A Historical film on Girmit - Fiji indenture by Dr Satish Rai
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
FREEDOM OF SPEECH UNDER THREAT IN INDIA - Indians punish two girls for private Facebook postings
Indians
talk a great deal about democracy, but kick in the teeth of freedom of speech. These
are not real Indians, but real hypocrites. This sounds similar to (déjà vu of) Indian
lynch mob, consisting of Indian leadership, one Indian media and an Indian Labour
MP after my position in Waitakere Indian Association. I had merely raised issue of corruption, mistreatment of
women, caste and dowry and other ills which belittle us. I had similarly put it
in my Facebook posting. Wonder if Indian Newslink will stand for freedom of
speech or dubious laws which thwart freedom of speech and shame the biggest
democracy on earth.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2235386/Right-speech-threat-Mumbai-girls-Facebook-post-Bal-Thackeray-landed-jail-hurting-religious-sentiments.html
So much for freedom of speech: Mumbai girls jailed after Facebook post about Bal Thackeray which 'hurt religious sentiments'
PUBLISHED: 22:19 GMT, 19 November 2012 | UPDATED: 00:23 GMT, 20 November 2012
A seemingly harmless post on Facebook questioning Mumbai shutdown after the death of Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray has landed two girls in trouble.
The Palghar police in neighbouring Thane on Sunday arrested Shaheen Dhada and her friend Renu charging them with hurting religious sentiments, apparently under pressure from Shiv Sainiks.
The police action has evoked widespread outrage. The girls were also charged under the IT Act.
Markets in Mumbai were closed to mourn the death of Shiv Sena Chief Balasaheb Thackeray in Karad, Maharashtra
'People like Thackeray are born and they die daily, and one should not observe a 'bandh' for that' is what Shaheen Dhada wrote on her Facebook
Shaheen had reportedly written on her Facebook wall that "People like Thackeray are born and die daily, and one should not observe a 'bandh' for that".
Renu was arrested for liking the post. The two were on Monday produced before a court which sentenced them to 14-day judicial custody.
However, they were granted bail soon after they furnished personal bonds. While the police were prompt in arresting the girls, they are still dragging their feet in apprehending the men who vandalised the hospital owned by Dhada's uncle at Palghar.
A mob of suspected Shiv Sainiks had on Sunday vandalised the facility after the girl posted the comment.
Terming the police action against the girls as absurd, Press Council of India chief Markandey Katju asked Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan to look into the issue.
He also demanded immediate action against the policemen involved. Chavan, on his part, said: "I have just come to know about the details, I am looking into the matter."
Congress spokesperson Sandeep Dikshit parried questions on the issue, saying it was something to which the Maharashtra government would respond. "I have no idea. We will find out," he said.
Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy also condemned the arrests, demanding that the CM apologise for reckless disregard of the Constitution and fundamental rights by the state administration.
The police have now gone on the defensive and said they had no choice after the Sena activists complained.
"Over 500 Shiv sainiks had come to the police station. They had the printouts of the Facebook message and the addresses of the girls. Since it was a sensitive issue after the death of Bal Thackeray, we initiated the action," Ramdas Shinde, sub-divisional police officer, Palghar, said.
When asked whether the charge of hurting religious sentiments against the girls was appropriate, Shinde said: "Though the offence did not hurt the religious sentiments in the proper sense of the word, it hurt the sentiments of a particular group."
'Don't throttle dissent'
Telecom and IT minister Kapil Sibal said he was deeply saddened by the arrest of the two girls over the Facebook post questioning Mumbai's shutdown over Shiv Sena patriarch Bal Thackeray's funeral and said the IT Act should not be used to throttle dissent. "I am deeply saddened.
Labour Leadership tussle: Worse than a lion is an injured one – what we call in Hindi “Zakhmi Sher” (An injured lion)
Labour Leadership tussle: Worse
than a lion is an injured one – what we call in Hindi “Zakhmi Sher” (An injured
lion)
As the sail
of Labour leadership scuffle collects air, there is an anti-climax as the
attacker David Cunliffe takes the air out of sails by saying he supports Labour
Leader David Shearer (for time being).
Hurray, Shearer wins the battle by default. However, as I mentioned, the WAR IS
FAR FROM OVER. Come February, there will be similar story, and war will be over
by election of a new leader- David Cunliffe.
Wellington
political scientist, Ryan Malone has predicted that come 2014 election, Labour
Party will have a new leader. I concur with him. We have problem today because
some 18 months ago, David Cunliffe committed the error of not rolling over Phil
Goff. After Goof stepped down, we saw the wrong David elected as the party leader
and subsequent constitutional change which gives more power to the people and local
electorate councils (LECs). This was after LECs felt that their MPs overrode their
wishes in choice of a new leader.
