Aaditya has shot off another angry email to the health minister…knowing fully well that just like the last time, this one would most likely be ignored too. Both times he actually put in an enormous amount of research, expertise and perspective - formulating clear plans and suggesting ways and means to remedy the particular problems he’s been perturbed about. These weren’t a means to rant at the establishment. I suspect the powers that be lost no time in brushing his emails off to the trash bin in one clean sweep without so much as a curious glance. At least that seems the most likely scenario as he has never heard back.
It’s true that the Indian healthcare system inspires dread and frustration in a by and large susceptible population struggling with every bend and curve of the system, unable to find any alternative. Some of the obscene statistics that have now become the hallmark of Indian healthcare system around the globe include the 900,000 Indians that die every year from drinking contaminated water and the more gruesome “5.6 million child deaths” in India every year, making up more than half of the world’s total. In the age of ‘India shining’ and words such as ‘corporate superpower’ being bandied about, this almost seems like an anachronism, doesn’t it? I won’t harp on about more of these ‘numbers’ as generations have sat on these statistics with nothing changing except the hospital walls which now look more beige than red, with successive generations of patients, their relatives and ward boys having spat that ubiquitous ‘paan ki peek’ that is as much a part of the hospital as the flies that buzz above.
As with everything else, Indians of a few thousand years ago seem to have been a lot more proficient and systematic at managing health care problems as well. We all cram lessons in school about Charaka, the ancient physician and Sushruta, the ancient surgeon who were both pioneers in their respective fields. Even before their time, there is some evidence that Agnivesh wrote an encyclopedic treatise under the guidance of the ancient physician Atreya in the eighth century BC. There is some evidence that Emperor Ashoka Maurya (third century BC) was the first leader in world history to attempt to give health care to all of his citizens. Thus it was the India of antiquity which was the first state to give its citizens national health care.
What seems to have gone wrong? The modern Indian system of health care is loosely based on the tiered British system, the National Health Service or NHS. We have Primary health care centres at village/small town levels and district hospitals/referral centres at the district or city level to manage the greater numbers in the city and more complicated problems referred from the PHC’s. But here the similarity ends. The PHC’s, though ideally suited to the needs of a country like India, are hardly functional. In actual effect, the system works with major input from the private sector through corporate hospitals and what are called ‘polyclinics’ where money making takes precedence over all else. The ‘sarkari haspatal’ experience is nothing short of purgatory for most of its users.
The system as it works in the UK (and yes, they have had their own share of problems with a fully state funded system of health care recently) caters to ALL citizens irrespective of their paying capacity. From the most basic level of preventative care to highest level of surgical /interventional care, everything is offered free of cost. This is what the planners in India envisaged. Except that they forgot to make provision for the basic needs of such a system. In India, health care comes under the remit of state Governments with central government providing overall direction and recognizing areas of impetus through the five year plans. The Seventh Five-Year Plan (FY 1985-89) budgeted Rs 33.9 billion for health, an amount roughly double the outlay of the sixth plan. However, the catch is that health spending as a portion of total plan outlays, had declined over the years since the first plan in 1951, from a high of 3.3% of the total plan spending in FY 1951-55 to 1.9% of the total for the seventh plan.
But financial resourcing is only part of the problem. Health care professionals – their attitudes, ethics and respect for self and profession seem to be the major players in what ails this system. In 2005 the World Bank conducted a study and reported that "a detailed survey of the knowledge of medical practitioners for treating five common conditions in Delhi found that the average doctor in a public primary health center has around a 50-50 chance of recommending a harmful treatment". This is the more shameful aspect of how a country of over one billion and a so called emerging economic superpower manages the health of the nation. Note the setting here- the public primary health center. Something about that rankles. It’s as if the country’s polity has decided that the poor/lower middle class Indian can make do with second grade health care. How else do you explain the fetid, non-resourced environs of a primary health care center? A rickety chair and desk, plaster falling off walls, no medical equipment to speak of and no support system in place should a difficulty arise. So by logical extension, the only people you find populating these centres are ones who would rather be elsewhere but find themselves unable to.
The disparity between how core services such as health and education are delivered by the public sector and how things work in the economic/commercial hubs of the nation couldn’t be any wider. There has been a complete failure to integrate health with wider social and economic development. While money flows in certain sectors, health and education end up being the ‘poorer cousin.’ The attitude at the top is that of indifference and apathy. Obviously, people have been dying of poor health for decades and no political party has ever lost an election on this issue. So why bother? And here is where the story of downfall begins for a medical professional. A healthy and motivated workforce only exists where adequate support is available at the top. As with people in the financial sector, give these people proper working conditions, make resources available to them and they would work. At least a majority would.
The lowest rung of health care in the UK starts with the GP’s or General Practitioners, who also happen to be some of the best paid health professionals. They have a planned system of referral to the secondary level and a thoroughly self sufficient setup to cater to all health problems that can be managed at primary level. They work with immense pride in what they do and society recognizes them as the key player in improving community health. There is never any question of their being treated as inferior to a doctor in a tertiary hospital. The GP’s have support from well trained nursing and paramedical staff and work with a team rather than in isolation. They have an electronic medical records system and access to national guidelines and protocols for management of the plethora of non-serious conditions that they manage in the community. Above all, they are trained from an early stage to be ‘family physicians’ and are not therefore people who could not be specialists settling in for the compromise of general practice.
And that is precisely what we lack. An adequately paid ‘primary’ workforce that has access to at least basic infrastructure. No one is asking for an interventional radiologist at every PHC but basic medicines, syringes, gloves, antiseptics, wound dressing, local anesthetic in adequate quantities is elementary. Nobody can ever know all about all aspects of medicine and its futile to expect this from our overworked and underpaid band of community medics. In a country like India where roughly 700 million people have no access to specialist care, it is astonishing that there is no recognized training programme in community medicine! So what the world bank report failed to highlight perhaps was that these people who they found lacking in knowledge, were functioning not only without guidelines/protocols, knowledge resources and infrastructure to upgrade their learning but also without any semblance of training for the job they were expected to do. They carry out a job that no one else seems to want to do and morale, motivation, job satisfaction and pride in what they do is nonexistent. They need to be appreciated and recognized, not treated like second rate citizens in the medical fraternity.
Just about a quarter of a million trained doctors come out annually in our country and yet there is a perpetual shortage of medical staff in rural areas. The Government tried a policy of enforcing rural postings but why not invest in rural healthcare instead? If these doctors had a viable career option in the form of rural practice, why would they struggle in the cut throat competition in surplus areas?
While no one would dispute the fact that India has its own set of unique problems and no foreign model can be superimposed on it, the obvious lack of interest in improving grass root level healthcare is a disgrace. While we brag about an ever expanding ‘medical tourism’ industry and healthcare is set to become a $150 billion industry by 2017, this seems like a hollow victory in the absence of any sign of improvement in the health of those that need it most. It’s a slap in the faces of policymakers that less than 40% births in the country are attended by trained birth attendants and maternal mortality still sits at the same level as 60yrs ago. To get a sense of just how far behind we are from the rest of the world , maternal mortality rate i.e. a mother dying in childbirth, which is arguably the most sensitive index of the health of a nation, was still sitting at about 450/100,000 live births compared to about 14/100,000 in the UK. That is a staggering difference. What’s more poignant is that about 800,000 women each year die of the most easily preventable causes possible- anemia, infection and haemorrhage. If Mumtaz Mahal died of haemorrhage after childbirth in the 1600’s, more than three hundred years later, one of our most prominent and promising actresses of recent times, Smita Patil, dies of the same in 1986, telling us that nothing had changed in the interim. It requires the simplest measures to prevent so many unnecessary deaths each year- deaths that leave fragmented families and the spectre of infants without their mothers. We’re perpetually in a race to be as advanced as the developed countries of the west. Why then has no initiative been shown to be at par with these countries in terms of the most basic human necessity- efficient healthcare? The answer lies perhaps in freeing healthcare from corrupt political influence and putting people who really know, in charge of the system. Maybe then we’d be able to make a start towards becoming a healthy nation, which I presume comes before ‘superpower’ nation.
Saturday, 26 December 2009
Friday, 11 December 2009
The other side of the story
Rohit’s uncle who lives in Bhopal has two very bright, chirpy, extremely lovable kids, 9 and 14 each. Of late we’ve noticed that they have acquired the look of mini sumo wrestlers, which to me isn’t a particularly good look if you can help it. So Rohit mentioned this to his Uncle one day. And got an incredulous look that translated in to ‘you’re either bonkers or under the influence of a cocktail of unmentionables.’ Followed by a retort “arrey khaate peete ghar ke hain to pata bhi to chalna chahiye.”
I live in a country (Scotland) which is second only to the US in terms of the number of Obese. The Americans have been the most obese in the world now for some years. It has been estimated that one out of every four Americans is now frankly obese as opposed to just being overweight – defined as having a body mass index of more than 30. (Body mass index is calculated as the body weight in kilograms divided by the height squared. So, it’s a true measure of how much weight there is in relation to height, in other words, body surface area. So, a shorter person will hit the high BMI mark of 30 with a lot less weight than a taller person.) Looks like the trend is catching up in India faster than anyone imagined.
One of the scariest adverts for me of recent times has been this:
“McDonald's India: As Indian as you and me……..”
This euphemistically worded ad conceals in it, a very deep intent to penetrate the Indian market and inundate it with what has been the undoing of health aspirations of a generation of Americans and more recently Brits. And looks like our folk have lapped it up like there’s no tomorrow. It used to be said that things that were happening in America reached India maybe with an 8-10 year lag. Now of course this gap is a lot shorter and in the case of practices with a serious potential for self harm, this seems to be instant. So upper class Indians have rushed into the race to be ‘fat and merry’. Even more alarming is the trend in children. In the UK, around 27 per cent of children are now overweight and research suggests the main problem is a continual reduction in the amount of exercise children take. Many overweight children have overweight parents - it's often a matter of family lifestyles. Obesity in the UK is now normal in society and someone with a bodyweight within the recommended range, stands out. How much longer before we start to boast of similar statistics? In adults, obesity causes increased risk of cardiovascular events, diabetes, arthritis and so on. The same risks are now beginning to emerge in children. Obesity increases the risk of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes which is normally a disease seen in later life in adults. However, increasingly children in their teens are presenting with type 2 diabetes as a consequence of being obese. Young girls run the risk of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) with long term sequelae of cardiac disease, diabetes and even cancer of the womb. Obesity in fact has moved on from being a ‘pre-disposing’ factor to certain health conditions to actually being part of a spectrum of diseases.
Indians when they emigrate to other countries, take their genetic risk, something called syndrome X which is commoner in South Asian populations, with them. They then adapt to the lifestyles and food habits in these countries and are consequently at even greater risk than the indigenous population. In the UK, an organisation called South Asian Health Foundation (SAHF) is working towards spreading awareness of these issues.
It’s a question of changing the outlook to health. Being a little chubby should no longer be seen as a matter of pride or a mark of affluence. On the other hand I am not for one instant suggesting that we should all join the size zero cult. That has problems of its own. In the UK, obsession with size zero has long been the bane of life for every impressionable teenage girl. Of late, there has been a counter offensive of sorts with a new pageant for plus size women. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEOuqjpQ5g8)
While it may just be a backlash against an unholy trend for unnaturally thin women’s bodies, the implications of this sort of ‘glorification’ of what’s essentially a health problem, are grave. It sends the wrong signal to women struggling with their body image. It seems teenage girls are no longer at risk of falling a victim to the epidemic of anorexia –but of obesity. It promotes a culture of overeating and not exercising as these are now considered ‘okay.’ Try telling these girls that in ten years time they would be in and out of hospitals with diabetes or angina and that might be a more realistic picture, albeit one that is bound to raise the hackles of a number of these proponents of ‘curvy’ figures. This is just political correctness gone crazy. In fact it got so bad at one point that a colleague was cautioned by the management when a patient complained about being ‘made to feel guilty’. The doctor in question, who is an obstetrician, had given the woman a fact sheet about the precise number of complications that increase in an obese woman in pregnancy…all substantiated by well validated studies. It is a crime if you so much as hint about losing weight, in order to minimise so many health complications. Of late, the trick I use is to pass on the counselling bit to my nurse who at a ‘plump’ 83 kgs, is seen by a lot of people as ‘one of them’ and is therefore not as unacceptable as me.
While I completely accept that someone who as a result of a medical condition cannot lose weight (women with PCOS, for example need a lot of extra support to shed those extra pounds) should not be blamed for the resulting health conditions, I can absolutely not believe that 30-40 percent of a nations population is destined to be obese and unhealthy and can do nothing about it. People need to take more responsibility for their own health. And this does not necessarily mean having a blame culture in healthcare, which is what many suppose this is all about
I live in a country (Scotland) which is second only to the US in terms of the number of Obese. The Americans have been the most obese in the world now for some years. It has been estimated that one out of every four Americans is now frankly obese as opposed to just being overweight – defined as having a body mass index of more than 30. (Body mass index is calculated as the body weight in kilograms divided by the height squared. So, it’s a true measure of how much weight there is in relation to height, in other words, body surface area. So, a shorter person will hit the high BMI mark of 30 with a lot less weight than a taller person.) Looks like the trend is catching up in India faster than anyone imagined.
“McDonald's India: As Indian as you and me……..”
This euphemistically worded ad conceals in it, a very deep intent to penetrate the Indian market and inundate it with what has been the undoing of health aspirations of a generation of Americans and more recently Brits. And looks like our folk have lapped it up like there’s no tomorrow. It used to be said that things that were happening in America reached India maybe with an 8-10 year lag. Now of course this gap is a lot shorter and in the case of practices with a serious potential for self harm, this seems to be instant. So upper class Indians have rushed into the race to be ‘fat and merry’. Even more alarming is the trend in children. In the UK, around 27 per cent of children are now overweight and research suggests the main problem is a continual reduction in the amount of exercise children take. Many overweight children have overweight parents - it's often a matter of family lifestyles. Obesity in the UK is now normal in society and someone with a bodyweight within the recommended range, stands out. How much longer before we start to boast of similar statistics? In adults, obesity causes increased risk of cardiovascular events, diabetes, arthritis and so on. The same risks are now beginning to emerge in children. Obesity increases the risk of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes which is normally a disease seen in later life in adults. However, increasingly children in their teens are presenting with type 2 diabetes as a consequence of being obese. Young girls run the risk of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) with long term sequelae of cardiac disease, diabetes and even cancer of the womb. Obesity in fact has moved on from being a ‘pre-disposing’ factor to certain health conditions to actually being part of a spectrum of diseases.
Indians when they emigrate to other countries, take their genetic risk, something called syndrome X which is commoner in South Asian populations, with them. They then adapt to the lifestyles and food habits in these countries and are consequently at even greater risk than the indigenous population. In the UK, an organisation called South Asian Health Foundation (SAHF) is working towards spreading awareness of these issues.
It’s a question of changing the outlook to health. Being a little chubby should no longer be seen as a matter of pride or a mark of affluence. On the other hand I am not for one instant suggesting that we should all join the size zero cult. That has problems of its own. In the UK, obsession with size zero has long been the bane of life for every impressionable teenage girl. Of late, there has been a counter offensive of sorts with a new pageant for plus size women. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEOuqjpQ5g8)
While it may just be a backlash against an unholy trend for unnaturally thin women’s bodies, the implications of this sort of ‘glorification’ of what’s essentially a health problem, are grave. It sends the wrong signal to women struggling with their body image. It seems teenage girls are no longer at risk of falling a victim to the epidemic of anorexia –but of obesity. It promotes a culture of overeating and not exercising as these are now considered ‘okay.’ Try telling these girls that in ten years time they would be in and out of hospitals with diabetes or angina and that might be a more realistic picture, albeit one that is bound to raise the hackles of a number of these proponents of ‘curvy’ figures. This is just political correctness gone crazy. In fact it got so bad at one point that a colleague was cautioned by the management when a patient complained about being ‘made to feel guilty’. The doctor in question, who is an obstetrician, had given the woman a fact sheet about the precise number of complications that increase in an obese woman in pregnancy…all substantiated by well validated studies. It is a crime if you so much as hint about losing weight, in order to minimise so many health complications. Of late, the trick I use is to pass on the counselling bit to my nurse who at a ‘plump’ 83 kgs, is seen by a lot of people as ‘one of them’ and is therefore not as unacceptable as me.
While I completely accept that someone who as a result of a medical condition cannot lose weight (women with PCOS, for example need a lot of extra support to shed those extra pounds) should not be blamed for the resulting health conditions, I can absolutely not believe that 30-40 percent of a nations population is destined to be obese and unhealthy and can do nothing about it. People need to take more responsibility for their own health. And this does not necessarily mean having a blame culture in healthcare, which is what many suppose this is all about
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Bolly Saga: The Case Of The Missing Brain
As I sat watching the very somber moments in the movie Paa, I could hear a couple of sobs around me in the theatre. The atmosphere was generally muted, fraught with sympathy with the protagonist in the movie (namely AB). And then, out of the blue, a chuckle escaped me…attracting a few angry glances. I said a sheepish ‘sorry’ and sank into my seat.
Right then! Granted there has been a massive improvement in the quality of movies doled out by bollywood in the last few years. But one thing that has remained consistent is the misplaced ideology surrounding how medical problems should be depicted. Giving rise to several very humorous moments. The precise scene in Paa that caused me to lose the emotional flow of the movie is when Auro is in a hospital and suddenly becomes quite agitated. The doctor rushes in, puts a stethoscope to his chest and exclaims- he’s had a stroke! As to how he reached that conclusion is completely beyond me….no one else has ever been able to do it, even after spending a lifetime in stroke research!
On the way back, another scene came to mind, from the recent release, Kurbaan. Now, I did enjoy the movie and in many ways, the subject treatment was above average. But remember the bit where Saif comes back after being hit by a bullet in a major police encounter? So, here’s the diminutive Ms Kapoor, at his side with a first aid box, hands trembling. Which is all very well. But then, she has a go…. and….hold your breath…gouges the bullet out with eyebrow tweezers! Which of course was very considerately, floating just beneath the skin. She then stitches the impeccable wound with hand held suture (which I presume must be part of every first aid kit in the US just for such an event). And post surgery, everything is instantly well..and the macho Khan goes back to doing his fight sequences..come on guys! I don’t expect you to put in hours researching trauma management, but at least something believable would be good. You don’t have to be remotely connected to medicine to appreciate that you’re being taken for a ride here…a little bit of common sense will do.
