The fight for human rights has to include the excluded

Kuldip Nayar

Kabul fell one day after some 500 men and women from South Asia, at a meeting in New Delhi, adopted a statement on the sovereignty of Afghanistan. It was a premonition or wishful thinking on their part. And they said that the country was a direct concern to all people in South Asia because historically and culturally Afghanistan has for ages been part of this region. The South Asians were right. But their immediate concern was over indiscriminate bombing of Afghanistan, which in any case becomes pointless when the Northern Alliance is at Kabul.

The main focus of the meet was, however, on the next set-up in Afghanistan. Not a single person in the conclave dissented when it was resolved that the Afghans, who had suffered through a succession of oppressive regimes, should not be denied their fundamental right to determine their future structure.

In the South Asian context, this is also the demand for the entire region, embracing India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan— to settle their affairs in their own way. Inevitably, the discussion centres on how to guarantee democracy, rule of law and human rights. The conclave justifiably felt that this was the region where threats to national security, real and original, have been exploited to justify authoritarianism or infringement of the principles of law and human rights.

Indeed, this is the region where people live amidst paradoxes: modernity vs tradition, poverty vs immense wealth, scientific advances vs illiteracy of huge proportions, emancipating philosophies vs narrow sectarianism and extremism, centuries of harmony and peaceful co-existence vs worst forms of belligerent intolerance. Yet this is the region which has to evolve common strategies to protect South Asia’s shared interests.

Who are these South Asians who have taken upon themselves the responsibility to change the attitude of the people and to resolve their differences? They are members of South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR). A few among them met last year at Neemrana, near Delhi, and set up a body to raise their voice against conflict and confrontation in the region. They also adopted a resolution to ask the South Asians to realise their ideals and aspirations for peace, democracy, secularism and human security, while promoting pluralism in approaches towards social, political, economic and cultural development of different communities, ethnic, linguistic, religious and other groups.

The Delhi conclave was meant to firm up a common approach to the common problems and to refurbish the South Asian identity transcending borders, religions and nationalisms. The two-day meet has created the structure—a 19-member bureau, an apex body, and a secretariat at Kathmandu under the charge of its secretary-general who is a Nepalese.

It must be sheer determination, if not optimism, which brought the South Asians together. They are fired by a common purpose—to work towards a more humane and just South Asia. Anyone from the region can be a member of SAHR. All they have to do is rise above chauvinism, fundamentalism and parochialism so that they may initiate in South Asia a movement which is secular and democratic in content and which helps people assume the responsibility to guide their communities towards freedom from injustice, want and squalor.

The participants, when they met, were haunted by their own problems: Indians by the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) to throttle dissent; Pakistanis by the absence of democracy in their country, Bangladeshis by the rise of fundamentalism in their Sonar Bangla, Sri Lanka by the smouldering threat of LTTE; and Nepal by the growth of Maoists in a traditional society. Still, the activists from the different countries agreed there was no alternative to peace and pluralism. They appealed to governments in the region to repeal all legislation, policies and measures that divide the people on the basis of belief, ethnicity, gender or social status so as to end the exploitation of the weak and derogation of human dignity.

Nobel laureate Amartya Sen, addressing the conclave, spoke in the same vein. He said: The dividing line between the haves and the have-nots is not just a rhetorical cliche or an eloquent slogan, but, alas, a substantial feature of the world in which we live. The fight for human rights, he said, will have little relevance till it included the excluded. According to him, the biggest challenge before the South Asian countries is the state of marginal sections of society.

Among the activists present were those who worked for the marginal sections of society. There was Medha Patkar, Arundhati Roy and BD Sharma from India, Asma Jehangir and IA Rehman from Pakistan, Kamal Hussain and editor of The Star, Maffuz Anam, from Bangladesh, Devender Raj Pandey from Nepal and Deepika Udagama from Sri Lanka. Former Indian Prime Minister I K Gujral was also one of the participants.

UN Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson, who inaugurated the formal formation of SAHR, drew attention to the war in Afghanistan and shared the belief of the South Asian activists that the world should not turn a blind eye to the issue of human rights in its fixation of the events of September 11 and after. She said: What must never be forgotten is that human rights are no hindrance to the promotion of peace and security. Rather, they are an essential element in any strategy to defeat terrorism.

Fixation is also the word which came to my mind when a participant from Pakistan asked me: What is the use of such gatherings when I find that the enmity between your and my country has not lessened in any way? I did not say anything beyond repeating a cliche that time is the greatest healer. But she was right. I think both the countries have painted themselves into a corner. Non-officials should take the initiative in placing before the two governments a solution of Kashmir which is not based on religion. Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf made a useful presentation at Washington on the nuclear issue. New Delhi should pick up the thread from where he left off, particularly when Pakistan is willing to separate the issue of nuclear weapons from that of Kashmir.

A Bangladesh participant probably put his finger on the nub of the problem when he said that South Asians were hypocrites because they continued to carry the old baggage of history and knew no forgiveness. But he was mistaken because Mr Rehman apologised on behalf of Pakistan for all that its armed forces had done in Bangladesh. Perhaps, South Asians are not making enough efforts to wipe out the past.

It seems that the new challenges in South Asia are merely the transformation of old challenges that we failed to tackle. As a result, we continue to stagnate and, at times, fail to act as a human community. South Asians are ideally suited to play a positive role in the circumstances and to suggest a way to the West which has forgotten the ethical and spiritual aspects of life which are basic to culture and civilisation and which give some meaning to life. Great religions are represented in this part of the world. There is a confluence of many civilisations. People have fought wars of liberation and have liberal and democratic ideas. Even where dictatorship has taken over, there are stirrings of democracy.

What this all boils down to is sincerity and commitment. Mere words and pious wishes alone will not do. Are we genuinely committed to the uplift of the poor? Will we really try to include the excluded?