However,
some (yours truly included) feel that the right wing media, leaning towards National
Party, has an agenda in this leadership conflict. Whosoever wins the leadership
battle, National party will be a winner. As a process of agenda-setting, right
wing media created an imminent scenario of a coup and created a news frenzy of
leadership battle in Labour conference when one did not exist. TV cameras were
placed in such angles that they always reported news from a leadership battle perspectives
and fanned the smouldering ashes.
In fact
one reader put a comment on a NZ Herald
story on leadership change and said: “I
wish the media would butt out and stop trying to influence the politics of this
country, they are there to report the news, not to analyse it, and try to
influence voters. If some reporters feel so strongly about things let them put
their money where their mouth is and stand for election themselves.” One hopes the First World media of NZ would
stop muckraking and agenda-setting and stop destabilising Labour party.
I fully
agree with John Armstrong, NZ Herald columnist
who said: The last thing Shearer needs is to
make a martyr out of Cunliffe among the wider party membership. But those
sanctions always remain an option. The Shearer camp is instead seeking to crush
Cunliffe as a political force by destroying what is left of his credibility.
I
hope that David Shearer and his supporters in the Labour caucus heed this
warning on the afternoon of 20th November, 2012, when a leadership
battle will fizzle out because the ambitious leader will not put up his hand –
not for now. You ask hunters who go out on Safari. It is dangerous game to kill
a lion. But it is MORE DANGEROUS to injure a lion and leave it lurking in the
forest. It will pounce unexpectedly when it have had its rest and mustered its
energy. I hope the Labour Party does not commit this cardinal error of
punishing or banishing David Cunliffe for displaying some antics of democracy
which a civilised New Zealand stands for.
When Chris Carter hinted a leadership change, wrong David got elected.
When
Chris Carter hinted a leadership change, wrong David got elected.
Shearer
may win the battle on 20th November to clinch leadership; the war is
far from over.
As Julia Gillard shafted Australian Labour Party leader Kevin
Rudd when caucus there saw that Rudd could not lead Australian Labour into the
next government, it was a hint to New Zealand Labour to do something because so
was true for Phil Goff.
However, while Chris Carter became the fall guy, Labour
caucus was too afraid for bloodbath, and a coup against Phil Goff never
happened. He finally stepped down, and out of the three David’s for the
leadership, the wrong one got elected. Reportedly the popular choice directed
by local electorate councils (LECs) was for David Cunliffe when some members of
caucus went against the wishes of their LECs and voted David Shearer. That is
what prompted constitution change, giving powers back to the people and not
leaving all decisions at the whim of caucus.
I know this because I helped a stalwart labour supporter
prepare submission for change in Labour party constitution. Following was
submitted to Labour Party when members and public were asked suggestion for change:
The Party’s organisation is at
all time low. We do not currently have enough people at grass roots level
working on philosophies of Labour Party and it being articulated prominently to
people out there. It is important to do so because we have an extremist right
wing media working for the National government. We have to get down to our grass roots membership and explain our philosophies. It is important for labour
party to take control of daily news media. They have a dwindling membership.
They have local newsletter drop-off but they are mere opinions of MPs or list
MPs. They come up with their own opinions. They are there not because we like
them but they are there to represent the views of their membership and
articulate our policies.
Our problem is that we are more
of centre left and become almost right-wingers. We need to be back where we
belong. Labour Party is in a situation where tail is wagging the dog. In a
particular electorate, members gave specific directive about leadership choice
to their elected MP but the MP went against that directive of his own
membership because of vested interests. Dissatisfaction is being expressed
about this erosion of democracy but little appears to be done and our membership
is voting with their feet, resulting in dwindling membership.
It is the last election of the leader, whereby peoples
wishes were ignored by caucus, led to the constitutional change. This change
has consequently led to erosion of power from the caucus, and given back to
electorates.
The leadership tussle in Labour Party will not end with
a roll call on 20th November, 2012. Much speculation is by media and
there is much ado about nothing in this battle because there will be no
opponent and David Shearer will win the battle by default. However, the war is
far from over. Change is inevitable.
My prediction is that Labour Party will be led by
another David come elections in 2014.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
RADIO AUSTRALIA: Commentator backs Fiji regime's role in 'coup culture' change
http://www.pmc.aut.ac.nz/pacific-media-watch/fiji-commentator-backs-fiji-regimes-role-coup-culture-change-8146
FIJI: Commentator backs Fiji regime's role in 'coup culture' change
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Item: 8146
Thakur Ranjit Singh is a former Fiji Daily Post publisher and an Indo-Fijian political commentator, who now lives in New Zealand.
Since 2006 Singh's comments that Fiji's media is part of the reason the country kept having coups, and his support of the interim government, has seen him repeatedly attacked by those who oppose it, and led to him being described as a coup apologist.
Recently he published an article that looks at the island nation's coup culture since 1987 and the impact of the media there, and it is likely it will result him becoming a target once more.
