Author: Mahendra Ved

Politics Of Personal Attacks

Politics of Personal Attacks

By Mahendra Ved

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi approvingly responded to the word ‘panauti’, meaning a bad omen, to describe Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s presence at last week’s much-hyped cricket World Cup final that India lost to Australia. It followed Modi’s remark, disapproving of his principal adversary’s criticism of the China policy, calling him ‘murkho ka sardar’ (king of clowns).

This kind of discourse has become normal, adding spurious spice to the public discourse, regaling participants on social media, and getting carried into conference rooms and even family gatherings.

All are culpable. To explore when and how it began would be like the never-ending chicken-or-the-egg argument. But the worst can be feared. The current round of Assembly elections to five states have already set the tone for next summer’s parliamentary polls when the game of decibels – louder the better – will score new heights.

Not the first one though, Modi two decades ago attacked ‘Mian Musharraf’, demonizing a whole community. A decade later, as he sought to burst on the national scene, Congressman Mani Shankar Aiyar belittled him as a mere ‘chaiwala’. It hugely fed Modi’s successful campaign as an underdog seeking to lead the country.

Questions arise about whether smear helps politics and since it touches new depths each time there are elections, win votes. But the answers are bound to degenerate into yet another unseemly debate. Scanning reports of the last ten years and more, it is clear that personal attacks and shrill rhetoric have characterized India’s election speeches during each poll season. Worse, it has entered public life 24×7.

“We don’t mean it,” a politico who shall remain nameless because he is not around to confirm or contradict this defence of public abuse. However, he had no defence of why it was being inflicted on the public. This is no excuse, but it may be an emulation of what is happening in other democracies where, too, racial and sexist slurs are part of the polls campaign. The media and social media spread this venom to promote their readers/viewers’ approval. It’s also a multi-billion business.

Coming from whichever direction, each allegation and response to it is found to be full of half-truths and lies. No slip of the tongue, it is planned and calculated. Even regrets, when pushed hard, are worded as semi-defence, leaving victims to let go in disgust. Matters have gone to already over-burdened courts.

While this helps the ruling party of the day deflect public attention from the bread-jobs-house issues, the opposition, struggling to highlight those issues falls for the same temptations. And whether or not the ruling side is responsible for toxicity in the discourse, the opposition, collectively and individually, fails to match even in this negativity.

ALSO READ: Modi Kicks Off His Campaign For 2024

Despite repeated failures, Rahul Gandhi continues to employ the same old strategy of making everything about Narendra Modi personal. He has himself been the biggest target of personal attacks and abuse. But he seems to think being personal and upfront helps his party. Doubts about it expressed outside the party are ignored and those stating within the party have been silenced.

Gandhi has ended up playing Modi’s game at Modi and has lost badly. His slogans such as ‘Chowkidar Chor Hai’ used with disastrous effect in the 2019 elections have ebbed. But the daily naming of Adani-Ambani only puts off the corporate class. The fact is that both prospered during the times Gandhi’s party was in power. In any case, the corporate class wants and needs Modi and fears his government. Personal attack is bad politics and since no party, especially in the opposition, can do without money, also bad economics.

By contrast, AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal has shed personal attacks, despite being fully besieged, what with many of his aides in jail, many more being pursued and an arrest threat looming over his head. He and his party may be accused of many things, but by and large, not of polluting the discourse.

The ill effect of personal attack and abuse, not just to the opposition but to society as a whole is real. Sharad Pawar has said that Modi is the first prime minister to go to opposition-ruled states for election campaign and launch personal attacks on the chief ministers. Home Minister Amit Shah also doubles down with allegations even as the central investigation agencies are working on them. Pawar calls it a sign of desperation and fear of a loss by the duo, but that may be more of poll rhetoric. The counter to and course correction forced on the government has come from the judiciary, not from the political class.

Modi’s aggressive attacks on his critics, in and out of parliament and with or without elections, have attracted counter-attacks that have tended to be personal. This tit-for-tat has vitiated public discourse. Unsurprisingly, the BJP has accused the opposition of launching “personal attacks” on Modi. The party’s political resolution in January this year accused the Opposition of running “a negative campaign” over several issues against the government and launching “personal attacks” on Modi. The two have been mixed. In a democracy, this is unacceptable.

The BJP and its government would like to term any criticism of the government, even on policy issues, as “personal attacks”. If it is on a foreign policy issue, the party officials have dubbed the critics “anti-national.” This precludes any criticism, however valid and factual.

When it comes to personal attacks, the attacker(s) and the target(s) can vary with time and with the situation. C P Joshi, then a Congressman, had in 2019 said that Modi, belonging to a “low caste and not a Brahmin”, was not qualified to talk of Hinduism. He now heads the BJP in Rajasthan.

Crass political speeches are self-inflicted wounds on the society and the republic that under the Constitution, promises freedom, justice and other noble virtues of public order. The truth is that people as a whole, are not vindictive, communal or sexist. They respond to what is fed to them.

Who will set the standards of a decent public discourse in these polarised times?

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmil.com

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Illegal Immigrants

Illegal Immigrants – The Dark Side of The Wall

By Mahendra Ved

Human migration forced by armed conflict is acquiring new and menacing dimensions as the world gets increasingly polarised. It needs talking since the discourse is predominantly about victory and defeat amidst daily reports of more and more arms pouring in. Human suffering has become a captive of the blame game. Even crocodile tears have dried up.

The Gaza crisis is poised for a decisive ‘resolution’ with the Israeli forces likely to over-run that strip of unfortunate land by the end of this month. Of prime concern over the longer term should be addressing the needs of over 200,000 people who have no home to return to. With aerial strikes continuing across Gaza, over two-thirds of the total population – about 1.5 million people – are currently internally displaced. Their number is rising by the day.

Nearly 6 million refugees fleeing Ukraine are recorded across Europe, while an estimated 8 million others had been displaced within the country by late May 2022. These are old figures but think of ninety per cent of Ukrainian refugees being women and children.

With these two conflicts raging, little attention is given to Yemen. 21.6 million need aid, including 11 million children, and more than 4.5 million are displaced. Yemen hosts around 99,877 refugees and asylum seekers, 70 per cent of whom are Somali and 20 per cent Ethiopian.

Being forced to move from the proverbial frying pan to the fireplace are 1.7 million Afghans who are unregistered as refugees in Pakistan. Many were born in Pakistan. Many had fled Afghanistan to escape the Taliban rule. They must return to a country they either do not know or detest.

These are conflict zones. But take India. Reports point to the rising craze to migrate, come what may, and the risks involved. Illustrative is the family of Brijkumar Yadav of Gujarat’s Gandhinagar. Trying to enter the US from Mexico, he climbed up the Trump Wall — the former US President built it to block illegal migration, but has failed — he fell on the Mexican side. His wife fell on the American side and died, leaving a 3-year-old child.

