|
|
|
In Kudankulam, Waiting for the Government to React
Pressure mounted on the Indian government to resume talks with antinuclear activists after a second protester died in southern Tamil Nadu in demonstrations against the Kudankulam Atomic Power Project, India's biggest nuclear plant.
The latest wave of protests, which began Sept. 9, was prompted by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board's approval for fuel loading at the plant in August. Protesters, led by the People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy, question the current safety measures at the plant, which has been opposed by residents since it was first proposed in the 1980s.
“The state government is making no effort to study the nuances of our objections or looking into it,†said M.P. J esuraj, a member of the antinuclear group. “What kind of a government are you? Are you meant to be a chief minister? You must have a stance.â€
A committee representing the central government met the protesters twice last year, and Tamil Nadu's chief minister, J. Jayalalithaa, met leaders of the People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy in March. Since then, no further discussions have taken place.
On Thursday, the antinuclear activists formed a human chain in the waters of the Bay of Bengal, and later that day the Supreme Court refused to block the Nuclear Power Corporation of India from loading fuel for the Kudankulam power plant.
“Emotions are high after the Supreme Court refused to stay the fuel loading,†said Amritharaj Stephen, a freelance photographer and a protester who is documenting the movement.
Mr. Stephen said the protest on Friday ended around 1:30 p.m. on confirmation of the death of a protester who had been critically injured after falling into the water. Newspaper reports say that a fisherman, who was standing on some rocks in the sea, fell and hit his head as a coastal guard aircraft flew over the protesters.
He was the second to die in the latest wave of protests. On Sept. 10, another protester was killed after police opened fire on a group of demonstrators.
Mr. Jesuraj said that S.P. Udayakumar, one of the leaders of antinuclear group, is on the move to avoid arrest. On Tuesday, a Tamil Nadu court issued a warrant for Mr. Udayakumar's arrest. A police official answering the phone at the Kudankulam police station said more than 50 demonstrators have been arrested so far.
The most recent protests against Kudankulam could be tempered if the Indian government shows willingness to discuss the safety fears of citizens living in the area, said Mr. Udayakumar.
“We have been saying that the government should start a discussion with us,†said Mr. Uda yakumar by telephone from an undisclosed location on Monday. “Four or five days ago we offered to talk and soul search, but it wasn't taken up by the state government. This isn't an ego issue. This is about democracy. If majority of people object to a project, it is the government's duty to listen to them and work toward a midpoint.â€
Nearly a quarter of a century ago, when plans for a Russia-backed nuclear plant in Kudankulam were made, fishermen and other locals started protesting. The plant was postponed following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, but in 2001 construction started on the 131.7 billion rupee ($2.4 billion) project. However, in March 2011, the local antinuclear movement regained momentum after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan.
India has 20 operational nuclear power plants and six more under construction. Tamil Nadu currently has just two nuclear power plants, which is one third of the number in Rajasthan and half of those in Karna taka and Maharashtra.
But Tamil Nadu's third nuclear plant project at Kudankulam - expected to churn out 2,000 megawatts of power once it is operational in the coming months - would be India's largest. Industry heads signal that the plant's role is critical at a time the southern state is reeling under a severe power shortage.
“For us it will definitely help tide over the power crisis; it is needed at this stage,†said R. Sethuraman, a director on the board of Hyundai Motor India, the second-largest car company in India and a subsidiary of the South Korean automaker, which has a factory near Chennai, the capital of Tamil Nadu.
Just 3 percent of India's energy needs are currently met by nuclear power, but the Indian government plans to set up 63,000 megawatts of nuclear power-generating capacity over the next two decades. India's push for nuclear energy comes as installed worldwide nuclear capacity has decreased in the years 1998, 2006, 2009 and again in 2011, according to the World Nuclear Report.
Mitt Romney\'s No-State Solution
Secretly recorded video of Mitt Romney dismissing the possibility of a Palestinian state at a fund-raiser in May posted online by Mother Jones on Tuesday.
As my colleague Sarah Wheaton reports, Mitt Romney said privately in May that “there's just no way†for an independent Palestinian state to be established on the West Bank territory Israel has occupied since 1967. The Republican presidential candidate's comments, during a discussion with donors in Florida, were secretly recorded and published on Tuesday by Mother Jones, a liberal magazine.
