A Factual Response to the Hate Attack on the India Development and Relief Fund (IDRF)
 © Friends of India and Authors of the Report
Next >>

 

V. THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK FUNDED BY IDRF[47]

"Nar Seva Narayan Seva - Service to Humanity is Service to God”

IDRF’s work reflects the organization’s interest in the interaction and convergence of development and relief work, particularly in relation to the needs and welfare of the poor.  As such, IDRF has a broad focus and does not restrict its activities to any particular set of projects.  However, the projects with which IDRF is involved will always reflect IDRF’s pledge to:

·         Create self help, rather than “welfare dependence”

·         Serve economically and socially disadvantaged people irrespective of caste, sect, region or religion

·         Operate, manage and monitor project activities without any overhead costs

Typically IDRF projects range from building schools for needy children, orphanages and rehabilitation centers for disaster victims, to urban slums and tribal area development schemes.  The project areas may be quite diverse, but all address relevant social and economic issues. 

A. Relief and Rehabilitation Work

While the focus is on development activities, IDRF has recognized the need to provide relief and rehabilitation services to victims of natural calamities such as earthquakes and cyclones.  Of the $6.1 million disbursed by IDRF since 1996[48], about $2.1 million has gone towards relief and rehabilitation, the majority in alleviating the hardship to people who suffered from three devastating events: the Orissa cyclone in 1999[49]; the Latur Earthquake in 1993; and the Gujarat Earthquake in 2001. 

Relief and rehabilitation is mostly focused around infrastructure (re-building schools and homes, etc).  Here are some examples of relief and rehabilitation work funded by IDRF:

Orissa Cyclone

·        Sookruthi (Bhubaneshwar, Orissa) – IDRF granted about $117,000 to Sookruthi for rehabilitation work.  Sookruthi has utilized the funds for the following:

·        300 tube wells for drinking water

·        Self-employment through Sriphal biplab (50,000 coconut saplings)

·        Gobardhan project (milk-yielding cows for 111 families)

·        Gram Seva medical van

·        Reconstruction of houses for six workers and also deep-water rice cultivation   

Gujarat Earthquake

·        Sewa Bharathi (Gujarat) – the IDRF has funded the reconstruction of two villages: Jivapar in Morbi Taluka (188 houses) and Visnagar in Dasada Taluka (155 houses).  The total grant to Sewa Bharathi was $790,000.  In addition to these villages, Sewa Bharathi has used these funds to reconstruct several schools that were destroyed by the earthquake.  Both IDRF funded villages have been completed and occupied. 

·        In addition to Sewa Bharathi, the IDRF has funded 20 more NGOs including Anoopam Mission, Art of Living Foundation, SATH and Manav Kalyan Trust, who are providing rehabilitation services to the earthquake victims.  The IDRF teams monitor the progress of every project. 

B. Development

IDRF has targeted its development efforts on projects designed to impact the lives of women and children.  This focus springs from a belief that such efforts will necessarily aid the entire family.  In addition, attention and money are also spent on fulfilling healthcare and children’s education needs in rural and urban slum areas.  Since 1996, IDRF has contributed a total of $4 million towards development work, using the following criteria:

·        Provide services to impoverished masses in IDRF focus areas: education, children, women, healthcare, and tribal welfare. 

·        Efficiently execute projects with minimal overhead. 

·        Possess successful track record of project execution. 

·        Demonstrate the trust of the local population that they serve all needy Indians without discriminating against any religion, caste, or creed. 

 

C. Misrepresentation of the IDRF-Funded Work (See Appendix M for additional rebuttal)

All accusations made in the report published by Sabrang/FOIL Communications are merely the authors’ opinions and ideological hatred packaged into accusations and implications.  The “evidence” cited is based on secondary sources such as newspaper reports, without any primary evidence either from appropriate government authorities or other acceptable proof-points.  The report makes several serious accusations that question the integrity of the IDRF, IDRF volunteers, IDRF supported NGOs, and IDRF donors.  The IDRF rejects all these accusations and provides the facts that speak otherwise.  In this section we present a core set of accusations made in the Sabrang/FOIL report and the IDRF’s answers to the same. 