Anyway, I’m sure nothing in these movies will ever compare to our classic gems of yesteryears. One scene that instantly comes to mind, and I’m sure every bollywood fanatic will remember this, is from that mother of all blockbusters, Amar Akbar Anthony. Fabulous movie, bollywood drama at its epitome, immensely enjoyable. But then Nirupa Roy gets hit by a car, lands in a hospital where the gorgeous Nitu Singh is sitting at a desk pondering over cosmic events, while her bleeding patient lies in a bed next doors. The even more gorgeous (I always thought that, looking at this pair) Rishi Kapoor comes in for a casual chat, and she says ‘arrey, tumhara blood bhi to wo negative wala hai na?’ and straps him to a charpoy with a needle stuck to his arm. And then the wonder of all wonders happens……three people simultaneously strapped to giving sets, a common line leading to a bottle, and the collective blood being transfused into a, growing pinker every minute, NR. Of course, the other two people happen to be the other two lost sons…hilarious stuff. I can picture some poor hematologist throwing a major convulsion watching this….But then bollywood wouldn’t be the same without some melodrama, tears, lost and found and major medical mishaps.
We’ve seen countless number of movies with identical twins, making you wonder if some extra-terrestrial intervention had caused the rate of identical twinning to suddenly jump up in India by a thousand percent? And then there are scores of movies with the sequence – hit his head, got amnesia, hit it again, got his memory back….Lovely! Or what about the ones where the old woman would lose her eyesight at some point in the movie, and in the climax squeal with delight – ‘beta, mujhe sab kuchh nazar aa raha hai…’ super lovely!
But, do you know which is the unanimous winner, and by a wide margin too? Its got to be Clerk….now I’d forgive you all for a collective case of amnesia on this….it happens to be the most eminently forgettable movie of the last few decades…but a real gem if you consider the entertainment value.
And you’ve got to watch this clip I found on youtube (where else!): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HrNLkZx7Gg
Pitaji having a heart attack, greedy doctor refuses to come. So what do we do? Play patriotic songs of course. And lo and behold, Pitaji starts to stomp around throwing his arms around for special effect. Priceless! It defies not only medical science but common sense, sanity and all those tiny slivers of art and aesthetics that may have escaped unharmed in the rest of the movie.
All said and done, I remain a devout fan of bollywood. There is something quite endearing, even in the most naively shot sequences, something that appeals to the heart, provides an outlet for emotional outburst, lets us all cry and laugh at the same time and brings a touch of hilarity in otherwise glum surroundings. Long live bollywood.
(BTW, you are all welcome to add your own favourite to the list.)
Right then! Granted there has been a massive improvement in the quality of movies doled out by bollywood in the last few years. But one thing that has remained consistent is the misplaced ideology surrounding how medical problems should be depicted. Giving rise to several very humorous moments. The precise scene in Paa that caused me to lose the emotional flow of the movie is when Auro is in a hospital and suddenly becomes quite agitated. The doctor rushes in, puts a stethoscope to his chest and exclaims- he’s had a stroke! As to how he reached that conclusion is completely beyond me….no one else has ever been able to do it, even after spending a lifetime in stroke research!
On the way back, another scene came to mind, from the recent release, Kurbaan. Now, I did enjoy the movie and in many ways, the subject treatment was above average. But remember the bit where Saif comes back after being hit by a bullet in a major police encounter? So, here’s the diminutive Ms Kapoor, at his side with a first aid box, hands trembling. Which is all very well. But then, she has a go…. and….hold your breath…gouges the bullet out with eyebrow tweezers! Which of course was very considerately, floating just beneath the skin. She then stitches the impeccable wound with hand held suture (which I presume must be part of every first aid kit in the US just for such an event). And post surgery, everything is instantly well..and the macho Khan goes back to doing his fight sequences..come on guys! I don’t expect you to put in hours researching trauma management, but at least something believable would be good. You don’t have to be remotely connected to medicine to appreciate that you’re being taken for a ride here…a little bit of common sense will do.
Anyway, I’m sure nothing in these movies will ever compare to our classic gems of yesteryears. One scene that instantly comes to mind, and I’m sure every bollywood fanatic will remember this, is from that mother of all blockbusters, Amar Akbar Anthony. Fabulous movie, bollywood drama at its epitome, immensely enjoyable. But then Nirupa Roy gets hit by a car, lands in a hospital where the gorgeous Nitu Singh is sitting at a desk pondering over cosmic events, while her bleeding patient lies in a bed next doors. The even more gorgeous (I always thought that, looking at this pair) Rishi Kapoor comes in for a casual chat, and she says ‘arrey, tumhara blood bhi to wo negative wala hai na?’ and straps him to a charpoy with a needle stuck to his arm. And then the wonder of all wonders happens……three people simultaneously strapped to giving sets, a common line leading to a bottle, and the collective blood being transfused into a, growing pinker every minute, NR. Of course, the other two people happen to be the other two lost sons…hilarious stuff. I can picture some poor hematologist throwing a major convulsion watching this….But then bollywood wouldn’t be the same without some melodrama, tears, lost and found and major medical mishaps.
We’ve seen countless number of movies with identical twins, making you wonder if some extra-terrestrial intervention had caused the rate of identical twinning to suddenly jump up in India by a thousand percent? And then there are scores of movies with the sequence – hit his head, got amnesia, hit it again, got his memory back….Lovely! Or what about the ones where the old woman would lose her eyesight at some point in the movie, and in the climax squeal with delight – ‘beta, mujhe sab kuchh nazar aa raha hai…’ super lovely!
But, do you know which is the unanimous winner, and by a wide margin too? Its got to be Clerk….now I’d forgive you all for a collective case of amnesia on this….it happens to be the most eminently forgettable movie of the last few decades…but a real gem if you consider the entertainment value.
And you’ve got to watch this clip I found on youtube (where else!): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HrNLkZx7Gg
Pitaji having a heart attack, greedy doctor refuses to come. So what do we do? Play patriotic songs of course. And lo and behold, Pitaji starts to stomp around throwing his arms around for special effect. Priceless! It defies not only medical science but common sense, sanity and all those tiny slivers of art and aesthetics that may have escaped unharmed in the rest of the movie.
All said and done, I remain a devout fan of bollywood. There is something quite endearing, even in the most naively shot sequences, something that appeals to the heart, provides an outlet for emotional outburst, lets us all cry and laugh at the same time and brings a touch of hilarity in otherwise glum surroundings. Long live bollywood.
(BTW, you are all welcome to add your own favourite to the list.)
Tuesday, 8 December 2009
Saving the 'Feriwala'
The last trip to India left me slightly troubled and until recently I had no idea what it was that was bothering me. Until that discussion at Manisha and Taral’s place which somehow meandered into the reasons for going back home. “As it is, you find all the high end shops there nowadays and huge shopping malls too…there is no brand that you won’t find in India now”. Manisha was speaking, as usual, at the top of her voice. And then it struck me….India had started looking too much like the west. The same things that you tire of here- shopping malls, restaurants, multiplexes all looking the same, showing off the same merchandise in every city/town, row after row of the same names…..topshop, newlook, warehouse, oasis and so on. In fact if you were to transplant the high street from one city into another, I doubt people will even notice.
My memories of shopping back home invariably drift to the little shops selling everything from cosmetics to jewellery, the tiny shops with shelf after shelf of garments and dress material which offered free alteration services – yeah, try asking for the price of alteration in one of the UK shops, it might just turn out to be more than what you’ve paid for the dress…but that’s beside the point.
As a kid, I’ve seen my mum buy fresh vegetables from the ‘thele wala’ who’d come to the door and implore ‘lauki, kaddoo, tamatar le lo….’ until either my mum or the kam wali bai opened the door and told him off for being too loud. But this would always result in some purchase being made, even if just a stack of coriander or a bunch of chillies. Organic vegetables, delivered to your doorstep, without the hefty premium on being ‘organic’…
Then again there were these numerous ‘feri wala’ guys who brought merchandise from far and wide- Kashmiri shawls, Saris from Orissa, jewellery from Rajasthan and went from one doorstep to another. A different world altogether. And the social side of all this is rarely appreciated….my mum would call on her friends who’d all come over for an afternoon of chit chat, purchasing and cups of tea. In my heavily blockaded and compartmentalised world, these memories seem to belong in some distant past. And one of the reasons is that our society, in a bid to copy everything western, has turned its back to these quaint little rituals and these people who now themselves seem to be an anachronism .
In the last few years we’ve seen corporate giants like Tesco and Marks and Spencer make a bid for the Indian market which of course is quite a lucrative thing to do, given the size of the Indian consumer-force. The sad bit though is that these peculiar, curious shops each selling something different and original will all be replaced by giant stores all selling factory produced goods that we are so sick of seeing everywhere. Jai Ho!
My memories of shopping back home invariably drift to the little shops selling everything from cosmetics to jewellery, the tiny shops with shelf after shelf of garments and dress material which offered free alteration services – yeah, try asking for the price of alteration in one of the UK shops, it might just turn out to be more than what you’ve paid for the dress…but that’s beside the point.
As a kid, I’ve seen my mum buy fresh vegetables from the ‘thele wala’ who’d come to the door and implore ‘lauki, kaddoo, tamatar le lo….’ until either my mum or the kam wali bai opened the door and told him off for being too loud. But this would always result in some purchase being made, even if just a stack of coriander or a bunch of chillies. Organic vegetables, delivered to your doorstep, without the hefty premium on being ‘organic’…
Then again there were these numerous ‘feri wala’ guys who brought merchandise from far and wide- Kashmiri shawls, Saris from Orissa, jewellery from Rajasthan and went from one doorstep to another. A different world altogether. And the social side of all this is rarely appreciated….my mum would call on her friends who’d all come over for an afternoon of chit chat, purchasing and cups of tea. In my heavily blockaded and compartmentalised world, these memories seem to belong in some distant past. And one of the reasons is that our society, in a bid to copy everything western, has turned its back to these quaint little rituals and these people who now themselves seem to be an anachronism .
In the last few years we’ve seen corporate giants like Tesco and Marks and Spencer make a bid for the Indian market which of course is quite a lucrative thing to do, given the size of the Indian consumer-force. The sad bit though is that these peculiar, curious shops each selling something different and original will all be replaced by giant stores all selling factory produced goods that we are so sick of seeing everywhere. Jai Ho!
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
'Going Rogue'
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely……….these words ring true of not only the entire socio political setup of this world that we live in but also of things on a much smaller stage…everyday living and issues surrounding who rules who?
It would be an interesting experiment to give power in the hands of the downtrodden of today….the ones who curse the system and wish politicians dead. Would they then establish a just world order or fall prey to the very temptations and machinations they abhor today??
Would this then answer the quintessential question? Chicken or egg? What came first?
Is it the wrong kind of people who go into politics, accumulate wealth and become powerful and then perpetrate the hideous culture that has become the hallmark of politics across the globe?
Or is it normal people …people like you and me, but maybe with a dash more of ambition thrown in, who get into politics, wake up to the immense thrill and kick that power gives and then start on the journey of corruption to maintain that power ?
Two old political scandals, or shall I say mishaps, have returned to the fore in the public arena this week. They belong in two different continents but the undertones are similar….
As the Chilcot enquiry begins its work to look into the legality of the war in Iraq, the most palpable sentiment around is hatred for Blair. Yet this is a man who could do no wrong a few years ago. A darling of the masses, twice elected to power, with a huge halo round his head and the glow of his charismatic personality radiating far and wide.
Did Tony Blair start off as a well meaning Prime Minister who seriously wanted to do the right thing, defend democracy around the world and establish a just world order? Few believe this today but in the heydays of Labour supremacy in Britain, he did have people enthralled by his sharp oratory and the look of earnestness about him. Did he start off as a smarmy, sly man or was it years in politics that made him cynical to the extent that many now are ready to believe he took the country into an illegal war? How cynical do you have to be to do something you know will cause immeasurable death and destruction, reduce an entire nation to a rubble and ruin the lives of generations to come?
Opponents of the war hope the inquiry will establish that the decision to invade Iraq was illegal and based on flawed or deliberately misleading intelligence about the risks posed by Saddam Hussein. Whatever else the enquiry achieves, simply by being in the news the past few months, it has played a major role in Blair losing out in the race to be EU President.
The other case in point is our very own L K Advani. In a dramatic turn of events, -the Liberhan commission report, which was 17 years in the making, was tabled after details of its conclusions – apparently implicating top leaders of the Hindu nationalist opposition in the Babri masjid destruction – were leaked on monday, triggering uproar in the lower house. Personally, I have always found it extremely difficult to digest that Advani and co had at any point acted out of ‘Ram bhakti’. It never was a campaign of moral outrage against historical acts of vandalism or a campaign to reignite religious sentiments in the hearts of the non believers. It always was a cynical political act directed towards exploiting the extreme naivety of the electorate, wasn’t it? Yet at the time, even the intelligentsia was divided about whether to celebrate or lament their growing influence.
Who knows if these two men started out believing in a just cause and simply ‘went rogue’. (Ha ha….could not keep our darling Ms Palin put of this…). Time will tell.
It would be an interesting experiment to give power in the hands of the downtrodden of today….the ones who curse the system and wish politicians dead. Would they then establish a just world order or fall prey to the very temptations and machinations they abhor today??
Would this then answer the quintessential question? Chicken or egg? What came first?
Is it the wrong kind of people who go into politics, accumulate wealth and become powerful and then perpetrate the hideous culture that has become the hallmark of politics across the globe?
Or is it normal people …people like you and me, but maybe with a dash more of ambition thrown in, who get into politics, wake up to the immense thrill and kick that power gives and then start on the journey of corruption to maintain that power ?
Two old political scandals, or shall I say mishaps, have returned to the fore in the public arena this week. They belong in two different continents but the undertones are similar….
As the Chilcot enquiry begins its work to look into the legality of the war in Iraq, the most palpable sentiment around is hatred for Blair. Yet this is a man who could do no wrong a few years ago. A darling of the masses, twice elected to power, with a huge halo round his head and the glow of his charismatic personality radiating far and wide.
Did Tony Blair start off as a well meaning Prime Minister who seriously wanted to do the right thing, defend democracy around the world and establish a just world order? Few believe this today but in the heydays of Labour supremacy in Britain, he did have people enthralled by his sharp oratory and the look of earnestness about him. Did he start off as a smarmy, sly man or was it years in politics that made him cynical to the extent that many now are ready to believe he took the country into an illegal war? How cynical do you have to be to do something you know will cause immeasurable death and destruction, reduce an entire nation to a rubble and ruin the lives of generations to come?
Opponents of the war hope the inquiry will establish that the decision to invade Iraq was illegal and based on flawed or deliberately misleading intelligence about the risks posed by Saddam Hussein. Whatever else the enquiry achieves, simply by being in the news the past few months, it has played a major role in Blair losing out in the race to be EU President.
The other case in point is our very own L K Advani. In a dramatic turn of events, -the Liberhan commission report, which was 17 years in the making, was tabled after details of its conclusions – apparently implicating top leaders of the Hindu nationalist opposition in the Babri masjid destruction – were leaked on monday, triggering uproar in the lower house. Personally, I have always found it extremely difficult to digest that Advani and co had at any point acted out of ‘Ram bhakti’. It never was a campaign of moral outrage against historical acts of vandalism or a campaign to reignite religious sentiments in the hearts of the non believers. It always was a cynical political act directed towards exploiting the extreme naivety of the electorate, wasn’t it? Yet at the time, even the intelligentsia was divided about whether to celebrate or lament their growing influence.
Who knows if these two men started out believing in a just cause and simply ‘went rogue’. (Ha ha….could not keep our darling Ms Palin put of this…). Time will tell.
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
The (Sur)real world of Indian television.
Have any of you recently tried to watch the soap operas telecast on Indian television channels ? If so, you will probably have complete empathy and sympathy with me and understand why I’m still tortured by the memories of what happened.
Here’s what happened: We’d driven off to London for the weekend (on one of our-‘let’s just drive off somewhere’whims). I have to say the weekend went by very well – we managed to catch ‘We will rock you- the musical’ and had some fabtastic Indian food which is always the attraction on a trip to London (God bless the Gujjus).
Then on the way back, we decided to stop by at one of Rohit’s old friends, Neha. Now it so happens that Neha is not just a devout fan of Indian TV soaps but in fact eats, talks and breathes television.
So she told us of this exciting new reality(?) show which has a bunch of guys staying together (No, don’t let your imagination run wild- that just does not happen on Indian television, yet!), a bunch of girls staying next doors with their mothers (the guys’ mothers, silly) and they are supposed to assess each others’ compatibility- the guys and girls with each other and the girls with their prospective mothers in law.
Needless to say there was a lot of bitching, sobbing, outrageous statements a la Big Brother (or is it Big Boss?) and generally everyone seemed to be terribly stressed about coming out of the TV show, having made a lifelong commitment or found their soul mates. Watching it, we went through a complete whirlwind of emotions in rapid succession - disbelief, amusement, puzzlement, frustration, and then downright rage… Rage at the way producers of these shows take the Indian audience to be made up of part cretins and part masochists. There is this complete dumbing down of TV shows and the audiences don’t know to expect any better.
What’s particularly frustrating is the portrayal of female characters: if she’s not running a corporate powerhouse in a sexy mini, she must be a stay at home bahu, indulging in politics of the most complex nature (Move over Mayavati and Rabri, the Indian Bahu is soon going to overtake you), all the time bedecked in tons of jewellery with, of course, a pallu over her head. She wakes up in the morning with more jewellery than most of us manage to wear in a lifetime.We thought we’d had enough when she insisted there was this other reality show (!!!!) featuring the newly engaged Rakhi Sawant and her partner showing their parenting skills….with other people’s children! Seems the idea is to have celebrity couples staying in a swanky Goa resort with successively older children every week, starting with toddlers. To judge what? How these smooth actors and actresses cope with the stress of being around other peoples’ kids for a few weeks?
