Health Imperialism and Discriminatory International Laws

Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich

“Hypocrisy can afford to be magnificent in its promise, for never intending to go beyond promise costs nothing.” – Edmund Burke

 Joe Biden’s statements on resuscitating the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has also reignited an old debate inside Iran. With the Rouhani administration clearly siding with those pushing for unconditional return to the ‘deal’ signed with the U.S.  and five other world powers, it is important to discuss what is at stake – specifically as it relates to medical isotopes and Iran’s enrichment needs.

 While the United States and its western ‘allies’ demand that Iran stop all enrichment of up to 20% for its research reactor and medical isotopes, the US government has continued its efforts to commercialize nuclear medicine.

 In 2011, while the Obama administration was busy talking in secret with the ‘reformist’ groups attempting to influence and undermine Iran’s rights under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the U.S. Congress passed the “American Medical Isotopes Production Act of 2011” . The Bill calls for providing uranium to private sector companies to make medical isotopes with U.S. government undertaking the task of waste removal: “The lease contracts shall provide for the Secretary to retain responsibility for the final disposition of radioactive waste created by the irradiation, processing, or purification of leased uranium.” It is important to read the entire Bill here: E:\BILLS\S99.IS (govinfo.gov)

 Under Section 6 titled ‘DOMESTIC MEDICAL ISOTOPE PRODUCTION’, the Bill stipulates:

 “(a) In General.— Chapter 10 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

 “Sec. 112. Domestic Medical Isotope Production.

“a. The Commission may issue a license, or grant an amendment to an existing license, for the use in the United States of highly enriched uranium as a target for medical isotope production in a nuclear reactor, only if, in addition to any other requirement of this Act.”

 Clearly not a proliferation concern.  America is the arbitrator of international treaties – it would seem with cooperation from other powers. But Iran’s uranium enriched to 19.75% – considered to be LEU and necessary for research reactors and medicinal purposes – has to be halted.

 Through National Nuclear Security Administration, the U.S. is monopolizing and handing control over global medical isotope production to profit-driven companies. Here is the statement published on NNSA’s website:

 “As part of its mission to minimize the use of highly enriched uranium (HEU), NNSA’s Office of Material Management and Minimization was tasked to lead the Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99) program. Mo-99 is an isotope that is used in over 40,000 medical procedures in the United States each day, but is 100% supplied by foreign vendors, most of which use HEU in the production process.”

 It also identifies four private companies currently working with the U.S. government:

NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC, located in Beloit, Wisconsin

• SHINE Medical Technologies, located in Janesville, Wisconsin Northwest
• Medical Isotopes, located in Corvallis, Oregon
• Niowave, Inc., located in Lansing, Michigan”

Medical isotopes are a lucrative, growing business and one that is essential to human health.

Radiotherapy can be used to treat some medical conditions, especially cancer, using radiation to weaken or destroy particular targeted cells.

• Over 40 million nuclear medicine procedures are performed each year, and demand for radioisotopes is increasing at up to 5% annually.
• Sterilization of medical equipment is also an important use of radioisotopes

The global radioisotope market was valued at $9.6 billion in 2016, with medical radioisotopes accounting for about 80% of the total, and poised to reach about $17 billion by 2021. North America is the dominant market for diagnostic radioisotopes with close to half of the market share, while Europe accounts for about 20%.  Hence, 70% of the global medical radioisotopes goes to a population of 778 million people (US 331 and EU 447 million) while 7 billion (global population 7.8 billion less US and EU) are left with only 30%.

Where there is health imperialism, profit, and discrimination, there is Bill Gates.  According to the Journal of Economics and Sociology (2015), Bill Gates, the single biggest contributor to World Health Organization (WHO):

 “Gates calls for discussion “about which parts of the process [WHO] should lead and which ones others (including the World Bank and the G7 countries) should lead in close coordination.” While the article contains perfunctory nods to U.N. authority, as well as brief lip service to the idea of strengthening public health services in poor countries, there can be little doubt that Gates is advocating a new form of international institution, transcending the United Nations, targeting the developing world, and effectively controlled by the wealthy nations of the West”.  

 It comes as no surprise therefore that Gates in involved with nuclear medicine.  “TerraPower, the nuclear research venture founded by Bill Gates, is joining with Isotek Systems and the U.S. Department of Energy in a public-private partnership aimed at turning what otherwise would be nuclear waste into radiation doses for cancer treatment.”

 Such benevolence.  But sovereign signatory nations party to the NPT are not permitted to cure their sick.

 Furthermore, the more affluent people living in countries with limited access to nuclear medicine, find their way to the US or the EU for treatment, benefiting from their affluence while taking their home country’s wealth to the West.  And the gap is only growing.

 In the USA there are over 20 million nuclear medicine procedures conducted per year, and in Europe about 10 million. In Australia there are about 560,000 per year, with 470,000 using reactor isotopes. The use of radiopharmaceuticals in diagnosis is growing at over 10% per year.

 But in spite of the dire shortage of medical isotopes as reported by IAEA report – April 2020, JCPOA and the signatories, are demanding that Iran not produce this life-saving nuclear medicine.

 The degree of double standards and hypocrisy cannot be emphasized enough. Only 10 nuclear reactors, many of which are nearing 50 years of operation, produce over 95% of the world’s supply. In 2007, Poland used HEU to supply medical isotopes – and continued.   Why and how is it that the IAEA and other members states have no problem with Poland possessing HEU?    “In 2007, during a supply crisis in the molybdenum 99 market (caused by breakdowns at some of the older reactors, particularly the Canadian NRU reactor), Poland’s MARIA reactor increased its HEU-based production of molybdenum 99 to fill the gap. Though the crisis has passed, the Polish reactor does not appear to have reduced its production. It too uses HEU fuel and targets.

 One of the main suppliers of medical isotope is the Netherlands using bomb grade/HEU to process.    Obviously not an issue with the IAEA or the U.S. or anyone else.  South Africa has maintained around 80 kilograms of its HEU according to NTI Civilian HEU: South Africa | NTI   Clearly, blessed by America as they are working on producing LEU medical isotopes while the U.S. looks the other way

 It is not clear how anyone can accept so much discrimination in applying science, and to enforce not only lawlessness, but health imperialism.

How long for civilization?

Andrew Glikson

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. – Albert Einstein.

As the world is trying to hopefully recover from the tragic effects of COVID-19, it is reminded there is no vaccine for the existential threat for its life support systems posed by global warming, nor for the looming threats of future wars and nuclear wars fueled by warmongers and $trillion preparations by military-industrial complexes.

