Jamiat Ulema-E-Hind Opposes Co-Education for Girls to Save Them from ‘Immorality’, ‘Misbehaviour’

The Muslim body’s chief Arshad Madani advocated setting up of separate schools and colleges for girls and also asked non-Muslims to refrain from giving co-education to their daughters.

New Delhi: Prominent Muslim body Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind on Monday advocated setting up of separate schools and colleges for girls and said non-Muslims should also refrain from giving co-education to their daughters to “keep them away from immorality and misbehaviour”.

In a statement issued after the working committee meeting of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind (Maulana Arshad Madani faction), its chief Arshad Madani said the kind of religious and ideological confrontation that is playing out across the country cannot be countered by any weapon or technology, and the only way to counter it is to equip the new generation with higher education.

He alleged that all post-independence governments had excluded Muslims from the field of education under a set policy.

He said, “It is also a fact that Muslims did not deliberately withdraw themselves from education, because if they were not interested in education, why would they establish madrasas.”

“I would like to repeat my words once again that Muslims must equip their children with higher education at any cost. We desperately need schools and colleges in which our children, especially girls with religious identity, can get higher education in the world without any hindrance or discrimination,” Madani said.

In its statement, the Jamiat appealed to the influential and wealthy people of society to set up separate schools and colleges for girls in their respective areas.

Madani said no religion teaches immorality and obscenity and they have been condemned in every religion of the world.

Also read: Why Indian States Need to Incorporate Gender Budgeting in Their Fiscal Planning

“Therefore, we will also ask our non-Muslim brothers to refrain from giving co-education to their daughters to keep them away from immorality and misbehaviour, and to set up separate educational institutions for them,” he said.

He said good madrasas and good higher secular educational institutions in which these poor children can be provided equal opportunities for education are needed in today’s situation.

On recently reported incidents of mob violence in various parts of the country, the Jamiat said all political parties, especially those who call themselves secular, should come out openly and call for a law against it.

Referring to the reported mob violence incidents, Madani claimed that all this was being done in a planned manner and was aimed at uniting the majority against the minority by inciting religious extremism.

He alleged that such incidents suddenly escalate when elections are due in states.

Madani demanded that the government take practical action against such incidents to protect its reputation, and the civilisation and culture of the country.

Apart from Madani, Mufti Syed Masoom Saqib, general secretary of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind; Maulana Abdul Aleem Farooqi, vice president of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind; Maulana Syed Asjad Madani and Maulana Abdur Rasheed Qasmi and others attended the meeting.

Yogi Adityanath Visits Dengue Patients in Firozabad After 40, Mostly Children, Die

“Till now, 32 children and seven adults have died,” the Uttar Pradesh chief minister said.

Firozabad: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath on Monday visited some dengue patients in Firozabad district where around 40 people, mostly children, have died in a week, and said teams will be formed to ascertain the cause of the deaths.

“Till now, 32 children and seven adults have died,” the chief minister said and added that instructions have been issued to officials to ensure treatment of every patient at government hospital.

“The death of children will be probed by a team from King George’s Medical University in Lucknow and a surveillance team so that the reasons can be ascertained,” he said.

The ruling BJP’s Firozabad MLA Manish Asija told PTI on Sunday that more than 40 children have died due to dengue in the district since August 22-23, and blamed the state health department and the local civic body for the “tragedy”.

“Most of these children were in the 4-15 age group,” the MLA had said.

The chief minister told reporters on Monday that the first case was detected on August 18 and family members of patients started their treatment in private hospitals and clinics.

“As the district administration came to know about the fever, a paediatric isolation ward was set up… where the death of three children was reported in the past two days. Two out of the three children were brought dead,” he said.

Adityanath also said samples of some patients should be sent to the King George’s Medical University in Lucknow and the National Institute of Virology in Pune.

He visited the 100-bed ward of the government hospital to meet the children affected by dengue and check the arrangements for their treatment.

He warned officials of strict action against laxity of any kind.

After visiting the hospital, the chief minister met the district magistrate, chief medical officer, additional director (health) and public representatives in the hospital’s auditorium and gave necessary instructions to them to make proper arrangements for children’s treatment and the prevention of dengue in the district.

He also visited the Sudama Nagar from where most of the dengue cases were reported.

Earlier, on his way to the hospital, Congress workers tried to show black flags to the chief minister but the police took them into custody.

Divisional Commissioner Amit Gupta of Agra division had also toured the affected areas of Firozabad on Sunday afternoon and had given necessary instructions to the Health Department and Municipal Corporation officials and had asked people to exercise caution.

BJP MLA Asija had told PTI on Sunday, “More than 40 children have died in Firozabad due to dengue since August 22-23. This morning, I received the sad news of (the death of) six children.”

Uttar Pradesh health minister Jai Pratap Singh, when contacted, had told PTI on Sunday, “The news is wrong, and there is no such report (about dengue deaths).”

Watch | Brutality Against Farmers: Will the Modi Govt Pay the Price in the Elections?

In conversation with Joginder Singh Ugrahan of BKU Ekta Ugrahan and journalist Adesh Rawal.

In Haryana’s Karnal city, the police on Saturday lathi-charged farmers protesting against a BJP meeting and many people were injured. SDM Ayush Sinha was heard telling the policemen in a viral video that if anyone breaks through, their head should be broken. The Samyukt Kisan Morcha has demanded Sinha’s suspension.

The Wire‘s senior editor Arfa Khanum Sherwani discusses this issue with Joginder Singh Ugrahan of BKU Ekta Ugrahan and journalist Adesh Rawal.

Uttar Pradesh CM Yogi Adityanath Bans Meat, Alcohol Sales in Mathura

The officers concerned are directed to make plans for the ban as well as for the engagement of people involved in such activities in some other trade, he said.

Mathura: Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath on Monday imposed a complete ban on the sale of liquor and meat in Mathura.

The officers concerned are directed to make plans for the ban as well as for the engagement of people involved in such activities in some other trade, he said.

The chief minister was speaking at the Krishnotsava 2021 programme in Mathura.

He suggested that those engaged in liquor and meat trade may take up selling milk in order to revive the glory of Mathura, that was known for producing huge quantity of animal milk.

Adityanath also prayed to Lord Krishna to eliminate the novel coronavirus infection. ”

Every effort will be made to develop Brij Bhumi and there will be no dearth of funds for this. We are looking at a blend of modern technology and the cultural and spiritual heritage for the development of the region,” he said.

