Mar 2003

Opposition to the Iraq War in the Subcontinent

Throughout the Indian Subcontinent, there is widespread opposition to the war. The most recent poll in New Delhi, India's capital indicated that 87% were opposed to war. In Pakistan, hundreds of thousands have taken to the streets to put pressure on the pro-military government in Pakistan to resist US pressure to vote for a new war resolution in the UN. Large demonstrations have also been held in Bangladesh.

Most recently, an estimated 200,000 or more marched on the streets of Rawalpindi in Pakistan. A Press Trust of India (PTI) report published on March 9 in the Times of India quoted Qazi Hussain Ahmad, of the Jamaat-e-Islami as saying that "Pakistan should not abstain, but it must oppose any UN resolution if it is put for voting in the UN Security Council". Organized by the Muthahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), a coalition of several Islamist parties, the Rawalpindi march followed a 150,000 strong anti-war rally in Karachi. Speakers at the rally condemned US imperialism, and warned that other Islamic nations, including Pakistan may be the next to face the wrath of the US.

Whereas in Pakistan, the anti-war movement gets its impetus primarily from Islamic solidarity, and in Bangladesh, demonstrations organized by Islamic groups have outflanked those called by left groups, in India, a wide range of political parties, students groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and spontaneous professional committees have formed to oppose war.

Even as Islamic organizations in India have organized some sizeable demonstrations including one that attracted 50-70,000 in Delhi, opposition to a war against Iraq extends across the political spectrum in India, and derives its strength from secular and humanitarian considerations, as well as from traditional anti-colonial and anti-imperialist solidarity. According to a spokesperson for India's Committee Against War on Iraq, left and secular groups have organized more than 100 protests in the last two months drawing tens of thousands in cities such as Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi, Hyderabad and Chennai.

On March 2, 10,000 anti-war protesters marched 10 kilometers in Hyderabad carrying placards and banners reading: "Drop Bush, not bombs", and "No War". At the March 8 Mumbai rally (which drew over 20,000), member of Parliament, Raj Babbar, took off his Nike shoes and burnt them on the dais asserting: "We must strike at the root of US power by refusing to buy American goods". Maharashtra's Deputy Chief Minister, Chhagan Bhujbal, warned that "the US will use its military might against India if it is not stopped today".

Thousands lined up in a human chain in New Delhi on March 15 holding signs like 'U-Ugly,S-Sadist, A-Aggressor', 'US Imperialism down, down', and 'Bush learn to respect UN'. At other rallies in Delhi and Kolkata, protesters burned effigies of George Bush. At a protest rally held by All India Minorities' Fundamental Rights Protection Committee (AIMFRPC), protestors carried placards which read: "Debar US from the membership of UN" and "All nations of the world stand united against US imperialism".

Amongst the largest of the protests was one organized in Patna on March 14 by Bihar's ruling party, the RJD. Tens of thousands (over a 100,000 according to some estimates) marched in a a massive rally in solidarity with the people of Iraq and in opposition to US imperialism. RJD leaders invoked the spirit of India's freedom movement as speakers railed against the tyranny of imperialism and criticized India's government for resisting an all-party resolution condemning the US for pushing war against Iraq.

The government's position also came in for criticism from India's Committee Against War on Iraq. A spokesperson for the committee noted that "Iraq is a country with which India has close ties and the attack on this country will directly effect the interests of the Indian people."

Under intense pressure to take a stronger stand against the US, the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, said in Parliament that unilateral military action would have “disastrous consequences” for the world order. “Governments should be changed only by the decision of the people and no outside power can do this. For someone else to decide which regime should be imposed on a people is not in consonance with the present times”.

Although the Indian government has been quite tepid in its opposition to the US, public opinion (as expressed on various Internet discussion forums) has been much more impassioned. When India's largest English-language daily, The Times of India carried an editorial opposing war, the net edition of the paper was flooded by anti-war responses from Indian readers of the newspaper.

