INDIA

Nehru’s Prescient Words During 1st General Elections Resonate Today

S N Sahu | 27 May 2024

• 
  

On India’s first PM’s 60th death anniversary today, amid a polarising election campaign, his utterances on upholding the Constitution and defeating communal forces resound.



Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru (Centre) and Maulana Abul Kalam 'Azad' (File Photo)

Sixty years ago, India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, passed away on May 27, 1964 while serving his third consecutive term in office. As the solemn death anniversary of Nehru is being observed on May 27, 2024, the 18th general elections are being conducted in seven phases, with the last phase scheduled to take place on June 1.

While paying tribute to Nehru and recalling his rich legacy to build a new India from the ravages of centuries of colonial rule, and lay its foundation, among others, on the strength of science, technology, scientific temper and secularism, it is of crucial significance to reflect his ideas on elections, which he articulated a few days before the conduct of the first general elections in 1951 and during the conduct of its different phases.

It is illuminating to note that those articulations of Nehru on elections were so prescient that those are immensely relevant for our country today, when the conduct of 18th general elections are in full swing.

Nehru’s Warning on Coercive State Apparatus to Benefit a Party

In a letter to the Chief Minsters on June 5, 1951, five months before the commencement of the 1st general elections in November that year, Nehru wrote that he was accused by several opposition parties that he was instrumental in passing several legislations for the purpose of creating a coercive State apparatus with a view to winning the elections. He described the conduct of the 1st general elections as “a colossal affair taxing our administrative capacity to the utmost.”  “They will,” he remarked, “tax also our forbearance and will be a test for all of us”.

He proceeded to add that in the shadow of those elections, there were heated debates in Parliament and in the press, and in several quarters the legislation passed by the provisional Parliament was interpreted as a measure connected with those elections. Possibly, Nehru was referring to the Representation of People’s Act of 1951 and described the twisted interpretation given to it as “….a completely wrong inference.”

“Indeed,”, he sharply stated, “there could be no greater folly for a government, such as we are, than to use the repressive apparatus of the State to benefit any party”. “That itself,” he sensitively observed, “would rouse antagonism and lose support for that party.”  

Nehru’s utterances that “Indeed there could be no greater folly for a Government, such as we are, than to use the repressive apparatus of the State to benefit any party” resonate when people of India and Opposition parties are confronting a highly coercive State headed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has employed several government agencies against Opposition parties and leaders, arrested leaders and even the Chief Minister of Delhi Arvind Kejriwal, former Chief Minister of Jharkhand Hemant Soren before and during elections.

Even the bank accounts of the Congress party have been frozen by the income tax authorities in a bid to financially paralyse the party from conducting its election campaign. So, today, the State apparatus is being used to benefit a particular party.

The contents of the aforementioned letter of Nehru need to be recalled while paying tribute to him on his death anniversary and remind the nation that how, with a farsighted vison, he wrote therein that bullying tactics of the State for winning elections for the party in power would generate antagonism and diminish people’s support for it. What Nehru wrote before the conduct of general elections is being replayed now when the election process is in full swing across the country.

Warning on Communal Forces

In that letter, Nehru also wrote that dangerous attempts were being made to cause trouble during the elections by, what he called “some ill-disposed persons” and he very prophetically stated, “Mostly it is expected from communal groups”. He, therefore, cautioned that the nation should be prepared to meet that anti-social challenge, which he candidly said, represented “fascist forces who never participated in freedom struggle.”

And 60 years after Nehru’s sad demise and during the election campaign, none other than Prime Minister Modi, as a star campaigner of the ruling Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) is engaged in stoking communal passions and targeting Muslims by spewing poison against them.

The Election Commission of India has written to the BJP president, J P Nadda, that the star campaigners of his party should desist from violating the Model Code of Conduct , which prohibits parties or candidates from indulging in activities that “may aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities, religious or linguistic.” 

While first Prime Minister Nehru, a few months before the conduct of the 1st general elections in 1951, indicted the communal groups for their attempts to engage in anti-social activities, the present Prime Minister, as BJP’s star campaigner, is being indicted by the Election Commission, albeit half-heartedly, for using religion and communally divisive narratives for appealing to the electorate to vote for his party.

It is instructive to note that Nehru, in another letter to Chief Ministers on October 4, 1951 wrote, “The near approach of elections has galvanized all kinds of communal parties into fierce activity”. He stated that this concerned itself not with any positive proposals but falsely targeted the Congress for its so called 'appeasement' policy toward Muslims.

Nehru also noted with deep anguish that the communal forces indulged in “an abundance of vulgar abuse” which, he said, went down with the crowd. He wrote with pain that the “vulgar and foolish approach and the inherent poison of communalism, which, if allowed free play, would break up India”.

However, he also expressed his optimism by writing that the “vulgar abuse peddling communalism” could be countered with presentation of facts before people, who were good enough to accept the narratives anchored in truthful account.

In another letter to Chief Ministers on November 1, 1951, Nehru referred to several aspects of electioneering as depressing and described the “ugly phenomenon of communalism” being pushed forward during the election campaign as the most dangerous development of the time.

That “dangerous” development flagged by Nehru during the first general elections is now being embraced by Prime Minister Modi with impunity, and in complete disregard of the law and the Supreme Court’s directions.

Nehru and Saving the Constitution

It is illuminating to note that Nehru, during the first general elections, wrote about the responsibility of the people in general and those occupying high offices in particular, for proper implementation of the Constitution. In a letter to Chief Ministers on April 15, 1952, while referring  to the formation on Congress ministries in Coorg, Delhi, Pepsu, Ajmer, Mysore and Madras, he wrote about the Constitution of India, defining the rights and responsibilities of the Centre and of the States. “But,” Nehru remarked, “however good the Constitution of a country might be, it depends ultimately on the people of that country, and more especially on those in positions of responsibility, how work is carried on and what results are achieved”.