In the surreptitiously recorded video, Mr. Romney can be heard asserting that “the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish,†because “the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace†and remain “committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel.†He then cast doubt on the viability of a Palestinian state, given the region's geography:
Some might say, ‘Well, just let the Palestinians have the West Bank, and have security, and set up a separate nation for the Palestinians. And then come a couple of thorny questions. I don't have a map here to look at the geography, but the border between Israel and the West Bank is obviously right there, right next to Tel Aviv, which is the financial capital, the industrial capital of Israel, the center of Israel. It's what? The border would be, maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank. …
The other side of the West Bank, the other side of what would be this new Palestinian state would either be Syria at one point or Jordan. And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did in Gaza, which is, the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel. So Israel of course would have to say, ‘That can't happen. We've got to keep the Iranians from bringing weaponry into the West Bank.'
Well, that means that - who? The Israelis are going to patrol the border between Jordan, Syria, and this new Palestinian nation? Well, the Palestinians would say, “No way! We're an independent country. You can't, you know, guard our border with other Arab nations.†And now how about the airport? How about flying into this Palestinian nation? Are we going to allow military aircraft to come in and weaponry to come in? And if not, who's going to keep it from coming in? Well, the Israelis. Well, the Palestinians are going to say, ‘We're not an independent nation if Israel is able to come in and tell us what can land in our airport.'
These are problems, and they're very hard to solve, all right? And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say, “There's just no way.â€
Rather than search of a solution, Mr. Romney said, “you hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem.†Comparing the open-ended crisis to the co-existence of China and Taiwan, Mr. Romney added: “we have a potentially volatile situation, but we sort of live with it and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it.â€
Yousef Munayyer, the executive director of The Palestine Center in Washington, was scathing in his response.
Pretend to care about peace, kick the can down the road, never pressure Israel. Romney just described what already is US policy on Palestine
- Yousef Munayyer (@YousefMunayyer) 18 Sep 12
Mr. Munayyer also said in a statement: “Usually it is not until candidates attempt to make progress on Middle East peace that they give up. Romney seems to have given up before even starting. To be fair, Obama has achieved little on this front but that is largely because of domestic political constraints and an intransigent Israeli prime minister. While several previous administrations have done little but maintain the status quo, this is not what they stated they set out to do.â€
Mr. Romney's frank remarks, which undercut even Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's public endorsement of “a solution of two states for two peoples: a Palestinian state alongside the Jewish state,†seemed to break from decades of official American foreign policy. Since before the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, Republican and Democratic presidents have thrown their weight behind the effort to secure Israel's future as a democratic state with a Jewish majority by creating a second state for up 2.5 million Palestinians who have lived under Israeli military rule for more than four decades.
Critics of the two-state solution, however, have argued in recent years that Israel's determination to hold on to large settlement blocks in the West Bank has made the creation of a viable Palestinian state there almost impossible.
In an interview with The Lede on Tuesday, the Palestinian-American activist Ali Abunimah said that there was “nothing Earth-shattering†in what Mr. Romney said. “In substance, I don't see it being very different than Obama's approach,†he said.
Mr. Abunimah, who advocates what is known as the one-state solution - in which Palestinians and Israelis would live together in a shared, democratic country - suggested that “there is an agreement among all politi cal parties in the U.S. to pay lip service to a political settlement and a negotiated two-state solution, but if any one of them was speaking frankly,†they would almost certainly agree with Mr. Romney's assessment. In the absence of progress toward a negotiated settlement, Mr. Abunimah observed, there is general agreement among political leaders on all sides in the region that “we're in a stage of so-called conflict management.â€
Two decades after the Oslo Accords, Mr. Abunimah said, the Palestinian Authority, which administers parts of the occupied West Bank, “needs to maintain the fiction that it is providing momentum toward Palestinian independence,†while, in fact, “they exist in order to keep a lid on the situation.â€
As the peace process has ground to a halt, support for some sort of one-state solution seems to have become more common in the region. According to a recent poll, cited by Mr. Abunimah in July, almost a third of Israelis and Palest inians agreed that “there is a need to begin to think about a solution of a one state for two people in which Arabs and Jews enjoy equality.â€
Edward W. Said, the renowned Palestinian professor, made the case for abandoning the two-state goal more than a decade ago, writing in The New York Times Magazine in January 1999: “it is time to question whether the entire process begun in Oslo in 1993 is the right instrument for bringing peace between Palestinians and Israelis. It is my view that the peace process has in fact put off the real reconciliation that must occur if the hundred-year war between Zionism and the Palestinian people is to end. Oslo set the stage for separation, but real peace can come only with a binational Israeli-Palestinian state.â€
In the absence of a negotiated solution, the search for an alternative arrangement has even led some political leaders on Israel's right to flirt with a form of the one-state solution. As the Israeli journalist and blogger Noam Sheizaf reported in 2010, members of Mr. Netanyahu's own Likud Party have suggested that they would rather annex the entire West Bank, including Jerusalem, and give Palestinians full civil and political rights than force more than 500,000 Israeli settlers to abandon their homes.