Cabinet ministers Laxmi Narain Chaudhary and Shrikant Sharma were also present on the occasion.

In 2017, Adityanath had already banned the sale of meat and alcohol in the Vrindavan and Barsana areas, which were declared pilgrimage sites. “Vrindavan area in Mathura is the birthplace of Lord Krishna and his elder brother Balram and is a world-famous site. Barsana is Radha’s birthplace. Lakhs of tourists visit these places to pay obeisance. Keeping in mind their importance and in view of tourism, these are declared as holy pilgrimage places,” an official release then had said.

(With PTI inputs)

Interview: Chidambaram Points Out Flaws in Asset Monetisation Plan, Warns of Price Rise, Monopolies

“I am very happy that this government never achieves its target. Because bad ideas should not be completed on the target date,” he said.

On August 23, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced the National Monetisation Pipeline (NMP), which is expected to fetch around Rs 5.96 lakh crore to the government. Following through on a decision announced in the Budget to monetise public assets to fund fresh capital expenditure on infrastructure, the government released a list of projects and facilities to be offered to private investors over the next four years through structured leasing and securitisation transactions.

One, only assets that are already operational are planned to be leased out under the NMP. Two, the government says it only plans to hand over control of its assets for a certain period of time, after which the assets must be returned to the government unless the lease is extended. The top three sectors identified for asset monetisation include railways, airports and coal mining. Concerns have been raised around the move – corporate favouritism, rising costs for users and handing over strategic assets amongst others.

Speaking to The Wire, former finance minister P. Chidambaram laid out his key concerns around the idea of a National Monetisation Pipeline.

Chidambaram said that as a principle, the private sector does manage infrastructure projects better. But it was too much of a generalisation to say all private sector cases are a roaring success and all public sectors cases are a disaster – something borne out by the number of cases in the IBC (Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code). The former finance minister said the telecom space was a prime example of how poorly thought out the NMP was. He asked, who will lease or buy out the assets fibre or telecom towers; it would either be one of the two players or a consortium of the two players. While he had nothing against the private sector, the problem was around monopolies. The same problem would present itself in the power sector where he believed only a few players would remain. There is nothing in the NMP that it would avoid monopolies if they did emerge.

Next, the prime concern Chidambaram laid out was that if a private sector company takes an asset on for a long period of time, what are you building into the model to ensure that the asset you leave behind is nearly as good as the asset that was inherited? He asked, “When the finance minister says we are owners and the asset will be returned to us, what asset is she talking about and in what form? It will be a completely depreciated asset.” Chidambaram said that is why he was proposing depreciation of asset should go into depreciation reserve, and that must be used by the private sector in order to keep the asset in good shape.

Another big concern he highlighted was the threat of price rise for the end user. Unless there is effective regulation prices will go up, to which private sectors will say you are over regulating us. Chidambaram said he was appalled by the idea that a bulk of the railways will be privatised – UK, France, Italy and Germany all run excellent public railway infrastructure.

Hitting out at the poor implementation of the plan, Chidambaram said there was no clarity of the process of selection of private players while leasing out infrastructure. He told The Wire, “My biggest fear is the motive of this government. The motive of this government has been suspect ever since they started this exercise of cherry picking airports, ports and other infrastructure and giving it away. That has not been a good experience for the country or the economy. The past does not inspire confidence, so why should the future?”

Also read: Modi’s Asset Monetisation Bonanza Must Avoid the Ownership Concentration Trap

What about the other end of the story, The Wire asked him – was there enough private sector appetite and financing depth for these lease offers? To Chidambaram’s mind, the invite and rate process will be driven by foreign capital, not the retail domestic investor. Pensions funds and PE funds that will fund the bulk of the SPVs that will finance these assets will be nominally Indian, but foreign owned for all practical purposes – and so it’s possible that foreign capital will own most of this country’s infrastructure.

Importantly, he points out that even if the assets that are privatised are monetised, assuming they will yield Rs 1,50,000 crore is a mistake. “What is the big earning when you are only earning on the difference on that? The finance minister doesn’t respond to that, she says I am going to get Rs 1,50,000 crore but she doesn’t answer the question, ‘What are you getting today?’ You’re not getting zero. Some assets may be loss-making but some will be profit-making, tell us the number? But she won’t tell us the number. Be that as it may, look at the number on the other side – for Rs 6 lakh crore, they are monetising assets worth lakhs of crores. They have disclosed the break-up of this Rs 6 lakh crore but not the capital investment made in the assets being put up for lease. Suppose the value of the asset that you have listed is Rs 200 lakh crore, what is the point of earning less than 2% or 3%? What is the value of the capital you have locked in, what is it that you hope to earn.”

On where the proceeds may finally be deployed, the former finance minister observes, “The fiscal deficit for your current year is Rs 5.5 lakh crore and you are going to make at the maximum Rs 1.5 lakh crore, so how is it going to bolster public investment? Will this amount be used to fill the deficit or will you use it for infrastructure investment? There is no clarity on that.”

In a scathing attack on the proliferation of “infrastructure schemes” announcements by the government, Chidambaram said, “You say the NMP is co-terminus with the National Infrastructure Pipeline. We are building too many pipelines now. There was a 100 lakh crore planned there, what is Rs 6 lakh crore when you have a 100 lakh crore. These numbers don’t make any sense at all. You are trying to dazzle people by these numbers. But if you sit and think about this calmly, they make no sense. What is the objective? First, let the finance minister and government spell out the objective; is it raising revenue, is it partially filling the FD gap or is it enhancing infra spending? Next, what is the criterion for choice of the asset, why have these assets been listed?”

But the crucial question is, will the issue come up for debate and discussion, either in parliament or amongst key stakeholders. To that, Chidambaram responded saying, “I am very happy that this government never achieves its target. Because bad ideas should not be completed on the target date. This should be opened up for wide public discussion, there must be consultation with trade unions and other stakeholders and political parties and a full-fledged discussion in parliament. Of the last I am sure, they will never allow a discussion in parliament. The media is not getting into the debate, it is still singing hail to the King and the Queen. Has the finance minister invited any stakeholder to the discussion? She is unilaterally making announcements bit by bit, and the NITI Aayog and the CEA chip in.”

