Bombay Riots: Second Phase

Author(s): Asghar Ali Engineer

Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 28, No. 12/13 (Mar. 20-27, 1993), pp. 505-508
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4399517
Accessed: 03-11-2015 08:49 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic and Political
Weekly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 103.36.84.1 on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 08:49:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Bombay Riots: Second Phase

Asghar Ali Engineer

Viciousand sustainedcommunalpropagandaby the Shiv Sena

and its state of preparednessfor violence,a communalisedpolice
force and internecinetensions within the state Congress(J)all
contributedto the extensivenature of the violence in Bombayin
f,anuary.
BABRI Masjid was vandalised on
December 6 and Bombay had witnessed
communal violence from December 7 onwards about which we have already prepared the report. The riots in second
phase began on January6. The causes are
variedand controversial.It is very difficult
to say with certainty as to how these riots
began. There are different theories. Some
say it began because of the murderof two
mathadi workers inside a godown in
Dongri. It was alleged that the Muslims
murderedthem out of communal vengeance. However,this has not been confirmed. It was also maintained that the
mathadi workers were killed in union
rivalry.The police confirmed this but only
after the damage was done.
According to another version the riots
began in Bhendi Bazar, Null Bazar and
Mohammad Ali Road as a result of
rumours that the Muslim dargah in
Mahim had been demolished by the Hindus. It is true that a few cases of stabbing
were reported from these areas. And undoubtedly this became the flash point for
the riots. However, it would be simplistic
to say that the riots started because of
these stabbing cases and no other factors
were at work.
Yet the note prepared by the government of Maharashtra for the MPs lists
only those incidents between January 6 to
8 in which the members of the minority
community attacked the Hindus. By implication the Maharashtragovernmenthas
accepted the Shiv Sena view that the riots
werestartedby the Muslims and that what
happened thereafter was a 'spontaneous'
response by the Sena and others. The Shiv
Sena was in fact preparingfor violent outbursts on a large scale. It only waited for
the flash point and the incidents in Bhendi
Bazar-MohammadAli Road area provided one.
A close scrutiny of events would belie
the government'sclaim. Apart from other
things the 'maha artis' had done a lot of
damage to communal peace. Hundredsof
Shiv Sainiks, BIP men and others participated in these maha artis which invariably ended with anti-Muslim propaganda that exacerbatedcommunal tensions and preparedthe atmosphere for an
Economic and Political Weekly

eruption of communal violence. In many

cases the maha artis were followed by attacks on Muslim properties and life. And
the government note mentions that there
were 33 such artis between December 26
and January 5,. i e, before the events to
which the government ascribes the riots.
The police commissioner admitted on
January 7 that the maha artis were 'aggravating'the situation. By January8, 113
such artis had already taken place. These
maha artis were allowed throughout the
period of riots and 498 of them had taken
place by February5 of which 172 had attendances of over 1,500, according to the
government. It also should be noted that
rioting in fact had begun on January 2 in
Dharavi leading to the exodus of Muslim
families (as reported in The Times of
India, January 3). This exodus swelled to
thousands within a few days. This certainly cannot be ignored as the government
note does.
In fact systematic preparations were
made much before the second phase of
riots began. Surveys had been carried out
to identify Muslim houses, rickshaws,
taxis and cars. For example, in Pratiksha
Nagar near Sion-Koliwada, such a survey
was carried out a week before the riots
and after the riots began those very
houses-identified as Muslim housesweredemolished. Bal Thackerayof course
blamed it on 'outside element' and 'antinational elements'. He even identified the
anti-national element as 'Pakistanis' one
crore of whom, according to him, had
entered the country and spread all over
India. Besides these he also mentioned the
infiltration of 'Bangla Muslims' in the
country. When it was pointed out that the
Shiv Sena had reportedly accepted its involvement in the riots, he said, "We have
been forced to get involved because our
job is to retaliate.If therewould have been
no Shiv Sena the Hindus would have been
slaughtered"
Earlier Pramod Navalkar, the Shiv
Sena's leader of opposition in the upper
house, had admitted in an interview to
Rajdeep Sardesai of The Times of India,
"Our boys were involved in the rioting"
adding "but for every five Shiv Sainiks on
the street, there were also 20 anti-social