Several of those who left their comments on the online forum made a note of the shocking double-standards and intolerable inconsistencies in US policies.

For example, many noted how the US had a much larger arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction than any other nation, that the US had used them several times - in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in the Korean War and in the Vietnam War, that the US had attacked more countries in the last 50 years than any other - certainly more than Iraq, and that it was the US government that presented the biggest danger to world peace, not the govt. of Iraq. Many wrote that the UN must destroy the US's weapons of Mass Destruction first.

Many expressed doubt that the US government was conducting a war against "terrorism". Instead they felt that it is US actions that encourage or provoke terrorism. Some asserted that it was the US government that was the biggest terrorist government in the world - that US actions amounted to super-power terrorism; that the US government was trying to rule the world without the worlds consent; that the world had not appointed the US government as its police, that they did not want a bully like the US in the world.

Many in India have made the point that Iraq is a sovereign country, that the US has no right to disarm Iraq, and that the world should prevent the US military from testing its most modern and deadly weapons of mass destruction on another sovereign country that has already been severely weakened through a decade of debilitating sanctions. Many wonder if the US can even be described as a "democracy" if it had so little respect for the feelings of the peoples of the world.

Some of those who have commented on US war plans have focused on the leadership of George Bush, describing him as a "cruel" or "mad" leader, as a "whimsical demon", or a "barbarian", and suggested that the Iraq war would amount to a "hate crime".

A few have drawn attention to the parallels between the activities of the East India Company as it transformed itself into a colonial entity and the actions of the US government in undermining Iraq. Those in India who have studied India's colonial history see remarkable parallels in how the US (and its allies such as Britain, Iraq's former colonial ruler) have used all manner of extra-legal and coercive means to chip away at Iraq's sovereignty with the eventual purpose of re-colonizing it. And they are extremely concerned that if the US military were to occupy Iraq for any length of time, it could lead to disastrous consequences for the Iraqi people.

What is most remarkable is how so few have been influenced by US propaganda concerning the necessity for war. Like people throughout the world, the people of the Indian subcontinent remain overwhelmingly against war, and this is one of the factors that has prevented any government in the region - even Pakistan's pro-military government from endorsing the US position.

(Report compiled from stories appearing in the The Times of India, the Deccan Herald, The Hindustan Times, Pakistan's Jang and Dawn newspapers, and the Iranian News Agency - IRNA)

Editorial Update, Apr 6, 03:

The full-scale bombing and invasion and of Iraq commenced soon after this article was published. Since then, anti-war protests have only intensified, and anger at the US government greatly increased. While opposition to the US war has remained at over 85%, an Outlook poll indicated that irrespective of the consequences, roughly 60% of the Indian people wanted to see the Indian government oppose the US much more aggressively. Demonstrations have grown both in size and frequency. Antiwar rallies in Kolkata and Thiruvananthapuram reportedly attracted 150,000 or more. Tens of thousands rallied at a Bangalore stadium, and numerous demonstrations have been held at the US embassy and US Information Center in New Delhi. Moves to build an economic boycott of the US and Britain have also been gathering steam.

In Pakistan, over 200,000 participated in impassioned rallies in Lahore and Peshawar. Mass rallies in Quetta and Multan attracted over 50,000. Tens of thousands joined the protests in Dacca. Protests have also been held in numerous other regional capitals and small towns throughout the subcontinent and point to growing anti-imperialist sentiments in the South Asian region.

However, to date, there has not been any significant degree of interaction, coordination, joint-strategizing or fraternal cooperation amongst those that have been organizing such mass protests. Were the organizers able to transcend religious divisions and other sectarian barriers, the impact of such mass actions could be much greater and could lead to very radical shifts in the political climate of the subcontinent. Genuinely progressive forces must explore every avenue to help construct a very broad and resilient front against the menace of colonial and imperial intervention - whether it be directed against Iraq, or any other oppressed nation (beyond or within the subcontinent).