The Indian State failed to stop the demolition of Babri Masjid : K N Panikkar

The history of the Mandir-Masjid dispute during the post-Independence period is but a record of aggression by Hindu communal forces, and a series of compromises and reconciliation bids by the Central government led by the Indian National Congress, particularly under Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao.

In 1949, Hindu communal forces conducted a seven-day continuous recitation of Ramcharitamanas, which proved to be the precursor to the installation of an idol of Ram Lalla in the mosque. The fact that they got away with the defiance of the state not only emboldened them to indulge in further aggression, leading ultimately to the demolition of the Masjid. During this period, the Sangh Parivar not only organised a series of agitations to mobilise Hindus in the name of Ram but also made preparations for the construction of the temple. It assiduously built up a tempo of aggression, with Uma Bharti and Rithambara leading the charge. The finale of this carefully constructed aggression was the Rath Yatra led by Lal Krishna Advani 20 years ago, which finally led to the demolition of the Masjid in 1992. 

The demolition was a criminal act according to the laws of the country, as the mosque was a 400-year-old historical monument that the state was committed to protect.

 While the Hindu communal forces were engaged in a progressive assault, the state was unable to solve its own political dilemma. The Congress which led the government during this period was committed to secularism in principle, but the party realised that it was not possible to survive without the electoral support of Hindus. As a consequence, the party indulged in secular rhetoric, but followed communal politics in practice. It pursued what has now come to be termed ‘soft Hindutva'. Through this means it hoped to outsmart the Hindu communal forces.

The leader who initiated this disastrous policy was Rajiv Gandhi. He ordered the opening of the locks of the Masjid, thereby permitting Hindus to perform puja inside. He did this in order to steal the thunder from the Hindu communal forces. His successor-Prime Minister pursued the policy of compromise much more vigorously, and ‘officially arranged' the shilanyas of the temple. The Congress thus became an appendage of communal forces; that is what emboldened a mob to demolish the Masjid, thus inflicting a major blow on democracy and secularism.

Decisive factor

The failure of the Indian state was a most decisive factor behind the act of demolition. As is evident from the account given later by Narasimha Rao, it is clear that the state failed to discharge its duty of protecting the monument. It failed to prevent Mr. Advani's Rath Yatra, which led to the loss of several lives: everybody knew it would have disastrous consequences. Even after the demolition, the construction of a temporary temple was not stopped. At least now the state can rectify its mistakes by charting out a bold and innovative step in line with the principles of secularism.

From K N Panikkar's article in The Hindu. More Here.

Arjun Sengupta is no more

Arjun Sengupta is no more. He was the famous economist who showed to the world that India is a poor country. A country where a staggering 394.6 million workers (86 per cent of the working population) belong to the unorganised sector and work under “utterly deplorable” conditions with “extremely few livelihood options.” A country where an overwhelming 79 per cent of workers in the unorganised sector live with an income of less than Rs. 20 a day.

He was the one who chaired the National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS). This commission released its report in 2007. And the findings were shocking indeed. But they failed to stir the conscience of the top echelons of this great country.

The following are some of the startling findings of the report.

• According to the report 88 per cent of the Scheduled Tribes and the Scheduled Castes, 80 per cent of the Other Backward Classes and 85 per cent of Muslims belong to the category of “poor and vulnerable,” who earn less than Rs. 20 a day.
• In 2004-05, a total of 836 million (77 per cent) had an income below Rs. 20 a day.
• Households of the small and marginal farmers account for 84 per cent and are forced to spend more than they earn and are under debt, while 90 per cent of agricultural labour households are landless or have less than one hectare of holding.
• The conditions in the non-agricultural sectors are no better with 21 to 46 per cent of men and 57 to 83 per cent of women being employed as casual workers, who get less than minimum wages.
• As per the survey, the latest trends indicate that agriculture is getting feminised with 73 per cent women being associated with it compared to 52 per cent men.

The NCEUS attributes the plight of the unorganised workers to a lack of comprehensive and appropriate legislation and the absence of targeted programmes.

Where laws exist, the Commission finds their implementation inadequate. Also, they are seldom focussed on unorganised workers.

Releasing the report, NCEUS Chairman Arjun Sengupta had said the panel had recommended a Rs. 45,000-crore action plan for the overall improvement of the unorganised sector.

What happened to its recommendation? Whether the action plan was taken seriously? Nobody knows. Nobody cares.

The nation has far more serious issues at hand. CWG games tops the list.

More here, here and here. Download the pdf version of the full report here.

