POLITICS

What's New?

Recently Dr. Karan Singh was asked to go to Kathmandu (Nepal) as a Special Envoy of the Prime Minister to meet with the opposition leaders and King Gyanendra in view of the acute political crisis there. Dr. Karan Singh's one-on-one meeting with the King broke the ice and set in motion a process, the outcome of which was his first television broadcast the next day and another one three days later., which defused a potentially disastrous situation. Dr. Karan Singh was assigned this delicate task in view of his long association with Nepal as well as his well established diplomatic and political experience.

Dr. Karan Singh has been appointed Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Cell of the Congress Party. In this capacity he is present whenever a visiting Head of Government calls upon the Chairperson of UPA, Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, or when she calls upon visiting Heads of Government

INDIA AT FIFTY

Back

 

As a civilisation India is at least five thousand years old; as a sovereign democratic republic it will celebrate its 50th birthday on August 15, 1997. By any standards that was one of the truly historic days in human history. If one day has to be chosen to mark the end of the colonial era that had dominated world affairs for almost five centuries, it would have to be the August 15, 1947. Historically the scope, the ambience, the sheer magnitude of the Indian freedom movement was unique. Its culmination marked the breaching of the citadels of colonialism, and, within 10 years from then, dozens of countries is Asia and Africa become free and the whole process of decolonialisation accelerated.

August 15, 1947 is a critical day also not only because India became free, but because it chose democracy. Many countries in Asia and Africa became free of the colonial yoke, but were not able for one reason or another to tread the democratic path, and went into a negative spiral. Countries with a population of ten million have seen over a million slaughtered in cold blood. Simply becoming free was not enough, it was also necessary to choose democracy. The fact that India chose and for half a century has sustained a democratic system is a major achievement.

There is a great deal wrong with India, but we must put it in its proper perspective and realise that what it has done is something never before attempted in the history of the human race, a massive effort to build for 1/6th humanity a better life through democratic means, with freedom of the press, an independent judiciary, rule of law and representative government based on universal adult suffrage with an electorate larger than the combined total population of the United States and Western Europe.

50 years into independence, however, it is now clear that India is going through a period of tremendous turbulence. The old consensus has broken down and a new equilibrium has not yet emerged. Those institutions which were considered to be the foundations of our democratic polity are under assault, and in several areas - the political, the economic, the social, the field of foreign policy - the time has come when we have to re-examine many of the beliefs upon which our polity was founded, see where we have gone wrong and what needs to be done to set matters right. This is what I will attempt to outline, very briefly, in this article.

To start with the political situation; the growth of political awareness in the last half century has been quite extraordinary. Vast segments of society that were submerged, vast areas that were marginalised, have been drawn into the mainstream of Indian politics.

Today whether it is a hamlet in Bastar in the heart of Madhya Pradesh, a village in windswept Zanskar in Ladakh or an island in Lakshwadeep, the people of India are aware of their rights. They have their demands - they want their roads, their electricity, their schools, their dispensaries, and they are aware of the fact that their vote can make a difference. In the last fifty years almost every political party which functions within the ambit of the Constitution has shared power at the Centre or the States. Transfers of power have been peaceful and based exclusively on election results.

With the decline of the once great Indian National Congress that spearheaded the freedom movement, there has been a substantial fragmentation of the party system. The last time there was a clear majority in the Lok Sabha was in the elections of 1984, when Rajiv Gandhi got a massive majority of over 400 seats in a House of 556 in the aftermath of the brutal assassination of his mother Indira Gandhi. Subsequently, we have had five minority governments in a row. The first was led by V.P. Singh, and supported from outside both the Left Front and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This "support from the outside" is a peculiarly Indian contribution to political thought, and almost invariably ends in disaster. In less than eighteen months V. P. Singh's government collapsed, then Chandrasekhar was supported from outside, but his government collapsed within six months.

P. V. Narasimha Rao also began a minority government and started off with only 225 seats. The methodologies involved are sub-judice, but he was able to gain a majority and did carry on the government for 5 years. Then there was Atal Behari Vajpayee heading the BJP which emerged as the largest single party in the 1996 elections, but he was able to continue only for 13 days.

Then we had yet another minority United Front government headed by H.D. Deve Gowda made up of 14 parties, also supported "from the outside" by the Congress, which collapsed in ten months. Now there has been a change of leadership and I.K. Gujral has emerged as the new United Front Prime Minister. Once again the government is based on support from the outside, but it is a matter for some satisfaction that the Government of India is now headed by a man of long political experience in India and abroad, and impeccable personal credentials. It remains to be seen how he will be able to manage the contradictions inherent in the present situation.

Clearly there is an inherent instability built into the present political situation, which to some extent reflects the social fragmentation that India has witnessed since the 'Mandalization' process initiated by V.P. Singh extending affirmative action to yet another category of Hindu society, the "other backward castes".

Coalition is an entirely legitimate form of political organisation known throughout the world, but to be stable a coalition must represent a majority in the lower House. A minority coalition with outside support is not viable, and yet that is what India has been experimenting with over the last decade.

A stable government is necessary for India at this critical juncture in its economic growth and liberalisation process. This will not be a one-party government, but a coalition reflecting the various regional and linguistic groups that between them constitute the vast and varied mosaic that is India. Indeed the Indian National Congress itself was a one-party coalition, representing a broad ideological spectrum from Left to Right.

Ideally, the political situation will achieve coherence if 3 fronts develop; the Left Front (LF) led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist); the Congress United Front (CUF) led by the Indian National Congress and the Janata Dal; and the National Front (NF) led by the Bharatiya Janata Party. Between them these three fronts would cover the entire ideological spectrum, including the various regional parties, and would offer voters viable alternatives in the Centre and the States. This model would give a sense of stability and continuity to Indian politics, so that people get used to the used to the theory of stable coalition governments. So far the very word 'coalition' has unfortunately become coterminous with 'instability'; this will have to change.

One of the main problems in a federal polity is the balance of power between the Centre and the States. Decentralisation of power is essential, but not to the extent that the nation itself starts to fragment. An Inter-State conflict such as the construction of the Almatti Dam in Karnataka, where two constituents of the United Front are locked in a confrontation over river waters, shows clearly that what needs to be done, apart from implementating the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission on Inter-State Relations, is to reactivate the Inter-State Council which the Constitution has specifically created for just this purpose.

Justice R. S. Sarkaria in his Report released in 1987, created a document of great importance which highlights the distortions that have taken place in our federal structure over the last 50 years, the manner In which the Centre has appropriated powers which really should belong to the States, and the measures that need to be taken to remedy the situation.

The Panchayati Raj Act was probably Rajiv Gandhi's most important achievement, providing as it does for decentralisation through local self-government institutions right down to the village level. If it is implemented with its 1/3 reservations for women, it could have a truly revolutionary impact on Indian society and the empowerment of women.

