Author: Mahendra Ved

Verghese Kurien – Showing The Milky Way

By Mahendra Ved

Cattle-breeders of Patri and surrounding villages in Gujarat’s Kutchh district produce 20,000 litres of milk earning a whopping ₹700,000 daily. Chilled and transported, it adds to the national grid of millions of litres marketed across the country.

Prosperous Patri is but a microcosm of the White Revolution that began in 1949 in a run-down creamery in Anand in Kaira (now Kheda) district. Today, the Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF) launched in 1950, is the world’s largest milk cooperative. Marketing ‘Amul’ brand of milk and dairy products, it registered a turnover of Rs 39,248 crore in 2020-21. It is the world’s eighth largest among the top 20 global dairy processors assessed by the International Farm Comparison Network (IFCN).

In mythology (Krishna and his love for butter), or in history, India may or may not have been the land of abundant milk. But at Independence, it had the world’s largest cattle population, and also millions of humans with no access to milk. That need was met through long years of cooperative effort. But the man who pioneered it, Dr Verghese Kurien, is a forgotten man in his birth centenary year.

A US-trained metallurgist from distant Kerala, Kurien arrived in Gujarat in 1949. How he fought the feudal, business and MNC interests and motivated farmers ignorant of their strength is a saga that stretches from the dawn of India’s Independence to the present.

Kurien and his team invented the process of making milk powder and condensed milk from buffalo’s milk instead of cow’s milk. Amul successfully competed against Nestle, the MNC that only used cow’s milk to make powder and condensed milk. In India, buffalo’s milk is the main raw material unlike Europe where cow’s milk is abundant.

Opening the first Amul “factory” in Anand, Jawaharlal Nehru hugged Kurien for his ground-breaking work. Kurien networked with successive governments to push his projects. A hard taskmaster, he could be blunt, even ruthless.

In his lifetime, India had become the world’s largest milk producer by 1998, surpassing the United States of America, with about 17 percent of global output in 2010–2011. But Kurien died in 2012, age 90, a disappointed man, saying that he did not like milk and did not consume it.

Three days before his death, renowned IT entrepreneur N.R. Narayana Murthy sought India’s highest civilian award for Kurien. He said: “A civilised society must show gratitude when people can sense it, or it is no gratitude at all. If our country does not stand and salute Verghese Kurien with a Bharat Ratna, I don’t know who else deserves it.”

That honour has eluded Kurien. He did get Ramon Magsaysay Award much earlier in 1963, and many more. The nation (read successive governments) have stopped short at Padma Vibhushan, the second-highest in 1999. Was it because he had lobbied hard, but unsuccessfully, to block the entry of foreign multinational corporations (MNCs) in India’s dairying sector? If that is so, perish the thought of his ever getting a much-deserved Nobel.

ALSO READ: Udham Singh – Revenge Of A Revolutionary

Kurien was crucial in replicating the “Anand Model” of cooperatives across India and beyond. In 1979, Alexei Kosygin invited Kurien to the Soviet Union for advice on its cooperatives. In 1982, Pakistan invited him to set up dairy cooperatives, where he led a World Bank mission. Around 1989, China implemented its own Operation Flood-like programme with Kurien’s help and the World Food Programme. Indian premier Narasimha Rao sent him to set up a dairy cooperative in Sri Lanka.

But during Rao’s regime and thereafter, Kurien and his ideas began to be discarded by governments keen on shedding the ‘socialist’ cooperatives approach and inviting foreign funds and participation as part of the economic reforms. Critics called his managing and planning ‘dictatorial’. If these reforms that are now integral to India’s progress, have had a ‘victim’, it was Kurien.

The path was opened, under pressures from governments, by Kurien’s own long-time protégé, Amrita Patel. While Amul and its Indian half-sister Mother Dairy continue to dominate the market of milk and milk products, the MNCs are also having a heyday.

It is no longer fashionable to berate the MNCs in dairying or farm sector, but at the ground level, it does betray seemingly misplaced priorities, when milk is diverted to making ice cream and potatoes to make chips. There is a global sop, however: Amul’s curd and paneer, the Indian cheese, are attracting health-conscious Americans.  High in protein and fat, Paneer is a favorite among those on the keto diet, a market valued at $9.5 billion in 2019. 

The concept of cooperative itself has undergone change. Dominated by politicians guided only by profit motives, the farmer/producer no longer calls the shots. The marketing guy in the Board Room does.

Looking back, Kurien was a product of the Cold War era. Mother Dairy separated from Amul, the brand name the two had nurtured. Both are doing well — so are the MNCs. This underscores the tussle between the urban India and the farming Bharat — and not only in dairying. The unease in their co-existence is palpable.

Some of these and other conflicting interests and contradictions in the larger farm sector are behind the three controversial farm laws. The Modi Government first rammed them through the parliament, but after a year-long agitation, has withdrawn them. This is not out of love for the farmers, 700 of whom died during the agitation, but for winning votes in the forthcoming elections. 

The producers of fruits, vegetables and cereals have failed to unite and form their cooperative retail outlets just as Amul did in the dairy sector. This would be more profitable and economical for both the producers and the consumers. Perhaps, it needs another Kurien.

ALSO READ: Sahir – The Poet Of The Underdog

Reforms are needed in each of these sectors. But the “human face” with which they were begun, howsoever imperfectly, is missing. There is something brazen about all this, even immoral, if morality is at all a consideration in the way people who toil and produce are, or should be, treated in a society.

The past and the present still coalesce in some ways. To tell his story to the world, Kurien co-wrote a feature film, Manthan (Churning), in 1976. Anand’s co-operators chipped in with ₹2 each. Directed by Shyam Benegal, it won both critical acclaim and money. A classic, the UNDP screened it to start similar cooperatives in Latin America and in Africa.

Amul is the first cooperative sector product, perhaps a global first, to be advertised on modern lines. The success of “utterly, butterly delicious — Amul” line remains the envy of the India Inc and the MNCs.

Amul has spelt both health and humour for half a century now. It has served delicious butter but also taught Indians to be witty and laugh at themselves. The little moppet in a red polka-dot dress and a blue ponytail has delivered on a regular basis a humorous take on everything that bothers Indians, everything that deserves a repartee.

Like a true spokesperson of the masses, she rises to every occasion, be it a cricketing double century, scandals surrounding politicians, to controversial diplomatic policies, with an infallible gut and tongue-in-cheek attitude. In the process, Brand Amul has become synonymous with honesty, purity and subtlety. As its advertiser, Kurien never pre-viewed them.

Come to think of it, Kurien’s was the first real cooperative success in an era with controls — long before humour-less economic reforms and information technology and telecom happened to India.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

The Rise Of Indian Americans

By Mahendra Ved

Christopher Columbus who failed to reach India, but discovered America instead, would be happy if he were to visit the United States today. He would find Indians, if not India, in every walk of American life. And he would learn that its Vice President Kamala Devi Harris was born of a woman from Chennai that he never visited and a man from Jamaica, barely 800 km from the Bahamas where he had first landed.

At one percent of the population, Indians certainly do not overwhelm the US. But history dictates that the US Census Bureau call them “Asian Indian” to differentiate from the indigenous peoples, commonly called “American Indians”, the ones Columbus had encountered.

At 4,459,999 (Indian Ministry of External Affairs’ 2018 figures), they are the largest Indian diaspora. Their “Westward-ho”, began in the 1890s, trickled into the last century, but really picked up in its second half. The graph has risen since.

Indian Americans are a ‘success’ story for both India and America. They are America’s “modern minority” that also earned notoriety, being targeted during recent presidential campaigns for being ‘snatcher’ of jobs meant for the locals. Actually, they have been job-givers.

Moving gradually from education to employment to enterprise and now, into public life, they are among America’s most educated and prosperous. Learning or having witnessed democracy at work in independent India, the community confidently talks of sending its elected representatives from City Halls across the US to the White House. The trend caught on with governors (Bobby Piyush Jindal, Namrata Niki Randhawa Haley), several lawmakers and now, Kamala has lit the fire.

The buzz begun when Harris became Joe Biden’s running mate in 2019, has since become a popular political lore: an ageing Biden, not seeking re-election, may anoint her instead for the presidency-2024.

