Guards for White Elephants

Uttar Pradesh CM Mayawati is an absolute dream come true for a blogger like me who believes that the biggest problem with Indian governance is the people who run it. She most accurately represents all the qualities that make up the modern Indian politician. She is blatantly opportunistic, almost shamelessly ambitious, has her own agenda that has almost nothing to do with the people who elected her but everything to do with her personal fortunes and legacy.

Never in the history of Indian politics has someone represented the hopes and dreams of so many as Mayawati has. Even Rajiv Gandhi's 3/4th majority in the Lok Sabha had to do with Indira Gandhi's assassination than any real identification with him or his politics. But Mayawati's ascent to the top post in India's most populous state was seen by so many as a sign of awakening of a people repressed for so long. To repeat an obvious but facetious comparison, her election and its ramifications for the Dalit people has been compared to Barack Obama's election and its influence on the African-American people. But Mayawati's tenure as UP's CM has not seen any dramatic improvement in the quality of life of millions of her die-hard Dalit supporters. But it has seen her personal fortunes go up dramatically.

But then, amassing personal wealth while ignoring the the very people who sent them to positions of power is written into the Indian politicians DNA. What makes Mayawati really different though is her single-minded determination to literally cement her place in Indian history. The 40 statues of Dr B R Ambedkar, Kanshi Ram and herself that she has built since 2007 at a cost of approximately Rs.2000 crore has already been reproved by the Opposition, independent commentators and the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court even went to the extent of threatening her with contempt of court for continuing work on her statues. Pro-Mayawati commentators have argued in favor of the statues saying represent a talisman of Dalit pride that was absent before. I guess then that they believe Pride trumps hunger pangs or abject poverty. However the latest gambit by Mayawati to spend taxpayer's money on her statues is the proposal to create a special elite force at a cost of Rs. 67 crores to the exchequer with the sole task of providing security to her statues. This in a state with so many other obvious problems that could've used the money or the police personnel. Its imprudent, impertinent and irresponsible. Unfortunately Mayawati has the required numbers to pass the bill that will make this latest bit of wasteful bragging a reality. And unless the judiciary can somehow put a stop to this, Mayawati will only be emboldened by her success at cocking a snook at the establishment. When that happens God help the state of Uttar Pradesh and even more importantly the legions of Mayawati's faithful followers.

Renewing Our Tryst with Destiny

Today India completes 60 years as a republic. It is truly a cause for celebration. At its conception the Indian nation was not given much of a chance of survival. But 60 years on here we are, a vibrant democracy poised to take our rightful place on the world stage. The Constitution of India is the backbone that has enabled this miracle. And while Dr B R Ambedkar has correctly been called the chief architect of the Indian Constitution, it was really the result of 3 year long debate by nearly 300 men and women who made up the Constituent Assembly.

It was at these debates that the very issues that we still debate today were first debated; debated by men and women who were more committed to the idea of India, more aware and passionate about their responsibility to the Indian people and certainly as a group a lot more representative of the ideal of India as it should be, of India as envisaged by our freedom fighters.

The debates of the members of the Constituent Assembly make for interesting reading. A quote in particular which I'd like to make the topic of this blog was attributed to Begum Aizaz Rasul during the debate on minority reservations. She said "Sir, those Muslims who wanted to go to Pakistan have done so. Those who decided to stay here wish to be on friendly and amicable terms with the majority community and realise that they must develop their lives according to the environments and circumstances existing here....To my mind reservation is a self-destructive weapon which separates the minorities from the majority for all time. It gives no chance to the minorities to win the good-will of the majority...To my mind it is very necessary that the Muslim living in this country should throw themselves entirely upon the good-will of the majority community, should give up separatist tendencies and throw their full weight in building up a truly secular state." Of course her comments were roundly criticized by those Muslims who were pro-reservation, but that these comments were expressed at that time and by a Muslim woman is truly amazing. The idea of reservation based on religion was was shot down then but we have still ended up with caste based reservation. What was initially meant to be a temporary step to reverse centuries of injustice to an oppressed people has become firmly entrenched in our lives. In the last 60 years there have been no real studies to evaluate the effect of reservation as policy. Meanwhile the groups of people who have demanded and been brought under the gambit of reservation has steadily increased. In my mind nothing can be a greater statement to the failure of the policy of reservation than that particular fact. All of which brings us back to the Begum's statement. Reservation is a self-destructive weapon which separates the reserved from the unreserved for all time. I've never been able to understand the dichotomy. If religion based reservation does not ring constant in a secular state then how can caste based reservation in a state that has outlawed casteism? Meanwhile our politicians have taken to heart the British policy of divide and rule and will do everything really to try and divide us along communal and casteist lines. Its time to re-examine and re-evaulate our entire policy of caste based reservations. But who will show the political will to take what will be such an unpopular step?

In this the 60th anniversary of the Indian republic my wish for India is a whole new breed of politicians who will show the kind of passion and commitment to India that this nation and its people deserve.

The 4th Idiot?