Accusation # 1: IDRF has been “duping” donors including corporations by not revealing NGO information to the donors. 

Basis: Sabrang/FOIL Authors’ conclusions

Fact: The charge of “duping” donors (including corporations) does not stand up to scrutiny as most of the relevant information (except Sabrang/FOIL authors’ own opinions and their pre-determined conclusions about IDRF and IDRF supported NGOs) is easily accessible from IDRF’s web site (www.idrf.org) and other web sites maintained by IDRF supported NGOs.  The IDRF has been unequivocal in its support of the NGOs in question, and its donors have been informed of the NGOs and their activities through the IDRF web site as well as with individual printed communication with relevant project reports.  Furthermore, at the time of IDRF’s founding and since then, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service has been appropriately informed about all NGOs being supported by the IDRF.  Hence, the accusation of “duping donors” is completely false.  The report exemplifies the authors’ irrational bias or pre-conceived notions against the IDRF and IDRF-supported NGOs. 

It is remarkable that out of the “votes” and associated comments exhibited by the Sabrang/FOIL’s “Stop Funding Hate” Petition web site, there is not a single comment that claims to be from any IDRF donor, former or present, complaining about being “duped” or anything similar to that. 

Accusation # 2: IDRF funds “Hindu Supremacist” organizations that are connected to RSS, and hence, funds “Hate.”

Basis: Sabrang/FOIL Authors’ conclusions

Fact: The labeling as “Hindu Supremacist” of those IDRF-supported NGOs is based on the authors’ own criteria and opinions.  This, in turn, is primarily based on their ideological and political inclinations.  Here are the facts about IDRF-supported NGOs:

All the IDRF-supported NGOs that are accused of being “Hindu Supremacist” organizations are legitimate NGOs registered with appropriate Central or State government authorities in India. 

Most of these NGOs have been working for several decades in their chosen fields, consistently monitored and funded by several governments – Congress, BJP, and even Marxist governments.  For example, the NGOs in West Bengal supported by the IDRF include, Manav Seva Prathisthan, 14, Princep Street, Calcutta - 700 072; Poorvanchal Kalyan Ashram, 161/1 Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Calcutta - 700 007; Vanabandhu Parishad, Calcutta (Friends of Tribal Society), 52, Zakaria Street, Calcutta 700073; and the Vastuhara Sahayata Samiti, Keshaw Bhawan, 9A Abhedananda Street, Calcutta - 700 006.  None of these NGOs have been found guilty by any government authorities, judicial commissions, and other non-partisan bodies.  These NGOs help the impoverished masses, provide adults and children with appropriate education and healthcare, and enable them to lead better lives. 

Accusation # 3: IDRF did not raise funds for Gujarat violence victims, when it raised funds for Bangladeshi-Hindu victims. 

Basis: Sabrang/FOIL Authors’ conclusions

Fact: As a matter of policy, IDRF does not raise funds for victims of communal violence.  IDRF does not have the resources to assist in every situation.  IDRF did not raise funds for the victims of the “Godhra train carnage,” in which 58 Hindus including women and children were burned alive, either.  Hence, the IDRF did not discriminate against Muslims, when it did not raise funds for post-Godhra violence.  The Gujarat government gave Rs. 200,000 (about $4179)[50] to each family that lost a loved one in the Godhra train massacre, and the following communal riots. 

Regarding funds for Bangladeshi Hindu victims, the effort to raise funds was a donor-designated project.  Donor-designated projects are a service the IDRF offers to any donor to fund his/her project of choice.  The IDRF does not have any influence on how the donor-designated project funds are spent. 

