post searching for him but to no avail. She said, “If my husband is alive I want to see him. I want authorities to tell me where he is. If he has been killed let them hand over his body to me…”

The Indian government does not provide any relief to half-widows before the expiry of seven years from the date of disappearance. And even after the completion of seven years from the date of disappearance, they get either a one-time grant ranging from US$1,000 and US$2,000 or a monthly pension of US$10 [13]. Further, a half-widow cannot remarry until the expiration of seven years from the date of disappearance of her husband whose whereabouts must not be known in these seven years. In the meantime, the right to her husband’s property are often threatened. Some widows, who intend to remarry, largely do not find men who are willing to marry them. A study titled, ‘Women And Children Under The Armed Conflict In Kashmir’ done by Prof A G Madhosh, a Kashmiri educationist and activist, reveals that the migration of widows with their children resulted in a sudden break in normal family life. Women had to assume the roles of breadwinners for their families and the future of their children became insecure.

Every month the members of APDP gather for a sit-in-protest at Central Park in Srinagar. Their continuous protests should have served as a resonating alarm for the authorities, but they seem to have turned a deaf ear to the woes of these people. Fahmeeda Bano, 37, lives in a remote Kashmir village of Kupwara and 14 years back the Indian army picked up her husband. She has gone from pillar to post searching for him but to no avail. She said, “If my husband is alive I want to see him. I want authorities to tell me where he is. If he has been killed let them hand over his body to me. [14]“

Psychological Impact
With killings, torture, rapes, molestations, disappearances and detentions becoming the order of the day in Kashmir, psychiatric disorders have seen a sharp increase post-1989. In 1989, about 1,700 patients visited the valley’s lone psychiatric hospital and by the year 2003, the number had gone up to 48,000. Before the onset of the armed struggle, certain disorders that were not known to Kashmiris started showing a significant presence amongst the civilian population. The Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PSTD), one of the psychiatric diseases, which was completely unrecognised before 1990 has witnessed a major upsurge. Major Depressive Disorder (MDO) follows this. There are other mental diseases like bipolar disorder, panic, phobia; general anxiety and sleep disorders that have also shown four-fold increase as told by Dr Arshad of the Psychiatric Diseases Hospital in Srinagar. Substance Use Disorder or drug addiction and suicidal tendencies has been another repercussion of the ongoing conflict in Kashmir. Dr Arshad further added that the patients who come to seek help are largely in the productive age group of 25-30 years [15]. Dr Mushtaq Marghoob, a leading psychiatrist of the valley states that women bear the brunt of every tragedy. They have to support the family after the death of their husbands, fathers, sons or brothers. Dr Arshad further adds that women form a major part of the patients who are suffering from PSTD (almost 50 per cent). For women whose husbands have died, psychotherapy has failed to produce desired results.
A woman from Batmaloo, Srinagar saw the body of her brother who was killed in custody by soldiers of the Indian army, the body had been split open and his heart had been taken out. The shock rendered her in a state of disturbed bereavement and PSTD ever since. According to Dr Marghoob, women have become increasingly suicidal and are resorting to sleeping pills, injections and inhalations [16]. Even though a large number of people visit the Psychiatric Diseases Hospital in Srinagar, however, this is only a tip of the iceberg as large numbers of patients visit hospitals at the district and sub-district levels.

Nearly every person, particularly women, suffer from general anxiety and the uncertainty pertaining to the security of their family members. This always keep them in a state of unrest and anxiety. Even in their houses people are harassed, beaten up or taken into custody by the troops. The fact that the situation doesn’t seem to get any better, doesn’t promise a better mental state of the civilian population, especially women, in Kashmir.

In past few years, murders, rapes, torture, custodial deaths, and enforced disappearances have witnessed an upsurge, but the response of the state in addressing these atrocities doesn’t promise hope for justice. The official figures of these atrocities are far too less than the reported ones. The factual human rights situation in Kashmir has always been rendered invisible by the national security concerns of the government and the state centric approach of the Indian media [17]. Living in this environment of hopelessness, there are people like Parveena who are still willing to give a tough fight to powers-that-be. Parveena says, “I am determined to fight till my last breath, with or without anyone’s support”. People like Parveena need to be lauded for their determination.