Being a die-hard Aamir Khan fan I had no intention of missing 3 Idiots. However the whole controversy raised by Chetan Bhagat's claims of being sidelined by the makers of the film has made the viewing of the movie all the more interesting. As far coverage goes, the media as usual is making hay while the sun shines. Media coverage has largely focussed on producer Vidhu Vinod Chopra's outburst asking a member of the media to shut up. But in all the sensationalism an important larger issue has been missed out; that of ownership and due credit.

Chetan Bhagat's Five Point Someone has been heralded as the biggest English language novel by an Indian author. It was definitely an entertaining read and all credit to Bhagat for writing a book that may have introduced a lot of young Indians to reading. But I saw an interview of Bhagat's last night on the telly where he compared his book to Harry Potter and Twilight. To me therein lies the central problem to this whole issue i.e. Chetan Bhagat seems to think he's on the same level as J K Rowling. The facts are these. The producers of 3 Idiots bought the rights to Bhagat's book and have held the the rights to make a movie of the book for some time. They've made that movie and from all reviews there are fundamental differences from the main story of the book and the plot line of the movie. The credits at the end of the movie mention Chetan Bhagat as the author of the book on which the movie is based. Nitpicking over certain scenes in the movie and comparing them to the book as is happening now through the media is just silly. Television presenters seem to be taking particular pleasure in bandying about numbers like 5% or 80%.

In the age of water tight prenuptial agreements its naive to sign a contract handing over rights to your best seller and then ask for credit through the media. To throw Bhagat's comparison right back at him, J K Rowling had complete control over every aspect of the making of the Harry Potter movies and a share of the profits. Now thats the way it should be done. Chetan Bhagat's previous experience with Bollywood happened to be with the exceedingly generous Salman Khan and involved the least entertaining of his 3 books which was translated onscreen into a flop movie. That exceedingly pleasant initiation into the Bollywood scene and his seemingly innate naivety probably upped his expectations. This whole episode should be treated as a lesson learnt and Mr Bhagat should remember it when he is in negotiations with Karan Johar and ShahRukh Khan for making '2 states- The story of my marriage' into 2011's biggest romantic comedy. Prominently upfront, above title opening credits and a share of the profits; all these should be written into the contract. As far as 3 Idiots is concerned, you know what they say Mr Bhagat, about spilt milk.

A new beginning

Another year has come and gone. 2009 was just as eventful as any other year with both good and bad. And most attempts at looking back at the year gone by tend to be negative; simply because the downs stick with us a lot more. Well as we usher in a new year I'm chosing to look forward. 2010 will in all probability have as many ups and downs as 2009. But atleast it wont be the same. And we always have hope; that somehow this year things will be better.

So here's hoping this year will bring us all happiness and also the strength to overcome the pitfalls life throws our way.

Happy 2010!!

Fast unto death or Fad Dieting?

K Chandrasekhar Rao's 10 day fast unto death has resulted in the possible formation of a new Indian state, a near complete standstill of legislative activity in AP, significant loss of public property and an epidemic, all over north India, of similar demands for statehood. The media debate has centered around whether the Congress government has acted in haste in accepting the demands of the agitating TRS cadres. Obviously there is also some debate over whether a new Telengana state will be viable and on the fate of Hyderabad. My own view point is that the attempt to divide a reasonably well-governed state along ethnic lines is the beginning of a dangerous trend that may eventually shake the very foundation of the Indian state.

But what I'd like to touch upon is the whole idea of the political fast and the role it has placed in this case. The TRS chief was arrested before his fast under section 309 of the IPC which covers any attempts to take one's own life but his fast continued. He was then shifted to Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences in Hyderabad where he even though he recieved attention his medical condition kept deteriorating. At this point his worsening condition began to consume the entire nation and national leaders of all hues came out with statements saying K Chandrasekhar Rao's life should not be martyred to the Telengana cause. The general public was bombarded daily with images of a visibly weak Rao and more importantly the damage to public property by rampaging supporters of the Telengana movement. It was here that the Chandrasekhar fast differed from say the kind of fast that Mahatma Gandhi used to undergo. Gandhi never undertook a fast unto death to force the British to leave India. Bapu's fasts were not about using the potential of his possible death to achieve his political aims, and he definitely would never have accepted any Telengana state that came into being after all the rampaging and violent demonstration that took place. His fasts were about penance and forcing his supporters and well-wishers to look inwards at their own actions. But comparisons to Gandhiji are probably unfair.

However how many of us have heard of Irom Charu Sharmila? This 37 year old civil rights activist and poet from Manipur has been on fast since November 4 2000; yes that's right, 2000, demanding the repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 which gives the army extensive powers and immunity in areas the Indian government deems 'disturbed areas.' Now I will not debate how justified Ms Sharmila's demands are. But given the extensive nature of the powers given to the Indian army there is every likelihood of it being misused. But more importantly we must compare the kind of media attention accorded to Chandrasekhar Rao and that given to Irom Sharmila and wonder why the difference? Why the alacrity to act and why the clamour of politicians to support a cause that has not even been debated much in the public forum?

Whatever the outcome of the Telengana agitation, Irom Sharmila atleast deserves a fraction of the media attention that K Chandrasekhar Rao got.