Accusation # 4: IDRF raised funds for 9/11 victims and Kargil War only because the perpetrators were Muslims.

Basis: Sabrang/FOIL Authors’ conclusions

Fact: After the terrible tragedy of 9/11/2001, IDRF rose to the occasion and contributed $10,000 to the New York Fire Department.  Anyone or everyone with an iota of humanity offered to help the victims within their own means. 

The IDRF raised funds for the Kargil War victims.  The war started when Pakistan occupied the Kargil sector in India’s Jammu and Kashmir state, and ended with India successfully driving out Pakistan from its territory[51].  The Sabrang/FOIL report claims that “IDRF raised funds for…Kargil War only because the perpetrators were Muslims.”  It is interesting that Biju Mathew focuses on the religion of those who attacked India and who dismembered Indian soldiers and burnt them, and not the country that was behind the attack – Pakistan.  Would India have not responded with force if “Chinese soldiers” had attacked India?  Would the IDRF not donated to the welfare of soldiers’ families if the attackers happened to be of another religion?  In fact, among the soldiers helped by the IDRF are not only Hindus but Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Muslim and Buddhists for the Indian Army recruits people of all religions unlike the Pakistani Army which, we believe, is almost entirely made up of Muslims.

As an Indian-American organization with deep roots in India, the IDRF has responsibility to help victims of the Kargil War.  The IDRF has disbursed the funds through a well-known organization that works with Veterans of Indian Armed Forces.  Several Muslim soldiers in the Indian Army have been helped through the IDRF funds.  The authors’ accusation that Kargil War victims were funded only because Muslims were the perpetrators defies all reason and logic.  It is also absurd to suggest that Indian soldiers and their families be deemed less deserving of aid because the enemy happened to be Muslim!  As an added irony, the adversary  in this case was a nation whose ideology is defined by its fealty to the Organization of Islamic States, and as such is hardly a model of minority tolerance.      

The disregard that the Sabrang/FOIL report authors show for India’s war veterans, and American victims of Islamic terrorism, speaks volumes about their double standards and hatred for all free, democratic, multi-ethnic societies.

Accusation # 5: IDRF has been funding Sewa Bharati, Madhya Pradesh whose license was revoked by the Congress Party government in Madhya Pradesh in February 2002.

Basis: A news report  - http://www.indianexpress.com/ie20020228/nat6.html

Fact: Sewa Bharati, Madhya Pradesh was never stripped of its license, as claimed in the Sabrang/FOIL report.  Our research shows that an organization called Sewa Bharati Shiksha Samiti based in Indore had its license temporarily suspended by the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, citing three reasons: (a) Involvement in activities other than mentioned in its Bylaws (organizing Hindu Sangam, at Jhabua), (b) not submitting audited accounts, and (c) purchasing properties without prior information.  An appeal against the order was made before Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industries, Madhya Pradesh State Government on February 11, 2002.  The following arguments were presented in that appeal: (a) Order has not substantiated the claim of indulgence in “other activities”, and that Sewa Bharati Shiksha Samiti did not organize the Hindu Sangam; (b) that there is a provision for late submission of audited accounts by paying a fine.  Many other organizations have availed this provision; (c) there is a provision that an organization can give information even after purchasing the property; and (d) no opportunity to present the organization’s view was provided.  After hearing arguments, the Ministry of Commerce and Industries, Government of Madhya Pradesh issued an order (order no.  F 1-24/2002/11/B) on May 16, 2002 revoking the earlier suspension order (order no.  S-7083/2002 dated February 5, 2002) by citing discrepancy in the procedure such as not mentioning which rules have been violated by Sewa Bharati Shiksha Samiti.  However, the above-cited newspaper did not bother to carry out this news – which would have illustrated that the real problem is political harassment and singling out of Sewa Bharati by the Congress Party-ruled state Government of Madhya Pradesh. 