A Times of India report said that the number of people trying to illegally enter the US could be much higher. A Gujarat Police official said that for every one person caught at the border, there could be 10 others who have managed to cross into the US.

Collating information from Gujarat and New Delhi, the report also said that residents of Gujarat and Punjab aspiring to settle in the US are in significant numbers among the illegal migrants. What makes people from these relatively better-off parts of India risk entering foreign lands illegally? Is it their wanderlust, or enterprise that has characterised their progress through the centuries? Or is it that they are the marginalised lot who have been left out of the economic progress? This needs wider, deeper research and debate by experts in many disciplines.

ALSO READ: Kabootarbazi – Inside India’s Immigration Racket

The people arrested are classified into four categories — single adults, unaccompanied children, children accompanied by family members and entire families. The figures include 700 unaccompanied children. Logic defies their presence. Either they were pushed there by their parents or were duped by greedy travel agents who operate as a network.

However, single adults are the largest category. The end of pandemic-era border policy Title 42 in May this year led to a surge in illegal immigration which was earlier prevented by the ruling which allowed the US to deport illegal immigrants without asylum hearings.

The larger burden of this essay, however, is that while India aspires to be “Vishwa Guru”, within the global count, Indians have a significant presence among illegal migrants. According to US Customs and Border Protection data, a record-breaking 96,917 Indians were apprehended while unlawfully crossing into the US between October 2022 and September 2023. This marks a fivefold increase compared to 2019-2020.

In September this year alone, 8,076 Indians were arrested by US law enforcement agencies. Of the total, 3,059 Indians were arrested from the US-Canada border alone, data from the US Customs and Border Protection has shown. The figure for September is the highest in a month in the period between October 2022 and September 2023.

This writer has visited Tijuana town on the Mexico-US border. Its emergence as an IT industry hub in recent years has not changed its old reputation. American mothers take their children to show them what poverty is. Looking at the dust and dirt, I heard a child tell the mother, “Mama, yuk yuk.” At the border barely two kilometres away, the US tries to block thousands seeking to cross into its territory, every day or rather, every night. The American side, at San Diego, has armed border guards and police in military-style formation trying to prevent illegal entrants. America’s border is snow-bound on the Canadian side in the north. But nothing deters desperate entrants. Whether they succeed or fail, many lose their lives, limbs and their dear ones. Their conditions as they await being pushed into America by touts are miserable.

The Indian “boat people” are not confined to Europe and America. Even in Southeast Asia at the other end of the globe, many who go as tourists or on family visits, end up as casual workers and throw away their passports. Unsurprisingly, these people are unwelcome.

Surprising though this may seem, research in the US, at least,  shows that illegal immigrants increase the size of its economy, contribute to economic growth, enhance the welfare of natives, contribute more in tax revenue than they collect, reduce American firms’ incentives to offshore jobs and import foreign-produced goods. They benefit consumers by reducing the prices of goods and services.

Economists estimate that the legalization of the illegal immigrant population would increase the immigrants’ earnings and consumption considerably, and increase U.S. gross domestic product. There is scholarly consensus that illegal immigrants commit less crime than natives and that immigration enforcement has no impact on crime rates.

Despite the pluses and minuses, it is worrying that this phenomenon is gaining more and more traction. A world that is combating numerous crises — all of them self-created — has little time and no sympathy for those leaving their homes, often with women and children — trying to sneak into another country. Such people, assuming that they survive the harsh travel and the hide-and-seek, are treated by the local law as criminals. But given the growing disparities, this is unlikely to change.

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Bobby Remains Fascinating @ Fifty

By Mahendra Ved

Half a century’s hindsight affords an advantage, though unfair, to view an event with warts and all. The film ‘Bobby’ (1973), opens itself to a critical view, without impacting its popularity, the near-cult status it enjoys and the nostalgia of generations.

So, one begins with a little regret and stating without being judgmental, going only by published records and not gossip and rumours that the film world generates. It may or may not have been the first, but its success set the trend for many things that have become the norm today.

It came when socially and even politically relevant Hindi films, Garm Hawa for one, were being made and would experience release and experience issues, besides production costs. With massive publicity, Bobby’s puppy love story came dressed up as “sublime love.”

Politically, India was in rich-versus-poor ferment. Bobby projected no class struggle. It had two well-off families fighting for their respective pride. But socially, it bridged the religious divide by showing a romance between a Hindu boy and a Roman Catholic girl. Both these phenomena have witnessed massive churning and change in the last 50 years.

But as cinema, after what Bobby did to “Romeo and Juliet”, not officially claimed but touted, the country had to wait decades to witness Vishal Bharadwaj’s Indian adaptations of three tragedies by William Shakespeare: Maqbool (2003) from Macbeth, Omkara (2006) from Othello, and Haider (2014) from Hamlet. No reflection on the filmgoers of those times and these. To each generation its own.

As film writer Bhawana Somaaya records: “When the Sixties ended, Hindi films became increasingly entertainment-oriented and so full of mindless masala, that the Seventies saw a whole movement coming up in rebellion—what is now remembered as the Parallel or Art Cinema movement. This was the time when cinema was clearly divided into Art and Commerce and Middle-of-the-the-Road, and each had its followers.”

Bobby’s success set the trend for debut launches, especially of children of established stars. This is a never-ending debate. Although not the first, Raj Kapoor’s success with Rishi Kapoor was followed by Sunil Dutt (Sanjay), Dharmendra (the Deol brothers) and many more. The Kapoor family itself has four generations. The accusation is that they block ‘outsiders’. But let it be said that only the better ones of both types – and lucky ones, given the uncertainties of filmmaking, film marketing and the audience’s reception – have survived. Given India’s traditional father/mother often transfers legacy to son/daughter, neither the star launches nor the debate for and against them is likely to end.

Certainly not the first or the last, Bobby encouraged the purchasing of film awards. Here, one is going by Rishi Kapoor’s memoir, aptly titled “Khullam khulla”. He confessed to having ‘bought’ an award and was ‘ashamed’ about it. That left Amitabh Bachchan sulking because he was hoping to get it for ‘Zanjeer,’ Rishi said.

“I am sure he felt the award was rightfully his for Zanjeer, which was released the same year. I am ashamed to say it, but I actually ‘bought’ that award. I was so naïve. There was this PRO, Taraknath Gandhi, who said to me, ‘Sir, tees hazaar de do, toh aap ko main award dila doonga.’ I am not the manipulative sort but I admit that I gave him the money without thinking,” Rishi Kapoor writes in his memoir.

ALSO READ: Pakeezah – The Courtesan’s Classic

Rishi writes of how his ‘serious’ friendship with a girl ended when Stardust magazine wrote of his ‘romance’ with Bobby’s co-star Dimple Kapadia, although she was married to Rajesh Khanna and was even pregnant before Bobby was released.