What is also unclear at this point is whether these lease agreements have any job security guarantees stitched into them. As the former finance minister warns, “Job losses are a major issue – the document has been silent on maintaining  current level of jobs in assets that will be monetised and I believe on reservation. There is an equality and equity aspect to this and that must be considered.”

UNSC Urges Taliban Not to Allow Terror Groups and to Ensure Safe Passage for Afghans

China and Russia abstained from voting on the resolution, and said greater engagement with the Taliban is needed.

New Delhi: Just as the last US plane revved up to leave Kabul airport, the United Nations Security Council met in New York to pass a resolution that invoked the Taliban’s “commitment” not to allow terror groups and ensure safe passage for people wanting to leave the country.

At midnight on August 31 local time in Kabul, there were no more American boots on the ground in Afghanistan after 20 years. Fifteen minutes earlier, the UNSC passed a resolution on the war-ravaged nation, drafted by the US, France and the UK, with 13 votes in favour and abstentions from Russia and China.

The draft was first circulated on August 27, just a day after twin suicide blasts targeted thousands of Afghans waiting outside Kabul airport, desperate to leave the country. The Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISIS-K) had taken responsibility for the devastating blasts which killed over 170 people, including 13 US soldiers.

The Taliban walked into Kabul on August 15 after President Ashraf Ghani escaped in a helicopter with his wife and close aides. It was the culmination of a blitzkrieg military campaign in which the Taliban conquered all but one province in less than ten days.

Following amendments proposed by China and Russia, a revised draft was formally put in blue on Sunday, indicating that the vote would be held immediately.

With foreign secretary Harsh Shringla chairing the session, 13 members, including India, raised their hands to show their approval on Monday afternoon, local time in New York.

In the resolution, there were two mentions of the Taliban – one in the context of terrorism and another on evacuation.

UNSC resolution 2593 demanded that Afghan territory should not be used by any terror groups to threaten or attack any country. It reiterated “the importance of combating terrorism in Afghanistan, including those individuals and entities designated pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999), and notes the Taliban’s relevant commitments”.

Also read: Rana Banerji on How Pakistan Propped Up, Funded and Sustained the Taliban

The Taliban has repeatedly committed, including in the February 2020 Doha agreement, that it will not allow terror groups, especially Al-Qaeda, to target other countries from Afghan soil. The Council added that UNSC-designated terrorist groups and individuals should also not find shelter in Afghanistan.

Noting the Taliban’s statement of August 27, the Council expressed expectation that the insurgent group will “adhere to these and all other commitments, including regarding the safe, secure, and orderly departure from Afghanistan of Afghans and all foreign nationals”.

French president Emmanuel Macron had earlier said on Sunday that the UK and France were drafting a resolution that “aims to define, under UN control, a ‘safe zone’  in Kabul, that will allow humanitarian operations to continue”.

However, there is no reference to a safe zone, under the United Nations, in the final resolution. Sources told The Wire that there had been no proposal for a safe zone, and Macron’s remarks may have been misquoted.

Instead, it called on “relevant parties to work with international partners” to take steps to strengthen security and make “every effort” for the “rapid and secure reopening of the Kabul airport and its surrounding area”. It also specifically mentioned that there were intelligence reports of further terrorist attacks around Kabul airport.

Turkey has been in talks with the Taliban over the technical operation of the Hamid Karzai International Airport, but differences remain about stationing Turkish security forces at the strategically important complex.

Just like taking care of airport security, the Taliban was also not directly mentioned by name when the Council called for “full, safe, and unhindered access for the United Nations” and upholding human rights, especially of women, children and minorities.

The UN’s top body for international peace and security also calls for a “negotiated political settlement, with the full, equal and meaningful participation of women, that responds to the desire of Afghans to sustain and build on Afghanistan’s gains over the last twenty years in adherence to the rule of law, and underlines that all parties must respect their obligations”.

The Council’s exhortation on these topics was addressed to “all parties”, even though it is unclear which other political entities were left in Afghanistan besides the Taliban after the flight by top government functionaries.

Even two weeks after the fall of Kabul, the Taliban has yet to announce a government. Taliban leaders have been holding talks with former Afghan leaders like Hamid Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah in Kabul, while former Northern Alliance members had gone to Pakistan, but there is no sign of progress towards a political settlement so far.

According to diplomatic sources, concerns raised by China and Russia had been “broadly addressed but with alternate formulations maybe not the exact language proposed by them”.

As indicated by official comments later, critical negotiations were only held between the permanent members.

The usage of “all parties” in the text resulted from amendments to the draft introduced after China and Russia felt that the Taliban was being singled out needlessly.

Also read: The Taliban Victory Has Not Put Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons in Danger

After the voting took place, Russia gave three reasons why it didn’t vote in favour of the resolution. “Firstly, despite the fact that the draft resolution was proposed against the backdrop of a heinous terrorist attack, the sponsors refused to mention ISIL and “Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement” – the organisations that are internationally recognised as terrorist – in the paragraph on counter-terrorism. We interpret it as unwillingness to recognise the obvious and an inclination to divide terrorists into “ours” and “theirs”. Attempts to “downplay” threats emanating from these groups are unacceptable,” said Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia.

The resolution does mention ISIS-K’s claim of responsibility for the August 26 airport blasts. While ISIS and ETIM are not explicitly cited in the resolution, both the groups were listed for targeted sanctions under UNSC resolution 1267, whose adherence is specifically mentioned in the resolution.

The Russian envoy also claimed that a ‘brain drain’ of highly qualified personnel would not help Afghanistan at this juncture.

Besides, he also claimed that the drafters ignored the proposal to include language that criticised the freezing of Afghan financial assets.

China also indicated its disapproval of “seizing and freezing Afghanistan’s overseas assets” and imposition of “unilateral sanctions”.

Instead, China’s deputy permanent representative to the UN, Geng Shuang, advocated for greater engagement with the Taliban and felt that the international community should “actively provide them with guidance”.

“The international community should provide Afghanistan with urgently needed assistance for the economy, livelihood and humanitarian needs in order to help the new authority maintain the normal operations of governing institutions, maintain public order and stability, curb currency depreciation and price increase, and embark on the path of peaceful reconstruction as soon as possible,” said Geng.

He reiterated that the “bottom line” in any future political agreement should be that Afghanistan can “must never again become the birthplace for terrorism or the base for terrorists”.