A great deal has been done in the field of electoral reforms, but much more is needed. For example, 11,105 independents stood for the last elections to Parliament, and there was a ridiculous story on television about a massive ballot book and huge ballot box in one constituency for over a thousand candidates. Legislation needs to be considered whereby, without restricting democratic rights, people who just stand for the sake of standing can be avoided. Also, if we live in a democratic system, why is it that we should not be obliged to vote once every few years? In Australia there is compulsory voting, with one space left blank in case the voter, decides to reject all the candidates. Compulsory voting will reflect a much more accurate portrayal of the will of the people, and there will be less scope for impersonation and electoral malpractice. Everybody talks of rights in India, but hardly anyone mentions responsibilities. If we have rights under a democracy, surely we also have responsibilities, and one of these is to get out there and vote.

There are other areas - partial state financing of elections, regulating the functioning of political parities and so on, which have to be seriously pursued to carry forward the electoral reforms that were initiated over the last few years. Tribute must be paid to the Supreme Court and the Election Commission which between them really tightened up the political system in India, and helped prevent some of the grossest abuses of power.

The sort of corruption, violence and mafia domination developing in many parts of the country are a betrayal of democracy, of the freedom movement, of everything that our Constitution stands for, and the Supreme Court and the Election Commission have rendered signal service to India at this critical juncture, by trying to curb excesses.

What is really needed is leaders with the courage of their convictions; someone who could give the sort of leadership that Roosevelt gave during the depression and the New Deal, or Winston Churchill when Britain was under the most terrible pressure, not to speak of the stalwarts of our own freedom movement such as Sri Aurobindo and Mahatma Gandhi. India has been a civilisation of great people, of great thought, with a philosophy going back to the dawn of history. We must not fall into a negative syndrome nor can we afford the luxury of pessimism and negativism, because if we do India is in fact doomed. The problems are there, but they can be overcome if we can summon up our inner and mobilize our outer resources.

Top

Let us now turn to economics. Our 'mixed economy' certainly played an important role at one time with State control of the so called 'commanding heights' of the economy. We were able to put considerable resources into infrastructure - communications, steel, railways, heavy industry and so on, which laid the foundations for India's possible economic break through today.

Unfortunately, the system tended to degenerate into statism, red tapism, bureaucracy, unaccountability, inefficiency and corruption. The whole idea of public sector undertakings was to insulate them from political interference and give the managers the opportunity to develop freely. But this was seldom followed, and often there was more political interference in the public sector than even in government departments.

Over the last decade the world has changed rapidly as the Soviet Union imploded and the Communist system collapsed. We, therefore, needed a massive U-turn in our economic policies. Manmohan Singh and P. Chidambaram spearheaded this revolution. It was indeed a revolutionary change in our economic policy - the dismantling of the so called 'licence-permit-raj' and the attempt to liberalise and open up the economy. Already this new policy has made substantial headway, but much will depend on political stability which is a sine qua non for an economic breakthrough. Two further points need to be made. Firstly, although government policy has changed in principle, in its implementation the situation is still not satisfactory. The people who are actually dealing with these problems are still unable to fully grasp the fact that there has been a revolution, and although in theory India is among the most liberal countries in the world, in practice we still tend to be rigid and negative. This will require a change of attitudes both among the politicians and the civil servants.

The second point is that when we talk about liberalisation we simply cannot forget the most vulnerable sections of our society, who have to be lifted out of the morass of poverty and Illiteracy - the rural poor and the poor in the urban slums, particularly women, and children. We cannot take the theoretical view that when we liberalise there is bound to be a temporary dip in living standards, because in India there is no safety net to prevent a free fall to disaster. A temporary dip in living standards in a country where millions still live below the poverty line is unacceptable because then they will simply go under. Therefore we have to work out a methodology whereby, along with liberalisation, we are able to structure an effective safety net.

Some measures have been initiated such as a mid-day school meal which is very valuable because it gets nutrition to each and every child in this country, as also the immunisation programme of eradicating polio and other diseases. We also need to work out some form is social security particularly for the elderly, who are now getting increasingly isolated as the joint family inevitably gives ways to the nuclear family, thus diluting the basic security that was built into our social system. Increasing urbanisation is also having the same effect, because it draws adult males away from the villages into urban slums, creating widespread social and psychological dislocation.

Perhaps our greatest failure in the last 50 years has been our inability to prevent the exponential population growth. When I was Minister of Health & Family Planning a quarter of a century ago, three projections were made for the year 2000. The most optimistic was 900 million and the worst case scenario one billion. It is now clear that we are going to hit the billion mark in the year 2000. With this rate of population growth, to expect the state of the nation to improve, poverty to be alleviated and unemployment to be contained is unrealistic to say the least.

I drafted the National Population Policy which I presented to Parliament in 1976. Unfortunately, that policy came out during the Emergency and therefore, got discredited. Indeed the whole population stabilisation scheme exploded and it became politically so radioactive that till today nobody is prepared to really implement it. All parties make eloquent speeches about breaking the poverty barrier, but they do not spell out how they are going to do this when India is sinking in an ocean of people. In my statement to the World Population Conference in Bucharest in 1974, where I led the Indian delegation, I had said that "development is the best contraceptive", a phrase that was subsequently widely quoted. I have now reversed my view and feel that "contraception is the best development". Unless this matter becomes a national commitment transcending party politics our economic policies will run into great difficulty despite the much welcome liberalisation.

Another negative factor that has gathered momentum over the last few years is the widespread corruption at many levels which has resulted, if we add up the various 'scams' that are now being investigated, to a staggering sum of Rs. 55 billion (one billion equal to 1,000 million) that have been drained off from the economy by a nexus of corrupt politicians, businessmen and bureaucrats. Such a massive haemorrhaging of an economy struggling to gain viability can be fatal. It is a tragedy that a land which produced some of the loftiest religious leaders and philosophical concepts known to humanity, should be mired in a quagmire of corruption and erosion of moral values. This is now no longer a matter simply of personal wrong doing. It has collectively assumed proportion that threatens the very basis of civil society and good governance.

While unprecedented measures have been taken by the courts on the basis of public interest litigations, which include chargesheeting and jailing of a number of high level political figures, the malaise lies deeper in the erosion of a value orientation in our educational system, a collapse of traditional value and the non-emergence of a viable philosophy for the global society. It is true not only of India and other developing countries, but is in fact a worldwide phenomenon. However, developing countries are particularly vulnerable, and the present drift must be a matter of deep concern to all right thinking lndians. Here again it is the leadership that can make all the difference in the years ahead.

India has a unique and complex social structure. Nine of the twelve major world religions flourish here, with vast numbers of sects within them. Hinduism itself, the religion of the vast majority of the people in India, is a pluralistic religion which encourages many paths to the divine. Even before any of the other religions were born, India had evolved different methodologies and pathways to divine realisation. Despite the trauma of Partition of the sub-continent, caused essentially by the separatist ideology of the Muslim League, India has in the last 50 years structured a polity not based on religion but upon freedom and equality of all citizens irrespective of their religious or other background. It is often overlooked that India has more Muslims than either Pakistan or Bangladesh.