One year on..

Today marks the 1st anniversary of the most blatant terrorist attack on Indian soil. The images from that horrific day are still fresh in our minds, although I doubt if the sense of outrage and activism that we all felt in the immediate aftermath of the Bombay attacks is still as intense as it was then.

Its been an eventful year for the nation in general and Bombay in particular. We've had a national election and an assembly election in Maharashtra. It was an opportunity for the Mumbaiites to make a statement. And yet despite all the campaigns inviting people to exercise their franchise the elections saw some of the lowest voter turnout in the country. The trial for the lone surviving terrorist is still going on, somewhat of the megaserials we have to suffer on TV. The police force in Mumbai have done themselves no good with the airing of dirty laundry in public that has been going on recently. Across the border in Pakistan, the charade of an investigation and trial keeps our media and analysts endlessly occupied without any real change in our neighbour’s attitude towards terrorism in general and us in particular. And to add insult to injury to our poor brethren in Mumbai, the hooligans of the Shiv Sena and MNS have started to flex their muscles again after a brief period of silence following the tragic events last year.

So what has the last year taught us? The fact that we’ve not had any other attacks in the last year isn’t really because we’ve corrected all the flaws in our security system. The disarray in the Mumbai Police, the first barrier in our security setup, is self-evident in all the in-fighting that goes on in the department. The Quick Response Team(QRT), which is meant to be the city’s answer to a slothful police force, has been abandoned even before it could gain a foothold in the security setup. The political players have done nothing more play the usual game of blaming everyone else. And the media is using the occasion of the anniversary to run up ratings and indulge in superficial schemes like NDTV’s Human Chain, which at the time of writing this post has managed only an abysmal 6115 participants. Even corporate India is using this anniversary to run up some profits like Idea Mobile’s, vulgarly opportunistic Talk For India campaign. And the common man, who was hit the most by the attacks last year, has gone back to doing what we as a people do best; accept it as fate and move on with our lives.

Some of India’s best laid down their lives on that fated day. Most of what has happened since is a great disservice to their sacrifice and memory. And that’s a bigger tragedy than the actual attacks of 26/11.

To sing or not to sing?

Its funny season again in Indian politics. The latest controversy to preoccupy our television media is the fatwa issued by the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Hind against the national song, Vande Mataram. The resolution asking Muslims not to sing the national song was passed at the national convention of the Jamiat, one of the largest groups of Muslim clerics in India, held at Darul Uloom Deoband, one the largest Muslim seminaries in South Asia. It was attended by Home Minister P Chidambaram. Now this is the kind of news that makes the nearly down and out BJP drool in anticipation. The BJP has condemned 2 different aspects of this bit of news. Obviously they have taken issue with the JEU for issuing the fatwa. And they are probably rubbing their hands in glee that no less than the Home Minister was at this convention. Mr Chidambaram has of course since distanced himself from the fatwa. The JEU however have taken refuge in the Constitution and the freedom of religious expression provided to every Indian therein. “Some of its lines are of course against the religious principles of Islam. We cannot bow before anybody other than the Allah. It is un-Islamic”, said Moulana Muizuddin of the Jamiat.

Written by Bankimchandra Chattopadhyay in response to the British Government making the singing of God Save the Queen compulsory, Vande Mataram was so successful in inspiring freedom fighters at the time, that the British at one time banned the utterance of the cry in public forums. The song, in its later stanzas, compares Mother India to Goddess Durga and therefore was unacceptable as the National Anthem to some of India’s more orthodox Muslims. So as a concession, Jana Gana Mana was adopted as the National Anthem and only the 1^st two stanzas of Vande Mataram which describe the beauty of India, was adopted as the National Song. The idea of a National Song or National Anthem or any of our other symbols of nationalism is to inspire pride and patriotism in our citizens. And as a nation we need as many proud and patriotic Indians as we can inspire. Given the historical import of the Vande Mataram and its role in our freedom struggle and the concessions that have already been made to Muslim sensitivities, I’m not really sure what the JEU was taking exception to. The Constitution guarantees freedom of religious expression to all citizens of India, a right that reflects the secular intentions of the people who framed it and the greatness of the Indian nation. Vande Mataram sings paeans to that greatness. To refuse to sing that song because it invites you to pay respects to Mother India, is the worst kind of narrow minded communalist sentiment. And to call this song un-Islamic is, in my view at least, anti-Indian.

Now it’s a whole different story if, as BJP governments in the past have done, someone makes the singing of Vande Mataram compulsory. The whole idea of being a democracy is that one has the freedom to do or not do what one chooses as long as it stays within the limits of the law and does not impinge on one’s neighbour’s freedoms. I don’t think the singing of the national song should be made compulsory just as I don’t think a fatwa should be issued advising Indian Muslims that Vande Mataram is un-Islamic. Its offensive to the sensibilities of a large number of people who prefer to see themselves as Indians first. Javed Akhtar put it best when he said he would not sing a single verse of the song if the BJP made it compulsory but would publicly sing the whole song including its un-Islamic later verses if a fatwa is issued against it.