I would not even like to venture into what the repercussions could be of one of these ‘celebrity’ parents abusing their proximity with other peoples’ children (Yes, despite 24 hr camera surveillance). What kind of parent leaves his/her child with some fake TV parent to have a showdown on national television?
Tell you what, one good thing to come out of the ordeal was that it reaffirmed our views that we do not need television for entertainment. Looks like the news is all I can watch anyway…as long as its not Star News reporters screaming down my throat, that is!
(P.S.- Interestingly my spell check suggested changing Mayavati to Amravati (didn’t know that was part of MS word repertoire) and Rabri to Rabbi (If only!)
Friday, 6 November 2009
Nick Griffin on BBC question time
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlQFvKgPSC0
Didnt watch the actual program but saw the video clips a couple of days later. (available on youtube, above).
Somehow, just came out with this acute sense of anticlimax. I had rather imagined Nick Griffin to at least be....mmm...you know, well read, erudite in his specialised field(!) and a good orator. Whereas he just came across as wishy washy, evasive and in places I simply felt aghast at his assumption that he could come to a national platform, expecting people to believe in his statements simply by sharing patronising smiles and nodding his head. I couldnt decide whether he is supremely stupid or attempting to be supremely smart. In any case, anyone who may have harboured delusions of sympathy for any one of his poilicies, I'm sure switched off his/her television thoroughly disillusioned. So in that sense, we all ought to congratulate the BBC for airing this. All the half baked truths about his party's policy that seemed attractive to some people (they nust have been, for his party to have won seats in an election) were unsheathed for what they were. A truly illuminating episode.
Of the panel, looks like Sayeeda Warsi was well coached in the art of political one-upmanship. She managed to get Jack Straw on a back foot and generally managed to win approval of the audience. So if this was political hara kiri for Mr Griffin, it would probably be a highlight on Baroness Warsi's political portfolio.
Didnt watch the actual program but saw the video clips a couple of days later. (available on youtube, above).
Somehow, just came out with this acute sense of anticlimax. I had rather imagined Nick Griffin to at least be....mmm...you know, well read, erudite in his specialised field(!) and a good orator. Whereas he just came across as wishy washy, evasive and in places I simply felt aghast at his assumption that he could come to a national platform, expecting people to believe in his statements simply by sharing patronising smiles and nodding his head. I couldnt decide whether he is supremely stupid or attempting to be supremely smart. In any case, anyone who may have harboured delusions of sympathy for any one of his poilicies, I'm sure switched off his/her television thoroughly disillusioned. So in that sense, we all ought to congratulate the BBC for airing this. All the half baked truths about his party's policy that seemed attractive to some people (they nust have been, for his party to have won seats in an election) were unsheathed for what they were. A truly illuminating episode.
Of the panel, looks like Sayeeda Warsi was well coached in the art of political one-upmanship. She managed to get Jack Straw on a back foot and generally managed to win approval of the audience. So if this was political hara kiri for Mr Griffin, it would probably be a highlight on Baroness Warsi's political portfolio.
Thursday, 5 November 2009
'Bharat ek khoj'
Granted I was a kid when this was aired. And this was in the good ol' days of Doordarshan when you didnt know the mad urge to flip between 21 channels in as many seconds. So I still remember some of the old TV serials from that time. Nowadays, aside from news items, I watch zero television.
Anyway this particular title 'song' (its wrong to call it song as it is translation from shlokas of the Rigveda) stuck in my memory and was it a pleasant surprise to see that some helpful soul had actually uploaded it to wikipedia! There honestly is not much that is not on wikipedia at the moment.
Another favourite is the theme song from 'Chanakya'. If anyone has the words, please feel free to upload to wiki! (And do let me know)
From wikipedia
This first stanza is in Sanskrit (Rig Veda, Book 10, Hymn 129):
nāsadāsīn no sadāsīt tadānīṃ nāsīd rajo no vyomāparo yat
kimāvarīvaḥ kuha kasya śarmannambhaḥ kimāsīd ghahanaṃ ghabhīram
Srishti se pehle sat nahin thaa, asat bhi nahin
Antariksh bhi nahin, aakaash bhee nahin thaa.
Chhipaa thaa kyaa, kahaan, kisne dhaka thaa?
Us pal to agam, atal jal bhi kahaan thaa.
Shrishti kaa kaun hain kartaa?
Kartaa hain yeh vaa akartaa?
Oonche aakash mein rahtaa.
Sadaaa adhyaksh banaa rahtaa.
Wohee sach much mein jaantaa..Yaa nahin bhi jaanataa
Hain kisi ko nahin pataa,
Nahin pataa,
Nahin hai pataa, nahin hai pataa.
Voh tha hiranya garbh srishti se pehle vidyamaan.
Vohi to saare bhoot jaatee ka swami mahaan.
jo hai astitvamaana dharti aasmaan dhaaran kar.
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Jis ke bal par tejomay hai ambar.
Prithvi hari bhari sthapit sthir.
Swarg aur sooraj bhi sthir.
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Garbh mein apne agni dhaaran kar paida kar,
Vyapa tha jal idhar udhar neeche upar,
Jagaa chuke vo ka ekameva pran bankar,
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Om ! Srishti nirmata swarg rachaiyta purvaj rakhsa kar.
Satya dharma palak atul jal niyamak raksha kar.
Phaili hain dishayen bahu jaisi uski sab mein sab par,
Aise hi devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar,
Aise hi devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar.
Anyway this particular title 'song' (its wrong to call it song as it is translation from shlokas of the Rigveda) stuck in my memory and was it a pleasant surprise to see that some helpful soul had actually uploaded it to wikipedia! There honestly is not much that is not on wikipedia at the moment.
Another favourite is the theme song from 'Chanakya'. If anyone has the words, please feel free to upload to wiki! (And do let me know)
From wikipedia
This first stanza is in Sanskrit (Rig Veda, Book 10, Hymn 129):
nāsadāsīn no sadāsīt tadānīṃ nāsīd rajo no vyomāparo yat
kimāvarīvaḥ kuha kasya śarmannambhaḥ kimāsīd ghahanaṃ ghabhīram
Srishti se pehle sat nahin thaa, asat bhi nahin
Antariksh bhi nahin, aakaash bhee nahin thaa.
Chhipaa thaa kyaa, kahaan, kisne dhaka thaa?
Us pal to agam, atal jal bhi kahaan thaa.
Shrishti kaa kaun hain kartaa?
Kartaa hain yeh vaa akartaa?
Oonche aakash mein rahtaa.
Sadaaa adhyaksh banaa rahtaa.
Wohee sach much mein jaantaa..Yaa nahin bhi jaanataa
Hain kisi ko nahin pataa,
Nahin pataa,
Nahin hai pataa, nahin hai pataa.
Voh tha hiranya garbh srishti se pehle vidyamaan.
Vohi to saare bhoot jaatee ka swami mahaan.
jo hai astitvamaana dharti aasmaan dhaaran kar.
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Jis ke bal par tejomay hai ambar.
Prithvi hari bhari sthapit sthir.
Swarg aur sooraj bhi sthir.
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Garbh mein apne agni dhaaran kar paida kar,
Vyapa tha jal idhar udhar neeche upar,
Jagaa chuke vo ka ekameva pran bankar,
Aise kis devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar?
Om ! Srishti nirmata swarg rachaiyta purvaj rakhsa kar.
Satya dharma palak atul jal niyamak raksha kar.
Phaili hain dishayen bahu jaisi uski sab mein sab par,
Aise hi devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar,
Aise hi devta ki upasana kare hum havi dekar.
Thursday, 22 October 2009
So, what label is it that you are wearing?
Dave scrutinized Rohit’s sunglasses for the tenth time and looked as puzzled as ever..where the heck is the label on this?? was his question at last….
Poor Dave has forever been perplexed by the severe ‘lack of labels’ in our life. Why don’t we buy D&G or Esprit. Why no brands around? Its kind of poignant too, his complete lack of understanding of why we don’t buy designer stuff despite being able to afford it. (Yeah, if we squandered our entire salaries on it, that is). Come on guys, surely if its in the shops, its meant to be bought? is his constant query. The happiest I have seen him was when he found the Armani shirt he did not need reduced from £850 to £810 and of course rushed forward to buy it.
Maybe its my Indian upbringing. I mean I grew up with my mother and all the ‘aunties’ of the campus constantly comparing notes on how much each had managed to get an item reduced before buying it. Used to be a matter of great pride if you bought the side table at half price or got the best deal on a jar of coffee.
I love haggling too! Pity I cant do that anymore in the UK but I’m unashamedly a fan of this dying art. Still would do it in the ‘galiyaras’ of chandni chowk or Palika Bazaar every time I return home. “Arre…. bechna hai to sahi daam batao.” Where’s the fun in shopping without this?
Dave would be shocked and horrified if I gave him details of our shopping habits.
Personally I think he’s completely wasted, being this upper middle class Brit who has never been to anything other than these mutely pretentious (the more dimly lit the shop, the more expensive it is) shops selling absurdly overpriced stuff….a cotton T-shirt for example with nothing else but a big screaming logo in the front for £210?
I like to think I’m an empowered shopper. (anyone remember surf’s ‘Lalitaji’?) I mean, if you are driven to buying everything that the big retail bosses want you to buy, where does your intelligence or individuality come in to it?
I have had to laugh at the price labels in some of these shops. And at people who’d still buy them simply because they have a particular logo or name printed on them. Designer clothes are like those penis extension cars people buy to announce to the world just in what bracket their earnings lie. They may not look good in them or even feel comfortable wearing them, but as long as there is a name on it….. These happen to be human beings with an inherent lack of confidence in their own persona or presence…..those who look around every time they contemplate anything other than breathing and see what others are doing. What’s ‘hot’ just now, or what’s ‘cool’, depending on which of these phrases is currently more ‘hip’. Ha.Ive always looked at Victoria Beckam, for example, and wondered if she ever manages to shake out this feeling that the whole world is watching her and is able to step out of her designerwear for long enough to actually enjoy living. The poor dame looks perpetually haggard and distressed. Even for someone who’s made a career out out of wearing D&G couture and not to forget, their mega size sunglasses whether indoors or outdoors, it seems a bit excessive.
Anyway, point of the matter is, I would rather buy a fantastically tailored coat from that little known high street shop than absurd looking designer stuff that I’d be afraid to wear to a party in case I spilled my drink on it.
Sunday, 11 October 2009
Exactly what constitutes racism?
Such a potentially explosive topic.. do you find yourself a victim of racism at times? What is racism? Not being considered a part of the group?
To be honest, whatever the dictionary definition, most of the times when laymen like us refer to an individual or a set up as being racist, we are merely commenting on the unfriendly nature of the place or individual. I am by no means denying the existence of serious racists in our society. That would at best be naïve and at worst dangerous.
But I get the feeling that we use this word all too commonly without thinking of the weight attached to it.
As for myself, the most vivid memory of feeling truly outcast because of who I was or where I came from, is sadly not of working in the UK but in Bombay when we moved, right after finishing medical college, to work in Bombay hospital. The fact that I could not speak Marathi always came to the fore (Rohit is a lot more accomplished in these matters and was speaking workable Marathi within days).
I’m sure there is a lot of covert ‘racism’ in our own country towards those that are different to you. Its not racism as per strict dictionary meaning, but its probably the more widespread of the two.
I for example, hear frequently about how the NHS is institutionally racist. About how, any foreign doctor has to be twice as good as a local graduate to measure up. About how the locals have a far better rapport in the unit despite maybe not being as knowledgeable or hard working. But is this not more about the inbuilt empathy or rapport that you feel for anyone from the same background or upbringing as yourself? And conversely, about the innate tendency to maintain a distance from or be suspicious towards anyone different to you. It is, I suppose, a natural instinct. I for one, have now come to terms with the unmitigated hostility doled out to me in, what is simply another state in my country. I now recognize it more as a case of xenophobia. A reaction simply to someone you don’t know or recognize as being different. It’s the ‘outsider’ syndrome, rather than racism. However there is a very fine line between the two and hostility towards outsiders can easily progress to overtly racist behaviour. We all remember the truly horrific episode in Mumbai not so long ago, of course.
To be honest, whatever the dictionary definition, most of the times when laymen like us refer to an individual or a set up as being racist, we are merely commenting on the unfriendly nature of the place or individual. I am by no means denying the existence of serious racists in our society. That would at best be naïve and at worst dangerous.
But I get the feeling that we use this word all too commonly without thinking of the weight attached to it.
As for myself, the most vivid memory of feeling truly outcast because of who I was or where I came from, is sadly not of working in the UK but in Bombay when we moved, right after finishing medical college, to work in Bombay hospital. The fact that I could not speak Marathi always came to the fore (Rohit is a lot more accomplished in these matters and was speaking workable Marathi within days).
I’m sure there is a lot of covert ‘racism’ in our own country towards those that are different to you. Its not racism as per strict dictionary meaning, but its probably the more widespread of the two.
I for example, hear frequently about how the NHS is institutionally racist. About how, any foreign doctor has to be twice as good as a local graduate to measure up. About how the locals have a far better rapport in the unit despite maybe not being as knowledgeable or hard working. But is this not more about the inbuilt empathy or rapport that you feel for anyone from the same background or upbringing as yourself? And conversely, about the innate tendency to maintain a distance from or be suspicious towards anyone different to you. It is, I suppose, a natural instinct. I for one, have now come to terms with the unmitigated hostility doled out to me in, what is simply another state in my country. I now recognize it more as a case of xenophobia. A reaction simply to someone you don’t know or recognize as being different. It’s the ‘outsider’ syndrome, rather than racism. However there is a very fine line between the two and hostility towards outsiders can easily progress to overtly racist behaviour. We all remember the truly horrific episode in Mumbai not so long ago, of course.
Wake up, indeed..
Went to watch this movie- 'wake up Sid' and I thought it was a cute movie, well made. But this is not a critique of the movie. The predominant thought as I drove home was not how charming or good looking Rishi Kapoor's son is (Yes, I'm a fan of Kapoor senior)...I pondered instead on the simple message of the movie, that you need to let the mind be free, in order for an individual to achieve anything. I cant remember how often I've felt that as students in the current system of education we were merely being driven like sheep towards a common exit- to come out as factory productions of the ideal graduate. But there cannot be a common exit...each individual is different. The current system only succeeds in stifling the natural talents and inborn instincts of some of the most incredibly gifted students.
Macaulay brand education, which was meant to produce an effecient bureaucratic class for the Raj anyway (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1833macaulay-india.html) is today simply an instrument of the state. There is very little, if any, room for spotaneity or originality. We must all be clones.
No doubt the educational system in the country needs a fresh perspective and a complete overhaul. But this looks like a very distant dream, especially because the powers that be are engaged in a constant battle about which poltical party is able to influence the curriculum the most and twist and turn facts to reflect their ideology.
The educated elite of the country have no doubt lost faith in the entire setup. How else do you explain the intense enthusiasm that surrounds any politician who has studied abroad? As if by the mere act of having studied at Harvard or Cambridge, they have gained extra insight into the business of running this country, or would be more dependable or honest than your other run of the mill politicians. The level of faith in the Indian educatioanal system is pretty much at its nadir. What we need is someone with a backbone to take charge of the educational system and prove the naysayers wrong.
Macaulay brand education, which was meant to produce an effecient bureaucratic class for the Raj anyway (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1833macaulay-india.html) is today simply an instrument of the state. There is very little, if any, room for spotaneity or originality. We must all be clones.
No doubt the educational system in the country needs a fresh perspective and a complete overhaul. But this looks like a very distant dream, especially because the powers that be are engaged in a constant battle about which poltical party is able to influence the curriculum the most and twist and turn facts to reflect their ideology.
The educated elite of the country have no doubt lost faith in the entire setup. How else do you explain the intense enthusiasm that surrounds any politician who has studied abroad? As if by the mere act of having studied at Harvard or Cambridge, they have gained extra insight into the business of running this country, or would be more dependable or honest than your other run of the mill politicians. The level of faith in the Indian educatioanal system is pretty much at its nadir. What we need is someone with a backbone to take charge of the educational system and prove the naysayers wrong.
Monday, 27 April 2009
The extremists among us
Have you noticed a recent upsurge of the fanatical streak in men and women you formerly thought were like minded individuals…you know, educated professionals, the guy you share a smile with at the office coffee machine, the gal you go to gym with….suddenly, discussions have become acrid, personal. People launch more readily into the separatist tirade you’ve so far associated with the likes of shiv sena activists/bajrang dal goons……
What’s caused the sudden paradigm shift?
I’ve always believed in the world being made up of two kinds of people…the good and the bad. There’s good and bad people in every religion, caste, creed, race. Maybe that’s very simplistic for our times…..but whats wrong with simplicity? Why complicate a society already heaving under the pressures of combining modern day living with the realities of our past?
I recently got a forwarded email from a guy I used to know in college, in support of Hindus trying to ‘uphold Hindutva’ as it were….on why its essential for Hindus to come up in arms against anyone trying to convert them to other religions and so forth. Well, the simple question here is if this guy would have cared so much if these very Hindus whose souls he’s worrying about, were starving to death. Probably not.
In my book, if you can do nothing to help the Hindu who can’t put food in his children’s mouth, cant afford medicines for his ailing wife then do not tell him what religion to follow.
I have far more common with Rehman, my old college friend than the rowdy upholder of Hindu faith that’s stomping the streets, frothing at the mouth chanting obscenities against another faith. But the dilemma of present times is, its easy to separate yourself from this ruffian….not so easy when your childhood friend, your colleague, family member begins to mouth the same spoon fed monologues…
Its easy to hate….always has been. The growing tentacles of communication media have made it easier to scaremonger…to perpetrate white lies or just colour the grey into a very deep shade of black. Who knows what the reality of the catholics of Orissa was, who got beaten up and slain by people pretending to be of my religion or that of youngsters ‘going overboard’ in aping western culture in the pubs of Bangalore who got humiliated and manhandled by upholders of our ‘ancient traditions and culture.’…but there’s a hundred and fifty different versions doing rounds of the internet and more than ever before people are openly supporting these heinous activities. That’s what’s changed. There have always been ‘gundas’….lawbreakers, in our society but to see supposedly sane individuals speaking their language is scary.
