Rig Veda: Amalgamation of the Aryans with the natives

A very interesting thing in North India is that almost all the languages and dialects are derived from Sanskrit or Persian, both of which are Indo Iranian languages. Apart from the few pockets of tribal areas, where Austro Asiatic Munda languages are spoken, Indo Iranian languages are spoken almost every where from Afghanistan to Assam. This means that the Indo Iranian languages took over almost all the native languages of which Munda and Burushaski may be just the two known to us. We've seen in Languages of Aryan Trail that Dravidian languages were never native to northern India. So we discount them as being taken over by Indo Iranian languages.

Let's see some of the other cases of language takeover in historical times.

The most recent scenario of immigration of non native elites imposing a foreign language on the subdued natives is the arrival of Europeans in the American continents. The mainly English peoples subjugated the native Americans in what later became USA. Traces of the ancient native languages in USA are now limited only to names of places and rivers like Mississippi and Missouri. English is the dominant language in USA now but the American Indians still speak their native language. Even centuries of subjugation and elite dominance couldn't impose English and Christianity on them. The Bolivian and the Peruvian Indians may be Spanish speaking Christians now, but a large part of them still speak the native Queucha as well. Many native customs and tenets of the Inca religion still survive, often in a Christian garb.

After the Norman Conquest of England in 1066 AD the elite dominance of the Norman French peoples influenced heavily and nearly replaced the Anglo Saxon, Welsh and other native languages of England. But in the end nothing happened. Apart from a few family names there are only very few remnants of that conquest and centuries of elite domination by the Normans.

The Russian language was enforced on the erstwhile Soviet Republics of Central Asia (Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan etc.). Now that the USSR has disintegrated the fate of Russian in all these countries is questionable. The Turkish language didn't survive in the Ottoman empire in Balkans. Even the bloody Arab dominance on the Parsis, that led to the coining of the term persecution, couldn't replace the Persian with Arabic. Even centuries of elite dominance by the elite English peoples in India couldn't replace any of the regional languages.

So it's very obvious that an elite dominance very rarely results in a complete language takeover, something that happened in India with the advent of the Indo Aryans peoples. So it's logical to believe that such a feat was achieved not by elite dominance, but through amalgamation and absorption of the native peoples. More than everything they showed better ways of lives to the native peoples. They brought considerable change in their standard of living. They made them prosperous.

Indus valley didn't know the use of plough. They had a primitive way of cultivation by using fertile silt left by periodic flooding of the rivers. Artificial dams and barrages were used to flood the river. This very flooding, which was so essential for farming, might have been one of the causes for the decline of their civilization. Lack of better agriculture is a striking difference from Mesopotamia and Sumer. Indus Valley had no canals as in Mesopotamia. Much less surplus in grains might have been the reason for the lack of internal competition and also external attack. That might have been the reason too for minimal change over 1500 years. The Aryans destroyed the dams and brought greater areas under cultivation. RV mentions Indra destroying Vritra, which means restrainer, obstacle and may refer to the barrage that obstructs the water. Indra is said to have removed rodhas, meaning obstacle but used in RV in context of dams and embankments. The Aryans broke barriers between primitive and conservative tribes which had managed to preserve their archaic religion and tools for long. They introduced better production techniques. Several groups of people separated for ages were brought together. Various skills, which were local secret, became public, thus stimulating more trade and prosperity.

A similar thing would have happened in BMAC around 1900 BC when there was a sudden surge of wealth with the arrival of the Indo Aryans from the northern Arkaim and Sintashta Cultures.

The Aryans never displaced anyone or enslaved entire lots of natives. The Aryans brought in new techniques and knowledge and provided the much needed guidance that led to their prosperity by better harnessing natural resources, producing more and enhancing trade and commerce. This made the Aryans very much acceptable to the natives as their elites.

In most cultures the natives were always enslaved by the intruders. But in case of the Aryans there are multiple instances where the natives were promoted to the ranks of elites. Discussions on Peoples & Conflicts during Rig Vedic times have many such instances. In fact the addition of shudra as the fourth class was to accommodate the natives. It may be still argued that the natives were put in the lowest stratum of the society. But still that's much better than treating them as slaves.

Anyway, coming back to the topic of language takeover it's important to understand that such a thing was possible not through force. Rather it was done through amalgamation and cooperation. It's a very rare instance in the history of mankind that a few elites make such a positive impact on the lives of the natives that they eventually adopt not only the language but also the culture and religion of the former.

Land Ownership in India vs. Urban Economic Growth

by CBSagar, April 2008

If the millions of landless own small amounts of land in India, we can improve the lives of hundreds of millions and help close the rural-urban gap where years of rapid growth have disproportionately benefited the cities, as per a Rural Development Institute report published in Washington Times.

Lack of clear rules regarding land ownership has locked many rural residents into deep poverty. Economic growth was disproportionately generous to Indian cities, forging a glaring rural-urban gap and a population of 60 million landless families. Some economists argue that clear property rights, giving the poor a clear ownership of his tiny plot of land are the foundation for free markets, prosperity and honest governance.

Millions landless families in India are forced to live and work on others property, earning very little in terms of a tiny agricultural wage. Most land reforms are at best short-term solutions for rural Indian poverty, not permanent solutions, as per economists. With 800 million rural residents and only 400 million acres of arable land in India, people should be out of the countryside. The future of Indian agriculture requires widespread irrigation, technology investments and large acreage agriculture farmlands similar to those found in mainland USA! Real Estate times (courtesy)

Landholding distribution too has become skewed. According to government data compiled from sources such as the All India Report on Agriculture Census 1991-2000, in 1995-96:

• 1.2% of landholdings in the country accounted for 14.8% of the total operational holdings with large holdings of 10 hectares and above (average holding: 17.21 hectares).
  
• 6.1% of holdings accounted for 25.3% of the total operational holdings with medium holdings of 4 to 10 hectares (average holding: 5.8 hectares).
  
• 12.3% of holdings accounted for 23.8% of the total operational holdings with semi-medium holdings of 2 to 4 hectares (average holding: 2.73 hectares).
  
• 18.7% of holdings accounted for 19.8% of the total operational holdings with holdings of 1 to 2 hectares (average holding: 1.42 hectares).
  
• As many as 61.2% of holdings accounted for only 17.2% of the total operational holdings. On average, the size of these marginal holdings was 0.4 hectares.
  

Landless labour

According to the India Rural Development Report of 1992, 43% of the country’s rural population was absolutely or near landless. Landless agricultural labour makes up almost half of those living below the poverty line in rural India.

A majority of the economically and socially weaker sections of society, such as scheduled castes and tribes, dalits, adivasis and women, make up the majority of landless population working as labour.

Landlessness has been steadily rising among the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. According to a government Rural Labour Enquiry report, the percentage of landless households among scheduled castes increased from 56.8% in 1977-98 to 61.5% in 1983, while among adivasis it increased from 48.5% in 1977-78 to 49.4% in 1983.

Even among those who own land, a majority own marginal plots that provide them little or no food security. The government describes such marginal landowners as ‘mere landless’ (those who own less than 0.002 hectares) and ‘near landless’ (those who own between 0.002 and 0.2 hectares). According to the draft paper of the Ninth Five-Year Plan, 77% of dalits and 90% of adivasis are either ‘absolute landless’ (own no land) or ‘mere landless’.

HUNGER IN INDIA

By Amartya Sen, Address made at a public hearing on hunger and the right to food, Delhi University, 10 January 2003

 

1

 

When India achieved independence, more than fifty years ago, the people of the country were much afflicted by endemic hunger. They still are. Since India is often considered to be one of the great success stories in tackling the food problem, the belief in success has to be scrutinized in the light of the grim reality that we can observe.

 

The positive perception in not, however, entirely mistaken. Certain things have been achieved, and it is important to see what has been accomplished and what remains to be done. Some positive things have certainly occurred. First, pre-independence India had a stagnating agriculture, and this has been firmly replaced by an imposing expansion of the production possibilities in Indian agriculture, through innovative departures. The technological limits have been widely expanded. What holds up Indian food consumption today is not any operational inability to produce more food, but a far reaching failure to make the poor of the country able to afford enough food.