Presenter: Campbell Cooney
Speaker: Thakur Ranjit Singh, Fiji media commentator
Carter's Coup:New leadership may change Labour’s fortune
This article was written in May 2011 when leadership battles were looming in Labour Party and Chris Carter had thrown in name of David Cunliffe as a suitable leader in place of Phil Goff. As a result Carter lost his seat and David Shearer g
New leadership may change Labour’s fortune
As the popularity of Labour and its Leader Phil Goff continue to slide, it is time the Party revisited what former frontbencher and Member Chris Carter had initiated last year.
Labour now has little to lose and perhaps much to gain from a younger leader who could be a match for National’s John Key.
Politics is a numbers game and numbers depend on popularity. Australia’s Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd knows it well, as he found himself displaced (as Prime Minister) overnight by his ruthless Party caucus.
When 78% of the voters say ‘you will not win’ and 55% of your own supporters discount your chances of winning the next election, warning bells should start ringing in the Labour caucus.
What happened in Australia in July 2010 appeared to have been taking shape in New Zealand, as we saw Mr Carter’s bungled efforts in being a one-man crusade to change leadership in the Party.
The Carter Principle
Was his action intended to change Labour’s misfortunes in 2011 elections? Was he really out to save the Labour Party?
Mr Carter’s action cannot be discounted as actions of an unsound mind. He has proved his worth not only as a credible, capable and visible Minister, but also as an effective MP. As a migrant and as a community worker in his Te Atatu Electorate, I vouch for his popularity, especially among the ethnic communities.
Mr Carter polled 14,620 votes in the Te Atatu Constituency in 2008 Election, while his Party collected 11,263 votes, which indicated his personal popularity.
In TV debates following the ‘Letter fiasco’ last year, there appeared consensus on one issue: how he revealed the disenchantment in the Party was questionable but what he had stated was the truth.
You need not have the crystal ball to see that Labour would not win in the 2011 Election with Mr Goff as the Leader. One commentator said he lacked the charisma while according to another, he suffers from the ‘Prince Charles Syndrome,’ of being around too long. That was in August 2010.
Missed opportunities
With Mr Key backing down on the mining of reserves, increasing economic woes and National’s assault on the rights of workers, coupled by New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters joining with (former MP and Wanganui Mayor) Michael Laws, may yet spell some positive chances for the Labour Party in Election 2011.
If the Party is prepared to go for a copy-cat gamble of Australians in ditching Mr Rudd for better election chances with Julia Gillard, then perhaps the smouldering embers set up by Mr Carter may be worth fanning by the Labour caucus.
The Cunliffe Factor
Now that the gap has widened further, they may have nothing to lose in ‘doing a Rudd,’ on Goff, but in a relatively more civil manner.
One name floated as a possible challenger for the leadership role is New Lynn MP David Cunliffe who, like Mr Carter, is popular in his electorate.
The New Zealand Herald, in its November 10, 2008 issue, named him as the possible competitor with Annette King for the role of Deputy Leader and said that he was tipped to be Labour’s next Leader.
It is perhaps a prophecy that could come true.
Mr Cunliffe had reportedly said that he would not put his hand up for leadership.
“Labour is a Collective Party. Wisdom will be shared, and I will not be surprised if people come to a pretty shared collective view.”
That was more than two years ago and the supporters are waiting to see if Labour will come to a collective view that Mr Cunliffe had hinted.
Things have gone worse for Labour now. Those with ears close to the political ground already know that the change in leadership is a foregone conclusion.
Some claim, though prematurely, that Mr Carter had either strategically planned or inadvertently put things in motion.
One scenario is that if commonsense is to prevail in the Labour caucus, then Mr Cunliffe should lead the Party, which may have a remote chance of wresting back political control.
If there is a change in leadership, fanned by the heat that he set, Mr Carter’s political life may be far from over.
[Thakur Ranjit Singh is a political commentator, a Waitakere community worker and a postgraduate student in Communication Studies at AUT University.
Email: thakurji@xtra.co.nz]
ot elected as Labour Leader despite LEC's direction for Cunliffe as the leader. So began the woes of Labour Party. It appears my friend Chris Carter would be redeemed, or avenged, with looming coup expected. What I suggested of David Cunliffe can happen now- David Cunliffe may emulate a Gillard - on - Kevin Rudd on Labour leader David Shearer.
THE QUESTION IS NOT IF IT WILL HAPPEN, IT IS WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN.
THE QUESTION IS NOT IF IT WILL HAPPEN, IT IS WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
New leadership may change Labour’s fortune
By Thakur Ranjit Singh
Labour now has little to lose and perhaps much to gain from a younger leader who could be a match for National’s John Key.
Politics is a numbers game and numbers depend on popularity. Australia’s Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd knows it well, as he found himself displaced (as Prime Minister) overnight by his ruthless Party caucus.
When 78% of the voters say ‘you will not win’ and 55% of your own supporters discount your chances of winning the next election, warning bells should start ringing in the Labour caucus.
What happened in Australia in July 2010 appeared to have been taking shape in New Zealand, as we saw Mr Carter’s bungled efforts in being a one-man crusade to change leadership in the Party.
