The way Indian society looks at and treats transgenders is slowly but surely changing. That said, we still have a long way to go when it comes to creating more opportunities for transgender people of our society, especially starting from their education.

After West Bengal and Maharashtra, Assam became the third State to get a transgender judge. On July 14, Swati Bidhan Baruah was appointed a member judge in the Lok Adalat in Guwahati. “My appointment as a judge in the Lok Adalat is a positive message for society and will help create awareness on discrimination against transgenders,” she told reporters. She also talked about the poor treatment and problems faced by transgenders in Assam and how she aims to resolve them and sensitise the Assamese towards trangenders, helping them lead a life of dignity and acceptance.

Swati’s appointment coincides with the Supreme Court’s decision to revisit its 2013 verdict on Section 377. The present scenario reflects a major change in the judiciary and upliftment of one of the most silent and neglected communities.

The transgender community was officially recognised in India after the Supreme Court decided to create a “third gender category” on April 15, 2014. According to this, transgenders can officially identify themselves on documents. “The spirit of the (Indian) Constitution is to provide equal opportunity to every citizen to grow and attain their potential, irrespective of religion, caste, or gender,” the court said in its verdict. With this decision, all federal and State Governments were to include transgenders in their welfare programmes, including education and healthcare.

In August 2015, following the Supreme Court’s order, the University Grants Commission (UGC) had asked all central universities to form a committee and an equal opportunities cell to address issues and ensure provisions and infrastructure to help the third gender feel safe and accepted. Panjab University (PU), Chandigarh, improved its infrastructure to support the decision. Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) also made special provisions to help the third gender enter the mainstream by providing them five marks under the ‘deprivation point system’, which was aimed at ensuring their admission in numbers. Delhi University (DU) also introduced the third gender admission in its postgraduate courses in 2014, followed by the undergraduate courses in 2015.

In an article written in 2015, Lakshmi Narayan Tripathi, a transgender rights activist, wrote: “One thing that we have to look at is the kind of enabling environment we give to the transgender community. For that, advocacy is necessary. The pre-conceived notions of society have to change. They should ensure transgenders are not dropping out because of ragging”. However, three years down the line, it seems not much has changed despite these positive steps. Transgenders say they still face harassment and do not feel safe even on the college campus. On the condition of anonymity, an official from DU told us, “Even though there is nothing on paper, the university does not allow transgender women to join women colleges due to lack of infrastructure like unisex washrooms.”

In 2015, DU scrapped its gender neutral anti-harassment law and replaced it with a new law which considered only women as victims of harassment. This came as a huge disappointment for the LGBTQ community. Although, DU has an informal group — DU Queer Collective — where issues are often raised, desired results are yet to be seen.

The past three years saw an upward trend in the registration of transgender students, but hardly any of these converted into actual admission. Sources who work in the administration section of the university are vague on why registrations don’t translate into admissions in the case of these students. They say there is no particular reason for ‘other’ applicants not showing up and that many who clicked the ‘other’ option did not belong to that category; they had made an honest mistake and came back to correct it soon.

Transgender students say that most of them drop out either because they do not feel safe or because they have to face harassment on a regular basis. The other hurdle is that not all DU colleges are transgender-friendly. They do not have the kind of facilities or sensitisation programmes that would make transgender students feel welcome. Due to these reasons, transgenders generally opt for the School of Open Learning (SOL), but the struggle does not end even there. The admission process in itself is a challenge. “Officials judge us in verbal as well as non-verbal ways. They stick to our previous gender in the records even after we submit the relevant documents,” said a student on the condition of anonymity. Another student added, “Officials ask us uncomfortable questions during the process. And other students call us chakka and hijra.” Third gender applicants also say that at times, they register themselves under their previous gender category and take admission to escape the barbs.

Professor Rajesh Kumar, a Professor at the Department of Adult Education and Extension, says: “DU is one of the largest universities in India. When put together, the number of students in a regular college and SOL would exceed a lakh. Bigger the system, more the problems faced by it. The university is obviously relatively better equipped to help male and female students. Admission of transgender students is a new thing, and the university is preparing itself for the same.”

Kumar informs that a team from the university was sent to areas with a large transgender population, such as Burari and Seelampur. He says, “We found that most transgenders follow a unique guru system. According to the system, the gurus have a share in each transgender’s earnings. It is the same gurus who often make it difficult for us to reach potential students. There’s a need to break this system and make the third gender aware of the different means of livelihood and life.”

When we spoke to some of these students about how they could be made more comfortable in the university environment, they said one solution could be hiring transgenders as administrative officials and professors. University officials say that while that is their aim too, it is not something that can be done overnight. Just like the university has been constantly evolving to become more inclusive of women students and students from Scheduled Castes or Other Backward Classes, it will eventually become “fit” for transgender students too.

Writer: APOORVAA NAVEEN JOSHI

Source: The Pioneer

Although the amendments proposed to child adoption/marriage are progressive, they are short-sighted and do not abide with the existing family law legislations.

The Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD) has proposed two amendments to the existing statutory enactments relating to marriage and adoption laws. The first proposal seeking approval of the Union Cabinet attempts to amend Section 3 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 (PCMA). Reportedly, the WCD is stated to have circulated a draft Cabinet note proposing to make child marriages void ab initio, ie invalid from inception. Currently, Section 3 of the PCMA  makes child marriages voidable ie, which can be terminated or annulled at the option of an aggrieved party.

The second suggested change is in the realm of enabling speedier adoption of children by proposing to amend provisions of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, (JJ Act) to recognise District Magistrates/Collectors as the competent authority for issuing adoption orders under the JJ Act.

