What is the Nation we want to be? – Food for Thought
by Amit Malviya
A friend recently wrote a very poignant observation on the US society. Several questions were inherent in his comments. I am taking the liberty of producing the content of the mail here.
Quote
One very significant aspect of the US society that we noticed here was the absence of strong bonding in society, even at the nuclear level.
Though the country might have progressed economically and technologically, there seems to be a void in the social sphere. Also people seem to be driven by rules of society but with little passion, there seems to be an underlying sense of resentment, which is very subtle and may even be invisible to them.
This is a great country which promotes freedom of speech and has a good non-discriminatory judicial and religious system but there is so much emphasis on being independent and protecting one’s personal space that people are living lives of isolation even though functioning according to the rules of society. So they are resorting to alternate means to satisfy their longing for being cared for, but none of it is giving them the happiness that they seek. The proponents of their religion are also not helping much since they seem to be ill equipped to understand the root cause of the malaise, themselves being a product of the same system.
The reason I mention this is because I see a turn for the worse in our Indian society as well. Embracing capitalism in all its glory seems to be draining the life forces from our social ecosystem as well. Material possessions are increasingly being projected as the means to a happier life.
It makes us marvel at the great insight which the creators of our religion had. It is so relevant for anyone practicing it and goes beyond barriers of Time, Space and Community. A lot of organizations are leading a resurgence of such a society and doing great work but I am not sure if they are being able to keep pace with the change. There seems to be an inherent though hidden aspect of capitalism which promotes greed and leads to deterioration of values. Not sure about other countries, but Japan seems to have been able to balance a strong family oriented culture yet promoting capitalism.
I feel it is better to have sanity in our social structure than aim for economic prosperity at the cost of our social balance.
Unquote
The question that we need to ask ourselves is - What is the Nation we want to be ? Do let us know what you think ?
Tomorrow: Possible solution and challenges
Didigiri
by Sudipto Das
Mamta Banerjee has provoked the media to coin a new term - didigiri. It’s not that we didn’t have fiery didis or behens in the past. Margaret Elizabeth Noble, christened ‘Sister’ Nivedita by Rabindranath, was no doubt a fiery didi or behen. Generally Rani Lakshmibai is not thought as a didi, nevertheless, she was indeed a fiery lady. History will point us to so many fiery didis. But still the term ‘didigiri’ was never used for any of them. It seems to have been reserved forever for Mamta-didi. That’s indeed an achievement for our beloved Didi, but I can’t say if it’s a great or ‘un’great one!!
Didi’s recent surprise victory in West Bengal is being perceived by her as the attestation of her electorate to her fiery opposition, often quite irrational, to land acquisition by the government for private companies. Her oppsotion has cost West Bengal the prestigious Nano factory from the Tatas. It’s true that the way West Bengal government has handled the entire issue of land acquisition was indeed very undemocratical and heinous. Some credit surely goes to Didi for bringing the Left front government in West Bengal at task. Without her opposition the nation won’t have known the atrocities and the corruptions that the Left has been indulging in over the past three decades in Bengal and elsewhere. But at the same time it’s also of utomost interest to make sure that the path towards industrialization of rural India is not met with such blockages. It’s here that BJP has to play a great role as opposition in the center.
It’s beyond doubt that to provide the growing population of India with effective employment (not the type of NREGS) industrialization is the only way. Agriculture doesn’t generate enough revenue compared to the people employed in it. The much needed employment and keeping pace with the high GDP growth need extensive industrialization. China’s is a very good example how industrialization can impact GDP and overall economy. It’s not recommended to follow everything that a communist and closely guarded China did. Nevertheless, there are several things that are worth following. For industrialization, the foremost thing that government has to do is setup an efficient policy for procurement of land that not only has a human face but also makes proper business sense. It’s here that the opposition can play a great role in bridging the gaps between UPA & Didi and help the country in a big way.
Land acquisition is a double edged sword which has to be handled with lot of care and prudence. The people who can be negatively impacted immediately are the ones whose lands are acquired. But in the long run the same people would be benefited in several ways once the industries are setup. It’s the role of the political parties to work at the grass root levels and explain the long term benefits of industrialization. Also at the same time the land deals should be very transparent and financially viable both parties - those whose lands are being acquired and the industries. The Left did really a very shoddy job in making the dealings transparent. But what Mamta did was actually throwing the baby along with the bath water.