It is tempting to speculate outcome of the 2019 election had Biden-Harris “dream team” clashed with rival “dream team” of Donald Trump and Haley. Also whether Haley’s Sikh-Indian-Christian combination would have matched Harris’ Asian-African, Indian-Caribbean, and a Jewish husband’s ethnic credentials. Although Trump is not about to give up the next fight, a future ‘dream’ line-up could be Harris versus Haley. Only time can tell.

Of immediate interest is the growing confidence of this diverse community that traditionally extends bipartisan support to both the Republicans and the Democrats, and is in turn wooed by them. And all this is occurring amidst burgeoning of India-US relations for over two decades now, no matter which party is governing in the two democracies.

ALSO READ: Indian Diaspora In UK On A New High

Millions of words spoken and published over this multi-layered phenomenon has the world taking note, approvingly by some, gingerly by others. It has been discussed in a book appropriately titled Kamala Harris and the Rise of Indian Americans (Wisdom Tree). It differs from others being a combined effort of Indian Americans and Indians, for them and by them. Edited by media veteran Tarun Basu who has observed the Indo-US and Indian American scene for long years, it is the first such book published in India.

Their combined target is ambitious. San Francisco-based IT entrepreneur M R Rangaswami sees the book as the medium to transform the success of the Indian diaspora as a whole “into meaningful impact worldwide.” He would like the Diasporas elsewhere to replicate his own journey, calling it “a roller-coaster ride of big wins, heart-breaking losses and exciting comebacks.”

Of the IT sector alone, he says, having founded one out of seven, and running one out of 12 start-ups in California’s Silicon Valley, Indians have actually engineered the predominant position the Valley enjoys globally.  

The Indian Americans’ collective effort stands out with their forming large profession-based bodies. The doctors’ for instance, represents a whopping 100,000, so is the hospitality sector – “hotels, motels and Patels”. Facilitating it is the Global Organisation of the People of Indian Origin (GOPIO), the earliest of the community mobilizers with global following.

The book notes how Indians have adapted to the multi-faith and multi-cultural American mores. US-based journalist Aziz Haniffa writes that Haley’s conversion to Christianity while retaining her Sikh roots or Jindal’s conversion did not prevent the community from adopting them. If they took a while accepting Harris it was because, one: she initially projected her African roots, as a black, while not really giving up the Indian one. And two: the general Indian aversion to Africans, “a kind of reverse racism,” as brought out by Mira Nair in Mississippi Masala (1991). Hardly surprising considering the average Indian’s “fair and lovely’ preference.

Basu records Harris’ little-known private journey to Chennai to immerse the ashes of her mother in the Bay of Bengal, where Ganga, the river held sacred by the Hindus, merges. Haniffa, after interviewing Harris finds her “tough yet vivacious, supremely confident yet unassuming, laser-focused on issues, mischievous yet non-malicious.”

The book’s USP is that its contributors are achievers themselves. They include scholars Pradeep K Khosla, Maina Chawla Singh, Sujata Warrier, Shamita Das Dasgupta, corporate leaders Raj L Gupta and Deepak Raj, industry observers Ajay Ghosh, Vikrum Mathur and Bijal Patel and journalists Arun Kumar, Mayank Chhaya, Suman Guha Mazumdar and Laxmi Parthasarthy.

Former United Nations official and Indian lawmaker Shashi Tharoor recalls: “A generation ago, when I first travelled to the US as a graduate student in 1975, India was widely seen as a land of snake charmers and begging bowls – poverty marginally leavened by exotica. Today, if there is a stereotypical view of India, it is that of a country of fast-talking high achievers who are wizards at math, and who are capable of doing most Americans’ jobs better, faster and more cheaply in Bengaluru. Today ‘IIT’ is a brand name as respected in certain American circles as ‘MIT’ or ‘Caltech’. If Indians are treated with more respect as a result, so is India, as the land that produces them. Let us not underestimate the importance of such global respect in our globalizing world.’”

ALSO READ: India’s Soft Power Drives Hard Bargains

How was, and is, India viewed? Actually, both Americans and Indian Americans changed their outlook after India launched economic reforms. They saw it shedding Cold War stance and socialism and joining the global economic mainstream. No longer condescending, some tracked back, looking for opportunities, as succinctly bought out by Shah Rukh Khan-starrer Swades (2004).

Notwithstanding the nuclear tests India undertook, successive US administrations, of both parties, have embraced it. Arguably, the tests gave India “nuclear notoriety”, but also respect that enabled Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh and now Narendra Modi, a place on the global high table.

Moving out of their professional comfort zones to join public affairs, many Indian Americans value giving and receiving political support. Many are engaging in philanthropy and in raising funds for parties and candidates of their choice. Harris was the first to support Barack Obama. In appreciation, Obama, as also Trump and Biden administrations, have appointed many Indian Americans to key positions that would be the envy of other diaspora.   

Noting their rise ‘From Struggling Immigrants to Political Influencers: How a Community came of Age’, Basu,  recounting  their “long and hardy road,” notes: “It was said that successful ethnic lobbies were those with an ‘elevated’ socio-economic profile like high education levels, good communicating skills, deep pockets with generous contributions to campaign funds, and Indian-Americans ticked on all these boxes as they grew in size, stature, and influence, becoming in effect the newest kid on the block.”

There are, and will be, critical voices when two diverse democracies are at work. But as Arun K. Singh, former Indian envoy to Washington DC, says, the relationship “is headed for further consolidation” and that the Indian community in the US is “well-placed to deepen them.”

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

An Apt Occasion To Dispel Darkness

By Mahendra Ved

Like last year ruined by Covid-29 pandemic, there are too many trepidations as one approaches Diwali. But an economy perceived as picking up faster than expected and the pandemic, after wreaking havoc earlier in the year, coming under relative control, have made the festival an occasion to look forward to, albeit with abundant caution.

The old innocence about Diwali, with crackers, sweets and lights, vanished long ago. There are more problems now than one can count, leave alone resolve. Think of the air pollution across the North and climate change-induced weather disturbances across the Indian peninsula. When did it rain last time, after Dusserah?  

Each one carries depressing caveats. Covid-19, although downgraded as epidemic as some experts say, is not about to go away soon. The neglect and laxity are widespread as people move out in crowds, unmasked, and unleash their pent-up spending power. This could mean a return to the lockdown days and also generate inflation. Fears on both counts are daunting.  

Next, there is this problem of statistics. Vaccination has certainly made a positive impact. But the billion-plus mark is of “at least one shot”. It is not enough till the second is administered. Experts recommend a third booster for the more vulnerable sections. The old and infirm who cannot visit a clinic/hospital are still not covered. The actual figure is 21 percent of the adult population administered both shots. Claims, made from the roof-top as it were, are misleading and could infuse laxity among the public. A third wave will be worse than the first two, what with new variants looming over the health horizon. Are the official claims, then, aimed at motivating public for key state assembly elections early next year?

All these are mundane issues on which facts and perceptions vary. So, how does one celebrate Diwali-2021? Ideally, its essence lies in the Sanskrit sloka, ‘Tamaso ma jyotirgamaya’ which means “Lead me from darkness to light.” We have to light the lamp of hope and happiness, of prosperity for all and of knowledge to dispel sorrow, poverty and disease. This journey needs to be both inner and external. Noble thoughts.

But when we seek to light lamps to celebrate victory of good over evil, we confront attempts at changing the very definition of what is good that should be preserved and promoted and what is evil that needs to be discarded and destroyed. 

Take, for instance, a message urging don’t burst the crackers to limit pollution is consciously and deliberately misinterpreted as having “hurt the sentiments” of one community because the message-giver belongs to another.

Another message, attributed to a “Union Home Ministry” official reads: “According to intelligence, since Pakistan cannot attack India directly, it has demanded China to take revenge on India. China has filled firecrackers with special types of firecrackers, which are toxic to carbon monoxide gas, to spread asthma in India. Please be aware this Diwali.” What should one make out of this? Blind, irrational hatred for people next door? Or is it commerce, as imported Chinese crackers have overawed India’s ₹5,000 crore fireworks industry?