In a country which was partitioned on the basis of religion, not only did its constitution makers not react and set up a religious state, they went out of their way to give special protection to minorities, to non-Hindu communities. The Indian Constitution sets up a secular State, and this has been maintained despite all provocations. It is true that secularism has often been misinterpreted as being anti-religious, but that is something India will not accept because it is par excellence a land of religion.

The people of India are deeply religious, whether they are Hindus or Muslims, Sikhs or Christians, Jains or Buddhists. India has a genius for religion, and the definition of secularism that is now getting increasingly accepted is equal respect for all religions, not equal neglect, and certainly not looking down upon or negating our rich religious and spiritual traditions.

These are some of the problems in India's social transformation. Our generation was brought up on Gandhiji's ideal that the goal for free India was a casteless society, but now we find that there has, in fact, been an institutionalisation of caste at many levels. The whole problem of affirmative action apart, even people whose caste identities had diluted, particularly in the cities, are busy looking up their backgrounds to see whether they belong to one or other of the caste formulation which are supposed to get special advantages. Here again India is going through tremendous turmoil and turbulence. The whole social structure is breaking down, the economic profile is changing, and it will be some time before we are able to achieve a new equilibrium. A huge middle class is arising in India which represents a common market of tremendous potential, both for production and consumption of goods and services.

The international situation also has changed beyond recognition over the last half century. India has never been an island unto itself, it has always been the centre of flux, a crossroads of world civilisation. When we became independent the Cold War began, and Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, President Tito of Yugoslavia and President Nasser of Egypt structured the Non-Aligned Movement. It was a valuable movement at the time, but the whole situation has transmuted with the implosion of the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, developing nations can benefit greatly through South-South co-operation which is what NAM should concentrate upon. India also needs to work much harder on SAARC. The European Union has shown what can be achieved by a regional grouping. France, Germany and England were at each other's throats for over 500 years, but one can now travel from Norway to Greece, and from Portugal to Poland, without a passport. If she is to achieve her due place in world affairs, India has also to sort out its regional problems.

A good beginning has been made with the recent agreements concluded with Bangladesh, Nepal and China spearheaded by I.K. Gujral who has recently been elevated to the Prime Ministership. With Pakistan our relationship remains prickly, but the emergence of a stable and more moderate and realistic government there under Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is a good sign.

The key lies in taking bold steps to liberalise trade, travel and commerce between the two neighbours, leaving the more contentious issues to be sorted out in due course in terms of the Shimla Agreement. We cannot look upon any country permanently as an enemy, nor will Pakistan gain by an attitude of permanent confrontation with its immediate neighbour. India and Pakistan between them have over a billion people, but tens of thousands of villages remain without potable water because scarce resources are spent on an arms race. The ASEAN countries were far behind India when we became independent, but today they are ahead of India in their economic development. We must try and develop SAARC on the same lines if we are to flourish in the highly competitive global economy that is rapidly emerging. This point has been effectively underscored by Mahbub-ul-Haq in his latest report Human Development in South Asia 1997 where he describes South Asia as '"The most deprived region in the world".

To conclude, we are passing through a very turbulent phase. It is like the samudra manthan - the churning of the milky ocean - in the ancient Hindu myth. When the ocean was churned, many gifts emerged, but before the ambrosia was finally attained a terrible poison was unleashed and threatened to spread throughout the three worlds.

The devas and the asuras who were churning the ocean, fled in terror until Lord Shiva, who is beyond avarice and greed, appeared and absorbed the poison into His own being.

Today, along with all the gifts of science and technology, a poison is also being released in human civilisation, the poison of fanaticism, and fundamentalism, organized crime and terrorism, rampant violence and pandemic sexually transmitted diseases. In a democratic system each one of us has to absorb the poison in the crucible of our inner consciousness and, through our own commitment, convert it into ambrosia and give it back to society.

This is a difficult and a dangerous path, beset with dangers. But as that famous verse from the Katha Upanishad exhorts us, we must awake, arise and move across the razor-edged path to the goal which we have set for ourselves, the goal of a regenerated India in a dynamic global society. Humanity itself is at cross-road and a new kind of consciousness is evolving on this planet. India has to spearhead the transition to the new consciousness. That is her true role, her next tryst with destiny.

New Delhi
1 May 1997

There is a great deal wrong with India, but we must put it in its proper perspective and realise that what it has done is something never before attempted in the history of the human race, a massive effort to build for 1/6th humanity a better life through democratic means, with freedom of the press, an independent judiciary, rule of law and representative government based on universal adult suffrage with an electorate larger than the combined total population of the United States and Western Europe.

50 years into independence, however, it is now clear that India is going through a period of tremendous turbulence. The old consensus has broken down and a new equilibrium has not yet emerged. Those institutions which were considered to be the foundations of our democratic polity are under assault, and in several areas - the political, the economic, the social, the field of foreign policy - the time has come when we have to re-examine many of the beliefs upon which our polity was founded, see where we have gone wrong and what needs to be done to set matters right. This is what I will attempt to outline, very briefly, in this article.

To start with the political situation; the growth of political awareness in the last half century has been quite extraordinary. Vast segments of society that were submerged, vast areas that were marginalised, have been drawn into the mainstream of Indian politics.

Top

INTEGRATION OF VALUES IN INSTITUTIONS

Back

 

On 13 July 1958 Jawaharlal had appended a seven-page note with his fortnightly letter to Chief Ministers in which he expressed his views, 'loud thinking' as he termed it, on a number of major problems facing the country and the world. It was a brilliant piece; the earlier vision of the Discovery of India had been enriched by ten years of active administration as leader of the world's largest democracy. He discussed the merits as well as the weaknesses of both capitalism and communism, and seemed to seek a third ground which would be a creative synthesis between socialism and Vedanta. In fact, he mentioned the Vedantic concept several times in the note, and ended by saying: "In considering these economic aspects of our problems, we have always to remember the basic approach of peaceful means; and perhaps we might also keep in view the old Vedantic ideal of the life force which is the inner base of everything that exists."

After reading this note I decided to write to Jawaharlal. "Along with your letter dated 13 July," I wrote to him on 8 August, "you attached a note in which you indulged in some 'loud thinking' upon the problems that face us. The result was most thought provoking. Belonging as I do to a much younger generation (I had just turned 27) I thought you might be interested in some random reflections that your letter induced in me, which I have set down in the enclosed note."

I reproduce below the note in extenso because it reflects my thinking at that time and shows that several issues - population control, nuclear disaster, corruption in public life and spiritual renaissance - which have remained important for me were already clearly formulated long before I plunged into national politics.

At the outset it may be repeated, because it is not always realized by older people, that ours is what may be termed the post-Independence generation in that our active political thinking and activity began after India had become free. Thus even the great freedom struggle, in which you were privileged to play so distinguished a role, has not really got a deep personal significance for us and we judge men and ideas by their post- rather than pre-Independence performances. This is not to say that we were indifferent to the freedom movement. On the contrary even as teenagers we were thrilled to the core by the great nationalist upsurge that swept the British out of the country. I still remember the feverish excitement when I first (and last) met Gandhiji here in 1947, and again when for the first time you came into my sick-room at Jammu later the same year. I recall how avidly I used to read your books in my schooldays, but surreptitiously for fear that my father would see me and discover that I was fast becoming a youthful revolutionary, as indeed I was!