Both China and Russia claimed the resolution was hastily pushed through the Council with hardly any notice. However, neither of the duo cast a veto. By merely abstaining, they allowed the resolution to sail through the Council.

As per sources, their abstention was not really a surprise, as China and Russia were also intent on playing the outcome for their political ends.

After a Council meeting, US ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield expressed disappointment at the two abstentions at a media stakeout. “I will tell you that within the P5, we consulted very closely. We took into account some of the concerns that both the Chinese and the Russians raised in the draft resolution that was eventually approved.”

The other author of the resolution, the United Kingdom’s Barbara Woodward, was also quick to point out that while the Taliban was eager for the removal of UN sanctions, the Council could also impose additional restrictions if there were concerns related to human rights. She also characterised the resolution as the Security Council’s “first response” to the situation in Afghanistan over the last month.

In September, the mandate of the UN mission in Afghanistan will be up for renewal. Woodward noted that the mandate renewal would provide an opportunity to “look into the medium term”.

Speaking to reporters, India’s Shringla said the adoption of the resolution “unequivocally conveyed that Afghanistan’s territory should not be used to threaten or attack any country or to shelter, train terrorists or plan or finance terrorism”.

“It underlines terrorist individuals and entities designated by UN Security Council (resolution) 1267. This is of direct importance to India,” he added.

Read the full UNSC resolution below.

UNSC Res 2593 on Afghanistan by The Wire on Scribd

Why People Flocked to Hitler, and Why the Nazis Believed ‘Here There Is No Why’

Theodore Abel’s ‘Why Hitler Came Into Power’ is a unique and frightening text from within the minds and consciousness of people who went on to become Nazis.

We now know why we should read a Nazi memoir: because it shows the need to examine the discourses that haunt nations even today. Then, the documents of historic trials such as Nuremberg, offer insights, via the documentation, on how cults and political parties worked.

Documents and texts produced by such parties, cults and organisations, written by the foot soldiers and “ordinary” men and women who decided to go and work in the killing fields of Nazi Germany, Poland and other places are, however, more difficult to come across. Daniel Goldhagen set out to find answer to the question – “When Hitler decided on the annihilation of the Jews, why did the Germans actively participate in the plan?” – and his search resulted in Hitler’s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust (1996), a meticulous, if controversial, documentation of the “ordinariness” of Nazi executioners.

But, better than these “looking-back” texts is a volume published in 1938, on the cusp of the World War. Built on a collection of over 700 autobiographical essays of different lengths collected in 1934, a year after Adolf Hitler acquired power, the book set out to examine why middle-class youth, farmers, bank clerks, soldiers, in their millions, between 1928 and 1933, joined the Nationalist Socialist German Workers’ Party and transformed it into a political movement.

Theodore Abel’s Why Hitler Came Into Power

Theodore Abel, a Columbia University sociologist, collected these first-person accounts in order to ask: what motivated the ordinary Germans to become Nazis? Why was National Socialism an attractive political movement? Abel proposed an essay contest for “the best personal life history of an adherent of the Hitler movement”, with cash prizes for the “most detailed and trustworthy accounts”.

The participants had to provide full details of their family life, education, economic conditions, memberships in associations, participation in the Hitler movement, and important experiences, thoughts and feelings about events and ideas in the post-war [i.e., World War I] world.

Abel’s aim was to understand from these autobiographies the reasons why people flocked to Hitler. The result of this massive project was Abel’s Why Hitler Came Into Power, a unique and frightening text from within the minds and consciousness of people who went on to become Nazis.

Here is why

In Auschwitz, in a Primo Levi episode that would provide the most horrific “slogan” (if that is what it is), the thirsty Levi breaks off an icicle to quench his thirst. A Nazi guard snatches away the icicle, and the bewildered Levi asks, “Why?” The guard responds: “Here there is no why.” That such an event came to a pass merits, however, a “why” question.

Midway through his book, Abel asks “the why of the Hitler movement”. He offers four responses:

  1. The prevalence of discontent with the existing social order.
  2. The particular ideology and programmes for social transformation adopted by the Nazis.
  3. The National Socialist organisational and promotional technique.
  4. The presence of charismatic leadership.

We can see the answers to the “why” from the accounts in the volume. It is to be kept in mind that these accounts are about the “why” of joining the Nazis, well before the Second World War, but it requires only a small imaginative leap to ask the same people who join totalitarian parties, hate mobs and such organisations even today.

Abel demonstrates how discontent offered a “common focus for many oppositions” and made “concerted action on a large scale possible”.  “Discontent on the part of individuals had a direct effect upon their subsequent joining of the Hitler movement,” writes Abel. Hitler projected national unity was based on a racial doctrine, “the idea that common blood binds individuals into a Gemeinschaft [community] and that racial intermixture is the cause of disunity as well as the deterioration of native stock.” A worker’s autobiographical account in Abel’s book states:

Faith was the one thing that always led us on, faith in Germany, faith in the purity of our nation and faith in our leader…Some day the world will recognize that the Reich we established with blood and sacrifice is destined to bring peace and blessing to the world.

An account by an anti-Semite records how he listened to speeches about the Jewish conspiracy, prosperity and threat. At a gathering, he records, “everyone cried: ‘Out with the Jew!’”  The mass media contributed to the general feeling: “Every honest German artisan was of the firm conviction that everything printed in a newspaper was true.”. The man writes, “In Germany everything in politics and economics at that time depended on Jews,” and so, “I occupied myself with the Jewish problem.” He decides: “Fight against the Jew by all means, as the embodiment of wickedness and evil.” When he first read Mein Kampf, he was “gripped by the greatness of thoughts…I was eternally bound to this man.” Hitler, the man concludes, “was given to the German nation as our savior, bringing light into darkness”.

The account by a soldier describes the corruption in German Marxism, and how, when he embraced Nazism, he found his Gemeinschaft. The sacrifices, he writes, were borne for the sake of this Gemeinschaft. Hitler’s call to duty was enough, he writes:

Honors and dignities do not matter. All that counts is that as soldiers of the front we keep out promise to Germany… The Leader is calling, gun in hand! And everything else falls away.