We need to be reminded of what we grew up learning, that Diwali has been everyone’s festival in India. A school-book essay talks of Ram’s return to Ayodhya after the victory in Lanka.  It tells of the legend from the Mahabharata, that on Karthik Amavasya, the Pandavas, on returning from their exile, were welcomed with lighting of lamps and distribution of sweets. This is mythology.

The same essay quotes history, of Hindu king Vikramaditya’s coronation marking the beginning of the Vikram Samvat, a new calendar.  It points to Diwali’s significance to Jains as Lord Mahaveera attained Nirvana, or eternal bliss, that day. The Sikhs celebrate Diwali to commemorate the freeing of Guru Hargobind from captivity by Mughal Emperor Jehangir and laying of the foundation stone for the Golden Temple in 1577.

Diwali is the festival to dispel darkness of ignorance. But we are being made to forget both mythology and history.

Fast-forward to the present-day contentions that seek to divide us. They rake up controversies on clothes to wear, food to eat, even sports and sportsmen. A major jewellery maker last year and a garment chain this year had to drop their advertising campaigns simply because their lines were in Urdu. Deliberately, this language is linked to Muslims and Muslims, to terrorism. This is not how we were nurtured in independent India.   

Cricket skipper Virat Kohli offered to give “meaningful tips” on how to celebrate Diwali. Someone smelt the rat that probably did not exist. He was asked to focus on the match on the social media (probably, because India was playing against Pakistan) and not pontificate on Diwali. Kohli and his team lost that match, and hugged the winning Pakistani skipper. This made him a double-pariah. Wrath was heaped on paceman Mohammed Shami.    

Much has already been said, written, broadcast and telecast on Shahrukh Khan and his son’s drug episode. It is undergoing multi-layered trial in police station, in court, in interrogation cell and custody — and in the political arena. Facing his worst crisis, perhaps, SRK has maintained a dignified silence. Talking for him on Diwali-eve is his Cadbury endorsement that supports the small and medium Indian entrepreneurs trying to survive the multinational retailers’ onslaught. Chak De India!

One talks of Bollywood, certainly not as the nation’s benchmark, but as a visible symbol of what people aspire while living their mundane lives. Its rich and famous are within the ‘grasp’ of anyone. This make-believe grasp helps where politicians and others privileged classes have proved elusive. 

It’s not easy when those on the social media get blood-thirsty, shooting down the very stars they admire. Bollywood is in the dock, paying a price, lyricist Javed Akhtar says, for being “high profile.”  Websites of even top-ranking media houses now live off salacious stories of its celebrities. Diwali is only commerce for them.  

In better times, many of these stars visited Mumbai’s popular shrines at Mahalakshmi or Siddhi Vinayak. In 2009, one recalls, the Khans, the Kapoors and the Kumars en masse walked the ramp at Diwali fashion festivals. This is one time of the year when they like to be with their families and be seen as family persons.

This year, they are looking over their shoulders before saying or doing anything. And perhaps, humming that old ditty: “Ek woh bhi Diwali thi, ek yeh bhi Diwali hai…” No need to translate. The contrast is clear.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Imran – Between Hardliners And A Hard Place

By Mahendra Ved

It used to be hockey once upon a time, it is now cricket. Winning a cricket match against India, after all the mutual war cries on the battlefield and cricket ground, has been the best thing to happen, in a long time, to Pakistan’s cricketing hero-turned-politician, Prime Minister Imran Khan.

A true Pathan, he may keep his handsome chin up. But he is currently besieged from all sides, and analysts at home and abroad have begun to say that he may not complete his term, now into its third year.

He has goofed his way through his first-ever stint in political power, changing ministers and special assistants to man his government with a record that can better that of Donald Trump. He gained office, albeit through an election, but essentially because the all-powerful army, decided to anoint him after being disillusioned with the two earlier options, the Pakistan Peoples’ party and the Pakistan Muslim League of three-time Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.

He has angered his benefactors, first by messing up governance. At this time last year, the Pakistan Democratic Movement (PDM) of opposition parties was, for the first time, attacking the armed forces and even mentioning the top brass by name at protest rallies. The movement frittered away this year because of their own competing ambitions and mutual contradictions. The military mainly, but Imran, at least partially, must get credit for this.

But the movement is back, when the military sees him as ‘interfering’ in its working. He has shown preference for Lt. Gen. Faiz Hameed, the Director General, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which is the most powerful wing of the powerful army. Hameed’s visiting Kabul, allegedly at Imran’s behest, and speaking to media, a tea mug in hand, has upset the Chief, Gen. Qaiser Javed Bajwa.

The talk in the Army GHQ, reports say, is that it is one thing to guide the whole strategy and operation that brought the Taliban back to power in Afghanistan, but it is quite another for the ISI chief, albeit a key man in it, to be seen as a peacemaker among the quarrelling Taliban helping them to form their interim government. Also, his alleged role in ensuring key posts in that government for the Haqqani family that runs a dreaded network of fighters that is proscribed by the United Nations, has upset the United States. Seething over the way it was made to evacuate from Afghanistan and looking for scapegoats, the US, holding all the aces at global financial bodies, could get bloody-minded and along with the Taliban, punish Pakistan as well.

ALSO READ: Pakistan-Taliban Ties Won’t Be Easy

Getting funds from friends has been iffy. Saudi Arabia, which took back two billion it loaned last year, has just agreed to $3billion. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) wants to impose severe preconditions that Islamabad is loath to accept because of their adverse impact on the domestic front, last week sent back Finance Minister Shaukat Tareen without a pact.

Bajwa transferred Hameed out of the ISI, and had an official announcement made. After a huge public debate for three weeks, Imran has surrendered in this turf war with the army. The tussle shows him up as less trust-worthy by the men in khaki, also vulnerable to his political opponents, ready to pounce upon him. The PDM has revived, this time to protest rising prices of essential commodities.

Like the opposition parties, Imran has a tough time dealing with the Islamists. Some of them have joined the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP)’s “Long March” from Lahore to Islamabad. In a way, Imran is getting the dose of the same medicine he served his predecessor Nawaz Sharif, laying a siege that lasted several weeks and was called off, again, on a telephone call from the Army GHQs.

The TLP’s demands make scary reading for Imran and his government. Besides release of its chief who has been in and out of jail, it wants the government to expel the French envoy in Islamabad because of France’s action against its radical Muslims. The diplomatic fallout of any such action could impact Pakistan’s relations, with not just France, but the entire Western world that is fearful of rising militancy in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region.  

As the long marchers broke through security cordons last week, the government did the only thing it has been used to – talk with an organization it has banned, and release hundreds of marchers and their key leaders. It is readying to talk also to its own Taliban of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Although many Muslims across the globe are upset with what they perceive as Islamophobia of the West, only in Pakistan, perhaps, thousands take to the streets on this issue and some even die of police bullets.

To return to the Afghanistan developments, they give Pakistan a distinct geo-political advantage over all other stake holders. But Imran cannot rejoice at this victory that is so far proving to be Pyrrhic. The Islamists at home have become bolder and the TLP march is just one indicator. The Taliban rule has resolved nothing in Pakistan’s relations with Kabul, nor within Afghanistan. This has meant more refugees crossing over the Khyber Pass. Pakistan already hosts half-a-million, some for the last four decades. The socio-economic impact of all this is negative.

ALSO READ: Taliban’s Victory Puts Pakistan In A Spot

The US wants to retain more than just a foot-hold in the region and is pressuring Islamabad to allow air operations facilities. Imran Khan has vociferously refused it, but may have to yield, angering the Taliban in Kabul who have warned of ‘consequences’. These are difficult choices and Imran Khan is no Churchill or De Gaulle.

Lastly, the India factor. In the last two decades, despite frequent upheavals, successive governments on both sides have brought phases of understanding and relative peace. But Narendra Modi believes in giving-it-back. He did pay a surprise visit to Lahore to attend a wedding in Nawaz Sharif’s family. But he has simply ignored Imran Khan, when not calling him “Mr Niazi”, an allusion to the general who surrendered to the Indian forces in Dhaka 50 years ago. Pakistan under Imran has become part of his party’s electoral arithmetic.