But my point is that by the time we reached maturity the British had already departed, and the freedom struggle is thus not an integral part of our emotional make-up as it must be of older generations. Even Gandhiji is for us a somewhat shadowy figure, very great of course but nevertheless belonging to the past rather than to the present or future.

After centuries of servitude we became free, and Mother India, though grievously amputated and bleeding, awoke to a new-found strength and vigour. India's freedom was an event of historic significance, symbolizing and heralding as it did the re-awakening of Asia after a torpor of ages. A thrill of pride shot through us as we took our rightful place among the great nations of the world and, under your inspiring leadership, began the Herculean task of national reconstruction. In the sphere of foreign policy we have made a creditable contribution towards the maintenance of world peace and a lessening of international tensions, and your advocacy of Panch-Sheel has given the world a new philosophy of peaceful coexistence which will have to be accepted if mankind is to survive in this nuclear age.

Internally also we embarked upon an attempt at planned economic development, and in this first decade of Independence we have made much progress on many fronts. But at the same time there is much that is unsatisfactory and indeed alarming in our present situation. The idealism that inspired public life in the half century preceding Independence appears to have largely evaporated, leaving behind a noxious residue of self-seeking opportunism. As you have so often pointed out in your speeches and writings, fissiparous tendencies seem to be growing and caste and communalism, though outlawed by our Constitution, appear to be getting more firmly entrenched. Several observers have pointed out that these forces played a much more important role in the Second than in the First General Election.

Corruption has established itself at almost all levels of public life, and it is this above all that corrodes the idealism of youth. Indeed our generation, which is always the mainstay of idealism, seems to have become largely frustrated and cynical. As you point out, this is to some extent a world-phenomenon. But it is yet surprising that this should be so in India, where vast fields of constructive work have opened out before us since Independence and fresh vistas of progress lie ahead.

The older generation of national leaders no doubt retain their idealism, but they are necessarily fast diminishing, leaving gaps in public life which are difficult to fill. The recent demise of the Maulana is a case in point. As Sri Aurobindo wrote in 1909 on the passing away of Romesh Chandra Dutt, "The landmarks of the past fall one by one and none rise in their place." I am more than forty years younger than you, and between our generations lies a vast gap only occasionally lighted by outstanding inspiration and idealism. You stand as a titanic figure, forward-looking, young in mind and spirit, full of noble ideals allied with the constant endeavour to actualize them. But, with a handful of exceptions, you stand alone, though we pray that you may be spared for many more years to guide us.

What is the cause of this lack of idealism in our country, even among the younger generation, as is so often reflected in our universities? I for one do not feel myself competent to offer an analysis of the complex economic, social and psychological factors that operate to shape the consciousness of our youth. But I think a fair share of responsibility must be borne by our political parties whose task it is in a democracy to infuse a spirit of hope and dedication among the people, especially the younger generation. They appear to have failed in this vital duty, and almost without exception have proved incapable of evoking in our generation genuine idealism on any substantial scale.

In your note you mention the views of a colleague: "In our attempts to ensure the material prosperity of the country we have not paid any attention to the spiritual element in human nature. Therefore, in order to give the individual and the nation a sense of purpose, something to live for and, if necessary, to die for, we have to live some philosophy of life, to give, in the wider sense of the word, a ritual background to our thinking." I feel that this is a crucial point, because it is widely admitted that the general level of national character-discipline, honesty, integrity - has seriously declined and Continues to do so. This is a very serious matter because without a 'high level of national character the new India of our dreams will remain a mirage. It is our educational institutions and, perhaps, the Community Development organization that must spearhead this -'spiritual renaissance', if I may use the term in its broadest sense. But mere words are not enough, concrete steps are called for before it is too late. The spiritual motive has always been an important element in our past greatness - as witness the Buddha, Ashoka, Gandhi - and if our country is to achieve the pinnacle of greatness in the future she must adhere to this ideal.

Finally a word about our economic problems. Whether or not a spiritual motive permeates us, there is no doubt that we will be judged, and indeed our democracy itself will be judged, by the extent to which we can solve our economic problems and ensure to the people of India a reasonable minimum standard of material goods and services. We have of course achieved a good deal since Independence, but the expectations of our people always expand faster than our capacity to meet them, with the result that the gap remains and even grows.

I am no economist and so I will not venture to say anything with regard to the method or content of our economic planning, but there is one matter which I feel bound to mention and that is the question of population. In almost all your letters you lay great stress upon the supreme importance of raising agricultural production and the need for a vigorous, sustained and coordinated drive in this direction. This is of course extremely important and must be done. But however much we may increase our food output per acre, however much we may extend our irrigation and improve our methods of production, our huge and rapidly increasing population will inexorably swallow up all that we produce and millions will remain in economic distress. It appears that the disastrous consequences of our terrifying population growth are not really being brought home to the people. Our public leaders talk constantly on a large variety of subjects but are conspicuously silent with regard to the supreme necessity of limiting our population. It may be argued that mere words will achieve nothing unless we have the concrete means of mass birth control. This is of course true, but before any such campaign can be launched we must create the necessary climate of opinion in the nation, particularly in the rural areas. Are we making full use of all the modern means of publicity in our control to educate the nation with regard to this basic problem? We are spending hundreds of crores upon numerous development works, but are we spending enough upon family planning and birth-control on a mass scale? Even China, which at one time impatiently brushed aside the population problem as a 'capitalist myth' which would automatically disappear in a communist society, has now, I understand, adopted stern and active measures to limit its population growth.

Unless we do the same all our plans and schemes will be gravely jeopardized and we will never succeed in lifting the mass of our people out of the morass of poverty in which they have been sunk for so many centuries. Population control is the most fundamental and important national problem facing us today, not excepting even food production. Have we a proper awareness of this, and if so, are we doing all we can to meet it?

After a few days he wrote back:

Some time ago, I received your letter of August 8th. I read your note with great interest and, I think, profit. What appealed to me especially was a young man of your generation looking at the world as it is. I wish I could enter a little more into the mind of your generation.

