Author: Prashanth Lakhihal
Publication: India Tribune
Date:
URL: http://www.indiatribune.com/update.html#A2
A group of scholars and other professionals
under the name of Friends of India has released a report rebutting the
charges laid against the India Development and Relief Fund that it is funneling
funds to communal forces in India.
Entitled, "A Factual Response to
the Hate Attack on the India Development and Relief Fund," the report has
a twin aim: establish the sincerity of IDRF's work and expose the forces
behind the attack on IDRF - the Sabrang Communications and the Forum of
Indian Leftists (FOIL).
The Friends of India report seeks
to prove that the IDRF is a " transparent aid agency providing critical
succor."
The Sabrang/FOIL in their report
"The Foreign Exchange of Hate: IDRF and American Funding of Hindutva" had
charged that the IDRF is funding several "Sangh Parivar" organizations
that propagate Hindu fundamentalism in India.
The FOI report, authored by Ramesh
Rao and Narayanan Komerath, says it offers "verifiable facts" as opposed
to "the veils of innuendo, specious logic, and extrapolation" presented
by the Sabrang report.
Questioning the motives and methods
of Sabrang/FOIL, the new report said the IDRF attackers have "relentlessly
pursued every avenue to choke off funds to IDRF based purely on the presumption
of guilt. In that arbitrary stampede to judgment, there was no thought
spared for the innocent beneficiaries of IDRF, a strange inconsistency
from a group that claims to be against 'hate.'"
In its rebuttal, the FOI report
takes a close look at the beneficiaries and developmental partners of IDRF
and claims it "offers an in-depth portrait of their activities stripped
of the alarmist hysteria."
For instance, the FOI report denies
Sabrang/FOIL's portrayal of single-teacher schools or "Ekal Vidyalayas"
in tribal areas as virtual petri dishes of "Hindutva" indoctrination. "Our
rebuttal shows that this educational approach appeals precisely because
it is not didactic but assimilative and respectful of local cultural norms
and belief systems. The teacher typically chosen is a local, who teaches
through story-telling sessions and folk drama in an informal, supportive
environment.
"Ironically, what the Sabrang/FOIL
report criticizes as "Hinduization" - is the same approach semantically
reincarnated in the West as "holistic/integral education" by Western philosophers,"
the authors said.
Further, the FOI report rejects
the Sabrang/FOIL's characterization of the Vikasan Foundation's "gurukul"
system of learning as equivalent to the Islamic Madrassas.
"A typical "gurukul" is an environment
free of caste restrictions, conventional examinations and textbooks, fostering
discipline and self-reliance. It offers an atmosphere of serenity and intellectual
growth in which a student's questioning nature is never stifled. A respect
for nature and the environment, patriotism, and the value of simple living
are just some of the values instilled. After their course at the gurukul,
students are free to pursue higher education of their choice at the university
level," explains the FOI report about the "gurukul" system of education.
The FOI report turns around the
Sabrang/FOIL allegation against Sewa International and lays it against
the Christian missionaries for converting people forcefully. Sabrang/FOIL
had charged that SEWA International is a front organization to "convert"
people who are "insufficiently Hindu" by means of "sectarian ideological
training" masquerading as "developmental activity." "This charge could
be more appropriately laid at the feet of the better-organized and munificently
funded Christian missionary activities in the country. It is ludicrous
to point to the celebration of Hindu festivals by Hindus as indicative
of some sinister purpose.
"Here is what a rational individual
should ask: Is being for something always being against something else?
Does loving your wife lead to hating other women? Is loving your nation
an indication of hating other countries? Is helping those closest to you
an attempt at undermining others? This logical fallacy perpetrated consciously,
willfully, and vulgarly by sophists and political grandstanders should
be condemned unequivocally by any sane reader of the Sabrang report," the
FOI report said.
The report rebuffs the fundamental
premises that underlie the claims made by the anti-IDRF report of Sabrang/FOIL:
The first presumption involves caricaturing organizations like the Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) as exclusive promoters of sectarian violence; and
the second presumption describes "Hindutva" as Hindu supremacist ideology.
The FOI report said the Sabrang/FOIL fail to acknowledge the RSS's peerless
record in providing timely, selfless and courageous disaster relief work.
The RSS, as the world's largest NGO, offers voluntary service on a non-partisan
basis, it added.
Rebutting the Sabrang/FOIL's exclusionist
definition of Hindutva, the FOI report noted what the Supreme Court of
India had to say on the subject: "Ordinarily, Hindutva is understood as
a way of life or a state of mind and is not to be equated with or understood
as religious Hindu fundamentalism. A Hindu may embrace a non-Hindu religion
without ceasing to be a Hindu and since the Hindu is disposed to think
synthetically and to regard other forms of worship, strange gods and divergent
doctrines as inadequate rather than wrong or objectionable, he tends to
believe that the highest divine powers complement each other for the well-being
of the world and mankind."
The FOI report, besides raising
doubts about the attackers' motives and methodology, also takes an inventory
of the IDRF's scope of work, its administration and disbursement of funds,
and its commitment to near - zero overhead costs to maximize donor impact.
"IDRF serves economically and socially
disadvantaged people irrespective of caste or religion; it does so in a
manner that promotes self-reliance over welfare dependence; it manages
and monitors project activities entirely through its volunteers. IDRF volunteers
meet their own out-of-pocket expenses and spend their own money to visit
the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) administering aid. This ensures
that almost every cent of donor-designated money (99.1%) is routed to the
beneficiary," the report concluded.