Those utterances made by Nehru 72 years ago, assume added significance on the occasion of his 60th death anniversary in 2024, when election campaign is on and people have made “saving the Constitution” an electoral issue. They did so because those in positions of responsibility, such as several BJP leaders contesting to get elected to the Lok Sabha, stated that Modi after winning 400 plus seats, would change the Constitution.

The words of Nehru “however good the Constitution of a country might be, it depends ultimately on the people of that country, and more especially on those in positions of responsibility” resonates in today’s India and constitutes a propelling force for people to remind those occupying positions of responsibility not to tinker with it.

It is rather fascinating that the issue of the Constitution and its proper implementation, which Nehru said rested with those wielding power, is now being reiterated by people and they are in the forefront to defend it by making it a major election issue.

Nehru’s legacy is of enduring significance and in upholding it, we can defeat communal forces who are out to cause havoc to the ‘idea of India’ and the Constitution.  

The writer served as Officer on Special Duty to President of India K R Narayanan. The views are personal.

Nuclear deterrence

Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry 

DAWN

Published May 26, 2024 

FIFTY years ago, in May 1974, India detonated its first nuclear device, calling it Operation Smiling Buddha. While the world remained largely silent, Pakistan’s foreign minister declared Pakistan would “never submit to nuclear blackmail” or “accept Indian hegemony over the subcontinent”. Earlier, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had expressed the resolve that if India ever built a nuclear weapon, Pakistan would ‘eat grass’, but build one of its own. Given India’s role in dismembering the country in 1971, the Pakistani leadership found it imperative to restore the power equilibrium by nuclear capability to deter further Indian aggression.

In 1998, South Asia became overtly nuclearised. On May 11, 1998, India tested its nuclear devices. Given the significant conventional asymmetry, Pakistan followed suit on May 28 as it could not remain vulnerable. Its nuclear tests restored the strategic balance and re-established nuclear deterrence, which essentially means deterring an adversary from conventional or nuclear aggression due to concerns that there would be retaliation that could eventually lead to mutual assured destruction.

Nuclear weapons are political weapons, ideally not intended for war-fighting. Their main purpose is to deter wars. Since 1998, South Asia has not seen a major war, primarily due to nuclear deterrence. However, nuclear deterrence could not prevent confrontations below the nuclear overhang — for instance, clashes in Kargil in 1999, troops mobilisation in 2001-2, and Indian aggression in Balakot in 2019. While none of these confrontations assumed the proportions of a major war, owing to nuclear deterrence, the risk of kinetic confrontations escalating into the nuclear dimension could not be ignored. With India’s aggressive doctrines like Cold Start, Pakistan opted for a full-spectrum deterrence posture, while remaining within the ambit of credible minimum deterrence to deter all aggression — from tactical to strategic level.

That said, nuclear deterrence is not a panacea to deter all forms of aggression and resolve our conflict with India. Pakistan has to rely on other instruments of national power, including conventional capabilities, to tackle threats on its borders. Political stability, economic strength, and public support for defence also enhance deterrence. Diplomacy, too, has an important role. Both countries agreed in 1988 not to attack each other’s nuclear facilities. There is also an agreement to prevent airspace violations (1991). The Vajpayee-Sharif meeting in Lahore in 1999 introduced several confidence-building measures to reduce the danger of nuclear warfare. An agreement was reached on advance notification of missile testing in 2005. In 2006, both sides agreed to reduce the risk of nuclear accidents or the unauthorised use of nuclear weapons.





Nuclear weapons are political weapons.

Given the dangers of a nuclear conflagration, both countries have, directly or indirectly, engaged in discussions on how to maintain strategic stability in South Asia. In nuclear parlance, strategic stability is often defined as removing incentives for the use of nuclear weapons or for engaging in a nuclear arms race.

Another view of strategic stability, to which Pakistan subscribes, is that the nuclear discourse cannot be segregated from regional geopolitics. US-India nuclear cooperation has created an environment of discrimination and imbalance in South Asia, which can be destabilising. Strategic stability requires that there should be no armed conflict or unresolved dispute or even grave mutual grievances, which could lead to instability or a wider war.

The need for re­­gional adversaries to show nuclear res­traint and responsibility, nuclear safe­­ty and security, and effective command and control cannot be over-emphasis­­ed. India’s accidental firing of a BrahMos missile into Pakistan and its failure to inform Pakistan well in time could have easily escalated matters. Nuclear arms must never fall into unauthorised or the wrong hands. Equally important, the leadership must eschew irresponsible rhetoric and brandishing of nuclear weapons (Diwali fireworks, ‘qatal ki raat’).

Emerging technologies, particularly AI, multirole drones, hypersonic missiles, and cyberspace, could also adversely affect nuclear deterrence and strategic stability. Of particular danger are lethal autonomous weapons that can search and engage targets without human intervention.

International negotiations have made little progress towards evolving an international regime that could minimise the dangers of emerging technologies.

It is of utmost importance that India and Pakistan engage in meaningful dialogue to avert risks of escalation in crisis situations, enhance understanding of each other’s nuclear postures, and address mutual threat perceptions.