Yours affectionately,
Jawaharlal Nehru
Autobiography &
One Man's World

Top

NATIONAL POPULATION POLICY

Back

 

1. With 24 percent of the world's land area, India has about 15 percent of the world's people. It is estimated that our population, as on 1st January 1976, has crossed the 600 million mark, and is now rising at the rate of well over 1 million per month. Since Independence, 250 millions have been added, equivalent to the entire population of the Soviet Union with six times the land area of India. The increase every year is now equal to the entire population of Australia which is 2-1/2 times the size of our country. If the present rate of increase continues unchecked, our population at the turn of the century may well reach the staggering figure of one billion. Indisputably, we are facing a population explosion of crisis dimensions which has largely diluted the fruits of the remarkable economic progress that we have made over the last two decades. If the future of the nation is to be secured, and the goal of removing poverty to be attained, the population problem will have to be treated as a top national priority and commitment.
2. Our real enemy is poverty, and it is as a frontal assault on the citadels of poverty that the Fifth Five-Year Plan has included the Minimum Needs Programme. One of its five items is an integrated package of health, family planning and nutrition. Far reaching steps have been initiated to reorient the thrust of medical education, so as to strengthen the community medicine and rural health aspects, and to restructure the health care delivery system on a three-tier basis going down to the most far-flung rural areas where the majority of our people reside and where child mortality and morbidity are the highest. Similarly, ignorance, illiteracy and superstition have got to be fought and eliminated. In the ultimate analysis, it is only when the underlying causes of poverty and disease are eliminated that the nation will be able to move forward to its desired ideals.
3. Nonetheless, it is clear that simply to wait for education and economic development to bring about a drop in fertility is not a practical solution. The very increase in population makes economic development slow and more difficult of achievement. The time factor is so pressing, and the population growth so formidable, that we have to get out of the vicious circle through a direct assault upon this problem as a national commitment. The President, in his address to the Joint Session of Parliament this year, reiterated the importance of stepping up family planning efforts, and the Prime Minister has on several occasions laid stress upon the crucial role that population control has to play in the movement towards economic independence and social transformation, specially in the light of the 20-Point Economic Programme.
4. Considerable work has been done in our country in the field of family planning, but clearly only the fringe of the problem has so far been touched. In this context, after a thorough and careful consideration of all factors involved as well as the expression of a wide spectrum of public opinion, government has decided on a series of fundamental measures detailed below which, it is hoped, will enable us to achieve the planned target of reducing the birth rate from an estimated 35 per thousand in the beginning of the Fifth Plan to 25 per thousand at the end of the Sixth. Allowing for steady decline in the death rate that will continue due to improvement in our medical and public health services and the living standards of our people, this is expected to bring down the growth rate of population in our country to 1.4 percent by 1984.
5. Raising the age of marriage will not only have a demonstrable demographic impact, but will also lead to more responsible parenthood and help to safeguard the health of the mother and the child. It is well known that very early pregnancy leads to higher maternal and infant mortality. Also, if the women of our country are to play their rightful role in its economic, social and intellectual life, the practice of early marriage will have to be severely discouraged. The present law has not been effectively or uniformly enforced. It has, therefore, been decided that the minimum age of marriage should be raised to 18 for girls and 21 for boys, and suitable legislation to this effect will be passed. Offences under this law will be cognizable by an officer not below the rank of a Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The question of making registration of marriage compulsory is under active consideration.
6. It has been represented by some States that while on the one hand we are urging them to limit their population, those States which do well in this field face reduction of representation in Parliament while those with weak performance in family planning tend to get increasing representation. It is obviously necessary to remedy this situation. It has, therefore, been decided that the representation in the Lok Sabha and the State Legislatures will be frozen on the basis of the 1971 census until the year 2001. This means, in effect, that the census counts of 1981 and 1991 will not be considered for purposes of adjustment of Lok Sabha/Legislature seats. Necessary constitutional amendment will be brought forward during the current year. Appropriate legislation for other elective bodies will also be undertaken.
7. In a federal system, the sharing of Central resources with the States is a matter of considerable importance. In all cases where population is a factor, as in the allocation of Central assistance to State Plans, devolution of taxes and duties and grants-in-aids, the population figures of 1971 will continue to be followed till the year 2001. In the matter of Central assistance to State Plans, eight percent will be specifically earmarked against performance in family planning. The detailed procedure in this regard will be worked out by the Planning Commission.
8. While there is a direct correlation between illiteracy and fertility, this is particularly marked in the case of girl's education. Wherever female literacy improves, it has been seen that fertility drops almost automatically. It is, therefore, necessary that special measures be taken to raise the levels of female education plans for young women especially in certain backward States where the family planning performance so far has been unimpressive. The same is true with regard to child nutrition programmes, as high infant mortality and morbidity have a direct impact on fertility. The Ministry of Education is urging upon the State Governments the necessity to give these matters higher priority than has been accorded so far and fully earmarking adequate outlays both for girl's education up to the middle level and child nutrition.
9. My Ministry is also in close touch with the Education Ministry with regard to the introduction of population values in the educational system, and the NCERT has already made a beginning in bringing out some text books on these lines. It is essential that the younger generations should grow up with an adequate awareness of the population problem and a realisation of their national responsibilities in this regard. Indeed, if I may venture to say so, exhortations to plan families are more important for the younger generations than for those who have already made their contribution to our demographic profile.
10. The adoption of a small family norm is too important a matter to be considered the responsibility of only one Ministry. It is essential that all Ministries and Departments of the Government of India as well as the States should take up, as an integral part of their normal programme and budgets, the motivation of citizens to adopt responsible reproductive behaviour both in their own as well as the national interest. A directive on this is being issued by the Prime Minister to all the Ministers of the Government of India, and a letter will also be addressed by her to all Chief Ministers. The performance of family planning the States will be more carefully and intensively monitored than in the past, and the Union Cabinet will review the situation in depth at least once a year.
11. Experience over the last 20 years has shown that monetary compensation does have a significant impact upon the acceptance of family planning, particularly among the poorer sections of society. In view of the desirability of limiting the family size to two or three it has been decided that monetary compensation for sterilisation (both male and female) will be raised to Rs. 150 if performed with two living children or less, Rs. 100 if performed with three living children and Rs. 70 if performed with four or more children. These amounts will include the money payable to individual acceptors as well as other charges such as drugs and dressing, etc., and will take effect from 1st May 1976. Facilities for sterilisation and MTP are being increasingly extended to cover rural areas.
12. In addition to individual compensation, Government is of the view that group incentives should now be introduced in a bold and imaginative manner so as to make family planning a mass movement with greater community involvement. It has therefore, been decided that suitable group incentives will be introduced for the medical profession, for Zila and Panchayat Samitis, for teachers at various levels, for co-operative societies and for labour in the organised sector through their respective representative national organisations. Details of these group incentives are being worked out in consultation with the concerned organisations.
13. Despite governmental efforts at the Union, State and Municipal level, family planning cannot succeed unless voluntary organisations are drawn into its promotion in an increasing measure, particularly youth and women's organisations. There is already a scheme for aiding voluntary organisations, and it has been decided that this will be expanded. Also, full rebate will be allowed in the income tax assessment for amounts given as donations for family planning purposes to Government, local bodies or any registered voluntary organisation approved for this purpose by the Union Ministry of Health.
14. Research in reproductive biology and contraception is under way in several of our scientific institutions, and there are some very promising developments which, we hope, will lead to a major breakthrough before too long. This is a great challenge to our scientists, and efforts in this direction will receive special attention so that necessary research inputs are ensured on a long range and continuing basis.
15. The question of compulsory sterilisation has been subject of lively public debate over the last few months. it is clear that public opinion is now ready to accept much more stringent measures for family planning than before. However, the administrative and medical infrastructure in many parts of the country is still not adequate to cope with the vast implications of nation-wide compulsory sterilisation. We do not, therefore, intend bringing in Central legislation for this purpose, at least for the time being. Some States feel that the facilities available with them are adequate to the meet the requirements of vigorous rural oriented approach. In this context my Ministry is working in close co-ordination with the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting and is also trying to draw the best media talent available in the country into the structuring of the new programme.
    