Accusation # 6: A vast majority (in excess of 80%) of the IDRF designated funds were sent to organizations controlled by RSS, VHP, while only 10% of the funds were earmarked for Sangh charities.

Basis: Analysis based on data available on IDRF’s web site. 

Fact: The Sabrang/FOIL authors and their spokespersons have repeatedly asserted that their report is the result of “meticulous research.”  However, it is important to note that when a researcher starts with a pre-determined conclusion and simply puts together disparate information, the end result is obviously misleading.  Let us present an example: As per the IDRF’s policies, it keeps 10 percent of the designated donation for its development projects including tribal welfare projects conducted by the Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram (VKA).  This fact is stated clearly in all donation forms and every donor is made aware of it.  This does not apply to the funds raised for relief and rehabilitation of victims of natural calamities and foreign invasions (Latur earthquake-1993, Orissa cyclone-1999, Kargil-1999, Gujarat earthquake-2001).  A major portion of the IDRF’s funds (almost 50 percent) is designated for purposes of relief and rehabilitation alone and not for the IDRF’s choice of projects.

The accusation further discounts the fact that majority of the designated donations were earmarked for so-called Sangh organizations upon donors’ requests. 

Accusation # 7: Nearly 70% of IDRF funds go to “Hinduization” efforts.

Basis: Analysis based on data available on the IDRF’s web site and authors’ scheme of rating organizations.

Fact: The term “Hinduization,” though creatively pejorative, is never given a clear conceptual definition by the Sabrang/FOIL report. What constitutes “Hinduization?”  We attempted to pin down the logic that led to the coinage of this term and its application to organizations funded by IDRF.   It quickly became apparent that the anti-IDRF report’s authors were driven not by logic and fact-based investigation -- but by sheer ideological bias.

If chanting Sanskrit slokas is construed as “Hinduization,” then one is led to ask: would an individual be considered “Christianized” if he or she participated in a rendition of the hymn “Abide With Me,” known to be a favorite with Mahatma Gandhi?

Thousands, if not millions of Hindu schoolchildren graduated from English-medium missionary schools in the decades following India’s Independence.  Some of the writers of this report remember being made to recite The Lord’s Prayer every single day at school.  Even though there was no alternative offered, this daily ritual was tolerated.  It was taken as a reminder to reset one’s moral compass each morning, nothing more.

Why then, should any sinister intent or agenda be ascribed to Sanskrit verses such as the following: 

Sarve bhavantu sukhinah sarve santu niramayah,

Sarve bhadraani pashyantu

Ma kashchit duhkhabhag bhavet. 

Om shantih, shantih, shantih.   

“May everybody be happy.  May all be free from ailments.  May they see what is auspicious.  May no one be subject to misery.  May there be peace, peace, peace.”

 

Om asato ma sadgamaya,

Tamaso ma jyotirgamaya,

Mrityor ma amritam gamaya.

 

“OM.  Lead us from the unreal to the real, from darkness to light, from death to immortality.” (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1:3:28).

We submit that only the narrowest of ideologues would impute religious coercion to the group chanting of verses such as the above, rather than see it as an attempt to transmit values.

This is one more instance of the Sabrang/FOIL authors’ sweeping conclusions that reflect more prejudiced conjecture than systematic research.  There is scant evidence of first-hand observation or interviews in their catalogue of damning indictments of IDRF-funded NGOs.  (Please see Appendix K for a first-hand report about educational efforts among tribal people).

The so-called “Hinduizing” NGOs are in fact providing yeoman services in the areas of education, healthcare, managing orphanages, rehabilitation work, and other social service projects helping the poor, the destitute, the neglected, and the impoverished. We provide a few examples here to establish that the Sabrang/FOIL authors did not do their homework before making wild assertions.

