Friday, 23 August 2013

gandi and mandela

GANDI AND MANDELA
The depth of oppression in South Africa created Nelson Mandela, a revolutionary par excellence,
and many others like him: Oliver Tambo, Walter Sisulu, Albert Lutuli, Yusuf Dadoo and Robert Sobukwe — all men of extraordinary courage, wisdom, and generosity. In India, too, thousands went to jail or kissed the gallows, in their crusade for freedom from the enslavement that was
British rule. In The Gods are Athirst, Anatole France, the French novelist, seems to say to all: “Behold out of these petty personalities, out of these trivial commonplaces, arise, when the hour is ripe, the most titanic events and the most monumental gestures of history.”Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi spent his years in prison in line with the Biblical verse, “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, be constant in prayer.” Nelson Mandela was shut off from his countrymen for 27 years, imprisoned, until his release on February 11, 1990. Both walked that long road to freedom. Their unwavering commitment to nationalism was not only rooted in
freedom; it also aspired towards freedom. Both discovered that after climbing a great hill, one only finds many more to climb. They had little time to rest and look back on the distance they had ravelled. Both Mandela and the Mahatma believed freedom was not pushed from behind by a blind force but that it was actively drawn by a vision. In this respect, as in many other ways, the convergence of the Indian and South African freedom struggles is real and striking. Racial prejudice characterised British India before independence as it marred colonial rule in South Africa. Gandhi entered the freedom struggle without really comprehending the sheer scale of racial discrimination in India. When he did, however, he did not allow himself to be rushed into reaction. The Mahatma patiently used every opportunity he got to defy colonial power, to highlight its illegitimate rule, and managed to overcome the apparently unassailable might of British rule. Gandhi’s response to the colonial regime is marked not just by his extraordinary charisma, but his method of harnessing “people power.”
Nelson Mandela used similar skills, measuring the consequences of his every move. He organised an active militant wing of the African National Congress — the Spear of the Nation — to sabotage government installations without causing injury to people. He could do so because he was a rational pragmatist.

INCLUSION

Both Gandhi and Nelson Mandela are entitled to our affection and respect for more than one reason. They eschewed violence against the person and did not allow social antagonisms to get out of hand. They felt the world was sick unto death of blood-spilling, but that it was, after all, seeing a way out. At the same time, they were not pacifists in the true sense of the word. They maintained the evils of capitulation outweighed the evils of war. Needless to say, their ideals are relevant in this day and age, when the advantages of non-violent means over the use of force are manifest. Gandhi and Mandela also demonstrated to the world they could help build inclusive societies, in which all Indians and South Africans would have a stake and whose strength, they argued, was a guarantee against disunity, backwardness and the exploitation of the poor by the elites. This idea is adequately reflected in the make-up of the “Indian” as well as the “South African” — the notion
of an all-embracing citizenship combined with the conception of the public good. At his trial, Nelson Mandela, who had spent two decades in the harsh conditions of Robben Island, spoke of a “democratic and free society in which all persons live in harmony and with equal opportunities. […] It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve, but if need be, an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”The speed with which the bitterness between former colonial subjects and their rulers abated in South Africa is astonishing. Mandela was an ardent champion of “Peace with Reconciliation,” a slogan that had a profound impact on the lives of ordinary people. He called for brotherly love and integration with whites, and a sharing of Christian values. He did not unsettle traditional dividing lines and dichotomies; instead, he engaged in conflict management within a system that permitted opposing views to exist fairly. Gandhi’s vision for independent India too extended beyond the territorial realm. He rejected the notion of a “clash of civilizations,” and sought to build bridges with the British. He saw no reason why cross-cultural goodwill — an idea close to Mandela’s heart — couldn’t be revitalised and sustained. Without his global perspective, India arguably would not have been an active participant and partner in the Commonwealth. This is not to say the views of Mandela and Gandhi fully converged. Gandhi had no doubt in his mind that, by adopting the traditionally accepted form of protest, he had mounted sufficient pressure to ease government control. Mandela, on the other hand, believed in “a more active,militant style of protest […] - actions that punished the authorities.” He and his brave partners at
Robben Island questioned the rationale behind hunger strikes, especially because it was next to
impossible to alert people on the outside when they were waging such a strike.Today, the India that Gandhi helped shape appears to be in disarray. Corruption is endemic. Our institutional inefficiencies are gloriously obvious. The political process has been fouled by the politics of caste and community. The South Africa of Mandela’s dream is, likewise, all but shattered. Unemployment among blacks is high. Slums still exist in the cities. Crime is rife.Fundamental obstacles to racial reconciliation have not been removed. Still, amid the problems faced by the two countries, the popular image of Bapu and Mandela is that of benevolent leaders, whose actions could not always be comprehended by us ordinary mortals. After all, history cannot be anticipated by those who make it.