I’m sure with the increased focus on industrialization, the issue of land acquisition would crop up in several states and one of the most important things that the government has to finalize is a good and efficient policy for it. I’d like to see BJP doing a really great job here to counter Didigiri!!
Shame at Sharm Al Sheikh
by Amit Malviya
It is often said that diplomacy is an art. It is evidently clear by now that both Dr Singh and Mr Krishna are inept at handling high level diplomacy. This has been reinforced by the way we as a Nation have responded to less than fair treatment being meted out to Indian students in Australia, concessions given away to US in the End User Monitoring Agreement compromising India’s security and sovereignty, accepting caps on emissions at the Climate Change summit, avoidable faux pass when Hillary Clinton (remember Krishna got a lesson from Hillary on how to exchange dossiers) visited India and most recently the sell out to Pakistan at Sharm al Sheikh.
It is no coincidence that the opposition, media, intelligentsia, opinion makers and even a section of the Government is seeing India’s strategic position being compromised in the understandings / agreements recently entered into by the Government.
It is without doubt that the joint statement issued by India and Pakistan at Sharm al Sheikh has severely compromised India’s position. It has a) accused India of fomenting trouble in Baluchistan and b) delinked the composite dialogue from action on terror. Inclusion of these references in the joint statement violates India’s stand against Pakistan. Never in the past has India ever given such concessions to Pakistan. Following the joint statement, a report has appeared in Dawn saying that Pakistan has handed a dossier to India highlighting its role in Baluchistan and attack on Srilankan players in Lahore. Not that one should loose sleep over the Dawn report, we also can’t deny the fact that we have handed over the advantage to Pakistan.
PM, the nice man he is, has defended this joint statement by saying that India has nothing to hide. This is a nice statement if it came from a political novice and not from the head of a State. The MoS in the External Affair Ministry, Shashi Tharoor, has a completely different take on the joint statement. He said that such joint statements are not legally valid and therefore should not be a matter of concern. Was he trying to imply that the document that the PM has signed is not even worth the piece of paper it is printed on or does he not know that in 1965 we handed over the Haji Pir Pass (critical to dominate the LoC) despite the military objections as part of one such joint agreement or including the words “outstanding issues” in the 1972 Shimla Agreement allowed Pakistan to revive the Kashmir issue all over again.
I am sure he is a smart man to realize the blunder but he obviously sees himself more as a politician than a former diplomat. While a statement like this could have cost him his job in UN, he is only ensuring that he is furthering his political career by defending the PM.
The Foreign Secretary has gone on record saying that it is a case of bad drafting (I hope that is indeed the case). Former diplomats have pointed out that the joint statement should include only what both the countries agree on. If there is a point of disagreement, then it should not find its way to the joint statement. But still the Government and Congress Party continue to defend the joint statement, at least in the public domain. Their compulsion is understandable.
As the PM rises in the House today to clarify the statement, it is likely that he will not have anything credible to say beyond what we already know. Nevertheless the country has the right to know why is the Congress led Government gambling with India’s pride ? Is it that Mr Singh realizes that he has very little time in office and wants to make a mark for himself in history ? While Dr Manmohan Singh will be remembered as the Regent who stood guard till the crown prince was ready to take over, he is clearly getting ambitious. This was evident in the way he defended the Nuclear deal and now his attempts to script a new chapter in Indo-Pak diplomacy. While I wish him luck, I only hope he will not compromise India’s interest. This I hope is not much to ask.
I also wonder sometime, purely based on how we as a Nation come across on global stage, that we have lost sense of pride, the realization that we are a power house and have a dominant role to play in the region. We dismiss trouble, which could potentially destabilize us, in neighbouring states as “their internal matter”. Assault on Indian students is a mere Law and Order problem of Australia. Can you imagine US reacting to injustice against their countrymen in another country in the same vein ? How do we explain our tolerance to repeated terrorist attacks on India ? Are we too resilient or perhaps don’t like confrontation to the extent that we are ok even if we appear weak and timid ?