    We are of the view that where State legislature, in exercise of its own powers, decides that the time is ripe and it is necessary to pass legislation for compulsory legislation , it may do so. Our advice to the States in such cases will be to bring in the limitation after three children, and to make it uniformly applicable to all India citizens resident in the State without distinction of caste, creed or community.
16. Some States have also introduced a series of measures directed towards their employees and other citizens in the matter of preferential allotment of houses, loans, etc., for those who have accepted family planning. In this sphere also, we have decided to leave it to each individual State to introduce such measures as they consider necessary and desirable. Employees of the Union Government will be expected to adopt the small family norm and necessary changes will be made in their service/conduct rules to ensure this.
17. In order to spread the message of family planning throughout the nation, a new multimedia motivational strategy is being evolved which will utilise all available media channels including the radio, television (specially programmes aimed directly at rural audiences), the press, film, visual displays and also include traditional folk media such as jatra, puppet shows, folk songs and folk dances. The attempt is to move from somewhat urban-elitist approaches of the past into much more imaginative.
18. This package of measures will succeed in its objective only if it receives the full and active co-operation of the people at large. It is my sincere hope that the entire nation will strongly endorse the new population policy which, as part of a multi-faceted strategy for economic development and social emancipation, is directed towards building a strong and prosperous India in the years and decades to come.

Top

SECULARISM: A NEW APPROCH

Back

 

The classical concept of secularism that we adopted soon after freedom is now subject to immense pressure and seems to be rapidly disintegrating. There are three main reasons for this.

Firstly, the Western concept of secularism originated in Europe several centuries ago when the question of separation of the church and the state had become a major concern and a subject of fierce political controversy. India has never had an organized church, so the European concept of secularism was not really relevant to our requirements. The term sarva-dharma-sambhava which is sometimes used in place of secularism is, in fact, a far more meaningful formulation, and certainly much closer to the views of Mahatma Gandhi, who was deeply imbued with the Vedantic concept of the essential unity of all religions.

Secondly, our secularism was based upon the assumption, which has proved to be erroneous, that religion is a purely private affair with which the state should not concerned. This may be true as far as individual prayer and spiritual practice is concerned, but quite clearly the collective impact of religion upon society and the state is something which is far from personal. That millions of Indian citizens should flock regularly to the Kumbha Melas and numerous places of worship, whether Hindu, Muslim or any other, is itself an indication that the state has necessarily to take cognizance of religion as a social force. When we add the conflicts within and between religious groups, which create serious law and order problems, it becomes quite clear that the myth of religion being a purely personal matter can no longer be sustained.

Indeed, that view is often put forward by a section of our intelligentsia who, for all practical purposes, are not believers and who, therefore, tend to look upon all religions as being equally irrelevant hangovers from the past. It is obvious that such a view is shared only by a miniscule percentage of India's vast population.

The third assumption upon which classical secularism is based revolves around the belief that, as education increases and living standards improve, religion will steadily lose its hold over the minds of people and become increasingly peripheral in its impact upon the human psyche. This assumption, too, has been repeatedly disproved in our own lifetimes. Not only in India but also in other developing countries it has become clear that there is little relation between economic progress and the decline of religion. On the contrary, there is evidence to show that with increasing affluence in hitherto poor nations the interest in religion shows a marked upsurge. One has only to travel in the more affluent parts of India to see the tremendous burgeoning of new temples and gurdwaras, mosques and churches, while a survey of rural India will show that a place of worship is one of the first demands of a new affluent area.

If these three points are accepted, it becomes quite clear that we have to move on to an entirely new concept of secularism if it is to have relevance in the years and decades to come. In the Indian context, secularism cannot mean an anti-religious attitude or even an attitude of indifference towards religion on the part of the state. What it should mean is that, while there is no state religion, all religions are given respect and freedom of activity, provided they do not impinge upon each other and provided again that foreign funds are not allowed to be channelled through ostensibly religious organizations for political purposes.

It is also essential that we overcome the religion-phobia in our educational system. At present we are getting the worst of both worlds. On the one hand, we refuse to take a positive attitude of presenting our rich, multireligious heritage to our students, thus depriving them of contact with much that is noble and great in our civilization. On the other, we leave religious education entirely in the hands of bodies which are seldom adequately equipped to undertake the task, and usually offer narrow and obscurantist interpretations of the living truths that permeate religious traditions. While the new education policy talks of 'value education', it is clear that without an understanding of our religious heritage it will be extremely difficult to develop a coherent and widely accepted value system.

The multireligious situation in India is a reality, which will not go away. Instead of approaching the whole problem from a negative viewpoint, it would be far better to take the bull by the horns and convert what is sometimes looked upon as a major 'problem' into a positive asset for the new India that is struggling to be born. This can only be done, if our educational system gladly accepts the multiplicity of our religious tradition. I have before me an admirable textbook brought out in London last year entitled Worlds of Difference, which presents a variety of cultural traditions in a simple, positive and appreciative manner. Sponsored by the World Wildlife Fund and with a foreword by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the book has separate chapters on the Chinese world, the humanist world, the Jewish world and the Muslim world. Attractively illustrated with photographs from the various religious traditions, it is accompanied by a guidebook, which provides the teacher with an interpretative framework for the classroom.

The book is meant for the age group 9-13, but much of it is useful for older children also. I doubt if in our educational system, whether at the primary, secondary or higher levels, there is a single book which presents the rich diversity of the Indian cultural tradition in this manner. Even at the post-graduate level there is hardly any significant work being done in the field of religious studies and comparative religion, which is so popular an area in the West. Inter-religious dialogue is also virtually non existent in our country. All this is a reflection of the fact that among our elite religion seems to have become unfashionable. This is a sad commentary upon our intellectual capabilities. India is by far the richest area for multireligious studies anywhere in the world, and should attract some of our best scholars. Hinduism itself, the religion of over four-fifths of Indians, is a vast treasure house of philosophy and mythology, sociology and worldly wisdom. Yet, in the last four decades, more work on Hinduism has been done by foreign scholars than by our own. Evidently their 'secularism' is not affected by working on one of mankind's oldest religious traditions.

If we are really serious in our efforts to build a strong and integrated India, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that the younger generation understands and appreciates not only its own religious traditions but also those of the other religions in the country. How many Muslims in India are able even remotely to appreciate the depth of feeling among the Hindus regarding the sanctity of Lord Rama's birthplace? Conversely, how many Hindus understand the emotional trauma among Muslims when they see idols being worshipped in what they consider to be a mosque? I do not want to comment on this deeply divisive issue, which is still sub judice, except to say that in Kashmir we do have places of worship which are common both to the Hindus and the Muslims, where arati and namaz are done at the same time.

But my point is that the gulf of incomprehension between the Hindus and the Muslims on this issue is fraught with grave danger for the nation, and is a reflection of our failure over the last forty years to tackle the religious issues adequately.