Since then, the film paparazzi, like those in politics, business and all other spheres of public activity, have successfully emulated the global trend of digging for information, right or otherwise, at times in connivance with those looking for publicity or to settle scores. The social media has pushed that many times over.

Bobby came when India was socially conservative. People who then experienced their adolescence pangs and pleasures have, at its 50th anniversary (September 28), confessed to enjoying the Rishi-Dimple romance on the screen, keeping it a secret from their scandalised elders.  This is universal and timeless – again, to each generation its own. The trend has only been bucked by the fast-spreading culture spawned by not only films but much that is available, at home without going to a cinema theatre, on the OTT (over-the-top) platforms. Significantly, this has bloomed despite the political conservatism currently sweeping India.

Bobby came when Urdu/Hindustani dialogue and lyrics were still the norm in cinema that later evolved as ‘Bollywood’. Not the pioneer again, it set the trend for urbanised Hindi, even the one laced with Konkani spoken by Prem Nath who played a Bombay fisherman. It pushed away the flowery language in which the hero serenaded the heroine.

Bobby’s songs, all of them chart-busters, had a variety ranging from Konkani folk (“Ghey ghey re saheba”), to Punjabi-philosophical folk (“Beshak mandir masjid todo”) to the north Indian (“Jhooth Boley Kauwa Katey”). Incidentally, Raj Kapoor ended his 25-year musical collaboration with Shankar-Jaikishan, switching to another duo, Laxmikant Pyarelal. But while he broke away from Mukesh to have Shailendra Singh sing for Rishi, he had to mend professional fences with Lata Mangeshkar to sing for Dimple.

If the name ‘Bobby’ itself gained wider currency in India, unwittingly, the film was also the forerunner of the present era of brands and branding. A motorbike produced by a family firm related to the Kapoors hugely succeeded when marketed as ‘Bobby’ bike riding on which Raj and Bobby escape their angry parents from Bombay to Goa. Everything from soap to hair clips also sold better with the Bobby tag.  

Bobby’s success brought the RK Studios back to life. It launched Rishi’s romantic-hero career and a second one on retirement bringing out the best in him. And Dimple, although marriage and family kept her away from cinema, staged a comeback that is still thriving.

Rishi confirms that Raj Kapoor, already in huge debt after Mera Naam Joker had flopped, needed a life-saver. He did not have the money for Rajesh Khanna, Sharmila Tagore and Mumtaz who were keen to work with him. This proved a blessing. He found an actor from within the family. What the film would have been with the reigning stars of that era, even if successful, would have been run-of-the-mill. We would not have been introduced to teenage love. That makes the film a landmark, no less, in Indian Cinema.

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Waheeda And Dev Anand – A Reunion of Sorts

By Mahendra Ved

If time can be measured in terms of the past merging with the present, it occurred with the honouring of two ‘timeless’ personalities last week. Whether anyone in the government planned it or not, the coincidence was too delicious to be missed.

The announcement of the Dadasaheb Phalke Award to Waheeda Rehman on Dev Anand’s birth centenary is a fitting tribute to two of the Indian cinema’s most enduring personalities. She was before the camera, yet again, to express her happiness at this.

It is also significant for both. Waheeda began her Hindi cinema career with C.I.D. one of Dev Anand’s landmark, albeit under-rated films. Of their six other films together, Kala Bazar had a perfect mix of romance and social commentary, a recurring theme in their cinematic journey. Arguably though, Waheeda is the most significant of Dev’s co-stars from among the numerous heroines, from Suraiya to Tina Munim.

Like Guru Dutt whose find she was, Waheeda also inspired confidence in Dev. She almost didn’t do Guide as director Vijay Anand felt she was unsuitable. Only Dev’s perseverance made her part of the film that all three were proud of. “Guide is not just my most iconic film. It is also Dev’s most celebrated work,” Waheeda has aptly said.

Mostly S D Burman-composed, songs linked Dev and Waheeda and are sung even today. Both set fashion trends till a globalised India emerged at the turn of the century.

Guide remains a landmark for Indian cinema. Dev transformed from a swashbuckling tourist guide to a ‘feminist’ who stands by a married woman in trouble before actually falling in love. He is her promoter who becomes insecure as she takes charge of her life. And finally, he is an accidental philosopher who personifies the Bhagwad Geeta’s message.

Given his self-created Westernised image, none among his fans and critics expected Dev to pull off the last part the way he did. It was as much brother Vijay’s triumph considering he bounced back to directing Shammi Kapoor, a role that Dev almost bagged, in Teesri Manzil the next year.

No matter what novelist R K Narayan, thought of his literary creation on celluloid (he called it “Misguided Guide”), the theme and its treatment by the Anand brothers were well ahead of their time. Waheeda performs with grace the difficult role of a married woman fulfilling her life’s ambition using another man’s support but does not stand by him when he falters. That ‘Rosie/Nalini’ got the Filmfare Award that year over ‘Debjani’ in Mamata played by another stalwart, Suchitra Sen, is also significant.

As it happens, be it in personal life or professional, the two lost touch in Dev’s last years. But she kept track of Dev’s compulsive latter-day film-making, most of which flopped being an exercise in self-indulgence. When he died in 2011, Waheeda said: “Without meaning any disrespect to him, I’d like to say that as the years went by Dev’s script sense went more and more haywire. I think he got too involved with himself. Dev was a very good producer. But he needed to look out for better scripts.”

ALSO READ: Sahir – The Poet of The Underdog

If personal asides be forgiven, I began my writing career by converting ‘points’ furnished by Waheeda’s PR man into a readable piece. She telephoned and I earned my editor’s first pat on the back. The present is her moment at the Phalke Award. When Dev received it, although reporting on a ‘routine’ event, unusually earned me a by-line at the Times of India.

The most appropriate film clip to go with the award ceremony was of Mein Zindagi Ka Saath Nibhata Chala Gaya. It was thought of by then Information Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad. These hope-as-heaven-and-hell lines written by Sahir Ludhianvi and composed by Jaidev remain relevant for all times to come.

To touch upon the trivia that matters, Dev not only acted and behaved young – remarkably, he looked young for long years when camera techniques and de-ageing processes did not exist. An American journalist meeting him on the sets called him “what Indians call fair complexioned”. Given the Indian fetish for fair complexion, Waheeda required a different layer of make-up than her north Indian counterparts. It was the same as Raj Kapoor with Vyjayanthimala or Padmini. Today, not that Indians have changed their preferences, but these techniques have largely ended this apartheid.

Waheeda was conscious that she had acting and dancing skills, but not the glamour to sustain her in films. She switched to purposeful roles quite early in her career. For Satyajit Ray’s Abhijaan, she waived her fees and committed to an uninterrupted shooting schedule.