elements involved:'Manohar Joshi, senior

Sena MLA, told Sardesai that "I will not
call them Shiv Sainiks. They were all
anguishedHindus who ere spontaneously
reactingto what happened in Jogeshwari"
(Four Hindus were burnt alive in the
Radhabai Chawl on January 8 in the
Jogeshwari slum.) Some grassroots Sena
workers told Sardesai that there were approximately 220 'active' 'shakhas' (branches) in the city. On an average, each
shakha has around 200 committed members. This itself gives the Sena an army
of 40,000 sainiks as against the police
strength of just over 30,000. According to
Sardesai "The plan decided upon in the
shakhas was simple-spread the word that
people's lives were threatened, that
temples would be destroyed and that
sophisticated arms were being brought into the city. The more active sainiks began
going through voters' lists and also finding out the names of building and shopowners in some areas. These lists were
available with the Sena shakha pramukhs
immediately after the December 6 riots."
All this clearly shows the involvement
of the Sena in the January riots in a big
way. The Sena had deliberatelyspread the
rumour that sophisticated weapons had
come for use in the riots but what is surprising is that the then police commissioner Bapat made a press statement that
there was a sustained firing from AK-47
rifle for an hour from a mosque in
Mohammad Ali Road area. He even said
that the "shells were found" though the
gun itself was not traced. This was an unfortunatestatementand the commissioner
had to admit later that no trace of an
AK-47 was found and that such a weapon
might not have been used. But to give such
a statementwhen the riots wereragingwas
highly irresponsible.
Another theory floated about these
riots was that buildershad organisedthese
riots. Apart from the fact that the builders'
organisation denied their involvement
through a press statement no such evidence was found during our investigations
except in Malad where in the first phase
too, a local builderwas probablyinvolved.
It is also maintainedthat the in-fighting
between the two factions of the Congress,
i e, one led by chief minister Sudhakar
Rao Naik and the other by Sharad Pawar
contributed to the tense situation. According to this theory the Sharad Pawar
group was fuelling the riots to destabilise
Naik ministry. It was also being said that
since Naik had got Pappu Kalaniand Bhai
Thakur-both Congress MLAs belonging
to the Sharad Pawargroup-arrested and
their unauthorised buildings demolished,
their men, in order to teach Naik a lesson,
systematically organised riots in the second phase. However, it is very difficult
to substantiate this theor9. Among the

March 20-27, 1993

This content downloaded from 103.36.84.1 on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 08:49:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

505

reasons given by Naik for the riots was

that various lobbies and mafias with connections in high places provoked the
violence and specially because he had
dared to take them on. Here he may be
hinting at those two controversial MLAs
and their clout with Sharad Pawar.But he
also mentioned the demolition activities
undertaken by the Bombay Municipal
Corporation in the minority-dominated
areas and other such incidents. There may
be some truth in the theory that some people were interested in destabilising Naik
ministry. Earlier riots were organised to
destabilise the Karnataka and Andhra
Pradesh chief ministers. Riots raged in
Hyderabad and in Karnataka until the
respective chief ministers were removed.
However,one thing is quite certain that
the Naik ministry totally failed to control
the situation which became so grim that
many from the city including Tata and
Nani Palkhiwala demanded partial emergency and the handing over of the city to
the army. The city had never witnessed
communal violence of such magnitude
ever before. Even the May 1984 riots were
nothing compared to what happened during January. The whole city went up in
flames and very few areas remained unaffected. Muslims, rich or poor, spent their
days in sheer terror. During the riots
generally poor people are considered soft
targets and it is they who die and it is they
whose properties are looted and burnt.
But during these riots in Bombay even the
richest Muslims were not safe. Their flats
located in high-rise apartment buildings
were threatened. Many had to pay protection money. Even their cars parked in the
courtyardof these buildings were in many
cases set ablaze. Hundreds of shops
belonging to Muslims were looted and torched. About 300 bakeries, mostly belonging to UP Muslims were burnt to ashes
with the result that there was a serious
shortage of bread for -many days in
Bombay. For a few days the price of bread
shot up to Rs 10 per loaf of 400 gm
against their normal price of Rs 4. Even
factories and industries were not spared.
It appeared as if it was a systematic attempt to destroy Muslims economically in
this prime commercialcity. Shops belonging to the Bohras and Khojas, the two
most peaceful Muslim communities who
hardly ever take part in any political controversy, were not spared. Hundreds of
Bohras and Khojas lost everything. Many
of them had to leave the city for other
places.
Also, it was for the first time that people fled in large numbers from the city.
Bombay never sends people back. It only
attracts them. It was only during these
riots that the exodus began and it is said
that more than 2,00,000 people left the
city, both Hindus and Muslims. Special