“The story of a middle-class youth” is the autobiography of a young man’s discovery of National Socialism (which was initially opposed in schools and in most families, as he notes). His conversion makes him realise: “I made up my mind that I would have to choose between politics and family.” Enrolled in the party, he describes how the “Fuehrer had … promised …to bring freedom and food to the German people.” In the countryside, “the peasants clung to the Fuehrer with reverence and love, and even in the larger cities the working class raised its hand in respect to him.” For the middle-class youth, “we will find strength in our Fuehrer, who arouses in us the slumbering ideals of Germanic freedom and heroism.”

Führerparade: Wehrmacht troops parading for Hitler in Warsaw, Poland, 1939. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

From these accounts we can see the answer to the “why”: why the middle-class youth, the worker, the soldier all took to National Socialism and then to Hitler. Given an enemy, a purpose, an ideology and a charismatic leader, the ordinary German found a route to glory and prosperity for the entire race. And nothing would hinder the march on that route.

It is on that march, unstoppable, brutal, often inexplicable that, when faced with the bewildered Jew’s question, “why”, the Nazi was able to respond without hesitation, “here there is no why”.

Also read: George Orwell’s Review of ‘Mein Kampf’ Tells Us as Much About Our Own Time as Hitler’s

Why we need to understand the Why

Abel’s collection provides astonishing first-hand accounts of the process and cultural psychological conditioning through which the ordinary Germans were able to explain, defend and even rationalise to themselves and to those who listened, the extermination of the Jews, and the need for war. Melita Maschmann, a propagandist in Nazi Germany, in Account Rendered: A Dossier on My Former Self, writes:

On the “Night of the Broken Glass” our feelings had not yet hardened to the sight of human suffering as they were later during the war. Perhaps if I had met one of the persecuted and oppressed, an old man with the fear of death in his face, perhaps…

This is another of the responses, alongside the many in Abel’s work, to the “why”. The depersonalisation and dehumanisation of the “enemy”, reducing them to an unimportant life form so that there was no guilt in the Nazi when executing or torturing them, is captured in Maschmann’s memoir (Maschmann corresponded with Hannah Arendt after the war).

In his interviews, available in Gitta Serenyi’s Into that Darkness: An Examination of Conscience, Franz Stangl, the commandant of Treblinka, the largest of the extermination camps, described how he began his career in the police, “flushing out villains here and there…it was all good experience and I knew it wouldn’t hurt my record”. His interviewer Serenyi notes how “however terrible the stories he was telling, Stangl was constantly to fall back into police jargon… ‘he was a villain’”. Later, when asked how he could take part in the extermination, Stangl says:

It was a matter of survival…The only way I could live was by compartmentalizing my thinking….if the “subject” was the government, the “object the Jews, and the “action” the gassings, then I could tell myself that for me the fourth element, “intent” was missing.

In a nation’s history, when discourses of dehumanisation, metaphors of animalisation and excess [the fear of minority numbers] are employed against communities, then we should recall how the ordinary men and women in Nazi Germany came to accept that the extermination of a race was integral to “their” nation. When we see cults and politics – and they become interchangeable after a point – offering answers to the “why” in the form of scapegoating or victim-blaming, we are on the cusp of disaster. The “intent”, as Stangl claims, is missing because he, like all Nazis, was trying to survive.

A general view of the former German Nazi concentration and extermination camp Auschwitz in Oswiecim, Poland, January 19, 2015. Photo: Reuters/Pawel Ulatowski

However, Goldhagen in his book examining the “why”, again, of everyman’s participation in the genocide, argues that “acts of initiative” (Germans who on their own set out to torture and kill) and “excesses” are “really both acts of initiative, not done as the mere carrying out of superior orders”. He proposes that “whatever the cognitive and value structures of individuals may be, changing the incentive structure in which they operate might, and in many cases will certainly induce them to alter their actions”. In a debate at the Holocaust Museum with Christopher Browning (author of Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland), Holocaust scholar Lawrence Langer and others, Goldhagen would put it pithily:

The German perpetrators, namely those who themselves killed Jews or helped to kill them, willingly did so because they shared a Hitlerian view of Jews, and therefore believed the extermination to be just and necessary.

Incentive structures and the “vision” offered by leaders that rewire the cognitive include: the law refusing to take its course, rewards by the party/organisation, even a career. Such structures embolden and produce the “initiative” to go after the Jews that Goldhagen saw in the ordinary Germans. This is an initiative that has been tragically replicated since then: “heroes” pointing guns at “enemies” in public spaces, hate speech targeting communities, law enforcement officials rewarded in their careers for being biased against communities, and others. If there is a reward in selling someone down the river, the cognitive dissonance that otherwise would prevent inhuman behaviour, is no longer in operation.

Also read: When Hitler Realised the End of the War Was Upon Him

There is no “why” in the minds of the perpetrators because the “why” has been provided for, by the party, the cult, the leader. This is not to say that they have signed away their minds. Rather, the minds have been rewired through regular dollops of incentives, immunity (from prosecution), and the “whys” provided top-down. Clearly, the ordinary Germans no longer needed to ask “why” since the incentive structures of “pure” Gemeinschaft, race or nation, the illusion of prosperity for the “pure” are adequate to alter cognitive and value systems.

What Abel’s documentation of the ordinary-as-excess, like Goldhagen’s, teaches us is this: if we do not ask “why”, the heinous actions we see around us will be explained as “why not”.

Pramod K. Nayar teaches at the University of Hyderabad.

The Taliban Victory Has Not Put Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons in Danger

Speculation regarding Pakistan’s nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban must be dismissed as alarmist fiction. 

Recently, a group of 68 US lawmakers from the Senate and the House of Representatives urged President Joe Biden to ensure that the Taliban, which is now the de facto ruler of Afghanistan, do not destabilise Pakistan and acquire its nuclear weapons.

Courtesy of Hollywood, the fear that terrorists or criminals could somehow steal nuclear weapons has haunted people for a long time. Several James Bond films including Thunderball (1965), The Spy Who Loved Me (1977), Octopussy (1983), Never Say Never Again (1983), Tomorrow Never Dies (1997) and The World Is Not Enough (1999) were based on the theme of stolen or captured nuclear weapons. 

Broken Arrow (1996), starring John Travolta, was also based on the theft of two nuclear bombs – ‘Broken arrow’ supposedly being the American code for “nuclear weapons missing!” Even Bollywood made December 16 (2002) on this theme. 