Khan has lost both ways. He wished for Modi’s success in the 2019 Indian elections, and when that happened, he has been attacking Modi and his government of ‘fascism’ and what not. His anti-India pitch has not worked even after Modi Government’s most provocative action against Pakistan, of dissolving the very entity of the disputed State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Facing all these woes, at home, abroad and with India, Imran Khan and his “men in green” deserve winning the cricket match.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Tatas Buy Wings For Maharajah

By Mahendra Ved

India is poised to show off to the world the return of a refurbished Maharajah – with a benign smile, moustache twirled-up, the red tunic dusted clean and regal turban in place. Air India, the national carrier, will undergo kayakalpa, or rejuvenation, to soon touch the sky with glory, flying higher and better.

It should hopefully be an age-defying transformation, and who can do it better than the mother that conceived it 89 years ago? Air India is purchased by the house of Tata in a landmark deal. The government, struggling to disinvest it for the last two decades, and failed twice, is third-time lucky. This largest, ₹18,000 crore off-loading should open the turf for more.

This has brought optimism in these otherwise toxic times. Even the social media, driven by personal peeves and prejudices of the educated middle classes, is applauding. Cartoons show the smiling Maharajah being welcomed by a beaming Ratan Tata, Chairman Emeritus of India’s largest conglomerate. The sentiment is: oh, why didn’t this happen earlier?

One people who may protest are the workers, with their multiple unions. They haven’t been paid for months. The deal includes a no-sack clause for a year, which is not ideal, but allows for recovery of old dues and a breather. Think of an outright closure or the airline going to someone less resourceful or less humane than the reputation Tata enjoys.

Born in the British colonial era in 1932 as Tata Airlines, AI pioneered Asia’s aviation success story, although Philippine Airlines (PAL), officially founded on February 26, 1941 is considered Asia’s oldest scheduled carrier, still flying under the same name. Post the World War II came decolonization of Asian skies with Cathay Pacific of Hong Kong (September 1946), Orient Airways (later Pakistan International Airlines (October 1946), Air Ceylon (later Sri Lankan Airlines), Korean National Airlines and Malayan Airways Limited (later Singapore and Malaysia Airlines) – all in 1947, Israel’s El Al and Garuda Indonesia in 1948, Japan Airlines (1951) and Thai Airways International (1960).

AI scored many landmarks. It was the first Asian airline to enter the jet age with a Boeing 707-420 in February 1960. Twenty-eight months later, it became the world’s first all-jet airline. It introduced Palace in the Sky livery and branding in 1971. In 1993, its Boeing 747-400 operated the first non-stop New York-Delhi flight.

AI entered the Guinness Book of World Records for the most people evacuated by a civil airliner. During the 1990 Gulf War, over 111,000 people were flown from Amman to Mumbai, a distance of 4,117 kilometer. AI operated 488 flights from August 13 to October 11, 1990 – lasting 59 day. Another airlift from Qatar involving 700,000 Indians begins this month by its subsidiary, AI Express.

ALSO READ: ‘Flying As We Knew It Has Changed’

For Tata Sons, it’s homecoming. The prodigal has returned, lost and found – lost for no fault of its own. Fourteen years after the legendary JRD Tata found it, the government of newly-independent India felt the need to have a national airline, acquired it 51:49, and then nationalized it in 1953.

JRD was to call this arbitrary. He met Jawaharlal Nehru, but despite best of relations, could not prevent it. Asked to meet Babu Jagjivan Ram, then in charge of civil aviation, JRD was simply informed of the Cabinet decision. The die was cast. Nehru persuaded JRD to remain the Chairman.

Always ready for a national cause, JRD set about building a national airline. Only he could have counselled men against growing long sideburns and women in the crew on tying their hair in a bun that is not larger than their face, or what lipstick to use.

His aides Bobby Kooka and Umesh Rao had in 1946 already created Maharajah, the exotic mascot who never ruled a state, but went on to rule the hearts of its fliers. He became one of India’s most recognizable symbols. In bright destination-driven promotional posters he would appear as a Brit with a bowler hat and umbrella; a Frenchman with a beret; a ruddy, alpine climber from Switzerland or one on an African safari.

The present-day fliers would not know that AI once had one of the best in-service and was among the most-flown airlines. Maharajah definitely ruled the skies and still flies amidst growing competition from minnows. But it never got over the government-corporate cultural and operational contradictions. The momentum Tata gave Air India outlived JRD’s unceremonious sacking in 1978 by Prime Minister Morarji Desai. Thanks to covetous bureaucrats and demanding politicians, the rot set within and competition outside, set in the 1990s. The economic reforms’ launch with new airlines born made AI untenable, but has taken three decades of mounting losses and worse to resolve.

Being the sole owner, the government was hit by a scare that some foreign court might attach and seize an AI aircraft against any dues in dispute. A British firm actually made such a move recently when a PIA aircraft was seized in Malaysia, forcing Pakistan to pay up.

AI’s profits vanished after its disastrous merger with Indian Airlines, the domestic carrier, in 2007. By 2019, the losses mounted to ₹12.8 billion. It has an ageing staff averaging 48-50 years, paid 35-50 percent higher compared to the budget airlines it is competing with. It has no hire and fire policy.

Yet, it has great potential. Apart from its fleet of over 130 aircraft, the new buyer will now have control of the airline’s 4,400 domestic and 1,800 international landing and parking slots at domestic airports, as well as 900 slots at airports overseas. And don’t write off the experienced work force of 1,600 pilots and 2,000 engineers.

Over two-thirds of the airline’s revenues come from its international operations. Air India also owns millions worth of prime real estate. According to the aviation ministry, its fixed assets – land, buildings, and aircraft – are worth over ₹450bn ($6bn). Besides, it has paintings of MF Husain and others and artefacts worth millions purchased in better times.

With Covid-19 hopefully abetting worldwide and Indians flying more and more, recording an annual passenger growth of around 20 per cent, AI is a good prospect. Analysts say the Indian market is vastly underserved. For Tata, it is an opportunity and a challenge. It’s a long haul. A failure could be devastating, but success could turn around AI, like Swissair, British Airways and Lufthansa.

The airline needs money to get cannibalised aircraft – which have been on the ground because of lack of spares and which have been stripped off some parts to be used in operational aircraft – in the skies again. It needs funds to pay off vendors, airport operators and other creditors; working capital needs as well as interest repayments also need to be fulfilled.

A refurbished AI should reclaim the territories and markets lost to others. Adding Air India to AirAsia and Vistara is three airlines too many: their merger is on the cards, and makes sense. There is no lack of either resources or experience. Tata has been on buying spree for the last two decades, acquiring Tetley, Land rover, Jaguar, and British Salt and South Korea’s Daewoo commercial vehicles. They now need to refuel aviation business.

Eventually, it’s au revoir. Maharajah’s line, “Tata does not always mean a goodbye” has proved prophetic.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Kanhaiya Is No Lord Krishna To Save Cong

By Mahendra Ved

One swallow does not a summer make. Not even two, or twenty, if it is India’s Grand Old Party that, by all indications, is in its autumn, not summer.  Stronger branches of this old banyan are being weakened from within, while its leaves, the young ones with green lives ahead, are falling off and falling out.

Two young leaders, Kanhaiya Kumar and Gujarat’s independent legislator Jignesh Mewani, joined the Congress party, bringing happy tidings after long. Along with Gujarat’s Hardik Patel, who joined earlier, theirs has been leadership in the making for five, tumultuous years.

Both are young, ideologically committed, and are clear about what they want. They are worried, like millions across the country, that if the Congress sinks, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will find it easy to overwhelm the smaller parties. This would be bad for democracy. Mewani echoed Kumar’s description of the Congress as “a ship that should not be allowed to sink.” They called for ‘saving’ the party and with that, “the idea of India.” That they spoke in these terms, from the Congress platform is   significant. The party needs to be rescued from itself.