 

Second, substantial famines that so plagued India until independence has been effectively eliminated: the last sizeable famine occurred in 1943 – four years before independence. And yet this creditable record in famine prevention has not been matched by a similar success in eliminating the pervasive presence of endemic hunger that blights the lives of hundreds of millions of people in this country.

 

Indeed, India has not, it should be absolutely, clear, done well in tackling the pervasive presence of persistent hunger. Not only are there persistent recurrences of severe hunger and starvation in particular regions, but there is also a gigantic prevalence of endemic hunger across much of India. Indeed, India does much worse in this respect than even Sub-Saharan Africa. Estimates of general undernourishment - what is sometimes called “protein-energy malnutrition” - are nearly twice as high in India as in sub-Saharan Africa. It is astonishing that despite the intermittent occurrence of famine in Africa, it too manages to ensure a much higher level of regular nourishment than does India. About half of all Indian children are, it appears, chronically undernourished, and more than half of all adult women suffer from anaemia. In maternal undernourishment as well as the incidence of underweight babies, and also in the frequency of cardiovascular diseases in later life (to which adults are particularly prone if nutritionally deprived in the womb), India’s record is among the very worst in the world.

 

2

 

What, then, should we do, indeed what can we do? People have to go hungry if they do not have the means to buy enough food. Hunger is primarily a problem of general poverty, and thus overall economic growth and its distributional pattern cannot but be important in solving the hunger problem. It is particularly critical to pay attention to employment opportunities, other ways of acquiring economic means, and also food prices, which influence people’s ability to buy food, and thus affect the food entitlements they effectively enjoy. It is also crucial to use the means of specialized delivery of food that particularly helps poor children, such as more extensive use of feeding in the school.

This can not only increase the incentive of children to go to school, but also actually make them healthier and less undernourished. The Supreme Court has been judicious in emphasizing the importance of this right.

 

Further, since undernourishment is not only a cause of ill health, but can also result from it, attention has to be paid to health care, in general, and to the prevention of endemic diseases that prevent absorption of nutrients, in particular. There is also plenty of evidence to indicate that lack of basic education too contributes to undernourishment, partly because knowledge and communication are important, but also because the ability to secure jobs and incomes are influenced by the level of education.

 

Indeed, low incomes, relatively higher prices, bad health care and neglect of basic education are all influential in causing and sustaining the extraordinary levels of under nutrition in India. There are also more complex connections. Recent medical research has brought out the long-run effects of maternal undernourishment, which not only ruins the health of the mothers, but can also cause serious health problems for the children who are born with low birth weight, since they are more prone to children’s diseases and – later on in life – also to adult diseases. Indeed, low birth weight substantially increases the incidence of cardiovascular diseases later in life.

 

3

 

What about food policy, and in particular food prices policy? Why is it the case that the large expenditure on food subsidy in India does not achieve more in reducing undernourishment? Part of the answer lies in the fact that the subsidy is mainly geared to keep food prices high for the sellers of food - farmers in general – rather than to make food prices low for the buyers of food. The high incentive to produce more food while giving little help to the poorer people to buy food has produced the massive stocks of food grains that we find in India today.

 

In 1998, stocks of food grains in the central government’s reserve were around 18 million tons - close to the official “buffer stock” norms needed to take care of possible fluctuations of production and supply. Since then, it has climbed and climbed, firmly surpassing the 50 million mark, and while it has had some ups and some downs, the total stock is still extraordinarily large. To take Jean Drèze’s graphic description, if all the sacks of grain were laid up in a row, this would stretch more than one million kilometres, taking us to the moon and back.

 

The public expense of the programme of subsidies (estimated, not long ago, at a staggering Rs. 21,000 crores a year) is mainly used to add to the market food prices to raise the incomes of the farmers. We are evidently determined to maintain, at heavy cost, India’s unenviable combination of having the worst of undernourishment in the world and the largest of unused food stocks on the globe. Indeed, a regime of high prices in general (despite a gap between procurement prices and consumers retail prices) both expands procurement and depresses the affordability of food. The bonanza for food producers and sellers is matched by the privation of the consumers. Since the biological need for food is not the same thing as the economic entitlement to food (that is, what people can afford to buy given their economic circumstances and the prices), the large stocks procured are hard to get rid of, despite rampant undernourishment across the country. The very price system that generates a massive supply keeps the hands – and the mouths – of the poorer consumers away from food.

In fact, much of the subsidy goes into the cost of maintaining a massively large stock of food grains, with a mammoth and unwieldy food administration. Also, since the cutting edge of the price subsidy is to pay farmers to produce more and earn more, rather than to sell existing stocks to consumers at lower prices (that too happens, but only to a limited extent and to restricted groups), the overall effect of food subsidy is more spectacular in transferring money to farmers than in transferring food to the undernourished Indian consumers.

Of course, those who want high producer prices of food include some who are not affluent, in particular the small farmer or peasant who sells a part of the crop. The interest of this group is mixed up with those of big farmers, and this produces a lethal confounding of food politics. While the powerful lobby of privileged farmers presses for higher procurement prices and for public funds to be spent to keep these prices high, the interests of poorer farmers, who too benefit from the high prices, are championed by political groups that represent these non-affluent beneficiaries. Stories of hardship of these people play a powerful part not only in the rhetoric in favour of high food prices, but also in the genuine conviction of many equity-oriented activists that this would help some very badly off people. And so it would, but of course it would help the rich farmers much more, and cater to their pressure groups, while the vital interests of the much larger number of people who have to buy food rather than sell it are thoroughly sacrificed.

 

4

 

There is need for more explicit analysis of the effects of public policies on the different classes, and in particular on the extreme underdogs of society who, along with their other deprivations (particularly low income, bad health care, inadequate opportunities of schooling), are also remarkably underfed and undernourished. For casual labourers, slum dwellers, poor urban employees, migrant workers, rural artisans, rural non-farm workers, even farm workers who are paid cash wages, high food prices bite into what they can eat. The overall effect of the high food prices is to hit many of the worst off members of the society extremely hard. And while it does help some of the farm based poor, the net effect is quite regressive on distribution. There is, of course, relentless political pressure in the direction of high food prices coming from farmers’ lobbies, and the slightly muddied picture of benefitting some farm-based poor makes the policy issues sufficiently befuddled to encourage the confused belief that high food prices constitute a pro-poor stance, when in overall effect it is very far from that.

 

Given our democratic system, nothing is as important as clear-headed public discussions of the causes of deprivation and the possibility of successful public intervention. Public action includes not only what is done for the public by the state, but also what is done by the public for itself. It includes what people can do by demanding remedial action and through making governments accountable. That is exactly why we are gathered here today. The lives and well-being of hundreds of millions of people will depend on the extent to which our public discussion can be broadened and be made more informed. I hope we manage to have some impact.

Don't Divide Us Further

This is with reference to the recent euphoria about conferring the status of Classical Language to Kannada and Telegu languages.

It's really shocking to see that many so called non-political literary people were involved in demanding classical status for their languages. As if, without the official status the fate and status of these languages would have been questionable. Technically, culturally and emotionally, each and every language in the world is classic in it's own way. The development of a language is perhaps one of the most fascinating things about the human race. Each language shapes up over so many years to express the feelings, emotions, love, technology and above all the culture of a race or creed. This evolution itself qualifies each language, irrespective of it's age and usage, to be classic in it's own unique way. So it really sounds so gross to attribute some special status to a particular language. It's also another way of further dividing our already divided country on another basis.