It is time that we got up and faced the world as a self assured Nation capable of dominating world politics. Aspiring to be a super power is also about behaving like one !
Is Idiotbox the Solution?
by Amit Malviya
“If there is electricity, people will watch TV late into the night and fall asleep. They won’t get a chance to produce children” - Ghulam Nabi Azad, Union Health Minister
This is a statement made by the honourable Health Minister on the World Population Day. He also suggested that women should marry at the age of 29 to 30 in order to control population growth in the country. Both these statements reflect a poor understanding of the challenge at hand and worse the Minister’s appreciation of the social order in the country. In the ensuing paragraphs, I will highlight specific instances to bring out the enormity of task at hand (population control) and what the Health Ministries’ priorities should be.
A not so distant relative of mine in my native village had eleven children. Only ten survived. It was strange that at one point of time the mother and daughter were both expecting. Let me clarify - they were educated, well to do and also had television ! She was in fact a teacher in the village school and eventually retired as the principal. So why did they have so many children ? Their desire to have a male child kept them in pursuit and it was their destiny that they had to wait this long. This is not an isolated instance. Eleven is an exceptionally big number but it is not unusual for people to have four to five children only because they are looking for a family heir. The solution is to educate the people and drive home the point that it does not matter if it is a boy or girl because in this changing social order both have equal opportunities. There was a time when such social messages were broadcasted with regularity but one does not see them too often now. Is it because a lot of people have moved away from Doordarshan and Government cannot spend enough on advertising on private channels.
On my last trip to UP, I happened to meet a health worker. She was working for the State Government and was responsible for a few villages. She had just returned from one such visit and started narrating how this woman she just met was pregnant for the fifth time. The Government apparently gives meager sum of money for the first two deliveries, which gets shared between the village Sarpanch (apparently for recommending the name and completing the paper work) and the family. It is understandable that the financial support would prompt people to have two children, but why more especially if they can’t provide for them. The health worker explained that most of the time women can’t refuse the men who are not employed through out the year, are invariably alcoholics and usually have a lot of time on hand. They can’t even suggest, let alone enforce use of contraceptive. The result is babies and more babies ! The situation is grim when it comes to Muslims who are seized with the belief that use of contraceptive is against their religion.
Equality and empowerment of women thus becomes very important. It is equally critical to educate the men and perhaps incentivize them financially for not having more than two children. Can we consider a legislation that than anyone having more than two children will not be entitled to benefits from the State ?
Let this not look like a problem of the villages alone. There are several cases of unwanted pregnancies as a result of indiscriminate sex in urban slums too. The reasons are same - lack of education, employment and empowerment of women. It is quite evident that the relatively progressive states of South have a relatively lower rate of population growth. It is also no surprise that they are more literate and their women enjoy better standing in the society.
Lack of electricity and television was never a reason in any of these instances !
I also can’t quite understand how the Minister thinks it is possible for women to push up the marriage age to 29/30 when the country is seized with social customs encouraging child marriages ! Even in urban areas, well educated families want to see their daughters settled latest by 26/27. Isn’t it ironical that a country where State Governments return to power on successful programs like “Kanyadan Yojana”, the Health Minister is suggesting something which will result in unprecedented social chaos.
As always the Ministry has not talked about “How to?” implement the suggestions. Merely hoping that miracle will happen and the situation will be addressed is not good enough. I hope that the Health Minister will move on from the frivolous statements and focus on delivering basic healthcare facilities to the vast uncovered population. We cannot afford him fret away precious time like his predecessor who was busy fighting turf war with the Director of AIIMS !
Concept Note: New India Policy Foundation (Part 4)
The Differentiation
The Foundation will be different from existing think tanks in at least two different ways: (a) It will focus on developing policy ideas for practical real-life issues, rather than engage in mere theoretical pursuits, and (b) Engaging with policy makers and opinion leaders will be an integral part of its mandate, and it will be judged by the direct impact it will make in shaping the policy discourse in the country.