This concern for the party’s survival was neither their entry-pitch nor altruistic. It is closely linked to long-felt need for forging an opposition phalanx to contain the BJP. Despite deep differences and past political baggage of mutual mistrust, the role of the Congress as a key member of that entity is being increasingly felt under the present circumstances. Differences, as of now are on whether or not the party should lead it and if yes, under an ailing Sonia Gandhi or anyone else. Rahul and sister Priyanka are not considered senior and experienced enough. And they have proved their critics right with their recent handling of the party’s affairs.    

Both Kumar and Mewani have a good track record so far, enough for their critics to also take note. Kumar has been greeted with bitter/sour trolls on the social media. He was charged, thrashed in full courtroom, jailed and tortured five years ago for wrecking the country to pieces — “tukde-tukde”.  Forty samples of his speeches of that period were examined, including the controversial one that he delivered at the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) as its students’ union president. They were officially subjected to forensic and legal examinations. Kumar’s voice did not match with those heard shouting anti-India slogans, India Today later reported. The charge did not stick.

That “tukde-tukde” has returned, especially on the social media, now that Kumar has joined the Congress. It signals the long battle ahead. That battle will need opposition clarity and unity of purpose. For instance, Kumar lost badly to BJP in the 2019 Lok Sabha election from Bihar, as no party was willing to accommodate him. In Bihar’s murky turf war, Kumar could face rejection by Laloo’s party that already has a young Tejashwi Yadav and hierarchical problems in Bihar Congress.

Kumar, who quotes Marx and Lenin along with Gandhi, Ambedkar and Gautam Buddha, is a communist. Indeed, the Congress has in the past infused communists in the 1970s, when Mohan Kumaramangalam was a central minister and Chandrajeet Yadav was a key party general secretary. But that was in the cold war era. The post-Soviet world and an India post-economic reforms, (launched by a Congress government) have discarded the socialist model. Will the left-of-centre political plank work against the BJP’s avowed right-wing political, economic and social agenda that openly plays on religion? Which Kanhaiya will people vote for?

Without surprise, Kanhaiya’s entry has unnerved many Congressmen and corporate circles uneasy with anything ‘leftist’ and has given an added weapon to the BJP and its front organisations.

ALSO READ: ‘Kanhaiya An Opportunist, Not A Communist’

The Congress shed its secular USP, first by pandering to Muslim conservatives vote in the Shah Bano case and to match L K Advani-led Rath Yatra in the late 1980s, climbed the Ram temple bandwagon. It is now openly trying to match, unsuccessfully, – the BJP’s electoral tactics. They include opening gaushalas and marketing gaumutra (cow urine). A party committee headed by A K Antony, a Christian, attributed repeated election losses to the perception that the party was pro-minorities. Along with socialism, secularism is also gone.

Under BJP ‘threat’, the Congress has discarded the minority constituency. No longer setting the agenda, the party reacts to others.    

No party can prosper without a clear direction and without ground support. No party can survive merely by infusion from outside, like polls strategist Prashant Kishore. (Some quarters attribute replacing of a well-regarded Captain Amrinder Singh with Navjot Singh Sidhu, a ma maverick showman and little else, to his counsel).

While noting the Kumar-Mewani entry as a harbinger of likely change, it is risky to read too much into their joining the Congress, when Jyotiraditya Scindia (although he had “access to Rahul’s bedroom”), Jitin Prasada and Sushmita Dev, besides others relatively low-profile, have quit.  The party has failed to renew itself before the people. If the young are disenchanted, the older guard is clueless, yet clinging to it. Imagine ex-Goa chief minister L. Faleiro flying across the peninsula to join Mamata Banerjee’s party in Kolkata!

The Congress is run at the top by a single family. The Gandhis used to be the glue that kept it ticking and united, but no longer. They gave winning slogans. This, too, was long ago. By all available accounts, Sonia Gandhi, the ‘interim’ president is ailing, and decisions are being taken by her children. They are all good and decent. But that is not enough in politics. From hugging to hissing at Prime Minister Modi, Rahul’s is a personalized approach. But that can’t be party strategy. Against the wily orator, Rahul comes across poorly. The brand name does not sell against Modi’s high octane campaign fuelled by men, money and media. 

ALSO READ: Is The Congress Really Rudderless?

Sadly, the party has for long shown signs of the last days of Mughal Empire.  Imposing fledgling central authority failed in Madhya Pradesh, narrowly saved Rajasthan and has yielded disastrous results in Punjab. A coterie surrounding the Gandhis counsels destabilising those seniors found growing roots in the states.  

On the day Kumar-Mewani entry, the squabbling Congressmen in Punjab were decimating their own fort with the assembly elections just five months away. They had the best chance of being re-elected a third time. It has been frittered away, to utter surprise of friends and foes alike. Angry Amrinder is set to launch a new party. With a multi-polar scene emerging, the battle for Punjab is now wide open.

This fiasco is unlikely to calm rumblings in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh where Congress is riven by factions. The steep decline in central authority is thanks to opaque decision-making that is often delayed, encourages more discontent and proves disastrous.  The party needs internal discussion, organisational elections and “a full-time president” – not an ailing interim matriarch. It needs, by implication, an inclusive leadership that does not function with one or more remote controls. Dissent is out in the open. The leadership – whoever thought and did it – has responded by sending goons to vandalise the house of Kapil Sibal, one of the dissenters. Notably, none has condemned the incident.

Is it any surprise that the BJP juggernaut, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi at its command, continues to roll?

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Kangana – The Mercurial Mistress Of Bollywood

By Mahendra Ved

Kangana Ranaut combats her critics on the social media with as much ferocity, if not more, when playing Rani Lakshmibai of Jhansi, she fought the British soldiers in 1857 before being killed in her last battle.

The vision of her blood-splattered face as she screamed and slashed at those pursuing her, riding her horse with son tied on her back, lingered long after one saw Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi (2019). Her performance as one of the most iconic persons in India’s contemporary history was outstanding and won her the National Award.

That she fought the director in its run-up and re-shot significant parts, completing the film after Sonu Sood, a popular co-star quit, was controversial but added to her feisty personality. It lent an aura, even bankability, although the film’s budget doubled.

It is difficult to ignore her on the screen, and equally difficult to digest what she posts on the social media. Some of it is vituperative and personalised. She insists she is stating the ‘truth’. Her comments on writer-lyricist Javed Akhtar are now a court case. Upon her skipping some hearings, the court has warned that if she does not show up, an arrest warrant might be issued.

Whether she says the right things rightly is debatable. Like those who rush to see her films, she also has a huge following in the cyberspace. Her right-wing ‘nationalist’ supporters surely outnumber her critics. She is not alone, given the addiction to be on social media these days. Professional compulsions, perhaps, but it is difficult to fathom why professionals and people in public life, otherwise presumably busy, court, even initiate controversy.

Kangana can be compared with Vidya Balan. Beginning their cinematic careers in 2006 and 2003 respectively, both are actors of the new century. They are ‘outsiders’, without filmy pedigree. Both are rightly credited for their choice of roles, as women of substance, performing them in ways that have changed the concept of the female protagonist in Hindi cinema. But they have different personalities. Compared to Vidya who is married into a filmy family, Kangana has been more forthright in decrying gender bias and nepotism in Bollywood. She even attacked a biggie like Karan Johar.

A better view of Kangana would need to include her rumoured and reported relationships and tiffs with Aditya Pancholi, Adhyayan Suman, American doctor Nicholas Laffarty, her courtroom spat with Hrithik Roshan and more. But who are we to judge the woman who is variously described as “free-spirited,” “sexiest star”, the “hottest vegetarian” and yes, the “best dressed actor”?

Her filmography, as with any artist, is a mix of flops, average and block-busters. Yet, 13 of her 35 films released so far have brought her nominations and awards, many of them in consecutive years. This is remarkable. She began with a bang in the 2006 thriller Gangster that won her the Filmfare Award for Best Female Debut. She received praise for portraying “emotionally intense” characters in the dramas Woh Lamhe (2006), Life in a… Metro (2007) and Fashion (2008). For the last of these, she also won the National Film Award for Best Supporting Actress. 

Besides Padma Shri, the country’s fourth highest civilian award, she stands out winning four National Film Awards and as many Filmfare Awards, three International Indian Film Academy Awards, and one award each from the Screen, Zee Cine and Producers Guild award.