The Carter Principle
Was his action intended to change Labour’s misfortunes in 2011 elections? Was he really out to save the Labour Party?
Mr Carter’s action cannot be discounted as actions of an unsound mind. He has proved his worth not only as a credible, capable and visible Minister, but also as an effective MP. As a migrant and as a community worker in his Te Atatu Electorate, I vouch for his popularity, especially among the ethnic communities.
Mr Carter polled 14,620 votes in the Te Atatu Constituency in 2008 Election, while his Party collected 11,263 votes, which indicated his personal popularity.
In TV debates following the ‘Letter fiasco’ last year, there appeared consensus on one issue: how he revealed the disenchantment in the Party was questionable but what he had stated was the truth.
You need not have the crystal ball to see that Labour would not win in the 2011 Election with Mr Goff as the Leader. One commentator said he lacked the charisma while according to another, he suffers from the ‘Prince Charles Syndrome,’ of being around too long. That was in August 2010.
Missed opportunities
With Mr Key backing down on the mining of reserves, increasing economic woes and National’s assault on the rights of workers, coupled by New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters joining with (former MP and Wanganui Mayor) Michael Laws, may yet spell some positive chances for the Labour Party in Election 2011.
If the Party is prepared to go for a copy-cat gamble of Australians in ditching Mr Rudd for better election chances with Julia Gillard, then perhaps the smouldering embers set up by Mr Carter may be worth fanning by the Labour caucus.
The Cunliffe Factor
Now that the gap has widened further, they may have nothing to lose in ‘doing a Rudd,’ on Goff, but in a relatively more civil manner.
One name floated as a possible challenger for the leadership role is New Lynn MP David Cunliffe who, like Mr Carter, is popular in his electorate.
The New Zealand Herald, in its November 10, 2008 issue, named him as the possible competitor with Annette King for the role of Deputy Leader and said that he was tipped to be Labour’s next Leader.
It is perhaps a prophecy that could come true.
Mr Cunliffe had reportedly said that he would not put his hand up for leadership.
“Labour is a Collective Party. Wisdom will be shared, and I will not be surprised if people come to a pretty shared collective view.”
That was more than two years ago and the supporters are waiting to see if Labour will come to a collective view that Mr Cunliffe had hinted.
Things have gone worse for Labour now. Those with ears close to the political ground already know that the change in leadership is a foregone conclusion.
Some claim, though prematurely, that Mr Carter had either strategically planned or inadvertently put things in motion.
One scenario is that if commonsense is to prevail in the Labour caucus, then Mr Cunliffe should lead the Party, which may have a remote chance of wresting back political control.
If there is a change in leadership, fanned by the heat that he set, Mr Carter’s political life may be far from over.
[Thakur Ranjit Singh is a political commentator, a Waitakere community worker and a postgraduate student in Communication Studies at AUT University.
Email: thakurji@xtra.co.nz]
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Satyamev Jayate: Hey Ram, Indian leadership in Auckland shot the messenger this Independence Day
Satyamev Jayate: Hey Ram, Indian leadership in
Auckland shot the messenger this Independence Day
Thakur Ranjit Singh
[This article was given to Indian Newslink newspaper in Auckland, which had incorrectly quoted
Thakur Ranjit Singh and led a lynch mob against Thakur for saying some home
truths about India on his Facebook posting. This was Thakurs correction which Indian Newslink and its editor, Venkat
Raman did not publish for obvious reasons.]
This episode opens with the Indian lynch mob after head
of an Auckland journalist. He is purported to have posted comments on Facebook,
deemed offensive by Indian politicians and some leaders. This makes a good
script for a Bollywood movie. Here is an honest-speaking journalist, who speaks
some home truths about his grandfather’s country. Indian leadership in
Auckland, with a media and some political opportunism, makes a villain of him.
He is chased out of his muhalla - his street, the house is burnt and emotionally-charged
people, prompted by media, stone this “villain” to death. Truth should never
interrupt a good script. And that is where the film ends with everybody dancing
around his dead body and chanting “bharat mata ki jay, mera bharat mahaan…”
Thank God I am not in India, or by now, I would have
been that dead body. That is the advantage all NRIs (Non-Resident Indians) have
in this civilised democracy - where we still (supposedly) have freedom of
speech. That journalist is none other than yours truly, Thakur Ranjit Singh.
What were the truths that Thakur said in his Facebook
posting? [Please see link (s) under each heading to substantiate what I said]
1)
India has been judged the worst country for a woman to live (by G 20 survey).
2)
Indians have hoarded the largest amount of black money in Swiss Banks
http://myeconomist.wordpress.com/indias-black-money-in-swiss-bank/
(1.5 billion in Swiss bank)
3)
India has one of the most corrupt politicians in the world.
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-03-29/news/29358042_1_civil-servants-national-level-wikileaks-report
(India among the most corrupt nations surveyed by PERC)
4)
India has done very well economically, but this wealth has failed to reach many
of the needy, with very heavy unequal distribution of wealth.