This Foundation will institutionalise the process of public policy research and intervention outside of the Government machinery. It will do so by employing and engaging the best minds under one umbrella, aggregating valuable information and ideas relevant for India, initiating debates in the intelligentsia and civil society and influencing the collective conscious of legislators and bureaucrats. It will be intellectually best in class and a constructive source of inputs on all important areas of legislation and policy making. It will aim to become the fountain head of all policy research and decision making in this country.
It will distinguish itself from other Think Tanks by its “result-oriented” (outcome focused) approach to policy intervention. The effectiveness of its output will be measured in a scientific manner and employee benefits will be linked to it. It will only have a guiding philosophy, and will have no pre-defined political affiliation. It will be accountable to its trustees and the country.
Article 377 – Food for Thought
In an opinion piece titled “Shy society. Shameless debate“, S Gurumurthy writes: “Homosexuals displaced the Economic Survey for the year 2008-09 from the headlines of most media on July 3, 2009. New headings such as, ‘Historic benchmark’; ‘Sexual equality’; ‘Landmark Judgement’ appeared in the media. This is how the media had headlined the Delhi High Court judgement holding Sec. 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which makes homosexual acts offences in law, partly unconstitutional. Sec. 377 of the Indian Penal Code was not Manu’s code. It was Macaulay’s. This colonial law made homosexuality punishable. In Judeo-Christian tradition homosexuality was seen an act against the law of God, punishable even with death. The Islamic rules also prescribed capital punishment for the offence. In all Abrahamic traditions the hostility to homosexuality originated in the story associated with a city as Sodom [the etymological source of the world 'sodomy'] where the sexual sin was first committed according to their texts, though the respective accounts varied. This is the philosophy of the law against homosexuals in Abrahamic societies. Macaulay’s law reflected their theological position. Earlier, there was no state law in India to punish homosexuality. Does that mean that the Hindu Â- read Indian Â- tradition approved of homosexuality?”
The article adds: “What was the position of the state and state enacted laws in India in such matters? The king or the state in India had refrained from handling most issues which the society or families could handle. It is the colonial state, with its laws and courts, that began to intrude the sovereign domain of the family and society. The Indian discipline was always built around unenforced social and family norms; not state laws. Self-restraint and shyness were the tools to regulate the deviants from the norms, not the police or courts. Even today, it is this non-formal moral order Â- read dharma Â- not the laws of Parliament or State assemblies, that largely governs this society. India is otherwise ungovernable; just some 12,000 plus police stations in some 7 lakh towns and villages cannot regulate over 110 crore people. Thanks to this moral order, the Indian society had handled, and even now handles, such sensitive issues with great finesse than does state law. It is in stark contrast to the gross state law and media discourse of today. Historian Devdutt Puranik says that in Hindu literature ‘though not part of the mainstream, the existence of homosexuality was recognised, but, not approved’.”
It concludes: “Tolerance for the deviants from generally accepted human conduct is part of the Indian ethos. Here the society would wisely ignore the marginal deviants rather than punish them, even discuss them Â- a more subtle, sensible social management principle. The society felt, even now feels, shy to discuss them. That is why the traditional religious scholars have refused to be drawn into the current debate on the issue. In the Indian tradition, homosexuals, as elsewhere, were thus regarded as deviants. But, here, unlike in the Abrahamic, the right of these deviants to exist without being punished was never denied; and will never be. Yet no one can argue here or elsewhere that homosexuality is a virtue. No law or court of law can declare it as a virtue”.
Given that the Supreme Court has upheld the Delhi High Court’s verdict decriminalizing homosexuality and on the other hand a survey indicates that 81pct of Indians do not approve of same sex relationships, let us know what you think ?
This piece first appeared in Indian Express on 16 July 09.
Concept Note: New India Policy Foundation (Part 3)
The Objectives and Activities
The two main objectives of the Foundation are:
- Research and propose new policy alternatives to address pressing national issues.
- Disseminate the work of the Foundation widely, especially with a view to directly impacting the course and content of national policy.
The Foundation will take up a number of activities:
- Undertake research studies on existing policies of the government, both at the central and state level, with a view to examining the impact of such policies, and suggest alternative approaches where such policies are not delivering in the desired manner.