Between 1740 and 1897 some 230 wars and revolutions in Europe suggested war remained deeply ingrained in the human psyche and civilization. The question is whether the currently approaching catastrophes can be averted.

No one wishes to believe in the projections made in the recent book ‘The Uninhabitable Earth’, except that these projections, made by David Wallace-Wells, are disturbingly consistent with the current shift in state of the climate toward +4 degrees and even +6 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, as indicated by the current trends (Figure 1) and conveyed by leading climate scientists and the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC).

Figure 1.. Global mean temperature estimates for land areas (NASA).

Facing the unthinkable consequences of global warming is pushing climate scientists into a quandary. In private conversations, many scientists express far greater concern at the trend of global warming than they do in public. However, faced with social and psychological barriers, as well as threats of losing positions and jobs, in business, public service and academia, a majority keeps silent, displaying lesser courage than school children.

According to James Hansen (2012), NASA’s former chief climate scientist: “You can’t burn all of these fossil fuels without creating a different planet”. According to Joachim Schellnhuber (2015), Germany’s chief climate scientist: ‘We’re simply talking about the very life support system of this planet’, and ‘If we don’t solve the climate crisis, we can forget about the rest’.

Referring to a phenomenon he termed “scientific reticence”, James Hansen (2007) states: “I suggest that a “scientific reticence” (namely a reluctance to convey worrying news) is inhibiting the communication of a threat of a potentially large sea level rise”.

According to Bajaj (2019): “when it comes to climate change, the need for excessive caution and absolute certainty of the results is manifesting as silence from the mainstream science on the worst yet probable consequences and the worst-case scenarios that are looking increasingly likely”. A paradox emerges where scientists who experience scientific reticence are still accused of being alarmists.

This is because an evaluation of the probability of a risk needs to be related to the magnitude of the risk. For example, the inspection of the engines of a Jumbo Jet carrying 300 passengers need to be even more rigorous than that of a commuter van, or evaluation of the risk posed by a potential failure of a nuclear reactor even more critical than that of a conventional power plant, as is the absolute safety of a particle accelerator.

By analogy with the dictum “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it” projections of future climate trajectories need to take account of studies of the past behaviour of the atmosphere-ocean system. The pace of current global warming exceeds those of the last 2.6 million years by an order of magnitude, with calamitous consequences for biological systems.

As indicated by the basic laws of physics, the principles of climate science and empirical observations in nature, under an increase of greenhouse gas concentrations by about 50 percent , global warming is inevitable. While modeled future climate change trajectories may vary, depending whether observations are based on recent measurements, paleoclimate data or models, the consequences of such an increase are inevitably catastrophic. Whereas IPCC models portray linear warming trends to 2300, other models take account of the flow of ice melt water from Greenland and Antarctica into the oceans and thereby irregular warming (Glikson, 2019).

Given the warnings issued by leading climate scientists and the IPCC, while nations keep investing their dwindling $trillions in its military-industrial complexes in preparations for future war/s, our world is losing its last chance to save its planetary life support systems.

Power Requires Structure, Structure Requires Discipline

Vincent Emanuele

 

“Kind-hearted people might of course think there was some ingenious way to disarm or defeat an enemy without too much bloodshed and might imagine this is the true goal of the art of war. Pleasant as it sounds, it is a fallacy that must be exposed; war is such a dangerous business that the mistakes which come from kindness are the very worst.”

― Carl von Clausewitz

“In practice, we always base our preparations against an enemy on the assumption that his plans are good; indeed, it is right to rest our hopes not on a belief in his blunders, but on the soundness of our provisions. Nor ought we to believe that there is much difference between man and man, but to think that the superiority lies with him who is reared in the severest school.”

― Thucydides

Ordinary Americans will never win the reforms we need to survive until or unless hundreds of thousands of poor and working-class people across the United States participate in the political process. It’s really that simple. The existing left does not have the numbers or resources, hence power, to win meaningful reforms.

The primary impediment to political organizing efforts is the lack of left-wing political institutions and structures. Unions must be rebuilt. Political institutions, perhaps in the form of new parties or structures somewhat similar to the DSA, must be developed. Community organizations, churches, tenants’ unions, and cultural projects will also play vital roles. In short, we need it all, and we need it now.

One of the obstructions to building structures and institutions is the unhealthy and unproductive cultural habits of poor and working-class people, including those already involved with political efforts. Here, I’m not so much talking about our eating habits or lack of exercise, though both are worthy of debate and discussion — I’m specifically thinking about the inordinate amount of time American adults spend on immature cultural activities that hinder organizing efforts: binge drinking, drug abuse, video games, Netflix, cosplay, etc. In my experience, Americans, particularly progressives, can muster any number of excuses to avoid cultural and political engagement.

To paraphrase the late-great comedian, Bill Hicks, the right is up at 4:00am, ready to fuck the world, whereas my left-wing friends wake up at noon, hungover and depressed.

We face a tremendous contradiction: on the one hand, serious, long-lasting, strategic, and powerful political structures must be developed in order to successfully channel the righteous anger and frustration felt by so many poor and working-class Americans, but in order to build those structures, we need poor and working-class Americans prepared to take the helm.

Here, things get tricky. While it’s true that we can find plenty of examples of successful single-issue or union campaigns — it’s also true that such efforts are limited in scope and do not represent bigger trends in American society.

This is the case for many reasons. First, existing activists and organizers do not adhere to a strict set of methods and skills that are absolutely required to build long-lasting structures. Second, existing activists and organizers (not all, but many) treat their efforts like a hobby or job. Politics is neither.

Politics is war. And we’re fighting for our lives. Over 320,000+ Americans have died of COVID-19. Tens of millions of people have been catapulted into poverty, with millions facing eviction on January 1st, 2021. Nurses, warehouse workers, teachers, retail, grocery store, and service-sector workers of all stripes have been used, abused, killed, and discarded by a ruthless economic system and a federal government beholden to it.

We face unprecedented challenges: climate change, increasing risk of global pandemics, nuclear proliferation, a fully globalized and technologically integrated financial system/economy, and an increasingly fragmented social and cultural landscape, which has given rise to right-wing movements across the planet.

The time for uplifting stories about resistance is long gone. We’re not here to speak truth to power— we’re organizing to survive, and survival requires winning.

What do I mean by winning? In the short-term, winning would look like Medicare For All, free childcare, increasing Social Security payments, expanding public housing, abolishing student debt, substantially increasing funds to public schools, and enacting some form of UBI, basically Bernie’s program, but with minor additions.