Majority of the people of Andhra Pradesh support Naxalites : TOI survey

 

India's biggest internal security threat, as the Prime Minister famously described it, may be worse than you thought. That's because even in Andhra Pradesh, where the battle against the Maoists has apparently been won, it turns out that the government is losing the battle for the minds and hearts of the people.

It's a debate that's been raging within the Congress, and outside it. Should the government adopt a largely law-and-order attitude towards the Maoists and deal with them like criminals or should the focus be more on cutting the ground from under their feet through a development agenda that wins over the population of the affected areas?

An exclusive survey of the once Maoist-dominated districts of the Telengana region by IMRB, well-known market research organisation, for The Times of India has found that while attitudes towards the rebels are ambivalent, the condemnation of the government and its means of tackling the problem is quite clear.

The findings raise disturbing questions about whether focusing largely on the policing aspects of the problem may be a flawed strategy in the long run. They also throw up another poser: Has the battle in AP truly been won or can the Maoists stage a comeback in a few years?

Tied to this is the question of how the Maoists are viewed by the populace of these parts. Are they perceived essentially as a bloodthirsty, extortionist bunch or as rebels standing up for people's rights?

TOI decided to do an opinion poll of the affected areas to find out. The problem, however, was that this was a region where pollsters found very difficult to enter. We finally decided to conduct the survey in those areas of Andhra Pradesh which were till not too long ago strongholds of the Naxalites but where their activities have been checked. The survey was conducted, therefore, in five districts of the Telengana region Adilabad, Nizamabad, Karimnagar, Warangal and Khammam. These districts were chosen not only because they were till recently severely Naxal-affected, but also because of their proximity to current hotbeds in Chattisgarh and Maharashtra.

To tap into the mood of the aam admi in these areas, the survey was restricted to the not so well off socio-economic categories, SEC B and SEC C and to men and women between the ages of 25 and 50. What we found has come as an eye-opener for us and should be worrying for everybody. The state may have won the battle of the guns, but the Maoists are clearly ahead in the perception game. This is particularly true in the districts of Warangal and Nizamabad as the accompanying charts show only too clearly.

The root cause of the disaffection is the overwhelming feeling of neglect of the areas by the government. About two-thirds expressed this view and in Warangal the figure was as high as 81%. That, you might say, is hardly alarming. Similar figures would probably be thrown up anywhere in India. True. But when two-thirds also say that the Maoists are right in choosing the methods they have to highlight the neglect, it is difficult to dismiss it as normal.

Perhaps the most revealing answers are in response to questions on whether the Maoists — still better known as Naxalites in this belt — were good or bad for the region and whether their defeat by the AP police has made matters better or worse.

Almost 60% said the Naxalites were good for the area and only 34% felt life had improved since they were beaten back. As for whether exploitation has increased after the Naxalite influence waned, 48% said it had against 38% who said it hadn't, the rest offering no opinion.

Equally importantly, 50% of the respondents felt the Naxalites had forced the government to focus on development work in the affected areas. What these responses show is just how negative the perception of the government is in these parts.

That the people here are not entirely comfortable with Naxalite methods is also quite clear. Even a question on what explained their strength in these parts showed that very few attributed it to popularity alone, a majority saying either that it was due to fear or that it was a combination of approval and fear. That despite this ambivalence there is a sympathetic view of the Naxals only betrays the people's desperate search for any means to shake shaking up the state.

The government may say, and with some justification, that the Maoists represent the biggest threat to India's internal security, but what this poll shows is that the aam admi in these parts views government apathy as the biggest threat to his wellbeing.

The towns in which the poll was conducted were Kamareddy in Nizamabad district, Gudi Hathnoor in Adilabad, Sirsilla in Karimnagar, Mahbubabad in Warangal and Palwancha in Khammam. A total of 521 people were polled in these five towns, a statistically robust sample size. 

 

From a report in Times of India. More Here.

Who is Shahryar?

Q: Who is Shahryar?
A: Shahryar is the famous Urdu poet from India who has been conferred with the Jnanpith, India's topmost award in the field of literature.

Q: Is Shahryar his real name?
A: No. His real name is Kunwar Akhlaq Mohammed Khan.

Q: How old is he?
A: He is 74. He was born on June 16, 1936.

Q: His birthplace?
A: Anwala village in Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh.

Q: Aligarh Muslim University alumni are ecstatic at the honor given to him. Was he associated with the university? In what way?
A: Shahryar is a quintessential AMU alumnus. He was associated with the university's Urdu department for several years and served as lecturer, reader, professor and department chairman. He retired from active service in 1996. It is also worth noting that he spent his formative years at AMU City High School and also completed his graduate studies at AMU. Perhaps his greatest assignment has been editorship of "Fikr-o-Nazar", the university's prestigious research publication. He was also member-in-charge of the university's Public Relations Office for some time.

