[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 39 (Thursday, April 7, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E566-E567]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     VISA DENIAL TO INDIAN OFFICIAL LEADS TO BURNING OF PEPSI PLANT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, April 6, 2005

  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Speaker, as you know, the United States government 
denied a visa to Narendra Modi, Chief Minister of Gujarat, due to the 
state government's complicity in the massacre of Muslims there and his 
insensitive statements about minorities. His visa was revoked under the 
law that prohibits those responsible for violations of religious 
freedom from getting visas. This was the right thing to do, and I 
salute those who made this decision.
  According to the March 25 issue of India-West, the denial of a visa 
to Mr. Modi was met with attacks from the Indian government. Prime 
Minister Manmohan Singh, who, as a Sikh, is a member of a religious 
minority himself, complained in Parliament that ``we do not believe it 
is appropriate . . . to make a subjective judgment question a 
constitutional authority in India.'' The Foreign Ministry said that the 
denial of Mr. Modi's visa ``is uncalled for and displays lack of 
courtesy and sensitivity toward a constitutionally elected chief 
minister of a state of India.'' Of course, they completely neglected to 
mention Mr. Modi's lack of courtesy and sensitivity towards the 2,000 
to 5,000 Muslims killed in the riots that his government helped 
organize. India's Human Rights Commission held Mt. Modi and his 
government responsible for the massacre.
  The Indian government officially stated that the decision showed ``a 
lack of courtesy and sensitivity'' and that their ``sovereignty'' was 
violated by the decision. This is the standard argument of tyrants. It 
is the argument countries like Red China make when they are criticized.
  On March 19 in New Delhi, India-West reported, fanatical Hindu 
nationalist fundamentalists affiliated with the militant organization 
Bajrang Dal rioted against the United States because Mr. Modi was 
denied his visa. They barged into a Pepsi-Cola warehouse, smashed 
bottles of Pepsi, and set fire to the building. The warehouse was 
partially burned. About a dozen workers fled. The rioters also 
ransacked a nearby Pepsi office. Another group protested the U.S. 
consulate in Bombay. They carried signs reading ``Down With the United 
States.'' Some Bajrang Dal members tried to enter the visa application 
center in Ahmedabad. Modi himself said, ``Let us pledge to work for 
such a day that an American would have to stand in line for entry into 
Gujarat.'' He accused the United States of trying to ``impose its laws 
on other countries.'' He urged India to deny visas to American 
officials.
  Mr. Speaker, this is just the latest chapter in India's ongoing 
repression of its minorities, which has been well documented in this 
House over the years, and its virulent hatred of America. Why do we 
spend our time, energy, and money supporting such a country?
  The time has come to hold India's feet to the fire. Denying Mr. Modi 
a visa was simply a small first step, and a good one. We must do more. 
The time has come to stop our aid and trade with India until all people 
enjoy the full flower of human rights and to support self-determination 
for all the peoples and nations seeking their freedom through a free 
and fair plebiscite. The essence of democracy is the right to self-
determination. As the world's oldest and strongest democracy, it is up 
to the United States to take fhese measures in support of freedom for 
all.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to place the India-West article of March 25 
into the Record at this tIme.

                  [From the India-West, Mar. 25, 2005]

  Pepsi Warehouse Burned in Visa Denial Uproar--Continued from page A1

       The riots were sparked by the burning of a train coach by 
     Muslims in Godhra, killing 59 Hindu kar sevaks.
       Modi was denied a diplomatic visa to travel to the United 
     States and his existing tourist/business visa was revoked 
     under the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act that bars 
     people responsible for violations of religious freedom from 
     getting a visa.
       Modi had been scheduled to address a gathering of Indian 
     American groups and motel owners in New York, Florida and in 
     New Jersey.
       India slammed the decision, saying it showed a ``lack of 
     courtesy and sensitivity,'' and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh 
     criticized the American decision in Parliament.
       ``The American government has been clearly informed . . . 
     we do not believe that it is appropriate to use allegations 
     or anything less than due legal process to make a subjective 
     judgment to question a constitutional authority in India,'' 
     Singh told the Rajya Sabha.
       Responding to opposition leader Jaswant Singh's submission 
     that the decision was unacceptable, Manmohan Singh said, ``We 
     agree that this is not a matter of partisan politics, but 
     rather a matter of concern over a point of principle. Our 
     prompt and firm response clearly shows our principled stand 
     in this matter.''
       Earlier, Indian officials summoned Ambassador Mulford's 
     deputy Robert Blake ``to lodge a strong protest.''
       ``This action . . . is uncalled for and displays lack of 
     courtesy and sensitivity toward a constitutionally elected 
     chief minister of a state of India,'' the Foreign Ministry 
     said in a statement, expressing the government's ``deep 
     concern and regret.''
       The U.S. stood by its decision after a review sought by 
     India. Mulford, who was out of town when the news broke March 
     18, said the U.S. decision was aimed at Modi alone, and not 
     Gujaratis. He also denied it would affect ties with India.
       In Washington, State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said 
     the U.S. response was based on a finding by India's National 
     Human Rights Commission that held Modi's government 
     responsible for the 2002 Hindu-Muslim violence in the state, 
     India's worst in a decade.
       The decision led to widespread uproar in parts of Gujarat. 
     A day after the decision, nearly 150 Bajrang Dal activists 
     barged into the warehouse of U.S.-based PepsiCo in the Surat, 
     smashed bottles and set fire to the place, said Dharmesh 
     Joshi, a witness. The warehouse was partially burned.
       A witness said about a dozen workers at the warehouse fled 
     during the attack and firefighters doused the flames.
       The protesters also ransacked a nearby PepsiCo office and 
     demonstrated outside the American consulate in Mumbai. Some 
     carried placards reading: ``Down with the United States,'' 
     ``Boycott the U.S. goods and the Americans.''
       Up to 150 Bajrang Dal activists also tried to enter the 
     U.S. visa application center in Ahmedabad but were turned 
     back by police.

[[Page E567]]

       Modi called the U.S. decision ``an insult to India and its 
     Constitution.'' In a public address in Ahmedabad, he lashed 
     out at the United States.
       ``A man from Gujarat was thrown out of a train in South 
     Africa. This led to a movement that overthrew the British 
     Empire,'' Modi thundered, in a reference to Mahatma Gandhi. 
     ``Let us pledge to work for such a day that an American would 
     have to stand in line for entry into Gujarat,'' he added.
       ``The United States can't impose its laws on other 
     countries. In the same way, India should deny visas to U.S. 
     officials as a protest against Washington's policies in 
     Iraq,'' Modi said.
       ``On what basis has the U.S. decided this?'' Modi asked. 
     ``Where has the U.S. got its information from? The American 
     government should know that every state in India is ruled by 
     the Constitution and no one can violate that. No court has 
     indicted the Gujarat government or the CM of complicity in 
     the incidents that took place in the state.''
       If the Pakistani president and the Bangladesh prime 
     minister could visit the U.S., two countries in which 
     minorities have suffered, Modi said he could be admitted too.

                          ____________________