It is being constantly projected in the mainstream media that the situation in Kashmir has improved, but the ever-increasing rate of human rights violations in the valley tell us a different story. People continue to suffer while the much-hyped slogan of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh proclaiming ‘Zero Tolerance’ towards human rights abuse stares him hard in the face!

REFERENCES

1. UN Fourth World Conference On Women, Beijing-China, September 1995.
2. UN Commission on Human Rights; Sub Commission on the Promotion and Protection Of Human Rights, Fifty Fifth Session, Item 6(a) of the provisional agenda.
3. ICRC, March 6, 2001.
4. Christine Chinkin; Rape and Sexual Abuse of Women in International Law. European Journal of International Law.
5. R Coomaraswamy; ‘Of Kali Born; Violence and the Law in Sri Lanka’; In M Schuler (ed), Freedom Of Violence; Women’s Strategies from Around The World.
6. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Report pursuant to Commission Resolution 1992/S-1/1/ 0f 14 August 1992, E/CN/4/1993/50/10 February 1993.
7. UN Fourth World Conference On Women; Beijing-China; Strategic Objective 144(C); Governments should fully respect norms of International Humanitarian Law in armed conflicts and take all measures required for the protection of women and children in particular against rape, forced prostitution and any other form of indecent assault.
8. Strategic Objective 143(C), UN 4th World Conference On Women; Beijing-China, Sept 1995: Governments should take action to investigate and punish members of the police, security and armed forces and others who perpetrate acts of violence against women, violations of humanitarian law and violations of the human rights of women in situations of armed conflict.
9. In ‘ Re Yamashita’ 327 USI, 6 Section 340 (United States Supreme Court 1946) the accused was charged that as commander of the armed forces of Japan…he unlawfully disregarded and failed to discharge his duty as commander to control the operations of the members of his command, permitting them to commit brutal atrocities. Although Yamashita was not physically present during the commission of the atrocities, he was found guilty.
10. The Supreme Court of India has ruled in a case that rape is a graver crime than murder as murder kills a person only once, while rape kills a woman again and again.
11. United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women; Beijing-China, September 1995; Action For Equality, Development and Peace.
12. Parveena Ahanger is the chairperson of APDP. Her son, Javed Ahmad Ahanger (then 16), was picked up by troops on August 18, 1990. Since then she has not heard of him. She says, ” We are fighting to obtain just some information of the whereabouts of our disappeared relatives. If they are alive, where are they? If they are dead, their bod ies should be handed over to us.
13. The widows have to suffer severely due to economic constraints and despite being entitled to government ex-gratis relief; they have to pay the concerned officers to get their grant-study done by Prof A G Madhosh (Kashmiri educationist).
14. Haroon Mirani, ‘Kashmir’s Half Widows Struggle For Fuller Life.’
15. Asia Jeelani, Turmoil And Trauma.
16. Ibid
17. John T, Contemporary South East Asia.
18. http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?issue_id=36&article_id=997

In 1974, when India conducted its first nuclear weapon test, no country was more surprised than the United States. The only nuclear explosive material India had on hand was plutonium, and the plutonium had been made in a Canadian-supplied reactor that India was running with sensitive “heavy water” imported from the United States. India had promised explicitly to restrict both the reactor and the heavy water to peaceful use. It was obvious, however, that India was running a secret bomb program under the guise of peaceful energy cooperation.

The United States reacted by passing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act of 1978. It prohibited the sale of American reactors, or reactor fuel, or heavy water, or similar items to countries like India that rejected the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and refused to put all of their nuclear material under international inspection. The law embodied a policy of providing the strongest possible support to the treaty.

President George W. Bush has now asked Congress to reverse this policy, so that nuclear trade with India can recommence. If Congress agrees, it will have to change the law in order to exempt India from the criteria laid down in the 1978 act. The president will also have to persuade the Nuclear Suppliers Group, a consortium of countries that have banded together to restrict nuclear exports, to make an exception for India because India does not meet the Group’s export criteria either.

