The Global Intelligence Files - Re: [CT] [MESA] INDIA-Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute

The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
1680
The Global Intelligence Files

### Index pages

List of Releases

### by Date of Document

unspecified
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011

### by Date of Release

2001-03-13
2010-03-10
2011-03-05
2011-03-15
2012-01-29
2012-02-27
2012-02-28
2012-02-29
2012-03-01
2012-03-02
2012-03-03
2012-03-04
2012-03-05
2012-03-06
2012-03-07
2012-03-08
2012-03-09
2012-03-10
2012-03-11
2012-03-12
2012-03-13
2012-03-14
2012-03-15
2012-03-16
2012-03-17
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
2012-03-25
2012-03-26
2012-03-27
2012-04-01
2012-04-02
2012-04-24
2012-04-26
2012-04-30
2012-05-10
2012-06-18
2012-06-20
2012-07-01
2012-07-24
2012-07-28
2012-07-29
2012-07-30
2012-07-31
2012-08-01
2012-08-02
2012-08-05
2012-08-06
2012-08-07
2012-08-08
2012-08-09
2012-08-10
2012-08-11
2012-08-12

### Our Partners

ABC Color - Paraguay
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand

### Community resources

Supporters Support Wikileaks Follow us on Twitter Twitter this Follow us on Facebook

courage is contagious

# The Global Intelligence Files

On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.

## Re: [CT] [MESA] INDIA-Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute

Released on 2012-08-11 09:00 GMT

Email-ID | 690823
Date | 2010-09-22 20:53:46
From | zucha@stratfor.com
To | ct@stratfor.com, mesa@stratfor.com, animesh.roul@stratfor.com

Thanks Animesh. Any updates you may have leading up to and on Sept. 24 are
appreciated.
Animesh wrote:
Verdict against Muslim would give impetus to IM/SIMI , radicals like PFI and other Pak trained and Kashmir centric groups to step up their activities in the name of Islam ('Islam in danger' argument). I donaEUR(TM)t consider Hindu Militants are that capable or dangerous. Rightwing groups like Siva Sena/MNS, RSS/VHP will do their protests...but nobody will go violent as they might not upset their chance in SUpreme Court.
Again there is no support for them in the Society at large.Hindu groups could trigger vigilante activities for sure. The situation (of 1992/1993 era) has changed. Hindus are not following the 'Ram'/RSS/Safron brigade blindly...
Well we can expect Riots/Stone pelting: in UP towns (Lucknow, Kanpur, Benares, Faizabad (the epicenter) and Gorakhpur have many sensitive places, mostly Walled Cities, Ghettos, and Muslim Bastis). Also in Kerala, in Hyderabad, in Mumbai there could be some tensions...but it wonaEUR(TM)t be too much for the security forces. Delhi might see some peaceful demonstrations...
Animesh
----- Original Message -----
From: Korena Zucha
To: CT AOR
Cc: Middle East AOR , Animesh
Sent: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:25:08 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: [CT] [MESA] INDIA-Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute
One other
question: could we also see Islamist militant groups launch attacks
against Hindu or Muslim targets in the hope of igniting riots?
Reva Bhalla wrote:

> Animesh, can you answer these questions for us? Thanks
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 22, 2010, at 12:50 PM, Korena Zucha <zucha@stratfor.com> wrote:

> > Any
> > insight
> > as to which way the high court is expected to rule over the Babri
> > Masjid site? Are there any protests planned in India ahead of the
> > ruling? It has been reported that security has already been increased
> > in
> > some areas of India as a precaution. Also, can we expect to see
> > Hindu-Muslim riots after the verdict?
> > http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/09/22/hindu-right-hopes-fortunes-turn-on-babri-verdict/
> > The Allahabad High Courtâ€™s verdict on whether the ruined structure at
> > a
> > disputed site in the town of Ayodhya in northern India is a mosque or a
> > temple, as well as who has the rights over it, is expected on Friday.
> > It will be a monumental decision that in itself, and in its aftermath,
> > will test Indiaâ€™s ability as a nation to balance its plurality of
> > faiths. But the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, a Hindu nationalist group
> > that is one of the parties on the Hindu side of the court case, is
> > counting on the event to resurrect the appeal of Hindu nationalism and
> > its political future.
> > Established in 1915, the group, whose name loosely translates as the
> > All India Hindu General Assembly, claims to be Indiaâ€™s first
> > â€œHinduâ€A
> > political party and aims to establish a â€œreally democratic Hindu
> > state.â€A
> > The main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party, formed in 1980, and its
> > other affiliates, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (National Volunteers
> > Group) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (World Hindu Council), established in
> > 1925 and 1964 respectively, have their roots in the Hindu Mahasabha and
> > espouse similar political ambitions.
> > The Hindu Mahasabha was briefly banned from contesting elections in the
> > 1990s because its manifesto didnâ€™t appear to uphold the secular
> > values
> > that Indiaâ€™s Constitution mandates from every political party. After
> > changing their manifesto and becoming a registered political party in
> > 1996, the group has had very little electoral support.
> > But the group appears to be trying to rally fervor for the Ram temple
> > issue again. In Hindu belief, Ayodhya, the name of the town in Uttar
> > Pradesh state where the disputed site is located, was the birthplace of
> > the God Ram.
> > Acharya Madan Singh, executive president of the Hindu Mahasabha, told
> > India Real Time that his group is the â€œcaretakerâ€A of the disputed
> > Babri
> > Masjid site, and maintains that the mosque was grafted onto a
> > pre-existing temple when the Central Asian conqueror Babur invaded
> > India in the 16th century.
> > â€œOnly the dome was added to the same temple by Baburâ€™s men in 1528
> > that
> > gave it a shape of a mosque,â€A Mr. Singh says. â€œNo namaz (Muslim
> > prayer) was offered in that place ever.â€A
> > Mr. Singh says that Babur â€œoccupied several temples and Hindu palaces
> > to turn them into mosques and forts.â€A Mr. Singh also calls the first
> > ruler of the Mughal empire, which weakened as the British colonial
> > conquest began, a â€œterrorist.â€A
> > Muslim groups differ with this understanding of history, saying their
> > examination of historical documents and travel accounts from the time
> > doesnâ€™t show any temple was demolished for the construction of Babri
> > Masjid.
> > Hindu mobs demolished the mosque in December 1992, demanding the right
> > to build a temple there. The demolition sparked sectarian riots into
> > January, especially in Mumbai, that left many dead, more of them Muslim
> > than Hindu.
> > Mr. Singh says his group was not involved in the demolition and says
> > that the BJP, RSS and other groups who led mobs to destroy the mosque
> > have wronged Hindu gods. He said the structure they destroyed was the
> > remains of a temple that had existed since the birth of the Lord Ram
> > hundreds of thousands years ago.
> > â€œThe BJP hijacked our issue,â€A said Mr. Singh. â€œWe had told them
> > â€˜you
> > are destroying the temple.â€™ But they needed an emotional issue for
> > winning Hindus.â€A
> > BJP spokesman Prakash Javadekar says that his party wanted a temple
> > built at the Ayodhya site, but that the demolition was not part of his
> > partyâ€™s plan.
> > â€œBJP never wanted demolition but it happened,â€A said Mr. Javadekar,
> > whose party has been in disarray since losing back-to-back elections.
> > These days, some Indian political observers wonder if Hindu nationalism
> > itself has lost its appeal.
> > In the larger political sphere, scores of commentators have argued one
> > side or another of Indiaâ€™s politico-religious tussles thrown into
> > relief around this case. In court, 22 lawyers have argued for the
> > structure to be recognized as Hindu against two lawyers arguing for it
> > to be safeguarded as an Islamic property.
> > The court case initially began in 1950, when a Hindu petitioner asked
> > for regular access to the Babri Masjid site for prayers and for idol
> > worship, says H.S. Jain, the Hindu Mahasabhaâ€™s lawyer. This was later
> > clubbed together with several other suits by Hindu petitioners. The
> > leading three petitioners each claim to be the only true representative
> > of the countryâ€™s Hindus.
> > On the other side, the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Board of Waqfs ,
> > which supervises mosques and other sites of Sunni Islamic heritage in
> > the state, and others filed a petition in 1961, asking for the removal
> > of idols from the site and full possession to the property. Zufar
> > Farooqui, the present chairman of the board, says the disputed site was
> > registered with the board as a mosque in the 1940s.
> > Unless the Supreme Court defers the verdict, the Allahabad High Court
> > in the state of Uttar Pradesh will have the uncomfortable task of
> > weighing in all these claims Friday.
> > The government has asked for calm, whatever the outcome. Mr. Singh at
> > the Hindu Mahasabha didnâ€™t appear to be giving any guarantees,
> > although
> > he did say the â€œfirst recourse in case of an adverse verdict is the
> > Supreme Court.â€A
> > But he also added, â€œIf Ram temple is not made, every Hindu will come
> > out of home for the sacrifice. If the law comes in between, the law
> > itself has to be changed. Law should be according to the will of the
> > Hindus to whom India belongs.â€A