Beneficial, benevolent and progressive as the proposals may be, they are shortsighted and do not seem to be in tandem or harmony with parallel existing family law legislations. This may tend to create statutory conflicts with contradictory and inconsistent interpretations in issues relating to marriage, adoption and guardianship. The wholesome solution then may be to let them remain as it is or incorporate similar amendments in other existing laws for harmonious views.

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (HMA) while prescribing the age of marriage for a bridegroom as 21 years and the bride as 18 years at the time of marriage, neither renders the marriage void or voidable in case of marriage of minors. Section 18  of the HMA, however, prescribes punishment for child marriages which may extend to two years rigorous imprisonment or call for a fine up to one lakh rupees or both. Likewise, Muslim personal laws, too, do not invalidate child marriages.

Consequently, both under Hindu and Muslim personal laws, child marriage remains valid. In this perspective, the laudable piecemeal amendment of the PCMA to render child marriages void will be an exercise in futility as both Hindu and Muslim communities governed by personal laws would have legislative protection for child marriages. Hence, making child marriages illegal and void under the PCMA alone will achieve no goal. It will become a dead letter in the statue book and a ship set to sail without a course.

Adoption of children under the JJ Act made dehors the provisions of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, (HAMA), is guided by Sections 56 and 57 of the JJ Act wherein irrespective of the religion, orphaned, abandoned and surrendered children can be adopted even by single or divorced persons as per procedure laid down under the Adoption Regulations, 2017.

The process entails a robust and protective mechanism routed through the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA). Ultimately, under the JJ Act, all Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) approved adoptions require an adoption order from a court, which under the JJ Act, “means a Civil Court, which has jurisdiction in matters of adoption and guardianship and may include the District Court, Family Court and City Civil Courts”. Section 61 of the JJ Act mandates that before issuing an adoption order approved by CARA, the court shall satisfy that the adoption is for the welfare of the child, as per the wishes of the child and without consideration, payment or reward for the adoption.

The definition of “court” in the JJ Act is shared by a similar interpretation of “District Court” under the Guardians and Wards Act (GWA) and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 (HMGA), wherein “court” means the City Civil Court or a District Court or a Judicial Court notified by the High Court under Section 4 of the GWA.

Clearly, the functions, authority and powers to oversee and lend finality in matters of adoption and guardianship have jurisprudentially ie, in the study of law, rested with the Judicial Courts and not the Executive Courts. This is because judicial and not executive minds, are lettered or trained to exercise legal powers, which require adjudicatory acumen to adjudge welfare of children, a prime duty vested by law.  Subrogation of judicial functions to executive authorities in routine, for stamping judicial finality will offend the fundamental division of powers of judicial and executive courts, besides encroaching on powers of judicial courts under the GWA and the HMGA.

The pivotal role of a judicial court under Section 61 of the JJ Act to X-ray an adoption, before passing an adoption order, cannot be delegated to executive courts, militating the fundamental concept of determining the best interest and welfare of the vulnerable child by making it an administrative exercise with no introspection. The end will defeat the means. Children, an asset of the nation, deserve a cautious adoption process.

(The writer is an alumni of the School of Oriental and African Studies, London, and practices at the Punjab and Haryana High Court)

Writer: Anil Malhotra

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The success of the idea of a composite India over a duplicitous and insularity bravado was commemorated today as the Kargil Vijay Diwas.

Kargil Vijay Diwas today commemorates the Indian military victory over Pakistan in the summer of 1999 as part of ‘Operation Vijay’, the only time two nuclear-armed nations had ever gone to a theatre level war. Beyond celebrating the raw courage of the Indian infantry battalions, the pulverisation done by its artillery and the daredevilry of its air warriors — the Indian victory is as much about the under acknowledged sovereign resolve and the busting of convenient Pakistani myths and theories that have sustained the Pakistani ‘establishment’, despite its inglorious track record of 1965 and 1971. Nineteen years since the bloody nose in Kargil, Pakistan has reverted back to dubious tact of its erstwhile dictator, General Zia-ul-Haq, in trying to ‘bleed India with a thousand cuts’, resulting in the vicious pattern of action-reaction, since then.

As the more conservative and exclusivist (two-nation theory) offspring at the vivisection of Independence, Pakistan is naturally more pugnacious, interfering and voluble nation as compared to moorings of the deliberately ‘inclusive’, pacifistic and democratic India — the genealogical reality has lulled the Pakistani ‘establishment’ to spin a very self-fulfilling narrative of a more martial identity. This lazy logic and irrational belief has extrapolated itself into assuming that the sovereign resolve prevailing in Islamabad (and in the garrison town of neighbouring Rawalpindi) is, therefore, more resolute and uncompromising than that in Lutyens Delhi.

The composition and essentialities of sovereign resolve, usually go beyond colourful optics of posturing, rhetoric or religious sanctification — and instead, are enmeshed in more mature and vapid instincts of self-control, righteousness, honour orientation and risk-responses. The Indian approach is deceptively passive, moralistic and philosophical as compared to the self-assumed stridency of the Pakistani ‘establishment’. It took the Pakistani misadventure of ‘Operation Gibraltar’ of 1965, butchery and exodus of Bengalis in 1971 and the ill-fated ‘Operation Badr’ to lead to Kargil, all with same results for Pakistan. Importantly, all three wars and victories were a reactionary response from a supposedly ‘irresolute’ Indian state.

Sheer contrast of physicality between the strapping Sandhurst-trained-Pathan, General Ayub Khan, and in the small and frail frame of Lal Bahadur Shastri, were symptomatic of the perception mirage that consumed Pakistanis. General Ayub’s plan was predicated on the absence of an Indian resolve for conflict as he noted, “Hindu morale would not stand more than a couple of hard blows at the right time and place”, till a 32-year-old Grenadier Havildar Abdul Hamid (Param Vir Chakra) corrected many elements in Ayub Khan’s statement.