What’s caused the sudden paradigm shift?
I’ve always believed in the world being made up of two kinds of people…the good and the bad. There’s good and bad people in every religion, caste, creed, race. Maybe that’s very simplistic for our times…..but whats wrong with simplicity? Why complicate a society already heaving under the pressures of combining modern day living with the realities of our past?
I recently got a forwarded email from a guy I used to know in college, in support of Hindus trying to ‘uphold Hindutva’ as it were….on why its essential for Hindus to come up in arms against anyone trying to convert them to other religions and so forth. Well, the simple question here is if this guy would have cared so much if these very Hindus whose souls he’s worrying about, were starving to death. Probably not.
In my book, if you can do nothing to help the Hindu who can’t put food in his children’s mouth, cant afford medicines for his ailing wife then do not tell him what religion to follow.
I have far more common with Rehman, my old college friend than the rowdy upholder of Hindu faith that’s stomping the streets, frothing at the mouth chanting obscenities against another faith. But the dilemma of present times is, its easy to separate yourself from this ruffian….not so easy when your childhood friend, your colleague, family member begins to mouth the same spoon fed monologues…
Its easy to hate….always has been. The growing tentacles of communication media have made it easier to scaremonger…to perpetrate white lies or just colour the grey into a very deep shade of black. Who knows what the reality of the catholics of Orissa was, who got beaten up and slain by people pretending to be of my religion or that of youngsters ‘going overboard’ in aping western culture in the pubs of Bangalore who got humiliated and manhandled by upholders of our ‘ancient traditions and culture.’…but there’s a hundred and fifty different versions doing rounds of the internet and more than ever before people are openly supporting these heinous activities. That’s what’s changed. There have always been ‘gundas’….lawbreakers, in our society but to see supposedly sane individuals speaking their language is scary.
Home revisited
India shining…..
The driver who came to pick us up at the airport loved to talk. Which always brings this gleam of utter pleasure in my husband’s eyes. He loves to goad and prod people into talking…gives him food for life. Yes, I have told him a few times, medicine doesn’t quite do justice to his talents. Anyway, so the guy was very enthusiastic about India shining- “arre bhaiya, abhi aap dekhna, ye do bade mall ke baad yahan ek aur sabse bada mall banega. Ab to foreign mein jo milta hai wo sab yahan milta hai.”
And so went the chat…Rohit his usual encouraging self- “waah yaar, tumko to bahut pata hai”….
So far so good. Drawing room chat for our entire length of stay centred on water though…or the lack of it. There was an almost palpable air of apprehension of what was to follow. It appears the authorities forgot to forward plan for water supply for the entire five month spell of skin cracking, torrid summer. So, there was to be NO water supply for the coming months, which made the current state of affairs- water once in five days- seem like a life of luxury. Those with oodles of money were obviously worried about the increase in crime this would bring….
Contingency plan?.....if you have money, get a water tanker to your home every few days n fill up all you can. And no prizes for guessing who owned these water tankers..of course it was those very politicians in the water department whose job it was to ensure regular water supply anyway. Now that’s what I call a genius business plan!
So on the way back our driver was slightly subdued. Its easy to get lost in the zitter glitter of fancy multiplexes and designer shops that adorn the high street in every big city nowadays. But the question is, is this what India needs? Or should the turning wheels of economic development be used to drive the fundamental changes this country’s billion strong population has craved for, for decades now i.e. water, electricity, sanitation, good roads?
The driver who came to pick us up at the airport loved to talk. Which always brings this gleam of utter pleasure in my husband’s eyes. He loves to goad and prod people into talking…gives him food for life. Yes, I have told him a few times, medicine doesn’t quite do justice to his talents. Anyway, so the guy was very enthusiastic about India shining- “arre bhaiya, abhi aap dekhna, ye do bade mall ke baad yahan ek aur sabse bada mall banega. Ab to foreign mein jo milta hai wo sab yahan milta hai.”
And so went the chat…Rohit his usual encouraging self- “waah yaar, tumko to bahut pata hai”….
So far so good. Drawing room chat for our entire length of stay centred on water though…or the lack of it. There was an almost palpable air of apprehension of what was to follow. It appears the authorities forgot to forward plan for water supply for the entire five month spell of skin cracking, torrid summer. So, there was to be NO water supply for the coming months, which made the current state of affairs- water once in five days- seem like a life of luxury. Those with oodles of money were obviously worried about the increase in crime this would bring….
Contingency plan?.....if you have money, get a water tanker to your home every few days n fill up all you can. And no prizes for guessing who owned these water tankers..of course it was those very politicians in the water department whose job it was to ensure regular water supply anyway. Now that’s what I call a genius business plan!
So on the way back our driver was slightly subdued. Its easy to get lost in the zitter glitter of fancy multiplexes and designer shops that adorn the high street in every big city nowadays. But the question is, is this what India needs? Or should the turning wheels of economic development be used to drive the fundamental changes this country’s billion strong population has craved for, for decades now i.e. water, electricity, sanitation, good roads?
No doubt we all feel proud of the recent surge in the Indian economy. I'm proud of the way Indian businessmen have taken the lead, the world over in entrepreneurship and intrepid business planning. But if the ultimate aim of all this is to create further luxury for the 0.1% of India's population, then I'm afraid nothing much has changed.
Friday, 9 January 2009
License to conceive?
Its two am in the morning and she’s come to the hospital with abdominal pain- ‘I cann’y do nothing for this pain, doctor’. Okay, so what have you been doing- ‘I wuz at the pub with ma mates…I”d had a few shots of vodka when this pain started...I’m in agony doctor’. And then she very conveniently stretches out on the couch and the next thing I hear is the sound of her loud snoring. With a growing sense of dejection I open her case records and see a series of admissions, each time after either drug or alcohol overuse. This woman is six months pregnant…and every conceivable drug misuse has been documented in her clinical notes, throughout the pregnancy.
I come home in the morning and have a rant, before an increasingly perplexed looking Rohit. ‘Look at Soumya and Piyush….they cant have children, despite the fact they’d be the most loving and caring parents in the world....and here is this woman, who’s got a brood of, god knows, six or seven already, from some six or seven different partners, all in different care homes or foster homes now, and she continues to breed!’ I blurt out in a single breath.
The sense of ‘acute lopsidedness’ of this world stays with me throughout the day. Soumya n Piyush have been trying for a baby for years. They are now on the waiting list for adoption. But the very long red tape bound around these issues means that they may have to wait for years. There are a dozen different checks to be done. Checks?
Does anyone check to see whether the woman I attended to overnight is fit to be a parent??
This has become my pet hate of late. People who take no responsibility for their lives whatsoever and produce an army of traumatized, scarred little kids who are doomed to a bleak future. And this is the land of ‘equal opportunity’. What kind of opportunities is this child going to get?
Have we reached a point in our society where we should be proposing a ‘license to conceive?’ i.e. you can’t be a parent if you’re deemed unfit to be a parent.
You don’t get to be the third sales assistant at Primark without producing some form of evidence of competence. So why should you be a parent without one?
I’m probably too tired from the night….should get some more sleep and hate the world a little less....
I come home in the morning and have a rant, before an increasingly perplexed looking Rohit. ‘Look at Soumya and Piyush….they cant have children, despite the fact they’d be the most loving and caring parents in the world....and here is this woman, who’s got a brood of, god knows, six or seven already, from some six or seven different partners, all in different care homes or foster homes now, and she continues to breed!’ I blurt out in a single breath.
The sense of ‘acute lopsidedness’ of this world stays with me throughout the day. Soumya n Piyush have been trying for a baby for years. They are now on the waiting list for adoption. But the very long red tape bound around these issues means that they may have to wait for years. There are a dozen different checks to be done. Checks?
Does anyone check to see whether the woman I attended to overnight is fit to be a parent??
This has become my pet hate of late. People who take no responsibility for their lives whatsoever and produce an army of traumatized, scarred little kids who are doomed to a bleak future. And this is the land of ‘equal opportunity’. What kind of opportunities is this child going to get?
Have we reached a point in our society where we should be proposing a ‘license to conceive?’ i.e. you can’t be a parent if you’re deemed unfit to be a parent.
You don’t get to be the third sales assistant at Primark without producing some form of evidence of competence. So why should you be a parent without one?
I’m probably too tired from the night….should get some more sleep and hate the world a little less....
Friday, 19 December 2008
Of Black and White and the various colours in between
I tried recently to watch the latest Subhash Ghai movie, Yuvraj. I say tried because I gave up in sheer disgust after about 43 mins of it. The movie has no storyline, crappy editing, overacting by almost everyone, and makes you lose faith in the endurance and tenaciousness of masala bollywood fare.
So I was pleasantly surprised to come across this other Subhash Ghai film that came out a little while ago without much noise. This movie is about the coming together of two characters that are so utterly defined by ‘black’ and ‘white’. One is a ‘Fidayeen’ Afghanistan trained terrorist who comes to Delhi to blow up people at the 15th August celebrations at Lal Qila and the other an Urdu professor living in Chandni Chowk who’s full of positive feelings for the entire humanity and who with his wife (played by Shefali Chhaya nee Shah, who I adore anyway) soon adopts this lonely young man and is ferrying him round Delhi’s Gali Mohalla on his Bajaj Super.
And although there are eminent opportunities for the kind of melodrama that Mr Ghai relishes, to his credit, he dodges temptation like never before. The scene where Anil Kapoor, after the pointless killing of his wife, decides not to make the news public fearing Hindu-Muslim tensions, was definitely one where I waited for that over the top, cheesy patriotic rhetoric, but none came. Instead the scene is subtle and underplayed. Well done, Ghai saab for suppressing that usually overpowering urge to pop into a scene yourself and destroy all semblance of serious acting.
The defining moment of the film is when the protagonist, after choosing to not pull the trigger after all, goes after his former mentors and kills them proclaiming- “tumne meri behan ko kyon mara?” The film shows that man made bonds and relationships nurtured through shared dreams can at times overcome prejudices of birth and religion.
Worth a watch if you haven’t already done so.
So I was pleasantly surprised to come across this other Subhash Ghai film that came out a little while ago without much noise. This movie is about the coming together of two characters that are so utterly defined by ‘black’ and ‘white’. One is a ‘Fidayeen’ Afghanistan trained terrorist who comes to Delhi to blow up people at the 15th August celebrations at Lal Qila and the other an Urdu professor living in Chandni Chowk who’s full of positive feelings for the entire humanity and who with his wife (played by Shefali Chhaya nee Shah, who I adore anyway) soon adopts this lonely young man and is ferrying him round Delhi’s Gali Mohalla on his Bajaj Super.
And although there are eminent opportunities for the kind of melodrama that Mr Ghai relishes, to his credit, he dodges temptation like never before. The scene where Anil Kapoor, after the pointless killing of his wife, decides not to make the news public fearing Hindu-Muslim tensions, was definitely one where I waited for that over the top, cheesy patriotic rhetoric, but none came. Instead the scene is subtle and underplayed. Well done, Ghai saab for suppressing that usually overpowering urge to pop into a scene yourself and destroy all semblance of serious acting.
The defining moment of the film is when the protagonist, after choosing to not pull the trigger after all, goes after his former mentors and kills them proclaiming- “tumne meri behan ko kyon mara?” The film shows that man made bonds and relationships nurtured through shared dreams can at times overcome prejudices of birth and religion.
Worth a watch if you haven’t already done so.
Monday, 15 December 2008
I was pained to see the Mumbai terror attack unfold before me on television. Perhaps even more pained was I to see another kind of terror attack unfold shortly afterwards.
I guess the following article did not take me completely by surprise. (http://hindi.webdunia.com/news/news/regional/0812/15/1081215143_1.htm) After being out of news for a while and out of the scene when the nation's pride was to be defended, that group of dastardly lunatics that calls itself shiv sena went into overdrive when opportunity arose to do what they do best - i.e. attacking lone defenceless civilians in their home.
This bunch of hooligans stormed into the home of a lawyer who'd proposed representing Ajmal Ameer Eeman, the lone terrorist arrested after the attack. The lawyer of course had only voiced what's enshrined in the Indian constitution - namely every accused, howsoever heinous the nature of the crime, has the right to be represented in court by a lawyer. The judgement on the culpability or not of an accused can only be taken by a court of law. Trial by public sentiment is perhaps the most unfair and least reliable means of judging a crime.
How long will it take before members of this great community realise that they have the completely wrong mouthpiece for their extrordinary achievements? Messrs Thackray as poster boys for Maratha pride?
And their contribution to the society at large I supppose will honing to perfection the art of making incendiary speeches and pandering to narrow parochial and regional agendas.
What truly upholds the pride of the Marathi community is its rich heritage, its culture, its theatre, its exuberant literature and above all, the extreme tenacity, respect for women and exceptional enterprise that have ensured that Indian citizens everywhere look up to Mumbai as the place where dreams do come true. That image of course is on the brink of being shattered by Raj Thackray's truly moronic acts of vandalising the home and hearth of poor North Indian residents of Mumbai. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Raj_Thackeray_in_judicial_custody_till_Nov_4/articleshow/3621395.cms
I guess the following article did not take me completely by surprise. (http://hindi.webdunia.com/news/news/regional/0812/15/1081215143_1.htm) After being out of news for a while and out of the scene when the nation's pride was to be defended, that group of dastardly lunatics that calls itself shiv sena went into overdrive when opportunity arose to do what they do best - i.e. attacking lone defenceless civilians in their home.
This bunch of hooligans stormed into the home of a lawyer who'd proposed representing Ajmal Ameer Eeman, the lone terrorist arrested after the attack. The lawyer of course had only voiced what's enshrined in the Indian constitution - namely every accused, howsoever heinous the nature of the crime, has the right to be represented in court by a lawyer. The judgement on the culpability or not of an accused can only be taken by a court of law. Trial by public sentiment is perhaps the most unfair and least reliable means of judging a crime.
How long will it take before members of this great community realise that they have the completely wrong mouthpiece for their extrordinary achievements? Messrs Thackray as poster boys for Maratha pride?
And their contribution to the society at large I supppose will honing to perfection the art of making incendiary speeches and pandering to narrow parochial and regional agendas.
What truly upholds the pride of the Marathi community is its rich heritage, its culture, its theatre, its exuberant literature and above all, the extreme tenacity, respect for women and exceptional enterprise that have ensured that Indian citizens everywhere look up to Mumbai as the place where dreams do come true. That image of course is on the brink of being shattered by Raj Thackray's truly moronic acts of vandalising the home and hearth of poor North Indian residents of Mumbai. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Raj_Thackeray_in_judicial_custody_till_Nov_4/articleshow/3621395.cms
Mumbai and Maharashtra shine brightly on the Indian Kaleidoscope but are by no means separate from the heartland. That cohesion and not confrontation make a truly great city was demonstrated amply in the aftermath of the Mumbai attacks when people irrespective of their religion, region or place of birth came together, to stand in solidarity with the Mumbaikars.
Sunday, 14 December 2008
India's Muslims in Crisis by Aryn Baker
Extremely thought provoking. Read on............
The disembodied voice was chilling in its rage. A gunman, holed up in the Oberoi Trident hotel in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), where some 40 people had been taken hostage, told an Indian news channel that the attacks were revenge for the persecution of Muslims in India. "We love this as our country, but when our mothers and sisters were being killed, where was everybody?" he asked via telephone. No answer came. But then he probably wasn't expecting one.
Over 100 Dead as Terrorist Attacks Overwhelm Mumbai
Stories
Terror Strikes in Mumbai
More Related
Pakistan: Divided by Faith - 60 Years of Independence
India: The Terrorists Within
The roots of Muslim rage run deep in India, nourished by a long-held sense of injustice over what many Indian Muslims believe is institutionalized discrimination against the country's largest minority group. The disparities between Muslims, who make up 13.4% of the population, and India's Hindus, who hover at around 80%, are striking. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, Muslim Indians have shorter life spans, worse health, lower literacy levels and lower-paying jobs. Add to that toxic brew the lingering resentment over 2002's anti-Muslim riots in the state of Gujarat. The riots, instigated by Hindu nationalists, killed some 2,000 people, most of them Muslims. To this day, few of the perpetrators have been convicted. (See pictures of the terrorist shootings in Mumbai.)
The huge gap between Muslims and Hindus will continue to haunt India's — and neighboring Pakistan's — progress toward peace and prosperity. But before intercommunal relations can improve, there are even bigger problems that must first be worked out: the schism in subcontinental Islam and the religion's place and role in modern India and Pakistan. It is a crisis 150 years in the making.
The Beginning of the Problem On the afternoon of March 29, 1857, Mangal Pandey, a handsome, mustachioed soldier in the East India Company's native regiment, attacked his British lieutenant. His hanging a week later sparked a subcontinental revolt known to Indians as the first war of independence and to the British as the Sepoy Mutiny. Retribution was swift, and though Pandey was a Hindu, it was the subcontinent's Muslims, whose Mughal King nominally held power in Delhi, who bore the brunt of British rage. The remnants of the Mughal Empire were dismantled, and 500 years of Muslim supremacy on the subcontinent came to a halt.
Muslim society in India collapsed. The British imposed English as the official language. The impact was cataclysmic. Muslims went from near 100% literacy to 20% within a half-century. The country's educated Muslim élite was effectively blocked from administrative jobs in the government. Between 1858 and 1878, only 57 out of 3,100 graduates of Calcutta University — then the center of South Asian education — were Muslims. While discrimination by both Hindus and the British played a role, it was as if the whole of Muslim society had retreated to lick its collective wounds.
Out of this period of introspection, two rival movements emerged to foster an Islamic ascendancy. Revivalist groups blamed the collapse of their empire on a society that had strayed too far from the teachings of the Koran. They promoted a return to a purer form of Islam, modeled on the life of the Prophet Muhammad. Others embraced the modern ways of their new rulers, seeking Muslim advancement through the pursuit of Western sciences, culture and law. From these movements two great Islamic institutions were born: Darul Uloom Deoband in northern India, rivaled only by Al Azhar University in Cairo for its teaching of Islam, and Aligarh Muslim University, a secular institution that promoted Muslim culture, philosophy and languages but left religion to the mosque. These two schools embody the fundamental split that continues to divide Islam in the subcontinent today. "You could say that Deoband and Aligarh are husband and wife, born from the same historical events," says Adil Siddiqui, information coordinator for Deoband. "But they live at daggers drawn."