5)
In the Olympics India failed miserably.
http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/indias-olympic-program-under-spotlight-again/
(New York Times)
Things that Thakur said you should do during
Independence Day in front of Indian Flag:
1) Bow your heads
and pray for a miracle to salvage the name of a once proud country, so once
again we can say we are proud to be an Indian
2) Pray for a
prosperous, honest conscientious and caring nation where all have equality and
share in the economic cake.
What Thakur said about Fiji?
1) I am proud to be Fijian, and thank my grandfather for
running away from India in 1915 for
a new home in Fiji.
What
Thakur did not say, but was misrepresented by media, Indian Newslink:
1) I never said I am NOT proud to be an Indian.
2) I never said ‘bow your head in shame” I said bow your heads in prayers.
3) I never said India is economically backward – I
praised its economic development, but criticised its distribution.
This is what the Indian President Pranab Mukherjee said
on the eve on India’s Independence Day: “Anger against the bitter pandemic of corruption is legitimate, as is the
protest against this plague that is eroding the capability and potential of our
nation. There are times when people lose their patience...” It was one such time for me.
India’s
Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh said the following in his Independence Day
speech: “We will continue our efforts to
bring more transparency and accountability in the work of public servants and
to reduce corruption...” So I wonder what different I said that riled these
distant NRIs?
Indians can say things because of blind nationalism and misplaced
patriotism. What I am perturbed by is
comments by former Fijians in Indian Newslink
of 1 September, 2012. In what I said above, what did Sunil Chandra, President
of Waitakere Indian Association, find “unacceptable”? What were “derogatory”,
Ahmed Bhamji? And Vinod Patel, who heads Mega Mitre 10 and is President of
Hindu Council of New Zealand (HCNZ), surprised me most with his boorish,
blinkered and vitriolic statement that borders on defamation of character. He
calls me a “failed journalist?” Last year I graduated with Masters in
Communication Studies with Honours from Auckland University of Technology (AUT)
after doing a 300 page research thesis on media and politics in Fiji. Does he
question the standard of AUT? Since when did he become a media commentator and
analyst? He blames me for writing without base and research and having hatred
in my writings. I had earlier worked at HCNZ and at one time had been president
of Hindu Elders Foundation and Chaired media section of their Hindu Conference
earlier this year. I still remain Media Officer for Waitakere Indian
Association and Waitakere Ethnic Board and head Sanatan Media Watch. I can also
question his suitability to head HCNZ with such non-substantiated and divisive
views, but I will not, but vote with my feet. HCNZ has strenuously attracted
only a handful Fijians, they will have one less now.
And Venkat Raman, editor of Indian Newslink has been using my free services, feature journalism articles and opinions for some 8
years and had occasionally praised me for this.
And he publishes this defamatory and unsubstantiated diatribe of Vinod Patel
in his paper which any respected editor would
question, especially against a person he knows personally. I find this
strange. I appreciate that as a journalist and media commentator, I have been
thorn to some people. Writing honestly about vice in society has been my trait
and for that I make no apologies, and even had tussles with the way HCNZ
operates. I believe that if you are a popular and likeable journalist, you are
not doing your job; if you rile or annoy people, and they hate you, you must
have done something right. I have been fired by two diametrically opposed Fijian
Prime Ministers for speaking truth. One is Qarase (serving jail term) and
another one is Mahendra Chaudhry, now in courts for abusing his position. Compared
to these, my suspension as Vice President of WIA due to pressure from Indian
leadership is like a Sunday picnic.
The instigator of this, Sunny Kaushal is a Labour politician
who can now proudly tell his son in Labour Party youth that he should never be
truthful and fearless like Thakur, team up with the right influential people
and politicians, hide truths, curtail free speech that offends your mother
country, befriend media-wallahs and you will become a successful Indian politician
in NZ.
No Indian leader or politician can teach me the history
of Girmit of my grandfather. He ran away to escape poverty and atrocities back
home, seeking better life elsewhere. I grew up listening to Bhagat Singh’s
revolution from my grandfathers’ 78 RPM HMV wind-up gramophone. That is why my
heart bleeds when it appears the sacrifices of these revolutionaries-“saheeds”
went in vain, with the current situation in India.
People are completely wrong in comparing this episode to
Paul Henry saga. I am a Fijian of Indian descent and judged things from my
knowledge of India and have substantiated each allegation with media link, in
many cases, written by Indians themselves. All those slating me are well-off
NRIs, majority from one or two particular prosperous states, very few migrants
are from downtrodden states, and hence they have little overseas voice. I chose
to speak bluntly on behalf of my downtrodden cousins in Karauli, Rajasthan in
India where I went in 2003 to trace my roots and was shocked to see how the Maharaja
still rules, Mandirs are his commercial arms and religion is for sale. Independence
has yet to reach Indians almost the population size of USA.
