Another Chapter in a Perennial War
Meghnad Desai, in his column for The Indian Express on Sunday, 17 February, designates the Pulwama terror attack a certain “endpoint” in Indo-Pak relations and wonders aloud what the way forward is.
He reminds one of a few problems in India’s way of countering terrorism: One, that Pakistan is not “a normal State, with its quizzical history of elections on democratic principles, its army establishment and its Islamist terrorist armies. Two, there is the problem that terrorism isn’t easy to eliminate and is, today, a global problem. And finally, that India can’t hope for much from its “fair-weather friends” in the fight.
“So what is to be done? It is not a case of repeating the Uri surgical strike. That was a skirmish between two armies. Terrorist movements exist outside that domain. For India to cross the border and attack guerrilla groups will be a violation of international law. That may not seem so bad to most Indians. But if such an attack across the border is carried out, India will have to be ready for a war of some duration with Pakistan.”
Inside Track: Fortitude Under Fire
Coomi Kapoor, in her Sunday column for The Indian Express, enumerates a host of political developments, and her rather unique commentaries on the same. She begins by marvelling at Arun Jaitley, whose fortitude also wins pride of place in her headline above anybody else. She talks of how Jaitley is set to resume duties as finance minister, and also head the BJP’s publicity campaign for the 2019 election, despite two major illnesses.
She mentions also the dissonance on both the BJP and the Congress’ fronts, and the factions that seem to be disputing with the power-that-be in both parties, in Parliament’s Central Hall.
Perhaps her quirkiest story yet, however, comes from a narrative about portraits:
“Last Tuesday, a portrait of Atal Bihari Vajpayee by Krishn Kanhai was installed in Parliament’s Central Hall. The majestic room is now so crowded with portraits that there is little space for additions. To make place for Vajpayee, Lala Lajpat Rai had to be moved to one side. Someone pointed out that the Jawaharlal Nehru portrait is a misfit alongside Rajendra Prasad, Ram Manohar Lohia and Lal Bahadur Shastri. A panel on the opposite side has four portraits, Motilal Nehru, Rajiv Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Sardar Patel. It makes sense to swap the positions of Nehru and Patel, the person said.”
A Government Running for Cover
For anyone wondering, P Chidambaram lists the many ways in which he believes the Rafale deal to have been “flawed” and come back to bite the BJP, in his column for The Indian Express on Sunday.
He alludes to how the deal has been PM Modi’s brainchild entirely, and a “one-man show” that he alone has orchestrated. He mentions how key people like the defence minister, finance minister, external affairs minister, Air Force, the Defence Acquisition Council (DAC) and the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) were kept out of the loop. He also refers to, among other things, how the “new deal was indeed a new deal” with earlier negotiations scrapped. And what had the government hoped for, in its favour?
“The government may have hoped that the CAG’s report will bail it out. The report was presented on the last day of the session of Parliament. Far from saving the government, the report exposed the fact that the government had tried and succeeded in muzzling the independent voice of the CAG, the supreme audit body of the country. The report also debunked the government’s claims on cheaper price and quicker delivery schedule.”
There Are Only Three Ways We Can Compel/Convince Pakistan to End Terror
Aakar Patel, writing for Aakarvani in the The Times of India, begins with this portentous headline. He tells the reader that one needs to, in today’s situation, figure out how to convince Pakistan to do the right thing. He also enumerates three ways of doing so: one, the use or threatened use of force, two, the mediation of an external party such as the US, China or the UN, and three, negotiation.
Patel then proceeds to debunk the merits of all three approaches and seems to have reached a strange conclusion: That none of these would work. He anticipates the problem and outlines a solution, in place of these three:
“We should demand to know from this government and the ones after it which of these ways they are using to keep our nation safe. We cannot accept the continual sacrifice of our warriors because of inaction. The death of a few of the enemy (‘surgical strike’) cannot be considered sufficient recompense for the blood of our martyrs. We should not see ourselves as a nation enthusiastic about honouring the jawan but also willing to see him die. The sad reality is that he has become fodder to the news anchor who encourages his martyrdom so that he can be worshipped afterwards. Breaking out of our inaction may change this.”
Easy to Talk War on TV, But Knee-jerk is Not the Answer
Nalin Mehta, in his column for the The Times of India, also delves deep into the horror of the Pulwama terror attack and sifts through the many ways in which Pakistan can be countered. He begins by listing how the attack was clearly a well-planned, meticulous move that was testing India’s resolve right before the country goes to polls. He also states that this must end any hopes Indians had of new PM Imran Khan establishing a new realm of peace between the two nations.