Similarly, in Kargil, Pakistanis miscalculated the Indian resolve, which General Pervez Musharraf himself describes in his book, In the Line of Fire: A Memoir, as “unreasonably escalated Indian response.” Contrary to the popular sense in the Pakistani mainstream, situational and moral reaction of the Indian ‘national will’ in moments of such crisis in a heterogeneous India are ‘surprisingly’ more powerful and compelling for sovereign resolve than those assumed simplistically in the ‘land of the pure’. Unlike the faction-riddled ‘establishment’ within Pakistan (eg Nawaz Sharif’s turf war with Pervez Musharraf during Kargil), seamless convergence of the disparate political parties in India during the wars is a glaring differentiator that ensures a unified political resolve.

Importantly, Kargil battles were more ‘equal’ in terms of deployment of men and materials with no side with an overbearing superiority, but for the hugely advantageous position that Pakistanis had occupied prior to the Kargil war. Overcoming such geographical odds makes the Indian infantry charges go down in the annals of modern military as the most fiery, doughty and surreal operations that blasted multiple indolent myths. The old yarn of ‘one Pakistani soldier being equal to 10 Indian soldiers’ was the foremost casualty of the Pakistani propaganda. Clearly the culture of honour and motivation was intrinsically rooted in the inherent regional-religious-racial diversity of Indian regiments like the Rajputana Rifles, Naga, JAK Rifles, Grenadiers, Rajputs, Jats, Sikhs, Madras et al.

Overt religiosity embedded in Zia-ul-Haq’s regressive contribution to the Pakistani Army motto of ‘iman, taqwa, jihad-fi-sabilillah’ (faith, piety, holy war), could not substitute for simple soldering imperatives like ‘leaving no one behind’ or ‘owning up to its own’ when the bodies of the fallen Pakistani soldiers were refused by them to cover up their complicity. The implausible theory of ‘local uprising’ to support the Pakistani efforts has entertained multiple misadventures since the first Indo-Pak war of 1948, 1965 and then in the Kargil war, only to come a cropper.

Lastly, the status of a ‘state within a state’ for the unmatchable privileges afforded on the Pakistani military has not led to any higher level of leadership for the Pakistani military. Virtually-unassailable Pakistani positions with their uninterrupted supply lines afforded by the geographical advantages were simply blunted — not just by the steely nerves of the Indian combatants but also by a decidedly higher order of military leadership. The Indian ‘officer-to-soldier’ fatality in the Kargil war was the highest in any modern battlefield. The released transcript of amateurish debriefing by Lt Gen Mohammad Aziz, Chief of Pakistani General Staff to his COAS General Pervez Musharraf is a testimony to the level of make-believe that Pakistanis have fallen for their own Goebbilian myths.

Kargil Vijay Diwas is, therefore, more than just a military victory; it is the success of a composite and complex idea of ‘India’ as opposed to a contrarian idea of insularity, religious dogmatism and duplicitous bravado that remains true of Pakistani tract, even today. An oft-forgotten nugget in the Pakistani thinking lies unread in the inherited British training manuals of both armies that suggests, ‘moral force in modern war preponderates over physical force’. Morality or the ‘high-ground’ cannot be couched and invoked in puritanical or religious contexts. Instead, it needs honesty, diligence and nobility of purpose that underlies the sovereign idea of India and that of its Armed Forces to deliver and honour, whenever faced by a ‘Kargil’.

(The writer, a military veteran, is a former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, and Puducherry.

Writer: Bhopinder Singh

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Although data and theories say otherwise, India is slowly and steadily winning the battle against extreme poverty

Traveling is often fun, thanks to the training one received, as a journalist and a research scholar at New Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University, most often, professional trips turn into an exercise in real-life and academic explorations. On a pleasant early morning drive from Sundargarh, Odisha to Ranchi, Jharkhand early last week, I requested my driver to pull up at two places. The first halt was on the picturesque Kutra road. While clicking some pictures, we also got an opportunity to spend a few minutes with a group of women who claimed to be from Bhogra village and were out on daily errands. Always curious to explore, we asked them if they knew Prime Minister Narendra Modi and their faces lit with  a smile. They blurted out their praise for the Pradhan Mantri, who they said was doing “baro baro kaam” (big work).

A little further in Simdega, Jharkhand, we halted at a roadside dhaba for our morning tea. During a casual conversation with the owner of the shop, we enquired about the pace of vikas and changes witnessed since Prime Minister Modi took over. A socially conscious Balram Singh acknowledged a distinct “change in the mood and approach” and said some of the programmes like Ujjwala and Mudra were truly remarkable and that he knew of women who have benefited from the Ujjwala scheme.

Everywhere we went, from Rourkela to Sundargarh and then to Ranchi, we never came across pot-holed roads. There we no snake-charmers either. A slew of roadside eateries, many with flashy boards, honking trucks, speeding Innovas and over-crowded Boleros conveyed a picture of India that was changing. I truly wish James Crabtree of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore travelled with us to see how his idea of India “becoming the most unequal society” was pregnant with flaws and may have been a victim of tyranny of scepticism perpetuated by a few in the country. Or who knows this could be influenced by narratives of India’s ‘poverty industry’, to borrow a phrase from one of India’s most competent, charming and articulate economists, Surjit S Bhalla.  