Linguistically, the present form of any language, be it Tamil or Hindi or anything else, is way different from what it used to be thousand years back. Each language has undergone tremendous changes over the years. Majority of the Indian languages have come from the Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Sino-Tibetan and the Austric group of languages. Both the Dravidian and the Austric groups are much older than the Indo-Aryan group. Apart from Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam, languages with Dravidian origin are still spoken in far off places like Baluchistan (Brahui) and Bengal (Malto). Most of the tribal languages of the Santal, Kol, Bhil, Mundas etc are derived from the Austric family, which is as old as the Dravidian group. Apart from this, most of the modern day major languages of Indo-Aryan group like Bengali, Assamese, Gujarati and Marathi can be traced back to 10th century AD. Manipuri language can be traced back to 3rd century AD. But none of these languages resemble much the primitive forms that existed thousand years back. The fascinating thing is that there have been so much amalgamation between all these languages that it's really hard to isolate the unadulterated nascent forms. This very amalgamation has created, in Tagore's words, the "ocean of the super humans of Bharatavarsha", on the pure banks of which he aspires his mind to arise - "He Mor Chitta, Punya Tirthe Jago Re Dheere / Ei Bharater Mahamanaver Sagar Teere". Let's not speak of Bengali or Tamil or Hindi. Let's realize that we all speak only one language and that's the language of Bharatavarsha. There's no division, there's no special status, there's no rivalry. As mentioned in Upanishads, "Srunvantu Vishve, Amrutashya Putrah", we, all Indians are the children of immortal bliss. We all are equal and for God's sake, let not the politicians divide us further!!

Indian politicians need management lessons

India is the land of the three most efficient managers the world has ever produced. The award for "Best Manager" surely goes to Krishna, well Lord Krishna to be more specific, whose management principles based on four different strokes - Sam, Daam, Dand and Bhed - for different people is still taught in all business schools even today. The way he was able to manipulate situations in his favor is something that any top business tycoon would die to learn and emulate for the best possible results. His people management skills are beyond any question. The way he convinced a reluctant Arjun to fight the battle of Kurukshetra is worth studying.

The second position for management surely goes to Chanakya and the third to none other than Mahatma Gandhi for managing the highest ever number of people. Both Chanakya and Mahatma Gandhi's principles of management were based on Sam, Daam, Dand and Bhed. The right stroke when used for the right people can have miraculous result. But at the same time the incorrect stroke can cause disaster.The Indian politics is full of incorrect strokes.

When a father motivates a little kid to drink a bottle of milk with the promise of a chocolate he is actually using "Daam" or reward for managing his little kid. This type of management works very well for immature people. When the same kid grows up a bit the same father has to rebuke and scold in order to keep him under control. Then the father is using "Dand" or punishment as a management tactic. When the kid grows up to a young man the aged father discusses his family business with the same kid and takes important decisions together. The father is then using "Sam" or equality in management. The Britishers used the divide and rule or the "Bhed" tactic to manage (or rather mismanage) Indians. Anyone can find out that the father can't apply Sam on the small kid or Dand on his grown up young son. But at the same time he has to use Dand many times to grow the right sense of discipline in his child. Rewarding and punishment at the right time in the right proportion is very essential for an efficient management.

In Indian politics what we see is just Daam and Bhed. There's no space for Sam and Dand. The entire horse trading of MPs is the wrong use of Daam. Not punishing the Left for their irrational behavior is also an instance of not using Dand when it's of utmost importance. The classic example of mishandling the Nuclear Deal is an example of failure to use Sam. It's well known that the BJP had actually sowed the seeds of the nuclear deal. But the Congress didn't want to give any credit to the BJP and wanted to usurp all the credits themselves. That made the BJP antagonized to the entire episode. Had the Congress given the proper credits to BJP publicly and kept them in loop for all their discussions then the later won't have had any scope to antagonize the deal. Even now BJP is never saying that they are opposing the UPA on the nuclear deal. Even in his speech during the debate before the Trust Vote on 22nd July leader of opposition Shri L K Advani made it very clear that BJP is opposing other issues like price hike, inflation, bad conditions of farmers etc. Very aptly BJP utilized the scenario of opposition to the nuclear deal to their favor to create pressure on Congress. The recent crisis won't have arisen at all had the Congress applied Sam or equality in management. Lastly there's innumerable cases of using Bhed. The entire politics of appeasement of Muslims is the blatant use of divide-and-rule tactics. Not only the Hindu-Muslim bhed, people use Dalit-Brahmin, Dalit-OBC, Creamy-non Creamy OBC, Yadavs-non Yadavs and all other forms or bheds or divisions to their advantage.

So overall the entire political class need thorough lessons in management, if at all they are interested to manage the country in an efficient and ethical manner.

Shri L K Advani's response to Dr. Manmohan Singh's speech on 22nd July in Parliament

This is interesting. Yesterday Dr. Manmohan Singh had published a speech in his website targeting Shri L K Advani's and today here is later's response. The good part is that now-a-days all the transcripts are available online immediately and the people of India can have a direct look into who is saying what. I think these are indeed worth reading, irrespective of the political affiliations of anyone.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Slightly over two decades ago, a stinking corruption scandal at the highest level of the Government, first unearthed by the foreign media and subsequently investigated by several courageous journalists in the Indian media, changed the political landscape in the country. Such was the public outrage created by the revelations of huge kickbacks in the purchase of Bofors guns from Sweden that the late Shri Rajiv Gandhi, who had won a four-fifth majority for the Congress party in the Lok Sabha in 1984, was swept out of power in the parliamentary elections in 1989.

The country witnessed an even more shocking bribery scandal yesterday when the Congress-led UPA Government secured a completely illegitimate victory in the trust vote by manufacturing a slender majority in the House. Three BJP MPs — Shri Ashok Argal and Shri Faggan Singh Kulaste from Madhya Pradesh and Shri Mahavir Baghora from Rajasthan — exposed, with tell-tale evidence, of how top leaders of the Congress and Samajwadi Party conspired together to secure cross-voting and abstention of non-UPA MPs by paying them crores of rupees.

A close look at the final tally in the House shows that the Government would have certainly lost the confidence motion in the absence of cross-voting and abstentions by MPs belonging to several non-UPA parties.

So shameless were activities and public pronouncements of the top functionaries of the two parties in the run-up to the trust vote that the entire country started suspecting that the Government was up to some mischief. Indeed, in my speech in Parliament on 21 July, I had specifically referred to the corrupt means being employed by a Government which, in the name of promising nuclear power, was resorting to "horse power" to save itself. Honourable Members from several other opposition parties also accused the Government of indulging in the worst kind of horse-trading to convert its minority into majority.

The Prime Minister had asked in a tone of injured innocence: "Where is the proof?" After the incontrovertible proof that our three MPs produced in front of the Speaker, the Prime Minister has no moral right to continue in office. His is a tainted victory. After having devalued the office of the Prime Minister by allowing the misuse of several democratic institutions for highly questionable ends — which includes misuse of the CBI and the Law Ministry in the Bofors case —, Dr. Manmohan Singh now stands exposed as one who blessed the desecration of the Temple of Democracy.

I am deeply saddened by the fact that several of our own MPs became a party to the murder of democracy. The BJP has decided to expel them with immediate effect.

The BJP profusely congratulates our brave three MPs who not only resisted the temptation of crores of rupees offered by the Congress-SP combine to abstain from the vote, but chose to expose this scandal in an effective manner.

I would also like to congratulate several other MPs, belonging to both the BJP and other political parties, for defying the threats, blackmailing tactics and allurements coming from persons in very high quarters in the Government and the Congress-SP combine. They have stood by the high standards of parliamentary behavior expected from every political party.

The cash-for-votes scandal has raised serious questions about the journalistic ethic followed by the TV news channel which recorded it. The right thing for the channel to have done is to show it and let the people draw their own conclusion. Indeed, at the meeting party leaders at the Speaker's Chamber yesterday, several opposition leaders, including Shri Vijay Kumar Malhotra of the BJP, had demanded that the tape be shown to all MPs before the trust vote was taken. After listening to the account given by our three MPs, the BJP is left with no doubt that, had the channel broadcast the tape, the Government would have been in the dock before the trust vote was taken.

Soon after our three MPs exposed the scandal inside the House, the TV channel had announced, at around 4.30 pm yesterday, that it had handed over the tape to the Speaker. We have now come to know that the tape had not been delivered to the Speaker's office till 1.00 pm today. This raises great apprehensions in everyone's mind about the possibility of doctoring of the tape.