The campus at Deoband is only a three-hour drive from New Delhi through the modern megasuburb of Noida. Strip malls and monster shopping complexes have consumed many of the mango groves that once framed the road to Deoband, but the contemporary world stops at the gate. The courtyards are packed with bearded young men wearing long, collared shirts and white caps. The air thrums with the voices of hundreds of students reciting the Koran from open-door classrooms.
Founded in 1866, the Deoband school quickly set itself apart from other traditional madrasahs, which were usually based in the home of the village mosque's prayer leader. Deoband's founders, a group of Muslim scholars from New Delhi, instituted a regimented system of classrooms, coursework, texts and exams. Instruction is in Urdu, Persian and Arabic, and the curriculum closely follows the teachings of the 18th century Indian Islamic scholar Mullah Nizamuddin Sehalvi. Graduates go on to study at Cairo's Al Azhar or the Islamic University of Medina in Saudi Arabia, or they found their own Deobandi institutions.
Today, more than 9,000 Deobandi madrasahs are scattered throughout India, Afghanistan and Pakistan, most infamously the Dara-ul-Uloom Haqaniya Akora Khattak, near Peshawar, Pakistan, where Mullah Mohammed Omar and several other leaders of Afghanistan's Taliban first tasted a life lived in accordance with Shari'a. Siddiqui visibly stiffens when those names are brought up. They have become synonymous with Islamic radicalism, and Siddiqui is careful to dissociate his institution from those who carry on its traditions, without actually condemning their actions. "Our books are being taught there," he says. "They have the same system and rules. But if someone is following the path of terrorism, it is because of local compulsions and local politics."
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, who founded the Anglo-Mohammedan Oriental College at Aligarh in 1877, studied under the same teachers as the founders of Deoband. But he believed that the downfall of India's Muslims was due to their unwillingness to embrace modern ways. He decoupled religion from education and in his school sought to emulate the culture and training of India's new colonial masters. Islamic culture was part of the curriculum, but so were the latest advances in sciences, medicine and Western philosophy. The medium was English, the better to prepare students for civil-service jobs. He called his school the Oxford of the East. In architecture alone, the campus lives up to that name. A euphoric blend of clock towers, crenellated battlements, Mughal arches, domes and the staid red brick of Victorian institutions that only India's enthusiastic embrace of all things European could produce, the central campus of Aligarh today is haven to a diverse crowd of male and female, Hindu and Muslim students. Its law and medicine schools are among the top-ranked in India, but so are its arts faculty and Quranic Studies Centre. "With all this diversity, language, culture, secularism was the only way to go forward as a nation," says Aligarh's vice chancellor, P.K. Abdul Azis. "It was the new religion."
This fracture in religious doctrine — whether Islam should embrace the modern or revert to its fundamental origins — between two schools less than a day's donkey ride apart when they were founded, was barely remarked upon at the time. But over the course of the next 100 years, that tiny crack would split Islam into two warring ideologies with repercussions that reverberate around the world to this day. Before the split became a crisis, however, the founders of the Deoband and Aligarh universities shared the common goal of an independent India. Pedagogical leanings were overlooked as students and staff of both institutions joined with Hindus across the subcontinent to remove the yoke of colonial rule in the early decades of the 20th century.
Two Faiths, Two Nations But nationalistic trends were pulling at the fragile alliance, and India began to splinter along ethnic and religious lines. Following World War I, a populist Muslim poet-philosopher by the name of Muhammad Iqbal framed the Islamic zeitgeist when he questioned the position of minority Muslims in a future, independent India. The solution, Iqbal proposed, was an independent state for Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern India, a separate country where Muslims would rule themselves. The idea of Pakistan was born.
Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the Savile Row–suited lawyer who midwifed Pakistan into existence on Aug. 14, 1947, was notoriously ambiguous about how he envisioned the country once it became an independent state. Both he and Iqbal, who were friends until the poet's death in 1938, had repeatedly stated their dream for a "modern, moderate and very enlightened Pakistan," says Sharifuddin Pirzada, Jinnah's personal secretary. Jinnah's own wish was that the Pakistani people, as members of a new, modern and democratic nation, would decide the country's direction.
But rarely in Pakistan's history have its people lived Jinnah's vision of a modern Muslim democracy. Only three times in its 62-year history has Pakistan seen a peaceful, democratic transition of power. With four disparate provinces, more than a dozen languages and dialects, and powerful neighbors, the country's leaders — be they Presidents, Prime Ministers or army chiefs — have been forced to knit the nation together with the only thing Pakistanis have in common: religion.
Following the 1971 civil war, when East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, broke away, the populist Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto embarked on a Muslim-identity program to prevent the country from fracturing further. General Mohammed Zia ul-Haq continued the Islamization campaign when he overthrew Bhutto in 1977, hoping to garner favor with the religious parties, the only constituency available to a military dictator. He instituted Shari'a courts, made blasphemy illegal and established laws that punished fornicators with lashes and held that rape victims could be convicted of adultery. When the Soviet Union invaded neighboring Afghanistan in December 1979, Pakistan was already poised for its own Islamic revolution.
Almost overnight, thousands of refugees poured over the border into Pakistan. Camps mushroomed, and so did madrasahs. Ostensibly created to educate the refugees, they provided the ideal recruiting ground for a new breed of soldier: mujahedin, or holy warriors, trained to vanquish the infidel invaders in America's proxy war with the Soviet Union. Thousands of Pakistanis joined fellow Muslims from across the world to fight the Soviets. As far away as Karachi, high school kids started wearing "jihadi jackets," the pocketed vests popular with the mujahedin. Says Hamid Gul, then head of the Pakistan intelligence agency charged with arming and training the mujahedin: "In the 1980s, the world watched the people of Afghanistan stand up to tyranny, oppression and slavery. The spirit of jihad was rekindled, and it gave a new vision to the youth of Pakistan."
But jihad, as it is described in the Koran, does not end merely with political gain. It ends in a perfect Islamic state. The West's, and Pakistan's, cynical resurrection of something so profoundly powerful and complex unleashed a force that gave root to al-Qaeda's rage, the Taliban's dream of an Islamic utopia in Afghanistan, and in the dozens of radical Islamic groups rapidly replicating themselves in India and around the world today. "The promise of jihad was never fulfilled," says Gul. "Is it any wonder the fighting continues to this day?" Religion may have been used to unite Pakistan, but it is also tearing it apart.
India Today In India, Islam is, in contrast, the other — purged by the British, denigrated by the Hindu right, mistrusted by the majority, marginalized by society. There are nearly as many Muslims in India as in all of Pakistan, but in a nation of more than a billion, they are still a minority, with all the burdens that minorities anywhere carry. Government surveys show that Muslims live shorter, poorer and unhealthier lives than Hindus and are often excluded from the better jobs. To be sure, there are Muslim success stories in the booming economy. Azim Premji, the founder of the outsourcing giant Wipro, is one of the richest individuals in India. But for many Muslims, the inequality of the boom has reinforced their exclusion.
Kashmir, a Muslim-dominated state whose fate had been left undecided in the chaos that led up to partition, remains a suppurating wound in India's Muslim psyche. As the cause of three wars between India and Pakistan — one of which nearly went nuclear in 1999 — Kashmir has become a symbol of profound injustice to Indian Muslims, who believe that their government cares little for Kashmir's claim of independence — which is based upon a 1948 U.N. resolution promising a plebiscite to determine the Kashmiri people's future. That frustration has spilled into the rest of India in the form of several devastating terrorist attacks that have made Indian Muslims both perpetrators and victims.
A mounting sense of persecution, fueled by the government's seeming reluctance to address the brutal anti-Muslim riots that killed more than 2,000 in the state of Gujarat in 2002, has aided the cause of homegrown militant groups. They include the banned Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), which was accused of detonating nine bombs in Mumbai during the course of 2003, killing close to 80. The 2006 terrorist attacks on the Mumbai commuter-rail system that killed 183 people were also blamed on SIMI as well as the pro-Kashmir Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Those incidents exposed the all-too-common Hindu belief that Muslims aren't really Indian. "LeT, SIMI — it doesn't matter who was behind these attacks. They are all children of [Pervez] Musharraf," sneered Manish Shah, a Mumbai resident who lost his best friend in the explosions, referring to the then President of Pakistan. In India, unlike Pakistan, Islam does not unify but divide.
Still, many South Asian Muslims insist Islam is the one and only force that can bring the subcontinent together and return it to pre-eminence as a single whole. "We [Muslims] were the legal rulers of India, and in 1857 the British took that away from us," says Tarik Jan, a gentle-mannered scholar at Islamabad's Institute of Policy Studies. "In 1947 they should have given that back to the Muslims." Jan is no militant, but he pines for the golden era of the Mughal period in the 1700s and has a fervent desire to see India, Pakistan and Bangladesh reunited under Islamic rule.
That sense of injustice is at the root of Muslim identity today. It has permeated every aspect of society and forms the basis of rising Islamic radicalism on the subcontinent. "People are hungry for justice," says Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani journalist and author of the new book Descent into Chaos. "It is perceived to be the fundamental promise of the Koran." These twin phenomena — the longing many Muslims feel to see their religion restored as the subcontinent's core, and the marks of both piety and extremism Islam bears — reflect the lack of strong political and civic institutions in the region for people to have faith in. If the subcontinent's governments can't provide those institutions, then terrorists like the Trident's mysterious caller will continue asking questions. And providing their own answers.
— With reporting by Jyoti Thottam / Mumbai and Ershad Mahmud / Islamabad
The disembodied voice was chilling in its rage. A gunman, holed up in the Oberoi Trident hotel in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), where some 40 people had been taken hostage, told an Indian news channel that the attacks were revenge for the persecution of Muslims in India. "We love this as our country, but when our mothers and sisters were being killed, where was everybody?" he asked via telephone. No answer came. But then he probably wasn't expecting one.
Over 100 Dead as Terrorist Attacks Overwhelm Mumbai
Stories
Terror Strikes in Mumbai
More Related
Pakistan: Divided by Faith - 60 Years of Independence
India: The Terrorists Within
The roots of Muslim rage run deep in India, nourished by a long-held sense of injustice over what many Indian Muslims believe is institutionalized discrimination against the country's largest minority group. The disparities between Muslims, who make up 13.4% of the population, and India's Hindus, who hover at around 80%, are striking. There are exceptions, of course, but generally speaking, Muslim Indians have shorter life spans, worse health, lower literacy levels and lower-paying jobs. Add to that toxic brew the lingering resentment over 2002's anti-Muslim riots in the state of Gujarat. The riots, instigated by Hindu nationalists, killed some 2,000 people, most of them Muslims. To this day, few of the perpetrators have been convicted. (See pictures of the terrorist shootings in Mumbai.)
The huge gap between Muslims and Hindus will continue to haunt India's — and neighboring Pakistan's — progress toward peace and prosperity. But before intercommunal relations can improve, there are even bigger problems that must first be worked out: the schism in subcontinental Islam and the religion's place and role in modern India and Pakistan. It is a crisis 150 years in the making.
The Beginning of the Problem On the afternoon of March 29, 1857, Mangal Pandey, a handsome, mustachioed soldier in the East India Company's native regiment, attacked his British lieutenant. His hanging a week later sparked a subcontinental revolt known to Indians as the first war of independence and to the British as the Sepoy Mutiny. Retribution was swift, and though Pandey was a Hindu, it was the subcontinent's Muslims, whose Mughal King nominally held power in Delhi, who bore the brunt of British rage. The remnants of the Mughal Empire were dismantled, and 500 years of Muslim supremacy on the subcontinent came to a halt.
Muslim society in India collapsed. The British imposed English as the official language. The impact was cataclysmic. Muslims went from near 100% literacy to 20% within a half-century. The country's educated Muslim élite was effectively blocked from administrative jobs in the government. Between 1858 and 1878, only 57 out of 3,100 graduates of Calcutta University — then the center of South Asian education — were Muslims. While discrimination by both Hindus and the British played a role, it was as if the whole of Muslim society had retreated to lick its collective wounds.
Out of this period of introspection, two rival movements emerged to foster an Islamic ascendancy. Revivalist groups blamed the collapse of their empire on a society that had strayed too far from the teachings of the Koran. They promoted a return to a purer form of Islam, modeled on the life of the Prophet Muhammad. Others embraced the modern ways of their new rulers, seeking Muslim advancement through the pursuit of Western sciences, culture and law. From these movements two great Islamic institutions were born: Darul Uloom Deoband in northern India, rivaled only by Al Azhar University in Cairo for its teaching of Islam, and Aligarh Muslim University, a secular institution that promoted Muslim culture, philosophy and languages but left religion to the mosque. These two schools embody the fundamental split that continues to divide Islam in the subcontinent today. "You could say that Deoband and Aligarh are husband and wife, born from the same historical events," says Adil Siddiqui, information coordinator for Deoband. "But they live at daggers drawn."
The campus at Deoband is only a three-hour drive from New Delhi through the modern megasuburb of Noida. Strip malls and monster shopping complexes have consumed many of the mango groves that once framed the road to Deoband, but the contemporary world stops at the gate. The courtyards are packed with bearded young men wearing long, collared shirts and white caps. The air thrums with the voices of hundreds of students reciting the Koran from open-door classrooms.
Founded in 1866, the Deoband school quickly set itself apart from other traditional madrasahs, which were usually based in the home of the village mosque's prayer leader. Deoband's founders, a group of Muslim scholars from New Delhi, instituted a regimented system of classrooms, coursework, texts and exams. Instruction is in Urdu, Persian and Arabic, and the curriculum closely follows the teachings of the 18th century Indian Islamic scholar Mullah Nizamuddin Sehalvi. Graduates go on to study at Cairo's Al Azhar or the Islamic University of Medina in Saudi Arabia, or they found their own Deobandi institutions.
Today, more than 9,000 Deobandi madrasahs are scattered throughout India, Afghanistan and Pakistan, most infamously the Dara-ul-Uloom Haqaniya Akora Khattak, near Peshawar, Pakistan, where Mullah Mohammed Omar and several other leaders of Afghanistan's Taliban first tasted a life lived in accordance with Shari'a. Siddiqui visibly stiffens when those names are brought up. They have become synonymous with Islamic radicalism, and Siddiqui is careful to dissociate his institution from those who carry on its traditions, without actually condemning their actions. "Our books are being taught there," he says. "They have the same system and rules. But if someone is following the path of terrorism, it is because of local compulsions and local politics."
Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, who founded the Anglo-Mohammedan Oriental College at Aligarh in 1877, studied under the same teachers as the founders of Deoband. But he believed that the downfall of India's Muslims was due to their unwillingness to embrace modern ways. He decoupled religion from education and in his school sought to emulate the culture and training of India's new colonial masters. Islamic culture was part of the curriculum, but so were the latest advances in sciences, medicine and Western philosophy. The medium was English, the better to prepare students for civil-service jobs. He called his school the Oxford of the East. In architecture alone, the campus lives up to that name. A euphoric blend of clock towers, crenellated battlements, Mughal arches, domes and the staid red brick of Victorian institutions that only India's enthusiastic embrace of all things European could produce, the central campus of Aligarh today is haven to a diverse crowd of male and female, Hindu and Muslim students. Its law and medicine schools are among the top-ranked in India, but so are its arts faculty and Quranic Studies Centre. "With all this diversity, language, culture, secularism was the only way to go forward as a nation," says Aligarh's vice chancellor, P.K. Abdul Azis. "It was the new religion."
This fracture in religious doctrine — whether Islam should embrace the modern or revert to its fundamental origins — between two schools less than a day's donkey ride apart when they were founded, was barely remarked upon at the time. But over the course of the next 100 years, that tiny crack would split Islam into two warring ideologies with repercussions that reverberate around the world to this day. Before the split became a crisis, however, the founders of the Deoband and Aligarh universities shared the common goal of an independent India. Pedagogical leanings were overlooked as students and staff of both institutions joined with Hindus across the subcontinent to remove the yoke of colonial rule in the early decades of the 20th century.
Two Faiths, Two Nations But nationalistic trends were pulling at the fragile alliance, and India began to splinter along ethnic and religious lines. Following World War I, a populist Muslim poet-philosopher by the name of Muhammad Iqbal framed the Islamic zeitgeist when he questioned the position of minority Muslims in a future, independent India. The solution, Iqbal proposed, was an independent state for Muslim-majority provinces in northwestern India, a separate country where Muslims would rule themselves. The idea of Pakistan was born.
Mohammed Ali Jinnah, the Savile Row–suited lawyer who midwifed Pakistan into existence on Aug. 14, 1947, was notoriously ambiguous about how he envisioned the country once it became an independent state. Both he and Iqbal, who were friends until the poet's death in 1938, had repeatedly stated their dream for a "modern, moderate and very enlightened Pakistan," says Sharifuddin Pirzada, Jinnah's personal secretary. Jinnah's own wish was that the Pakistani people, as members of a new, modern and democratic nation, would decide the country's direction.
But rarely in Pakistan's history have its people lived Jinnah's vision of a modern Muslim democracy. Only three times in its 62-year history has Pakistan seen a peaceful, democratic transition of power. With four disparate provinces, more than a dozen languages and dialects, and powerful neighbors, the country's leaders — be they Presidents, Prime Ministers or army chiefs — have been forced to knit the nation together with the only thing Pakistanis have in common: religion.
Following the 1971 civil war, when East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, broke away, the populist Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto embarked on a Muslim-identity program to prevent the country from fracturing further. General Mohammed Zia ul-Haq continued the Islamization campaign when he overthrew Bhutto in 1977, hoping to garner favor with the religious parties, the only constituency available to a military dictator. He instituted Shari'a courts, made blasphemy illegal and established laws that punished fornicators with lashes and held that rape victims could be convicted of adultery. When the Soviet Union invaded neighboring Afghanistan in December 1979, Pakistan was already poised for its own Islamic revolution.