Thursday, 22 August 2013

British Colonialism in India

British Colonialism in India

British Colonialism in India


Colonialism is a distinct form of imperialism in which a colonizing nation exerts direct controls over a colonized state by military, economic, and political means. The forceful widespread intrusion of a colonizing nation naturally causes an irreversible
change in all dimensions of the colonized state, the lives of the people, and the social architecture. To achieve the primary objective of colonialism, creating wealth for the colonizing nation and its people, many different groups, including women and children acting synergistically, must contribute. India forms an excellent case study, beginning with the children of imperial officials themselves.
During the period between 1830 and 1880 a large number of British children either went to India with their parents or were born there. The exact number of British children in India at any given time during that period is unclear, as sources of information about British children in the Indian subcontinent are scanty. The accounts of children's lives are in parents' letters and diaries, and in contemporary domestic manuals. If all of these writings are read as a corpus, a picture emerges about British childhood in India. The available documents relate the experiences of children from British families ranging from lower-middle class to upper-middle-class.

Infant Mortality

A major anxiety for British families in colonized India was the high rate of infant mortality. In the Bengal presidency between 1860 and 1869, the average death rate was about 148 per thousand British children under the age of five, while in England during the same period the mortality rate was about 67 per thousand. The grief of losing children was expressed time and again by British mothers. Maria Amelia Vansittart, wife of a Civil Session judge in northern India, noted in her diary on March 26, 1846, that between eight and nine in the evening a very little girl was born, and in the entry of April 13 she described her daughter's burial. Theon Wilkinson, who studied tombstones in India, documented the repeated misfortunes of some families. The rate of infant mortality decreased as the century progressed, but it was still high enough to create anxiety and perceived helplessness among British mothers.

Wet Nurses, Ayahs, and Bearers

In the subcontinent, British mothers generally depended on Indian wet nurses to nurse their children, as European wet nurses were not available and British physicians advised mothers not to breast-feed their own children since the climate was thought to be too debilitating. The wet nurses, commonly calledammahs, were low-caste Hindus or Muslims. Many memsahibs (British married women in India) hired an Indian wet nurse for the infants and Indian ayahs (nurses) for the other needs of their children, although many greatly disliked the idea. Besides having an ayah, many Anglo-Indian parents hired a male servant, or bearer, for their male children. Anglo-Indian children spent most of their waking hours with Indian servants. These domestics, serving frequently as playmates, taught the children Hindi words like bhaia (brother) and baba(infant), and often "papa" and "mama" as well. Children generally developed a close attachment to their ayahs and bearers and the close bond served to provide comfort to the children when the families were in transit. As the time came for the Anglo-Indian mothers to take their children to England, some took their children's ayahs or bearers with them.

Racial Barriers

The need to have help to raise infants forced memsahibs to hire Indian servants, but they were always apprehensive about the intimate bond between the ayah and the infant and attempted to maintain a distance between their children and the servants. Authors of prescriptive literature discouraged any closeness between British children and the Indian servants, fearing that the children would imitate "native" habits, mannerisms, and language. This fear clearly surfaced in the mind of Julia Thomas Maitland, wife of a district judge at Rajahmundry in Madras, when she emphasized in a letter that she did not want her daughter to learn Indian languages and grow up "like a little Hindu" (Jan. 9, 1839).
Mothers were not often successful in shielding their children from learning the local language. When little Eric Bailey's mother Florence wrote to her husband that Eric could say a few words in Hindi and imitated making chappatis (Indian bread), her husband became quite upset. To check the infusion of Indian influence on their children, many memsahibs employed English women in addition to ayahs as nurses for their babies. Some tried to assuage the problem by hiring Indian ayahs who could speak English. The British nurse and the Indian ayah were sometimes at odds with each other about their authority over the child; not surprisingly, the white nurse was usually the winner. The underlying reason for Anglo-Indian parents' fear of close bonds between their offspring and their native servants was undoubtedly tied to the attitude of racial exclusiveness that accompanied imperialism. While Anglo-Indian parents were maintaining a social distance from the Indians, however, their children, through their close relationships with the servants, were dismantling the barrier between the colonizers and the colonized. This cross current from the children ultimately acted to erode the foundations of the empire.