trainshad to be run for the purpose. Many

may never return now. Non-Maharashtrian Hindus also left for fear of being
attacked by the Shiv Sena. And some left
because they were attacked by the
Muslims.
Despite all this Naik maintained that he
had not failed in his duty. He said, "I have
taken the maximum possible measures to
bring the situation to normal. I have not
failed in my responsibility and left no
stone unturned to tackle this abnormal
situation. There was no lapse on the part
of the state administration. On the contrary it worked round the clock." He also
added that he would not resign owning
moral responsibility for the violence
because, "as the head of the state, I must
tackle the situation firmly come what may
and must not run away from the situation". How he tackled the situation is now
history. Some newspapers even likened
him to Nero who was fiddling when Rome
was burning. To inipartialobservers it appeared as if the Sena chief Bal Thackeray
was in command.
The police was totally communalised
with few exceptions. there was overwhelming evidence that the police was
siding with the Sena. Policemen even used
filthy language for the Muslim police officers in their wireless messages which are
always taped. Some messages were recorded in which the policemen on duty sent
a message asking for a fire brigade to be
made available as the miscreants had set
fire to some houses. The police officer in
police control room then inquired about
the community of those whose houses
wereset ablaze and on being told that they
were Muslims, the officer concerned said
that let them die and if anyone comes out
alive, shoot them. The Committee for
Protection of Democratic Rights has filed a suit requesting the court to take
possession of the cassettes on which the
conversation has been recorded.
People from various areas like Behrampada, Bandra complained to us that the
Shiv Sena goondas set fire to houses by
throwing petrol bombs and when they
came out to douse the fire, the police fired
upon them. Some even alleged that the
policemen were leading some miscreants.
It was also alleged-though difficult to
verify-that some policemen gave their
uniforms to the Shiv Sainiks. This may be
true or not but there is no doubt that the
Bombay police was showing open sympathy with the Sena men. Despite such
overwhelmingevidence nothing was done
to chequemate it. Police commissioner
Bapat never admitted the failure on the
part of his men but kept defending them.
Although he was later removed from his
post the action came too late. The army
was called but it had no orders to shoot.
Only a police officer could give orders to

shoot. Thus the.army was totally dependent on the poli-c and hence could not
be as effective as it could have been. This
can be illustrated by an incident at
Behrampada.
The local Shiv Sena -MLA Sarpotdar
was alleged to have playeda'role in attacks
on Behrampada. He was found in possession of a revolver and a 'gupti' and the
army arrestedhim. But the police released
him after women supporters demonstrated outside the police -station. Bal
Thackeray said that the police had done
the 'right thing. This clearly shows that
the police was taking very lenijentview of
the activities of Shiv S4jniks. Bal
Thackeray wrote highly provocative
editorials in Samna, the Sena mouthpiece
and yet no action was taken by the Naik
administration. On the other hand, Naik
phoned Thackerayasking him not to write
such provocative editorials and articles.
This also shows how weak the Naik administration was.
Prime minister Narasimha Rao was
equally ineffective. He did not stir out of
Delhi when Bombay was aflame. When
some film artists met him in Delhi requested him to go to Bombay he said hle
can do so only after Makar Sankranti on
January 14! What can be expected of a
prime ministerwho gave more importance
to his religious beliefs than to the bloodshed in Bombay? When he finally did visit
Bombay riots were already over. It was a
short visit and he merely passed through
riot-affectedareas without as much as getting down from his car the reason given
by him for not coming out of his car was
that the securityofficers did not allow him
to do so.
The prime minister was content to send
Sharad Pawarto Bombay.He made an appeal for peace but it was hardly effective.
Though the intensity of rioting decreased
in the city, it spread to other areas in
suburbs. One cannot say whether Sharad
Pawar tried really hard to stop riots or
not. However, when riots were raging in
Bombay,dissension was at its height in the
Congress. Even Sunil Dutt, a noted film
artist and an MP from Bombay tendered
his resignation from parliament to the
prime minister out of sheer disgust.
The BJP leader L K Advani too visited
Bombay on January 16. His first halt was
at Jogeshwari where four members of a
Hindu family were burnt alive by Muslim
miscreants. He too attributed the communal violence to 'foreign hand: without
of course substantiating it or specifying
which country had a hand in inciting the
riots. He visited mostly the Hindu areas
though he did talk to some Muslim victims also. He also maintained that the
riots in Bombay were intensified only
after the incident at Radhabai Chawl in
Jogeshwari. However, he desisted from