She partnered with top men of her time impacting their careers as well as hers. She was the underdog, a fallen woman, to a well-heeled Mala Sinha in Pyasa. Saheb Bibi Aur Ghulam was as much her film as it was Meena Kumari’s. For all the thematic and technical wizardry and their brilliant performances, Kagaz Ke Phool, a landmark in Guru Dutt’s career, flopped. She contributed to recovery with Chaudahvin Ka Chand. She was definitely his muse and leaving behind the talk of her role in his family life, it is not difficult to guess how her career would have evolved had Guru Dutt lived longer.

Besides Dev, she was the perfect foil to Dilip Kumar in Dil Diya Dard Liya, Ram aur Shyam and Aadmi. With Raj Kapoor she shone in a multi-layered role in Teesri Kasam and Sunil Dutt in Reshma Aur Shera and Mujhe Jeene Do. With Raaj Kumar, it was Neelkamal and she outshone Rajesh Khanna in Khamoshi. No matter the age these roles placed her in, she was the compassionate figure that Indian audiences adored.

As young India grows older, nostalgia is gripping the minds of young and old. To borrow a paragraph from what celebrated writer Santosh Desai observed when Dev Anand passed away in 2011: “Old legends can carry the past gracefully, or become its embarrassment; Dev Anand’s unique ability was to speak of the past as if it were present and to act in the present as if it were the past. He spoke of his latest film Chargesheet with the same enthusiasm as he did of a film like Guide; to him, they were both accounts of a present — separated by a few decades.”

When Zeenat Aman, 71, is busy giving interviews, it is nice to see Waheeda, 85 and Vyjayanthimala, 90, amidst us.

The writer may be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Many A Bump On India-Middle East-Europe Corridor

By Mahendra Ved

The initial response was positive. Israel’s Benyamin Netanyahu called the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) as the “largest cooperation project in history”. In a deft move, the United States dispatched its envoy to Pakistan to visit Gwadar Port, at the southern end of the rival China-Pakistan Corridor (CPEC). All applauded the MOU signed alongside the G20 summit, from Joe Biden to host Narendra Modi.

Undoubtedly, because it was floated by Biden, the idea was widely welcomed. The ceremony was attended by the leaders of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, the European Union, Italy, France and Germany. Everyone keen to ‘contain’ China joined what would now need a closer look and a coherent, collective follow-up.

Connecting an emerging powerhouse like India with Europe is a dream that has been nurtured for centuries. Linking it further across the Atlantic would be a win-win for all. But ifs and buts have cropped up way too soon about the feasibility of the nascent project.

While diplomatic analysts visualise numerous strategic and territorial obstacles, the economists find it is not feasible. Better and cheaper alternatives, are already available along the waterways or can be forged without cutting through mountains on the Arabian Peninsula to reach Greece, one of the weakest of European economies. All trade between India and Europe, anyway takes place via the sea route, passing through the Suez Canal. Questions arise about whether this corridor can better the Suez route or can attract more takers than the CPEC that it is widely perceived as competing with.

Unlike the BRI, which is aimed at securing China’s access to natural resources and building more direct trade and transport links among countries in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Middle East, IMEEC is much smaller in scale and so far, does not include African, Central Asian, Southeast Asian or other South Asian countries besides India.

The “new spice route” is a bridge too far. It is even a “bridge too late” and could duplicate the BRI’s effort. In its 10th year, BRI has seen more than 150 countries and upward of 30 international organizations sign cooperation agreements with China. The CPEC, its flagship, is also ten years old. Despite mutual disputes, slow and lopsided progress in Pakistan and security challenges for both, have at least met China’s objective of accessing the energy-rich Gulf. Assuming the IMPEEC takes off, its success will largely depend upon how many BRI members will be ready to switch to it to make it cost-effective.

ALSO READ: Belt Road Initiative – A Blessing or A Curse?

Undoubtedly, India stands to gain. For one, it can hope to circumvent the ‘wall’ of the volatile Afghanistan-Pakistan to reach West and Central Asia. But it has also to circumvent the objections, real or subtle, of its Western allies.

Take Chabahar Port which has languished because the Americans do not like Iran’s Ayatollahs. The US not only curbed the Indo-Iran ties but also scared away Japan and the ADB who were keen to invest in this corridor at one stage. The new corridor will require billions in consistent investment, over a long period to fructify and bring benefits to all participants.

At the diplomatic level, is a highly polarised world ready for it? Is the proposed corridor an American / Western response to China’s brokering peaceful ties between Riyadh and Tehran?

India has good ties with the Middle East and would need to stay neutral against the moves of those more powerful. The IMPEEC favours the UAE (Jebel Ali) and Israel (Haifa) but keeps out Egypt and Iran, two major players in the region. At the ground – or sea level — for India, loading-off-loading would mean multiple handling and container charges, among other levies, at every terminal and transhipment point.

At the political level, both Biden and Modi are looking at elections next year. Is the MOU a diplomatic harbinger for mutual political benefits? Modi is forever looking to consolidate his political domination to win a third term. Biden, while battling China in the global arena, needs to score a major point, especially after China took credit for the Saudi-Iran rapprochement in what was once an Anglo-American backyard. Although a Trump legacy, Biden has yet to live down the cumbersome evacuation from Afghanistan that has weakened the Western presence in the region.

As for India, to be able to see through a multi-billion project like the IMPEEC from its end, it has to constantly worry about its allies even more than its adversaries. The US/West have constantly pushed it to the defensive on human rights issues. Ukraine remains a major irritant, despite the G20 resolution, as India will continue to trade with Russia. Not strictly an ally, Turkey’s Erdogan, while at G20 lent qualified support to India getting a permanent place on the UN Security Council. But within days, he attacked India, yet again, on the Kashmir dispute.

Think of developments across this month. Emerging from the success of the G20 summit (and of its moon mission), India has been pilloried by these very allies in the new confrontation with Canada. Like Ukraine, this is not likely to go away anytime soon.

The world is informed daily of the counter-offensive against the Russians in Ukraine. The US-led alliance is keeping its war-like determination and its chin up. If it doesn’t produce the desired results, will “Ukraine fatigue”, like it had happened in Afghanistan, set in at some stage?

Beyond the initial official enthusiasm, it is not surprising to see a more considered response that underscores patience and the need to invest wisely in this long-term project.  India has seen interest in many transnational projects like the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas grid rise and fade with shifting economic interests and changing strategic goalposts. Economists have already dampened the diplomats’ enthusiasm, for politicians to take note. Overall, it means putting the money where the mouth is.

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Communal Hatred In The Classroom

By Mahendra Ved

India, it is said, is where extremes and contradictions are colliding all the time. One thought one was shock-proof, but it was not enough, to witness in the wake of the successful Chandrayan-3 landing on the moon, a school teacher asking students to slap a seven-year-old boy. And, after his tear-filled face went red with multiple hits, on his bare behind.

A fact-check journalist has been arrested for revealing the boy’s name. Given a clue, the authorities in Khubbapur village, district Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, may well get hold of the person who shot the damning video or for naming the school and its owner-teacher.