The writer is former foreign secretary and chairman of Sanober Institute, Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, May 26th, 2024

Antibiotic overuse

 Pakistan, the third largest consumer of antibiotics globally,

Editorial

DAWN

Published May 27, 2024 

ANTIMICROBIAL resistance is an escalating crisis claiming some 700,000 lives annually in Pakistan. It is the third leading cause of death, trailing only cardiovascular disease and maternal and neonatal disorders. These alarming statistics, shared recently at the National Antimicrobial Stewardship Summit 2024, underscore a grave situation. Antibiotics,

 heralded as ‘wonder drugs’, have saved countless lives. However, their rampant misuse has precipitated a public health emergency.

 Pakistan, the third largest consumer of antibiotics globally, consumed Rs126bn worth of these medicines in 2023 alone. The consequences of overuse are dire, with bacteria now exhibiting resistance even to third and fourth-generation antibiotics. Many factors contribute to this crisis. Self-medication, ‘prescriptions’ by quacks, incomplete courses of antibiotics, and substandard production practices are primary culprits. Moreover, the misuse of antibiotics in livestock worsens the problem, contributing to 80pc of antimicrobial resistance cases in this sector. This not only impacts human health but also threatens food security.

The government must aim to increase understanding of antibiotic resistance among both healthcare professionals and the public, through awareness drives, healthcare professional training, patient education, school and community programmes and the distribution of information material at hospitals, clinics and pharmacies. The government must also enforce strict regulations on the sale of antibiotics, ensuring they are available only through prescription by licensed doctors. Additionally, there should be stringent oversight of drug companies to guarantee the production of high-quality antibiotics. Moreover, investment in healthcare infrastructure is crucial. Strengthening antimicrobial stewardship programmes that promote appropriate use of antibiotics in hospitals can curb over-prescription. These programmes should incorporate lessons from past health crises, including the Covid-19 pandemic, which saw a spike in antibiotic use despite clinical guidelines advising against it for viral infections. Also, vaccination programmes can play a pivotal role in preventing infections that might otherwise necessitate antibiotic treatment. The success of the typhoid conjugate vaccine campaign in Sindh demonstrates the efficacy of such initiatives. The spectre of AMR looms large, threatening to render common infections untreatable and reversing decades of medical progress. Only through sustained efforts can we hope to turn the tide against the devastation antibiotic misuse can cause and safeguard public health for future generations.

Published in Dawn, May 27

PAKISTAN

In defamation’s name

Umair Javed 

DAWN

Published May 27, 2024 

LAST week, the Punjab Assembly hastily passed a defamation bill, despite grave concerns raised by journalist unions and rights bodies, as well as opposition legislators. The bill, which now only requires the governor’s assent before coming into force, proposes special tribunals to deal with cases of ‘fake news’ and purposeful ‘misinformation’, with punishments ranging from a fine of Rs3 million in general damages to 10 times that amount as punitive damages.

There are several reasons why the passage of this bill is a worrying development. It provides a pretext to the state to clamp down on speech in the name of fighting fake news; it opens up a new route to victimise opposition politics; and it empowers unaccountable, single-member platforms outside the existing legal apparatus to determine what constitutes defamation.

Before getting into these in detail, there is sufficient ground to wonder whether a defamation law of this nature helps in addressing its targeted problem in the first place. There is no denying that the widened use of social media outlets has created an oversupply of information, much of which is free from the burden of factual rigour or accuracy. It is also true that the proliferation of such information happens at a much faster rate now, with intended, or otherwise, effects taking place more rapidly and at a wider scale.

This premise makes it seem that a legal remedy of some sort is required, which defamation laws usually provide. But the government in this instance is monopolising the nature of the remedy, when it is not equipped or capable of determining the scale and nature of the problem. The task deserves careful deliberation by a much wider set of stakeholders that includes citizen media watchdogs, journalist associations, and rights bodies, especially those dealing with digital rights.

Such a punitive legal instrument in the hands of state authorities can only indicate coercive intention.

One primary reason for caution and scepticism regarding this latest piece of legislation stem from the particular track record of the Pakistani public authorities on issues related to speech, especially in the online domain. The impact of Peca’s passage under the PML-N government in 2015 and subsequent amendments in recent years has been detrimental to free expression, especially regarding rights activists and critical voices (such as those of the opposition). This point was ably demonstrated by representatives of the Lahore Press Club who pointed out the double standards of the current government, which sided with journalists against the Peca amendments while in opposition, but were quick to pass them once they stepped into power.

The end result has been that the grounds established for Peca, that it would protect the online rights of citizens, have been subverted by the act itself. Instead, it has turned out to be yet another example of the state using the law to empower itself against citizens. This is a natural consequence of a state that envisions itself primarily on grounds of (self-defined) national security, and sees segments of its population as a source of insecurity and risk. In turn, this vision flows from the imbalance between civilian and security apparatuses within the structure of the state itself.

A second reason for caution lies in the timing and the political context in which this bill has been drafted. The last two years have seen an escalation of rights violations, culminating in the suppression of the PTI through a variety of legal and extra-legal means. The opposition party’s use of social media is frequently cited as a key reason for its enduring popularity, which allowed it to wage an unprecedented, insurgent election campaign and emerge as the largest party in the country.

This defamation bill places the regulation of social media as one of its central objectives. In other words, it is reasonable to think of it as a key legal instrument that can be deployed against an already suppressed political entity, further limiting its ability to play its role as an effective opposition. While there is no doubt that social media disinformation has been a key plank of the PTI’s political strategy, such a punitive legal instrument in the hands of state authorities can only indicate coercive intention.

Finally, the procedural critique of setting up a parallel judicial structure, raised forcefully by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, is also worth raising here. As the rights body has stated in a recent statement, the 180-day timebound nature of proceedings, while possibly well-intentioned, undermines the quality of the legal process and may lead to large punishments being levied in relative haste. It also sidesteps the provisions of existing witness laws in the country.