Economic and Political Weekliy

This content downloaded from 103.36.84.1 on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 08:49:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

March 20-27, 1993

saying that the reaction was out of all proportions as more than 600 persons were
killed in retaliatioh.
What was worrying most was the cruelty with which many people were killed in
Bombay. Most of the bodies were beyond
recognition as they were highly mutilated.
In some cases a person was stabbed and
then set ablaze after sprinkling petrol
while still alive to make his death more
painful and agonising. In KEM hospital
a most shocking incident occurred. The
miscreants stabbed an injured person in
a critical condition just outside the operation theatre. The miscreants thought he
might survive if the operation was successful. In fact it was a case of mistaken
identity as the person concerned was a
Hindu and the miscreants thought he was
a Muslim on account of his beard.
Apart from the fact that now miscreants could come right up to the operation theatre with arms it shows the extent
of dehumanisation of the killers and insensitivity of people to such brutal killings. It is not only the question of killing
'the other'. but of dehumanisation and
desensitivisationnot only of the killersbut
also of the community to which they
belong. Our survey also points out that
therewas, in general, acceptabilityof what
was happening. There was no protest
against it in any form. Middle class
Maharashtrians had sympathy with the
Shiv Sena and their killers. It is only very
conscious and committed people who protested or took out peace-marcbes.Workers
were also divided along communal lines.
The trade unions could not intervene at
all and this included left trade unions, as
the workers were not with them. Workers
were by and largesympathetic to the Sena.
One must understand that in such a
communally surcharged situations, the
emotional appeal of religion is far more
powerful than that of workers' unity, etc.
It is also partly the result of lack of efforts on the part of trade union leaders
to politically educate their workers. Trade
union activities have been confined, by
and large, to economic demands for
higher wages, dearness allowance, bonus,
etc. In some places the Shiv Sena successfully tried to prevent the Muslim
workers from rejoining their duties after
the riots. It happened even in the public
sector Mazgaon Docks.
In 1984 riots too the Shiv Sainiks had
tried to stop Muslim workersfrom resuming the work, but not on such a scale.
Moreover, this time it was not only
restricted to the workers. They even tried
to prevent Muslim children from going to
schools. They threatened principals of
schools not to let the Muslim children
come to their schools. Even at Lijjat
Papads_,.a women's co-operativeMuslim women were preventedfrom comEconomic and Political Wecklv

ing to work. It is this wide-ranging communalisation which poses a great danger

to our national integrity.
The BJP propaganda has had a terrible
impact on the minds of Hindus, particularly Maharashtrians.The Shiv Sena is
much cruder in its propaganda and is able
to influence the Hindu masses. And it is
they who mostly participate irvarson,loot
and murder.
In these riots some journalists were
specially targeted. Those Hindi, Marathi
and Urdu papers who wrote against the
BJP-Shiv Sena faced the wrath of the
Sainiks. Two journalists belonging to
Mahanagar were manhandled i4i the
Mahanagar office and some Urdu journalists like Harun Rashid escaped in time
from their house. But their house was razed to the ground and looted. Journalists
were never so systematically attacked
before. But it must be said to the credit
of these journalists that they stood their
ground and never gave in to such terror
tactics.

The death toll in the rioting in second

phase was quite high. The Tines of India
sources placed it at 557 on January 22,
1993.They added 99 to the official sources
which put the death toll at 458 only as the
hospital sources wereyet to report99 more
deaths to the coroner's court from where
the police compiles its figures. According
to police commissioner Bapat out of 458
killed, 288 were Muslims and 170 Hindus.
Out of all those killed, 133 died in police
firing (75 Muslims and 50 Hindus, eight
unknown), 259 in mob violence (186
Muslims, 73 Hindus) and 66 in arson (39
Hindus and 27 Muslims). About 99 dead
it is difficult to say which community they
belonged.
However, the figure of 557 is also certainly an underestimate.The death toll in
all probability will exceed 600 as many
bodies are still being discovered from
various places like nullahs, etc. Also, field
investigations show that many families
reported their men missing and they are
hoping against hope that they might be
in jail or somewhere from where they will
return one day.
Sources at the coroner'scourts said that
the numberof stabbingcases this time was
far higher than what the figures show.
Severalvictims were stabbed seriously and
then set on fire or thrown into gutters.
Their postmortems would indicate that
they died of asphyxiation or drowning,
even though the stab injuries alone would
have proved fatal. Interestingly the
number of victims of police firing, 133,
is almost the same as those killed in the
December riots. This does not bear out
the criticism in some papers that the
police was not opening fire due to heavy
criticismof its indiscriminatefiring during
the December riots. The fact that more