Her defence of the act is ingenious: she asks other students to take turns slapping the boy because she is handicapped. No remorse. There is not even a defence for enforcing corporal punishment which is, anyway, illegal. The ‘Mohammedan’ students were incapable of learning, she said exhorting her proxy perpetrators.

The victim is a member of the largest minority community that has of late become fair game for anyone in authority, as well as the groups of vigilantes who enforce their street power. The law, if there is an outcry, takes its own slow, tedious course. In this case, the communal angle is excluded and she has been charged with non-cognizable offences. Familiar, again, are pressures on the family of the victim to reach a ‘compromise’ – in short let the lady off the hook in this case – or else, threats follow.

The outcry is because someone has filmed the crime and when it goes viral, it reduces its deniability. Salute to social media, despite its million faults. Almost always, the perpetrators/accused say the film is tampered. The action, the reaction and the remedy run on a familiar course. Regrettably, the political course is also getting increasingly normal.

Familiar, yet again, is caste and political considerations. They have brought the ruling BJP on the same page with many of the opposition bunch with stakes in Western UP, keen to garner votes of the lady’s powerful caste. Where does this caravan of crime and consensual compromise end?

The incident is set against a larger backdrop. A Delhi school teacher is also accused of hate rants against Muslims in her classroom. A constable kills four on a running train and delivers a hate speech stomping the body of one of the victims. An increasing political polarisation is steadily trickling into public and private spaces across India.

ALSO READ: Toxic Environs (No, It Is Not About Pollution)

One would have thought that lessons might be learnt from a non-issue like Muslim girls wearing hijab to school contributing to the electoral outcome in Karnataka where it played out. Obviously, one was being naïve. It has only radicalised and polarised the situation further, far and wide. This is evident in Nuh, Haryana, where people have been killed and maimed and their homes bulldozed, prompting the country’s apex court to question the objective and the objectivity that guided the latter action of clearing illegal encroachment.

The scene is becoming murkier and is giving forthcoming electoral contests a new edge. It circumscribes debates in between elections and in media where cacophony has come to rule. With few exceptions, media houses, small and big, are involved, for political favours, ad revenue and the TRPs.

Boosted by social media (the seamy side of the same coin), there are many more incentives for promoting views that veer to the extremes and stay firmly there, than for positions that reflect reason and sobriety, much less openness and tolerance. Sadly, the elections and 24×7 electioneering have come to mean little else in this world’s largest democracy.

The slap-the-boy incident is a new phenomenon in that what was confined to political issues, faith, caste and region, has now come down to the children and their schooling. A classroom, one thought, is sacrosanct and we still remember the school and the teachers who educated us. What is taught and what is learnt in it stretches into the future.

Sadly, the experience of punishment and the open airing of prejudices have become normal, even socially and politically correct these days. This sends out troubling signals for future citizens.  A troubled childhood could be the recipe for future actions that may not be conducive to society. The present may be sowing poisonous seeds that can only grow poisonous fruits.

Media reports another incident in Kathua that also occurred last week, in which a Muslim teacher in a government school reportedly beat up a student for writing “Jai Shri Ram” on the blackboard. This cannot be justified either. But it does not cancel out the Muzaffarnagar outrage — it only adds to it, and to a series of such incidents that betray, not mindless violence prompted by the social volatility, but one that also conforms to a political agenda.

To return to the terrain that wreaks of unnerving familiarity, it is likely that such incidents may get cancelled out by compromises that competing political forces may strike. It is also likely that after initial indignation, the episode, like numerous others before, may be forgotten.

The media have this thing about causing ‘fatigue’ to its readers/ viewers over an unpleasant incident, and move on, happily lapping up the seemingly delicious distractions that the people in power dish out. The “khao-piyo-aish-karo” is a convenient recipe for a media that entertains more than informs or educates. This may be the end for the Muzaffarnagar and Kathua incidents, like others that have happened before, to fade out or the public memory – which is short, anyway.

The responsibility to counter the brutalisation of the classroom must be owned by civil society, of course, but the onus is primarily on the political leadership, and especially the government that seeks to educate the whole world. This is essential because, God forbid, more such incidents could take place as India goes for multiple elections in the next nine or ten months.

Such incidents recur in the silence and ambivalence that settles around them, after a perfunctory show of indignation. They repeat themselves in the spaces vacated by a political system that ignores them to seek short-term gains.

The basic worry persists. What type of future citizens are we nurturing today when hatred and ‘othering’ of a region, caste or faith are promoted?

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Living With The Taliban

Living With The Taliban

By Mahendra Ved

Two years after it evacuated from Afghanistan, the United States is still analysing the consequences of engaging militarily in a nation/region and those that entail withdrawal, with “lessons for the future,” as per the latest report submitted to the US Congress by US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan John F Spocko.

More detailed and forthright is the response of former US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ryan Crocker. He said at the congressional hearing: “The first is to be careful about what you get into. Military interventions bring consequences.., consequences that we cannot even imagine, let alone plan for.” The second lesson was that “a withdrawal can have consequences as far-reaching and as serious as those of an intervention.., (as) we simply cede the field to our adversaries.”

One can only hope that this wisdom by hindsight would help in future, given America’s penchant for intervention and compulsion to stay on top of the global power game.

Crocker lists the “third lesson” of the need for “strategic patience.” The US failure to do so in Afghanistan, he said, had “its greatest impact… next door in Pakistan” where “allies came to fear our lack of strategic patience.” Crocker is wrong here and adds to the American delusion. Pakistan sheltered the Taliban for two decades hoodwinking the world and facilitated their return. Then Prime Minister Imran Khan called the US exit “freedom from slavery”. Far from gaining any “strategic depth”, it is running back to the US “to combat terrorism and ensure regional stability.” The US may oblige, without direct intervention. So, here we go again!

Zalmay Khalilzad midwifed the 2020 Doha Agreement with the Taliban because Donald Trump wanted to “bring the boys home” in time for his presidential re-election. ‘Boys’ returned, badly bruised, under Joe Biden. Khalilzad proposed that Afghan politicians, now living in exile, return to their country, “make a unity government and negotiate with the Taliban.” One may ask if he would risk returning to Kabul to be part of the talks with the ‘good’ Taliban.

American media and think tank reports indicate that the US thinks the Taliban may be “more willing to oblige now than ever before,” because of the growing rivalry between them and other militants, particularly the ISIS-K. Again, this delusionary vision needs to be cleared with some more introspection. Although threatened, the Taliban are unlikely to beg the world community for help.

Kabul has recently appealed only for “more transparent” dealing by the world, which can be interpreted as diplomatic recognition. But there is not even a hint in the address by their chief, Heibatullah Akhundzada, about sharing power with anyone, or a better deal for women. On both scores, the Taliban, perhaps, consider themselves as more Muslims than others. The Islamic nations are extremely wary, not for lack of solidarity but for the Taliban’s threat potential.