Additionally, the bill authorises the government to appoint tribunal members (drawing on a pool solicited from the chief justice of the high court) and offer emoluments higher than currently being done by the judiciary. This represents a significant encroachment of executive authority on judicial functioning, leaving the door open to misuse and subversion for a wide range of political purposes.

Overall, the bill has solicited an outcry from media and rights-based civil society, along with the expected opposition from PTI-SIC members in the legislature. This alone should give the government reason to pause and evaluate the contours of this legislation.

It is an indictment of public authority in this country that punitive attempts to resolve a problem such as fake news invite significant scepticism about intentions and expected use. It reflects a deepening of mistrust between key civil society stakeholders and the state, and an erosion of democratic norms that grants rights and space for the functioning of political opposition. Simultaneously, it provides yet more proof that the undergirding logic of public authority in Pakistan is legal and extra-legal coercion rather than legitimised consent.

The writer teaches sociology at Lums.
X: @umairjav

Published in Dawn, May 27th, 2024

PAKISTAN

After Jaranwala, Christians in Sargodha face the mob

Saima William 

Published May 27, 2024 

Rev Samson Sohail, executive director of United Council of Churches, and other leaders from the Christian community protest against the Sargodha incident in Islamabad’s G-7 sector on Sunday. — White Star

Once again, a Christian family faced the wrath of a mob, which burnt their house and factory over yet another accusation of blasphemy. The claim was the family desecrated the holy Quran.

The incident in Sargodha is a heart-wrenching reminder of the unchecked mob violence that continues to plague our nation. Mobsters vandalised property and attempted to lynch a man after accusing him of blasphemy. Social media footage showed a mob surrounding a bloodied man and others, including teenagers, wrecking furniture. Another video showed a large blaze outside a house.

A statement from the Minority Rights March also said that videos of the incident showed the mob lynching a 70-year-old man “on the instigation of a local cleric” while the man’s home and factory were set ablaze.

Did this injured person surrounded by mob in the videos know at the time of the Jaranwala incident that he and his family would be next?

The videos of the attack clearly show officers of the Punjab police present there as silent spectators, which points towards their tacit approval and facilitation of the terrorists involved in the attack. Sargodha police claim to have arrested 15 people involved in the incident.

But the question is that 15 people were arrested in the Jaranwala case as well, and in dozens of previous cases of mob attacks on churches, Christianhomes and colonies. Were any of the attackers punished?

The Pakistani government has repeatedly failed to stop these horrific incidents from occurring. How many more innocent lives need to be shattered before something changes?

It is time for the world to take notice and for the Pakistani authorities to act decisively to protect Christians as citizens of Pakistan. We must stand together against this injustice and demand an end to this senseless violence.

What is more painful is that many people continue to claim on social media that Christians desecrate the holy Quran. This cycle of violence should end. The blasphemy laws in Pakistan have been misused for far too long, serving as a tool for personal vendettas and religious persecution.

Furthermore, there must be accountability for those who incite and participate in mob violence. The silent complicity of the police and other authorities cannot continue. Those who fail to protect the innocent and uphold the rule of law must be held accountable.

The government must take concrete steps to promote interfaith harmony and protect the rights of all its citizens. Educational reforms are needed to promote tolerance and understanding among different religious communities while media and civil society must also play a role in countering hate speech and promoting peace.

The voice of the marginalised and persecuted must be heard. We must amplify their cries for justice and stand in solidarity with them. The pain and suffering of Christian families in Pakistan are not just their burden to bear but a stain on the conscience of the entire nation. It is time for change, and it is time for justice. Enough is enough. — The writer is a human rights activist. She tweets @SaimaWilliams1

Published in Dawn, May 27th, 2024




Fact check: Christian man, son from Sargodha mob violence have not been killed

Imran Gabol | Dawn.com 

Published May 27, 2024 

Multiple posts and an image circulating on social media since Sunday claimed that the Christian man subjected to mob violence in Sargodha over the alleged desecration of the Holy Quran was killed along with his son. However, a close relative has confirmed the claims to be false

The police on Saturday rescued the man as well as two Christian families from the enraged mob that wanted to lynch him and barge into the homes of some other members of the minority community.

The incident had taken place after some residents of the colony fou­nd burned pages near an electric pole and the houses of the Christian family.

On Sunday, an X user shared an image of a woman cradling a man with his eyes closed.


The caption said: “Protesting and crying for Palestine, while killing this innocent Christian brother and his father, over false blasphemy allegations, explains our hypocrisy. Each and every Pakistani, who was involved, must be arrested and an example should be made!”

The post gained over 16,000 views.

In a similar X post today, LUMS professor Dr Taimur Rahman said: “N* and his father were murdered over false blasphemy allegations. This is what mullahs can achieve even without state power. If they had state power, they will ensure that there would be no non-Muslims left in Pakistan.”

The post gained over 44,000 views and was also reshared by The News journalist Arshad Yousafzai.

However, a nephew of the victim told Dawn.com that he (his uncle) was “fine and alive” and has since been moved to a different hospital for treatment.

Sargodha Regional Police Officer Shariq Kamal also said on Sunday that there was “no casualty and no seriously injured [person]” in the incident .


Additionally, there were no reports or mention of the father or son being killed by Dawn.com’s correspondent or other credible news outlets in their coverage of the incident.

Furthermore, the claims also misattributed the man’s name, which has been withheld for security purposes, as being that of his son.

Therefore, Dawn.com has determined that the claims of a Christian man and his son lynched in Saturday’s act of mob violence in Sargodha are inaccurate. Both the family and police confirmed that there were no deaths and the circulating posts also misattributed the identity of the man.