Perhaps
my only crime is to have used English idiom that perhaps many Indians do not
properly understand. Calling “every Englishmen and his dog” does not mean I am
calling or comparing England to a dog. It is just a way of emphasising “all’ or
‘everybody” Similarly; I have said nothing about dog and India. I hope Indian community
leaders understand this.
Nobody to date
can honestly say what I have said wrong or untruthful, they just merely
appeared to have joined the lynch-mob started by a labour politician, seeking
my scalp, hiding behind generalisations like “unacceptable”, “derogatory”, “bad
attitude”, ‘deplorable,” “very disturbing” and so on. Only one person agreed
with my right to free speech. Contrary to
Mahatma Gandhi’s teachings, it may now be an Indian sin to speak the truth. However,
I feel it is still not a Kiwi sin to do so.
What an irony
that on the Independence Day of the largest democracy on earth, Indian
leadership in New Zealand shot down few of the strongest pillars of free world,
democracy and principles of Independence - free speech, media freedom and - truth.
Together with it, they have shot the messenger as well. Hey Ram!
[E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co.nz]
Why Indo-Fijians did not join Fiji army during the wars: What Girmitiya descendants need to know
Why Indo-Fijians did not
join Fiji army during the wars: What Girmitiya descendants need to know
Thakur
Ranjit Singh, Auckland, New Zealand
At the 11th hour of the
11th day of the 11th month, Fiji marks a memorable day. That is
Remembrance Day on 11th November each year. Americans call it Veteran’s
Day. Remembrance Day (also known as Poppy
Day or Armistice Day)
is a memorial
day observed in Commonwealth countries since the end of World War I
to remember the members of their armed forces who have died in the line of duty.
Historically, arguments have raged since the wars on reasons why Indo-Fijians
did not join the army in numbers. Since Fiji’s history fails to tell this, descendants
of Girmitiyas (indentured labourers) need to be told the reasons why their
forbears did not join Fiji army.
Every now and then Fijian (read I-Taukei) leaders in all
sizes and shapes have levelled accusation at Indo-Fijians for being disloyal to
Fiji by not joining the army during the world wars. Among others, a Fijian
nationalist academic who was behind the racist 1990 constitution, late Dr
Asesela Ravuvu had accused Indo-Fijians of not being interested to fight for
the maintenance of democratic rule in the world and were selfish while Fijians
gave their lives for this cause. He accused Indo-Fijians of demanding more pay
and special protection for their families and property. It was such
non-cooperation, according to him, that partly contributed to difficulties in
acquiring trust and acceptance of the Fijians as good neighbours and countrymen.
Dr Brij Lal, an Indo-Fijian academic and one of the
Commissioners behind the 1997 constitution wrote about the reasons and I take
liberty to quote him to inform the world that deserved to know this a long time
ago.
It is agreed that while to some extent, government’s
refusal to grant Indo-Fijians the same conditions of service provided to
European soldiers is one of the reasons for them not being in the military,
there are others which need to be clarified to counteract accusations of Fijian
nationalists who castigate a whole race for something they were not guilty of.
The reasons why Indo-Fijians did not join in the World Wars in the Fiji army are
the following, among others:
1)
Recruitment for Fijians was well-organised
and even supported by chiefs, including Ratu Sukuna in his military uniform.
His support and efforts perhaps was because, he was a beneficiary of the things
that came from Britain ,
hence the need to protect them. Furthermore, by recruiting greater number of
Fijians, there was an intention to display Fijian loyalty to the British to win
their support for the Fijian community, as pressures were being exerted by the Indo-Fijian
community for more say in the government.
2)
Easier access to Fijian villagers to
recruit, as they lived in stratified structure collectively and were more
easily accessible than scattered Indo- Fijians.
3)
While Indo-Fijians said they would fight if
Fiji was attacked, they refused to fight for the empire in the other parts of
the world unless government acknowledged the principle of equality between
European and non-European soldiers. What they said was that an Indo-Fijian life
should be valued same as a European life.
4)
The government was reluctant to recruit Indo-Fijians
because of objections from Fijians and Europeans, as they did not wish them to
be equipped with this skill. There have been instances where Indo-Fijians were
requesting their sons to be recruited, but were refused. One Indo-Fijian is reported to have gone to
New Zealand to enlist in the Maori regiments because the Fiji army was not
taking in Indo-Fijians.
5)
Europeans were fearful of Indo-Fijians
because of Gandhi’s ’Quit- India’ campaign and Subhash Chandra Bose’s
collaboration with the Japanese.
6)
There was reluctance by CSR (sugar millers)
to grant leave for the farmers to fight the war, as they needed to meet their
contractual arrangements on the cane farms. Indo-Fijians were not unemployed
and “free’ like most of the villagers who were not fully utilised and were
available for military without any constraints elsewhere. Indo-Fijians had a
difficult choice of selecting between enlisting for war and keeping their
farms. Fijians on the other hand did not have the difficulty of such a choice,
as they had no farming obligations.