Kangana plays a strong woman – strong, even if erring. Leaving out Lakshmibai, she has by and large played the city girl not ready to take nonsense from men, even husband after a love marriage. One saw her doing that in Tanu Weds Manu: Returns (2015).

A still from Tanu Weds Manu Returns

This film showed her in a double-role, the slick Londoner and a Haryanvi lass. The former sends the squabbling husband to a mental asylum, without regret. As a college-going athlete, she falls for that married man who thinks she resembles the estranged wife. It seems unreal, especially in the Haryana milieu. But it is real when at the end, the Jatti shows immense maturity and a big heart. She sacrifices her nascent love and refuses marriage, so as not to ruin the ‘other’ girl’s. The two roles are a veritable contrast. It is difficult to believe that the same actor is playing them.

ALSO READ: Sahir – The Poet Of The Underdog

In her other super-success in Queen (2014), she is an abandoned bride who proceeds alone on honeymoon, experiences life in Europe, full of fear and fun, and returns as a confident woman.

Not an English-speaking urbanite, the small-town Kangana found herself ignored in the initial Mumbai days. She has learnt the ropes, and more since, calling fellow-actress Sonam Kapoor a “mafia bimbo”, Urmila Matondkar, a senior, “soft-porn star” and a junior Rhea Chakraborty a “small-time druggie”. On the other hand, she has displayed refreshing flair for effortless Hindi. The same cannot be said of many Convent-educated women actors.

She has portrayed varied roles amidst phases of being type-cast, including a fashion diva, a con-woman, a druggy, a politico, even an alien. She shines, whether or not her films earn well. This has happened time and again. The Lakshmibai role earned her fame, awards and also the image of a patriotic icon. But the film did only modest business, which is surprising, considering the current political preference for nationalist themes and biographical portrayals.

Kangana has portrayed with aplomb lives of the big, real or imaginary. In Rangoon (2017), her Julia was loosely based on “Fearless Nadia”, a star of the 1940s. She comes off well, but the film did not. It could not repeat the huge success of Once Upon A Time in Bombay (2010), of an actress-turned sweetheart of a mafia don.

Her much-talked, much-awaited biopic Thalaivii has opened to lukewarm audiences. Reviewers are near-unanimous in praising her portraying Jayalalithaa, the actress-turned-politician who remains one of the most remarkable personalities in recent times. The film has suffered because a) multiplex theatre chains are not showing it, b) the release was ill-timed as cinema theatres are closed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and c) she has received the ‘outsider’ tag for the Telugu and Tamil versions. There is no final word yet. Films do recover after faltering initially.

Amidst the Thalaivii let-down comes the news that she is to play Sita in Ramayana, The Incarnation. She supposedly beat Kareena Kapoor Khan and Deepika Padukone. The film’s screenplay writer Manoj Muntashir has dismissed ‘rumours’, insisting that the film’s promoters always wanted Kangana. All this may well help her “settle scores” with two of her rivals and give a big boost on social media.

Cinema promotes woman power as no other sector. Kangana was featured by Forbes India in their annual Celebrity 100 list in 2012, 2014–2017, and 2019. In 2017, Forbes calculated her annual salary to be ₹320 million (US$4.5 million), one of India’s highest paid women.

Probably, one has already had enough of Kangana. But at 34, she has a long cinematic journey ahead. Unless politics, given her support and admiration for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, consumes her time, talent and unbound energy.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Awaara – Of Tramp And His Times

By Mahendra Ved

Exploring Awaara, found a clip of a Turkish film made in 1946. It has a song identical to ‘Awaara hoon…’ with the capped hero walking the street, happily singing to strangers, including pretty women. Words sound similar, the musical score is identical. Only, it could be Ankara or Istanbul, not Bombay. When a song you grew up humming turns out to be a ‘copy’, it hurts a bit, even if momentarily.

Film analyst Gautam Kaul says this was probably the first case of plagiarism by Shankar Jaikishan, the composer duo. Like Raj Kapoor, the film’s producer-director-actor, they badly needed to establish themselves. The film itself was a gamble after two Kapoor flops. To get a ‘star’ like Nargis, Kapoor had to stage a hunger strike outside her home and melt her mother Jaddan Bai’s heart.

The rest is history: the film was a universal hit. The title song has had presidents and prime ministers foot-tapping, if not singing it.

The world has changed a lot since Awaara was released 70 years ago. Whether it is for better or for worse depends upon one’s values, circumstances and the nostalgia quotient. To compare the world with a film may look simplistic, but Awaara is a good landmark and a benchmark.

Although billed as a crime-and-romance film, it was the story of a newly independent, aspiring India with Jawaharlal Nehru guiding the nation’s destiny. Whether he left the glass half-full or half-empty is currently being vehemently debated. Constantly demonized, he is being struck off history books on modern India.

The most striking change is about the message of socialism that the film carries. Khwaja Ahmed Abbas, the left-leaning journalist and filmmaker who co-wrote the sorry with V P Sathe, also wrote the dialogues. He sharpened his message in Shree 420 (1955), in a similar tale with a wider span.

ALSO READ: Sahir – The Poet Of The Underdog

Few Indians talk of socialism, declared as a failed ideology. Much of the world is currently dominated by right-wing demagogues, all ‘nationalists’ (or ultra-nationalists) with narrow vision. Judge Raghunath, played by Prithviraj Kapoor who nursed a wrong ‘usool’ about a criminal begetting only a criminal, would be uncomfortable today. He shows the humility of accepting his ready-to-reform son. Not so today’s little men wielding big power, backed by money, muscle, media and blind supporters.

Raghunath may be forgiven for his single prejudiced judgment that altered his life, when one sees some present-day judges – taking some recent instances – justify marital rape, acquit molesters of minors, condone state-sponsored violence, help the executive suppress public dissent and much else.

Judges no longer live in palatial mansions like Raghunath. Not, at least, in Mumbai. Abbas sharpened his pen and vision of the city in Shree 420 and his own Shehar Aur Sapna, to make this Urb Prima in Indis, independent India’s first global city. It never sleeps. People flock there to fulfil their dreams, also to the dream factory called Bollywood.

Awaara’s romance blended the western with traditional India. Not much change here. By and large, men are weak and confused (when not stalking their hapless ‘prey’), but women are bold and caring. Patriachy persists, but from president to peon, women, given half-a-chance, have been pushing their way.

The gender-bender in this film is Rita, played by Nargis. In a well-etched role, reflecting a strong character, she carries the film on her shoulders. She dares to love her childhood friend despite the huge gulf in education and lifestyle. She weans bim away from the world of crime. But when told that law doesn’t listen to matters of heart, she says with quiet defiance: my heart, too, doesn’t listen to law.

In an evocative sequence at the beach, Raj goes close to where Rita is changing. A gentleman would never do this, she chides him. He admits he is not one. She calls him junglee (savage) thrice. He chases and slaps her thrice and twists her arm, even tries to strangulate her. But she surrenders, falls at his feet, willing to be slapped more. He caresses her and the two embrace passionately. ‘Libbers’ today would revolt against her ‘surrender’ to a ‘junglee’. Yet she would be a torch-bearer in any campaign to support inter-caste and inter-faith marriages, being opposed by ‘khaps’ or in the name of “love jihad”, by bigots.

Awaara’s theme appealed to the universal sentiment of social upliftment and justice. Its advocacy of the reformative theory of punishment puts some of the onus on the society for creating a criminal. This makes it a landmark film.

It’s a film about relationship. Raj fights to win legitimacy. He explodes when the society ill-treats him. He takes his insecurities out on Rita, and that makes their romance uncomfortably bruised and traumatic. Beautifully portrayed, it shows that real human relationships are messy, unpleasant – even painful. The message is: everyone, from a wealthy judge in his mansion or a tramp on the street, needs a bit of love.

Raj Kapoor emulated Charles Chaplin as he introduced him to Hindi cinema, perfected it in Shree 420 and continued till Mera Naam Joker (1970). Chaplin must have had more avatars in India than anywhere else because Indians have, long before Chaplin, digested Hollywood. That enterprise continues well into this century, even as Indians offer Hollywood some run for the money around half he world.