Education

Emma Roberts reported in 1837 that schools were established in every regiment for the children of European soldiers. Boys were educated to become noncommissioned officers, regimental clerks, and so on. The girls were trained to be wives for men of higher ranks. Information on Anglo-Indian children's education is often quite sketchy. The letters of Sarah Terry described the education of her eight-year-old daughter and five-year-old son. During their first year in India, Sarah taught English and math to her children at home in the morning. In the second year, both of them went to school at the Bombay Fort at 7:30 in the morning and returned at 4:00 in the afternoon.

Transient Life of Anglo-Indian Children

During the summer it was quite common that British infants suffered from heat stroke, boils, and diarrhea. To protect children from heat-induced diseases they were taken to the hill stations by their mothers from March to October, while their fathers remained at their jobs in the plains. Most Anglo-Indian parents believed that if their children stayed in India for too long the Indian climate and environment would weaken their constitutions, perhaps for all their lives. Even an English nurse was not a sufficient protection from this danger, so British parents sent their children to England at a very early age. Boys usually left India by the time they were five years old, and girls normally went back at the age of seven or eight.
Colonialism influenced the texture of British family life in India. Anglo-Indian children lived in the Indian subcontinent without a lasting home base. Soon after their birth, many children had to be separated from their fathers for six to seven months to avoid the summer heat. Their daily routines were disrupted by their fathers' recurrent job transfers. By the time these children reached the age of seven, many of them returned to Britain without their parents. Thus, unlike their contemporaries in Britain, the Anglo-Indian children seldom had a stable home life with both parents around. Although it was common for upper- and upper-middle-class children in Victorian Britain to go away to boarding school for months at a time, the Anglo-Indian children were often not able to see their parents for periods extending over many years.
Sometimes it became difficult for parents to send their children back to England. Often Anglo-Indian men did not get the leave to take their families home or lacked the money to send them back. They frequently had difficulty finding someone to take their children home. For example, following the death of his wife in 1871, a Mr. Wonnacott sought to send his three-year-old daughter to Britain. He was not able to find her a woman escort until 1874. (Female children under age seven were not considered old enough to travel with unrelated and often unknown adults; boys could go home at the age of five with unrelated and often unknown army personnel.) Because of the great distance and high cost of the journey between India and England, parents and children could see each other only at lengthy intervals, sometimes as long as nine to ten years. At times children never saw their parents again. The Metcalfe children's mother died in India while they were in Britain. The Wonnacott children's father died on his way back to Britain and their mother died in India.
Victorians placed the need for a strong family at the center of their lives. The family disruptions caused by long separations between parents and their children commonly seen in Anglo-Indian families were not in tune with the Victorian emphasis on creating a stable home and family that would provide what historian Anthony Wohl called moral, ethical, religious, and social standards of good citizenship. Still, colonialism sometimes created a repetition in the pattern of parent–child relationships within Anglo-Indian families as the young men returned to India as civil servants or members of the armed services and the young women returned to marry and again create a family life in a colonial atmosphere.

Effects of Colonialism on Indian Children

Colonial governments generally did little to change the lives of local children, particularly in rural areas. There were some attempts to regulate what imperial authorities regarded as abuses. For example, colonial officials frowned on marriages that were contracted for young girls, though they did not usually press their concerns very vigorously. While colonial officials often criticized "natives" for working children too hard, the colonial economy usually depended on continued child labor, so there was little change here. Gradually, colonial administrations did introduce some new educational opportunities, supplemented often by missionary efforts. So some children were exposed to formal schooling, which in some cases pulled them away from family traditions and into new contact with Western values. Schools for girls might also influence socialization for women's roles, again pulling away from tradition. Educational opportunities were limited, however, so the impact of this aspect of colonialism was only gradually felt.

Monday, 12 August 2013

post metric scholorship datails

Post Matric Scholarship Eligibility Details

Rate of ScholarshipAn amount equivalent to Admission and Course/Tuition Fee and Maintenance allowance, subjected to a maximum ceiling. See Instructions for details.
Eligibility Condition
a) Should be the First Year student of 
i. Plus Two/ UG/ PG/ Ph.D Course of Higher Secondary School/ College/ Institutes/ University, which is either a Govt/ Aided/Recognised Unaided Institution.
OR
ii. 11th Class/Technical/ Vocational Course of ITI/ITC Centres affiliated to NCVT.
OR
iii. Course, other than those listed in under merit-cum-means scholarship scheme. The names of courses listed under Merit-cum-means scholarship are given in See Instructions for details.
b. Should belong to Minority Community (Muslim/ Christian/ Buddhists/ Sikh/ Zoroastrians or Parsis).
c. Should have secured not less than 50% marks or equivalent grade in the previous Board/ University Examination.
d. The Annual Family Income should not exceed Rs. 2 Lakhs.
e. Should not be availing any other Scholarship or Stipend.
Other Relevant Information
a. Candidate should have a Saving Bank account in State Bank of Travancore (SBT)/ State Bank of India (SBI) / Federal Bank/ South Indian Bank in her/his name. The candidate should be in possession of the Bank account Number and the Branch Code.
b. Scholarships will not be given to more than two students in a family.
c. The scholarships will be sanctioned in accordance with the criterion laid down by the Central Government.