Crabtree must have heard a recent address by Prime Minister Modi to a group of youngsters where he gave hard data for sceptics like him: Three crore children vaccinated; 1.75 lakh kilometres of rural roads built in the last four years; electricity reaching every single village; 85 lakh homes electrified since October 2017; 4.65  crore gas connections reaching the poor; and more than one crore homes built for the poor in the last four years. If Crabtree doesn’t believe these data, he should perhaps take a leaf out of recent credible reports to review his hypothesis. A Brookings report said, every minute an estimated 44 Indians are being pulled out of poverty, this being one of the fastest rates of poverty reduction — even though Bhalla terms it “overly pessimistic” and estimates that the real number could be 100 per minute. The 44 figure, claims Bhalla, is based on National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) data of 2011-12 and is, therefore, problematic.

Crabtree should meet Homi Kharas, Kristofer Hamel and Martin Hofer of  Brookings who published a well-articulated study, ‘The start of a new poverty narrative’ last month. Referring to a fascinating World Poverty Clock (worldpoverty.io) data, they say that there are “two new storylines about what is happening to global poverty.” The first is that extreme poverty in today’s world is largely about Africa. Fourteen of the 18 African nations are seeing a rise in poverty. The second is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to achieve SDG 1 goal of ending poverty.

It will require little imagination to derive the fact that impressive reductions in poverty, socially conscious and informed communities, and rapid spread of welfare programmes cannot be concomitant with rise in inequality, unless of, course, some adamant economist comes out with a bizarre model for the same. Crabtree can also refer to a June edition of the World Bank’s report, ‘Global Economic Prospects: Turning of the Tide?’ which said that India is one among the emerging economies in South Asia where strong per capita growth rates are expected to bring down poverty (read inequality). Bhalla, who has a Master degree in data and analytics, opined that when the findings of the NSSO Consumer Expenditure (NSSO-CE) survey for July 2017 to June 2018 will be released, most likely it will see India from an absolutely poverty obsessed “poor” country towards a middle-class, middle-income country. He was confident that this analysis would reveal that “absolute poverty in India, according to the official Tendulkar poverty line, is in the low single digits.”

Data and facts on the ground do seem to suggest the flaws in arguments of those who continue to paint a grim picture about India’s poverty records. Across the length and breadth of the country, irrespective of which party governs, India has made steady progress and the theory of the country being the most unequal is biased and distorted at best.

(The writer is a strategic communications professional)

Writer: Navneet Anand

Courtesy: The Pioneer

The provision of triple talaq of Islamic law has now abolished. Now, it is time to take some action on the broader issues such as education and employment of Muslim women to make them self-dependent.

Should we smell politics behind the Triple Talaq Bill which the Modi Government is so keen to push through in the ensuing Monsoon Session? Will it be passed or sent to the select committee for further scrutiny or will it be buried? The Lok Sabha successfully passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill last December by voice vote where the BJP has a majority. However, it has been an uphill task for the party to get it through the Rajya Sabha as the NDA does not have the numbers in the Upper House. While the measure was allowed to sail through the Lok Sabha, the Congress-led Opposition now wants the Bill to be sent to a select committee. The Government obviously fears that if it goes to the select panel, it will undergo changes. But one thing is sure: There is an absence of a reach-out in building a consensus.

The Triple Talaq Bill is a part of the BJP’s political gambit ahead of the 2019 General Election. If the Bill were to be passed, the Government would tomtom its success. If the Opposition blocks it, the Government would malign the opposition parties as pseudo-secular and real enemies of Muslim women. Either way, it is a win-win situation for the BJP. The Congress does not want to be seen as playing a repressive role it had played three decades ago in the Shah Bano case. Also, the Opposition cannot go beyond a certain limit as it is a social reform Bill which is why even while stalling the Bill, it played a lip service for the need to end the practice of triple talaq.

The demand to send the Bill to the select committee has the support of parties like the Congress, the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Biju Janata Dal and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi. Even a few NDA allies like the Shiv Sena stand opposed to it. The Telugu Desam Party, which quit the alliance with the NDA in March, too has joined the Shiv Sena. The Left, the Trinamool Congress, Samajwadi Party (SP) and the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) are also opposed to it in its present form.

The proposed Bill aims to outlaw the practice of Talaq-e-bidat, making it a cognizable and non-bailable offense with a three-year jail-term for erring Muslim husbands. Many political parties have pointed out the flaws in the Bill. They have argued that some provisions of the Bill can be easily misused. While the Congress, SP, BSP, Left parties, Rashtriya Janata Dal among others argue that this is a religious issue and should not be tinkered with, the Modi Government came out with an unambiguous position in public and in the Supreme Court. The argument in favour of the Bill was that making triple talaq an invalid practice under the civil code had not really worked even after the Supreme Court rendered the practice as void in August 2017 and asked the Government to frame a law on it. It was only after the apex court’s order that the Government came up with this Bill.

Why should the BJP bat for the Muslim women? Why should secular parties like the Congress and the SP stand opposed to it? This is all vote-bank politics. Every political party wants the votes of the Muslims. Even the BJP is looking for these plus votes it might need in the 2019 General Election. Indeed, Muslims have a decisive presence in 90 districts, 100 Lok Sabha constituencies and 720 Assembly seats all across the country.  Traditionally, Muslims have voted against the BJP and voted for secular parties. In the Modi regime, they experienced several incidents of communal violence, cow vigilantism, and persecution in the garb of love jihad that created fear within the community. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had pitchforked on the issue and used it during the 2017 Uttar Pradesh Assembly election and had declared that he and his party are in favour of the abolition of the triple talaq. The BJP claimed that this promise got them some Muslim votes. He is also trying to get the backward Muslims on board.

Significantly, in his recent Azamgarh rally, Modi said, “I want to ask if the Congress is a party only for Muslim men or for women too? Is there a place of respect and dignity for Muslim women? They stop the Triple Talaq law, create a ruckus and don’t allow the Parliament to function.” Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attack on the Congress is understandable. In the run-up to the 2019 election, the BJP wants to isolate the Congress. Even Congress chief Rahul Gandhi’s meet with some Muslim intellectuals recently was portrayed as Muslim appeasement. At the same time, the Congress has not been able to counter the BJP; although it tried to adopt a soft Hindutva stand in Gujarat and Karnataka Assembly campaigns.