- Initiate studies to propose new policies over and above what governments might have so far considered. This is expected to address the problem of short term thinking that is often prevalent in governments, at the cost of long term strategic planning.
- Hold consultations, seminars, closed door sessions with policy makers, conferences on important national issues to stimulate debate and guide the policy process. Engage with formal (TV shows / appearances etc) and informal media for large scale dissemination and outreach.
- Engage with and convene meetings with key policy makers (MPs / MLAs & beauracracy) and opinion leaders to shape national policy.
The Foundation expects to demonstrate tangible results within the first few years of its operation. The Foundation will try and forge links with like-minded individuals and institutions globally.
Tomorrow: The Differentiation
Concept Note: New India Policy Foundation (Part 2)
The Solution
There is a cross section of society who believes that there is space for new thinking beyond being wedded to socialist ideals. The Group believes that there is scope for new ideas with a right-of-centre thrust, on a range of economic and social issues in the country. This group is coming together to create a new think tank - the New India Policy Foundation — that will provide cutting edge research on a range of economic and social issues.
The Foundation will propose, educate and engage with policy makers (elected representatives and members of bureaucracy) with the objective of guiding public policy, legislation and delivery, and influencing public opinion. Its support in matters of policy and governance will be driven by India’s long-term requirement and not short-term opportunism. The Foundation will be guided by the principles of liberal democracy, free enterprise (keeping in mind the interests of wider sections of society), social inclusion, robust defence policy and nationalism and will deliver India-oriented research.
The Foundation will analyse ongoing programmes and make suggestions for new policies that can be taken up by policy makers across party lines. Even as the Foundation expects that it is likely to have a right-of-centre thrust in its work, the Foundation will take a well researched and reasoned position on issues affecting India, rather than being driven purely by any economic or social ideology. The Foundation will be supported by a wide range of actors such as grant making foundations, the corporate sector, and individuals.
Similar parallels can be found with Heritage Foundation and Centre for American Progress, which support the Republican and Democratic Parties in the US, respectively.
Tomorrow: The Objectives and Activities
Concept Note: New India Policy Foundation
One of the ideas that a group of us have been thinking is the creation of a centre-right policy foundation / think thank. Amit Malviya and I, with help from a few others, have put a concept note on the idea. We would be keen to get your feedback on this.
The Problem
India since Independence has seen politics of convenience, one that is driven by individual preferences and often catering to compulsions of electoral politics. In the process, public policy-making and delivery are severely compromised. It is ironical that the Congress party has at its convenience oscillated from opposing Socialism to being a strong proponent of it and then embracing free markets when driven by compulsion. The Party has straddled these positions all in a matter of a few decades. Likewise, the BJP when in power, neither emerged as Right of Centre nor did it espouse the cause of Swadeshi. Popular perception is that the two major national parties have little to distinguish their economic policies and are often accused of being opportunistic and short sighted when it comes to policy related matters.
As a result, it is no secret that India as a nation has not realised its potential even after six decades of Independence. Our agriculture is in dismal state, internal security is compromised with alarming impunity, manufacturing sector is not robust enough to employ the vast semi skilled work force, education is highly regulated, health services are woefully insufficient and infrastructure is grossly inadequate. A nation of over a billion people is ruled by absolute adhocism. We are invariably held hostage to one of the pressure groups operating to services the narrow interest of its subjects.
In essence, India suffers from a lack of critical thinking on several key issues of national importance. The thinking that goes on happens within the confines of government - the civil service and the cabinet. There is almost a complete absence of groups outside the formal establishment who develop new policy ideas and actively engage with policy makers to see the ideas through.
It is this state of affairs that has prompted the idea of creating a Foundation which will work towards creating a better future for India.
Tomorrow: The Solution
Ironic Euphemism for Brazen Betrayal
by Swapan Dasgupta
There is a small minority of Indians who grew up in cities and hill stations where the British influence lingered for a decade or two after Independence. Of them, there must be another lot that developed a liking for the oh-so-English fudge — an extremely rich confectionary made with sugar, butter and milk with a light flavouring of cocoa or vanilla or even chocolate.