The president has taken this action after making a deal with India in July 2005. Under the deal, the United States would effectively endorse India’s nuclear weapon effort in exchange for benefits that have proved rather difficult to define. When the deal is examined, it is hard to see a real prize for the United States. Yet, the supporters of the deal have repeatedly put forth claims that greatly exaggerate the supposed benefits. The claims have been repeated so often as to take on the aura of myths. Virtually absent, however, has been any discussion of the attendant risks of reopening this trade. This report tries to give a more balanced view. For each of the administration’s claims, Congress is told the risks. The objective is to enable Congress to see more clearly what is at stake.

Myth #1: The deal will bring India into the “nonproliferation mainstream” and help stop the spread of nuclear weapons.

Fact: The deal leaves India far outside the international effort to combat nuclear arms proliferation. India continues to oppose the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has pointedly refused to sign it. It has just as pointedly refused to limit its production of nuclear weapons, or to obligate itself not to test such weapons. It has also refused to stop making fissile material for such weapons. Nor has India joined Europe and the United States in condemning Iran’s enrichment of uranium. The deal does not change India’s negative stance on any of these questions; instead, it legitimizes it.

Myth #2: India’s agreement to allow 14 of its 22 power reactors to be inspected is a “gain for nonproliferation.”

Fact: Inspecting these reactors will not limit India’s nuclear weapon production in any way. The other eight reactors, which will be barred from inspection, will make more plutonium for weapons than India will ever need. Thus, the offer to inspect the fourteen is merely symbolic. Among the eight reactors off limits to inspectors will be India’s fast breeder reactors, which will generate plutonium particularly suited to bomb-making. In addition, the inspections themselves will waste resources. The International Atomic Energy Agency has a limited number of inspectors and is already having trouble meeting its responsibilities. To send inspectors to India on a fool’s errand will mean that they won’t be going to places like Iran, where something may really be amiss. Unless the Agency’s budget is increased to meet the new burden in India, the inspections there will produce a net loss for the world’s non-proliferation effort.

Myth #3: India has made other new commitments that will help stop proliferation.

Fact: India made only one new promise under the deal, which is to adhere to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Additional Protocol. The protocol allows for more extensive inspections, but is irrelevant to India because the purpose is to unmask hidden nuclear weapon activities. India, however, has a known nuclear weapon program, so there is nothing to unmask. India’s other promises were either already required or reflected existing Indian policy. India’s promise to improve its export control laws was already required by UN Security Council Resolution 1540; India’s promise to “work toward” a cut off of fissile material production for weapons was made long before the deal; India’s decision to voluntarily refrain from testing also preceded the agreement; so did India’s decision not to export enrichment or reprocessing technology.

Myth #4: Nuclear cooperation will make India a reliable U.S. ally.

Fact: India’s sovereign interests are likely to conflict with those of the United States. India, for example, cooperates militarily with Iran and has been training Iran’s navy. India is dependent on Iranian oil, and is discussing a natural gas pipeline from Iran. Although India grudgingly voted for U.N. efforts to restrain Iran’s nuclear program, Indian politicians have been careful to emphasize that India’s friendship with Iran will continue. It is unrealistic to expect that India, the creator of the Non-Aligned Movement, will ever do America’s bidding internationally.

Myth #5: The deal will build up India as a bulwark against China.

Fact: The notion that India might assist the United States diplomatically or militarily in some future conflict with China is unrealistic. This “counterweight” theory reminds one of the argument made by the first Bush administration in the 1980’s, when it contended that the United States should export sensitive dual-use equipment to Saddam Hussein in order to build up Iraq as a counterweight to Iran. U.S. pilots were later killed in Iraq trying to bomb things that U.S. companies had provided. History shows that such predictions can be dangerously wrong. India shares a border with China, is keen to have good relations with China, and does have good relations with China. The two countries have just signed a new memorandum of understanding on military cooperation. India will not sour such relations simply from a vague desire to please the United States.

Myth #6: India’s strategic position entitles it to unique treatment.

Fact: Of the three countries that have refused to sign the NPT – India, Israel and Pakistan – India is the least important strategically to the United States. Pakistan is essential to ongoing U.S. military and political efforts in Afghanistan and to the U.S. campaign against Al Qaeda. Pakistan is also a leading power in the Muslim world, a world with which the United States needs better relations. Israel has always been a close U.S. ally, and is located in a region of critical importance to U.S. foreign policy interests. In any competition for strategic favor from the United States, India finishes a distant third.