Unfortunately, triple talaq is not the only problem faced by the Muslim women. The real problem is of education and employment and overall empowerment. Both Prime Minister Modi and the Opposition should think of measures to empower Muslim women. According to Census 2011, at 52 per cent, Muslim women are the least educated amongst the women in India. Only a few reach the graduation level (2.75 per cent).  Vote-bank politics and making it a gender issue alone will not help the Muslim women. Much more needs to be done. Triple talaq is just the beginning.

(The writer is a senior political commentator and syndicated columnist)

Writer: Kalyani Shankar

Courtesy: The Pioneer

As the economic figures make a huge turn for the better, it is evident that the Indian economy is gaining momentum. The credit goes to the policies of the government that had a vision to combine the global with the local.

Leaders don’t create followers…they create more leaders.

—Tom Peters

In what can be called the biggest endorsement of Modinomics, last week, India became the world’s sixth largest economy as its GDP, which stood at $2.597 trillion, surpassed that of France that stood at $2.582. More good news poured in the form of India’s 57th ranking in the Global Innovation Index in a poll covering more than 125 countries across 81 parameters — a massive improvement from the 76th rank in 2013-14. Meanwhile, the BSE-30 Sensex hit a lifetime high last week while the Nifty reclaimed the 11,000 mark, reflecting the overall mood of business optimism and investor confidence. Also, Reliance Industries became the second listed Indian company after TCS to join the $100 billion club in terms of market capitalisation.

The big turnaround in corporate India’s fortunes was best amplified by the June 2018 quarterly results of IT behemoth, TCS, which saw a stellar 23 per cent jump in its net profit driven by a 16 per cent jump in total income and a massive 44 per cent rise in digital revenues. CRISIL said that with a projected revenue growth of 12.8 per cent in the June 2018 quarter, India Inc is expected to see its best-ever quarter in the last three years in terms of top line performance.

The bigger news though is that  India is poised to surpass the UK to become the fifth largest global economic powerhouse in 2019 which is a far cry from 2009 when India, which was the ninth largest economy then in terms of nominal GDP, rapidly slid to the 10th rank between 2010 and 2013.

The validation for Modinomics also came from ‘World Poverty Clock’ that said that 44 people are being pulled out of poverty in India every minute and a large part of the credit for this goes to the Jan Dhan, Aadhaar mobile trinity that sees more than seven billion dollars being credited directly into the bank accounts of the beneficiaries every year sans leakages.

No wonder that the rate of poverty reduction under the Modi Government in the last four years has been faster than what it was between 2004-2014 under the Congress regime. Modi baiters would do well to know that India’s entry into the top six world economies of the world has happened despite a global order that is increasingly becoming stridently xenophobic. What with Trump threatening China with fresh $200 billion worth of tariffs, even as the NATO meeting took place last week between Trump and Germany’s Angela Merkel that  ended on a bitter note, with the US accusing Germany of favouring Russia and not making enough defence purchases from America.

Festering political worries in Italy and Spain, problems between Merkel and her allies, the Alternative for Germany and Christian Social Union over entry of immigrants via the porous border Germany shares with Austria and Boris Johnson’s tumultuous exit from the Theresa May led-Government amidst a rocky route to ‘Brexit’ have all led to heightened global tensions with trade and currency wars taking centre-stage.

India, which recently signed 11 Agreements with South Korea to double its bilateral trade to $50 billion by 2030, stands out as an oasis of political stability with the BJP-led coalition firmly in the saddle. Coming back to the economy, as if geopolitical tensions were not enough, many emerging markets, including in India which imports 80 per cent of its crude requirements, bore the brunt of crude oil prices going up all the way to $80 per barrel in May-June this year from $48 per barrel in June 2017 though prices cooled off from the recent highs by 6.4 per cent roughly last week.

Despite crude prices moving up from a low of $28 per barrel in 2016, India’s current account deficit (CAD) was a mere 0.6 per cent in 2016-17. And even in 2017-18, it was just 1.9 per cent of the GDP. In 2018-19, if crude prices remain elevated, CAD may be closer to 2.2 per cent of the GDP, which is still a huge achievement from 2012-13 when CAD touched a scary 4.8 per cent of GDP under the UPA regime.

The Rupee, that gained over four per cent in 2017, has had a rough ride this year but even if it were to slide to say to 70 or 72, it will not necessarily mean bad news as it would still be relatively overvalued in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms at those levels. Again, do note that in a bid to push exports, China is willfully allowing the Yuan to depreciate with offshore Yuan hitting an 11 month low last week. Ditto for the Japanese Yen which hit a six month low to 112.17 versus the Dollar last week. Even the mighty Euro which was hitting new highs versus the Dollar last year is struggling today to stay at 1.16 to a Dollar.

The moot point to be noted here is that 2018 will largely be a year of competitive devaluation amidst rising global protectionism and Rupee weakness is not India-specific. In fact, a relatively weaker Rupee, if anything, may be a pragmatic way to manage the balance of payments. Speaking of Modinomics, retail inflation last week inched to five per cent for June 2018 but this was largely driven by fuel inflation at 7.14 per cent versus 5.8 per cent  in May 2018.