ALSO READ: How To Deal With A Stubborn Taliban

Other than this, the world cannot but worry on two counts: the abject poverty of the Afghan people, a majority of whom, as per the UN, do not get enough food and medical help. And as the Taliban must, Afghanistan has become a terror hub whose impact can go well beyond its borders and the region. The ISIS-K has relocated from West Asia and Al Qaida operates directly and through affiliates from Arab and Central Asian militant groups.

More experienced than they were and more cautious, but the Taliban are not very different from what they were when in power (1996-2001). There have been 51 bans on women, stymying their normal existence and taking away whatever freedom they gained during the Soviet era of the 1980s and the US-one during 2002-2021.

A mix of defiance and resignation pervades in Kabul. Those in government are under the firm control of their ideological mentors in Kandahar. They are ready to sit out for any recognition that would have to come on their terms.

The Taliban have shown tactical patience in warding off global pressures amidst poverty and isolation. Despite the obvious advantage, Pakistan enjoys as the principal provider of access to the world outside, a landlocked Afghanistan has sought to leverage its position. For one, it wants to bargain any cooperation on reining in the marauding Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) by seeking larger trade and more trading points on the border. For Kabul, the TTP is a point of leverage against Islamabad. The latter, so far, has no clue how to tackle the TTP, with or without Kabul’s cooperation.

In a bitter irony, Pakistan’s Ambassador to US Masood Khan has said that the TTP and other militant groups were using weapons left behind by US troops for attacking targets in Pakistan. As per American media reports, the US forces left behind $7billion worth of military equipment and weapons, including firearms, communications gear, and even armoured vehicles. While Kabul enjoys the bigger booty, small arms and ammunition are used by the TTP to make violent forays targeting Pakistani security forces.

The Kabul rulers treat TTP, whose fighters had fought alongside in 2021 as ideological brothers and guests – the same sentiment that made them host Osama bin Laden and his successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri. The US eliminated the latter with Pakistani logistic support. That, despite denials by Islamabad and silence by Washington, is likely to continue.

Retired Pakistani diplomat Ashraf Jahangir Qazi writes in Dawn (August 17, 2023): “Mullah Akhundzada also asks pertinent questions. Why out of Afghanistan’s six neighbours only Pakistan, which has fenced almost its entire border, complain of terrorism from Afghanistan? Is it because Pakistan cannot contain the TTP which actually operates from inside Pakistan with on-and-off support from certain quarters?” For obvious reasons, Qazi does not elaborate on “certain quarters” that are doubly betrayed, by the Taliban and the TTP.

As the US loses strategic space, the net gainer is China. The Afghan-China border trade via the Wakhan Corridor is set to begin even as Kabul seeks Chinese investment in copper mining and energy/infrastructure projects. With Pakistan, its biggest ally in the region, China is working to extend the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to Afghanistan. Even if fraught with security risks and heavy investment, the ‘CPAEC’ opens new vistas for China. Pakistan wants it extended to Turkey as well. Even a partial success of all these plans cannot leave Afghanistan untouched.

This may seem far-fetched today – so was the CPEC – but fits into China’s plans in the vast region where its economic footprint can grow wider. Deft diplomatic moves in facilitating an Iran-Saudi Arabian rapprochement earlier this year have shown that China can pull off successes in areas that the West for long considered its backyard.

Two years of Taliban are but a speck in Afghanistan’s long history as the crossroad of invaders and emperors, conquerors, scholars, builders and travellers. Sadly, however, peace has eluded its people. There is no idea how many more generations will have to suffer.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

Mukesh – A Tragic Voice That Tickles The Heart

By Mahendra Ved

As we progress into this century, the Hindi cinema of what is called its “golden age” (late 1940-mid 1960s) and thereabouts, is being celebrated, more than its many iconic films, through its music. Arguably though, songs have lingered on while the films of that era are considered slow today. Many viewers skip the scenes and fast-forward to the songs that have survived the onslaught of time and changing tastes better.

Mukesh (Mukesh Chand Mathur) whose centenary is being celebrated, excelled in that era. Along with his contemporaries whose birth centenaries will soon come – Talat Mahmood next February, Mohammed Rafi in December 2024, Lata Mangeshkar and Kishore Kumar in 2029 – while Manna Dey’s in 2019 went unremembered – he is part of the multi-million nostalgia factory that thrives wherever Hindi/Hindustani/Urdu is understood.

Why Mukesh matters today and may do so in future? One word is empathy in our increasingly impersonal times. Devdas clones do abound but are seemingly frowned upon in a fast-moving world. Mukesh’s songs exuded plenty of empathy to record the heartache of a jilted lover or one who had given up on life. It was considered perfectly okay to be rueing one’s fate.

We are talking of the age when pathos came silhouetted in black-and-white and came through good verse by the best poets of that era, composed in good classical-based music. That music was and remains universal. But the old ethos is gone. Arguably, in the race for westernization and globalization, Indian music, like cinema, has lost its niche.

Another sentiment that went with those times was romance. It was expressed in abundance, but less explicitly, when a mere gesture of a hand or bashful lowering of the lady’s eyes sufficed. On the other extreme, it meant running around the tree, if far removed from day-to-day life. Mukesh crooned for almost all the leading men from Dilip Kumar to Amitabh Bachchan – just as Lata Mangeshkar did for the heroines. He could express their many moods in many situations.

On patriotic songs, Mukesh had healthy competition but he didn’t have to raise his pitch to be heard. Recall Hum Hindustani composed by Usha Khanna, Aa ab laut chalein or those he sang for Manoj Kumar, making a significant contribution to the image change from the romantic to ‘Bharat’.

He was the feel-good guy (Dum Dum Diga diga, Man daudne lagta hai). He could be philosophical (aasmaan pe hai khuda au zameen pe hum) or naughty (Main Nashe mein hun). But he remains better known for his many tragic numbers (Mujhe tumse kuchh bhi na chahiye, Aansu bhari hai).

It was not easy. The man from old Delhi did well amidst arrival post-Partition, of the Punjabi exuberance and the soulful Rabindra Sangeet. He did well without undergoing the vocal grind under known Ustads. He recorded fewer songs than his contemporaries but proportionately, is estimated to have given more hits than others.

Goodness is not confined to any cinema, society or era. It came naturally to Mukesh for he was reputedly, a good man as much as a good singer. If nothing else, he didn’t court controversies. He helped out needy families and sang at family gatherings of dear ones.

ALSO READ: Dadamony, The Actor Who Could Do No Wrong

Mukesh happened to Raj Kapoor at the outset of his career and remained unchallenged all through Kapoor’s acting years. Of the 1,300-odd songs that he sang over three decades, 110 were crooned for Kapoor. Mukesh lent voice to Shailendra or Hasrat Jaipuri lyrics, 133 of which were composed by Shankar-Jaikishan. It was the most formidable team in highly competitive times, winning Mukesh three of the four Filmfare Awards.