7)
The government proclaimed that the most
important contributions the Indo-Fijians could make were to increase the
production of foodstuffs and maintenance of essential agricultural interests.
This had been their contribution to the war, as soldiers do and cannot fight wars
on a hungry stomach.
8)
Membership in the British Empire was no
badge of honour for the Indo- Fijians. Local Europeans owed their power and
prestige to British colonialism, and Fijian chiefs were grateful for the
security and privilege they and their people enjoyed as a result of British policies.
On the other hand, Indo-Fijians had been subjected to most inhuman racial
humiliations and denigrations on a daily basis during indenture (girmit), and fighting a war for the
British would have meant a fight for preservation of a system that was oppressive
and humiliating.
The conclusion by Dr Brij Lal
in analysis of the above reasons is that the Indo-Fijians were neither
seditious nor disloyal. It was the European propaganda and the exuberance war
efforts of the Fijians that made them appear so. It was concluded that there
was no evidence of any opposition to war by Indo-Fijians who had displayed full
loyalty for the government with a fervent hope for the victory of the Allied Nations.
It is obvious that a vacuum in the true historical facts have clouded this
issue.
The question that I pose
here is would Fiji’s history have been different if the British had encouraged
racial balance in the Fijian Military during the wars? What may be the history
of Fiji if Indo-Fijians were encouraged and even forced to join the army during
the two world wars?
The answer perhaps lies in
the next question and answer.
Question: Why Papua New Guinea and India ,
despite being so divided on regional, provincial, language, cultural or ethnic
lines have little chance of success of a racially-instituted military coup that
Fiji
saw?
Answer: This is because
their military do not have the type of racial, ethnic, traditional or religious
polarisation that Fiji
military has. In those countries the diverse make up of the soldiers would
thwart, discourage and even prevent uprising based on racial, religious or
regional superiority.
For argument sake, assume
if Fiji military in 1987 had, say 30 to 50 percent Indo-Fijian soldiers
distributed equally in all ranks, would Rabuka still have been able to topple
the then Commander (now Fiji’s President) and institute a racially-based coup?
The chances would have been
slim, and may even have resulted in a mutiny as comradeship in the military
transcends race and reason may have come out of such a treasonous suggestion.
The bottom-line is, to
remove coup culture in Fiji, for the military to venture on racial balancing of
the Fiji Military forces and encourage Indo-Fijians to join the military
service. There is no shortage of such people to join, the only problem is that,
like in those colonial days, they are not taken in, and in turn are blamed for
lacking patriotism.
I hope Indo-Fijians will
learn the reasons why they are not represented in the Fiji army, and rebut any
uninformed people who accuse us of lack of patriotism towards Fiji.
E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co.nz
(About the Author: Thakur
Ranjit Singh is a political analyst and a media commentator, based in Auckland,
New Zealand. He graduated with Masters in Communication Studies (MCS) from
Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in 2011 and the above was an extract
from a project paper he had done on coup culture in Fiji)
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
A smooth landing from Los Angeles to Nadi: Thanks to Air Pacific
A
smooth landing from Los Angeles to Nadi: Thanks to Air Pacific
As the Boeing 737-800 of Delta Airlines, eased into
descent mode in a flight from Sacramento to Los Angeles on 16 August, 2012, it
was relieving to leave a burning and extremely hot Sacramento. Temperatures
here stood at above 38-41 deg C (over 100 F, climaxing at 107) some eight days
in a row, when our Fiji hardly heats above 32. Sacramento Airport has really
expanded to international level, in an expanding region with some 2.5 million
people. In case you did not know, Sacramento is the capital city of the U.S. state
of California.
In 1967, former president, Ronald Reagan became its governor, and actor of the
action movies Commando and the latest
one, Expendables 2, Arnold
Schwarzenegger was its last governor. Sacramento was cited by Time
magazine as America's most ethnically and racially integrated city in 2002.
Indeed, it is. You ask any Fijian in Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Fiji,
somebody would have a relative in Sacramento- so great is Fijian (Indo Fijian)
population there, perhaps most for any US city. I have over 100 in-laws, and
many people are there through family sponsorships. They are doing well, they
have a Mandir, numerous mandalis, have many ritual activities, but social
issues and family problems, despite wealth of America, are always there.
Richness or being wealthy never solves any social problems. And, yes, they also
have English/ Hindi newspaper, Sanatan
Sandesh, run by a former Fijian, Kishore Gokul for I which I am a regular
writer.
So, on this clear
afternoon, as Delta flight 4502 glided over Los Angeles,
the huge city of Hollywood looked magnificent with tall buildings, and
mountains on one side leading on to a blue, deep port on the seaside. After glidingly
descending for another 25 kilometres, we approached Los Angeles International
Airport. The airport looked strange and unwelcome; there were airlines of many
rich developed and other Asian and South American nations. Air New Zealand and
Qantas gave us some familiarity and assurance of South Pacific connection. But
I was looking for that reassuring sign of our rainbow colour, and lo behold,
there it was. As we eased on the ground, near Tom Bradley International
Terminal (TBIT) I could see the tail of our island in the sky-yes, our Air Pacific.