Myth #7: It is possible to loosen export controls for India without doing the same for Iran and other countries pursuing the bomb.

Fact: Weakening export controls for India will automatically weaken them for Iran, Pakistan, and even terrorist groups who might want to buy the means to make mass destruction weapons. Export controls today depend on groups of supplier countries that have agreed among themselves not to export dangerous technologies. The principle is mutual restraint. If, however, the United States drops export controls to help its friend India, Russia will drop controls to help its friend Iran, and China will drop controls to help its friend Pakistan. That is the way international controls work. India, like Iran, has decided to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of peaceful nuclear cooperation. From this standpoint, the two countries are indistinguishable. It will be impossible to convince Russia to refrain from supplying Iran, or China from supplying Pakistan, with the same technologies that the United States wants to sell India. U.S. legitimization of India’s nuclear weapon program will also make it harder to convince Russia and China to brand Iran as an outlaw in the U.N. Security Council.

Myth #8: U.S. nuclear exports will not help India make bombs.

Fact: Such exports will help India make bombs. India now needs more uranium than it can produce. This means that India must choose between using its own uranium to make nuclear power or nuclear weapons. Allowing India to fuel its power reactors with imported uranium will free India’s domestic production for reactors that make bombs, thus increasing India’s nuclear arsenal. In addition, without being able to inspect all of India’s reactors, it will be impossible to tell whether a U.S. export supposedly intended for peaceful purposes has been diverted to bomb making. Nuclear exports are inherently capable of military as well as civilian applications.

Myth #9: Peaceful space cooperation will not help India’s nuclear missile program.

Fact: The administration’s plan to help India develop its space launch capability will at the same time help it build long-range strategic missiles. In fact, this is already happening. As part of the Strategic Partnership umbrella announced with India, the U.S. Commerce Department has already removed export restrictions on three subsidiaries of the Indian Space Research Organization, which are all active in Indian missile development. India, indeed, is the first country to develop a long-range nuclear missile from a civilian space launch program.

Myth #10: India has an exemplary nonproliferation record and is a reliable trading partner.

Fact: India has a long record of developing both nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles under the guise of peaceful nuclear and space cooperation. India tested its first nuclear weapon in 1974 by diverting plutonium made with nuclear imports from the United States and Canada that were supplied for peaceful purposes. In the 1980’s, India had a deliberate policy of defeating international controls by smuggling heavy water from the USSR, China and Norway, which allowed India to use its reactors to make plutonium for bombs. In a similar fashion, India built its largest nuclear-capable missile, the Agni, by importing from NASA the design of an American space launcher, again for ostensibly peaceful purposes. Even today, Indian missile and nuclear sites continue to import sensitive American equipment in violation of U.S. law.

Myth #11: India needs more nuclear power to assure its energy future.

Fact: Nuclear power has been virtually insignificant in India’s energy mix in the past, and will be no more important in the future. India has been generating electricity with nuclear reactors for more than 40 years. Yet, reactors supply only 2% to 3% of its electricity today. India has not built more reactors because they have not turned out to be as safe, or as clean, or – most important – as economical as originally thought. Even if India were to achieve a 50% increase in nuclear power generation (which is unlikely) such a step would only increase India’s overall electricity output by one percent at most, and would only increase India’s overall energy output by a fraction of one percent. That is not a significant increase in the energy available to India and would not decrease India’s demand for oil and gas.

Myth #12: The deal will result in more U.S. reactor sales.

Fact: It is unlikely that the United States will receive reactor orders from India. India is building a string of domestic reactors that are cheaper to construct than American imports would be, and there are easier places to buy imported reactors. Russia already has a foothold in India’s reactor market, and will charge less money and attach fewer conditions than will U.S. sellers. France and Canada will also enter the competition. The chance that the United States will defeat these competitors is slim. The precedent is the U.S. experience with China in the 1980’s. At the time when U.S. nuclear cooperation with China was being debated, American vendors were citing the large number of reactors that China would probably buy from the United States. After the deal was signed, China bought exactly no American reactors. Instead, the U.S. agreement increased the competition and drove down the price for the Chinese buyers. That was good for China, but did nothing for the United States. The same is likely to happen with India.