The BJP demands that the Speaker immediately convene a meeting of the leaders of all parties, show the tape to them, and institute a time-bound inquiry. The outcome of this inquiry must be made known before Parliament convenes for the Monsoon Session in August.

The BJP has decided to launch a nationwide campaign to make the people aware of the illegitimacy of the UPA Government and its unsuitability to continue in office after exposure of the cash-for-votes scandal. The campaign, which will begin from Sunday (27 July), will also highlight the UPA Government's saga of failures and betrayals – above all, its failure to control skyrocketing prices of essential commodities, to ameliorate the plight of farmers, and to effectively fight the menace of terrorism.

Somnath Chatterjee - The Lotus among the comrades

Yesterday I'd written about the filth in Indian parliament and today I'm thrilled to see a Lotus blooming in that filth. Despite the relatively cleaner (lesser criminal credentials, lesser scams and corruption charges and almost not a single case of horse trading) background of the Left, there's no doubt that they have filled the Indian politics with the maximum filth with their hypocritical ideologies and total nonsense principles. Let me not remind everyone that they'd opposed the Quit India Movement and supported the Emergency. They had burnt effigies of Rabindranath Tagore, Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar and many other luminaries of Bengal renaissance in Bengal a few decades back stating that these personalities are representative of the Burjwa Class, the term plagiarized by the Left people from some French word referring to the rich people. They still hang pictures of a person like Stalin, who is no lesser evil than Hitler, in their party offices. There are zillion other filth that can be written about them. But amidst all the filth we do see a personality like Somnath Chatterjee who defies his party whips and decides to be a torch bearer of India's constitution. He is like a Pankaj, a lotus, that thrives in the filth, 'pank'. His decision to not step down from the post of speaker is an exemplary evidence of selflessness, nonpartisanism, and integrity in today's Indian politics of greed, opportunism and horse trading. The post of speaker is above any party. The role of the speaker is like a headmaster in a school. What he has done, even at the cost of being expelled from his party, is a rarity in today's politics. Everyone in Indian politics should take a lesson from him.

So at the end of the day, there's still hope that not everything is bad. There's still hope that the dawn will surely come.

This reminds me of one of my favorite Hindi songs written by Sahir.....

वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी, वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी
इन काली सदियों के सर से, जब रात का आंचल ढलकेगा
जब अम्बर झूम के नाचेगी, जब धरती नग़मे गाएगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

जिस सुबह की खातिर जुग-जुग से,हम सब मर-मर के जीते हैं
जिस सुबह की अमृत की धुन में, हम ज़हर के प्याले पीते हैं
इन भूखी प्यासी रूहों पर, एक दिन तो करम फ़रमायेगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

माना के अभी तेरे मेरे इन अरमानों की, कीमत कुछ नहीं
मिट्टी का भी है कुछ मोल मगर, इनसानों की कीमत कुछ भी नहीं
इनसानों की इज़्ज़त जब झूठे सिक्कों में ना तोली जायेगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

दौलत के लिये अब औरत की, इस्मत को ना बेचा जायेगा
चाहत को ना कुचला जायेगा, गैरत को ना बेचा जायेगा
अपनी काली करतूतों पर, जब ये दुनिया शरमायेगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

बीतेंगे कभी तो दिन आखिर, ये भूख और बेकारी के
टूटेंगे कभी तो बुत आखिर, दौलत की इजारेदारी की
अब एक अनोखी दुनिया की, बुनियाद उठाई जायेगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

मजबूर बुढ़ापा जब सूनी, राहों में धूल न फेंकेगा
मासूम लड़कपन जब गंदी, गलियों में भीख ना माँगेगा
हक माँगने वालों को, जिस दिन सूली न दिखाई जायेगी
वो सुबह कभी तो आयेगी ...

PM's reply to the debate on the Motion of Confidence in the Lok Sabha

This is worth reading. Something like this should have been published from PM's office long time back when the opposition parties were criticizing the Nuclear Deal with all baseless allegations. I think this is the only document from government's side which explains the benefits of the deal in such explicit manner for common people.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

22nd July, 2008, New Delhi.

The Leader of Opposition, Shri L.K. Advani has chosen to use all manner of abusive objectives to describe my performance. He has described me as the weakest Prime Minister, a nikamma PM, and of having devalued the office of PM. To fulfill his ambitions, he has made at least three attempts to topple our government. But on each occasion his astrologers have misled him. This pattern, I am sure, will be repeated today. At his ripe old age, I do not expect Shri Advani to change his thinking. But for his sake and India's sake, I urge him at least to change his astrologers so that he gets more accurate predictions of things to come.

As for Shri Advani's various charges, I do not wish to waste the time of the House in rebutting them. All I can say is that before leveling charges of incompetence on others, Shri Advani should do some introspection. Can our nation forgive a Home Minister who slept when the terrorists were knocking at the doors of our Parliament? Can our nation forgive a person who single handedly provided the inspiration for the destruction of the Babri Masjid with all the terrible consequences that followed? To atone for his sins, he suddenly decided to visit Pakistan and there he discovered new virtues in Mr. Jinnah. Alas, his own party and his mentors in the RSS disowned him on this issue. Can our nation approve the conduct of a Home Minister who was sleeping while Gujarat was burning leading to the loss of thousands of innocent lives? Our friends in the Left Front should ponder over the company they are forced to keep because of miscalculations by their General Secretary.

As for my conduct, it is for this august House and the people of India to judge. All I can say is that in all these years that I have been in office, whether as Finance Minister or Prime Minister, I have felt it as a sacred obligation to use the levers of power as a societal trust to be used for transforming our economy and polity, so that we can get rid of poverty, ignorance and disease which still afflict millions of our people. This is a long and arduous journey. But every step taken in this direction can make a difference. And that is what we have sought to do in the last four years. How far we have succeeded is something I leave to the judgement of the people of India.

When I look at the composition of the opportunistic group opposed to us, it is clear to me that the clash today is between two alternative visions of India's future. The one vision represented by the UPA and our allies seeks to project India as a self confident and united nation moving forward to gain its rightful place in the comity of nations, making full use of the opportunities offered by a globalised world, operating on the frontiers of modern science and technology and using modern science and technology as important instruments of national economic and social development. The opposite vision is of a motley crowd opposed to us who have come together to share the spoils of office to promote their sectional, sectarian and parochial interests. Our Left colleagues should tell us whether Shri L.K. Advani is acceptable to them as a Prime Ministerial candidate. Shri L.K. Advani should enlighten us if he will step aside as Prime Ministerial candidate of the opposition in favour of the choice of UNPA. They should take the country into confidence on this important issue.

I have already stated in my opening remarks that the House has been dragged into this debate unnecessarily. I wish our attention had not been diverted from some priority areas of national concern. These priorities are :

(i) Tackling the imported inflation caused by steep increase in oil prices. Our effort is to control inflation without hurting the rate of growth and employment.

(ii) To revitalize agriculture. We have decisively reversed the declining trend of investment and resource flow in agriculture. The Finance Minister has dealt with the measures we have taken in this regard. We have achieved a record foodgrain production of 231 million tones. But we need to redouble our efforts to improve agricultural productivity.

(iii) To improve the effectiveness of our flagship pro poor programmes such as National Rural Employment Programme, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Nation-wide Mid day meal programme, Bharat Nirman to improve the quality of rural infrastructure of roads, electricity, safe drinking water, sanitation, irrigation, National Rural Health Mission and the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission. These programmes are yielding solid results. But a great deal more needs to be done to improve the quality of implementation.

(iv) We have initiated a major thrust in expanding higher education. The objective is to expand the gross enrolment ratio in higher education from 11.6 per cent to 15 per cent by the end of the 11th Plan and to 21% by the end of 12th Plan. To meet these goals, we have an ambitious programme which seeks to create 30 new universities, of which 14 will be world class, 8 new IITs, 7 new IIMs, 20 new IIITs, 5 new IISERs, 2 Schools of planning and Architecture, 10 NITs, 373 new degree colleges and 1000 new polytechnics. And these are not just plans. Three new IISERs are already operational and the remaining two will become operational from the 2008-09 academic session. Two SPAs will be starting this year. Six of the new IITs start their classes this year. The establishment of the new universities is at an advanced stage of planning.