Monday, 29 July 2013

EGYPT: RECOMMENDATION TO U.S

Egypt’s Transition to
Democracy One Year
On: Recommendations
for U.S. Policy

Life for most Egyptians has deteriorated one year after the
overthrow of President Mubarak following mass popular
protests in January and February. The economy is
approaching a crisis, and lawlessness and insecurity have
spread throughout the country. Yet Egyptians remain
optimistic about their revolution and hopeful that a new
civilian government will begin to deliver on promises of
change. The U.S. government’s role in Egypt’s uncertain
transition is controversial; it is often mischaracterized in
public discourse, not least by Egyptian officials. The U.S.
government needs to focus more on delivering a clear
message about its policies and goals in Egypt and in
ensuring that it is received by the newly empowered
Egyptian public.
Introduction
As Egyptians celebrate the first anniversary of the popular
uprising that ended the thirty-year rule of President
Mubarak on February 11, 2011, U.S. policy makers are
faced with a confusing situation. Egypt’s democratic
transition has seen free parliamentary elections in which
tens of millions of voters participated peacefully, but the
outcome has fueled concerns over the role of the
parliament as a guarantor of the rights and freedoms of all
Egyptians. Specifically, activists are addressing new
developments, such as the majority of seats in parliament
that will be held by political parties rooted in political Islam;
the very poor showing of secular, liberal parties
associated with organizing the popular protests of a year
ago; the emergence of the extreme anti-democratic Salafi
movement as an electoral force with almost 25 % of the
parliamentary seats; and the low representation in
parliament of women and religious minorities.
These concerns are compounded by the fact that one of
the major tasks of the new parliament is to appoint a 100
member committee to prepare a new constitution that will
be adopted by referendum in a few months’ time.
Concerns over the composition of the new parliament are
just one among many pressing human rights issues in
Egypt. The ruling military junta, the Supreme Council of
the Armed Forces (SCAF), has had a calamitous year in
charge, vacillating between accommodating the demands
of protesters to protecting the interests and privileges the
military has accumulated in the course of 60 years of
military-backed dictatorial rule. At times, such as in
November when it sought to impose so called “supraconstitutional
principles” that would have ensured a
continuing preeminent role for the military over Egypt’s
political system, it has appeared to be backing away from
its pledge to step away from politics after the election of a
civilian government. In power, the military has
exacerbated sectarian tensions between the majority
Muslim community and the Christian minority, even using
state television to incite members of the public to attack
Christian protesters in October; it has tried thousands of
civilians in military courts that do not provide a fair trial; it
has tortured detainees, including subjecting women to
sexual assaults through so-called virginity tests; and it has
killed scores of protesters, a death toll that escalated in
the last quarter of 2011.
Independent civil society, especially human rights
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), have come
under unprecedented attack from the authorities in recent
weeks. On December 29 and 30, public prosecutors
backed by the security forces raided the offices of twelve
NGOs in the Cairo area, including three American
organizations, two German and seven Egyptian groups,
seizing computers and files and placing wax seals on their
doors. The government accused the groups of
destabilizing the country by receiving foreign funding to
foment protests, playing into popular suspicions that
foreign forces were conspiring to harm the interests of the
country. Some groups were accused of operating without
required permits.
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 1
In addition, dozens of other groups were ordered to
respond to questioning by prosecutors and to submit their
bank account details for official inspection. Over 400
groups and individuals, comprising most of the leading
figures in Egypt’s human rights and democracy
movement, are said to be targets in a wide-ranging,
continuing investigation. These attacks, accompanied by
hostile, defamatory statements from government officials
and in the government-controlled media, have created a
hostile environment for NGO activity. This is interfering
with the ability of some targeted NGOs to carry out their
usual work, because they have to respond to
investigators, provide information, attend interrogations,
and prepare legal defenses for their activities. The attacks
are having a chilling effect on human rights and
democracy promotion in general.
The attacks on independent civil society organizations
recall the tactics of the Mubarak regime, by seeking to
distract public attention from national problems and
government failings by scapegoating civil society
organizations backed by international financial support as
agents of hostile foreign forces.
This is not the only way in which the SCAF’s rule has
come to resemble the old regime, causing some
Egyptians to question whether the uprising brought about
any real changes. The SCAF has portrayed itself as a
force for order and social peace, meanwhile, perhaps in
order to underline the threats against which it purports to
be a guardian, it has presided over a deterioration in