Mr. Romney's argument about the region's geography also seemed to echo remarks made last year by Mr. Netanyahu, who told President Obama last year that Israel “cannot go back to the 1967 lines,†because the country's borders before it seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem that year were “indefensible.†In an address to Congress the same week, Mr. Netanyahu insisted that, in any negotiated settlement, it would be “absolutely vital for Israel's security that a Palestinian state be fully demilitarized. And it is vital that Israel maintain a long-term military presence along the Jordan River.â€
As The Lede reported at the time, not all Israelis agree that a Pales tinian state on the entire West Bank would pose a mortal threat to Israel. Martin van Creveld, a leading Israeli military historian, explained why in an essay for The Forward in late 2010 headlined, “Israel Doesn't Need the West Bank to Be Secure.â€
After dealing in detail with the ways that a nuclear-armed Israel could neutralize any military threat from an independent Palestinian state, Mr. van Creveld suggested that continuing the military occupation of the West Bank indefinitely, the approach that Mr. Romney explicitly endorsed in another part of his recorded comments, would be a greater threat to Israel's security than ceding the entire territory.
“Strategically speaking,†Mr. van Creveld wrote, the risk of giving up the West Bank “is negligible.†He continued: “What is not negligible is the demographic, social, cultural and political challenge that ruling over 2.5 million - nobody knows exactly how many - occupied Palestinians in the West Bank poses. Should Israeli rule over them continue, then the country will definitely turn into what it is already fast becoming: namely, an apartheid state that can only maintain its control by means of repressive secret police actions.â€
Mercurial Leader Withdraws Support From Governing Coalition
NEW DELHI - 's national government was plunged into turmoil on Tuesday night, facing an uncertain future after a crucial regional ally threatened to withdraw her support from the governing coalition to protest a package of fuel price increases and pro-business economic changes.
Mamata Banerjee, the populist chief minister of the state of West Bengal, announced on national television that her party would formally leave the government on Friday - a 72-hour delay that most analysts interpreted as a tactic to leave open a window for further negotiations. A government spokesman signaled a willingness to renew talks, though it was unclear if the government was prepared to roll back any of the new economic measures, including those that would allow multinational giants like Walmart and Ikea to build major retail outlets in India.
The governing United Progressive Alliance would lose its narrow majority in Parliament if Ms. Banerjee withdrew her 19 lawmakers from the coalition, raising the possibility that the government could collapse, forcing early elections. Other regional parties, however, have signaled a willingness to extend “outside†support to the government, meaning that the United Progressive Alliance could survive as a minority government.
Ms. Banerjee, in a fiery address, accused the government of “selling the country†as a result of the policy changes last week, which raised the price of diesel fuel and allowed greater foreign investment in retailing and aviation. Ms. Banerjee has characterized the moves as against the poor, though many economists and business leaders say they are critical measures that will attract investment and help address the country's fiscal deficit.
Sandeep Dikshit, a spokesman for the Indian National Congress Party, which leads the coalition government, said that “it saddens us losing an important ally,†even as he defended the government's economic moves last week.
“I think this is the beginning of the reform process,†Mr. Dikshit said in a televised interview. “I think it has been kick-started. I think we'll surprise everyone by the decisions we take, the actions we take and the stability of the government.â€
Opposition leaders, on the other hand, pounced on Ms. Banerjee's decision to portray the government as floundering and facing its final days.
“This whole U.P.A. alliance is full of instability and contradictions,†said Ravi Shankar Prasad, chief spokesman for the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party. “The government has become inherently unstable.â€
Whatever happens in the next few days, Ms. Banerjee has once again ensured that she is the focus of much of the nation's attention. Last year, Ms. Banerjee blocked an earlier attempt by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to push through measures allowing foreign retailers to enter India in a big way when she threatened to bring down the government. This time, Mr. Singh and other leaders, trying to recover from corruption scandals and other mistakes, decided to push ahead, vowing not to roll back the policy changes.