But Vince, why not go bigger? Because it doesn’t matter how badly we want or wish or scream for certain policies: the U.S. left lacks the basic institutions necessary to shift the balance of power away from elites and to ordinary people, hence we’re in no position to demand more. If we want more, we have to organize a base capable of demanding more. That requires a lot of hard work (social media posts, YouTube channels, and pithy essays won’t cut it).

We face unprecedented challenges: climate change, increasing risk of global pandemics, nuclear proliferation, a fully globalized and technologically integrated financial system/economy, and an increasingly fragmented social and cultural landscape, with each trend fueling right-wing movements across the planet. That’s the context in which we’re living, fighting, organizing, and dying.

Do I want more than Bernie’s reforms? Fuck yes. I’m with Jim Morrison: “We want the world, and we want it now!” But wanting and actually doing are two different things.

Achieving the goals I laid out above would significantly improve the lives of poor and working-class people. For many, such reforms would mean the difference between life or death.

If, of course, an opportunity to push a more radical agenda presents itself, existing activists and organizers should jump on it, but they should do so with a vision and strategy. Indeed, the uprisings following the murder of George Floyd represent the limitations of what a non-organized left can achieve. Yes, millions can turn out for protests, but without organizations and institutions to keep them engaged, little is accomplished in terms of meaningful reforms or long-lasting institution-building.

All that said, in order to build successful institutions, especially long-lasting structures capable of taking on and defeating the most murderous and powerful government and corporate sector in the world, the U.S. left will need heavy doses of discipline, accountability, commitment, and seriousness, which requires challenging people.

Right now, I have friends, neighbors, and former coworkers in their mid-50s, unemployed, sitting at home playing video games all day. I have friends in their 30s, trade union members, who spend their weekends cosplaying. They’re not alone. Americans spend a disproportionate amount of their time distracted from the political world. Can you imagine our grandparents playing dress-up while fascism marched through Europe?

To be clear, I’m not prescribing misery — what I’m saying is that people in this country need to grow the fuck up. Remember, everything is on the line. Yes, I also enjoy sports, parties, concerts, art, working out, my cat, going to the beach, visiting historical sites, family gatherings, and a whole host of shit that must, for the moment, take a backseat to political organizing efforts.

Creating institutions and cultural norms that facilitate solidarity, love, creativity, and fun should be the ultimate goals of our political efforts. In other words, let’s organize and fight back, then truly enjoy life. Yes, we can find enjoyment while fighting back, but I worry that too many Americans, particularly self-identified leftists, process politics as entertainment.

In fact, the absurd proliferation of left-wing podcasts and media outlets is perhaps the best measure of this ongoing and troubling trend. For every left political organization that’s created, at least one hundred left media outlets are born — another sign of the deeply immature, narcissistic, and unserious nature of left politics in the U.S.

Here, I’m not prescribing burn out, nor am I prescribing workaholism. I’m not asking you to discipline yourself for a corporation, government agency, or ungrateful spouse, nor am I encouraging you to beat yourself up in order to live up to some unobtainable cultural or beauty standard — I’m encouraging you to get disciplined and fight back for yourself and your loved ones, and yes, even for the people you don’t personally know.

I’m arguing that you should take politics seriously, which first requires taking yourself seriously — your life, desires, values, family, and friends. That means waking up early. That means making daily plans. That means making weekly work schedules. That means sticking to them. The best political organizers I’ve met over the years are also, unsurprisingly, quite organized in their personal lives. We should cultivate more.

In the end, the left will never accomplish much without building structures and institutions, and building successful structures and institutions requires disciplined, accountable, and serious people. Everything self-proclaimed leftists do in terms of organizing or activism should take place with these things in mind. We’re fighting a war, not hosting a dinner party. Act accordingly.

The U.S. and Yemen: Will Biden End the Nightmare?

Eve Ottenberg

Biden has lots of promises to keep. Or break, if he wants to follow a grand old presidential tradition. Foremost among those to keep is ending U.S. support for the slaughter in Yemen. If Biden backslides on this, he should be fought and stopped pronto. Obama greenlighted this war, Trump stubbornly continued to aid the Saudi bombing campaign, and candidate Biden promised to end it. U.S. arms and military assistance to the Saudi assault have, over four years, pulverized Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East, unleashing two plagues and famine. Cholera broke out, but even worse was the starvation caused by the Saudi blockade. Even humanitarian aid cannot get in. And this, during a lethal Covid-19 pandemic.

Trump could have ended this nightmare. Congress voted to stop assisting the Saudis militarily, by passing the War Powers Resolution on Yemen, thus giving Trump plenty of cover to retreat from a monstruous, ongoing crime. Congress was partly motivated by the horrific Saudi murder and dismemberment in its Istanbul embassy of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But Trump vetoed that bill in April 2019, and it was no secret that he did so largely to protect lucrative U.S. arms deals with the Saudis. This was particularly despicable given his campaign pledges to end American’s pointless forever wars – and Yemen is arguably one of those. But Trump’s transactional affection for the Saudi dictator prevailed over the tens of thousands of Yemenis killed by U.S. weapons and U.S.-assisted famine. It was a venal, cowardly veto and an international disgrace. Nothing can excuse it. Had American military aid stopped, so would have the war. Thousands of lives would have been saved. Hundreds of thousands of children, stunted by malnutrition, would have had enough to eat. The whole world witnesses Yemen’s agony. It also witnesses U.S. complicity in this crime.

Over 100,000 people have perished in Yemen since Saudi Arabia began bombing it in 2015, in a doomed attempt to dislodge rebel Houthis. More than 85,000 have starved to death. Those are long, slow, excruciating deaths. According to the International Red Cross last week, roughly 24 million Yemenis need aid and “the majority of the country really needs UN and humanitarian funding in order to meet their basic day-to-day needs.” Aljazeera reports that last month, “Yemen had received less than half of the emergency funds it needed this year…About 13.5 million Yemenis currently face acute food insecurity.” Four million Yemenis have been displaced.

Still, the Saudi attempt to crush the rebel Houthis continues. For a while it seemed the Saudis might relent – that was back in September 2019, when the Houthis launched successful missile attacks on Saudi oil facilities, tankers and airports. These remarkably precise and economically devastating assaults got Saudi attention. The price of shares in the enormous Saudi oil company, Aramco, fell precipitously, as Saudis and the world realized that the tough, determined, supposedly outgunned bands of Houthis could decimate the kingdom’s fossil fuel infrastructure. Temporarily terrified, the aggressor seemed ready to negotiate. Indeed, in November 2019, indirect peace talks mediated by Oman were reported. But now the war blazes on again full blast. The British Independent observed in August that 2020 “could be the worst year yet for hunger in Yemen, with millions on the brink of famine.”