(v) A nation wide Skill Development Programme and the enactment of the Right to Education Act,

(vi) Approval by Parliament of the new Rehabilitation and Resettlement policy and enactment of legislation to provide social security benefits to workers in the unorganized sector.

(vii) The new 15 Point Programme for Minorities, the effective implementation of empowerment programmes for the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, paying particular emphasis on implementation of Land Rights for the tribals.

(viii) Equally important is the effective implementation of the Right to Information Act to impart utmost transparency to processes of governance. The Administrative Reforms Commission has made valuable suggestions to streamline the functioning of our public administration.

(ix) To deal firmly with terrorist elements, left wing extremism and communal elements that are attempting to undermine the security and stability of the country. We have been and will continue to vigorously pursue investigations in the major terrorist incidents that have taken place. Charge-sheets have been filed in almost all the cases. Our intelligence agencies and security forces are doing an excellent job in very difficult circumstances. They need our full support. We will take all possible steps to streamline their functioning and strengthen their effectiveness.

Considerable work has been done in all these areas but debates like the one we are having detract our attention from attending to these essential programmes and remaining items on our agenda. All the same, we will redouble our efforts to attend to these areas of priority concerns.

I say in all sincerity that this session and debate was unnecessary because I have said on several occasions that our nuclear agreement after being endorsed by the IAEA and the Nuclear Suppliers Group would be submitted to this august House for expressing its view. All I had asked our Left colleagues was : please allow us to go through the negotiating process and I will come to Parliament before operationalising the nuclear agreement. This simple courtesy which is essential for orderly functioning of any Government worth the name, particularly with regard to the conduct of foreign policy, they were not willing to grant me. They wanted a veto over every single step of negotiations which is not acceptable. They wanted me to behave as their bonded slave. The nuclear agreement may not have been mentioned in the Common Minimum Programme. However, there was an explicit mention of the need to develop closer relations with the USA but without sacrificing our independent foreign policy. The Congress Election Manifesto had explicitly referred to the need for strategic engagement with the USA and other great powers such as Russia.

In 1991, while presenting the Budget for 1991-92, as Finance Minister, I had stated : No power on earth can stop an idea whose time has come. I had then suggested to this august House that the emergence of India as a major global power was an idea whose time had come.

Carrying forward the process started by Shri Rajiv Gandhi of preparing India for the 21st century, I outlined a far reaching programme of economic reform whose fruits are now visible to every objective person. Both the Left and the BJP had then opposed the reform. Both had said we had mortgaged the economy to America and that we would bring back the East India Company. Subsequently both these parties have had a hand at running the Government. None of these parties have reversed the direction of economic policy laid down by the Congress Party in 1991. The moral of the story is that political parties should be judged not by what they say while in opposition but by what they do when entrusted with the responsibilities of power.

I am convinced that despite their opportunistic opposition to the nuclear agreement, history will compliment the UPA Government for having taken another giant step forward to lead India to become a major power centre of the evolving global economy. Jawaharlal Nehru's vision of using atomic energy as a major instrument of development will become a living reality.

What is the nuclear agreement about? It is all about widening our development options, promoting energy security in a manner which will not hurt our precious environment and which will not contribute to pollution and global warming.

India needs to grow at the rate of at least ten per cent per annum to get rid of chronic poverty, ignorance and disease which still afflict millions of our people. A basic requirement for achieving this order of growth is the availability of energy, particularly electricity. We need increasing quantities of electricity to support our agriculture, industry and to give comfort to our householders. The generation of electricity has to grow at an annual rate of 8 to 10 per cent.

Now, hydro-carbons are one source of generating power and for meeting our energy requirements. But our production of hydro-carbons both of oil and gas is far short of our growing requirements. We are heavily dependent on imports. We all know the uncertainty of supplies and of prices of imported hydro-carbons.

We have to diversify our sources of energy supply.

We have large reserves of coal but even these are inadequate to meet all our needs by 2050. But more use of coal will have an adverse impact on pollution and climate. We can develop hydro-power and we must. But many of these projects hurt the environment and displace large number of people. We must develop renewable sources of energy particularly solar energy. But we must also make full use of atomic energy which is a clean environment friendly source of energy. All over the world, there is growing realization of the importance of atomic energy to meet the challenge of energy security and climate change.

India's atomic scientists and technologists are world class. They have developed nuclear energy capacities despite heavy odds. But there are handicaps which have adversely affected our atomic energy programme. First of all, we have inadequate production of uranium. Second, the quality of our uranium resources is not comparable to those of other producers.Third, after the Pokharan nuclear test of 1974 and 1998 the outside world has imposed embargo on trade with India in nuclear materials, nuclear equipment and nuclear technology. As a result, our nuclear energy programme has suffered. Some twenty years ago, the Atomic Energy Commission had laid down a target of 10000 MW of electricity generation by the end of the twentieth century. Today, in 2008 our capacity is about 4000 MW and due to shortage of uranium many of these plants are operating at much below their capacity.

The nuclear agreement that we wish to negotiate will end India's nuclear isolation, nuclear apartheid and enable us to take advantage of international trade in nuclear materials, technologies and equipment. It will open up new opportunities for trade in dual use high technologies opening up new pathways to accelerate industrialization of our country. Given the excellent quality of our nuclear scientists and technologists, I have reasons to believe that in a reasonably short period of time, India would emerge as an important exporter of nuclear technologies, and equipment for civilian purposes.

When I say this I am reminded of the visionary leadership of Shri Rajiv Gandhi who was a strong champion of computerization and use of information technologies for nation building. At that time, many people laughed at this idea. Today, information technology and software is a sun-rise industry with an annual turnover soon approaching 50 billion US dollars. I venture to think that our atomic energy industry will play a similar role in the transformation of India's economy.

The essence of the matter is that the agreements that we negotiate with USA, Russia, France and other nuclear countries will enable us to enter into international trade for civilian use without any interference with our strategic nuclear programme. The strategic programme will continue to be developed at an autonomous pace determined solely by our own security perceptions. We have not and we will not accept any outside interference or monitoring or supervision of our strategic programme. Our strategic autonomy will never be compromised. We are willing to look at possible amendments to our Atomic Energy Act to reinforce our solemn commitment that our strategic autonomy will never be compromised.

I confirm that there is nothing in these agreements which prevents us from further nuclear tests if warranted by our national security concerns. All that we are committed to is a voluntary moratorium on further testing. Thus the nuclear agreements will not in any way affect our strategic autonomy. The cooperation that the international community is now willing to extend to us for trade in nuclear materials, technologies and equipment for civilian use will be available to us without signing the NPT or the CTBT.

This I believe is a measure of the respect that the world at large has for India, its people and their capabilities and our prospects to emerge as a major engine of growth for the world economy. I have often said that today there are no international constraints on India's development. The world marvels at our ability to seek our social and economic salvation in the framework of a functioning democracy committed to the rule of law and respect for fundamental human freedoms. The world wants India to succeed. The obstacles we face are at home, particularly in our processes of domestic governance.

I wish to remind the House that in 1998 when the Pokharan II tests were undertaken, the Group of Eight leading developed countries had passed a harsh resolution condemning India and called upon India to sign the NPT and CTBT. Today, at the Hokkaido meeting of the G-8 held recently in Japan, the Chairman's summary has welcomed cooperation in civilian nuclear energy between India and the international community. This is a measure of the sea change in the perceptions of the international community our trading with India for civilian nuclear energy purposes that has come about in less than ten years.

Our critics falsely accuse us, that in signing these agreements, we have surrendered the independence of foreign policy and made it subservient to US interests. In this context, I wish to point out that the cooperation in civil nuclear matters that we seek is not confined to the USA. Change in the NSG guidelines would be a passport to trade with 45 members of the Nuclear Supplier Group which includes Russia, France, and many other countries.