This combination went well with Kapoor’s smiling face hiding suffering in a Chaplinsque persona. It was a heady mix as much for an aspirational India as for many an enslaved nation that gained independence and those in Europe that had just left behind the Stalinist era.

A deeper analysis of Mukesh’s contribution to Kapoor and his Awaara image which has survived generations, would need separate space. When Mukesh died in 1976, prematurely at 53, the man who in turn made Mukesh’s voice globally heard, aptly said that his ‘voice’ had vanished.

All this can be argued, but not the fact that Mukesh was eminently hummable. Everyone thought he could sing a la Mukesh. Requiring little of the high pitch, his songs created amateurs – and bathroom singer types – with varying knowledge of melody and rhythm. In that sense, he was the “people’s singer” in an era when belonging to the ‘people’ carried a political label.

Mukesh was probably not an activist/sympathiser of the Left-leaning Indian Peoples’ Theatre Association (IPTA) which had members among writers and filmmakers of that era. But he responded to a call from composer-writer and IPTA activist Salil Chowdhury for whom he had sung some of his best songs. He performed, gratis, for an event this writer was associated with in the late 1960s.

Mukesh had an audience gathered essentially to hear him. He didn’t speak a word, sang three soulful numbers that were the rage of those times, and a peppy one to lift the audience’s mood. No orchestra – he played the harmonium as singers do, and his own man accompanied him on the tabla. He didn’t even wait to receive a bouquet.

Legend has it that when he sang Dil Jalta Hai, K L Saigal whom he worshipfully emulated, wondered when he (Saigal) had recorded that song, till he was put wise. Mukesh’s fledgling career took off. Two decades later, Mukesh green-signalled Manhar Udhas’ career with Aap se hum ko bichchade huye ek zamana beet gaya that the latter had actually sung as a standby.

Clones do not survive for long and Mukesh had to shed the Saigal influence. Naushad helped him evolve an individual style. But Naushad did not continue with him since Dilip Kumar, for whom Mukesh had sung 20 songs (Andaaz, Madhumati) opted for Rafi.

Out of the studio system, the acting ‘stars’ in the 1950s chose their favourite singers who in turn became stars. Along with Mukesh, Rafi and Lata Mangeshkar also broke free from the old and evolved their own styles to make the era truly ‘golden’.

They and their music dominated society enough to alarm the social and political conservatives of that era. They feared that the age-old classical music was being threatened by film music. But ousted from the state-controlled All India Radio, Hindi film music moved to Radio Ceylon and gained further reach and popularity.

Mukesh has defied generational change. Although he died 47 years back, there are still many who rock to Rook ja oh jane wali, rue over their fate (Mujhe tum se kuchh bhi na chahiye) or live in the hope for Woh subaha kabhi toh ayegi.

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmal.com

Tarla – A Housewife’s Soul Curry

By Mahendra Ved

Moving away from last century’s running-around-the-tree romanticism, Bollywood’s films on over-the-top (OTT) platforms these days can be broadly divided into contemporary fare that is explicit in visuals and words and one that is equally contemporary, but less colourful, and deals with day-to-day challenges that India faces.

Tarla, the latest offering, belongs to the latter category. It is feel-good cinema and is yet thought-provoking. It resonates in the new century despite being ‘inspired’ by last century’s heroine, India’s first food chef, culinary writer and television presenter. It celebrates a woman’s success and conveys multiple messages without sounding preachy.

Tarla Dalal, a Pune-born-Bombay-based Gujarati housewife of the 1960s, is keen to do ‘something’ in life. That ‘something’ she searches for a dozen years, only to find it within herself and in her home.  Through India’s nascent television, she brings into Indian drawing rooms home-cooked vegetarian recipes.

Many of that generation testify how she motivated wannabe working women and housewives alike to view their work with pride, beyond “pleasing their men through their tummies”. She added spice and flavour to their lives when cooking at home was considered just a dutiful domestic chore requiring no skill and hence, having no “market value”. Even a seasoned cook, whether she admits it or not, would want to improve upon her fare. This was where Tarla came in, making television the classroom. Men frowned at it but enjoyed the food fare.

Another admit-it-or-not: in psychological terms, much of India is still the same when it comes to food preferences. People do eat out, for joy or compulsion. But at the end of the day, it is dal-chawal-roti-sabzi. Unsurprising, even elite clubs and many restaurants offer “ghar-jaisa khana.”

The desire to have homemade food, or something close to it, which is different from the preservatives-laden fast food offered by a growing number of outlets and a fast-expanding market of app-based enterprises is, perhaps, not surveyed enough.

How much of India – and the Indian diaspora – is vegetarian is another unending debate. So is the argument about nutrition values that often pit vegetarians against non-vegetarians. But while food habits are dictated by family in the early years, more and more people are willing to – or required to – experiment with at least a partial cross-over. It is a personal choice at the end of the day.

ALSO READ: Biopics – Real Life Stories Retold

Since taste differs from tongue to tongue, Tarla, both in real and reel lives learnt to adapt. Although a staunch vegetarian, she successfully caters to the craze/curiosity among many vegetarians to taste the bird/animal, in the quiet if need be. The man-to-please was at home – her husband Nalin Dalal. After a tantrum, she chooses to innovate. “Moorg musallam” became potato-made “batata-musallam.” Her “Chicken 65” was an early recipe.       

Despite a doting, supportive husband, it wasn’t/isn’t easy for Tarla. Her cookery tuitions are barred by neighbours, while the mill where Nalin works closes down. The couple published the first recipe book in 1974, which failed initially.

Television had begun in Bombay, now Mumbai, in 1972. The next gingerly step was on TV. Tarla speaks with confidence, from her heart, and wins many among the mainly-feminine followers.

It is difficult to think that nearly 50 years back, doing a show for a government-run TV channel, she asked: instead of a woman, why not have a male co-presenter? This writer recalls seeing her TV shows by which time she was a grandmother, the team-mate was a young enthusiast preparing food under her playful direction, making cooking an innovative and easy-to-do task.

The real/reel lives overlap. After being rejected many times, Nalin gets a job in recognition of his now-famous wife and she goes on, as per available records, to write a hundred books, translated into a dozen languages, topping the hard-earned success. Tarla remains the country’s only food presenter to be honoured with a Padmashree in 2007.

The film directed by Piyush Gupta and co-written with Gautam Ved explores the travails of the overworked woman entrepreneur/ celebrity. Ironically, her child rejects food at home and falls sick, while she does TV shows. Her mother sternly asks her to keep the TV show out and be a housewife and mother at home. She is unmoved by the TV show being named after the daughter. It is a stark reminder of how the Indian-American Indra Nooyi came home to announce that she was the new boss of the food and beverage giant Pepsico, only to be told by her mother to fetch milk from the market.