What came as a huge respite for the aam aadmi though is the fact that food inflation actually came down to 2.9 per cent in June from 3.1 per cent in May 2018. Also, as per the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) guidance, inflation should average 4.4 per cent in the second half of this fiscal once the kharif harvest comes into the market. Most importantly, a five per cent inflation for an economy that grew at 7.7 per cent in the March 2018 quarter is absolutely fine as India is comfortably poised to track a nominal GDP growth of anywhere between 11-14 per cent.  The other number that made headlines last week was the Index of Industrial Production (IIP) figure for May 2018 which came in at 3.2 per cent. The soft IIP print should see a big improvement in June 2018 because the Nikkei Manufacturing PMI, which is a lead indicator, hit a six-month high at 53.1 in June 2018 from 51.2 in May 2018 on the back of higher output and new orders. So did the Services PMI for June 2018, that rose to 52.6 from 49.6 in May 2018.

Again, what will boost IIP is also massive infrastructure boost, given that of the 16,400 odd kilometres of national highways proposed to be built this fiscal, work orders for roughly 6,300 kms have already been awarded. Last fiscal, close to 10,000 kms of national highways were built at the rate of 27kms per day, the fastest pace ever in post-Independent India. The aim is to touch 40 kms a day soon.

In fact, if the June PMI numbers are anything to go by, IIP in June 2018 could well surpass six per cent or more, given that manufacturing has 77.63 per cent weightage in IIP. Interestingly, areas that stood out even in the tepid May IIP print were primary goods and mining which grew by a robust 5.7 per cent each, electricity generation rose by a healthy 4.2 per cent and capital goods grew by a solid 7.6 per cent.

It is said that the auto sector is in many ways a leading indicator of the economic momentum. By that logic, Modinomics has a lot to cheer about —with passenger vehicle sales growing by a whopping 37.54 per cent in June 2018 — the fastest monthly growth in nearly 10 years. Sale of utility vehicles grew by a chest-thumping 47.1 per cent. According to Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM), total 2-wheeler sales in June rose by 22.2 per cent and motorcycle sales by a sound 24.42 per cent, in yet another endorsement of how purchasing power in rural India is alive and kicking, given that over 40 per cent of 2-wheeler sales come from rural areas.

Cargo traffic up by four per cent at major Indian ports in the June 2018 quarter, double-digit air traffic growth for 43 months in a row; with May 2018 growth at 28 per cent, bank credit growth up by a resounding 12.84 per cent in June 2018, driven by retail lending growth of over 16per cent; housing sales up by 23 per cent in NCR and; equity mutual fund inflows driven largely by retail investors from Tier-2 towns, going up by a healthy 15 per cent at Rs 33,000 crore in April-June 2018 quarter, are a ringing endorsement of how Modinomics percolated to virtually every segment of the “pyramid”. Finally, Samsung Electronics set up the world’s largest mobile manufacturing unit in Noida. Spread over 35 acres with a capacity to create 15,000 jobs and manufacture 12 crore handsets annually,  the Noida unit is set to become an export hub for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. It is the essence of Modi’s ‘Make In India. After all, in the final analysis, Modinomics is an idea that transcend borders with a vision that marries the global with the homegrown.

(The writer is an economist and chief spokesperson for BJP, Mumbai)

Writer: Sanju Verma

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Right now, people can only wonder on prevalent public opinions. Only time will tell which party will come forward at the Centre to provide effective leadership to India after 2019 General elections.

India is a vast country consisting of 29 States and seven Union Territories. An estimated population of 1.3 billion people constitutes almost 18 percent of the world’s population, occupying nearly 2.4 per cent of the world’s total land surface area. An immensely diverse country where each State and region is a mini cosmos in itself, cooperative federalism seems to be the key to the development of New India under a politically stable leadership at the Centre. In order to achieve inclusive growth with social justice, all States need to work in consonance and also think alike.

Recently, a no-confidence motion against the Union Government was moved by the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) in the Lok Sabha over its unhappiness at Andhra Pradesh not being granted Special Category status. This incident reinstated a debate on the need for a uniform development of India in a non-partisan manner. With the 2019 Lok Sabha election on the horizon, political parties are already feeling the pressure to fasten their seat belts and prep up to face the poll in a rather democratically fluid environment. This further gets accentuated by the consolidation of regional parties under the umbrella of a loosely held, fragile and informal mahagathbandhan.

At this point in time, one can only speculate and try to analyse the general impression and political perception prevailing all around. Only time will tell whether the coming together of regional parties  to form a Government at the Centre under the elected leader from the constituents of the mahagathbandhan, can provide effective leadership to a complex and culturally prolific country like India.

Though the perception infused in the mind is steered towards a big “no”, the backdrop of this sentiment is the victory of the Janata Party (amalgam of the various political parties like Congress (O), Bharatiya Jana Sangh and Bharatiya Lok Dal)  in 1977. The party had a landslide victory against the Emergency imposed by the then Congress Government. It signalled the power of the regional parties against the monolithic power of a national party like the Congress and injected a new political paradigm in the democratic character of India.

Unfortunately, the Janata Party developed an intense internal, ideological and a political conflict later on and experienced instability in the Government with Prime Minister Morarji Desai resigning in mid-1979 and his successor Chaudhary Charan Singh failing to sustain a parliamentary majority later on.

This tumultuous political trajectory led to the premature dissolution of Parliament in 1980. Indian polity henceforth remained largely driven by coalition Governments under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) and United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Needless to say, these new political formations had a number of regional parties playing significant roles in survival and failure of the Governments.

The emergence of regional parties as major centres of power in India’s political, economic and social structure had been one of the most important developments in the country’s post-Independent history. Now, as the 2019 General Election nears, regional parties seem all set to play a pivotal role in influencing the formation of the next Union Government.