Myth #13: The deal is needed to build better relations with India.

Fact: There are better ways to improve relations with India than engaging in nuclear trade. The United States can help India generate electricity without expanding India’s wasteful and inefficient nuclear infrastructure, which also makes bombs. Supporting India’s reactors only reinforces the perceived prestige of nuclear technology for developing countries, a notion that the United States is trying to discourage. The United States can also support India’s space effort without boosting India’s missile work. The United States could offer to launch Indian satellites and to share satellite observation data with India analysts. The reality is that trade, military cooperation, scientific exchange and political consultation can all grow vigorously without a nuclear deal.

Myth #14: The deal is not primarily about making money; it is about creating a new U.S. strategic relationship in south Asia.

Fact: The deal is primarily about making money. The main effect of the deal will be to pardon India – to remove it as a violator of international norms. After such a change in status, there will be no impediment to U.S. arms sales. This is where the real money is, not in nuclear reactors. U.S. exporters have mentioned selling as much as $1.4 billion worth of Boeing airliners, hundreds of F-16 or F/A-18 fighter jets, as well as maritime surveillance planes, advanced radar, helicopters, missile defense and other equipment. The Russian press has even complained that the nuclear deal is a ploy to squeeze Russia out of the Indian arms market.

Myth #15: The deal is consistent with U.S. efforts to fight terrorism.

Fact: The deal undermines America’s ability to fight terrorism. By favoring India over Pakistan, the deal undercuts the Pakistani government’s position at home. At best, the deal is a blow to General Musharraf’s prestige, and at worst a public humiliation. Without the aid of General Musharraf, the United States will have a much harder time accomplishing its goals in Afghanistan and succeeding in its efforts to defeat al Qaeda. There is no benefit to U.S. security coming from India under the deal that will offset these disadvantages.

Myth #16: This is a “good deal for the United States.”

Fact: India has received a giant benefit – the American seal of approval for India’s nuclear weapon program – in exchange for virtually nothing. There is not a single “trophy” in the deal – nothing the United States can credibly hang on the wall as an achievement. The deal does not improve India’s proliferation status, or limit its bomb-making potential, or make it a reliable ally, or make it a regional counterweight, or guarantee a reactor sale. For the United States there are mainly costs and few or no advantages.

Myth #17: Congress needs to act now so that the deal can move forward.

Fact: Congress need take no action until a formal agreement for nuclear cooperation has been negotiated with India, and until the International Atomic Energy Agency has agreed with India upon suitable inspection arrangements, and until the Nuclear Suppliers Group – the consortium of countries that supply nuclear technology – has decided whether to change its rules to accommodate the deal. The best, and in fact the only, way for Congress to learn the details of what India will actually do, or promise to do, under the deal is to wait until all these steps are taken. Once an agreement is made and presented for consideration, Congress can add any conditions that seem warranted. Congress has never approved an agreement for cooperation without seeing the actual agreement. There is no reason to start now.

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/india/Seventeen_Myths.htm

In January 2006, an Indian government agency purchased newspaper ads seeking help in building an obscure piece of metal machinery. The details of the project, available to bidders, were laid out in a series of drawings that jolted nuclear weapons experts who discovered them that spring.

The blueprints depicted the inner workings of a centrifuge, a machine used to enrich uranium for nuclear bombs. In most Western countries, such drawings would be considered secret, but the Indian diagrams were available for a nominal bidding fee, said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector. He said he acquired the drawings to prove a point.

“We got them for about $10,” said Albright, who called the incident a “serious leak of sensitive nuclear information.”

India has since tightened its bidding procedures, but the incident has fueled concerns among opponents of a U.S.-Indian civilian nuclear deal that Congress is expected to consider in the coming weeks.
ad_icon

The accord, first announced in 2005 by the Bush administration, would lift a decades-old moratorium on nuclear trade with India, allowing U.S. companies to share sensitive technology despite that country’s refusal to ban nuclear testing or sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Backers of the deal say it will cement U.S. ties with India and reward a country that has been a responsible steward of nuclear technology since it first joined the nuclear weapons club in 1974.