After the Gujarat earthquake of 2001 the IDRF donated $760,000 to Sewa Bharati, Gujarat for rehabilitation of victims.  In their zeal to associate this sizable grant with the so-called “Hinduization” effort, the authors hide the fact that Sewa Bharati used this grant for building houses and schools for earthquake victims.  With the help of an IDRF grant, Sewa Bharati rebuilt two villages: Jivapar in Morbi Taluka (188 houses) and Visnagar in Dasada Taluka (155 houses).  More information on the Gujarat earthquake rehabilitation efforts can be found at www.idrf.org and in (Appendix I) to this report.

The following organizations are accused of aiding the so-called “Hinduization” effort, but the Sabrang/FOIL authors fail to substantiate their claims.  The authors merely slap the label “Hindu” or “Hinduization” by conflating any Hindi/Sanskrit name with “Hinduization.”  Some of the money received by these organizations went to donor-designated projects.  Any serious investigator could have simply called the IDRF and asked for information on these organizations or projects.

But that is not what the Sabrang/FOIL authors did.  In coming up with their “classification,” scheme, the authors cynically, deliberately and with utter disregard for any norms of academic honesty proceeded with their own caricature.  They did so knowing that most members of the media and the many “South Asia experts” would not bother to investigate deeper (See Appendix I)[52]:

The  “South Asia experts” have in particular, despite being personally contacted and asked to check into the facts, preferred to hide behind their professional titles in their refusal to admit a rush to judgment.

A Case Study: One of the organizations that the IDRF has supported is the Meghani Foundation.  This charitable foundation registered in India donates money to worthy and registered institutions in India. The foundation does this after conducting a detailed analysis of their projects, their office bearers, and the budget for each proposed project.  The Meghani Foundation focuses on development in the tribal areas of India, where some of the most impoverished and illiterate people of India live.  It was involved in relief work in Gujarat, India after the tragic earthquake of 2001, and has ongoing projects to promote literacy and education. 

The founders of The Meghani Foundation are Abul and Jyoti Meghani.  Jyoti Meghani is the Executive Director of The Meghani Foundation.  They visit  Foundation-supported projects twice a year to ensure that the money allocated is being used appropriately and is benefiting the intended people.  They remain in touch through phone, snail mail, and e-mail with people who are working at the local level in India with the institutions supported by The Meghani Foundation.

The foundation is named after Zaverchand Meghani, whom Mahatma Gandhi called the “National Poet.”  He is known throughout Gujarat for writing 50 books and plays in his short life, and recording the folklore of that state. He enjoys the same stature as Mark Twain or Charles Dickens in the West.  The government of India recently issued a postage stamp in his honor.

One project supported by the IDRF through The Meghani Foundation is the Shri Sarvodaya Saraswati Mandir (SSSM), an educational non-profit organization.  It operates 16 secondary schools, 4 higher secondary schools, and a Primary Teachers’ Training College in remote villages.  More than 400 students and 40 staff members reside in the campus of Babapur.

Another big project supported by the IDRF through The Meghani Foundation is the Gram Seva Sabha (GSS), in the Valsad district of south Gujarat - a very poor and downtrodden region with a large tribal population.  The GSS is an institution to improve socio-economic conditions, to improve health, and to spread education.  Among their many educational activities is a tribal girls’ hostel in the village of Bilpudi.  This facility serves an important need as the literacy rate and educational level among tribal women is much lower than for men.

The Meghani Foundation through IDRF also funded a power generator and air conditioner for the Computer Training Center at Nandigram Ashram in Nandigram, Gujarat.  The Meghani Foundation, IDRF, and the Nandigram Ashram believe that training in computers and the Internet opens up a host of educational and career opportunities for marginalized communities. Giving individuals in these communities marketable skills promotes their economic advancement, which in turn ultimately benefits the entire community.

The Meghani Foundation does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, political view, sexual orientation, language, or color[53].

Here are some other IDRF supported NGOs and the real activities that they are engaged in: 

 

Organization/ NGO

Facts

1

KBC Zilla Parishad High School

A government school in Andhra Pradesh

2

Smt.  Misri Bai Kedia Charitable Trust

This organization is running projects for empowerment of women in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. 