We appreciate the fact that the US has taken the lead in promoting cooperation with India for nuclear energy for civilian use. Without US initiative, India's case for approval by the IAEA or the Nuclear Suppliers Group would not have moved forward.

But this does not mean that there is any explicit or implicit constraint on India to pursue an independent foreign policy determined by our own perceptions of our enlightened national interest. Some people are spreading the rumours that there are some secret or hidden agreements over and above the documents made public. I wish to state categorically that there are no secret or hidden documents other than the 123 agreement, the Separation Plan and the draft of the safeguard agreement with the IAEA. It has also been alleged that the Hyde Act will affect India's ability to pursue an independent foreign policy. The Hyde Act does exist and it provides the US administration the authorization to enter into civil nuclear cooperation with India without insistence on full scope safeguards and without signing of the NPT. There are some prescriptive clauses but they cannot and they will not be allowed to affect in any way the conduct of our foreign policy. Our commitment is to what has been agreed in the 123 Agreement. There is nothing in this Agreement which will affect our strategic autonomy or our ability to pursue an independent foreign policy. I state categorically that our foreign policy, will at all times be determined by our own assessment of our national interest. This has been true in the past and will be true in future regarding our relations with big powers as well as with our neighbours in West Asia, notably Iran, Iraq, Palestine and the Gulf countries.

We have differed with the USA on their intervention in Iraq. I had explicitly stated at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington DC in July 2005 that intervention in Iraq was a big mistake. With regard to Iran, our advice has been in favour of moderation and we would like that the issues relating to Iran's nuclear programme which have emerged should be resolved through dialogue and discussions in the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

I should also inform the House that our relations with the Arab world are very good. Two years ago, His Majesty, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was the Chief Guest at our Republic Day. More recently, we have played host to the President of Iran, President of Syria, the King of Jordan, the Emir of Qatar and the Emir of Kuwait. With all these countries we have historic civilisational and cultural links which we are keen to further develop to our mutual benefit. Today, we have strategic relationship with all major powers including USA, Russia, France, UK, Germany, Japan, China, Brazil, Nigeria and South Africa. We are Forging new partnerships with countries of East Asia, South East Asia and Africa.

CONCLUSION

The Management and governance of the world's largest, most diverse and most vibrant democracy is the greatest challenge any person can be entrusted with, in this world. It has been my good fortune that I was entrusted with this challenge over four years ago. I thank with all sincerity the Chairperson of the UPA, the leaders of the Constituent Parties of the UPA and every member of my Party for the faith and trust they reposed in me. I once again recall with gratitude the guidance and support I have received from Shri Jyoti Basu and Sardar Harkishen Singh Surjeet.

I have often said that I am a politician by accident. I have held many diverse responsibilities. I have been a teacher, I have been an official of the Government of India, I have been a member of this greatest of Parliaments, but I have never forgotten my life as a young boy in a distant village.

Every day that I have been Prime Minister of India I have tried to remember that the first ten years of my life were spent in a village with no drinking water supply, no electricity, no hospital, no roads and nothing that we today associate with modern living. I had to walk miles to school, I had to study in the dim light of a kerosene oil lamp. This nation gave me the opportunity to ensure that such would not be the life of our children in the foreseeable future.

Sir, my conscience is clear that on every day that I have occupied this high office, I have tried to fulfill the dream of that young boy from that distant village.

The greatness of democracy is that we are all birds of passage! We are here today, gone tomorrow! But in the brief time that the people of India entrust us with this responsibility, it is our duty to be honest and sincere in the discharge of these responsibilities. As it is said in our sacred texts, we are responsible for our actions and we must act without coveting the rewards of such action. Whatever I have done in this high office I have done so with a clear conscience and the best interests of my country and our people at heart. I have no other claims to make.

Latest pot boiler: Indian Parliament

It's quite some time that I have written something in my blog. Actually I was waiting for something interesting to write. The recent developments in Indian politics for the past few days was providing me enough fodder to write something. Then today's incident in the Parliament was so interesting that I was compelled to take up my pen again.
Let me keep all statistics aside. Just the turn of events were enough for even the most apolitical person to be interested in politics. I believe all the proceedings in parliament are recorded meticulously. I'm sure any aspiring director, looking for a 'hatke' thriller with all elements of sex, love, passion, betrayal, violence, vengeance, loyalty and all other possible ingredients that guarantee the box office success of any movie, should study all these proceedings properly to come up with a nice plot. Lately there have been enough of thrillers showing a brother sleeping with his brother's wife, wife getting her husband killed in order to help her ex-boyfriend, sister seducing her sister's husband and finally provoking to have sex on a rainy night, every other person in an office having sex with with office mates at an office mate's flat and many more interesting and, at times, unbelievable plots. I think more interesting things happen in our very own parliament. Off course the sex part might be implicit at times, but all other aspects are quite explicit. The only difference is that in the movies there's still a hero and a villain in most cases. The hero is more often than not shown as the virtuous one. But in the parliament it's really hard to get a hero. It's a story of all villains. We don't have a choice to elect a hero against a villain. We've the option to just choose the lesser devil, or the shit that stinks less or the dog that barks less. If by mistake there appears a hero, he is never brought in front of the electorate perhaps because his peers might think that the electorates, like man eaters, might get the taste of human blood and henceforth always look for men, rather than goats and sheep.That's why Dr. Manmohan Singh has never been allowed to contest a Lok Sabha election. We never got a chance to elect a clean, educated, upright politician.
Today's climax before the trust vote was just beyond anyone's imagination. Even if it turns out that the BJP had orchestrated the entire episode of three of their MPs being offered three crores by Congress and Samajwaadi Party top notches for abstaining from voting, still the turn of events can surely make Hitchcock embarrassed. It's known to all that each major party at state or center has been resorting to 'horse trading' since ever. Very few come to limelight but there's no denying the fact that this is as prevelant as the cops taking bribes. Only few cases, like Narasimha Rao's case of bribing Shibu Shoren in nineties for support, hog the headlines. But never the episode had a climax like today when three BJP MPs, who themselves are not Yudhisthirs in their own space, displayed one crore of rupees, allegedly given as advance payment for abstaining from voting, in the parliament. There's no reason to believe that these three MPs wanted to uphold their integrity and hence brought the entire episode to public. It's highly possible that they might have got better 'offers' from BJP to do so. Gone are the days when we were the only people who used to get multiple offers from various companies and use one against the other to crak better 'deals'. Shibu Soren had offers from both BJP and Congress. These three MPs would surely have multiple offers.
The dynamics that play the final act is a matter of suspense. Like it is really a suspense who actually wrote the script that Dr. Manmohan Singh couldn't read in the parliament and finally uploaded at his website. Anyone who has been following him for the past 17 years (since he became the finance minister in Narasimha Rao's government in early nineties) know very well that he would be the last person to write this -

The Leader of Opposition, Shri L.K. Advani has chosen to use all manner of abusive objectives to describe my performance. He has described me as the weakest Prime Minister, a nikamma PM, and of having devalued the office of PM. To fulfill his ambitions, he has made at least three attempts to topple our government. But on each occasion his astrologers have misled him. This pattern, I am sure, will be repeated today. At his ripe old age, I do not expect Shri Advani to change his thinking. But for his sake and India's sake, I urge him at least to change his astrologers so that he gets more accurate predictions of things to come.

Dr. Manmohan Singh has been the best example of "If you're bad, why can't I be good". His restraint in his speeches and reaction to critics have been exemplary. But still finally we saw this very unexpected thing. This is as unusual as Johny Walker talking in Amitabh's voice!!