Is the Israel-Palestine conflict a religious war or struggle by the colonised against the coloniser?

Human pulsion toward sadism and destruction is as natural as our pulsion toward pleasure, and Gaza has become a museum of the death drive.




Arpan Roy 

DAWN

Published May 27, 2024 

It is often said that the bloodiest wars in history were fought in the name of religion. In fact, the opposite is true.

The most inhumane conflicts in history were all secular, modernist, and conducted according to the logic of the rational sciences. While it is true that the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and other holy wars dragged on for centuries in the medieval world, these were always interlaced with “secular” interests like economics and politics of power, and their death tolls (if known) pale in comparison to those of modern warfare.

Forty million people were killed during World War I, over 50 million during World War II, the great atheist Stalin killed millions during his reign as General Secretary of the Soviet Union (even if the standard 20 million number may have been American propaganda), and Pol Pot was responsible for the genocide of two million of his fellow Cambodians (again, the numbers are disputed).

The exact number of casualties in all the wars varies, but when we enter the language of “giving or taking” a few million here and there, we have already entered the realm of humanity reduced to bare life.

Counting souls, not bodies

By comparison, the so-called religious conflicts of recent history were much more benign. The Yugoslav wars, ostensibly rooted in an immortal Catholic/Orthodox rivalry, saw around 140,000 deaths, and Islamic State terror in Iraq and Syria did not top 35,000 casualties (at the highest estimate).

Even the Hindu/Muslim fratricide during Partition “only” resulted in around one million deaths; a “small” number compared to the 20th century’s secular world wars, but perhaps more painful because it was brother against brother, neighbour against neighbour. Its pain can still be felt in a way that the spectacular numbers of the world wars’ military casualties perhaps cannot be.

There are two points to be taken from the discussion so far. One, it is simply not true that religion has been the cause of the most inhumane wars and killings in history. The facts clearly illustrate an inverse situation, to the extent that one might wonder who or what benefits from this often-repeated myth.

Moreover, whereas secular politics driven by Enlightenment ideals or utopian projects like communism have regarded human life as a statistical fact subordinate to a greater imminent good, it is religion that has maintained its fidelity to the idea of a soul, that which uniquely inhabits each and every body. The soul, in its afterlife, designates a place for the individual beyond the collective good, as seen in concepts like martyrdom — a theology for which secular ideologies have no viable alternative.

And, two, the pain caused by violent conflicts cannot be measured in numbers. If this were true, then our capacity to feel pain from the deaths of our loved ones would be trivial compared to the pain felt from knowledge of distant wars. No amount of solidarity in the world can move us to such extremes of empathy.
Secular vs religious

I offer these thoughts now in a time of great suffering in the world — in Palestine — where secular and religious ideologies meet in complicated and often contradictory ways.

There is no mistaking that the Israel-Palestine conflict is a colonial conflict, meaning that it is a secular conflict in which the colonised refuse the terms laid out by the coloniser on basic principles of human dignity and justice. But this basic framework is also imbued with significant religious overtones, and a kaleidoscope of other undertones.

For half a century, leftist internationalists have invested in the Palestinian revolution as a litmus test for a potential world revolution. Similarly, for over a century, Muslims have viewed Palestinian suffering as synonymous with Muslim suffering, and Jewish dominance over Palestine as representative of diminishing Muslim sovereignty.

Israelis, too, construct their unique form of colonialism not on scientific concepts of racial superiority (akin to Nazi Germany’s colonial aspirations) but on Jewish supremacy derived from biblical prophecy.

Regardless of the efforts made by secular Jewish intellectuals, both in the past and present, to dissociate Zionism from religious influences, the fact remains that the millennia-old Jewish connection to Palestine finds its foundation solely in the Torah, the Mishnah, and the Talmud — the sacred texts of Judaism.

At the same time, to Israelis who are convinced that their colonised subjects are inherently antisemitic Jew-haters, the question must be asked: Would Palestinians hate their colonisers any less had Israel been a Hindu or Christian settler colony? A related version of the question can also be posed to Muslim publics around the world who pray for Palestinians because they are (mostly) Muslims: Would the Ummah abandon Palestine if its inhabitants were Buddhists or Sikhs?

These are difficult questions, but we are in difficult times. Israeli soldiers have consistently used Jewish symbols during the genocide in Gaza, from erecting menorahs in bombed-out neighbourhoods to underwriting a genocidal subtext into Jewish holidays.

True, this is a perverted Judaism that does not speak for all Jews, in the same way that Islamic militancy does not speak for all Muslims, but the religious nature of Israel’s war cannot be brushed aside as a mere curiosity.

One can see shades of the militant Islamic State (IS) in videos of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and the West Bank. A particularly disturbing instance that comes to mind is a recent video in which an Israeli soldier shoots an elderly Palestinian man — a convert to Judaism — for not being sufficiently Jewish.

The video shows the soldier interrogating the elderly man’s religion and then cuts out before he is shot at point-blank range. Its cruelty jolts the memory of videos that surfaced from Raqqa and Sinjar a decade ago. So the question then becomes: Is the genocide in Gaza a religious one or a secular one? And if it is both, as is probably the case, where does one seep into the other?
The evolution of Zionism

Zionism is a project with many faces, currents, countercurrents, and evolutions. In the past two decades, its way of self-narration has adapted to global sentiments, but without sticking to any one of them exclusively. The basic frame narrative of European Jewish settlers establishing a state on the fringes of Arabia has gone from a story of utopian nation-building in a barren desert to a bellicose narrative in which there was a war with the Arabs and the Jews fairly won their spoils.