3

Lokniketan

(Gujarat)

A cursory look at its website http://www.lokniketan.org/ will show that it is inspired by Gandhian values of serving humanity, and was started by those associated with Seva Dal (A Congress Party affiliated voluntary organization). 

4

Arpana Research & Charitable Trust (Karnal, Haryana)

Provides health and socio-economic services to the poor.  More information is available at: http://t8web. lanl.  gov/people/rajan/AIDS-india/MYWORK/hivindia2001.html

http://www.arpana.org/support/support-service.htm

5

Center for Development of Advanced Computing

A research organization. See http://www.cdacindia.com/ An individual donor-designated project in Karnataka.

6

National Education Society (Karnataka)

A secular organization according to the report writers, yet accused of being busy in “Hinduization” effort.  Dr. Narashimhaiah, a Gandhian, a nuclear physicist, a former Vice Chancellor of Bangalore University, well-known for setting up the committee to investigate miracles and other verifiable superstitions, a noted educationist, he is now the President of National Education Society. 

7

Anuradha Engineering College (Maharashtra) 

A government approved engineering college.  (http://www.educationinfoindia.com/engg/auanu.html)

8

Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Vaidyakiya Pratishthan (Maharashtra)

A medical institute serving the poor without discrimination based on religion, caste or creed”.  Vaidyakiya Pratishthan” translates to “Medical Institute” and is NOT engaged in any so-called “Hinduization” efforts. 

9

Educate the Children-India (Mumbai)

An NGO focusing on education.  This is a secular organization according to report writers, yet accused of being busy in the “Hinduization” effort. 

10

Jnana Prabodhini (Maharashtra)

A well-reputed NGO, Jnana Prabodhini (http://www.jnanaprabodhini.org/) has also received grants from organizations such as ASHA and AID. 

11

Vanavasi Kalyan Kendra (Thane, Maharashtra)

Mainly working to raise the health, hygiene, nutrition, economic, and living standards of tribal people.  The IDRF has funded its mobile medical van project. 

12

Vatsalya Trust (Mumbai)

Runs an orphanage home.  Another U.S. based charity, the Maharashtra Foundation has also funded it in past. 

13

Uchabali High School (Bhubaneshwar, Orissa)

This is an educational institution providing education based on Orissa State educational standards.  According to the report authors, this is a “Hinduization” effort even though they cannot pinpoint what “Hinduization” takes place in this school.  More information about this school is available at

http://www.mycalnet.org/home/oriyasevaka. asp

14

Chaudhry Charan Singh Girl’s Hostel (Rajasthan)

This is a girls’ hostel.  Apparently, no information was available to the report writers, but they still labeled it as a “Hinduization” effort.  There are many educational institutions, including universities, named after Charan Singh, one of India’s Prime Ministers. 

15

Government Secondary School (Nibipura, Rajasthan)

A government-run school, but according to the report authors it is apparently involved in “Hinduization” effort. 

16

Grameen Mahila Shikshan Sansthan (Sikar, Rajasthan)

(Translation: Village Women’s Education Center).  Apparently, no information was available to the report authors, but they still labeled it as “Hinduization” effort. 

17

Gramotthan Vidyapeeth Didwana (Hanumangarh)

(Translation: Village Empowerment Education Center).  Apparently, no information was available to the report authors, but they still labeled it as a “Hinduization” effort. 

18

Kisan Chhatrawas Nawalgarh (Jhunjhunu)

(Translation: Farmers Hostel).  Apparently, no information was available to the report authors, but they still labeled it as “Hinduization” effort. 

20

Naya Jyoti Charities Trust (Chennai, Tamilnadu)

This NGO runs a senior citizen home.  It is accused of participating in a “religious effort” by the Sabrang/FOIL authors!