Almost overnight, thousands of refugees poured over the border into Pakistan. Camps mushroomed, and so did madrasahs. Ostensibly created to educate the refugees, they provided the ideal recruiting ground for a new breed of soldier: mujahedin, or holy warriors, trained to vanquish the infidel invaders in America's proxy war with the Soviet Union. Thousands of Pakistanis joined fellow Muslims from across the world to fight the Soviets. As far away as Karachi, high school kids started wearing "jihadi jackets," the pocketed vests popular with the mujahedin. Says Hamid Gul, then head of the Pakistan intelligence agency charged with arming and training the mujahedin: "In the 1980s, the world watched the people of Afghanistan stand up to tyranny, oppression and slavery. The spirit of jihad was rekindled, and it gave a new vision to the youth of Pakistan."
But jihad, as it is described in the Koran, does not end merely with political gain. It ends in a perfect Islamic state. The West's, and Pakistan's, cynical resurrection of something so profoundly powerful and complex unleashed a force that gave root to al-Qaeda's rage, the Taliban's dream of an Islamic utopia in Afghanistan, and in the dozens of radical Islamic groups rapidly replicating themselves in India and around the world today. "The promise of jihad was never fulfilled," says Gul. "Is it any wonder the fighting continues to this day?" Religion may have been used to unite Pakistan, but it is also tearing it apart.
India Today In India, Islam is, in contrast, the other — purged by the British, denigrated by the Hindu right, mistrusted by the majority, marginalized by society. There are nearly as many Muslims in India as in all of Pakistan, but in a nation of more than a billion, they are still a minority, with all the burdens that minorities anywhere carry. Government surveys show that Muslims live shorter, poorer and unhealthier lives than Hindus and are often excluded from the better jobs. To be sure, there are Muslim success stories in the booming economy. Azim Premji, the founder of the outsourcing giant Wipro, is one of the richest individuals in India. But for many Muslims, the inequality of the boom has reinforced their exclusion.
Kashmir, a Muslim-dominated state whose fate had been left undecided in the chaos that led up to partition, remains a suppurating wound in India's Muslim psyche. As the cause of three wars between India and Pakistan — one of which nearly went nuclear in 1999 — Kashmir has become a symbol of profound injustice to Indian Muslims, who believe that their government cares little for Kashmir's claim of independence — which is based upon a 1948 U.N. resolution promising a plebiscite to determine the Kashmiri people's future. That frustration has spilled into the rest of India in the form of several devastating terrorist attacks that have made Indian Muslims both perpetrators and victims.
A mounting sense of persecution, fueled by the government's seeming reluctance to address the brutal anti-Muslim riots that killed more than 2,000 in the state of Gujarat in 2002, has aided the cause of homegrown militant groups. They include the banned Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), which was accused of detonating nine bombs in Mumbai during the course of 2003, killing close to 80. The 2006 terrorist attacks on the Mumbai commuter-rail system that killed 183 people were also blamed on SIMI as well as the pro-Kashmir Pakistani terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). Those incidents exposed the all-too-common Hindu belief that Muslims aren't really Indian. "LeT, SIMI — it doesn't matter who was behind these attacks. They are all children of [Pervez] Musharraf," sneered Manish Shah, a Mumbai resident who lost his best friend in the explosions, referring to the then President of Pakistan. In India, unlike Pakistan, Islam does not unify but divide.
Still, many South Asian Muslims insist Islam is the one and only force that can bring the subcontinent together and return it to pre-eminence as a single whole. "We [Muslims] were the legal rulers of India, and in 1857 the British took that away from us," says Tarik Jan, a gentle-mannered scholar at Islamabad's Institute of Policy Studies. "In 1947 they should have given that back to the Muslims." Jan is no militant, but he pines for the golden era of the Mughal period in the 1700s and has a fervent desire to see India, Pakistan and Bangladesh reunited under Islamic rule.
That sense of injustice is at the root of Muslim identity today. It has permeated every aspect of society and forms the basis of rising Islamic radicalism on the subcontinent. "People are hungry for justice," says Ahmed Rashid, a Pakistani journalist and author of the new book Descent into Chaos. "It is perceived to be the fundamental promise of the Koran." These twin phenomena — the longing many Muslims feel to see their religion restored as the subcontinent's core, and the marks of both piety and extremism Islam bears — reflect the lack of strong political and civic institutions in the region for people to have faith in. If the subcontinent's governments can't provide those institutions, then terrorists like the Trident's mysterious caller will continue asking questions. And providing their own answers.
— With reporting by Jyoti Thottam / Mumbai and Ershad Mahmud / Islamabad
Saturday, 13 December 2008
The monster in the mirror by Arundhati Roy
You sometimes stumble over a piece of writing that transcends conventional rules of writing...its not bound by a single thought, agenda or the rush to establish a particular viewpoint as sacrosanct. It flows from the authors deepest beliefs. Beliefs that are not narrow, blinkered or prejudiced. This ability to 'look beyond' the obvious sets it apart from the run of the mill commentaries that we have all heard a zillion times since the attacks on Mumbai. Its hard not to play the eternal blame game when confronted by indescribable cruelty and gruesome circumstances, as the bombings were. Sadly, our political system has failed us in more ways than one. Not only is there an inherent apathy in th political machinery unless something as drastic as Mumbai happens, there is also a complete lack of the abilty to quit political muck racking and shalllow agenda based knee jerk actions even when confronted by the truth in the face.
There are no good guys or bad guys....there are just role players. I live for the day when India as a whole refuses to fall into the vicious cycle of hatred and Indians as a people take responsibility for their lives instead of entrusting them into the hands of a corrupt few.
Here is the article.
The link to the pages of The Guardian for this article is http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/12/mumbai-arundhati-roy
The Mumbai attacks have been dubbed 'India's 9/11', and there are calls for a 9/11-style response, including an attack on Pakistan. Instead, the country must fight terrorism with justice, or face civil war
Arundhati Roy
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 13 December 2008 00.01 GMT
Article history
We've forfeited the rights to our own tragedies. As the carnage in Mumbai raged on, day after horrible day, our 24-hour news channels informed us that we were watching "India's 9/11". Like actors in a Bollywood rip-off of an old Hollywood film, we're expected to play our parts and say our lines, even though we know it's all been said and done before.
As tension in the region builds, US Senator John McCain has warned Pakistan that if it didn't act fast to arrest the "Bad Guys" he had personal information that India would launch air strikes on "terrorist camps" in Pakistan and that Washington could do nothing because Mumbai was India's 9/11.
But November isn't September, 2008 isn't 2001, Pakistan isn't Afghanistan and India isn't America. So perhaps we should reclaim our tragedy and pick through the debris with our own brains and our own broken hearts so that we can arrive at our own conclusions.
It's odd how in the last week of November thousands of people in Kashmir supervised by thousands of Indian troops lined up to cast their vote, while the richest quarters of India's richest city ended up looking like war-torn Kupwara – one of Kashmir's most ravaged districts.
The Mumbai attacks are only the most recent of a spate of terrorist attacks on Indian towns and cities this year. Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Delhi, Guwahati, Jaipur and Malegaon have all seen serial bomb blasts in which hundreds of ordinary people have been killed and wounded. If the police are right about the people they have arrested as suspects, both Hindu and Muslim, all Indian nationals, it obviously indicates that something's going very badly wrong in this country.
If you were watching television you may not have heard that ordinary people too died in Mumbai. They were mowed down in a busy railway station and a public hospital. The terrorists did not distinguish between poor and rich. They killed both with equal cold-bloodedness. The Indian media, however, was transfixed by the rising tide of horror that breached the glittering barricades of India Shining and spread its stench in the marbled lobbies and crystal ballrooms of two incredibly luxurious hotels and a small Jewish centre.
We're told one of these hotels is an icon of the city of Mumbai. That's absolutely true. It's an icon of the easy, obscene injustice that ordinary Indians endure every day. On a day when the newspapers were full of moving obituaries by beautiful people about the hotel rooms they had stayed in, the gourmet restaurants they loved (ironically one was called Kandahar), and the staff who served them, a small box on the top left-hand corner in the inner pages of a national newspaper (sponsored by a pizza company I think) said "Hungry, kya?" (Hungry eh?). It then, with the best of intentions I'm sure, informed its readers that on the international hunger index, India ranked below Sudan and Somalia. But of course this isn't that war. That one's still being fought in the Dalit bastis of our villages, on the banks of the Narmada and the Koel Karo rivers; in the rubber estate in Chengara; in the villages of Nandigram, Singur, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Lalgarh in West Bengal and the slums and shantytowns of our gigantic cities.
That war isn't on TV. Yet. So maybe, like everyone else, we should deal with the one that is.
There is a fierce, unforgiving fault-line that runs through the contemporary discourse on terrorism. On one side (let's call it Side A) are those who see terrorism, especially "Islamist" terrorism, as a hateful, insane scourge that spins on its own axis, in its own orbit and has nothing to do with the world around it, nothing to do with history, geography or economics. Therefore, Side A says, to try and place it in a political context, or even try to understand it, amounts to justifying it and is a crime in itself.
Side B believes that though nothing can ever excuse or justify terrorism, it exists in a particular time, place and political context, and to refuse to see that will only aggravate the problem and put more and more people in harm's way. Which is a crime in itself.
The sayings of Hafiz Saeed, who founded the Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Pure) in 1990 and who belongs to the hardline Salafi tradition of Islam, certainly bolsters the case of Side A. Hafiz Saeed approves of suicide bombing, hates Jews, Shias and Democracy and believes that jihad should be waged until Islam, his Islam, rules the world. Among the things he said are: "There cannot be any peace while India remains intact. Cut them, cut them so much that they kneel before you and ask for mercy."
And: "India has shown us this path. We would like to give India a tit-for-tat response and reciprocate in the same way by killing the Hindus, just like it is killing the Muslims in Kashmir."
But where would Side A accommodate the sayings of Babu Bajrangi of Ahmedabad, India, who sees himself as a democrat, not a terrorist? He was one of the major lynchpins of the 2002 Gujarat genocide and has said (on camera): "We didn't spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire … we hacked, burned, set on fire … we believe in setting them on fire because these bastards don't want to be cremated, they're afraid of it … I have just one last wish … let me be sentenced to death … I don't care if I'm hanged ... just give me two days before my hanging and I will go and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs [seven or eight hundred thousand] of these people stay ... I will finish them off … let a few more of them die ... at least 25,000 to 50,000 should die."
And where, in Side A's scheme of things, would we place the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh bible, We, or, Our Nationhood Defined by MS Golwalkar, who became head of the RSS in 1944. It says: "Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting on to take on these despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening."Or: "To keep up the purity of its race and culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races – the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here ... a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by."
(Of course Muslims are not the only people in the gun sights of the Hindu right. Dalits have been consistently targeted. Recently in Kandhamal in Orissa, Christians were the target of two and a half months of violence which left more than 40 dead. Forty thousand people have been driven from their homes, half of who now live in refugee camps.)
All these years Hafiz Saeed has lived the life of a respectable man in Lahore as the head of the Jamaat-ud Daawa, which many believe is a front organization for the Lashkar-e-Taiba. He continues to recruit young boys for his own bigoted jehad with his twisted, fiery sermons. On December 11 the UN imposed sanctions on the Jammat-ud-Daawa. The Pakistani government succumbed to international pressure and put Hafiz Saeed under house arrest. Babu Bajrangi, however, is out on bail and lives the life of a respectable man in Gujarat. A couple of years after the genocide he left the VHP to join the Shiv Sena. Narendra Modi, Bajrangi's former mentor, is still the chief minister of Gujarat. So the man who presided over the Gujarat genocide was re-elected twice, and is deeply respected by India's biggest corporate houses, Reliance and Tata.
Suhel Seth, a TV impresario and corporate spokesperson, recently said: "Modi is God." The policemen who supervised and sometimes even assisted the rampaging Hindu mobs in Gujarat have been rewarded and promoted. The RSS has 45,000 branches, its own range of charities and 7 million volunteers preaching its doctrine of hate across India. They include Narendra Modi, but also former prime minister AB Vajpayee, current leader of the opposition LK Advani, and a host of other senior politicians, bureaucrats and police and intelligence officers.
If that's not enough to complicate our picture of secular democracy, we should place on record that there are plenty of Muslim organisations within India preaching their own narrow bigotry.
So, on balance, if I had to choose between Side A and Side B, I'd pick Side B. We need context. Always.
In this nuclear subcontinent that context is partition. The Radcliffe Line, which separated India and Pakistan and tore through states, districts, villages, fields, communities, water systems, homes and families, was drawn virtually overnight. It was Britain's final, parting kick to us. Partition triggered the massacre of more than a million people and the largest migration of a human population in contemporary history. Eight million people, Hindus fleeing the new Pakistan, Muslims fleeing the new kind of India left their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs.
Each of those people carries and passes down a story of unimaginable pain, hate, horror but yearning too. That wound, those torn but still unsevered muscles, that blood and those splintered bones still lock us together in a close embrace of hatred, terrifying familiarity but also love. It has left Kashmir trapped in a nightmare from which it can't seem to emerge, a nightmare that has claimed more than 60,000 lives. Pakistan, the Land of the Pure, became an Islamic Republic, and then, very quickly a corrupt, violent military state, openly intolerant of other faiths. India on the other hand declared herself an inclusive, secular democracy. It was a magnificent undertaking, but Babu Bajrangi's predecessors had been hard at work since the 1920s, dripping poison into India's bloodstream, undermining that idea of India even before it was born.
By 1990 they were ready to make a bid for power. In 1992 Hindu mobs exhorted by LK Advani stormed the Babri Masjid and demolished it. By 1998 the BJP was in power at the centre. The US war on terror put the wind in their sails. It allowed them to do exactly as they pleased, even to commit genocide and then present their fascism as a legitimate form of chaotic democracy. This happened at a time when India had opened its huge market to international finance and it was in the interests of international corporations and the media houses they owned to project it as a country that could do no wrong. That gave Hindu nationalists all the impetus and the impunity they needed.
This, then, is the larger historical context of terrorism in the subcontinent and of the Mumbai attacks. It shouldn't surprise us that Hafiz Saeed of the Lashkar-e-Taiba is from Shimla (India) and LK Advani of the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh is from Sindh (Pakistan).
In much the same way as it did after the 2001 parliament attack, the 2002 burning of the Sabarmati Express and the 2007 bombing of the Samjhauta Express, the government of India announced that it has "incontrovertible" evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba backed by Pakistan's ISI was behind the Mumbai strikes. The Lashkar has denied involvement, but remains the prime accused. According to the police and intelligence agencies the Lashkar operates in India through an organisation called the Indian Mujahideen. Two Indian nationals, Sheikh Mukhtar Ahmed, a Special Police Officer working for the Jammu and Kashmir police, and Tausif Rehman, a resident of Kolkata in West Bengal, have been arrested in connection with the Mumbai attacks.
So already the neat accusation against Pakistan is getting a little messy. Almost always, when these stories unspool, they reveal a complicated global network of foot soldiers, trainers, recruiters, middlemen and undercover intelligence and counter-intelligence operatives working not just on both sides of the India-Pakistan border, but in several countries simultaneously. In today's world, trying to pin down the provenance of a terrorist strike and isolate it within the borders of a single nation state is very much like trying to pin down the provenance of corporate money. It's almost impossible.
In circumstances like these, air strikes to "take out" terrorist camps may take out the camps, but certainly will not "take out" the terrorists. Neither will war. (Also, in our bid for the moral high ground, let's try not to forget that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the LTTE of neighbouring Sri Lanka, one of the world's most deadly terrorist groups, were trained by the Indian army.)
Thanks largely to the part it was forced to play as America's ally first in its war in support of the Afghan Islamists and then in its war against them, Pakistan, whose territory is reeling under these contradictions, is careening towards civil war. As recruiting agents for America's jihad against the Soviet Union, it was the job of the Pakistan army and the ISI to nurture and channel funds to Islamic fundamentalist organizations. Having wired up these Frankensteins and released them into the world, the US expected it could rein them in like pet mastiffs whenever it wanted to.
Certainly it did not expect them to come calling in heart of the Homeland on September 11. So once again, Afghanistan had to be violently remade. Now the debris of a re-ravaged Afghanistan has washed up on Pakistan's borders. Nobody, least of all the Pakistan government, denies that it is presiding over a country that is threatening to implode. The terrorist training camps, the fire-breathing mullahs and the maniacs who believe that Islam will, or should, rule the world is mostly the detritus of two Afghan wars. Their ire rains down on the Pakistan government and Pakistani civilians as much, if not more than it does on India.
If at this point India decides to go to war perhaps the descent of the whole region into chaos will be complete. The debris of a bankrupt, destroyed Pakistan will wash up on India's shores, endangering us as never before. If Pakistan collapses, we can look forward to having millions of "non-state actors" with an arsenal of nuclear weapons at their disposal as neighbours. It's hard to understand why those who steer India's ship are so keen to replicate Pakistan's mistakes and call damnation upon this country by inviting the United States to further meddle clumsily and dangerously in our extremely complicated affairs. A superpower never has allies. It only has agents.
On the plus side, the advantage of going to war is that it's the best way for India to avoid facing up to the serious trouble building on our home front. The Mumbai attacks were broadcast live (and exclusive!) on all or most of our 67 24-hour news channels and god knows how many international ones. TV anchors in their studios and journalists at "ground zero" kept up an endless stream of excited commentary. Over three days and three nights we watched in disbelief as a small group of very young men armed with guns and gadgets exposed the powerlessness of the police, the elite National Security Guard and the marine commandos of this supposedly mighty, nuclear-powered nation.
While they did this they indiscriminately massacred unarmed people, in railway stations, hospitals and luxury hotels, unmindful of their class, caste, religion or nationality. (Part of the helplessness of the security forces had to do with having to worry about hostages. In other situations, in Kashmir for example, their tactics are not so sensitive. Whole buildings are blown up. Human shields are used. The U.S and Israeli armies don't hesitate to send cruise missiles into buildings and drop daisy cutters on wedding parties in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.) But this was different. And it was on TV.
