The China Question, Part 2.1, Murky Maldivean Waters

Are the external affairs Gods listening to what I have to say? In a recent blog post, I had argued that the present turbulent state of affairs in the Maldives was a manifestation of the India-China “big-power” rivalry currently underway in the Indian Ocean. I had suggested that in order for India to maintain strategic and operational security, it was necessary to ensure that Chinese moves in India’s oceanic neighborhood must be contained and that Maldives was one piece of the puzzle. It would seem that India’s hand has been forced by the continuing drama in Male.

I find this line in “The Hindu” article of great interest:

Ironically, the Nasheed drama unfolded at a time when an Indian warship arrived in Maldives to conduct a five-day anti-piracy and maritime domain awareness exercises with the Maldivian Nation Defence Force (MNDF).

Whether or not this warship is in Maldivean waters on the invitation of the present government of President Mohd. Waheed is not of great relevance, for the simple fact that if India wishes to send warship(s) to the Maldives, there is little that the island nation can do but complain vocally.

In the coming days, as Indian tacticians finally get their act together and begin to cement Maldives’ return to the Indian fold, the following point should be kept in mind.

While there is a strong and reasonable argument to be made that the anti-Nasheed developments in the Maldives were engineered by external forces (read “China”), as outsiders we cannot determine that this was the end all and be all of the situation. In the name of restoring democracy to Maldives, India should be extremely wary of ending up in a situation where it is forced to prop up an unpopular dictatorial leader against a recalcitrant population. While the islands and ports of the Maldives might provide much needed shelter and resources for Indian warships, the overall strategic benefit of a pro-Indian tilt by the Maldives would be greatly lessened if the general population was to end up seeing India as the big bad wolf.

India is not the big bad wolf. India is the good woodsman come to rescue Red Riding Hood from the real big bad wolf. But if the woodsman is clumsy, the wolf might just end up convincing Ms. Hood that her savior is actually her enemy. In other words, all care must be taken so that the true feelings and democratic aspirations of the Maldivean people themselves are not betrayed in the process, even as India sets out to apply force – diplomatic or otherwise – in order to ensure the integrity of its own strategic perimeter in the Indian Ocean.

Rahul’s Big Entrance – Hit or Flop?

I waited longer than usual before seeing what Rahul Gandhi had to say in his much talked about speech and how he said it. With all the hysteria and hyperbole naturally associated with this event, I wanted to wait a bit before the noise died down so I could see his speech without distracting comments from either side. I wanted to see for my own eyes as to what degree he was “emotional” and “genuine” (as Congress might have it) as opposed to “staid” and “manufactured” (the BJP talking point). It is obvious that the BJP would have nothing positive to say about him and that, likewise, we would hear nothing negative from Congress. We can’t find the truth if we rely on their versions. We have to see it for ourselves. You have to see if for yourself.

Rahul Gandhi’s speech in Chintan Shivir, Jaipur – YouTube.

I just did.

I also have a clear opinion as to how his speech went and to what I can gather about him personally and about his political and rhetorical talents. But I won’t share those thoughts with you, at the moment. Some readers might have some idea of my leanings from reading my earlier posts. Try much as I can to keep a neutral point of view, it is inevitable that any commentator, me included, must at the end of the day, come down on behalf of one side or the other. Though, that is not my point! My point is …

See it for yourself, then decide

And in my next post or the one after, when I feel that I have given you ample time to do so (!), I will subject you to hearing what I have to say. Till then, adios!

A good country for rapists

That, at the very least, is what the world appears to think of India at present. I can hardly blame them. It is a feeling that many Indians are themselves gripped with. The statements coming from the very highest levels of leadership in India only provide reassurance to criminals and perpetrators of rape. When even one of India’s most powerful woman politicians in India – West Bengal’s Chief Minister Ms. Mamata Banerjee – says that the “media is glorifying rape“, what hope is there for the victims of this heinous crime.