21

Sevalaya (Chennai, Tamilnadu)

Sevalaya runs a free school (recognized by the State Government of Tamil Nadu) for the children at the orphanage and surrounding villages; a free medical center; and a free library.  It has also received funding from ASHA.

22

Dr. Ram Kumar Gayatri Devi Shiksha Association Etah (Uttar Pradesh)

An educational institution named after a person.  Apparently, no information was available to the report authors, but they still labeled it as “Hinduization” effort. 

23

Ramakrishna Mission Sevashram (Hardwar, Uttar Pradesh)

Runs a hospital catering to more than three lakh patients annually, but report authors think that IDRF has funded a “religious effort”. 

Ramakrishna Mission received honorable mention by the UNESCO Madanjeet Singh Prize for Promotion of Tolerance and Non-violence for 2002. 

24

Sri Ram Gram Vikas Samiti Nagauri (Meerut, Uttar Pradesh)

(Translation of “Gram Vikas Samiti” – Village Development Committee).  Apparently, no information was available to the report authors, but they still labeled it as “Hinduization” effort. 

25

Sewa Bharati Gujarat  (Ahmedabad)

IDRF funds have been utilized for reconstructing two villages and several schools.  These villages have already been completed and are already occupied. 

26

Shree Navtanpuri Dham (Jamnagar, Gujarat)

IDRF has funded this NGO to reconstruct schools that are damaged in the earthquake. 

27

Miraj Medical Center

It is a healthcare center and is affiliated with the Church of North India.  It is the only complete healthcare entity in a 150-mile radius. 

 

 

Accusation # 8: Of the total of $4,467,605 disbursements … a little over a quarter are donor-designated funds.  Donor designated funds are those monies that are directed to a specific charity by the donor and thus are funds that IDRF has no control over vis-à-vis its disbursement.  Therefore, only $3.26 million is under the direct control of IDRF and is disbursed to charities identified solely by it. 

Basis: Analysis based on data available on IDRF’s web site. 

Fact:  It is not clear how the report writers came to the conclusion that only about 25 percent of the IDRF funds are donor-designated.  The IDRF’s annual reports available on the web site mark some grants as (fully or partially) donor designated.  While other grants do not have any such identification marked, the report writers conveniently ignore the fact that majority of the IDRF funds are in fact earmarked by the donors for projects run by the IDRF’s NGO partners for over a decade (e.g.,  Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram, Seva Bharati, Swami Vivekananda Medical Mission, Vikas Bharati, and Single Teacher Schools)

IDRF has been mentioning the list of NGOs, which will receive its grants for any financial year, before it sends its annual appeal.  In most cases, the donors designate one or more of these NGOs to be the recipients of their donations.  (These are not donor-designated funds, yet the IDRF has to accord the wishes of its donors in this case.)


[47] We thank the IDRF for granting permission to use a variety of arguments presented in this chapter that the IDRF has compiled and will be presenting in their own rebuttal to the Sabrang/FOIL report

[48] Since inception the IDRF has raised about $10 million. 

[50] Op. cit footnote 16 above on rupee-dollar exchange rate

[51] For a brilliant summary of the Kargil conflict see J.  N.  Dixit (2002), India and Pakistan in War and Peace, New Delhi, Books Today.

[52] That many of these South Asia experts are viscerally opposed to the RSS and its affiliates can be seen from a variety of academic discussion lists.  See also the five part series of articles written by Yvette Rosser at Sulekha.com titled, “The Groan-I: Loss of Scholarship and High Drama in 'South Asian' Studies” (http://www.sulekha.com/articledesC.asp?cid=261809), and Rajiv Malhotra’s article titled, “RISA-Lila: Wendy’s Child Syndrome” in Sulekha.com, http://www.sulekha.com/column.asp?cid=239156

[53] The Meghani Foundation, 37808 Fruitwood Court, Fremont, CA 94536 USA. Email jyoti@eyepiece.com

 

Next >>