However, Hollywood has no idea how nuclear weapons work or are used. Firstly, except for those few B-52 Stratofortress heavy bombers in the 1960s which were kept airborne 24×7 as the ultimate repository of nuclear weapons which could be launched even if everything on the ground was wiped off in a surprise Soviet first-strike, no nuclear weapons are ever kept armed on any aircraft or missile in a ready-to-fire mode. The fissile cores of even those bombs aboard the B-52s were supposed to be inserted in the bombs at the last moment (known as ‘in-flight insertion’). 

Usually, from the point of view of safety, critical components of the bombs, like high explosives, detonators and firing sets, are kept isolated. Thus, even if you steal a nuclear bomb, you cannot make it work. 

The paranoia created by Hollywood has permeated the popular imagination too. In April, 2009, then American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had spoken of the possibility of Islamist militants taking over Pakistan and its nuclear weapons. Not to be left behind, Bruce Riedel, a former CIA officer, also wrote an essay titled “Armageddon in Islamabad”. 

The general ignorance regarding anything nuclear is such that in 2012, Bill Clinton had gone on to surmise on CNN, “It wouldn’t be that much trouble to get a Girl Scout cookie’s worth of fissile material, which, if put in the same fertiliser bomb Timothy McVeigh used in Oklahoma City, is enough to take out 20-25% of Washington, D.C. Just that little bit.” 

Clinton is not a nuclear scientist and he had no idea of the problems inherent in making ‘Radiological Dispersal Devices’ (RDD or ‘dirty bombs’) or their limitations. Making a RDD that destructive is a technical impossibility; they can, at best, kill only a few people.  

Nuclear weapons have impregnable safing, arming and fusing systems

In view of the great risks of accidental detonation, a whole, complex science of fool-proof safing, arming and fusing of nuclear weapons has been developed. 

The arming system of a nuclear weapon is that portion which originates the signals required to arm the bomb – for example, they would permit arming only when the bomb is subjected to a specific acceleration for a specified period of time when falling towards earth. 

The fusing system (usually consisting of radars, timers, impact crystals, antennae, and baro-sensing elements) is that portion of the weapon which originates the signal which triggers the firing system. 

Pakistan’s Shaheen 3 Missile. Source: Reuters.

Safing or disarming systems isolate power sources in a weapon from the firing components.

The safing, arming, and fusing sub-systems of the warheads of ballistic missiles are also designed to ‘sense’ particular points in the re-entry vehicle (RV) trajectory and only then take steps to arm, fuse and finally fire the warhead. 

This means that, even if someone steals or commandeers a missile warhead, they cannot make it explode; it is designed to fire only when mounted on a missile which takes its full, proper course in flight. It is rather unrealistic to expect that terrorists would be able to take control of the entire missile complex and fire the missiles at will.

Launching codes and Permissive Action Link devices

Additionally, there are elaborate security systems, such as launching codes and Permissive Action Link (PAL) devices that prevent unauthorised persons from launching nuclear weapons, even if they have them in their possession. A Permissive Action Link is, essentially, an electronic combination lock that prevents the arming of the weapon unless the correct codes are inserted into it. Two different codes must be inserted simultaneously or close together. Moreover, the codes are usually changed on a regular schedule. It thus precludes both accidental and unauthorised detonation. 

By locking out critical electrical paths, the PAL guarantees that a nuclear warhead will not explode without the proper authority. They are built into the weapon casings and are not removable without disassembly of the entire bomb or warhead. Many nuclear weapons are ‘booby-trapped’ to destroy critical internal components if the casing is disassembled. This means that even if some James Bond-type person makes an attempt, the device would automatically lockout or self-destruct after a limited number of attempts. 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has developed an even more advanced device called Intrinsic Use Control (IUC) which uses the radiation of the bomb to protect it from tampering. Barring the authorised person, even the engineers who created the bomb can’t compromise it.

Also read: Full Text: Rana Banerji on How Pakistan Propped Up, Funded and Sustained the Taliban

Pakistan has a proper command and control system for its nukes

In the context of growing anti-Americanism in the Pakistani armed forces, it has been speculated, off-and-on since 2010 that, to protect the Pakistani nukes from terrorists, the US must ‘take control’ of the weapons. We also hear of the Pentagon’s secret plans to secure Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. 

Highly exciting stuff though it is, we must keep in mind that, militarily it is next to impossible. There is a world of difference between a raid on an undefended house containing nothing but sleeping people and hardly a rifle amongst them to protect themselves (such as the one which killed Osama bin Laden) and a raid on highly-guarded nuclear facilities and storage complexes which are the most closely-guarded secrets of any nuclear power. 

There is simply no reason to even suspect that Pakistan’s National Command Authority (NCA) is so incompetent that, in spite of having developed some 165 nuclear weapons – which is more than India has – they would not have the above-mentioned safety and security systems in place. 

Pakistan’s NCA, chaired by its prime minister, was created in 2000 by the National Security Council. Its members consist of the foreign, interior, defence, defence production and finance ministers; the three service chiefs; the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee and the Directors Generals of the ISI and the Strategic Planning Division (SPD). 

Faiz Hamid, Director General of the ISI. Source: Twitter.

The NCA is the nation’s highest decision-making authority on nuclear and missile policy issues and oversees all nuclear and missile programs. Headed by a three-star general, the SPD, acting as the secretariat of the NCA, executes and administers NCA policy. A security wing of the SPD called the ‘SPD Force’ is responsible for protection of its tactical and strategic nuclear weapons stockpile and its strategic assets.

Pakistan has established the PCENS (Pakistan’s Centre of Excellence for Nuclear Security) to strengthen its nuclear security regime and bring it at par with international best practices. It focuses on physical protection and personal reliability as well as the safety and security of nuclear and radiological materials and facilities.

In fact, even for their nuclear tests in 1998, Rai Muhammad Saleh Azam had reported in his oft-quoted and most detailed and accurate account, that the nuclear devices were flown in a semi-knocked down (SKD) sub-assembly form on two flights of the PAF C-130 Hercules aircraft. The F-16 pilots escorting the C-130s had been given orders that, in the ‘unlikely event’ of the C-130 being hijacked or flown outside of Pakistani airspace, they were to shoot down the aircraft before it left Pakistani skies.

If they could take that many precautions for their test devices, it is reasonable to expect them to have state-of-the-art safety systems for their weaponised bombs and missile warheads also. 

By all logic, a country that has developed 165 nuclear bombs/warheads must have certainly developed state-of-the-art safing, arming and fusing, since the technical sophistication required for doing the former is far higher. 