The boy-terrorists' nonchalant willingness to kill – and be killed – mesmerised their international audience. They delivered something different from the usual diet of suicide bombings and missile attacks that people have grown inured to on the news. Here was something new. Die Hard 25. The gruesome performance went on and on. TV ratings soared. Ask any television magnate or corporate advertiser who measures broadcast time in seconds, not minutes, what that's worth.
Eventually the killers died and died hard, all but one. (Perhaps, in the chaos, some escaped. We may never know.) Throughout the standoff the terrorists made no demands and expressed no desire to negotiate. Their purpose was to kill people and inflict as much damage as they could before they were killed themselves. They left us completely bewildered. When we say "nothing can justify terrorism", what most of us mean is that nothing can justify the taking of human life. We say this because we respect life, because we think it's precious. So what are we to make of those who care nothing for life, not even their own? The truth is that we have no idea what to make of them, because we can sense that even before they've died, they've journeyed to another world where we cannot reach them.
One TV channel (India TV) broadcast a phone conversation with one of the attackers, who called himself Imran Babar. I cannot vouch for the veracity of the conversation, but the things he talked about were the things contained in the "terror emails" that were sent out before several other bomb attacks in India. Things we don't want to talk about any more: the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the genocidal slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, the brutal repression in Kashmir. "You're surrounded," the anchor told him. "You are definitely going to die. Why don't you surrender?"
"We die every day," he replied in a strange, mechanical way. "It's better to live one day as a lion and then die this way." He didn't seem to want to change the world. He just seemed to want to take it down with him.
If the men were indeed members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, why didn't it matter to them that a large number of their victims were Muslim, or that their action was likely to result in a severe backlash against the Muslim community in India whose rights they claim to be fighting for? Terrorism is a heartless ideology, and like most ideologies that have their eye on the Big Picture, individuals don't figure in their calculations except as collateral damage. It has always been a part of and often even the aim of terrorist strategy to exacerbate a bad situation in order to expose hidden faultlines. The blood of "martyrs" irrigates terrorism. Hindu terrorists need dead Hindus, Communist terrorists need dead proletarians, Islamist terrorists need dead Muslims. The dead become the demonstration, the proof of victimhood, which is central to the project. A single act of terrorism is not in itself meant to achieve military victory; at best it is meant to be a catalyst that triggers something else, something much larger than itself, a tectonic shift, a realignment. The act itself is theatre, spectacle and symbolism, and today, the stage on which it pirouettes and performs its acts of bestiality is Live TV. Even as the attack was being condemned by TV anchors, the effectiveness of the terror strikes were being magnified a thousandfold by TV broadcasts.
Through the endless hours of analysis and the endless op-ed essays, in India at least there has been very little mention of the elephants in the room: Kashmir, Gujarat and the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Instead we had retired diplomats and strategic experts debate the pros and cons of a war against Pakistan. We had the rich threatening not to pay their taxes unless their security was guaranteed (is it alright for the poor to remain unprotected?). We had people suggest that the government step down and each state in India be handed over to a separate corporation. We had the death of former prime minster VP Singh, the hero of Dalits and lower castes and villain of Upper caste Hindus pass without a mention.
We had Suketu Mehta, author of Maximum City and co-writer of the Bollywood film Mission Kashmir, give us his version of George Bush's famous "Why they hate us" speech. His analysis of why religious bigots, both Hindu and Muslim hate Mumbai: "Perhaps because Mumbai stands for lucre, profane dreams and an indiscriminate openness." His prescription: "The best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever." Didn't George Bush ask Americans to go out and shop after 9/11? Ah yes. 9/11, the day we can't seem to get away from.
Though one chapter of horror in Mumbai has ended, another might have just begun. Day after day, a powerful, vociferous section of the Indian elite, goaded by marauding TV anchors who make Fox News look almost radical and leftwing, have taken to mindlessly attacking politicians, all politicians, glorifying the police and the army and virtually asking for a police state. It isn't surprising that those who have grown plump on the pickings of democracy (such as it is) should now be calling for a police state. The era of "pickings" is long gone. We're now in the era of Grabbing by Force, and democracy has a terrible habit of getting in the way.
Dangerous, stupid television flashcards like the Police are Good Politicians are Bad/Chief Executives are Good Chief Ministers are Bad/Army is Good Government is Bad/ India is Good Pakistan is Bad are being bandied about by TV channels that have already whipped their viewers into a state of almost uncontrollable hysteria.
Tragically, this regression into intellectual infancy comes at a time when people in India were beginning to see that in the business of terrorism, victims and perpetrators sometimes exchange roles. It's an understanding that the people of Kashmir, given their dreadful experiences of the last 20 years, have honed to an exquisite art. On the mainland we're still learning. (If Kashmir won't willingly integrate into India, it's beginning to look as though India will integrate/disintegrate into Kashmir.)
It was after the 2001 parliament attack that the first serious questions began to be raised. A campaign by a group of lawyers and activists exposed how innocent people had been framed by the police and the press, how evidence was fabricated, how witnesses lied, how due process had been criminally violated at every stage of the investigation. Eventually the courts acquitted two out of the four accused, including SAR Geelani, the man whom the police claimed was the mastermind of the operation. A third, Showkat Guru, was acquitted of all the charges brought against him but was then convicted for a fresh, comparatively minor offence. The supreme court upheld the death sentence of another of the accused, Mohammad Afzal. In its judgment the court acknowledged there was no proof that Mohammed Afzal belonged to any terrorist group, but went on to say, quite shockingly, "The collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender." Even today we don't really know who the terrorists that attacked the Indian parliament were and who they worked for.
More recently, on September 19 this year, we had the controversial "encounter" at Batla House in Jamia Nagar, Delhi, where the Special Cell of the Delhi police gunned down two Muslim students in their rented flat under seriously questionable circumstances, claiming that they were responsible for serial bombings in Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad in 2008. An assistant commissioner of Police, Mohan Chand Sharma, who played a key role in the parliament attack investigation, lost his life as well. He was one of India's many "encounter specialists" known and rewarded for having summarily executed several "terrorists". There was an outcry against the Special Cell from a spectrum of people, ranging from eyewitnesses in the local community to senior Congress Party leaders, students, journalists, lawyers, academics and activists all of whom demanded a judicial inquiry into the incident. In response, the BJP and LK Advani lauded Mohan Chand Sharma as a "Braveheart" and launched a concerted campaign in which they targeted those who had dared to question the integrity of the police, saying it was "suicidal" and calling them "anti-national". Of course there has been no inquiry.
Only days after the Batla House event, another story about "terrorists" surfaced in the news. In a report submitted to a sessions court, the CBI said that a team from Delhi's Special Cell (the same team that led the Batla House encounter, including Mohan Chand Sharma) had abducted two innocent men, Irshad Ali and Moarif Qamar, in December 2005, planted 2kg of RDX and two pistols on them and then arrested them as "terrorists" who belonged to Al Badr (which operates out of Kashmir). Ali and Qamar who have spent years in jail, are only two examples out of hundreds of Muslims who have been similarly jailed, tortured and even killed on false charges.
This pattern changed in October 2008 when Maharashtra's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) that was investigating the September 2008 Malegaon blasts arrested a Hindu preacher Sadhvi Pragya, a self-styled God man Swami Dayanand Pande and Lt Col Purohit, a serving officer of the Indian Army. All the arrested belong to Hindu Nationalist organizations including a Hindu Supremacist group called Abhinav Bharat. The Shiv Sena, the BJP and the RSS condemned the Maharashtra ATS, and vilified its chief, Hemant Karkare, claiming he was part of a political conspiracy and declaring that "Hindus could not be terrorists". LK Advani changed his mind about his policy on the police and made rabble rousing speeches to huge gatherings in which he denounced the ATS for daring to cast aspersions on holy men and women.
On the November 25 newspapers reported that the ATS was investigating the high profile VHP Chief Pravin Togadia's possible role in the Malegaon blasts. The next day, in an extraordinary twist of fate, Hemant Karkare was killed in the Mumbai Attacks. The chances are that the new chief whoever he is, will find it hard to withstand the political pressure that is bound to be brought on him over the Malegaon investigation.
While the Sangh Parivar does not seem to have come to a final decision over whether or not it is anti-national and suicidal to question the police, Arnab Goswami, anchorperson of Times Now television, has stepped up to the plate. He has taken to naming, demonising and openly heckling people who have dared to question the integrity of the police and armed forces. My name and the name of the well-known lawyer Prashant Bhushan have come up several times. At one point, while interviewing a former police officer, Arnab Goswami turned to camera: "Arundhati Roy and Prashant Bhushan," he said, "I hope you are watching this. We think you are disgusting." For a TV anchor to do this in an atmosphere as charged and as frenzied as the one that prevails today, amounts to incitement as well as threat, and would probably in different circumstances have cost a journalist his or her job.
So according to a man aspiring to be the next prime minister of India, and another who is the public face of a mainstream TV channel, citizens have no right to raise questions about the police. This in a country with a shadowy history of suspicious terror attacks, murky investigations, and fake "encounters". This in a country that boasts of the highest number of custodial deaths in the world and yet refuses to ratify the International Covenant on Torture. A country where the ones who make it to torture chambers are the lucky ones because at least they've escaped being "encountered" by our Encounter Specialists. A country where the line between the Underworld and the Encounter Specialists virtually does not exist.
How should those of us whose hearts have been sickened by the knowledge of all of this view the Mumbai attacks, and what are we to do about them? There are those who point out that US strategy has been successful inasmuch as the United States has not suffered a major attack on its home ground since 9/11. However, some would say that what America is suffering now is far worse. If the idea behind the 9/11 terror attacks was to goad America into showing its true colors, what greater success could the terrorists have asked for? The US army is bogged down in two unwinnable wars, which have made the United States the most hated country in the world. Those wars have contributed greatly to the unraveling of the American economy and who knows, perhaps eventually the American empire. (Could it be that battered, bombed Afghanistan, the graveyard of the Soviet Union, will be the undoing of this one too?) Hundreds of thousands people including thousands of American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. The frequency of terrorist strikes on U.S allies/agents (including India) and U.S interests in the rest of the world has increased dramatically since 9/11. George Bush, the man who led the US response to 9/11 is a despised figure not just internationally, but also by his own people. Who can possibly claim that the United States is winning the war on terror?
Homeland Security has cost the US government billions of dollars. Few countries, certainly not India, can afford that sort of price tag. But even if we could, the fact is that this vast homeland of ours cannot be secured or policed in the way the United States has been. It's not that kind of homeland. We have a hostile nuclear weapons state that is slowly spinning out of control as a neighbour, we have a military occupation in Kashmir and a shamefully persecuted, impoverished minority of more than 150 million Muslims who are being targeted as a community and pushed to the wall, whose young see no justice on the horizon, and who, were they to totally lose hope and radicalise, end up as a threat not just to India, but to the whole world. If ten men can hold off the NSG commandos, and the police for three days, and if it takes half a million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir valley, do the math. What kind of Homeland Security can secure India?
Nor for that matter will any other quick fix. Anti-terrorism laws are not meant for terrorists; they're for people that governments don't like. That's why they have a conviction rate of less than 2%. They're just a means of putting inconvenient people away without bail for a long time and eventually letting them go. Terrorists like those who attacked Mumbai are hardly likely to be deterred by the prospect of being refused bail or being sentenced to death. It's what they want.
What we're experiencing now is blowback, the cumulative result of decades of quick fixes and dirty deeds. The carpet's squelching under our feet.
The only way to contain (it would be naïve to say end) terrorism is to look at the monster in the mirror. We're standing at a fork in the road. One sign says Justice, the other Civil War. There's no third sign and there's no going back. Choose
There are no good guys or bad guys....there are just role players. I live for the day when India as a whole refuses to fall into the vicious cycle of hatred and Indians as a people take responsibility for their lives instead of entrusting them into the hands of a corrupt few.
Here is the article.
The link to the pages of The Guardian for this article is http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/12/mumbai-arundhati-roy
The Mumbai attacks have been dubbed 'India's 9/11', and there are calls for a 9/11-style response, including an attack on Pakistan. Instead, the country must fight terrorism with justice, or face civil war
Arundhati Roy
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 13 December 2008 00.01 GMT
Article history
We've forfeited the rights to our own tragedies. As the carnage in Mumbai raged on, day after horrible day, our 24-hour news channels informed us that we were watching "India's 9/11". Like actors in a Bollywood rip-off of an old Hollywood film, we're expected to play our parts and say our lines, even though we know it's all been said and done before.
As tension in the region builds, US Senator John McCain has warned Pakistan that if it didn't act fast to arrest the "Bad Guys" he had personal information that India would launch air strikes on "terrorist camps" in Pakistan and that Washington could do nothing because Mumbai was India's 9/11.
But November isn't September, 2008 isn't 2001, Pakistan isn't Afghanistan and India isn't America. So perhaps we should reclaim our tragedy and pick through the debris with our own brains and our own broken hearts so that we can arrive at our own conclusions.
It's odd how in the last week of November thousands of people in Kashmir supervised by thousands of Indian troops lined up to cast their vote, while the richest quarters of India's richest city ended up looking like war-torn Kupwara – one of Kashmir's most ravaged districts.
The Mumbai attacks are only the most recent of a spate of terrorist attacks on Indian towns and cities this year. Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Delhi, Guwahati, Jaipur and Malegaon have all seen serial bomb blasts in which hundreds of ordinary people have been killed and wounded. If the police are right about the people they have arrested as suspects, both Hindu and Muslim, all Indian nationals, it obviously indicates that something's going very badly wrong in this country.
If you were watching television you may not have heard that ordinary people too died in Mumbai. They were mowed down in a busy railway station and a public hospital. The terrorists did not distinguish between poor and rich. They killed both with equal cold-bloodedness. The Indian media, however, was transfixed by the rising tide of horror that breached the glittering barricades of India Shining and spread its stench in the marbled lobbies and crystal ballrooms of two incredibly luxurious hotels and a small Jewish centre.
We're told one of these hotels is an icon of the city of Mumbai. That's absolutely true. It's an icon of the easy, obscene injustice that ordinary Indians endure every day. On a day when the newspapers were full of moving obituaries by beautiful people about the hotel rooms they had stayed in, the gourmet restaurants they loved (ironically one was called Kandahar), and the staff who served them, a small box on the top left-hand corner in the inner pages of a national newspaper (sponsored by a pizza company I think) said "Hungry, kya?" (Hungry eh?). It then, with the best of intentions I'm sure, informed its readers that on the international hunger index, India ranked below Sudan and Somalia. But of course this isn't that war. That one's still being fought in the Dalit bastis of our villages, on the banks of the Narmada and the Koel Karo rivers; in the rubber estate in Chengara; in the villages of Nandigram, Singur, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Orissa, Lalgarh in West Bengal and the slums and shantytowns of our gigantic cities.
That war isn't on TV. Yet. So maybe, like everyone else, we should deal with the one that is.
There is a fierce, unforgiving fault-line that runs through the contemporary discourse on terrorism. On one side (let's call it Side A) are those who see terrorism, especially "Islamist" terrorism, as a hateful, insane scourge that spins on its own axis, in its own orbit and has nothing to do with the world around it, nothing to do with history, geography or economics. Therefore, Side A says, to try and place it in a political context, or even try to understand it, amounts to justifying it and is a crime in itself.
Side B believes that though nothing can ever excuse or justify terrorism, it exists in a particular time, place and political context, and to refuse to see that will only aggravate the problem and put more and more people in harm's way. Which is a crime in itself.
The sayings of Hafiz Saeed, who founded the Lashkar-e-Taiba (Army of the Pure) in 1990 and who belongs to the hardline Salafi tradition of Islam, certainly bolsters the case of Side A. Hafiz Saeed approves of suicide bombing, hates Jews, Shias and Democracy and believes that jihad should be waged until Islam, his Islam, rules the world. Among the things he said are: "There cannot be any peace while India remains intact. Cut them, cut them so much that they kneel before you and ask for mercy."
And: "India has shown us this path. We would like to give India a tit-for-tat response and reciprocate in the same way by killing the Hindus, just like it is killing the Muslims in Kashmir."
But where would Side A accommodate the sayings of Babu Bajrangi of Ahmedabad, India, who sees himself as a democrat, not a terrorist? He was one of the major lynchpins of the 2002 Gujarat genocide and has said (on camera): "We didn't spare a single Muslim shop, we set everything on fire … we hacked, burned, set on fire … we believe in setting them on fire because these bastards don't want to be cremated, they're afraid of it … I have just one last wish … let me be sentenced to death … I don't care if I'm hanged ... just give me two days before my hanging and I will go and have a field day in Juhapura where seven or eight lakhs [seven or eight hundred thousand] of these people stay ... I will finish them off … let a few more of them die ... at least 25,000 to 50,000 should die."
And where, in Side A's scheme of things, would we place the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh bible, We, or, Our Nationhood Defined by MS Golwalkar, who became head of the RSS in 1944. It says: "Ever since that evil day, when Moslems first landed in Hindustan, right up to the present moment, the Hindu Nation has been gallantly fighting on to take on these despoilers. The Race Spirit has been awakening."Or: "To keep up the purity of its race and culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races – the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here ... a good lesson for us in Hindustan to learn and profit by."
(Of course Muslims are not the only people in the gun sights of the Hindu right. Dalits have been consistently targeted. Recently in Kandhamal in Orissa, Christians were the target of two and a half months of violence which left more than 40 dead. Forty thousand people have been driven from their homes, half of who now live in refugee camps.)
All these years Hafiz Saeed has lived the life of a respectable man in Lahore as the head of the Jamaat-ud Daawa, which many believe is a front organization for the Lashkar-e-Taiba. He continues to recruit young boys for his own bigoted jehad with his twisted, fiery sermons. On December 11 the UN imposed sanctions on the Jammat-ud-Daawa. The Pakistani government succumbed to international pressure and put Hafiz Saeed under house arrest. Babu Bajrangi, however, is out on bail and lives the life of a respectable man in Gujarat. A couple of years after the genocide he left the VHP to join the Shiv Sena. Narendra Modi, Bajrangi's former mentor, is still the chief minister of Gujarat. So the man who presided over the Gujarat genocide was re-elected twice, and is deeply respected by India's biggest corporate houses, Reliance and Tata.