Confronted with the grim reality at home, the husband wavers a bit but as usual, leaves the “final decision” to her, and supports it. It’s a tribute to him, even more than her perseverance. This, too, is commendable since social and working lives have not changed much and require working couples, especially the wives, to adjust at the expense of career prospects and personal egos.

In the mutual harmony that the Dalals forge, the silently suffering man says that he is “not open-minded enough.” It’s too much of a confession for a male in a society that remains largely patriarchal but is changing. Here lies the message for the Indian society – its men and women, as couples and parents. Perhaps, also for this century’s children who have parasitic dependence on their parents.

Like she does the household, Huma Qureshi dominates the show with Shareeb Hashmi playing the husband. In an otherwise excellent performance, Huma cannot shed a tear or two while crying. Hashmi is gentle and submissive to a fault but that makes him the perfect foil. Easy chemistry works between the two and generates the feel-good flavour for which this movie stands out.

Veteran Bharti Achrekar shines in a small role as Tarla’s neighbour-mentor. She provides the gentle push the story needs, just as the raddiwala, whom Tarla watches from her window. It keeps alive her desire to do ‘something’ with life. The scrap seller’s hawking Tarla’s book door-to-door spells enterprise for which Bombay/Mumbai is well known. It adds spice and lends a heightened sense of purpose to the film.

A grandmother who lived in a high-end part of the city, Tarla Dalal passed away a decade back. She sold over 10 million copies. She also ran the largest Indian food website and published a bi-monthly magazine, Cooking & More. Her cooking shows included The Tarla Dalal Show and Cook It Up with Tarla Dalal. Her recipes were published in about 25 magazines and tried in an estimated 120 million Indian homes.

Tarla, the film, happily takes in the inspiration her life exudes.

PS: This writer happily takes inspiration from the film’s co-writer, his son.

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Slave Trade – A Stain That Refuses To Go

By Mahendra Ved

They are part of the past of many countries of origin, and of folklore that is fading into public memory as time moves. India is one of them. They are the unsung part of its diaspora, the world’s largest.

Those captured and shipped out as slaves are conveniently forgotten while India respects their successors, the indentured labour that left the shores with an official nod, never to return. Only, the past captors and the new consent-givers were the same.

Enslaving the weak and the vulnerable as part of the warfare caused by the thirst for territory and power is as old as mankind. But it became a lucrative business in the 17th century. The armed captors came stealthily, riding boats and ships, using the cover of darkness and local help, confident that the law was asleep.

Moving guns with goods for trade, also using religion when and where convenient, European powers colonized the world. They created national borders where none existed, to suit their geo-economic interests. The traders carved out empires where they impoverished the people and divided them into ethnic/faith/regional lines.

That colonial-era slavery is today surfacing across the world, Europe especially, as racism, apartheid and sectarian violence in countries that colonized and their erstwhile colonies alike. Note the shootouts, the terror attacks, the ethnic strife and much that is happening today.

The Empire is striking back as former colonizers struggle to co-exist with their former subjects. While this may be arguable, the recurring violence that is the consequence of colonization is not. And it is only going to escalate with time.

The provocation for writing this is the apology tendered last week by Dutch King Willem-Alexander. He laid a wreath at the slavery monument after apologising for the royal house’s role in slavery and asking forgiveness. Only, it has come on the 150th anniversary of the date when slavery was officially outlawed. And with the ban had come compensation, not for the slaves but for slave owners.

Old records say the Dutch pioneered slavery as “the world’s oldest trade”, soon to be joined by Spain, Portugal, France, Belgium and Britain. The last-named defeated them all in Europe and/or in the distant colonies and became the world’s largest colonizer-Empire builder where, as it was famously said, the sun never set.

ALSO READ: The King And Shashi Tharoor’s Grumbling

To be fair, some European Union members are working to return the precious artefacts their ancestors stole from erstwhile colonies. But there is no such move in evidence in ‘Brexit’ Britain.

Unsurprisingly, sections of the Dutch opinion-makers last week said there is nothing to apologise for. They fear that this might open Pandora’s Box with former slaves and subjects asking for reparation. Didn’t the Britons bristle when India’s Shashi Tharoor held up a stained mirror to them at the 2015 Oxford debate?

India, the ‘jewel’ of the British Empire was perhaps the biggest ‘exporter’ of manpower. The context here is South Asia as, for nearly two centuries, its entire peninsula from Gujarat to the Arakans was the catchment area for slaves – 600,000 as per some estimates.

According to a study by Ruchi Singh for Migrationpolicy.org: “The 1833 abolition of slavery in most parts of the British Empire transformed the colonial system, replacing slavery with indentured servitude. In the eight decades that followed, the United Kingdom relocated millions of bonded Indian workers to colonies across Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean.”

A million ‘girmitiyas’ – those who signed an agreement – found work, but their poverty was replaced by another type with inclement weather and working conditions and what became their permanent separation from home. The story of the slaves and the indentured labour overlaps, with only shades of differences.

On the studied silence on slavery, Hubert Gerbeau has acutely observed, “The specialist in the slave trade is a historian of men and not of merchandise, and he cannot accept the silence of those transported.” While trans-Atlantic slavery from the western African shores to the Americas has been fairly well-documented, the Indian Ocean region is not.

Indeed, the study of how European traders set up ‘factories’ to trade, and forts for protection, took advantage of weak Indian Rajas and turned maritime powers. The competition in trade included the slave trade. It was huge, even though the records of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) cynically put the proportion of the slave trade as merely five per cent of the total.

The Portuguese imported Africans into their Indian colonies on the Konkan coast between about 1530 and 1740. Slavery in India continued through the 18th and 19th centuries. During the colonial era, Indians were taken into different parts of the world as slaves by various European merchant companies as part of the Indian Ocean slave trade. Slavery was prohibited in the possessions of the East India Company by the Indian Slavery Act, of 1843, in French India in 1848, in British India in 1861, and in Portuguese India in 1876.

There is hardly a mention of slavery – from India and by Indians. For, India was also a large slave trade hub in which all communities participated and benefitted. In historical terms, it was the latter-day business enterprise succeeding what each invader to India did and by those who built kingdoms through internecine warfare. Each battle – and they were numerous, history says – meant enslavement by the victor of the vanquished – men, women and children – who were killed or converted and many shipped out.

Scholars of the slave trade say that the practice continued, stealthily, with an unofficial nod, long after slavery and trade were banned by the Europeans. Keeping slaves was as common as keeping concubines wherever feudalism married business enterprises. The former helped with abundant manpower that the latter needed for indigo, cotton and tea cultivation, or to build roads and railways.

One may not call it slavery. But labour under duress is rampant in most of the former colonies. Is it surprising to see today under-aged boys at wayside restaurants and factories (despite the Factories Act) and little girls minding babies while ‘memsahib’ is at a kitty party or simply surfing on a cellphone or watching the latest film?

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.com