It is even (remotely) possible that India’s next General Election will produce a “third front” (anti-BJP grand alliance) Government headed by the leader of a regional party. Question arises whether regional parties can actually offer a competent leadership at the Centre. Sceptics are of the view that these parties at the State level or even a mahagathbandhan lack the charisma and a competent leadership to take on the formidable stronghold of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Contrary to this non-conformist approach, there is a need to analyse the probable faces of the political leadership of these regional parties in the context of equitable inclusive growth of federal india. Irrespective of political leanings, it is without doubt that today we need a powerful leadership at the Centre while looking at the geo-political, social and economic challenges before India. The critical question here is: Who are these regional political leaders of our country that we can bank on? How does one spot them among the opportunists and sycophants who plague the Indian politics? The litmus test is that these leaders should have been  exposed to pan-India complexities in their political career.

Here, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is an exception, who although remaining confined largely to the political and administrative exposure in the State of Gujarat, offered tremendous pan-India leadership. He achieved unprecedented international recognition with his larger-than-life image. Modi has even been ranked among the 10 most influential people in the world by Forbes.

But do we have a parallel or a better alternative  leadership emanating from the regional parties today? Certainly, political arithmetics and strategies can determine the leadership if an anti-BJP alliance comes into power in 2019. Who are these leaders? In the past, we have seen Chandrababu Naidu (son-in-law of late NT Rama Rao) emerging in the south. Naidu chaired the National IT panel under the NDA Government and was hailed as one of the “Hidden Seven” working wonders around the world by Profit (Oracle Corporation’s monthly magazine).

Naveen Patnaik (son of late Biju Patnaik), the current Chief Ministers of Odisha and supremo of Biju Janata Dal (BJD) held the position of Union Minister of Mines in the Cabinet of NDA Government under then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee. He has been the Chief Minister for three consecutive terms and comes from an illustrious political family with good educational background.

Other names that resonate in the mind as State level leaders include Nitish Kumar, leader of Janata Dal (United) (JD(U)) and Chief Minister of Bihar since 2017 and Mamata Banerjee, leader and founder of All India Trinamool Congress (AITMC) and presently the West Bengal Chief Minister. Nitish Kumar served as the Bihar Chief Minister from 2005 to 2014 and 2015 to 2017. He was also the Union Minister for Railways, Minister for Surface Transport  and Minister of agriculture in the NDA Government of Vajpayee. He was admired for the reforms in Railways and is considered to be a competent politician.

Mamata Banerjee, the first woman Chief Minister of West Bengal, is one of the exceptional politicians in the country who is self-made. She hails from a lower middle-class family and is well-known for maintaining a consistently austere lifestyle. She clearly stands on a pedestal with her determined and fearless leadership style. High on secular credentials and a scholar of Islamic studies, Mamata is instrumental in the consolidation of the Opposition parties. She served as the first female Union Minister of Railways, Minister of Coal, Minister of State for HRD, Youth Affairs, Sports, Women and Child Development in the Central Government.

Mamata, also known as Didi, pulled off a landslide victory,  defeating the 34-year-old Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI (Marxist)) led by the Left front. In 2012, Time magazine branded her as one of the 100 most influential persons in the world. She is dynamic with proven administrative and political mettle, and resilience to withstand tough times.

Similarly, there are many other leaders in various States with a Pan-India experience. However, if there is an emergence of new leadership post 2019 parliamentary election, Mamata Banerjee seems to be the best option to lead the nation towards a positive change. Akhilesh Yadav, though extremely competent and popular, is not being considered here, as comparatively, he has less exposure than the aforementioned politicians. Also, since the discussion is restricted to the regional parties, Congress president Rahul Gandhi is also not an alternative however Congress party can surprise by agreeing to the possible consensus candidature of Pranab Mukherjee or Kapil Sibal, if the situation demands because both of them are capable of attracting several regional parties for their respective leadership bid as and when it happens.

The country today needs to shift its focus on a  competent leadership to match the robust captaincy of Narendra Modi if the NDA is not able to again form the Government in 2019 (though chances are remote as there seems a very high possibility of a second term for the Modi Government).

The issue is who can bring about  inclusive economic, social and political growth of today’s vision of New India. We need to revisit our perception that regional leadership cannot lead the country effectively. In the past also, we have seen Prime Ministers from small parties in comparison to the large national parties like the Congress and the BJP. The election of HD Deve Gowda (United Front) and Chaudhary Charan Singh (Janata Dal) are some of the examples that prove the point. The biggest challenge is to choose a leader who can steer India to become a mature and transparent democracy based on sustainable political governance.

(The writer is a commentator, Bollywood actor and singer)

Writer: Mukesh Tyagi

Courtesy: The Pioneer

I spoke at a discussion, earlier this week, in a committee room of the House of Lords on topics related to Britain, Brexit and India. As i made my speech, I referred to the Indian exasperation of how our country is occasionally depicted as a land of endemic hunger and malnutrition.

David Goodhart, author of the best-selling Road to Somewhere that contributed immeasurably to our understanding of Brexit and other populist revolts in Europe, who was a commentator on the occasion, argued that the Oxfam poster analogy was dated. That view of India, which certainly held sway until the 1970s and which often propelled feelings of compassion, condescension and contempt — sometimes all rolled in one — is, he argued, now history. It has been replaced by the widespread appreciation of the British Asian success story, particularly the success of the Gujarati immigrants to the United Kingdom from East Africa. To add to that was the success of Indian companies, including IT companies, that, together, are said to be creating employment that benefits some 1.3 lakh people. I could even have added the contribution of Indian visitors to the UK, including high-spending tourists, that are said to number nearly five lakhs each year. More would have come had the visa fees not been so exorbitant.