But opponents say India’s record on nonproliferation is not as unblemished as is claimed by the White House, which regards the nuclear pact as one of the foreign-policy highlights of the Bush administration’s second term. Critics, including former U.S. diplomats, military officers and arms-control officials, accuse the White House of rushing the agreement through Congress without considering the long-term implications.

“This deal significantly weakens U.S. and international security,” said retired Army Lt. Gen. Robert G. Gard Jr., chairman of the Washington-based Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation. Yesterday, a group of 34 arms-control advocates and former government officials urged Congress to reject the deal in its current form.

Administration officials have repeatedly lauded India’s efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear technology, contrasting its behavior with that of Pakistan, the home base of Abdul Qadeer Khan, the acknowledged nuclear smuggler who delivered weapons secrets to Libya, Iran and North Korea.

R. Nicholas Burns, the former undersecretary of state for political affairs and a chief supporter of the landmark accord, said in a recent forum that India was “playing by the rules of the [nuclear] club but not allowed to join the club.” Burns said the agreement “strengthened the international nonproliferation regime because it resolves an inherent contradiction in the regime.”

Likewise, India’s government says it deserves the trust of the world’s nuclear gatekeepers. “India has an impeccable nonproliferation record,” External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said last week. “We have in place an effective and comprehensive system of national export controls.”

Opponents point to what they call decades of deceptive practices India has used to acquire nuclear materials from foreign governments. A draft report by Albright and his Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington-based nonprofit that monitors the spread of weapons technology, cites recent incidents in which it says India engaged in “illicit nuclear trade.”

In an instance alleged by ISIS, India used an array of trading companies to secretly acquire tons of tributyl phosphate, a chemical used to separate plutonium from spent nuclear fuel. China, a longtime supplier of TBP to India, halted shipments of the chemical in 2003 after U.S. criticism. India turned to independent trading firms that acquired TBP from German and Russian companies without revealing the true destination, the report said.

The ISIS report, due for release today, included photocopies of some of the centrifuge drawings obtained by Albright, although the group removed key specifications. Albright said he shared his findings with State Department officials but was turned away.

“It didn’t fit with their talking points,” Albright said. “At the highest level, they were dismissive of our concerns.”

A State Department spokesman declined to comment on Albright’s report, saying it had not been reviewed, and said the agreement was in the U.S. interest.

Other opponents have cited transfers of sensitive weapons technology by individual Indian scientists. In 2004, the State Department slapped sanctions on two Indian nuclear scientists alleged to have passed heavy-water technology to Iran. At least four Indian companies have been sanctioned over sales of missile technology to Tehran.

Such incidents underscore concerns about the possible transfer of India’s expanded nuclear know-how by rogue scientists and businessmen, said Henry Sokolski, the Defense Department’s top nonproliferation official in the George H.W. Bush administration.

As trade grows between India and Iran, so does the risk of “transfers of technology that could be useful for Iran’s purported weapons of mass destruction,” Sokolski said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/17/AR2008091703646.html?sub=AR

The extent of torture, killings and rapes perpetrated on Kashmiri people by Indian forces are already creating a new record of atrocities. Gouging of eyes, cutting off of men’s genitals, use of ever new methods of torture and endless curfews would shame Hitler’s SS death squads. The Indian occupation army’s deviltry such as gang-rapes, burning of entire villages and crops, destruction of economic life of whole communities and genocide of the Kashmiri people in defiance of international human rights laws, are everyday affairs.

This database represents only a minute proportion of the Indian atrocities in Kashmir as the majority go undocumented.

A Brief Catalogue of Indian Atrocities in Kashmir

Since 1989, an estimated 40,000 Kashmiris have been killed by the Indian forces stationed in Kashmir. For the last five years the people of the State have intensified their efforts in order to invite the attention of the world community towards the “Kashmir Dispute”, though the people of the State had been fighting for their just cause peacefully for the last forty eight years. Indian Government throughout these four decades has been suppressing the people by illegal use of force, putting them into the jails/ Interrogation centres etc. under draconian laws. Whenever any person demanded holding of ” Plebiscite”, he has been put behind the bars.