public security that has added an unpleasant new edge of
insecurity to Egyptian life. For decades President Mubarak
assured his people and Egypt’s western allies that he
stood as a bulwark against extremism and disorder, while
stifling the development of independent democratic
institutions that are the only lasting guarantees for such
stability. The SCAF has shown little inclination to progress
from this destructive manner of rule, closing down media
outlets that criticized it, targeting independent critics,
including bloggers, maintaining sweeping powers to detain
without charge or trial, and resisting accountability for its
actions.
Under the 2012 appropriations law that passed Congress
at the end of 2011, the State Department is required to
certify that the Egyptian government is meeting certain
human rights conditions: "supporting the transition to
civilian government including holding free and fair
elections; implementing policies to protect freedom of
expression, association and religion; and due process of
law,” before $1.3 billion of foreign assistance can be
released to the Egyptian government.
Any honest assessment of the events of the last year in
Egypt would necessarily find that the Egyptian authorities
have fallen short of meeting these conditions in several
areas. It remains far from clear that the ruling military
council is fully committed to a transfer of power to civilian
rule; freedom of expression, association, and religion have
all come under attack at different times, and more
importantly, measures to better protect these rights in the
future have not been implemented; and due process of
law has been undermined by unfair trial of thousands of
civilians by military courts.
The framework of conditionality provides broad guidelines
for the Egyptian authorities, and for U.S. policy makers in
discussing and seeking to advance Egypt’s transition to
democracy. Better protection for basic rights and
freedoms, such as those stipulated in the law, are key
indicators of whether political change in Egypt is
producing democratic progress or not.
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 2
The Views of Human Rights
and Democracy Activists
It is impossible to generalize the range of views expressed
by activists from diverse backgrounds, engaged in
different types of activism. However, there are some
common concerns:
 There is a broadly shared realization that after a year
of post-revolutionary drift, Egypt’s new political
landscape will crystalize in the next few months. This
has brought forth two competing emotions: optimism
and uncertainty. Optimism, because one of the main
goals of the uprising – the handover of power to an
elected civilian government – is close at hand;
uncertainty because the outcome of the election was
not predicted, especially the very poor showing for
secular liberal forces who were prominent in the
protest movement.
 Most human rights and democracy activists are
supportive of the SCAF getting out of power as quickly
as possible, despite misgivings about what an
Islamist-dominated parliament might mean for civil
liberties and personal freedoms. As one activist
explained, “The Brotherhood may limit basic rights
and freedoms, but the SCAF threaten our very
existence.” In practice, the debate over whether to
compress the timetable for a handover to civilian rule
is probably redundant. There is not much time
between now and the beginning of July when the
formal handover of power to a new civilian president is
scheduled to take place, especially given the many
intermediate steps that will take place, including the
adoption of a new constitution, before the presidential
election in June.
 What will be important is the degree of the residual
powers of the military under the new system. While it
is expected, and even conceded by some, that the
military will retain control over issues relating to
foreign policy, including regional security issues like
Israeli-Palestinian peace, there are demands for
greater transparency in the military budget, including
provision for parliamentary oversight, and especially
for accountability for recent incidents where members
of the armed forces are implicated in the killing of
protesters. Several activists mentioned that former
President Mubarak and former Minister of the Interior
Habib al-Adly face a possible death sentence for their
alleged involvement in ordering the killing of
protesters at the time of the uprising last year. It is,
therefore, hardly consistent to let the SCAF evade
accountability for their actions. These demands for
greater accountability and transparency, taken up by
some of the youth protest movements, are likely to
find some support in the parliament and will be a
source of tension with the military leadership as it
shifts its position within the political system at the end
of June.
 No democracy or human rights activists see the SCAF
as any kind of guardian of secular or liberal values.
Since the SCAF has been in power, they have killed
Christian protesters and incited the people against
Christians; directed the timetable and format of the
transition process in ways that have favored the
Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood, in particular;
done nothing to strengthen democratic institutions,
and have undermined freedom of the press, attacked
civil society, and used the judiciary for political ends. A
common perception among activists is that the SCAF
and the Muslim Brotherhood, the backer of the largest
parliamentary party, the Freedom and Justice Party,
have formed or are working towards an