More recent shifts use the language of decolonisation and indigeneity, purporting to depict the Jews as indigenous people shouting in the wilderness for their ancestral land rights (as if they were the Navajo nation) but nobody hears them.

These shifts indicate that Israel is not immune to changing global sentiments, and that adapting to these new horizons is hard and constant work. But because the Palestinian story is now known to the world, and because this story touches the hearts of whoever hears it, Israel has had to search for new discursive strategies to situate itself in this changing world.

A new kind of narrative voice has emerged in Israel since Hamas’s uprising on October 7. This is one that acknowledges the dark matter of Israeli history that were long circumvented: massacres of Palestinian villages in 1947 and 1948, collusion with succeeding imperial powers like Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States, manipulating peace treaties signed on lavish lawns of Western capitals, and so on.

Perhaps because it is no longer possible to conceal truths in the age of the internet, perspectives that were once taboo in Israeli society are now game for legitimate discussion.

Another reason for this new voice is that Palestinians have also changed. Long having favoured some version of a binational model as a solution to the Israel-Palestine impasse, younger Palestinians have shifted to a revolutionary Algerian model, one in which there is no solution but driving the colonisers out of the homeland, en masse, and even after generations. Not aloof to this new world order, the new Israeli voice says: “We are refugees, and should the Palestinian resistance win, we would have nowhere to go.”

There is a tragic sincerity in this voice. Yet, when I watch the videos from Gaza, it is difficult to empathise with Israelis who believe that genocide is the only solution to permanently safeguard their own existence on the land. We know from psychoanalysis that the death drive, as Freud called it, meaning the human pulsion toward sadism and destruction, is as natural as our pulsion toward pleasure, and Gaza has become a museum of the death drive. But it does not have to be this way.
Can the Israeli youth contemplate an exit from violence?

In a fascinating recent book on genocide, the anthropologist and psychiatrist Richard Rechtman draws from years-long research with asylum seekers in France to reach a highly original insight — that the millions of asylum seekers from Afghanistan, tribal areas of Pakistan, and Iraq who have flooded Europe over the past decade are, in many cases, not seeking asylum because they are afraid for their own lives.

These men often belong to the same religion and sometimes the same tribal lineages as the jihadists from whom they seek asylum, and therefore the probability that these men would be killed is low. Rather, they are fleeing their villages, families, and lifeworlds because they do not want to be recruited by jihadist groups that would essentially oblige these young men to become killers.

In other words, they leave everything and flee because they refuse to kill. To contain their experience to the generic category of “migrant” is a lack that does not adequately capture the ethical sacrifice that these men have made.

In lieu of such an insight, one wonders what would happen if, as the world changes around them, a generation of Israeli reservist soldiers and conscription-age teenagers wake up one morning and decide not to kill; to not participate in a holy war.

They would indeed have to leave Israel under these circumstances, but this would be an exit not as disgraced colonists but as asylum seekers — like the hundreds and thousands of young men resettled in monotonous small towns in Germany, Austria, Sweden; building new lives in distant places — who refuse to participate in a genocide in the name of religion.

Header image: Women and children mourn people killed in Israeli bombardment, at a health clinic in the area of Tel al-Sultan in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. — AFP


Arpan Roy is an anthropologist researching in Palestine and currently based in Berlin. His book Relative Strangers: Romani Kinship and Palestinian Difference will be published in 2024 by University of Toronto Press.

SLAUGHTER OF INNOCENTS

Israeli attack on Rafah tent camp kills 45, prompts global outcry

Reuters | AFP Published May 27, 2024 

Palestinians gather at the site of an Israeli strike on a camp area housing internally displaced people in Rafah on May 27, 2024. — AFP

Fire rages following an Israeli strike on an area designated for displaced Palestinians in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, in this still picture taken from a video on May 26, 2024. — Reuters

A Palestinian child, wounded in an Israeli strike on an area designated for displaced people, is assisted at a hospital in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 26, 2024, in this screen grab from a video obtained by Reuters.

An Israeli airstrike triggered a massive blaze killing 45 people in a tent camp in the Gaza city of Rafah, officials said on Monday, prompting an outcry from global leaders who urged the implementation of a World Court ruling to halt Israel’s assault.

“There are 249 others who were wounded,” the Gaza health ministry said in a statement.

Mohammad al-Mughayyir, a senior official at the civil defence agency, told AFP: “We saw charred bodies and dismembered limbs … We also saw cases of amputations, wounded children, women and the elderly.”

He said that rescue efforts were facing major challenges. “There is a fuel shortage … there are roads that have been destroyed, which hinders the movement of civil defence vehicles in these targeted areas,” Mughayyir said. “There is also a shortage of water to extinguish fires.”

Israel has kept up operations in Rafah despite a ruling by the top UN court on Friday ordering it to immediately halt its military operations in the overcrowded city, once claimed by Israel to be a safe zone.

The attack took place in the Tel Al-Sultan neighbourhood, where thousands were sheltering after Israeli forces began a ground offensive in the east of Rafah over two weeks ago.

More than half of the dead were women, children, and elderly people, health officials in Gaza said, adding that the death toll was likely to rise as more people caught in the blaze were in critical condition with severe burns.

Palestinians search for food among burnt debris in the aftermath of an Israeli strike on an area designated for displaced people, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 27, 2024. — Reuters

The International Committee of the Red Cross said its field hospital in Rafah was receiving an influx of casualties, and that other hospitals also were taking in a large number of patients.

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri described the attack in Rafah as a “massacre”, holding the United States responsible for aiding Israel with weapons and money.

Meanwhile, the Israeli military claimed its air force struck a Hamas compound in Rafah and that the strike was carried out with “precise ammunition and on the basis of precise intelligence.”