Since being elected president, Biden has said little about Yemen. But during the campaign, he referred to Saudi Arabia as a “pariah state,” and announced: “I would end U.S. support for the disastrous Saudi-led war in Yemen and order a reassessment of our relationship with Saudi Arabia.” He also promised to “end the sale of material…to the Saudis where they’re going in and murdering children.” Even back in 2019, Biden said it was “past time to end U.S. support for the war in Yemen.” So the president-elect has a track record of pronouncements against the war. Now we shall see if congress again finds the spine to pass a bill ending U.S. support. If it does, it’s hard to imagine Biden wouldn’t sign it. Even if congress doesn’t, the president on his own can stop much of this butchery.

According to the Independent on December 17, however, there’s “no end in sight” for the Yemen war. “The Houthis hold areas in the north and center” of the country, the publication explained. “The government, supported by the coalition, has as its sphere of influence Aden as well as the south and east.” That coalition is led by the Saudis and the United Arab Emirates. In the past, troops and fighter jets from Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Jordan, Egypt, Morocco and Sudan, along with support from U.S. mercenaries from the entity once called Blackwater have participated in the assault. Aside from their ally Iran, the Houthis are fairly isolated. According to Human Rights Watch, which appears, for once, to be on the right side of an issue, “Defense Department officials have misled congress about their ability to track and analyze coalition strikes in Yemen…support of Saudi Arabia…remains a top state department priority.” On this issue, as on aggression toward China, the pentagon and the Trump regime see eye to eye: both are fine with more killing in Yemen.

The Trump regime picked a side in a civil war that the U.S. arguably has nothing to do with. Anything for its rich friends the Saudis, despite any atrocities, any savageries. But back in November, The Arab Weekly contradicted other media assessments and reported that the Saudis wanted to expedite the Yemeni settlement process. Its focus is on a “joint declaration” between the Yemen government it recognizes and the Houthis. “The Arab coalition wants to achieve a breakthrough in the Yemen war file before the end of this year,” the weekly reported. If this is true, the coalition sure has a strange way of showing its peaceful intentions. Things are worse in Yemen than ever.

So prospects for peace right now are not especially bright. The best hope for starving, brutalized Yemen lies in a new Biden administration, which should scrupulously honor its promise to stop promoting genocidal war crimes and thus bust up the Obama-Trump legacy of blood in Yemen. Without U.S. military backing, with actual U.S. condemnation of Saudi Arabia, the war would end quickly. And for once, all too infrequently in its foreign policy, the U.S. would step over to the correct side of history. Trump and Obama chose barbarism over civilization in Yemen. One of Biden’s first acts should be to reverse that.

Dreamers Deserve a Path to Citizenship

Diana Anahi Torres & Valverde

I grew up undocumented in America. As a kid, I often saw little hope for the future in the country I considered home.

In high school, I was denied scholarships, financial aid, and college admissions because of my status. It seemed like all I could hope for was a job cleaning homes, like most undocumented Mexicanas did in my hometown.

Luckily, the support of my community — and a big change in immigration policy in 2012 — changed that.

First, with the help of many teachers, family, and friends, I was able to attend Amherst College with a generous financial aid package. Then, in 2012, President Obama finally bowed to pressure from the immigrant rights movement and created the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Under DACA, undocument applicants like me who’d arrived as young children were temporarily shielded from deportation. If we’d arrived early enough, stayed in school, and stayed out of trouble, we got temporary Social Security numbers and two-year work permits.

This program changed everything for me. For the first time in my life, I could apply to jobs where I could receive health benefits and save for retirement. If I got sick, I could go to the doctor. If I wanted to buy a home, I could. And if I wanted to pursue a professional degree, I could.

So I did. And today I’m an immigration attorney.

Countless other young people also benefited. Tom K. Wong, a political scientist at the University of California, surveyed over 3,000 DACA recipients from across the country. Wong found that after receiving DACA, about 69 percent of respondents got a higher paying job and about 56 percent got a job with better working conditions.

With their new jobs and spending power, these “DACAmented” youth started contributing approximately $4 billion dollars in taxes every year. Clearly, DACA benefitted not only individual DACA recipients but the economy at large.

But if these past four years have taught us anything about DACA, it’s that DACA is simply not enough. As soon as President Trump came into power, he worked tirelessly to abolish DACA by executive action, throwing the futures of hundreds of thousands of young Dreamers into jeopardy.

These incessant attacks spread fear throughout the community. I constantly feared that one day ICE agents would break into my home and tear me out of bed. I dreamt of men in black suits with guns pursuing me through dark streets.

At work, DACAmented clients pleaded with me with fear in their eyes. “If Trump eliminates DACA, I’ll lose my job as a teacher,” one said. “Can you help?” Sadly, most of the time, there was nothing I could do.

For me, the fear ended only a few months ago after an interview at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office with my U.S. citizen husband, when I was finally granted permanent resident status.

This is the first time since President Trump’s election that I feel safe. It’s the first time I feel like ICE can’t burst through my living room door and take me away from my loved ones to a place I barely remember. I finally feel like I can plan for my future.

That feeling is priceless. And it is a feeling that all young undocumented people who have grown up in this country deserve to feel.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have promised to protect Dreamers and our families. They need to keep that promise and reverse all of Trump’s attacks on DACA within the first 100 days. But that’s not enough. They also need to push for legislative reforms that would grant us a pathway to citizenship that can’t just be taken away by the next administration.

It is the right thing to do. All of us deserve to live a full, safe, and fearless life full of promise.

An End to Stability

Kollibri terre Sonnenblume

2020, with its pandemic and its protests, was many things to many people: a hardship for those who lost homes, livelihoods and people they loved to COVID and insufficient government support; an inspiration for activists who have been working for years to call attention to police brutality; and an imposition to those who resent anything that makes them take other people into account (like demands for racial justice or requests to follow public health protocol).

What 2020 should have been for everyone was a wake-up call that the system is not as solid as it might have seemed, and further, that that isn’t all bad.

A brief history of the prosperity myth

Our culture has been operating under an outdated assumption of economic dependability and social consistency for decades now. It’s true that the ’50s, ’60s and early ’70s were a period of economic growth that brought material gain to a larger percentage of (mostly white) people than before. During this time, one could succeed in the system by following particular, prescribed paths.