The Indian Forces, stationed in Kashmir, have been given a free hand to kill any person they choose. These powers have been given to them under the draconian laws like “Disturbed Areas Act of 1990″ and “Indian Armed Forces Act of 1990″. Indifference shown by world community to the miseries of people, have encouraged and given a free hand to armed forces, to deal with the people, as they like. In October 1992, the Indian Armed forces started to intensify the killing of people immediately after their arrest. These operations have been carried out under the code name of “Operation Tiger”, “Operation Eagle” and “Operation Shiva”. Now the armed forces have resorted to another policy of “Catch and Kill” which means that no sooner a person is taken into custody, within minutes he is brutally tortured and killed . The dead body is then thrown into the street. In other cases, innocent civilians are arrested and taken to border areas where they are shot. The Indian government then publicises that these people were militants killed in armed encounters with the troops.

It is common practice for the paramilitary forces to walk into a quiet village/town and start shooting indiscriminately, killing innocent and unarmed civilians - all under the pretence of crack-down operations against the Freedom-Fighters. In most cases, innocent civilians are killed, women gang-raped and properties set on fire.

TORTURE AND CUSTODIAL DEATHS

Indian armed forces have let loose a reign of terror and are pursuing with the policy of unabated killings, torture and brutal methods of killings in Kashmir State since 1989. Despite the fact that international community and Human Rights Organizations all over the World have registered constant protests against this policy of Indian Government in Kashmir, no change is visible in the acts of repressions and suppression at the hands of forces. In fact the death due to torture and in custody have alarmingly increased.

Many such incidents go un-noticed due to severe restrictions on the movement of people, constant crackdowns, curfews and other repressive measures by the forces. However, the Forum has been able to collect details about some such incidents which are based on personal information, print and electronic media and data collected by Human Rights activists. The officials and armed forces are in the habit of naming such killings as the result of so called encounters. But the fact of the situation is that most of such arrests are made during crackdown operations where people of the area are collected first, bodily searched before their entry in the specified area and then subjected to identification. The arrests of the people are made when such persons are totally unarmed and there is no possibility of any encounter with the forces. Such fake encounters are carved out by the forces in order to save themselves from the wrath of international community and over all public resentment.

 Rape and Molestation of Women

Operation Blue Star, popularly known as Indira Gandhi’s genocide of Sikh’s, was followed by a Hindutva Terrorists flase flag in Kashmir, to malign the Sikh’s and embattle the Kashmiri Muslims into a battle with the Sikh’s, and blame Pakistan for those actions. As usual, the Indian government was not up to the mark, they failed in their False Flag attempt, but not before another 5 innocent Sikh’s were murdered to suit India’s own vested interests.

False Flag by RAW in Kashmir.
(Prelude to Mumbai 2008)

Hindutva Terrorists massacre Sikh’s in Kashmir and tried to implicate Muslims
Kashmir massacre samples ‘faked’

“The five men were killed a few days after the massacre”

The government in Indian-controlled Kashmir has acknowledged that DNA samples taken from five men blamed for the masscre of 35 Sikhs two years ago were tampered with.
Those responsible for collecting and sending the samples had something to hide

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah
“Samples were taken from the men only after protests in Kashmir by local people who insisted they were innocent, and were deliberately killed by the security forces in a stage-managed encounter. ”

The Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah now says it appears that fake samples were sent suggesting “that those responsible had something to hide.”

The killing of the 35 Sikhs took place just hours before the then US President Bill Clinton arrived in India and was one of the worst examples of violence in the territory in recent years.

It was highlighted by Delhi to support its accusations that Pakistan sponsors militant attacks in Kashmir.
‘Mislabelling’

The state government ordered the samples to be taken from the dead men after protesters in Kashmir demanded an investigation into the affair.
The Sikh massacre led to big protests
Relatives of the dead men insisted their bodies be exhumed, saying that DNA tests would prove they were not foreign militants as claimed by the security forces.

But the laboratory in southern India to which the men’s DNA samples were sent returned them, saying they were mislabelled and showed serious discrepancies.

It is not clear what errors were shown, but the Times of India newspaper said that some samples said to belong to female relatives in fact came from men.

In remarks to the Kashmir legislature on Friday, Mr Abdullah apologised for the injustice done and promised an investigation into the affair headed by a judge.

Mr Abdullah said fresh samples would be taken from the men’s bodies.