A November 2007 report in the New York Times by David E. Sanger and William J. Broad had claimed that, since the 9/11 attacks, the Bush administration had spent almost $100 million on a highly classified program to help Pakistan secure its nuclear arsenal. Since it is top secret, further details are not available in the public domain. 

Even if Pakistan is rocked by civil unrest, its nukes will remain safe

Terrorist strikes are one thing, a terrorist takeover is quite another. The mere fact that there have been terrorist attacks on the campuses of the armed forces in Pakistan (such as the attack on PNS Mehran, the headquarters of the Pakistan Navy’s Naval Air Arm) does not mean that terrorists can take over Pakistani nukes. 

Dr. R. Rajaraman, emeritus professor of theoretical physics at Jawaharlal Nehru University and co-chair of the International Panel on Fissile Materials, also maintains that terrorist attacks at the gates of some military bases are a far cry from penetrating the rings of security that Pakistan must undoubtedly have to guard its weapons.

Theoretically, terrorists can create disturbances in the country with suitably planned terrorist attacks, which could cause great consternation amongst the people and lead to civil unrest. However, the security agencies of the nation are expected to hold fast. There may be demonstrations, strikes, blockades, agitations, police firings, casualties, etc. However, none of these will have any bearing on the safety of their nukes. Destabilise them they may, nuclear weapons they cannot touch. 

Realising this, another hypothesis has been floated that many senior officers in the Pakistani army are secretly in league with the terrorists and might stage a coup, take control of some of the nuclear assets or even divert a warhead to the terrorists. This is theoretically possible but has nothing to do with the Taliban victory. 

Moreover, one must keep in mind that the entire process of safing, arming and fusing nuclear weapons is not in one man’s hand. For example, there is a standard practice of the Two-Man Rule with respect to nuclear weapons. There is no reason to believe that the authority to launch even a low-yield Tactical Nuclear Weapon (TNW) would ever rest with local commanders. 

It is outrageous to think that the Pakistanis are so irresponsible that a Lieutenant General, Major General, Brigadier or Colonel would be able to launch nuclear weapons single-handedly. Speculation regarding Pakistan’s nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the Taliban must be dismissed as alarmist fiction. 

Dr. N.C. Asthana, a former DGP, is a nuclear physicist by training. Of his 49 books, 10 are on military science, defence, strategic studies and science of weapons. Views are personal. He tweets @NcAsthana.

Karnal Lathicharge: As Khattar Defends Police Action, Farmers Demand FIRs Against Cops

In mahapanchayat farmers also insist they will not take any more violence, seek Rs 25 lakh ex-gratia to the farmer killed in police action; police deny the claim of death.

New Delhi: There appears to be no immediate end in sight to the standoff between the Haryana farmers and the state government over the issue of lathicharge on protesting farmers in Karnal on Saturday, as chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar on Monday, August 30, defended the police action.

Meanwhile, farmers continued with their protests and also organised a mahapanchayat in Karnal where they demanded registration of police cases against officers involved in the cane charge which left many of them injured and one farmer allegedly died.

Addressing a press conference in Chandigarh, Khattar came out in support of the police action, which had left 10 people injured and one dead (as per farmers, though superintendent of police Karnal denied it), saying: “Strictness had to be maintained to ensure law and order situation there was kept under check.”

When asked about sub-divisional magistrate Ayush Sinha’s viral video in which he was seen instructing police personnel manning a barricade to “smash the heads” of those who may try to cross it, Khattar only insisted that the IAS officer’s “choice of words” was “not correct”.

Also read: Haryana: Farmers Injured as Police Lathicharge to Disperse Anti-Farm Laws Gathering

However, to persistent questions on any action that his government may be contemplating against the officer, as had also been assured by deputy chief minister Dushyant Chautala on Sunday, Khattar only said that “if any action has to be taken, it would first have to be assessed by the district administration”.

He added that the director general of police (DGP) was looking into the matter, but reiterated that “to maintain law and order, strictness had to be ensured.”

Khattar, who in the past too had criticised sections of farmers for disrupting political party meetings and movement of political leaders, again used the same argument to ask why a section of the farmers decided to proceed to the Karnal hotel where the BJP was organising a meeting on Saturday. He said the farmers should realise that “they are not gaining anything out of such protests”.

He also claimed that the farmer’s agitation was losing people’s support. “People are no longer sympathetic towards them and I have been getting phone calls that they need to be dealt with strictly. But we are exercising restraint because they are our people,” he said.

Meanwhile, farmers organised a protest demonstration outside the Press Club in Chandigarh, where Khattar addressed the media on completion of 2,500 days of his government.

A mahapanchayat was also organised by the Samyukt Kisan Morcha, Bharatiya Kisan Union and other farmers organisations in Karnal where they demanded that FIRs (first information reports) be registered against those involved in the lathicharge.

Addressing the gathering, the head of the Haryana unit of BKU, Gurnam Singh Charuni said the patience of the farmers had run out and they would not let anyone beat them with lathis anymore. He said the farmers would gherao the Mini Secretariat in Karnal from September 7 if their demands were not met.

Charuni also urged the farmers to reach a mahapanchayat called in Uttar Pradesh on September 5 in large numbers.

The meeting also called upon the Haryana government to book all those involved in the violence against the farmers. It was decided that FIRs should be registered against those involved in the recent lathicharge on farmers.

The farmers also demanded compensation of Rs 25 lakh be paid to the family of Sushil Kajal, a resident of Rampur Jata village, who they claimed was injured in the lathi charge and later succumbed to injuries. The Akhil Bharatiya Kisan Mazdoor Sabha had on Sunday claimed that the man was killed due to police action. The claim was, however, denied by the superintendent of police of Karnal. The mahapanchayat also demanded that a government job be provided to a son of Kajal.

Apart from this, it demanded payment of Rs 2 lakh in compensation to injured farmers. Charuni said farmers would again assemble in the Karnal grain market on September 7 to review the progress on their demands and decide the future course of action.

From Stroessner to Syngenta: Paraguay’s Soy Conflicts

The ‘soybeanisation’ of the Paraguayan economy has had a devastating impact on the country’s ecology, rural populations and democratic process — but it has been lucrative for foreign firms and the domestic oligarchy.