Here is a small sampling of what India’s best and brightest have to say on the matter:

Neeraj Kumar, Commissioner of Police, New Delhi (in-charge at time of gangrape)	“it is not necessary that she would be sensitive to women because both men and women in our society today have the same mentality that men should dominate women” – on the question of deploying female constables at women’s help lines
Mamata Banerjee, leader of the Trinamool Congress (TMC) party and chief minister of West Bengal	“Earlier if men and women would hold hands, they would get caught by parents and reprimanded but now everything is so open. It’s like an open market with open options” – justifying the rise in rape cases.
Mohan Bhagwat, President of the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the paramilitary wing of the so-called “Sangh Parivar”, whose political wing is the BJP, India’s main opposition party at present)	“Such crimes hardly take place in ‘Bharat’, but they occur frequently in ‘India’“  suggesting that rapes happen in urban India which is influenced by “western cultures” as opposed to rural India where “ancient Indian values” prevail.
Kailash Vijayvargiya, cabinet minister in the Government of Madhya Pradesh	“Maryada ka ulanghan hota hai, toh Sita-haran ho jata hai. Laxmanrekha har vyakti ki khichi gayi hai. Us Laxmanrekha ko koi bhi par karega, toh Ravan samne baitha hai… woh Sita-haran karke le jayega” – espousing his views on the reasons for rape.
Abhijit Mukherjee, son of the President of India (Pranab Mukherjee) and Member of Parliament	“Those who are coming in the name of students in the rallies, sundori, sundori mahila (beautiful women), highly dented and painted … Giving interviews in TV and showing off their children. I wonder whether they are students at all … what’s basically happening in Delhi is something like pink revolution, which has very little connection with ground realities.” – commenting on the character and antecedents of female anti-rape protestors.
Asaram Bapu, self-proclaimed “godman”, one of many such in India	“she should have taken God’s name and could have held the hand of one of the men and said I consider you as my brother and should have said to the other two ‘Brother I am helpless, you are my brother, my religious brother.’” – commenting on what the victim should have done when confronted with six drunk men on the bus
Raj Thackeray, nephew of recently deceased Bal Thackeray, president of Maharashtra Navanirman Sena, known for hate-speech against all “outsiders” to his state – especially those from Bihar.	“All are talking about the Delhi gang-rape, but nobody is asking where these men came from. No one is asking who did this. No one is talking about the fact that all these rapists are from Bihar” – on the (supposed) state of origin of the gangrape perpetrators
T. Thiagarajan, Education Minister for the Union Territory of Puducherry (previously known as Pondicherry)	Banning use of mobile phones by students, requiring female students to wear overcoats, and separate buses for girls and boys – measures enacted in order to reduce “temptation” and curb sexual assault cases.

With friends like these, India’s women don’t need enemies.

If there was any “marayada” (“honor”) left in India’s leaders, they have squandered it. If there was any “laxman rekha” (a limiting boundary) to their decency and sense of compassion, they have crossed it.

The Hindustan Times has a similar list of disgusting comments by luminaries cutting across lines of party, region or religion.

Jyoti Singh Pandey, sacrificed her life to sate the brutal instincts of India’s perverted patriarchal culture. It is not just the six perpetrators who are responsible for this horrendous crime, but 1.2 billion Indians and especially their political and religious leaders, who refuse, even in this moment of unbearable sorrow, to bury forever their prejudiced and hateful mindsets against women. This mentality is founded upon a perspective that women were created to be man’s servants, a perspective which is considered to be a cornerstone of India’s “ancient culture” by many amongst us. If this is “culture”, then what is barbarism?

UPDATE: Given the bonanza of inappropriate comments in recent weeks, it is safe to turn this post into an archive where I will continue to collect more oral vignettes, in the “table of shame”, above. Readers are encouraged and invited to submit more such examples of shameful comments by public figures. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, as they say.

Seeing through Tarantino

Another blockbuster article in the New Yorker. I always felt Tarantino and his work are severely overrated. I’m mean, sure, his creativity is boundless. But the question I have always had has been about his intellectual integrity, or lack thereof.