Muslims were killed in police firing during

the second phase shows the partial
behaviour of the police (as most of the
mob attacks in January were led by the
Shiv Sainiks).
The economic loss too was staggering
this time. It was not only due to looting
and burning of property. That was only
one aspect of it. It was more due to stoppage of production and movement of
goods. Nearly 10,000 houses were demolished or burnt and more than 1,00,000
had to live in refugee camps for various
periods of time. Many are still living in
relief camps even two months after the
event. The government has sanctioned
only Rs 5,000 for those whose shops and
homes were looted. It is a pittance. This
pittance also has not been received by all.
The values of homes lost range from
Rs 50,000 to Rs 10 lakh. Many people are
unable to return to their homes even now
not just for imaginary fear. When they
returned to get the 'panchnamas' made,
or just to survey their lost homes, they
found their neighboursuncommunicative.
In some cases, walls had been erected anq
boards put up saying, "Minorities not
wanted".
All of them want to sell their rooms and
"live with members of their community,
if possible",even if it means, as Shahabuddin of Pratiksha Nagar said, "living in
third-class surroundings compared with
my A-class area". Shahabuddin is not
alone in his sentiments. There has been
distress sale of properties on both sides,
i e, Muslims selling off properties in the
Hindu area and vice versa. Thus in a way
communal divide is complete.
Many have alreadyleft Bombay,finding
no other alternative.This has also brought
to our knowledge the inter-dependenceof
the two communities in certain areas of
economic activities. Garment exports
received serious set-back as most of the
tailors are Muslims. Exports worth crores
of rupees have been affected as the
Muslim tailors have fled to their native
places and one does not know whether
they will return at all and if so, when.
Also due to frequentlyimposed curfews
workers could not report to duty and in
many cases the industries and business
establishments themselves were located in
the curfew-bound areas and there was
tremendous loss of production. Also
goods did not move from one place to
another as truckers were not prepared to
take risks. Though it is difficult to
Economic

and lolitical
Available from

Wieeklv

M/s. EBS News Agency

1701 Sector 22B,
Chandigarh - 160 022.

March 20-27, 1993

This content downloaded from 103.36.84.1 on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 08:49:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

507

estimate total economic loss a rough

estimate puts it above Rs 10,000 crore. It
is no insignificant loss for a poor country like India.
Tata Services drew up a tentative
estimate of the total loss due to the
January riots. According to this estimate,
the loss of gross value of output of goods
and services comes to Rs 1,250 crore; the
loss of tradingbusiness Rs 1,000crore,the
loss of exports Rs 2,000 crore, the loss of
tax revenue for the government Rs 150
crore and loss of properties worth about
Rs 4,000 crore. Thus according to this
estimate the total losses come nearly to
Rs 9,000 crore. Also, add to this the compensation, etc, the government will have
to pay to the riot victimt and destruction
of their properties. It would be a staggering sum.
The central and state governments have
done nothing to inspireconfidence among
the minorities.One can hardly be sure that
such violence along communal lines will
not repeat in the future. There are no
plans to overhaul the police force and
thoroughly reorient it in a secular value.
Also, many key persons who bear direct
responsibility for planning and organising the Januaryriots have not been touched. And it is unlikely that they will be prosecuted, let alone be punished. Also, no
steps are being contemplated to make
communal propaganda a punishable of-

fence. Whatever law exists, is hardly ever

applied. The coming elections can once
again prove disastrous if the BJP fights
elections on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue.
As pointed out by some, a law is urgently
needed to make communal or sectarian
propaganda a serious criminal offence
and the candidate should automatically
stand disqualified from contesting
elections.
Also, in order to preventthe occurrence
of violence on such a scale it is for the
secular forces to start the mass contact
programmeand intensify it whereverit has
begun as in West Bengal and Bihar. The
BJP has been isolated among the political
parties but not among the masses. On the
other hand it is hoping to get a majority
in parliament in the next elections. Thus
it is necessary Forthe secular and democratic forces to start a massive mass contact programme.
Secularism cannot be saved from the
BJP-VHP onslaughts if Muslims, too, do
not reorienttheir behaviour.Their leaders
have been simply reckless and have never
acted out of sense of responsibility. Their
aggressive movements on the Shah Bano
judgment and Babri Masjid controversy
has only harmed the cause of minorities.
Minority communalism is not the best
way to fight majority communalism.
Majoritycommunalism can be challenged
only by secular forces.