In recent days, analysts predicted that Ms. Banerjee would probably have a tactical response, by withdrawing her party's ministers from the government as a gesture of protest, while maintaining her party's presence in the governing coalition. Her state government in West Bengal is facing a huge budget shortfall, and political experts say Ms. Banerjee is trying to negotiate favorable terms for money from the central government.
Three days ago, she set the Tuesday deadline for her decision, and then, after a closed three-hour meeting with leaders of her party, she held her announcement until around 8 p.m. - the heart of prime-time television viewing.
India's next national elections are scheduled for 2014, but many analysts are now predicting earlier elections. Regional leaders like Ms. Banerjee and Mulayam Singh Yadav, leader of the Samajwadi Party, have told their supporters that early elections could offer an opportunity to pick up additional seats in Parliament, increasing their national clout. Yet Indian politics are notoriously volatile, and most analysts say regional leaders will most likely wait until next year before forcing elections.
For the moment, the question is whether Congress Party leaders can reach a deal with Ms. Banerjee. Some political analysts have speculated that the government might be able to win her support by lowering the price of diesel or by allowing a few more subsidized purchases of cooking gas canisters. Her allies, though, said she was taking a principled stand to protect poor people and would never accept the widespread entrance of foreign retailers, a move she sees as a threat to small shop owners.
“I think she has taken a moral position,†said Amit Mitra, who serves as Ms. Banerjee's finance minister in West Bengal. Mr. Mitra said her decision was also rooted in her disgust with the corruption scandals rocking the United Progressive Alliance government, including the recent controversy over allocations of fields to political cronies.
But others suggested that Ms. Banerjee might still strike a deal, despite her tough tone on Tuesday.
“I'm not sure that we've heard the last word, but we've certainly heard a very strong word,†Mani Shankar Aiyar, a Congress Party stalwart and a member of the upper house of Parliament, said on CNN-IBN, a news channel. “The ball now has been put firmly in the court of the U.P.A. government. Let's see what the U.P.A. government is going to do.â€
Protests in Kashmir Turn Violent
SRINAGAR - “It may blow - get back everyone!†someone in the crowd shouted.
The police and journalists drew back from the government vehicle that had been set on fire by angry protesters in Srinagar. Its flames set the nearby tree alight. Everyone fell silent for a few seconds at the sight of the burning vehicle and branches.
Srinagar witnessed on Tuesday a complete shutdown of the city, which was called by several Muslim organizations to protest a video denigrating the Prophet Muhammad that was produced in the United States. The move had originally received a lukewarm response in the city, but it gathered momentum after it was backed by the hard-line separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani, w ho enjoys huge support here.
Kashmiris responded to call by closing businesses, schools and transport services. Usually buzzing marketplaces were left with rows of shuttered shops and empty pavements.
Even as large portions of the city remained eerily quiet, in other areas thousands of protesters took to the streets to vent their anger against the anti-Islam film. Demonstrators burned the American and Israeli flag, as well as effigies representing both countries.
“Death to America and death to Israel!†the cry went up. “Long live Islam!â€
In several areas, the demonstrations turned violent. Groups of men threw stones at the security forces, which responded with sling shots and tear gas. “We want America to find the men who did this and hang him on the street,†one young protester told India Ink.
“We don't want them arrested; we want them dead,†another man chimed in. Several participants refused to giv e their names because they feared the police would find them later.
Other districts of Kashmir and Muslim-majority areas of Jammu saw demonstrations as well, reported Kashmir Dispatch, a local news Web site.
The protesters demanded an apology from the United States government, which they believe has backed the film. “This will continue, until they say sorry,†said Irfaan Sidiq, a 27-year-old businessman. “America, say sorry, say sorry.â€
In Kashmir, the film has raked up old resentments of the Muslim world against the United States, including its presence in Afghanistan and the Middle East, and more recently the burning of the Koran by the Florida pastor Terry Jones in 2010. “If we don't voice our anger now, then they will provoke us again and again,†said another protester, referring to the United States.