“Inglourious Basterds” was an imagining of WW2, painful to sit through, because it took one of humanity’s worst and greatest moments and filtered it down to a superhero tale hinging entirely on Brad Pitt’s character. Jelani Cobb hits the nail squarely on the head when she notes that: The movie’s [Inglourious Basterds"] lines between fantasy and the actual myopic perspectives on history were so hazy that the audience wasn’t asked to suspend disbelief, they were asked to suspend conscience. Now I don’t remember a great deal about that movie, but I do remember it made my stomach churn.

There is some controversy over Tarantino’s latest film: “Django Unchained”. I’m not sure what kept him from calling it “Nigger Unchained”, since as Cobb notes: “the term appears with such numb frequency that “Django” manages to raise the epithet to the level of a pronoun.” What Tarantino is trying to pull off here is quite audacious. He imagines that his use of a black character as a vengeful assassin in the era of slavery, should inoculate the film from critics of his method. After all, in a culture afraid to use the “n-word” (as even Cobb is), how is one to criticize it’s obscene usage in a film about slavery? As Cobb puts it: “Had the word appeared any more often it would have required billing as a co-star”! She highlights Tarantino’s racial sleight-of-hand by pointing out his propensity to employ the “n-word” in his other movies (“Jackie Brown” and “Pulp Fiction” to name two) which do not even remotely connect with slavery.

The question is, will the audience also see through Tarantino the way Jelani Cobb does, as he searches desperately in his cinematic bag of tricks for more ways to fool them?

Delhi Police 101

The Delhi Police Department is probably one of the most corrupt, venal and ineffective police departments anywhere in India, or for that matter in the world. The inconsiderate behavior, thug tactics and plain out criminal collusion of members of Delhi police is old news to every person – young and old – capable of reading a newspaper or holding a conversation in the street. The only people who view Delhi police as a benevolent, dutiful protector of law and order belong to that very small minority who live in gated houses and communities, surrounded by wealth and the trappings of power. Such individuals have never had the misfortune of being on the receiving end of Delhi police justice. For the other 99% of the populace, those not lucky enough to have a senior (or even junior) government officer as a family relation or who’s family is not endowed with great wealth and power, Delhi police is a byword for injustice, oppression and lawlessness.

These might sound like strong words if you haven’t experienced this city’s police first-hand, but if you have had that misfortune then you’ll know that my description is tame compared to the reality. In broad daylight plainclothes policemen in official vehicles drive down our street to collect protection money from various businesses. If you happen to be making a building there are set rates depending on the number of floors in your construction and the total area. It is no surprise then calls to the 100 police emergency number in order to report construction occurring in an illegal manner and at prohibited times of the day (or rather “night”) are told that “PCR aa rahi hai” (“the Police Control Vehicle is on its way”). Of course, no PCR ever shows up.

Much ado about exit polls

As a casual observer of the news media, in the past few days I have been surprised to see the eruption of accolade for Modi’s (supposed) win in Gujarat. The electronic and print media alike have arrived at the shared conclusion that the BJP is certain to – in fact, it already has – won Gujarat with a 120-140 seats. What is the basis of all this jubilation? Exit polls. This is India’s “exit poll” moment – the moment when the media, in its eternal folly, initially goes overboard over some new way of forecasting the future and later backtracks when its predictions turn out to be very different from the reality.

The US media has experienced such gaffes several times before in various Presidential elections (trust me, or Google it!) and having learned the bitter truth about the inaccuracy of exit polls, is now much more cautious in using exit poll data to make electoral determinations.

The China Question, Part 2, India’s “Cuban missile crisis” moment

The recent  developments in Maldives – first the removal of the head of state in what was apparently a coup, then the cancellation of GMR’s contract for managing the Abuja airport by the Maldivian government – are part of a larger geopolitical game between Asia’s two great powers – China and India.

Strategically, India’s greatest advantage over its powerful neighbor to the north, is the plateau of Tibet and the mountainous terrain of the Himalayas that separates Chinese-controlled Tibet from northern India. Until now India’s coastlines, which are far south of these borders, were considered generally secure against Chinese attack because of their large distance from the Chinese mainland to the north and the barrier of the Indian Ocean and Bay of Bengal protecting the coasts on the south-western and south-eastern flanks of the Indian subcontinent.