The role of Left is really very amusing. They are like cancerous growth on India's body. The problem is that they are not big enough viruses to attack the heart or brain so that anyone would die, but they are irritating enough to attack areas like throats, breasts etc which even when operated have some embarrassing marks. The Left are not a significant entity that can kill India and that has been proved beyond doubt today when even after their withdrawal Dr. Manmohan Singh is still going ahead with the Nuclear Deal. But they are indeed very irritating - something like those insects that fill your lamp shades around Diwali and you've to clean them every year. The Left can provide enough comic relief from time to time. Today's incident should have taught a good lesson to all the comrades. In most Hindi movies you always have some small-time rowdies and thugs who play as nth level local agents to the big don. These people are off course not the Gabbars or Shakals, not even the Shakti Kapoors of the day. They are like Keshto Mukherjee playing a don's role after 100 pegs of scotch. The Left are like that..... not much to worry about, but enough to laugh out loud.

Then there are the vamps - the Mayawatis, Jayalalitas, Meneka Gandhis, Mamta Banerjees and Sushma Swarajs. Each one is unique in their own apporach. Sushma Swaraj doesn't want sexy stuff in TVs, Mamta Banerjee is good at blocking roads at the peak hours in office days in South Calcutta and playing kabaddi-kabaddi with Vajpayee, Jayalalitha allegedly has the biggest collection of shoes and perhaps one of the most influencial ladies in the world who officially has a girlfriend, Meneka Gandhi is concerned more about the death of animals than humans and Mayawati aspires to become the first Prime Minister in India who would prefer to talk to the President of United States in Hindi!! Well, I totally forgot about the Congress' High Command, without whose diktat no one in Congress even winks!! Wow, isn't that a wide range of characters for writing an interesting story?

But the striking thing is that despite all these, our country continues to grow at a rate of 8% per annum. That's a miracle. Just think if our politicians were educated and sophisticated then what all we could have done.That's another suspense. You never know. Perhaps the skill and expertise that the work force of India has developed owes everything to this non functional politicians. Had they been good we all won't have worked so hard for our country......

Vande Mataram!!

Tagore's letter to Viceroy of India renouncing Knighthood in protest of Jalianwallahbag mass killing

Your Excellency,

The enormity of the measures taken by the Government in the Punjab for quelling some local disturbances has, with a rude shock, revealed to our minds the helplessness of our position as British subjects in India. The disproportionate severity of the punishments inflicted upon the unfortunate people and the methods of carrying them out, we are convinced, are without parallel in the history of civilised governments, barring some conspicuous exceptions, recent and remote. Considering that such treatment has been meted out to a population, disarmed and resourceless, by a power which has the most terribly efficient organisation for destruction of human lives, we must strongly assert that it can claim no political expediency, far less moral justification. The accounts of the insults and sufferings by our brothers in Punjab have trickled through the gagged silence, reaching every corner of India, and the universal agony of indignation roused in the hearts of our people has been ignored by our rulers- possibly congratulating themselves for imparting what they imagine as salutary lessons. This callousness has been praised by most of the Anglo-Indian papers, which have in some cases gone to the brutal length of making fun of our sufferings, without receiving the least check from the same authority, relentlessly careful in something every cry of pain of judgment from the organs representing the sufferers. Knowing that our appeals have been in vain and that the passion of vengeance is building the noble vision of statesmanship in out Government, which could so easily afford to be magnanimous, as befitting its physical strength and normal tradition, the very least that I can do for my country is to take all consequences upon myself in giving voice to the protest of the millions of my countrymen, surprised into a dumb anguish of terror. The time has come when badges of honour make our shame glaring in the incongruous context of humiliation, and I for my part, wish to stand, shorn, of all special distinctions, by the side of those of my countrymen who, for their so called insignificance , are liable to suffer degradation not fit for human beings. And these are the reasons which have compelled me to ask Your Excellency, with due reference and regret, to relieve me of my title of knighthood, which I had the honour to accept from His Majesty the King at the hands of your predecessor, for whose nobleness of heart I still entertain great admiration.

Yours faithfully,
RABINDRANATH TAGORE
Calcutta,
6, Dwarakanath Tagore Lane,
May 30, 1919

Who's a lesser devil among BJP & Congress?

Let me first tackle the communal vs. secular angle. Congress is perceived (and that’s what everyone in Congress claims) as a secular party whereas BJP a communal party. So let’s get some basic facts. As per dictionary I don’t think communal (which means pertaining to any particular commune or community) is the right antonym for secular (which means not pertaining to any religion). I’d rather prefer to use the word non-communal in place of secular, because that’s what it means in the context of BJP and Congress. Even though everyone in Congress claims to be a non communal party, long back Md. Ali Jinnah and so many other people associated with Muslim League never accepted that. The very fact that Jinnah and Muslim League supporters didn’t get enough space within Congress, finally created Pakistan. That’s a blatant fact that nobody can deny. All those people, who didn’t get space in Congress, did think that Congress was a communal party. I strongly believe the last non communal personality in India was Mahatma Gandhi and every other politician fitted into the communal or non communal bill as per the prospect and space he/she got in any party. Had Jinnah got the space within Congress, that Nehru got, there won’t have been a Pakistan. Let’s fast forward to post independence scenario. The Jan Singh leaders (Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, Jayaprakash Narayan etc) didn’t get space within Congress, the same way as Annadurai, MGR, NTR, et al, didn’t get space and floated separate parties specifically for Dravidian and Telegu communities. At present there are so many regional or community based parties in India. So it’s a fact that Congress didn’t have space to accommodate the aspirations of the leaders of these communities. So I don’t think Congress can take the credit of being a non-communal party. I believe by ‘communal’ and ‘non-communal’ (or secular and non-secular) people generally perceive the idea of how much hostile or friendly a party is towards any religious minority community. So let’s now turn to some statistics with regards to the hostilities of BJP and Congress against minority communities.

In the 1984 anti Sikh riots, after the murder of Indira Gandhi, 2,733 people were killed only in Delhi. It’s wide known that the riots had implicit support of many Congress leaders and the police force didn’t come to the rescue to the Sikh victims. Congress leaders like Jagdish Tytler and Sajjan Kumar, convicted of mob instigation during those riots were in power for quite some time after the riots. Tytler was even given a birth in the UPA government. A very similar thing repeated in Gujrat in 2002 where 254 Hindus and 790 Muslims were killed in Hindu-Muslim clashes in retaliation to at least 15, out of 59 karsevaks, being charred to death when a coach of the Sabarmati Express was set ablaze near Godhra railway station on February 27 by Muslim fanatics. The state apathy and police inaction, that resulted in the carnage was exactly same as what had happened in Delhi in 1984. Both the 1984 anti Sikh riots and 2002 post Godhra riots are equally ghastly episodes and both Congress and BJP governments are responsible for the carnage. But still number of Sikhs killed in 1984 in Delhi alone is more than three times the number of Muslims killed in 2002 in Gujrat. So at least in this case, statistically I see BJP as a lesser devil.

During the 21 months of the Emergency period, between June 25, 1975 and March 21, 1977, more than 100,000 persons were jailed without trial. This was in fact twice the number of arrests made during the 1942 Quit India movement throughout the Sub-continent. During this time twenty custodial deaths were reported. This was again the handwork of the mother of Indian National Congress, Mrs. Indira Gandhi. This is a sort of atrocity towards the minority community, who belonged not to a different religion, but to a different ideology.