There’s much to criticize about this system: besides the fact that its benefits weren’t extended to everyone, it was exploitative of the planet. Factories belched pollution into the atmosphere, waterways were tainted with toxic effluent, mines tore open the earth, cars swarmed over the landscape on ribbons of asphalt, wetlands were drained for farms where DDT was sprayed, forests were razed, dams blocked fish, and hundreds of atomic bombs were “tested” sending radiation around the world. Humans who tried to stand in the way of any of this were ridiculed, threatened, imprisoned, driven off their ancestral land or killed.

However, within the narrow scope of what constituted economic well-being in the US, more people were admitted into the “middle class” if they were willing to submit themselves.

It was never as nice as it was made out to be, and this period (known colloquially as “the ’50s”) was also marked by the breakdown of the extended family and place-based community, the rapid rise and dominance of television, and the degradation of the typical diet with junk food. That picture-perfect happy housewife was popping pills for her depression (see the Rolling Stones: “Mother’s Little Helper”).

But yeah, this was the era when, if you were a white guy, you could get a job just by walking up to a boss man, looking him right in the eye, giving him a firm handshake and asking him for one. Or so it was claimed by the purveyors of this mythology, right up through the Reagan era.

Then, in the ’70s, hourly wages began to slip in terms of inflation, and in the ’80s, “trickle down economics” was instituted. The ’90s were marked by austerity and diminishing opportunities. In the 2000s, inequality hit obscene levels, debts skyrocketed, and gentrification stole the cities for the rich. So in truth, the US has been in decline for over forty years. Forty years! And we’re still subjected to the same old pablum about “the rewards of hard work.”

Social subterfuge

So even as the whole game became increasingly unfair and oppressive, we were sold a picture of “America” in which everyone had equal opportunity, anyone could go from rags to riches, and the only people who didn’t succeed were ones who deserved to fail.

We were pressured into choices and lifestyles we were told were unavoidable because “that’s just how things are.” An air not merely of reliability, but inevitability, characterized the pronouncements of this supposedly prudent class, as they dispensed their wisdom on “success.”

Sacrifice played big in their admonitions, as did obedience. “Here are the rules,” they’ve insisted. “Follow them or end up broke, alone and unhappy.”

Their advice—or more often, arm-twisting—led millions into debt peonage, unhappy commitments and delayed gratification. Questioning any of it was unpatriotic and shaking things up was criminal. Throw in a heavy dose of American exceptionalism so nobody looked elsewhere else for alternatives, and you have the general outlines of our collective delusion.

I always resented these people: the know-it-alls with their dreary prescriptions and arrogant demeanors, pompously professing a gospel of so-called “responsibility” which in actuality was nothing more than a stultifying conformity. They turned a blind eye to the historically demonstrated fact that nothing lasts forever, and that cracks were already appearing in their grand facade.

2020 showed that these folks are wrong. Of course, playing by the book never offered all the rewards they claimed anyway, but their bubble has been burst in full view now. The biggest thing they had going for them—an illusory sense of dependability—is no longer believable for a big swath of the population.

There’s no “going back to normal.” The economy will never fully recover from the blows it took this year; for one thing, too many businesses shut down that will never reopen; for another, too many people are deeper in debt; and most of all, because the momentum was already downhill. On the other hand, a lot more people are now aware of the fact that the police are a racist institution that needs to be brought under control. That’s a welcome strike against Establishment power and propaganda. When the weather warms up in 2021, hopefully we will see another flowering of dissent.

So, as this period of stability crumbles in the US, we have prospects of both continuing economic deterioration and livelier forms of resistance.

But the US domestic scene is not the only thing that’s transitioning out of a period of stability: there’s also the climate.

Climate & civilization

For the last 11,500 years, the earth’s climate has been in a Goldilocks zone for humans: not too hot and not too cold. This allowed agriculture to flourish, which birthed civilization. Civilization has been a mixed bag to say the least, what with patriarchy, slavery, monotheism, ecocide, property, and a distinct decline in human health. Civilization has not mellowed with age, either; more recently, it invented industrialism, colonialism and capitalism. People like to extol the “wonders of modern medicine” but much of what it treats—coronary disease, cancer, diabetes, zoonotic epidemics—are themselves ailments of civilization. That’s a lot like the guy who stabs you taking credit for sewing up the wound.

Regardless, the last 115 centuries have indeed been remarkably consistent, even with anomalies like the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period. As this reliability dissolves, we’ll experience many ills, including elevated seas that flood settlements; the spread of disease as the ranges of tropical insects expand; animal die-offs on land in the sea, including ones that humans eat; failure of climate-control infrastructure such as air conditioning in urban areas; more wildfires; more floods; and more pandemics.

But farming is the one that worries me most. Whole areas that are currently used for food growing will become unsuitable for that purpose. What is now raised in Nebraska will need to be in North Dakota and eventually Saskatchewan, and there’s only so far north you can go. Political considerations are all too likely to intervene into what should be common sense “all in this together” decisions; at some point the current idea of nation states will need to be set aside for the purpose of collective survival. That might seem impossible right now, but modern notions of nationalism only date from the late 19th Century. Before that happens, I fear that more wars will erupt.

“Normal” isn’t working anyway

Whether we like it or not, the stability of both the US and the planet’s climate is ending. But before we shed too many tears, we must ask ourselves a very honest question: Was either the United States or civilization working that well anyway?

The US has been a brutal experiment in settler-colonialism, founded on genocide, theft and slavery. To this day, its wealth is produced from horrific human rights abuses and outright ecocide. Its citizens are depressed and debilitated. Who is it actually working for? It will be a blessing to many when it no longer has muscle to flex.

As for civilization, it’s a killing machine. Forests precede it and deserts follow, as has been observed (though of course a healthy desert ecosystem is as worthwhile as any other). Like the US, the agricultural-urban complex is founded on domination. It serves a small number while harming multitudes, with non-humans bearing the brunt of the brutality. The sooner it is gone, the sooner the healing can begin.

I know these transitions will bring much human suffering, and I do not wish for that. I am not a misanthrope, as too many collapse-aware individuals are these days; I do not wish for anything that will hurt anyone. However, I recognize that the status quo itself is inherently hurtful, and its end—though messy in the middle—will result in relieving a tremendous amount of suffering that’s just “normal” now.