Q: Is Jnanpith his first award?
A: No. He got the Sahitya Akademy Award in 1987 for his anthology of Urdu poetry titled, "Khwab Ka Dar Band Hai".

Q: Is he the first Urdu litterateur to get the Jnanpith?
A: No. He is the fourth. Firaq Gorakhpuri (1969), Qurratulain Haider (1989) and Ali Sardar Jafri (1997) were the previous recipients of the award.

Q: Your favorite couplets from Shahryar?
A: These two from his ghazal "Zindagi Jaisi Tamanna Thi Nahin Kuch Kam Hai" are my favorite. He read this ghazal at the mushaira in Jeddah on Thursday, Sept. 23, 2010, a day before the Jnanpith award was announced. This ghazal is perhaps closest to Shahryar's heart as well because he recites this one at all poetry gatherings. He did recite this in the 2005 Jeddah mushaira as well.

Ghar Ki Taameer Tasawwur Hi Me Ho Sakti Hai
Apne Naqshe Ke Mutaabiq Ye Zameen Kuch Kam Hai

Bichde Logon Se Mulaqaat Kabhi Phir Hogi
Dil Me Ummeed To Kaafi Hai Yaqeen Kuch Kam Hai

Q: What is so great about Shahryar's poetry?
A: I put that question to Hifzur Rahman, the Riyadh-based Indian diplomat, who is himself a connoisseur of Urdu poetry and literature. This is what he has to say: "Shahryar's greatest contribution is that he refused to break the mold of ghazal. What he did was to add a dash of modernity to this popular genre without tampering with its traditional structure. This is a particularly tough task, but not for Shahryar. He came out with some of the best lines in Urdu poetry."

From Siraj Wahab's post in Notes from Arabia. More Here

Indian way of organising BIG, BIG events

India was awarded the rights to host the CWG seven years ago. The total cost is now estimated to run over $ 6 billion. Some Indians saw a golden opportunity to make a fast buck. Allegations of corruption first appeared in the press about 2 months ago. To save face the Government decided to look into allegations after completion of the games. Will the government be impartial in conducting the enquiry? A parliamentary committee of political parties should go into all aspects of the corruption. The enquiry should be timely and those responsible for blatant corruption should be sent to jail. Will the press pursue the alleged corruption charges with vigor?

The collapse of a foot bridge connecting the parking lot to the Nehru stadium and the damage to the canopy adjoining the stadium have caused injuries to several construction workers and police officers. These two incidents should be seen as symptomatic of what has gone wrong in public sector construction. In its eagerness to make a tidy profit, construction companies cut corners. Behind such shoddy work is rampant corruption that prevails in the industry. Organizers perhaps get 10% of the cut for turning a blind eye. Will criminal charges be brought against the construction company for causing serious injury to the people and giving a bad name to the country? Now why should construction companies employ child labor? Why did Organizing Committeee Chairman, Suresh Kalmadi remain silent when such practices were taking place? Westen countries see child labor with disdain.

A boy plays with his toy in front of the Games Village

Indian authorities had seven years to prepare for the games. When India was awarded the games for 2010, some Indians had warned that the country was not ready to host such a major event. The Government has to take full responsibily for the inordinate delay in completing the infrastructure. If the Prime Minister had chaired a committee to assess the progress of the construction and met every three months things would have been different. Certainly there was a steady lack of Central government leadership even as the Government poured in billions of dollars.

A major issue that upset many participating countries was the lack of proper hygiene in the athletes village. Westerners generally see Indian cities as filty and lacking in basic amenities. These games would have been a golden opportunity for the government to win the hearts and minds of the athletes and the fans from different countries. Basic hygiene is something that the Indians don’t like to talk about. Politicians rarely mention hygiene and population control. Perhaps this a time for Indians to take a pledge to keep their cities, towns and villages clean. This effort should start at the primary school. For this effort to succeed the elected politicians from the Panchayat to Parliament should take the lead.

When fear grips people, reasoning power vanishes rapidly. Fear of a terror attack, fear of dengue fever and fear of substandard living conditions at the Games village quickly spread throughout world like a wild fire. In a country where threat perception remains high, is it prudent to spend large amount of money on security? Many top athletes from different countries have backed out at the last minute for the reasons mentioned above.

From Girish Bhaskar's column in BHASKAR. More Here