accommodation to protect their particular interests
and priorities, and this relationship will work to the
detriment of human rights and democracy.
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 3
 The U.S. government is widely seen as an
unconditional supporter of the military and its
continuing role in politics. Activists do not understand
why there has not been more criticism of the SCAF.
For example, one activist says the SCAF’s
involvement in large-scale killing of protesters in the
past few months is “much worse than anything that
happened under Mubarak.” Many activists remain
skeptical that the United States will tolerate the
emergence of a democratic government in Egypt that
may be more critical of U.S. policies in the region.
 While human rights activists generally welcome U.S.
support and pressure from U.S. policy makers when
violations occur – indeed, many activists are highly
sensitive to the tone, frequency, and level of
statements from U.S. officials relating to human rights
concerns, and highly critical when they deem them to
be insufficient – they are skeptical of the value of
public threats to condition or suspend U.S. aid, even
military assistance. Rather than conditioning aid,
activists would rather see the U.S. government being
much more transparent about its aid relationship with
Egypt, explaining which institutions receive it and the
purposes for which it is sent. This would make clear
that civil society receives a very small proportion of
the $1.3 billion annual aid sent by the United States
and, thereby, help to lessen the disproportionate
public concern, stoked by official misinformation.
Observations
Egypt is the cornerstone of the Arab Spring; a successful
democratic transition there, even if it is lengthy and
circuitous, would provide the United States with a
democratic partner in the heart of the Arab world with the
potential to transform the United States’ troubled
relationships in the region as a whole.
The U.S. government must choose between backing the
democratic transition, with all its uncertainties, or else
seeing Egypt drift into instability under a more brutal, less
competent form of authoritarianism. One positive outcome
of the SCAF’s troubled year in office is that any illusion
that the military could provide a guiding hand for Egypt’s
democratic transition has been stripped away. The only
way to advance democracy is by implementing the
democratic process and building safeguards for
democratic rights and freedoms as the process moves
forward. There is no option but to back the democratic
transition.
Support for Egypt’s economy must be a top priority, and
the prospects for a strong trade relationship between the
United States and Egypt are good. There is pent-up
demand and growth potential in Egypt that would be
unleashed by an end to political uncertainty and paralysis
– by bringing tourism close to normality, for example. The
economy is in a deep crisis, but improvements would be
quickly felt by the people, and would aid the transition.
Voters in the just-completed parliamentary elections made
their choices based on symbols and untested promises. It
would be a mistake to see the results of this first
experience of a contested election as a stable indicator of
the political aspirations and views of the Egyptian people
in the longer term. Egypt’s new government will have to
make tough policy choices, especially on the economy.
Future elections will be based on the actual record in
government of the ruling parties and will likely see a
realignment of parties on issues other than religion.
Egyptians are scheduled to go to the polls at least three
times in the next few months, to elect the upper house of
the parliament, the Maglis al-Shurra, to vote on proposed
constitutional amendments in a referendum, and to elect a
president in June. The presidential vote is likely to have
the highest participation rate ever for an Egyptian election.
Each of these elections represents an opportunity for the
authorities to improve the process and to stamp out
irregularities, such as partisan campaigning close to
polling stations that is forbidden by law, but was
widespread in the parliamentary elections.
The SCAF and the dominant Freedom and Justice Party
are moving towards a modus vivendi that will see an
effective division of labor with the military, which continues
to defend its own privileges and interests and maintains
control over security and foreign policy. The potential for
future conflicts between the SCAF and the Brotherhood is
apparent, though both sides have an interest in avoiding
them. There is a danger that this de facto accommodation
between Islamists and the military could proceed at the
expense of democracy and human rights.
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 4
One activist observed that Egypt was still going through its
revolution. In her view, the transition would only begin
after the presidential election in June and the appointment
of a new government. This realistic assessment points to
the need for patience and sustained attention to
supporting Egypt’s transition from authoritarianism. The
transition will take years and there will be mistakes and
setbacks along the way. Nonetheless, the goal of a
democratic Egypt is worth the investment of time.
Recommendations
Recommendations for U.S. Policy
The role of the United States government in Egypt’s
transition is highly controversial, often misunderstood, and
manipulated for political gain by the government and other
factions. In this context, it is hard for the U.S. government
to communicate a clear message about its policies in