Suhel Seth, a TV impresario and corporate spokesperson, recently said: "Modi is God." The policemen who supervised and sometimes even assisted the rampaging Hindu mobs in Gujarat have been rewarded and promoted. The RSS has 45,000 branches, its own range of charities and 7 million volunteers preaching its doctrine of hate across India. They include Narendra Modi, but also former prime minister AB Vajpayee, current leader of the opposition LK Advani, and a host of other senior politicians, bureaucrats and police and intelligence officers.
If that's not enough to complicate our picture of secular democracy, we should place on record that there are plenty of Muslim organisations within India preaching their own narrow bigotry.
So, on balance, if I had to choose between Side A and Side B, I'd pick Side B. We need context. Always.
In this nuclear subcontinent that context is partition. The Radcliffe Line, which separated India and Pakistan and tore through states, districts, villages, fields, communities, water systems, homes and families, was drawn virtually overnight. It was Britain's final, parting kick to us. Partition triggered the massacre of more than a million people and the largest migration of a human population in contemporary history. Eight million people, Hindus fleeing the new Pakistan, Muslims fleeing the new kind of India left their homes with nothing but the clothes on their backs.
Each of those people carries and passes down a story of unimaginable pain, hate, horror but yearning too. That wound, those torn but still unsevered muscles, that blood and those splintered bones still lock us together in a close embrace of hatred, terrifying familiarity but also love. It has left Kashmir trapped in a nightmare from which it can't seem to emerge, a nightmare that has claimed more than 60,000 lives. Pakistan, the Land of the Pure, became an Islamic Republic, and then, very quickly a corrupt, violent military state, openly intolerant of other faiths. India on the other hand declared herself an inclusive, secular democracy. It was a magnificent undertaking, but Babu Bajrangi's predecessors had been hard at work since the 1920s, dripping poison into India's bloodstream, undermining that idea of India even before it was born.
By 1990 they were ready to make a bid for power. In 1992 Hindu mobs exhorted by LK Advani stormed the Babri Masjid and demolished it. By 1998 the BJP was in power at the centre. The US war on terror put the wind in their sails. It allowed them to do exactly as they pleased, even to commit genocide and then present their fascism as a legitimate form of chaotic democracy. This happened at a time when India had opened its huge market to international finance and it was in the interests of international corporations and the media houses they owned to project it as a country that could do no wrong. That gave Hindu nationalists all the impetus and the impunity they needed.
This, then, is the larger historical context of terrorism in the subcontinent and of the Mumbai attacks. It shouldn't surprise us that Hafiz Saeed of the Lashkar-e-Taiba is from Shimla (India) and LK Advani of the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh is from Sindh (Pakistan).
In much the same way as it did after the 2001 parliament attack, the 2002 burning of the Sabarmati Express and the 2007 bombing of the Samjhauta Express, the government of India announced that it has "incontrovertible" evidence that the Lashkar-e-Taiba backed by Pakistan's ISI was behind the Mumbai strikes. The Lashkar has denied involvement, but remains the prime accused. According to the police and intelligence agencies the Lashkar operates in India through an organisation called the Indian Mujahideen. Two Indian nationals, Sheikh Mukhtar Ahmed, a Special Police Officer working for the Jammu and Kashmir police, and Tausif Rehman, a resident of Kolkata in West Bengal, have been arrested in connection with the Mumbai attacks.
So already the neat accusation against Pakistan is getting a little messy. Almost always, when these stories unspool, they reveal a complicated global network of foot soldiers, trainers, recruiters, middlemen and undercover intelligence and counter-intelligence operatives working not just on both sides of the India-Pakistan border, but in several countries simultaneously. In today's world, trying to pin down the provenance of a terrorist strike and isolate it within the borders of a single nation state is very much like trying to pin down the provenance of corporate money. It's almost impossible.
In circumstances like these, air strikes to "take out" terrorist camps may take out the camps, but certainly will not "take out" the terrorists. Neither will war. (Also, in our bid for the moral high ground, let's try not to forget that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, the LTTE of neighbouring Sri Lanka, one of the world's most deadly terrorist groups, were trained by the Indian army.)
Thanks largely to the part it was forced to play as America's ally first in its war in support of the Afghan Islamists and then in its war against them, Pakistan, whose territory is reeling under these contradictions, is careening towards civil war. As recruiting agents for America's jihad against the Soviet Union, it was the job of the Pakistan army and the ISI to nurture and channel funds to Islamic fundamentalist organizations. Having wired up these Frankensteins and released them into the world, the US expected it could rein them in like pet mastiffs whenever it wanted to.
Certainly it did not expect them to come calling in heart of the Homeland on September 11. So once again, Afghanistan had to be violently remade. Now the debris of a re-ravaged Afghanistan has washed up on Pakistan's borders. Nobody, least of all the Pakistan government, denies that it is presiding over a country that is threatening to implode. The terrorist training camps, the fire-breathing mullahs and the maniacs who believe that Islam will, or should, rule the world is mostly the detritus of two Afghan wars. Their ire rains down on the Pakistan government and Pakistani civilians as much, if not more than it does on India.
If at this point India decides to go to war perhaps the descent of the whole region into chaos will be complete. The debris of a bankrupt, destroyed Pakistan will wash up on India's shores, endangering us as never before. If Pakistan collapses, we can look forward to having millions of "non-state actors" with an arsenal of nuclear weapons at their disposal as neighbours. It's hard to understand why those who steer India's ship are so keen to replicate Pakistan's mistakes and call damnation upon this country by inviting the United States to further meddle clumsily and dangerously in our extremely complicated affairs. A superpower never has allies. It only has agents.
On the plus side, the advantage of going to war is that it's the best way for India to avoid facing up to the serious trouble building on our home front. The Mumbai attacks were broadcast live (and exclusive!) on all or most of our 67 24-hour news channels and god knows how many international ones. TV anchors in their studios and journalists at "ground zero" kept up an endless stream of excited commentary. Over three days and three nights we watched in disbelief as a small group of very young men armed with guns and gadgets exposed the powerlessness of the police, the elite National Security Guard and the marine commandos of this supposedly mighty, nuclear-powered nation.
While they did this they indiscriminately massacred unarmed people, in railway stations, hospitals and luxury hotels, unmindful of their class, caste, religion or nationality. (Part of the helplessness of the security forces had to do with having to worry about hostages. In other situations, in Kashmir for example, their tactics are not so sensitive. Whole buildings are blown up. Human shields are used. The U.S and Israeli armies don't hesitate to send cruise missiles into buildings and drop daisy cutters on wedding parties in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan.) But this was different. And it was on TV.
The boy-terrorists' nonchalant willingness to kill – and be killed – mesmerised their international audience. They delivered something different from the usual diet of suicide bombings and missile attacks that people have grown inured to on the news. Here was something new. Die Hard 25. The gruesome performance went on and on. TV ratings soared. Ask any television magnate or corporate advertiser who measures broadcast time in seconds, not minutes, what that's worth.
Eventually the killers died and died hard, all but one. (Perhaps, in the chaos, some escaped. We may never know.) Throughout the standoff the terrorists made no demands and expressed no desire to negotiate. Their purpose was to kill people and inflict as much damage as they could before they were killed themselves. They left us completely bewildered. When we say "nothing can justify terrorism", what most of us mean is that nothing can justify the taking of human life. We say this because we respect life, because we think it's precious. So what are we to make of those who care nothing for life, not even their own? The truth is that we have no idea what to make of them, because we can sense that even before they've died, they've journeyed to another world where we cannot reach them.
One TV channel (India TV) broadcast a phone conversation with one of the attackers, who called himself Imran Babar. I cannot vouch for the veracity of the conversation, but the things he talked about were the things contained in the "terror emails" that were sent out before several other bomb attacks in India. Things we don't want to talk about any more: the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992, the genocidal slaughter of Muslims in Gujarat in 2002, the brutal repression in Kashmir. "You're surrounded," the anchor told him. "You are definitely going to die. Why don't you surrender?"
"We die every day," he replied in a strange, mechanical way. "It's better to live one day as a lion and then die this way." He didn't seem to want to change the world. He just seemed to want to take it down with him.
If the men were indeed members of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, why didn't it matter to them that a large number of their victims were Muslim, or that their action was likely to result in a severe backlash against the Muslim community in India whose rights they claim to be fighting for? Terrorism is a heartless ideology, and like most ideologies that have their eye on the Big Picture, individuals don't figure in their calculations except as collateral damage. It has always been a part of and often even the aim of terrorist strategy to exacerbate a bad situation in order to expose hidden faultlines. The blood of "martyrs" irrigates terrorism. Hindu terrorists need dead Hindus, Communist terrorists need dead proletarians, Islamist terrorists need dead Muslims. The dead become the demonstration, the proof of victimhood, which is central to the project. A single act of terrorism is not in itself meant to achieve military victory; at best it is meant to be a catalyst that triggers something else, something much larger than itself, a tectonic shift, a realignment. The act itself is theatre, spectacle and symbolism, and today, the stage on which it pirouettes and performs its acts of bestiality is Live TV. Even as the attack was being condemned by TV anchors, the effectiveness of the terror strikes were being magnified a thousandfold by TV broadcasts.
Through the endless hours of analysis and the endless op-ed essays, in India at least there has been very little mention of the elephants in the room: Kashmir, Gujarat and the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Instead we had retired diplomats and strategic experts debate the pros and cons of a war against Pakistan. We had the rich threatening not to pay their taxes unless their security was guaranteed (is it alright for the poor to remain unprotected?). We had people suggest that the government step down and each state in India be handed over to a separate corporation. We had the death of former prime minster VP Singh, the hero of Dalits and lower castes and villain of Upper caste Hindus pass without a mention.
We had Suketu Mehta, author of Maximum City and co-writer of the Bollywood film Mission Kashmir, give us his version of George Bush's famous "Why they hate us" speech. His analysis of why religious bigots, both Hindu and Muslim hate Mumbai: "Perhaps because Mumbai stands for lucre, profane dreams and an indiscriminate openness." His prescription: "The best answer to the terrorists is to dream bigger, make even more money, and visit Mumbai more than ever." Didn't George Bush ask Americans to go out and shop after 9/11? Ah yes. 9/11, the day we can't seem to get away from.
Though one chapter of horror in Mumbai has ended, another might have just begun. Day after day, a powerful, vociferous section of the Indian elite, goaded by marauding TV anchors who make Fox News look almost radical and leftwing, have taken to mindlessly attacking politicians, all politicians, glorifying the police and the army and virtually asking for a police state. It isn't surprising that those who have grown plump on the pickings of democracy (such as it is) should now be calling for a police state. The era of "pickings" is long gone. We're now in the era of Grabbing by Force, and democracy has a terrible habit of getting in the way.
Dangerous, stupid television flashcards like the Police are Good Politicians are Bad/Chief Executives are Good Chief Ministers are Bad/Army is Good Government is Bad/ India is Good Pakistan is Bad are being bandied about by TV channels that have already whipped their viewers into a state of almost uncontrollable hysteria.
Tragically, this regression into intellectual infancy comes at a time when people in India were beginning to see that in the business of terrorism, victims and perpetrators sometimes exchange roles. It's an understanding that the people of Kashmir, given their dreadful experiences of the last 20 years, have honed to an exquisite art. On the mainland we're still learning. (If Kashmir won't willingly integrate into India, it's beginning to look as though India will integrate/disintegrate into Kashmir.)
It was after the 2001 parliament attack that the first serious questions began to be raised. A campaign by a group of lawyers and activists exposed how innocent people had been framed by the police and the press, how evidence was fabricated, how witnesses lied, how due process had been criminally violated at every stage of the investigation. Eventually the courts acquitted two out of the four accused, including SAR Geelani, the man whom the police claimed was the mastermind of the operation. A third, Showkat Guru, was acquitted of all the charges brought against him but was then convicted for a fresh, comparatively minor offence. The supreme court upheld the death sentence of another of the accused, Mohammad Afzal. In its judgment the court acknowledged there was no proof that Mohammed Afzal belonged to any terrorist group, but went on to say, quite shockingly, "The collective conscience of the society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender." Even today we don't really know who the terrorists that attacked the Indian parliament were and who they worked for.
More recently, on September 19 this year, we had the controversial "encounter" at Batla House in Jamia Nagar, Delhi, where the Special Cell of the Delhi police gunned down two Muslim students in their rented flat under seriously questionable circumstances, claiming that they were responsible for serial bombings in Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad in 2008. An assistant commissioner of Police, Mohan Chand Sharma, who played a key role in the parliament attack investigation, lost his life as well. He was one of India's many "encounter specialists" known and rewarded for having summarily executed several "terrorists". There was an outcry against the Special Cell from a spectrum of people, ranging from eyewitnesses in the local community to senior Congress Party leaders, students, journalists, lawyers, academics and activists all of whom demanded a judicial inquiry into the incident. In response, the BJP and LK Advani lauded Mohan Chand Sharma as a "Braveheart" and launched a concerted campaign in which they targeted those who had dared to question the integrity of the police, saying it was "suicidal" and calling them "anti-national". Of course there has been no inquiry.
Only days after the Batla House event, another story about "terrorists" surfaced in the news. In a report submitted to a sessions court, the CBI said that a team from Delhi's Special Cell (the same team that led the Batla House encounter, including Mohan Chand Sharma) had abducted two innocent men, Irshad Ali and Moarif Qamar, in December 2005, planted 2kg of RDX and two pistols on them and then arrested them as "terrorists" who belonged to Al Badr (which operates out of Kashmir). Ali and Qamar who have spent years in jail, are only two examples out of hundreds of Muslims who have been similarly jailed, tortured and even killed on false charges.
This pattern changed in October 2008 when Maharashtra's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) that was investigating the September 2008 Malegaon blasts arrested a Hindu preacher Sadhvi Pragya, a self-styled God man Swami Dayanand Pande and Lt Col Purohit, a serving officer of the Indian Army. All the arrested belong to Hindu Nationalist organizations including a Hindu Supremacist group called Abhinav Bharat. The Shiv Sena, the BJP and the RSS condemned the Maharashtra ATS, and vilified its chief, Hemant Karkare, claiming he was part of a political conspiracy and declaring that "Hindus could not be terrorists". LK Advani changed his mind about his policy on the police and made rabble rousing speeches to huge gatherings in which he denounced the ATS for daring to cast aspersions on holy men and women.
On the November 25 newspapers reported that the ATS was investigating the high profile VHP Chief Pravin Togadia's possible role in the Malegaon blasts. The next day, in an extraordinary twist of fate, Hemant Karkare was killed in the Mumbai Attacks. The chances are that the new chief whoever he is, will find it hard to withstand the political pressure that is bound to be brought on him over the Malegaon investigation.
While the Sangh Parivar does not seem to have come to a final decision over whether or not it is anti-national and suicidal to question the police, Arnab Goswami, anchorperson of Times Now television, has stepped up to the plate. He has taken to naming, demonising and openly heckling people who have dared to question the integrity of the police and armed forces. My name and the name of the well-known lawyer Prashant Bhushan have come up several times. At one point, while interviewing a former police officer, Arnab Goswami turned to camera: "Arundhati Roy and Prashant Bhushan," he said, "I hope you are watching this. We think you are disgusting." For a TV anchor to do this in an atmosphere as charged and as frenzied as the one that prevails today, amounts to incitement as well as threat, and would probably in different circumstances have cost a journalist his or her job.
So according to a man aspiring to be the next prime minister of India, and another who is the public face of a mainstream TV channel, citizens have no right to raise questions about the police. This in a country with a shadowy history of suspicious terror attacks, murky investigations, and fake "encounters". This in a country that boasts of the highest number of custodial deaths in the world and yet refuses to ratify the International Covenant on Torture. A country where the ones who make it to torture chambers are the lucky ones because at least they've escaped being "encountered" by our Encounter Specialists. A country where the line between the Underworld and the Encounter Specialists virtually does not exist.
How should those of us whose hearts have been sickened by the knowledge of all of this view the Mumbai attacks, and what are we to do about them? There are those who point out that US strategy has been successful inasmuch as the United States has not suffered a major attack on its home ground since 9/11. However, some would say that what America is suffering now is far worse. If the idea behind the 9/11 terror attacks was to goad America into showing its true colors, what greater success could the terrorists have asked for? The US army is bogged down in two unwinnable wars, which have made the United States the most hated country in the world. Those wars have contributed greatly to the unraveling of the American economy and who knows, perhaps eventually the American empire. (Could it be that battered, bombed Afghanistan, the graveyard of the Soviet Union, will be the undoing of this one too?) Hundreds of thousands people including thousands of American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. The frequency of terrorist strikes on U.S allies/agents (including India) and U.S interests in the rest of the world has increased dramatically since 9/11. George Bush, the man who led the US response to 9/11 is a despised figure not just internationally, but also by his own people. Who can possibly claim that the United States is winning the war on terror?
Homeland Security has cost the US government billions of dollars. Few countries, certainly not India, can afford that sort of price tag. But even if we could, the fact is that this vast homeland of ours cannot be secured or policed in the way the United States has been. It's not that kind of homeland. We have a hostile nuclear weapons state that is slowly spinning out of control as a neighbour, we have a military occupation in Kashmir and a shamefully persecuted, impoverished minority of more than 150 million Muslims who are being targeted as a community and pushed to the wall, whose young see no justice on the horizon, and who, were they to totally lose hope and radicalise, end up as a threat not just to India, but to the whole world. If ten men can hold off the NSG commandos, and the police for three days, and if it takes half a million soldiers to hold down the Kashmir valley, do the math. What kind of Homeland Security can secure India?
Nor for that matter will any other quick fix. Anti-terrorism laws are not meant for terrorists; they're for people that governments don't like. That's why they have a conviction rate of less than 2%. They're just a means of putting inconvenient people away without bail for a long time and eventually letting them go. Terrorists like those who attacked Mumbai are hardly likely to be deterred by the prospect of being refused bail or being sentenced to death. It's what they want.
What we're experiencing now is blowback, the cumulative result of decades of quick fixes and dirty deeds. The carpet's squelching under our feet.
The only way to contain (it would be naïve to say end) terrorism is to look at the monster in the mirror. We're standing at a fork in the road. One sign says Justice, the other Civil War. There's no third sign and there's no going back. Choose
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