I also have no idea if I will make it through these transitions without experiencing intense suffering myself. I realize that to some degree—maybe small, maybe large—it’s not up to me. I could make sensible plans, hone practical skills, and gather vital resources and still be taken out by some random event beyond my control.

What’s “beyond our control”? More than we’d like to think, I would guess, or more than we’ve been led to believe by the defenders of the system anyway. Our notion of individual agency might amount to nothing more than the kind of hubris that can only be sustained by the artificiality we’ve manufactured for ourselves. Nature is now delivering us a lesson in humility.

What now?

We don’t need a magic eight-ball to know that 2020 is just the beginning; more crises and more opportunities are on the way. The ride’s only going to get more intense. Time to strap in. Or jump out.

Is there anything we can do about the new territory of uncertainty we are entering?

No, in that the inertia of these forces is unstoppable. The US will just fall, the climate will just change. It’s as simple as what goes up must come down.

But also yes, in that we can always try to be decent human beings, living from compassion. We are not only malicious. Those who would have you believe that are not trustworthy; they’ve just told you what they think about themselves.

Ultimately, even though the big picture of downfall is clear, the little steps along the way are not and they won’t all be painful. Some beauty awaits us too.

Facebook AI Research (FAIR) Residency Program 2021

Application Deadline: 31st January 2021 at 5:00 pm PST.

Eligible Countries: International

To Be Taken At (Country): USA

About the Award: The Facebook AI Research (FAIR) Residency Program is a one-year research training program with Facebook’s AI Research group, designed to give you hands-on experience of machine learning research. The program will pair you with a senior researcher or engineer in FAIR, who will act as your mentor. Together, you will pick a research problem of mutual interest and then devise new deep learning techniques to solve it. We also encourage collaborations beyond the assigned mentor. The research will be communicated to the academic community by submitting papers to top academic venues (NIPS, ICML, ICLR, CVPR, ICCV, ACL, EMNLP etc.), as well as open-source code releases. Visit the FAIR research page for examples of research performed in FAIR .

The AI research residency experience is designed to prepare you for graduate programs in machine learning, or to kickstart a research career in the field. This is a full-time program that cannot be undertaken in conjunction with university study or a full-time job.

Type: Internships/Jobs

Eligibility: Prior experience in machine learning is certainly a strength but we seek people from a diverse range of backgrounds, including areas ostensibly unrelated to machine learning such as (but not limited to) math, physics, finance, economics, linguistics, computational social science, and bioinformatics.

• Bachelors degree in a STEM field such as Mathematics, Statistics, Physics, Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, or equivalent practical experience.
• Completed coursework in: Linear Algebra, Probability, Calculus, or equivalent.
• Coding experience in a general-purpose programming language, such as Python or C/C++.
• Familiarity with a deep learning platform such as PyTorch, Caffe, Theano, or TensorFlow.
• Ability to communicate complex research in a clear, precise, and actionable manner.

Preferred Qualifications

• Research experience in machine learning or AI (as established for instance via publications and/or code releases).
• Significant contributions to open-source projects, demonstrating strong math, engineering, statistics, or machine learning skills.
• A strong track record of scholastic excellence.

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: Residents will be paid a competitive salary. Residents will also:

• Learn how to perform research in deep learning and AI.
• Understand prior work and existing literature.
• Work with research mentor(s) to identify problem(s) of interest and develop novel AI techniques.
• Translate ideas into practical code (in frameworks such as PyTorch, Caffe 2).
• Write up research results in the form of an academic paper and submit to a top conference in the relevant area.

Duration of Program: 

• Residency Program start: August 2021
• Residency Program end: August 2022

How to Apply: To apply, complete the application in the Program Webpage (Link below) and include the three required documents in PDF format. Any applications or late materials after this date will not be considered.

If your application passes an initial screening, we will contact you to request a letter of recommendation. Following this, we may want to interview you in person over video conference.

Visit the Program Webpage for Details

Award Providers: Facebook

UK Commonwealth Scholarships 2021

Application Deadline: 18th January 2021 16:00 (GMT)

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Developing commonwealth countries

Subject Areas: All subject areas are eligible, although the CSC’s selection criteria gives priority to applications that demonstrate strong relevance to development.

About Scholarship: Each year, Commonwealth Scholarships for Master’s and PhD study in the UK are offered for citizens of developing Commonwealth countries. These scholarships are funded by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), with the aim of contributing to the UK’s international development aims and wider overseas interests, supporting excellence in UK higher education, and sustaining the principles of the Commonwealth.

Offered Since: 1959

Type: Masters, PhD

Who is qualified to apply? To apply for these scholarships, you must:

PhD

To apply for these scholarships, you must:

• Be a citizen of or have been granted refugee status by an eligible Commonwealth country, or be a British Protected Person
• Be permanently resident in an eligible Commonwealth country
• Be available to start your academic studies in the UK by the start of the UK academic year in September/October 2021
• By September 2021, hold a first degree of at least upper second class (2:1) honours standard, or a second-class degree (2:2) and a relevant postgraduate qualification (a Master’s degree)
• NOT be registered for a PhD, or an MPhil leading to a PhD, at a UK university before September 2021
• NOT have commenced and be currently registered for a PhD, or an MPhil leading to a PhD, in your home country or elsewhere
• Have the support of a potential supervisor from at least one UK university listed in your application form
• Have provided all supporting documentation in the required format
• Be unable to afford to study in the UK without this scholarship

Masters

To apply for these scholarships, you must:

• Be a citizen of or have been granted refugee status by an eligible Commonwealth country, or be a British Protected Person
• Be permanently resident in an eligible Commonwealth country
• Be available to start your academic studies in the UK by the start of the UK academic year in September 2021
• By September 2021, hold a first degree of at least upper second class (2:1) honours standard, or a second class degree (2:2) and a relevant postgraduate qualification (usually a Master’s degree). The CSC would not normally fund a second UK Master’s degree. If you are applying for a second UK Master’s degree, you will need to provide justification as to why you wish to undertake this study
• NOT be registered for a PhD, or an MPhil leading to a PhD, at a UK university or in your home country before September/October 2021
• Be unable to afford to study in the UK without this scholarship
• Have provided all supporting documentation in the required format

The CSC promotes equal opportunity, gender equity, and cultural exchange. Applications are encouraged from a diverse range of candidates.

Selection Criteria: Applications are considered according to the following selection criteria:

• Academic merit of the candidate
• Quality of the proposal
• Potential impact of the work on the development of the candidate’s home country

Selection process

Each year, the CSC invites selected nominating bodies to submit a specific number of nominations.