Egypt and even harder to have it understood by the
Egyptian public. Nonetheless, it is vital that the U.S.
government continue to engage proactively and creatively
in the information battle in Egypt, and to do so effectively
in Egypt’s expanded and more open media environment.
What Egyptians think about the United States colors their
support for values with which the United States is publicly
identified, including human rights and democracy. Further,
how the U.S. government’s actions in Egypt are perceived
will shape public attitudes throughout the region on
whether the United States supports authoritarianism or
democracy.
1. The U.S. government must continue: to make clear its
support for civilian, democratic rule in Egypt; to urge
the ruling military council to vacate the political scene
as soon as possible; and for the Egyptian military to
take its place in a democratic system, subject to
accountability, transparency, and civilian oversight.
2. Maintain pressure on Field Marshall Tantawi and the
SCAF to repeal the Emergency Law. Partial steps or
cosmetic reforms are inadequate, and should not be
disproportionately appreciated. For example, Field
Marshall Tantawi’s statement that the SCAF would lift
the State of Emergency to mark the anniversary of the
beginning of the uprising on January 25 was
undermined by the caveat that it would continue to be
used “against thugs.” “Thugs” is a broad term, and
retaining the law means that the authorities retain the
power to search and detain anyone indefinitely on
suspicion. The repeal of the Emergency Law, which
has been almost continually in force since 1958, will
take more than just a statement from the ruler, and
should be carefully followed by U.S. policy makers.
3. The NGO raids are a direct challenge to human rights
and democracy promotion policies. The U.S.
government must use this moment to:
a) negotiate a durable arrangement with the
Egyptian authorities that will ensure the longterm
stability and integrity of U.S. assistance to
independent human rights and democracy
organizations in Egypt;
b) press for reform in laws governing the
functioning of NGOs; and
c) continue to deliver a strong response at the
highest levels to Egyptian officials – as
President Obama recently did in a call to Field
Marshall Tantawi, and through other high-level
contacts by U.S. officials -- to ensure that the
Egyptian authorities make progress towards
meeting the conditions set forth in the 2012
appropriations law.
Official harassment of civil society, and especially
of human rights organizations, is the norm in
Egypt, and has been since at least 1995. The
Egyptian authorities know that Egyptian human
rights organizations have little popular support in
Egypt and that they, in fact, serve a useful
propaganda purpose for the government by
providing clear evidence of the existence of the
nefarious “hidden hand” of foreign interference that
is conveniently blamed in government statements
and the official media for many of Egypt’s
problems.
There is a clear divide between the U.S. and
Egyptian government positions on foreign funding
of Egyptian NGOs and it suits the Egyptian
government for this divide to remain unbridged,
since it enables the Egyptians to portray the United
States as interfering and disrespectful of Egyptian
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 5
sovereignty – a line of argument that is widely
believed and plays into the foreign interference
narrative noted above.
A Durable Agreement on U.S. Democracy and Human
Rights Assistance
The U.S. government should use the opportunity of the
transition to a new civilian government and the escalation
of tension caused by the recent raids and attacks on
NGOs to move the bilateral conversation beyond the
stalemate that is serving the interests of antidemocratic
elements within the Egyptian government. To do that:
a) U.S. policy makers should stress as often and as
positively as possible the readiness of the U.S.
government to work with the Egyptian government
to continue to provide support to independent civil
society organizations working to promote
universal values in Egypt in ways that will be
acceptable to both sides, and that comply with
international standards.
b) The U.S. government should propose
consultations involving the new parliament and,
eventually, the government appointed by the new
president, and other governments involved in
funding human rights and democracy
organizations in Egypt. These consultations would
be aimed at protecting the independence of civil
society organizations and ensuring their right to
receive necessary financial support for their work
from domestic and international sources.
c) In such consultations, U.S. policy makers could
propose the creation of a voluntary standards
body for civil society organizations in Egypt. This
would be a counterproposal to efforts by Egyptian
officials to create a General Union for Civil
Associations that would be government-controlled
and that NGOs would be obliged to belong to.
Such centralized control and compulsion is alien
to the idea of independent civil society
There would be some benefits for civil society in the
creation of an independent Egyptian institution that
could play a role in promoting best practices for
Egyptian NGOs, enhancing NGO transparency and
accountability, and could even assist international
(and domestic) donors in identifying grant recipients –
as long as such a body would never exercise
monopoly control over NGO support in Egypt. Such a
body may be similar in composition to a more
independent version of Egypt’s National Human