No nation can continue to grow if its central concepts become fossilized and it loses the capacity for creative reinterpretation of its philosophical roots. The great secret of Indian civilization, which has survived so long, lies precisely in its capacity for such periodic reformulations. It is no longer good enough for us to try and hide behind an outmoded concept of secularism. What is needed is a deeper understanding of the importance of religion in the life of our people, and the formulation of a new and dynamic interpretation of secularism which would ensure the creative coexistence of our many religions, all making a positive contribution to the rich and varied mosaic that is India.

Chapter 11 Essays on Hinduism

Top

MY RETURN TO CONGESS: STATEMENT AUG 06, 1999

Back

 

The country is going through a prolonged period of political turmoil and instability, and it is necessary in the broader national interest to strengthen the Congress, which alone can cut across religious, caste, and regional dimensions upon which almost all other parties depend for their predominant support, and give the nation a full term government that it do urgently needs. In a vast, pluralistic, multi-lingual, multi-religious State like India strengthening of such a party is urgently needed to safeguard and consolidate national unity. I have, therefore, decide to rejoin the Indian National Congress, the only party of which I have been a member.

My association with the party goes back to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, whom I looked upon as my political guru when I entered public life 50 years ago at the age of 18; Shrimati Indira Gandhi with whom I was a Cabinet colleague for ten years; and with Shri Rajiv Gandhi whose career was so cruelly cut short by his tragic assasination in 1991. Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, since she became Congress President last year has been battling valiantly to revitalise the party and she has been remarkably successful in doing this, as is borne out by the fact that the Congress has won all four State Assembly elections held thereafter - Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Goa as well as an important bye-elections in Orissa. However, in the fresh challenges that lie ahead, she needs assistance, support and encouragement.

India surely has a great future as envisaged by seers and thinkers like Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo; Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru; Sadar Patel and Maulana Azad. But to fulfil this destiny each one of us has to fulfill our dharma towards the nation. The next decade will be crucial in deciding whether or not we are able to move substantially towards the goals of poverty eradication and political stability.

The country is going through a prolonged period of political turmoil and instability, and it is necessary in the broader national interest to strengthen the Congress, which alone can cut across religious, caste, and regional dimensions upon which almost all other parties depend for their predominant support, and give the nation a full term government that it do urgently needs. In a vast, pluralistic, multi-lingual, multi-religious State like India strengthening of such a party is urgently needed to safeguard and consolidate national unity. I have, therefore, decide to rejoin the Indian National Congress, the only party of which I have been a member.

My association with the party goes back to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, whom I looked upon as my political guru when I entered public life 50 years ago at the age of 18; Shrimati Indira Gandhi with whom I was a Cabinet colleague for ten years; and with Shri Rajiv Gandhi whose career was so cruelly cut short by his tragic assasination in 1991. Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, since she became Congress President last year has been battling valiantly to revitalise the party and she has been remarkably successful in doing this, as is borne out by the fact that the Congress has won all four State Assembly elections held thereafter - Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Goa as well as an important bye-elections in Orissa. However, in the fresh challenges that lie ahead, she needs assistance, support and encouragement.

India surely has a great future as envisaged by seers and thinkers like Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo; Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru; Sadar Patel and Maulana Azad. But to fulfil this destiny each one of us has to fulfill our dharma towards the nation. The next decade will be crucial in deciding whether or not we are able to move substantially towards the goals of poverty eradication and political stability

Top

KS INDIAN EXPRESS INTERVIEW,
AUG 5, 2007

Back

 

Dr Karan Singh
THE IDEA EXCHANGE, THE INDIAN EXPRESS
Sunday, August 05, 2007

'If Om Namah Shivay is why I didn't become president, then it's certainly a great blessing'

Dr Karan Singh, son of the late Maharaja Hari Singh of Kashmir, has had a long career in academics and politics. He has been associated with the Congress since 1967, when he became a minister in then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's cabinet. A scholar on Hinduism and the founder of the Virat Hindu Sammelan, Karan Singh is also active in promoting inter-faith understanding and heads the Rumi Foundation. He was in the news recently as a likely UPA candidate for the President's post. Karan Singh visited The Indian Express office recently, and in an interaction with staffers, spoke of why he thinks he lost the presidential race and his ideas on the Left and secularism. The discussion was moderated by Senior Editor (Politics) Varghese George

KARAN SINGH: I have a large number of different interests, for example, the Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR), which I head. I have been trying to stress the importance of cultural diplomacy. I think there are three scenes of diplomacy: traditional political diplomacy, the Ganga, as it were; then there's economic diplomacy, the Yamuna; and there's the invisible Saraswati, which is cultural diplomacy. And India is certainly a cultural superpower - whether or not we become a political or economic superpower, we are a cultural superpower.

Another area of interest is the interfaith movement. For 30 years I have been president of what is called the Temple of Understanding, a worldwide interfaith movement, trying to bring people from different faiths and religions in harmonious dialogue. We had a SAARC interfaith conclave in April, which the prime minister inaugurated, and that is something to which I give a good deal of time.

My third area of interest is environment. I head an NGO called People's Commission on Environment & Development.

Then, of course, there is my role in politics. I'm deputy leader in the Rajya Sabha.

Most important of all, for me, is the spiritual quest. I've been talking about Vedanta around the world and I think that in life the inner spiritual quest is the most important single activity one can undertake.

VARGHESE GEORGE: You have been proposed for the president's post so many times but have not yet made it. Would you say you are a politician among philosophers and a philosopher among politicians?

Philosophy is not directly linked to the presidential election. But I've been in public life for 58 years. I started at 18, becoming head of state in J & K for 18 years under three different capacities. Then I joined Indira Gandhi's cabinet and was a minister for 10 years. I've also been in public life and in Parliament for 18 years, in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. I've also been an ambassador. In some ways, my whole career was a preparation, as it were, for presidency. If it had come my way, it was fine. If it hasn't, as you said, I'm a philosopher, and it doesn't really matter. I have all these other interests, none of which is connected to the presidency.

But why didn't I become President? I want to revisit that. Bardhan (CPI general-secretary A.B. Bardhan), a very senior man for whom I have high regard, said the first objection the Left had was that I am the son of a maharaja, and second, that I am the founder of the Virat Hindu Sammelan.

I'm not comparing myself, but Ashoka, too, was the son of a maharaja, Buddha was, Ram was. Second, from the age of 18, I've thrown my lot with democratic politics, spearheading the transition from feudalism to democracy. When the issue of (the abolition of) privy purses came up, I stood by the government in which I was a minister. I'm the son of a maharaja as a result of whose signature J& K is a part of India.

(As to the second objection) I have said I'm interested in Hinduism, I have a PhD on Sri Aurobindo, and I've been lecturing on Vivekananda and Aurobindo across the world. The Viraat Hindu Sammelan was set up during the time of the mass conversions in Meenakshipuram, in South India. So it was a sort of social reform movement to see why the unfinished social revolution in Hinduism has got stuck. The national movement itself flowed from Hindu social reform. Social reform is important, and it was simply a platform for me. I have also been working on the interfaith movement and I needed some organisation for that.