It was so assuring to see this familiar Pacific sign on this international
airport where our part of the world was missing. In Los Angeles, just seeing you Air Pacific in our unique
colours is so reassuring that your friend and island in the sky is nearby. Other
countries in the Pacific, notably, Samoa, because of our problems, wanted to
replace Fiji as the hub and administration centre of Pacific. Even they,
including other rival Pacific neighbours have no capability to have their
airlines in Los Angles; hence Fiji really flies the flag of Pacific in Los
Angeles. It is so reassuring to know that from next year, it will be flying
Fiji’s flag, as Fiji Airways. And Tom Bradley terminal is so familiar to many
Fijians who have passed through LA. This
terminal opened for the 1984 Summer Olympic Games and is named in honor of Tom Bradley, the first African-American
and longest serving (20 years) mayor of Los Angeles, and champion of LAX.
Tom Bradley
International Terminal is just minutes walk if you are coming by Delta or
United, but there are good sign-posting for those who are confused, and free
buses. The ground staff are very friendly to advice on directions. It always
helps to arrive four to five hours before the flight to Nadi to avoid crowding;
check in open at 6.30 pm for the 11.30 flights; hence you have five hours
before flight time. Facilities in TBIT are good with many food outlets including
many types of pizzas and Mc Donald. For Fijians linking from Canada, San
Francisco or Sacramento, you can bring your roti parcels or sandwiches if you
do not like junk food. Make sure to bring in bottles of water if you have long
wait, as no drinking fountains are available at TBIT check in area, but discard
all liquids before going in for security check. However if you miss your meal
then air hostesses in the plane are very friendly and efficient and hot food
served is much enjoyable and better now than cold sandwich wrap that I received
in 2010. I experienced big improvements after two years.
If two of you are travelling then inside aisle
seats are recommended because then you will not be disturbed by anybody else to
stand up, with four seats, two exits on each side respectively. Choosing window
seats for two people would be uncomfortable, with three seats in window side
rows. One stranger would be disturbed every time you go out in the 10 hour
flight. The seat configuration in Air Pacific’s 747-400 is three- four- three
(3-4-3). Do not choose window seats if you do not have to, because you hardly
see much except for a few minutes light of LA as it is a night flight. Even
landing at Nadi is often in dark, in early hours of the morning.
The in flight service
was very good, meal and a breakfast plus drinks all throughout the night, and
good opportunity to sleep as well, after takeoff. Compared to my flight in 2010,
this flight was in a better-fitted aircraft with better seating space and other
facilities.
I must commend our captains
and accompanying offices, I found smooth landings in all Air Pacific flights
and at times you do not feel when you have already landed. When I disembarked
the flight after 10 hours flight, for somebody over mid-fifties, I still felt
fresh and energetic. The new arrival card is a welcome change where all racial
references are removed and you are only treated equally as a Fijian. The
welcome change is arrival at the arriving lounge where instead of a boiler room
as in the past, you are in an air-conditioned nicer area which could be further
improved. The immigration officers were helpful and smiling, unlike those
unfriendly zombies I found in Canadian Greyhound bus offices and grumpy
officers at American-Canadian border near Surrey. More often than not, the
visitors queue tends to be very long.
Thank God for the new
Government’s policy on dual citizenship, I checked in LA on NZ passport, but
used my Fiji passport to enter Fiji at Nadi Airport. I went in as a breeze in
the Fiji citizen counter and had done my duty –free shopping and was collecting
my baggage when my wife joined me downstairs from the long visitors queue with
an NZ passport. In fact the inbound duty-free shopping, taken for granted in
our part of the world is foreign to Vancouver. Never put off duty free-buying
to Vancouver in-bound as they do not have any. This plus duty free shops
allowance of only one bottle spirit is a
Canadian policy of reducing alcohol usage.
There is so much of
welcome change at Nadi Airport where the scanning of baggage has made customs
clearance so efficient and fast. I found myself outside the terminal just half
an hour after landing when as usual, I had allowed an hour for this. My trip
into Nadi from Los Angeles after two years was a complete contrast to 2010 when
I found that a burden. Now, it was a breeze and thanks Fiji for the progress
you have made.
For those critical of
Fiji, you need to make a trip to experience the change. And thanks to Air Pacific,
our international pride for spreading its wings with pride in parts of the world
most airlines from our part of the world does not fly to- that is our Air
Pacific, soon to be Fiji Airways.
[E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co.nz
[Thakur Ranjit Singh was
on a trip to Canada and USA and notes his personal experience, services and
advice. He has been round the world twice, loves travelling and writing about
his experience. This is a travel segment that we will endeavor to bring on a
regular basis to assist and inform visitors in planning their trip. Further
information on flights can be obtained at Air Pacific website: www.airpacific.com]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)