Mehta understands, he says, that “a desire of retribution” in the face of “helpless anger” is natural, but insists on using tools that have more deterrence value:
“The post-Uri surgical strikes were a great tactical victory but have not changed the basic Pakistani template of terror as an instrument of state policy. India’s armed forces on the ground will respond tactically at a time and place of their own choosing but the strategic challenge from Pakistan remains. As several generals have pointed out we need a military response that is part of a calibrated escalation matrix, not a knee-jerk one.”
The Need to Go Beyond Anglophone Models
Tabish Khair, in his column for The Hindu, addresses a key concern with governance or more specifically, a model of governance, that some citizens seem to be voicing. He talks about the clamour for changing India’s model of democracy to a presidential one. However, he laments the fact that the only two models we seem to be looking at, are the US and UK models.
Many opposed to the BJP have argued the case for a presidential system, as opposed to the winner-takes-all system of the UK. However, where representation of the majority is the main calling card, Khair argues that this is not the answer:
“Let us look at the last presidential election in the U.S. It is widely known that Hillary Clinton won 48.2% of the votes cast, while Donald Trump won only 46.1%. But Mr. Trump is today the U.S. President. If you factor in the election of senators, once again you have a scenario where the majority of voters do not find appropriate representation.Obviously, the problem of a majority of votes being lost is bigger under the U.K.-style winner-takes-all prime ministerial system, but the U.S.-style presidential system does not resolve the issue. Once again, the majority is not represented — and democracy is all about representation of the majority.”
In the Chishti Shrine in Ajmer
Rana Safvi, in her column for The Hindu on Sunday, writes beautifully and evocatively about a historical site that occupies a pride of place in the country’s cultural pantheon: the Ajmer Dargah. She begins by writing of Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti, and how he was “generous like the sea and hospitable like the earth.” She elucidates his history for her readers, starting at birth and moving through his journey to Delhi and Ajmer.
She also writes of her own visit to the dargah, and how it instills in her, a sense of peace:
“Devotees enter it with baskets of flowers, chadors to be offered to the Khwaja. As we wait our turn to enter the dargah, a sense of peace prevails. This is one dargah where women are allowed. A silver and mother of pearl canopy offered by Jahangir can be seen on four silver posts above the cenotaph. The rest of it is covered in flowers and chadors.”
The Impact of Pigs Flying
“A lot of what’s flying is only just lying.” Sankarshan Thakur might easily win top honours for the most mischievously crafted Sunday column yet, as can be evidenced in this week’s piece for The Telegraph. He begins with a fantastical scenario, almost Orwellian, where he calls people’s attention to fact that swine are flying in the air. This swine is dropping all manner of pestilence upon the face of the country, and, as Thakur warns, if one gets hit by any of the flying swine: Then, WHAM! “You are flu.”
Thakur’s column bears an eerie similarity to Ionesco’s iconic play, Rhinoceros, a telling social satire that talks about how people were rammed into by rhinoceroses, epitomes of rising fascism, and how such people were immediately converted themselves. The fact that Thakur, in the midst of his wordplay, also throws in references like “pigs have been flying for a fair number of years, maybe four” is also less-than-subtle allusion to his narrative:
“Pigs have been flying overhead and dropping scourges and outbreaks upon us a while now, quite a while, a fair number of years, maybe four, or a little more. It has been a time of pus and virus deliberately infused into the air, like that lard spewing down; a time of fraudulent fable and fancy falsification, of slander and vilification and revilement, of plain and brutal lies employed as instrument of animosity, of subterfuge invoked to stereotype and subjugate, of plain and laughable lies invented to brew non-existent glories — prehistoric, or ahistoric, myth as patent truth.”
Dumb Down India
“Student politics is one thing and using students to further a political agenda is quite another.” Thus succinctly can Upala Sen’s column for The Telegraph be summed up this Sunday. Sen begins with the cloud hanging over Aligarh Muslim University, claiming that it has been lately in the news for not all things academic – later making a reference to the recent tweet by a student on the Pulwama attack.
However, the crux of her argument is that students and universities have largely been wrested by political parties for their motives. She asks a valid question:
“Are being politically aware and academically driven mutually exclusive qualities? Certainly not. Is it normal for political parties in India to control and work through their student wings? Of course. But student politics is one thing and using students and higher seats of learning for political ends alone is quite another.”
Sen also goes on to list the number of times students have been in the eye of fire, in recent times:
“Banaras Hindu University (BHU) has been in the news for an unrest here, a protest there, since 2017. That year when a woman student complained about being molested on campus, it backfired. Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao regime notwithstanding, there was lathi charge — on students. Down South, 2019 began at the University of Hyderabad with the administration tearing down the Velivada, a temporary structure with portraits of Dalit icons. And in January this year, Delhi police charged Kanhaiya Kumar and several other former and current students of Jawaharlal Nehru University with sedition. The chargesheet had to do with a stand-off over an event that took place three years ago.”
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)