Wall Street Populism

James Petras

President Clinton provides symbolic gratification to some popular

Democratic constituencies while providing substantive economic
concessions to bankers, real estate operators and high tech
capitalists.
ASKED to comment on president Clinton's economic programme, William
Kristol, chief of staff of former vicepresident Daniel Quayle, summed it up
succinctly: "What is striking labout Clinton's economic programme] is that there
is this class warfare rhetoric, but what's
creepy is how cynical it is.

. He doesn't

believe in this rhetoric. He has a cabinet

full of millionaires". To be exact, 10 of
Clinton's i 3 named cabinet members
could be millionaires-double the number
of Reagan(7) and Bush (6). Most of them
became rich during, the Reagan-Bush
speculative period of the 1980s. While
Clinton may have a cabinet that reflects
gender and racial diversity in the US, it
is not at all reflective of the class differencesof the economic system. A crucial
factor defining the new administration's

508

economic policies is the wealth and linkages of its.key membersto the class structure and economic system.
ADMINISTRATION'S MILLIONAIRES

Treasury secretary Lloyd Bentsen has

assets worth $ 5.6 million; was on the
board of banks and insurancecompanies;
owns substantial real estate holdings and
was a stronger supporter of bigger tax
reductions for business than Reagan during the 1980s. In the 1980s Bentsen supported capital gains tax cuts and held
monthly $ 10,000 a plate breakfasts for
lobbyists. Robert Rubin, Clinton's senior
economic adviser,accumulated a substantial fortune as co-chair of Goldman-Sachs
investment house (the single largest contributor to Clinton's electoral campaign)

and once appointed wrote a letter to his

former private clients: "I also look forward to continuing to work with you in
my new capacity". Roger Altman,
Bentsen's deputy assistant was vicechairperson of the Blackstone Group investment banking firm that piled up huge
profits during the mergers and acquisitions mania in the 1980s. Chief trade
negotiator Ron Brown ('representing'
blacks) earned $ 5,80,000 last year from
the law firm Patton, hoggs and Blow and
represented the Duvalier family in Haiti
and Japanese multinationals. Mickey
Kantor, US trade representative, made
S 3,14,000 from another Washington law
firm Manatt, Phelps, Phillips and Kantor.
RichardRiley,education secretary,had an
income of $ 5,68,000 as a lawyer for Aetna Life and Casualty Insurance. Warren
Christopher, the new secretary of state,
earned nearly $ 1 million from a Los
Angeles law firm representingmany major
corporations. R J Woolsey, head of the
CIA, was a director of Martin Marietta,
a military-industrialcorporation, makers
of the MX missile. Woolsey recently
represented McDonnel Douglas and
General Dynamics in a law suit against the
government for cancelling purchases of
the A-12 airplane. H R Cohen, a top Clinton economic adviser, was a partner in
Sullivan and Cromwellrepresentingmany
major banks including Bank of America.
Eugene Ludwig, a law partner of Covington and Burling which represents the
fourth largest US banking company, Nationsbank, heads Clinton's working group
making recommendations on banking
regulations-and de-regulations.It should
be noted that bankers contributed heavily to Clinton's electoral campaign. Clinton's senior adviser for policy development, Ira Magaziner,a principalfigure involved in 'reforming' the health system,
is a multi-millionairewho made his money
advising corporate clients in the 1980s
(charging more than $ 500 per hour). In
the national health care industry (as in his
private practice) Magaziner is an ardent
advocate of 'free market competition',
with a firm state hand.
The fundamental point is the sharp
contrast between the speculative banking,
real estate and military industrial
background of Clinton's major economic
appointees and the populist rhetoric and
image projected in the US and overseat.
The apparent contradiction between Wall
Street appointees and populist rhetoric
is resolved by examining Clinton's economic programme and who pays and who
benefits.
TAXES AND DEFICITS

During the electoralcampaign Clinton's

programmatic statement P"tting People

Economic and Political Weekly

This content downloaded from 103.36.84.1 on Tue, 03 Nov 2015 08:49:54 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

March 20127, 1993