Certainly not the first since Indian cinema had caught attention outside even before independence, Awaara was a rage in many countries across the world. It was called The Vagavond, The Tramp, Tavarish Brodigya in Russia, and many other names. It crashed the Iron Curtain, gently pushing the de-Salinisation process in the erstwhile Soviet Union. Those were early days of Hindi-Rusi Bhai Bhai. It shaped India’s cultural outreach under Nehru, making cinema integral to India’s ‘soft’ diplomacy today, something few countries possess.

ALSO READ: India’s Soft Power Drives Hard Bargains

The egalitarian ideals Awaara championed resonated in the newly-independent nations and those emerging from miseries of the World War II. Unsurprisingly, it was wildly popular in Russia, China and across the Eastern Europe, but also in Turkey and the Arab world, more familiar than the West with India’s song-and-dance.

It became a family movie in many countries. Dr Amar Kumar Sinha hosted me to the Hungarian version, Csavargo, way back in 1973. At the interval, we Indians were surrounded and asked about the film and those behind it. Sinha says the movie doesn’t run in European theatres any more. But “Awaara Hoon” can be heard on YouTube in multiple versions in Russian, in Uzbekistan, China, Japan – you name it. That takes away some of the plagiarism sting.

Well-written and well-composed songs quicken the momentum in this slow-paced movie. Ten songs were the standard input those days. Some are forgettable, but others, mainly those penned by Shailendra, make for rich experience.

Awaara gave Indian cinema its first dream sequence, uniquely, with three songs, performed amidst a sea of twirling clouds or mist. Choreographed by Zohra Segal, the songs depicted heaven-to-hell-and back episodes. It ends on an optimistic note, a metaphor of life.

Awaara, his third film as a director, established Kapoor. He was only 27 then, but at 22, Nargis was his ‘senior’. Rita’s character went well with her modern-girl image. She dons a one-piece swim suit, considered daring seven decades ago. It also underscored the success of a fine team job by some of the brilliant minds and hands, including cameraman Radhu Karmakar and art director M R Achrekar.

Dina Iordanova, professor at the University of St Andrews, and other experts cite several texts and anecdotal evidence to state in a special issue of the journal ‘South Asian Popular Cinema’ that Awaara may be a candidate for the title of the “most popular film of all times”.

The writer can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Taliban In Frame, Afghanistan In Flames, India In Firing Range

By Mahendra Ved

Buzkashi, the national game of the people of Afghanistan, has horsemen competing to possess the headless body of a goat. In one of the world’s most enduring ironies, the country has itself become the goat, being dragged and tossed around. A horrified world watches as an elected government is losing out to the Taliban, a group of women-hating men poised to take control.

They have rendered impotent and helpless the outsiders, all powerful, that have been either backing them diplomatically and militarily, or opposing them meekly, with wordy resolutions.

It happened to the British and the Russians and now, it is the Americans. The unprecedented turn of events has yet again shown that Afghanistan cannot be controlled from outside. Even before the United States ends its longest war by this month-end, the Taliban are knocking at the gates of Kabul, poised to win this round of what has been gamely called the “Great Game”.

The Game’s original players, erstwhile imperial powers Britain and Russia, now pale shadows of themselves, are riding piggy-back on the United States and China respectively. As the US departs, yet dominates the global discourse, the ascending player is China. Sadly, the global line-up the two lead, guarantees more violence and bloodshed for the Afghan people.

This round unfolds without a political solution that the US naively sought, signing a deeply flawed Doha Agreement of February 2020. It gave the Taliban primacy and legitimacy, without securing an end to the conflict and certainly, to terrorism. Now, since everybody is talking, the world is witnessing a collective shedding of crocodile tears.

The only thing that seems certain is prolonged violence. A UN report says 6,000 fighters of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) are fighting alongside the Afghan Taliban and along with thousands of ‘volunteers’ from many countries. The Pentagon has woken up to the presence of “terrorist safe havens” on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Time will tell who has played what role and why.

All this does remind of the past – except that the world’s most powerful nation, having conceded ground, both territorially and tactically, is left conducting aerial operations from outside. Signals from Washington, as it licks its wounds worse than in Vietnam of the 1970s, are that this may not continue after August 30. The Afghans will be left on their own – abandoned to their bloody fate.

ALSO READ: A Resurgent Taliban In India’s Backyard

If this sounds like a diatribe, well, it is, against all those who had begun with lofty ideas at the 2001 Bonn Conference to facilitate a moderate regime in Kabul. Two decades hence, a war-weary Joe Biden confirms what George Bush Jr. said in 2002, that “nation building” was never the aim in Afghanistan. The Afghans, then, have a valid question: why are/were they there?

India was not alone in 2003, when its External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha lobbied with the US against a military campaign in Iraq. But they persisted, with a patently false excuse that Saddam Husain had weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) which were never found. Super-confident after removing the Taliban from Kabul in response to 9/11, Bush Jr. needed to avenge his father’s humiliation at not being re-elected America’s President.

The Iraq campaign badly distracted Afghanistan’s. Its consequences are now clearly visible. Eighteen years hence, by end-2021, the US military will quit Iraq. Meanwhile, in addition to Al Qaida, another Frankestein has been created in the Islamic State (IS).

Again, India was not alone when its then National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon pleaded against the US announcing a firm date to withdraw from Afghanistan. The Pakistan-hosted Taliban would merely “sit out”, Menon had warned. That, and worse has happened since Donald Trump struck a deal with yesterday’s ‘terrorists’ and ‘insurgents’, bypassing the US-supported and US-dependent government in Kabul. That hit the credibility of all those in the world community who supported the “global war on terror” in Afghanistan.

To put it bluntly, this is America’s hubris. Its failure to see where the Taliban, ousted from Kabul, had moved to was compounded by failure/unwillingness to touch them. It was satisfied getting Osama Bin Laden. It kept deluding itself, and the world, in seeking to separate the ‘good’ Taliban from the ‘bad’. To cover up its own failure at the eleventh hour, it expected everyone else to seek an “Afghan-led, Afghan owned” political solution. Nobody asked why the Taliban would want it.

This is a lesson for Big Powers: you can light a fire in any corner of the world, but cannot douse it. Taliban became ‘good’ since they are not supposed to have ambitions outside of Afghanistan. But what about Al Qaida and the IS? Will the Big powers return to Afghanistan, Iraq or any other place if they perceive a new global threat? Someone has aptly said that those who do not learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat them.

Of the others, if China is ambitious in Afghanistan, Russia and Iran are being plain opportunistic. The hapless Central Asians must seek American, Chinese or Russian help to fend off a resurgence in Islamist extremism at home that a Taliban triumph guarantees.

India is again on the wrong side, like it was when the Russians left and now, when the Americans are leaving. It invested three billion dollars and earned goodwill. Will it now be India’s fate to “do more” in Afghanistan at the US’s behest, to compete with China and Pakistan?

That, of course, will depend upon how the Kabul-Delhi equations develop. A furious debate has ensued if India should talk to the Taliban and whether Taliban are interested in talking to the Indians, when they have support of India’s regional adversaries. Otherwise supportive of the present government, Vivek Katju, an old Af-Pak hand and envoy to Kabul, calls it “policy paralysis”.

ALSO READ: Four Lakh Displaced As Taliban Advances

Conventional wisdom is that a ‘friendly’ government in Kabul would mark Pakistan’s victory. But it will prove Pyrrhic, what with flow of refugees, drugs and arms. It successfully hoodwinked the West while benefiting from them militarily and materially, nurtured the Taliban and calibrated their across–the-border operations and backed them in negotiations. Islamabad’s more important move, however, is effectively shifting a part of its allegiance from West to China.

Not a factor before, China is now the region’s strongest power-player, with global reach. Beijing has embraced the Taliban diplomatically and as reports indicate, also militarily. It is poised to extend the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) to Afghanistan. China gains greater access to the Indian Ocean and to the Gulf, through Iran. Not just geopolitics, geo-economics is also at work.