It said it took out Hamas’ chief of staff for the West Bank and another senior official behind deadly attacks on Israelis. “The IDF is aware of reports indicating that as a result of the strike and fire that was ignited several civilians in the area were harmed. The incident is under review.”

Israel’s top military prosecutor, however, called the air strike “very grave” and said an investigation was under way.

French President Emmanuel Macron said he was “outraged” over Israel’s latest attacks. “These operations must stop. There are no safe areas in Rafah for Palestinian civilians,” he said on X.



Germany’s foreign minister Annalena Baerbock and the EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said the International Court of Justice ruling must be respected.

“International humanitarian law applies for all, also for Israel’s conduct of the war,” Baerbock said.



Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said it was “horrified” by the attack, adding that the “deadly event” showed once again that nowhere was safe in Gaza.





Burnt tents, charred belongings

In scenes grimly familiar from a conflict in its eighth month, Palestinian families rushed to hospitals to prepare their dead for burial after the strike late on Sunday night set tents and rickety shelters ablaze.

Palestinians look at the damages after a fire at the site of an Israeli strike on an area designated for displaced people, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 27, 2024. — Reuters


Women wept and men held prayers beside bodies in shrouds.

“The whole world is witnessing Rafah getting burnt up by Israel and no one is doing anything to stop it,” Bassam, a Rafah resident, said via a chat app, of the strike in an area of western Rafah that had been designated a safe zone.

“The air strikes burnt the tents, the tents are melting and the people’s bodies are also melting,” said one of the residents who arrived at the Kuwaiti hospital in Rafah.

By daylight, the camp was a smoking wreckage of tents, twisted metal and charred belongings.

Sitting beside bodies of his relatives, Abed Mohammed Al-Attar said Israel lied when it told residents they would be safe in Rafah’s western areas. His brother, sister-in-law and several other relatives were killed in the blaze.

“The army is a liar. There is no security in Gaza. There is no security, not for a child, an elderly man, or a woman. Here he (my brother) is with his wife, they were martyred,” he said.

“What have they done to deserve this? Their children have been orphaned.”

Israeli tanks continued to bombard eastern and central areas of the city in southern Gaza on Monday, killing eight, local health officials said.

A Palestinian child, wounded in an Israeli strike on an area designated for displaced people, sits at a hospital in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 26. — Reuters

Earlier on Sunday, the Israeli military said eight projectiles were identified crossing from the area of Rafah, the southern tip of the Gaza Strip. A number of the projectiles were intercepted, it said. There were no reports of casualties.

In a statement on its Telegram channel, the Hamas al-Qassam Brigades said the rockets were launched in response to “Zionist massacres against civilians”.

Rafah is located about 100 kilometres south of Tel Aviv. Israel says it wants to root out Hamas fighters allegedly holed up in Rafah and rescue hostages it says are being held in the area, but its assault has worsened the plight of civilians and caused an international outcry.

Israeli war cabinet minister Benny Gantz said the rockets fired from Rafah “prove that the [Israel Defense Forces] must operate in every place Hamas still operates from”.

Itamar Ben Gvir, a hardline public security minister who is not part of Israel’s war cabinet, urged the army to hit Rafah harder. “Rafah with full force,” he posted on X.

Nearly 36,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s offensive, Gaza’s health ministry says. Israel launched the operation after Hamas attacked southern Israeli communities on Oct 7, killing around 1,200 people and seizing more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

Smoke rises from a fire in Gaza near the Israel-Gaza border, as seen from Israel on May 26, 2024. — Reuters

Fighting also continued in the northern Gaza area of Jabaliya, the scene of intense combat earlier in the conflict.

During one raid, the military said it found a weapons storage site with dozens of rocket parts and weapons at a school. It denied Hamas statements that Palestinian fighters had abducted an Israeli soldier.

Hamas media said an Israeli airstrike on a house in a neighbourhood near Jabaliya killed 10 people and wounded others.
Truce talks

Efforts to agree a halt to the fighting and return more than 120 hostages have been blocked for weeks but there were some signs of movement this weekend following meetings between Israeli and US intelligence officials and Qatar’s prime minister.

An official with knowledge of the matter said a decision had been taken to resume the talks this week based on new proposals from Egyptian and Qatari mediators, and with “active US involvement.”

However, a Hamas official played down the report, telling Reuters: “It is not true.”



Netanyahu’s war cabinet would discuss the new proposals, his office said.

A second Hamas official, Izzat El-Reshiq, said the group had not received anything from the mediators on new dates for resuming talks as had been reported by Israeli media.

Reshiq restated Hamas’s demands, which include: “Ending the aggression completely and permanently, in all of Gaza Strip, not only Rafah”.

While Israel is seeking the return of hostages, Netanyahu has repeatedly said the onslaught will not end until Hamas, which is sworn to Israel’s destruction, is eliminated.
Aid trucks enter Gaza

Israel has faced calls to get more aid into Gaza after more than seven months of offensive that has caused widespread destruction and hunger in the enclave.

Khaled Zayed of the Egyptian Red Crescent told Reuters 200 trucks of aid, including four fuel trucks, were expected to enter Gaza on Sunday through Kerem Shalom.

It follows an agreement between US President Joe Biden and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi on Friday to temporarily send aid via the Kerem Shalom crossing, bypassing the Rafah crossing that has been blocked for weeks.

Egypt’s state-affiliated Al Qahera News TV shared a video on social media platform X, showing what it said were aid trucks as they entered Kerem Shalom, which before the conflict was the main commercial crossing station between Israel, Egypt and Gaza.

The Rafah crossing has been shut for almost three weeks, since Israel took control of the Palestinian side of the crossing as it stepped up its offensive.