The CSC invites around three times more nominations than scholarships available – therefore, nominated candidates are not guaranteed to be awarded a scholarship. There are no quotas for scholarships for any individual country. Candidates nominated by national nominating agencies are in competition with those nominated by other nominating bodies, and the same standards will be applied to applications made through either channel.

Number of Scholarships: Approximately 300 scholarships are awarded each year. The CSC invites around three times more nominations than scholarships available – therefore, nominated candidates are not guaranteed to get a scholarship. There are no quotas for scholarships for any individual country. Candidates nominated by national nominating agencies are in competition with those nominated by universities/university bodies, and the same standards will be applied to applications made through either channel.

Duration of Scholarships: 12 months for Masters and up to 36 months for PhD

Value of Scholarships: Each scholarship provides:

• Approved airfare from your home country to the UK and return at the end of your award (the CSC will not reimburse the cost of fares for dependants, nor usually the cost of journeys made before your award is finally confirmed)
• Approved tuition and examination fees
• Stipend (living allowance)
• Thesis grant towards the cost of preparing a thesis or dissertation, where applicable
• Warm clothing allowance, where applicable
• Study travel grant towards the costs of study-related travel within the UK or overseas
• For PhD Scholars, fieldwork grant towards the cost of fieldwork undertaken overseas (usually the cost of one economy class return airfare to your fieldwork location), where approved
• For PhD Scholars, paid mid-term visit (airfare) to your home country (unless you have claimed (or intend to claim) spouse and/or child allowances during your scholarship, or have received a return airfare to your home country for fieldwork)
• Family allowances, as follows (rates quoted at 2019-2020 levels):
  • If you are accompanied by your spouse but no children: spouse allowance of £233 per month
    for a maximum period of nine months, if you and your spouse are living together at the same
    address in the UK (unless your spouse is also in receipt of a scholarship; other conditions
    also apply)
  • If you are accompanied by your spouse and children: spouse allowance of £233 per month
    and child allowance of £233 per month for the first child, and £114 per month for the second
    and third child under the age of 16, if your spouse and children are living with you at the same
    address in the UK (unless your spouse is also in receipt of a scholarship; other conditions
    also apply)
  • If you are accompanied by your children but no spouse: child allowance of £465 per month for
    the first child, and £114 per month for the second and third child under the age of 16, if your
    children are living with you at the same address in the UK

To be taken at: UK Universities

How to Apply: You must apply to one of the following nominating bodies in the first instance – the CSC does not accept direct applications for these scholarships:

• National nominating agencies – this is the main route of application
• Selected universities/university bodies, which can nominate their own academic staff
• Selected non-governmental organisations and charitable bodies

All applications must be made through one of these nominating bodies. Each nominating body is responsible for its own selection process and may have additional eligibility criteria. You must check with your nominating body for their specific advice and rules for applying, their own eligibility criteria, and their own closing date for applications.

You must make your application using the CSC’s online application system, in addition to any other application that you are required to complete by your nominating body. The CSC will not accept any applications that are not submitted via the online application system.

You are advised to complete and submit your application as soon as possible, as the online application system will be very busy in the days leading up to the application deadline.

The CSC will not accept supporting documentation submitted by nominating agencies or outside the online application system.

Visit PhD Scholarship webpage for details. Read carefully for guidance.

Visit Masters Scholarship webpage for details. Read carefully for guidance.

Indian Communalism – A Deep Dive

Hemanty Tudu & Vidhyam

Introduction

Communal harmony has barely been upheld in recent Indian history. It is always one issue or the other that gets attached to religion and then the communal terrorism commences. Kashmir, Ayodhya, mob lynching, elections, these all had their fair share in creating tensions in the name of religion. It is high time we realize the manipulations the common people are being subjected to by those in power and those in opposition too. The real problems that are plaguing this country like poverty, increasing income inequalities, natural disasters, this pandemic, corruption; all get overshadowed by the trivial matters and the corrupt media chasing their ratings never sheds light on the real issues.

Ever since Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government passed amendments to India’s citizenship law in December 2019, there has been fear and panic around the country about its potential effects. Quickly, the panic instilled by the law led to protests from hundreds of thousands of people all over the nation demanding the laws to be rolled back.

As the elections were soon going to be held in Delhi, these protests and the law became a major political rhetoric. Later as some protesters decided to occupy the roads was when the Bhim Army called for a national strike. BJP politician Kapil Mishra led a rally of supporters against the former protesters. With rising tensions between the both groups, few hours later violence galloped over the nation’s capital. Muslim houses, commercial shops and masjids were singled out and torched. This violence lasted for more than 3 days and stray incidents continues to happen till date.

This violence was clearly communal in nature. Victims from both the sides suffered property loss, personal loss and were a subject of mental trauma. If the reports are to be believed, the protesters included outsiders from other states who were called up by the perpetrators to disrupt communal harmony. There were many cases of communal riots in recent Indian history, most of them directly or indirectly affected the electoral outcomes.

In this article, we try and explore the major incidences of communal violence in Indian history, the reasons behind them, the consequences and effective steps that can be taken to curb the same.

The History

Let us take a glance at some major communal riots that damaged the fibre of unity, spread hate, violence and disrupted the communal harmony in the country.

Anti-Sikh riots (1984): The Anti-Sikh riots of 1984 refers to the series of violent acts against the Sikh community in Delhi and other parts of the country which resulted in more than 10,000 deaths across the country. Operation Bluestar, a military operation against the militants occupying the Golden temple was at the core of these riots. This military action was criticised by Sikhs all over the country as they believed it was against their religion. The riots started after the then PM of India, Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her bodyguards who were from the Sikh community. Riots spread across the country and Delhi was at the core of the violent acts. People watched with terrors as their houses were burnt and several thousands were displaced during the riots. Many leaders from Congress were believed to be behind the riots and several were booked by CBI. Later the case was closed against several due to lack of evidence.

Demolition of Babri masjid (1992): It has been 28 years since the nation was engulfed by the hate rage following violence against many innocent people. Babri masjid demolition remains as the direct or indirect cause of many communal clashes that occurred in the past 3 decades. On the ill-fated day of December 6, 1992, a huge group of protesters named “Kar Sevaks” engulfed the town, climbed on top of the masjid and demolished it to the ground. The Hindu majority group believed that the masjid was built on the sacred ground where Lord Shri Ram was born and the Mughals had destroyed the temple that stood on the ground and built a masjid afterwards. The events that followed resulted in the deaths of thousands of people, mostly Muslims. Hindu and Muslim communities across the country clashed, and innocent people who were caught amidst the rage of protesters had suffered huge losses. Whatever the history behind the temple and masjid was, future of many was destroyed in these riots. In the end it was a result of political parties using religion to gather mass support.