Next, let’s discuss the Babri Masjid Demolition issue. Over one thousand people were killed in incidents of violence throughout India after Babri Masjid was demolished in 6th December, 1992. There has been a tendency to label these incidents as "Hindu-Muslim riots," but as is typical in most instances of communal violence, there is mounting evidence that many people killed have actually been the victims of police gunfire. Why has such violence been used against innocent people? One wonders what stopped the government and the security forces from maintaining the peace and preventing the demolition of the mosque as the terrible events of 6th December, 1992, were unfolding. Why has such tolerance been shown toward the attackers in Ayodhya, who were permitted, for over a day and a half, to demolish the mosque, build the "temple foundation," and leave the city in special buses and trains without being appre­hended, even after the state had been under direct president's rule for more than twenty-four hours? The Babri Masjid demolition was the culmination of Mr L K Ldvani’s Rath Yatra (procession) in 1990, which was directly linked to the communal car­nage that took place at various cities along his route. If the Congress government has today chosen to charge Advani (and others involved in the Rath Yatra) with crimes of instigating mobs, then why was he not arrested during the course of 2 years, especially since Advani and his supporters had long advertised their intention of tearing down the mosque? If Advani is responsible for the communal violence the Congress run government at the centre, lead by Mr. P V Narasimha Rao, can’t also be relieved of the charges of inaction. Advani’s Rath Yatra and Babri Masjid demolition were just very intelligently conceived devices that helped BJP to come to power very soon, the same way Congress came to power after the 1984 riots (and also BJP came to power after the post Godhra riots). Somehow it’s a very disturbing trend that people of India bring to power the very party that had indulged in some sort of ghastly carnage and communal violence immediately after the violence and I see both Congress and BJP exploiting this to their benefit. So here also I don’t see any reason why I should brand BJP as more communal than Congress. Recently the Congress’ apathy to condemn the Left Front government in West Bengal, which is also a partner in UPA, for their state sponsored terrorism and extreme human rights violations at Singur & Nandigram, for which the sitting Left Front has lost miserably in the recent Panchayat Polls, has also shown that Congress doesn’t care to take up minority causes unless it helps them electorally, something what can be said for BJP also.

Now let’s turn towards economy and growth. Based on the findings of this paper, between 1987 and 1999 earnings differences between Muslims and non-Muslims have increased, to the detriment of the former. During the entire period Congress was in power and had they really been keen on improving the conditions of Muslims then they would have done something about it. But the fact remains that Congress has been just using the Muslim-factor to their benefit for electoral success. The conditions of Muslims didn’t change significantly during BJP tenure also but then neither did it change during Congress regime.

Lot has been told about Gujrat and Narendra Modi’s atrocities towards Muslims. But the basic fact is that, despite all the riots, Gujrat is still one of the most prosperous states in India. It’s GDP is $54billion (5% of India’s GDP), growing at the rate of 12.17% (against India’s 9.4% during 2005-06), with per capita GDP of $1068 (against $790 for 2006-2007), which is 6th highest among all states. A more striking fact (more details) is that Gujrat’s 9% Muslim population has a literacy rate of 73%, higher by 5% than that of Hindus (against India’s literacy rate 65% among Hindus and 59% among Mulsims).

The BJP lead NDA regime had its share of goodies and baddies, very much same as the present UPA regime. I don’t want to blame UPA for the recent rise in inflation or terrorism. I do accept that they are just helpless and NDA would have been also in similar position now. What frustrates me is the way Congress gives in to its allies. They removed the competent Dayanidhi Maran from Telecom ministry just to please Karunanidhi. Their budging before the Left for the Nuclear Deal is ridiculous. The waiver of farm loans is just a populist measure without actually solving the ailment of the farmers. With economic stalwarts like Montek Singh & Manmohan Singh & a fairly decent Chidambaram the potential of Congress to really elevate India’s economic condition is enormous. But they don’t have the guts to take bold steps and rise above electoral outcome. BJP would have also cared more for the electoral outcome, but then I feel they have more guts to do things. Also they are less hypocrites. If Congress claim that they are pro-Muslim I don’t see any statistics showing their contribution to improve conditions of Muslims or for that matter any minority community. Also I don’t see anything that says that BJP has hindered the growth of Muslims. So I conclude that BJP is a lesser devil than Congress!!

How much is Congress responsible for high inflation

The inflation has risen from 4.1 in February to 3 year high of 7.6 in May and it’s expected to touch 10 in coming months. Global trends are cited as the primary reason for the present situation. The IMF has reported that food prices in February were 65% more than in 2005; metal prices were up by 70% since 2005 and petroleum products have shot up by over 175%. A buoyant economy, shortfall in production of several goods, sky-rocketing crude prices, and the diversion of food crops for bio-fuel have all contributed to rising prices. These global trends have impacted not only India, but every country. Even China has reported an 11 year high inflation of 8.7%.

With the Lok Sabha elections due in a few months from now, this is really very unfortunate for the Congress. Very aptly the opposition has been using the price hike and inflation as an ammunition against Congress. The recent state election in Karnataka seems to have yielded results to BJP on this ground. But truly speaking none of the causes of high inflation can be directly attributed to the Congress. The economy is strong and we’ve been harvesting record wheat (67 million metric ton in 2003-04) & rice (89). We’re the second highest producer of both rice and wheat, just behind China. Still, we see high inflation due to the external factors, none of which could have been directly controlled by the UPA government. The measures taken by RBI are also very correct and typical to such situations.

Inflation is caused when the supply is less, demand is high and people have money to buy. Theoretically to tackle inflation the local currency, INR in this case, should be allowed to appreciate, which means the value of dollar should decrease (one way of doing this is to stop dollars purchase, thus reducing the demand for dollars). This results in lesser import cost, and hence reduction in price of all the imported commodities. But this impacts the export adversely, because exporters now earn lesser. This results in some exporters refraining from exporting stuff outside, which results in availability of more commodities in local market, which results in increase of supply and hence reduction in price. The second measure is to increase bank interest rates, thus resulting in people refraining from taking more loans from banks and keeping more money in banks. This results in less money floating in the market/industries. Hence the production is impacted, dividends are lowered, people have lesser money to spend and thus finally the demand (or buying capacity) reduces, which in turn helps to reduce inflation. At the same time the government has more money (in banks) at its disposal, which can be used for many developmental work. RBI has exactly done these two things. It has stopped buying dollars and hence allowed INR to appreciate. It has also increased the bank interest rates.
But still, isn’t there anything that the UPA government, lead by Congress, can do at this moment? Also is there anything that they have done wrong, which is having an adverse effect now? Yes, they can surely do something that will impact inflation in the long run, but not before the election and hence I’m sure they will never do that. Also it’s not possible for the illiterate electorate to appreciate the point.

Apart from the measures, mentioned earlier, for curbing inflation, there’s another indirect way, that is to increase the supply and match the demand. One of the reasons for the present inflation is scarcity in wheat and rice in the world market. Isn’t there any way to increase the production of both these grains significantly in India? The prices in the international market for these grains is now very high. If we have any surplus, after feeding our unfed and partially fed population, we can make a killing. At present we’re produce little surplus rice to export around 3 million tons of rice and just adequate wheat to feed our own people. But still not everyone in our country is fed adequately. If we can produce more rice and wheat we can surely add value to the nutrition of our own people. If we can produce even more we can surely export the surplus. At present the yield, metric ton of grain produced per hectare, for wheat is only 2.63 (10th in the world), whereas in China it’s 3.93 (7th), USA 2.97 (9th) and UK 7.78 (1st). For rice India’s yield is just 3.12 (17th), even lower than Bangladesh, which is 3.6 (14th), whereas in China it’s 6.06 (8th) and Egypt 9.52 (1st). UK & Egypt, with highest yield for wheat & rice, have much smaller cultivable lands and hence we may choose to argue that emulating them might not be feasible. But we can always emulate China, which has comparable cultivable lands. If we operate at China’s yield we can produce 100 million tons of wheat and 250 million tons of rice, against the current consumption of 69 and 118 million tons respectively. The increase in yield is possible through better technology and infrastructures, which will come at a cost.

This additional cost could have come from the $15 billion that was waived as debt for farmers. It was argued that this will impact 40 million farmers who have taken loans from government banks. But in reality the 110 million farmers, who have taken loans from local money lenders at ridiculous interest rates like 120%, won’t be benefitted. Only in Punjab, farmers have debt of the order of $250 billion, out of which more than 50% is from local money lenders. So this $15 billion waiver is just a political gimmick. The entire amount could have been used for increasing the agricultural yield, which would have impacted the farmers in a much better way and solved the present food crisis to a great extent.

Recommended Reading for futility of the $15 billion waiver of farmers debt: http://conversationstarter.hbsp.com/2008/03/indias_25_billion_poison_pill.html

All statistics from http://www.nationmaster.com/red/country/in-india/agr-agriculture&all=1 (for 2003-04)