But Bardhan (and the Left) argue otherwise. I respect their mature judgment and I'm grateful to them for saving me from five years in what's by all accounts an extremely uncomfortable building. I stayed there when I was a governor, and I got the prized suite when I was just 21, and it's extremely uncomfortable. So I'm happy to be living in my house.

Lots of names came up, and you know more than I do that in the end just two names were left - Shivraj Patil and me. Then Karunanidhi came, and I understand that in the end he said, 'We prefer Dr Karan Singh.' So I was the last man standing, before the women took over.

Top

D.K. SINGH: Did Mrs Sonia Gandhi speak to you about this?

Yes, on May 27 she said to me, 'I have sent two names - yours and one more.' It was obviously Shivraj Patil.

D.K. SINGH: How is it that after decades of unwavering loyalty to the party, you have been only shifted from one ceremonial post to another?

This time the party backed me till the end, but we counted without the redoubtable Mr Bardhan.

D.K. SINGH: But it was for yet another ceremonial post.

Maybe I'm good at taking ceremonial posts. I've held them all my life. For me influence is more important than power. I'm not interested in how many people I can appoint, how many contracts I can arrange. I'm interested in ideas and concepts. I believe in the power of the mind rather than the power of the file. I've lots of other things going, but I think I'd have made a very good president.

D.K. SINGH: Couldn't the government have involved you more in negotiating the Kashmir issue? All these roundtable conferences . . . but you were nowhere.

First, it's Jammu & Kashmir not Kashmir, remember that. Everyone is using Kashmir as a shorthand for Jammu & Kashmir and in fact many of our problems flow from this mistake. It's like calling U.K. England. England is not U.K. Kashmir is one unit in a five-unit state. I have deliberately avoided getting too much involved in J& K for a variety of reasons. Hitchcock once made a film, The Man Who Knew Too Much. I'm the man who knows too much (about Jammu & Kashmir).

PAMELA PHILIPOSE: In retrospect, do you feel that if your father had acceded to India right in the beginning, rather than waiting and weighing his options, the whole problem of Kashmir could have been avoided?

I don't think it could have been avoided, because in any case Pakistan was all set upon trying to grab Kashmir. You see he was in a very difficult position. It was an 80 per cent Muslim state, a multiregional state. It wasn't an easy decision. Ultimately it was the tribal invasion that forced his hand.

MINI KAPOOR: There is a sense that your father was overtaken by circumstances. Would you consider making his private papers public?

My father wasn't a great correspondent. I have already made public my correspondence with Jawaharlal Nehru. Penguin has come out with the book as well, with the papers written between 1949 and 1964. Those papers reveal quite a lot and I have written my own autobiography, in which I have pointed out the situations that my father was facing. I don't think I really have any more state papers with me.

AMITABH SINHA: You mentioned you'd have made a very good president. Would you like to share with us your assessment of the present president?

No, no, I would not. We have to wait and see how she does.

PAMELA PHILIPOSE: On your role as the emissary of the Government of India to the King of Nepal, the criticism was that the Indian government completely misread the Nepal situation.

There should have been no flak. I was given an assignment by the prime minister. He gave me a letter addressed to King Gyanendra and a personal message, which I delivered.

I didn't have any individual diplomacy in that. It was just that they wanted to give a message to the king that it was essential to hand over power immediately to a leader chosen by the seven parties. At that time there was no mention of reviving the Parliament or anything else. That was India's assessment at that time. I took a letter and I had a meeting with the king and I came back and he did make a broadcast. That wasn't enough. Subsequently, he had to make a second broadcast. But I don't see why I should get any flak. In fact I was the only one who could at least get him to move.

PAMELA PHILIPOSE: Isn't it true that the assessment of the Indian government at that time was wrong?

That's another thing and the Government of India should get the flak for that, not me. I was not a minister in the government. I went there as an MP and as an individual.

SHEKHAR GUPTA: You have always been very open about being a practising Hindu. You even wear an Om Namah Shivay bracelet on your wrist. Did that stand in the way of your becoming president, or being considered worthy of the job of president by the Left?

I've never been apologetic about this. If Om Namah Shivay is the reason I didn't become president, then certainly it's a great blessing, because I won't exchange my Om Namah Shivay, as Arjun says in the Bhagwad Gita, "even for the sovereignty of the three worlds, what then for this land."

SHEKHAR GUPTA: Is the Left's position on (irreligious) secularism also the Congress view now?

I don't know. That's really for the party spokesman to answer. I'm not sure if atheism is an essential part of the ideology of the Left in India. But it was in other communist countries. As a guest of (Nikita) Kruschev, I asked, 'Mr General-Secretary, is it possible in your country to be a believer and also a member of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union?' He said, 'No, it is not. We do respect religion and other faiths but to be a member of the CPSU, you have to be an atheist.'Whether that applies to Left in India or not, I do not know. But once you give the Left the veto . . .

SHEKHAR GUPTA: Do you think the Left could now end up vetoing those who are religious even out of the membership of the Congress Working Committee?

It's the Left which vetoed, not the CWC. Shekhar, I feel relieved with this presidency thing, which has been hovering over my head for 10 years, out of my system. I'm free now. So I'm feeling a sense of relief.

AMITABH SINHA: By bowing to the wishes of the Left, do you not think that the Congress is taking its secularism a bit too far?

I don't think it's a question of secularism so much as it is of numbers. I don't know what you mean by 'too far', but, you know, I think in India secularism has come to mean something quite different from what it means in Europe. Secularism in India should not mean anti-religiousness. Secularism is what Gandhiji preached or what even Sarva Dharma Sambhav says, that is, equal respect for all religions. But the Left still looks at secularism from the absolutist point of view, as either pro- or anti-religion.

But this whole thing (the presidential race) was run by the Left. They first laid down the parameters. Prakash Karat clearly is the most powerful man in India today . . . and I didn't say woman!

SHEKHAR GUPTA: Let's look at the first 15-20 senior-most members of the Congress, those in the Union Cabinet and those in the CWC. How many can actually pass the new criteria of being secular, which is being irreligious. How many of them actually believe in some god in their private and professional lives?

None of them would qualify. I don't know if there is an atheist among them. Even Dr Manmohan Singh is a devout Sikh. And I think all the others have their own religious beliefs. In India 99 per cent of the people are religious. By census figures, people who write 'no religion' or 'agnostic' are less than one per cent. This time it was the question of numbers, which Congress did not have. So the support of the Left was needed. So it laid down the parameters and called the shots. But I don't think that the 'anti-religious' definition of secularism of the Left is sustainable.

VANDITA MISHRA: You spoke of secularism and respecting all religions. What will your party do to counter Narendra Modi in Gujarat?

Violence in the name of religion is something that cannot be accepted. So the party in Gujarat will do all it can. But I believe there is a social rift in the state along religious lines and the Congress must do what it can to bridge that. And then Modi is supposed to be a good administrator, so you have to balance that.

editor@expressindia.com

Top