Egypt has been increasingly alarmed at the prospect of large numbers of Palestinians entering its territory from Gaza and has refused to open its side of the Rafah crossing.

Israel has said it is not restricting aid flows and has opened up new crossing points in the north as well as cooperating with the United States, which has built a temporary floating pier for aid deliveries.

LOOKS LIKE A UFO
U.S. Air Force Releases First Photo Of B-21 Raider Bomber In Flight

May 22, 2024 

Military Aviation
DAVID CENCIOTTI

The first air-to-air image of the B-21 during a test flight. (All images, credit: USAF)
The first photo of the B-21 Raider during a test flight was released along with other two new images of the 6th generation bomber.

The U.S. Air Force has released the first photo showing a Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider bomber in flight. The image was taken during one of the test flights of the 6th generation aircraft conducted out of Edwards Air Force Base, by the B-21 Combined Test Force.

As we have recently reported, the new B-21 Raider stealth bomber is currently undergoing flight tests at Edwards Air Force Base in California. However, the U.S. Air Force has remained tight-lipped about the progress since the aircraft’s first flight, and has not released any official photos. The images available so far were taken by photographers who captured the Raider during its initial flight or subsequently flying overhead.

The B-21’s flight tests began at Edwards Air Force Base after its first flight from Air Force Plant 42 in Palmdale on November 10, 2023. Despite the Air Force’s secrecy about the bomber’s status, it acknowledged that the flight test campaign is ongoing. A spokesperson confirmed that the B-21 flew again on January 17, 2024, and subsequent flights were rumored to have occurred in late March and early April, with the a recent confirmed flight on April 4, 2024.

B-21 Raider program update

On May 8, 2024, Andrew Hunter, the Air Force’s Service Acquisition Executive, provided a rare update on the B-21’s status during his testimony to the Senate Committee on Armed Services about Air Force modernization. When asked about the air leg of the nuclear triad, which includes the B-21 and the Long-Range Stand-Off nuclear missile, Hunter stated, “We are in the flight test program, the flight test program is proceeding well.” He explained that the testing is effectively helping to understand the platform’s unique characteristics.

Hunter did not go into further details about the flight tests, which are considered highly sensitive. Previously, the Air Force had also indicated it would not disclose specific details about the test program or the number of flights conducted. Nonetheless, Hunter noted that the program is on track and expressed optimism about the results.

An interesting image of the B-21 inside a hangar.

“We are working our way through the test objectives that we have for the platform, and I’m encouraged with how that’s progressing,” Hunter said in response to Senator Kelly. He added that significant milestones are expected this year, and he looks forward to providing data on those efforts in the future.

The B-21 program has heavily utilized advanced digital design tools, which Northrop Grumman claims have been crucial in identifying and correcting errors early in the design process. These tools, such as digital twins, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), and simulation environments, allow extensive modeling and testing before physical construction.

Hunter highlighted the digital nature of the B-21’s design, stating that it is significantly more digital than previous aircraft, aiding in achieving the current progress. This digital approach, along with disciplined requirement setting and the use of mature technologies, has contributed to a relatively short timeline in getting the B-21 airborne.


Following the start of flight testing, Northrop Grumman was awarded the contract for the Low-Rate Initial Production of the B-21 Raider. Although the Pentagon did not disclose the contract details, the Air Force had earlier estimated an average unit cost of $692 million at the bomber’s rollout in 2022. Reports suggest the first contract may cover up to 21 aircraft, with six airframes currently in various production stages, including the one already flying, named “Cerberus.”

Recently, U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David W. Allvin mentioned that the Air Force might limit the acquisition to the planned 100 B-21 Raiders, as newer technologies could emerge by the time these bombers are built and delivered.
The Raider

The B-21 is a long-range, highly survivable, penetrating strike stealth bomber set to gradually replace the B-1 and B-2 bombers. According to the U.S. Air Force, it will significantly contribute to national security objectives and reassure U.S. allies and partners worldwide.

The B-21 features an open systems architecture, allowing for the rapid integration of advanced technologies and ensuring the aircraft’s effectiveness against evolving threats. It is expected to enter service in the mid-2020s, with at least 100 units planned for production.

The Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office oversees the acquisition program, emphasizing the need to make test aircraft as close to production models as possible. These test aircraft are constructed on the same production line with the same personnel and tools intended for the final production run, enabling a faster transition to mass production.

A public release says the strategy of the AFRCO involves creating test aircraft that are as representative of production models as possible, including mission systems, using the same manufacturing processes and tooling. This method, instead of traditional flight prototypes, facilitates a quicker start to production.

Upon entering service, Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota will be the primary operating base and location of the Formal Training Unit for the B-21. Whiteman AFB in Missouri and Dyess AFB in Texas are the preferred locations for the remaining bases, which will receive the aircraft as they become available.

The B-21 is set to become the cornerstone of the Air Force’s bomber fleet, capable of both conventional and nuclear missions, and will eventually replace the current fleet of B-52Hs, B-2As, and B-1Bs with a new composition of 100 B-21As and 75 B-52Js by the 2030s.

The B-21 taking off



About David Cenciotti
David Cenciotti is a journalist based in Rome, Italy. He is the Founder and Editor of “The Aviationist”, one of the world’s most famous and read military aviation blogs. Since 1996, he has written for major worldwide magazines, including Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, and many others, covering aviation, defense, war, industry, intelligence, crime and cyberwar. He has reported from the U.S., Europe, Australia and Syria, and flown several combat planes with different air forces. He is a former 2nd Lt. of the Italian Air Force, a private pilot and a graduate in Computer Engineering. He has written five books and contributed to many more ones.