Rights Council, or may be conceived of like a
domestic-focused Egyptian version of the U.S.
National Endowment for Democracy, that could take
funds from public and private sources and direct them
to independent NGOs under the supervision of an
independent board of directors.
Such an idea will require extensive input from
Egyptian civil society groups. One of its prime benefits
is that it would provide a way for the U.S. government
to indicate that it is not opposed to Egyptian
involvement in the oversight of foreign funds going to
Egyptian NGOs, thereby responding to one of the
Egyptian government’s main objections. The U.S.
government could, nevertheless, maintain a principled
opposition to government control over the work of
NGOs that strips them of independence, and to the
Egyptian government exercising a veto over U.S.
foreign assistance in the fields of democracy and
human rights. It could also provide vulnerable
Egyptian NGOs with much-needed local legitimacy
and official validation that would make it more difficult
for the authorities to defame and demonize them.
Legal Reform
d) U.S. officials should call for the revision of the
Law on Associations and Foundations (Law 84
of 2002), to free independent NGOs from
stifling government interference and
burdensome registration requirements.
Recently proposed amendments to the law do
not meet these requirements. They recycle a
repressive law announced by former Prime
Minister Abdelaziz Hegazy in March 2010, and
are inappropriate in the context of a new
democratizing Egypt.
4. The U.S. government should take advantage of the
new political conditions in Egypt to stimulate domestic
support for civil society human rights and democracypromotion
activities. The U.S. government can play a
role in encouraging Egyptian civil society
organizations to seek domestic financial support and
A HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST BLUEPRINT: EGYPT’S TRANSITION TO DEMOCRACY ONE YEAR ON 6
can offer training and capacity-building in this area; it
can encourage the Egyptian government to facilitate
the support of human rights and democracy-promotion
groups by local donors, and it can encourage wealthy
Egyptians and private Egyptian companies to extend
their philanthropy to independent human rights and
democracy-promotion groups that are a vital part of
any democratic society.
Human rights and democracy-promotion groups in
Egypt are damaged by the public perception that they
are influenced by foreign interests, fueled by the fact
that they receive almost all their funding from foreign
donors. Under the Mubarak regime it was impossible
for private individuals or business interests to support
human rights and democracy-promotion organizations
without running a substantial risk of becoming the
victims of government reprisals. A healthy Egyptian
civil society should be rooted in Egyptian society and
should meet increasing amounts of its needs from
local donors.
5. The United States should respond to widespread
demands in Egyptian society for greater transparency
in U.S. foreign assistance to Egypt.
As one NGO leader explained, “I don’t know why the
U.S. ambassador doesn’t give a press conference to
explain all the foreign aid the U.S. gives in Egypt in all
sectors, explain the benefits to the U.S. and to Egypt.”
Greater transparency can be achieved in many ways:
 The embassy website should provide more
information in Arabic about U.S. foreign
assistance, its primary recipients by sector, its
purposes, and its benefits, in terms of Egyptian
and U.S. national interests.
 The embassy should provide information about
the very large sums of foreign assistance,
amounting to tens of billions of dollars, provided to
Egypt over the last 30 years.
 The ambassador and visiting U.S. officials should
be much more visible in the Egyptian media,
describing the foreign assistance program in all its
aspects, and should be proactive in correcting
distortions and misrepresentations that may
appear in the local media from time to time.
Many sectors of Egyptian society, including the
military and many government agencies, as well as
religious and charitable institutions of different kinds,
receive extensive financial support from international
sources. These sources include governmental aid
from Europe, North America, and other parts of the
developed world, but also large sums of donations to
religious institutions from private sources in the
Arabian Gulf. That U.S. foreign assistance to Egypt is
part of a much greater whole of foreign assistance
from many sources, and that assistance directed to
human rights and democracy organizations is a small
fraction of total U.S. assistance to Egypt, are not well
understood by many Egyptians. Greater transparency
and clear messaging can help to push back the weight
of disinformation and thereby support the
development of independent civil society groups.
6. The U.S. embassy in Cairo should mark this moment
of transition by embarking on a new approach of
closer engagement with independent human rights
and democracy-promotion organizations in Egypt.
Embassy staff should be in regular contact with
human rights activists in Cairo and throughout the
country. Where activists and organizations face
harassment and threats, clear public support from the
United States sends an important message of support
for the vital work of civil society activists in building a
democratic society in Egypt.

RED ARMY BOYZ 

innuagration of new room

RED ARMY BOYZ & RAB INTERNATIONAL new corporate and club house will be innuagrated on 1/AUGUST/2013 at U.city, KOTTAKKAL,MALAPPURAM,KERALA.