I have always preferred the fudge to either lozenges or toffee. There is nothing that gives me greater pleasure than landing up in a quaint English town or a village fair in the ‘Shires and buying a small packet of creamy fudge from one of those sensible ladies who run those quaint tea shops. It is one of those simple pleasures of life — as worthwhile as re-reading an Agatha Christie whodunit on a holiday.
Unfortunately, life isn’t all that uncluttered. Like the perfectly innocuous terms ‘gay’ and ‘queer’ that have been misappropriated by determined crusaders of ignoble causes, fudge no longer conjures happy images of innocent childhood. The term is more commonly associated with a sleight of hand, deceit and manipulation. In the age of innocence, this fudge would have been shunned; in today’s world of cleverness, it has become a political attribute, a byword for canniness.
Take the battle of figures involving Minister for Railways Mamata Banerjee and her predecessor Lalu Prasad Yadav. In her intervention in the Lok Sabha on July 9, Mamata revealed that Lalu’s claim that the Indian Railways was in the pink of health with a cash surplus of Rs 90,000 crore was worse than an eyewash — it was a fudge. “One cannot talk about the income and skip the expenditure part,” Mamata told the House, “after spending Rs 28,200 crore on account of the Sixth Pay Commission award for two years, we are left with a cash surplus of Rs 8,361 crore.”
It is a misfortune that the significance of this scandalous revelation by the Railways Minister has, by and large, escaped the political class. What Mamata was alluding to wasn’t a minor miscalculation or an accountant’s error. She was suggesting that her predecessor wilfully misled both Parliament and the nation. Worse, her revelation of the true state of railway finances pointed to the fact that the Budget has lost its sanctity and that official statistics are fudged.
The significance of the fudge is awesome. Less than a year ago, the corporate sector was shaken by the disclosure that Satyam Computer had misled its shareholders about the true state of the company’s finances. The company has been charged with criminal conspiracy, its auditors have been sacked and its chairman is behind bars and may well receive a stiff prison sentence. If Lalu is guilty of concealment and misrepresentation, it follows that his offence is no less severe than that of the hapless Ramalinga Raju. If Raju is prosecuted for playing havoc with the money of investors and banks, does Lalu and, for that matter, the Railway Board get away by fudging the accounts of a corporation funded by the taxpayer? There cannot be different sets of laws for the private and public sector.
Nor does the buck stop here. Lalu was a member of Manmohan Singh’s Government and was repeatedly praised by the Prime Minister for his remarkable performance. Surely the Prime Minister now owes the country an explanation? So far he has been silent.
Fudging, it would seem, is fast becoming a national preoccupation. In suggesting that the fiscal deficit of India stood at some 6.8 per cent of the GDP, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee need not be charged with Laluism, but he was certainly guilty of inexactitude. The figure, as he well knows and as do economists, is only a partial representation of the true state of public finances. If non-Budget items such as the deficit of States, oil bonds and fertiliser subsidy are added to the list, the real fiscal deficit is likely to approximate between 12 and 13 per cent of a falling GDP.
The implications of this are staggering. It means that the Government is bequeathing to the country a debt burden that will haunt the present and the future. Yes, there is a law enacted in 2003 that makes it obligatory for a Government to pursue the path of fiscal responsibility. But the Government has unilaterally waived its own responsibility for following the law — on the ground that exceptional situations warrant exceptional remedies. This means that there is very little faith in the Government actually carrying out its commitment to lower the fiscal deficit in the next two years. If the monsoons don’t come up to expectations, the profligacy with public finances will continue merrily and be justified.
The issue is not so much whether or not the Government has a right to pursue voodoo economics. That privilege cannot be taken away from an elected Government. The more important question is the ethics of selective revelation, bordering on concealment, what in everyday parlance is called fudging. If you doubt what I am saying, just correlate the official claim of a negative rate of inflation with the soaring consumer price index.
At one time, particularly after smooth public relations professionals started regulating the flow of information, many Western Governments were charged with being a hostage to spin. In India, the quality of non-cricket spin is still amateurish. But we have moved to a higher level of political management. We are now a nation driven by fudge.
What a shame, it isn’t the real thing.
(This article was first published in The Pioneer on July 12, 2009.)