‘Encounter’ allegation
At the time, the authorities insisted they were foreign militants from the Lashkar-e-Toiba and Hizbul Mujahideen groups - although the groups themselves denied any involvement in the Sikh massacre.

As I said earlier, Operation Blue Star wasn’t just a one time mistake, as proclaimed by The Indian Government.

It was most definitely a prelude to the long term genocidal plans of The Hindutva Terrorists.  The audacity of the indian Government to address Sikh’s as disloyal or brand them as Terrorists when it were them who sacrificed their lives for India to fight selflessly for their nation.

The Real Truth Behind Operation Blue Star, June 1984
From June 3-6, 1984, the Indian government brutally invaded the Golden Temple and 125 other Gurdwaras around Punjab. Over 20,000 people were killed in these attacks, including such Sikh leaders as Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, who was the strongest spokesman for Sikh rights and Sikh freedom. More than 100 young boys, ages 8 to 13, were taken outside into the courtyard and asked whether they supported Khalistan, the independent Sikh homeland. When they answered with the Sikh religious incantation “Bole So Nihal,” they were summarily shot to death. The Guru Granth Sahib, the Sikh holy scripture, handwritten in the time of the ten Sikh Gurus, was shot full of bullet holes by the Indian military. Sant Bhindranwale warned that if the Indian government invaded the Golden Temple, it would “lay the foundation stone for Khalistan” and it did.

“The mere fact that they have the right to choose their oppressors does not mean they live in a democracy.” – Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY)
THE REPPRESSION CONTINUES WHILE INDIA PROCLAIMS ITS SECULARISM AND DEMOCRACY

Half a million Indian forces have been sent to Punjab, Khalistan to subdue the freedom movement there. Another 700,000 are deployed in Kashmir. They join with the police in carrying out the kinds of atrocities described on the other side of this flyer. India calls this “protecting its territorial integrity.”

In March 2000 in the village of Chithisinghpora, 35 Sikhs were massacred. Two studies of this massacre, one by the International Human Rights Organization, based in Ludhiana, and the other conducted jointly by the Punjab Human Rights Organization and the Movement Against State Repression, concluded that the massacre was the work of Indian forces, a conclusion supported by reporter Barry Bearak in the December 31, 2000 issue of the New York Times Magazine. In another village in Kashmir, Indian troops were caught red-handed trying to set fire to several Sikh houses and the local Gurdwara. Sikh and Muslim villagers joined together to stop this atrocity before it could be carried out. This past January, 35 Sikhs were arrested for raising the Sikh flag.

Sikhs ruled Punjab as an independent, secular country from 1765 to 1849. Sikhs have never accepted the Indian constitution. At the time of the transfer of power, Sikhs were equal partners who were to receive sovereignty along with Muslims and Hindus. When the Indian constitution was adopted in 1950, no Sikh representative signed it and no Sikh representative has signed it to this day.

Unfortunately, Sikhs are not the only victim of India’s brutal tyranny.

· India has murdered over 300,000 Christians in Nagaland since 1947, more than 90,000 Kashmiri Muslims since 1988, and tens of thousands of other minorities
· Australian missionary Graham Staines and his two young sons were brutally murdered by being burned to death while they slept in their jeep by a mob of Hindu militants affiliated with the militant, pro-Fascist Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) who chanted “Victory to Hannuman,” a Hindu god.
· An American missionary from Pennsylvania, Joseph Cooper, was expelled from the country after being so severely beaten by RSS goons that he had to spend a week in the hospital.
· In January 2003, an American missionary and seven other individuals were attacked
· Christian schools and prayer halls have been attacked and destroyed.
· A Christian religious festival was broken up by police gunfire.
· In March 2002, between 2,000 and 5,000 Muslims were brutally murdered in Gujarat. India’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), an official body, found evidence in the killings of premeditation by members of Hindu extremist groups and complicity by Gujarat state officials. A police officer confirmed to an Indian newspaper that the massacre was pre-planned by the government.
· The most revered mosque in India, the Ayodhya mosque, was destroyed by Hindu mobs affiliated with the BJP and a Hindu temple was built on the site.
· The states of Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, and Orissa have all passed bills barring religious conversions.

Will This Ever End?

The Violent history of Hinduvta