Now, the fast-shifting ground situation. The Taliban have played their military card commendably by seeking to eliminate the re-emergence of the Northern Alliance that had helped the US remove them from Kabul in 2001. They have captured huge territory and some of the provincial capitals from Herat in the west to Badakhshan in the north and closed the gates for any external intervention on the ground.

But it’s not going to be easy. Embedded in their campaign are seeds of resistance from ethnic minorities who will fight for sheer survival, and not just against Pashtun domination. It’s life-and-death for the Uzbeks and Tajiks, who are in significant numbers and the Hazaras who, as Shias, are traditional Pashtun targets. Battles are likely to be fought for long for control of the cities and the countryside.

It is almost certain that a government, if born out of Taliban’s military victory, will face economic sanctions. Without hand-holding, Afghanistan is bound to suffer. Besides political instability, economic misery will worsen, not to speak of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Some questions for the near-future: how long and to what effect will the threatened sanctions work? As had happened with the Myanmar military junta, will biggies of the world engage in behind-the-scene engagements to guard their business interests? Not to forget, a Taliban mission operated in Washington till 9/11 happened, because the US wanted to guard its interest in Afghan and Central Asian oil and gas reserves.

How will the Islamic world respond to the near-certain birth, or re-birth, of the Islamic Emirate? Now that the West has taken a beating, will the definition of terrorism change? What will be the new global security threat perceptions and how will they be responded to?

The new chapter of ‘Great Game’ has more questions than answers. Not the least, the fate of that Buzkashi’s goat.

The writer is co-author, with late Sreedhar, of Afghan Turmoil: Changing Equations (Oxford Books, 1988) and Afghan Buzkashi: Great Game & Gamesmen (Wordsmiths, 2000). He can be reached at mahendraved07@gmail.com

Parliament – Disruption As Doctrine

By Mahendra Ved

A prominent newspaper editor elected to the Lok Sabha routinely joined protests that disrupted proceedings in the House. Asked by a fellow-scribe why he couldn’t be ‘different’, he said, much as he would like to make his mark with his speeches, he knew that his joining slogan-shouting in the Well of the House would get him front-page mention in the newspapers.

He was being candid. To be seen as an ‘active’ parliamentarian, whether or not there is the party’s ‘whip’ on an issue, participation in the ‘pandemonium’ that media routinely reports, pays. Forget the 24X7 politicos, many of those who excel in their respective fields, on being elected to legislature, also follow it.  

The days of debating and making erudite speeches are over. Lawmakers with Ox-Bridge education have departed. The oratory in “English by Nath Pai and in Hindi by (Atal Bihari) Vajpayee” is forgotten. Those who dare to speak are now mocked at. No matter which party is in power — crass, high decibel, slogan-shouting is the rule rather than exception.

Now, we have entire sessions being disrupted. Much of Parliament’s time to debate and legislate is wasted in filibustering, name-calling, slogan shouting, loud denunciation, blocking of proceedings and frequent adjournments. Like many legislatures across the democratic world, if that is any consolation, the Indian lawmakers sit – or rather, stand — more often and protest, making it an art, if not industry, with each side, like the kettle, calling the pot black.

India’s Parliament, the circular shape of which will soon disappear into the Central Vista revamp, is like an imperfect merry-go-round. Imperfect, because the going-round, depends on the life of a government and is not uniform. After long years of the Congress rule, an assortment of parties occupied the treasury benches and now a coalition led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is at the helm.

Parliament is supposed to meet for 110 days every year and larger state legislative assemblies for 90 days. In effect, amidst acrimony and adjournments, the government of the day pushes through key legislation with little or no debate, even by voice vote. That was how the three farmers’ legislations were passed — the ones that are now being contested. In that sense, the “farmers’ Parliament” being conducted on the streets is a testimony of the failure of the Mother Parliament.

The current Monsoon session, begun on July 19, is about to end August without much debate. The opposition wants to discuss the farm bills, rising prices and the Pegasus spyware snooping scandal, but the government is blocking them. Official figures show that Parliament has only functioned for 18 hours out of the scheduled time of 107 hours, resulting in a loss of more than Rs 133 crore of taxpayers’ money. The Rajya Sabha functioned for only 21 percent of its scheduled time and the Lok Sabha, only 13 percent, for about seven hours out of 54.

These statistics, however, tell only a part of the story. Disruptions have been the only recourse for the opposition of the day, and it has not always succeeded in getting the government to concede. Take the Bofors gun deal controversy, or the Raphael aircraft deal, or any of the scams, from sugar to share market to telecom. Pegasus is only the latest. The fact is that when a contentious issue crops up, the government dithers on debating it, leading to Opposition MPs violating the conduct rules and disrupting the proceedings of Parliament. Since they have the support of their parties in breaking the rules, the threat of suspension from the House does not deter them.

ALSO READ: Modi Govt’s Contempt For Parliament

There is justification, too, for disruptions. Only, when the shoe pinches those in power, blame the cobbler. Congress’ Anand Sharma denies that the opposition is responsible for disruptions and blames the government. A decade earlier, then Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley had said, “Parliament’s job is to conduct discussions. But many a time, Parliament is used [by the government] to ignore issues and in such situations, obstruction of Parliament is in the favour of democracy. Therefore, parliamentary obstruction is not undemocratic.”

Over the years, with unceasing uniformity the party/alliance in power accuses the opposition parties of stalling proceedings. The latter want a myriad issues discussed, but is not allowed.  What has changed now is levelling of a serious allegation, coming repeatedly from the country’s prime minister himself, that the opposition’s blocking the proceedings is “anti-national.” The same was said by another prime minister who compared her critics with Hitler. That was the Emergency era that cannot be justified. Now, the government’s critics allege, it is “undeclared Emergency.”

By a broad-brush comparison and contrast, there is less respect for parliament and parliamentary norms and procedures today and worse, a total lack of mutual trust. The legislature has become an arena of aggression.

The rot began to set in long ago, in the last quarter of the last century, when the likes of Vajpayee, Chandra Shekhar and Indrajit Gupta, the pride of any Parliament, were still around. It is not easy to pin it down to any party or period. All parties are guilty and must share the blame. There seems little prospect of India’s political class doing introspection or reform.

There was acrimony over issues in the past, too. The government and the opposition – within the opposition, from different parties and regions — had differing priorities. They increased as parliament, over the years, became more diverse since the 1980s with more parties representing the electorate. Reflecting complexities of the Indian society and aspirations of a billion-plus people is never easy.

ALSO READ: My Years In Parliament House

Certainly, attempts to set right things were right in the first Lok Sabha. A simple code of conduct was prescribed for Members in 1952. The rules required MPs not to interrupt the speech of others, maintain silence and not obstruct proceedings by hissing or by making commentaries during debates. It seems like utopia today.

Newer forms of protest required updating of those rules in 1989. Accordingly, members were expected not to shout slogans, display placards, tear away documents in protest, play cassettes or tape recorders in the House. Much of it is now on as nobody bothers about rules. The tone of the proceedings has become strident and the language, toxic.  More powers were accorded to the presiding officers. Thirteen members were suspended for “unruly behaviour” by the Lok Sabha Speaker last week.

The Supreme Court has sought to affect some change. Its judgment does not directly deal with Parliament but with state legislatures. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled elected representatives could no longer go scot-free for acts of vandalism and violence committed inside a house claiming immunity provided under the Constitution. It takes away the protection of privileges and immunities making elected representatives liable for prosecution for their acts.

You cannot push the clock back. But it is worth noting why the debates during the 1950s and 1960s used to be informative and livelier, when disruption was not used for expressing dissent or opposition. Or, why loss of time was below 10 percent during the 10th Lok Sabha (1991-1996), reached a record high of 40 percent during the 15th Lok Sabha (2009-2014), and threatens to be worse now. Notably, the earlier periods corresponded to the significant increase in penetration of mass media in society (including direct coverage of parliamentary proceedings on TV) and the passage of anti-defection law. These well-meant measures have back-fired, hurting Parliament’s healthy functioning.  

A parliamentary democracy is government by discussion. There can be no running away from debates and more time on legislation. Mutual blame-game and disruptions have got to end. The onus is on the executive. Each government has avoided biting the bullet. But who will bell the cat?

The writer can be contacted at mahendraved07@gmail.xom