In 2003, the agrichemical behemoth Syngenta published a controversial advertisement in Argentinian newspapers. It showed a map of South America with a large portion of the Southern Cone – Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil – highlighted in green and labelled the ‘United Republic of Soybeans.’ The ad was criticised as an expression of neocolonial avarice directed at one of the region’s most profitable exports. Echoes of the 20th century’s ‘banana republics,’ maldeveloped export economies governed by brutal puppets of US corporations, were obvious.

The implications of the ad were obvious: for multinational agribusiness, the people of Latin America do not matter, nor do fair labour practices or the sanctity of democratically elected governments. These companies only see profit, and they are more than willing to reorganise the region at will to enrich themselves. Agribusiness concerns such as Syngenta, Monsanto, and Bayer have insinuated themselves with governments throughout the region, which have then facilitated the dispossession of rural campesinos – expelling them from their homes, deforesting their lands, murdering them if they become too rebellious – so that the land can be purchased by their corporate friends.

In the words of Joel E. Correia, ‘soy is a central node in networks of social, political-economic, scientific and ecological relations literally rooted in, reshaping and reterritorialising many states in South America..’ Some scholars refer to this violent neocolonial process as the sojización, or ‘soybeanisation,’ of the Southern Cone.

Also read: Futures and Derivatives: Can Farmer Producer Organisations Take Some of the Risk Out of Farming?

Soybean production is central to the political and economic functioning of the Paraguayan state. In fact, sojización recently played a decisive role in the country’s national politics. As noted above, an integral part of soybeanisation is the eviction of rural farmers so that their land can be purchased by multinational agribusiness corporations. In 2012, an eviction of this kind led to a massacre, a national scandal and a legal coup against the leftwing president Fernando Lugo.

Fernando Lugo in the Presidents Plenary at the World Economic Forum, on April 8, 2010. Photo: WEF/Edgar Alberto Domínguez Cataño/ CC BY-SA 2.0/Wikimedia Commons

On 15 June 2012, 300 police officers descended on the town of Curuguaty to evict 70 landless farmers from their property. This land had belonged to the state before military dictator Alfredo Stroessner, who ruled for a 35-year period known as the stronato (1954-1989), transferred ownership to a friend. The confrontation, whose exact details remain muddled, led to the deaths of 11 campesinos and six policemen. Rightwing forces in Congress used the killings as a pretext to impeach President Lugo, who, as a former bishop, a student of liberation theology and the first progressive head of state in the country’s history, was seen as dangerously sympathetic to the plight of the farmers.

The fall of Lugo, who was a thorn in the side of agribusiness, was immediately followed by a scramble to appease these powerful forces. The next president, Federico Franco of the centrist Authentic Radical Liberal Party (PLRA), quickly implemented neoliberal reforms that allowed multinationals to produce 19 genetically-modified crops in Paraguay, whereas only one (a Monsanto soybean) had been approved prior to the Curuguaty massacre.

Lugo’s impeachment was the second successful counterattack against the anti-neoliberal ‘Pink Tide’ governments that had come to power across Latin America in the 2000s. The first was the military coup of 2009 that deposed Honduran president Manuel Zelaya, but, significantly, Paraguay’s ‘legal coup’ model would be reproduced in Brazil to remove President Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and pave the way for Jair Bolsonaro’s accession to the presidency two years later. From a regional perspective, it would not be hyperbolic to say that the temporary collapse of leftist governance across Latin America was in part presaged by the political economy of Paraguayan soy.

Soybean production has not always been central to political and economic life in Paraguay. Rather, the sojización has been gradually tightening its hold over the country since the time of Stroessner. Scholars generally agree that there have been two principal waves of soybeanisation in Paraguay. The first was driven by the pre-neoliberal Agrarian Statues of the stronato and the second by the introduction of genetically-modified soy variants into the country. Correia, however, introduces a third stage. He posits that ‘the violent rejection of post-neoliberal politics espoused by former President Fernando Lugo marked the beginning of a third wave of sojización defined by state-led violence and new neoliberalisations of nature,’ i.e. new methods for privatising, exploiting and profiting from the processes of soybean growth and cultivation in Paraguay.

Also read: ‘The Neoliberal Project Is Alive but Has Lost Its Legitimacy’: David Harvey

Lugo’s agrarian populism and his position as a political outsider struck a chord with an imperilled campesino population. However, the inexorable stronato state prevented his every attempt at reform. His struggle to impose a 5% tax on soy exports was suppressed, and when he signed an executive order to limit the use of pesticides, powerful farming corporations organised protests until he backed down.

The swift politicisation of the Curuguaty massacre by the rightwing establishment, coupled with numerous discrepancies in the official investigation and the murder of a key peasant witness shortly before testifying, have led many progressives to believe that the incident may have been manufactured in order to remove the would-be reformist from the presidency. Whether or not this is true, there is no arguing that the judiciary blamed the peasants for the incident and has persecuted them at the expense of an open inquiry into the actions of the police. There is also no denying that the coup was integral to returning the Colorado Party to power under President Horacio Cartes, who continued his predecessor Franco’s programme of accelerated agricultural neoliberalisation.

The violence at Curuguaty and the almost instantaneous coup against Lugo brought Paraguay into the ‘third wave’ of the sojización. This is a period defined by an increase in visible state violence against landless farmers in combination with an even more severe subjugation of traditional agriculture to the harmful efficiencies of GMOs.

Since the passing of Franco’s Decree 9699/2012, the amount of genetically-modified soy grown in Paraguay has increased to 95% of all soybean production. In the years since the return of the Colorado Party, former president Cartes and current president Mario Abdo Benítez have rejected calls to raise taxes on soy exports, and although Lugo remains a national political figure, the debate seems dead in the water. The economic base of the stronato is holding as firm as ever. In fact, President Benitez is himself a big fan of Stroessner’s accomplishments.

Recent mobilisations against the Colorado regime indicate that the Paraguayan public has grown largely dissatisfied with the status quo. This may lead to the election of another Lugo-esque figure in the future, or perhaps even Lugo himself, but one thing is clear: unless a nationwide anti-neoliberal movement emerges as happened in Chile, the soybeanisation of the Paraguayan economy which has been so devastating to the country’s ecology and rural populations will never be reformed, let alone dismantled.

Owen Schalk is an independent writer whose areas of interest include post-colonialism and the human impact of the global neoliberal economy.

This article was originally published on Progressive International.