A young woman watching the violence from the distance said she was deeply hurt by the film. “I support what the men are doing,†she said. “If other women go, I'll join the protest as well.â€
The anti-Islam film has triggered violent protests in many Muslim and non-Muslim countries as well. Jeff Murray, a 47-year-old Australian tourist, pointed out that similar protests were happening back in Sydney. Mr. Murray and his mother calmly watched an angry crowd go by Dal Lake, where the houseboats stood empty. “We're not scared at all,†he said. “We've been given some good advice not to go to the old town in a tuk-tuk.â€
The media followed smoke from the tear gas that rose high into the sky all day. In several instances, the police stopped journalists from getting close to areas of heavy stone-pelting. “Get out of here, you media people,†ordered an officer from the Central Reserve Police Force, a paramilitary group. “Get out before I break your camera.â€
On one street, officers grabbed three boys off their bikes and beat them with sticks even though the youths didn't appear t o be involved in the clashes.
Winding his way through the angry mob was a Koran teacher, Maulana Nazir Ahmed.
Mr. Ahmed, 40, wasn't joining the protesters, but he fully endorsed their sentiments.
“Not hung but have his head cut off,†he said, referring to the filmmaker. “We can see a man die, but we cannot tolerate any insults to the Prophet Mohammad.â€
Protests in Kashmir Turn Violent
SRINAGAR - “It may blow - get back everyone!†someone in the crowd shouted.
The police and journalists drew back from the government vehicle that had been set on fire by angry protesters in Srinagar. Its flames set the nearby tree alight. Everyone fell silent for a few seconds at the sight of the burning vehicle and branches.
Srinagar witnessed on Tuesday a complete shutdown of the city, which was called by several Muslim organizations to protest a video denigrating the Prophet Muhammad that was produced in the United States. The move had originally received a lukewarm response in the city, but it gathered momentum after it was backed by the hard-line separatist leader Syed Ali Shah Geelani, w ho enjoys huge support here.
Kashmiris responded to call by closing businesses, schools and transport services. Usually buzzing marketplaces were left with rows of shuttered shops and empty pavements.
Even as large portions of the city remained eerily quiet, in other areas thousands of protesters took to the streets to vent their anger against the anti-Islam film. Demonstrators burned the American and Israeli flag, as well as effigies representing both countries.
“Death to America and death to Israel!†the cry went up. “Long live Islam!â€
In several areas, the demonstrations turned violent. Groups of men threw stones at the security forces, which responded with sling shots and tear gas. “We want America to find the men who did this and hang him on the street,†one young protester told India Ink.
“We don't want them arrested; we want them dead,†another man chimed in. Several participants refused to giv e their names because they feared the police would find them later.
Other districts of Kashmir and Muslim-majority areas of Jammu saw demonstrations as well, reported Kashmir Dispatch, a local news Web site.
The protesters demanded an apology from the United States government, which they believe has backed the film. “This will continue, until they say sorry,†said Irfaan Sidiq, a 27-year-old businessman. “America, say sorry, say sorry.â€
In Kashmir, the film has raked up old resentments of the Muslim world against the United States, including its presence in Afghanistan and the Middle East, and more recently the burning of the Koran by the Florida pastor Terry Jones in 2010. “If we don't voice our anger now, then they will provoke us again and again,†said another protester, referring to the United States.
A young woman watching the violence from the distance said she was deeply hurt by the film. “I support what the men are doing,†she said. “If other women go, I'll join the protest as well.â€
The anti-Islam film has triggered violent protests in many Muslim and non-Muslim countries as well. Jeff Murray, a 47-year-old Australian tourist, pointed out that similar protests were happening back in Sydney. Mr. Murray and his mother calmly watched an angry crowd go by Dal Lake, where the houseboats stood empty. “We're not scared at all,†he said. “We've been given some good advice not to go to the old town in a tuk-tuk.â€
The media followed smoke from the tear gas that rose high into the sky all day. In several instances, the police stopped journalists from getting close to areas of heavy stone-pelting. “Get out of here, you media people,†ordered an officer from the Central Reserve Police Force, a paramilitary group. “Get out before I break your camera.â€
On one street, officers grabbed three boys off their bikes and beat them with sticks even though the youths didn't appear t o be involved in the clashes.
Winding his way through the angry mob was a Koran teacher, Maulana Nazir Ahmed.
Mr. Ahmed, 40, wasn't joining the protesters, but he fully endorsed their sentiments.
“Not hung but have his head cut off,†he said, referring to the filmmaker. “We can see a man die, but we cannot tolerate any insults to the Prophet Mohammad.â€
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)