Bombay riots (1992): After the demolition of Babri masjid, communal riots occurred all over the country. Hindus organized rallies in celebration. These events aggravated the sentiments of Muslims and what followed is an absolute tragedy which will permanently stain the Indian communal harmony forever. Bombay became the epicentre of the riots. Nearly 900 people were killed, and several thousands were displaced in the weeks following. Several children and women were among the victims. The riots were considered to be orchestrated by Shiv Sena.

Apart from these, several communal clashes had occurred all over the country in the past decade including Muzaffarnagar riots, Saharanpur riots, Coimbatore riots and the latest Bangalore riots of 2020.

Causes of Communal Divide

Communal unrest in India is often attributed to religious differences between the two major religious groups namely the Hindus and the Muslims. However, this line of thought severely underplays the involvement of communal violence by and against other groups based on caste, religion, region etc.  Some academicians ascribe the origin of communal violence in India to be the divide-and-rule policy of the British. Others blame it on the economic deprivation caused by the government’s policies post-independence. The selective capitalistic development approach has benefitted certain sections of the society creating a divide between the flourished and the impoverished ultimately giving rise to social anxieties and social tensions. Communal riots can be viewed as a path to vent out the frustration between the two social strata. Scholars have thus attributed the cause of communal violence in India to different factors including social, religious, political, historical, geographical, economic, historical etc. Few major reasons have been explored below:

The Past: The Divide and Rule policy of the Britishers ultimately led to Jinnah’s Two Nation Theory. The Britishers were successful in sowing the seed of communalism by creating a feeling of mistrust between the various communities, ultimately leading to the formation of India as a Hindu and Pakistan as a Muslim Nation. Even though the Indian government has been strongly promoting the idea of secularism, the fear still keeps trickling down from the remains of history.

Communal Politics: Religion is expressed in the ideology of a number of so called secular political parties. The Islamic League, Jamaat, Hindu Mahasabha, Akali Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad are directly or indirectly responsible for the rise of communalism. Electoral benefits linked to candidacy based on the communal composition of the constituency have further fuelled this thought in the society. Vote bank politics by instigating communal riots is what we have been recently witnessing in the country.

Clash of the Ideologies: After Pakistan was carved out of India, Indian Muslims have considered themselves as being a separate entity. This tendency of isolation has led to Islamic extremism creating a psychological separation promoting communal tensions in the society.  On the other hand, the idea of Hindutva promoting Hindu communalism and opposing minority protection policies have also been instrumental in worsening the communal ties. Ghar Wapsi, Hindu-Muslim riots in Muzzafarnagar, Dadri lynching, ethnic clashes over disputed Nagaland-Assam borders, burning down of churches in Delhi etc. are few other examples of clashes of the religious ideologies. These ideologies being encouraged by religious leaders have further created a turf war between these communities.

Resource Crunch: As the availability of natural resources is declining due to a rapidly increasing population, there is also a growing demand for control of the available resources at the hands of different populations.

Poverty: As explained earlier, the economic deprivation has led to poverty, backwardness, illiteracy, ignorance and unemployment. Communal forces have been instigating and exploiting the unemployed youth, making them the breeding ground for communalism by feeding on their vulnerabilities.

Growing Intolerance: The social insecurities arising out of poverty and mistrust between communities have led to growing intolerance in the society. Cow vigilantism against Muslims and attacks on religious or marginalised minorities especially Dalits have created an atmosphere of fear and insecurity. Lack of credible investigation done by the government on groups claiming to support the government has compounded the fear.

Foreign Influences: India’s two biggest neighbours China and Pakistan have been relying on the communal forces to make the nation weak internally. Pakistan, backed by Chinese funding, has been actively supporting Muslim terrorists in Jammu & Kashmir and communal provocation in Punjab. Foreign funding especially from the Gulf to promote Muslim ideologies in the country have also aggravated the ill-feeling between the two major communities.

The Media: Irresponsible reporting by the Indian media for TRPs is not surprising either. Presenting hearsays, rumours, biased and sensitive reports on national television increases animosity between the communities where one feels threatened while the other feels victimised.

Inclination of the Government: The tendency of the government of siding with their own has raised questions on their intent. The silence of the ruling party on communal issues involving its own people and on irresponsible statements promoting Hindu supremacy by their representatives is alarming. The Modi government for example has been criticised for taking decisions appeasing the RSS. The neutral stance of the government on issues such as these questions their take on secularism.

Failure of the Government: Both the state and central governments have been taking ineffective measures in curbing communalism. The approach has always been reactive rather than being proactive. The post-Godhra riots in Gujarat reflects the inefficiency and inability of the government in controlling communal riots. The perpetuation of communalism has been triggered by the lack of rapid, preventive and successful actions.

The Consequences

The common man is the greatest sufferer of all being inevitably caught in the loop of communal violence. There is an unavoidable loss of life and public property. There are economic repercussions to communal violence as well. An atmosphere of animosity dissuades foreign investors to set up businesses in the country. Lawlessness exploited by divisive forces increases the risk to internal security. Large scale deployment of security forces to handle anti-social elements not only diverts the government funds from achieving development goals but can also lead to human rights violations, something which we are witnessing in the state of Jammu & Kashmir.

Handling Communal Violence

India proudly calls itself a democracy and a secular state but the tendency of the past and current governments in downplaying the rise in incidences of communal violence calls in to question whether all of it is simply vote bank politics.

1. Efforts should be made to enlighten the citizens to identify and discourage participation in the activities promoted by the communal forces
2. Security forces should be physically and emotionally trained to handle sensitive situations
3. Accountability in the administration handling incidences of communal violence should be reinforced
4. Violations of the press without breaching the freedom of speech and expressions should be strictly dealt with
5. Use of licensed weapons should be effectively regulated and ceased as a preventive measure prior to increasing communal tension
6. Fair investigation of any communal incident should be carried out
7. Proactive stock of required items likes medicines, soaps, blankets, food, water etc. should be maintained. Emergency funds should be maintained to ensure supply post riots.
8. The state should ensure protection of the identities of informers, victims and witnesses
9. Election Commission should be watchful of hate and provocative speeches by parliamentary leaders
10. Cyber police should be vigilant of spread of communal tensions via provocative content over the internet especially on social media