Certainly there is much to be said for the success story of peoples of Indian origin in the UK. When I first came to London in 1975, among the first sights that greeted you was the elderly Punjabi women cleaning the toilets in Heathrow airport. There were, of course, a significant number of Indian doctors in the National Health and the Gujaratis — almost invariably Patels — that ran the corner shops and newsagents, but they were often subsumed, at the level of perception, by the factory workers in the Midlands and London. The Indian community in those days was relatively poor and objects of social disdain. They were also easy targets of racially-motivated attacks.

In 2018, it is a different story. The children of the corner shop owners are now professionals — mainly lawyers, accountants and techies — having secured degrees from Redbrick universities. Many have become mid-sized businessmen and others work in the financial sector in the city of London. There are also a sprinkling of Indian Asians in politics, many of them elected from constituencies where White Britons are in an overwhelming majority. Culturally, Indian Asians are distinct but this distinctiveness hasn’t created tensions. They are seen to be making valuable contributions to the British economy and they are also seen to be extremely hard-working and enterprising. Most important, the Indian Asians are seen to be law abiding, unlike those that trace their origins to Pakistan and Bangladesh.

However, it is also fact that the successes of the Indian Asians, whether from Punjab, Gujarat or East Africa, haven’t quite succeeded in denting official perceptions of the Indian passport. In the past year, holders of Chinese passports have had their visa fees made more cost effective. The same facility wasn’t extended to Indian passport holders, despite the claim that the UK and India are experiencing an “enhanced partnership.”

The reasons have everything to do with what the UK claims is the presence of nearly one lakh illegal immigrants in the UK. These are mainly people who entered the UK on short-term visitor visas, then simply tore up their passports and disappeared into the crowd. The UK insists India should take these people back. In theory, India doesn’t disagree with the principle that Indian citizens who have been expelled from the UK, for whatever reasons, should be returned home. India and UK also have a treaty of extradition — an agreement that is giving the likes of Vijay Mallya sleepless nights.

To be able to deport an illegal immigrant of Indian origin, the British authorities have to prove that the culprit was the holder of an Indian passport. This, however, isn’t possible unless the Indian authorities confirm this is indeed so. Unfortunately — or so Whitehall claims — the Indian authorities lack any sense of urgency and have demonstrated laxity and indifference. Those familiar with India’s local police networks — the ones who will have to provide the verification — will understand the UK’s exasperation. Moreover, it is hellishly difficult to trace pre-biometric passports, especially if some crucial details such as father’s name or village address turn out to be a little different from the ones given in the passport. The British wanted all enquiries to adhere to a timeline. Initially North Block agreed and an agreement was initialled but the Government then had second thoughts and the agreement wasn’t finalised and signed during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit for the Commonwealth Summit last April.

Both sides have conflicting versions of why things went wrong. Reassuringly, however, both sides are agreed that an agreement is still possible. For India’s sake I hope it is. This is not because the UK is in any ways a top dog but that India should always signal its respect for national laws, on a strictly reciprocal basis. Once governments across the world but particularly in the European Union, the US, Canada, Singapore, the Gulf and Australia — areas that have large concentrations of Indian workers — are persuaded that New Delhi takes ultimate responsibility for its citizens, life will become much easier for the genuine Indian entrepreneur, professional, student and tourist.

At present, there is a mismatch between India’s worth as a rising economic power and an Indian passport. In the past four years the gap has narrowed thanks to the proactive, citizen-friendly initiatives of External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, but much more will have to be done before the Indian passport gets the full respect it deserves.  

Writer: Swapan Dasgupta

Courtesy: The Pioneer

India is a land of many tongues. Some say themselves as Bharatiya, some say Hindu and some say Indian. No matter which language we are using, the only thing that need to be understood by all is, we all are talking of one and the same thing.

A few months ago, I met with a Christian family from Agra and they asked a lot of straightforward questions about the RSS. I answered every one of those queries. They attended some RSS programs and had a first-hand experience of the Sangh. Now, when they meet a co-religionist who claims that RSS is anti-Christian, they pose three questions to them:

• Is your opinion based on your own experience?
• Have you ever met with a Sangh functionary?
• Have you read any literature from the RSS?

Invariably, the answers they get are in the negative. During a subsequent routine tour, when I was in Agra, this family insisted I should stay with them. They also arranged my meeting with the Bishop there. We went to the Bishop’s office and the meeting went well. But we can’t expect such openness from the Left-inspired RSS haters.

There is a Marathi poem, roughly translated, which goes: Those who are habituated to say “Yes” do not want to hear any “No”. And those who are habituated to say “No” have no place for a “Yes”. In the same vein:

In our “inclusion” of all we also include these “intolerants”.

But in their (intolerant) tolerance they cannot tolerate us, the “inclusive”.

During his travels, the RSS Sarsanghchalak often meets influential people from all walks of life. During one such interaction, he met with a well-known industrialist who suggested that in place of using the word “Hindu” the Sangh should use the word “Bharatiya”. To this Dr Mohan Bhagwat replied, “For us, there isn’t much difference between the two terms. However, the term Bharat has a territorial connotation while the term Hindu has value-based resonance.” This is the reason why Pakistan-born academic Tarek Fateh refers to himself as Hindu. Hence, you can say Bharatiya and we can say Hindu. Some others may say Indic. We would understand that we are all speaking of one and the same thing. This is what is meant by Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti.

But in the dogmatic worldview of communists these values, so Bharatiya in their essence, hold no significance. Their tribe insists that in the so-called “secularist” lingua franca Hindutva is a pejorative. Should you deviate from this language, then even the right to live is denied. You are not even worthy of being tolerated, let alone be engaged with. In Kerala, the bastion of communist intolerance and a Stalinist enclave, from March 1965 till May 2017, over 233 RSS workers have been killed for the only reason that they were working for the Sangh. Significantly, 60 percent of them were former communists.

As many times as one may try and explain the idea of a Hindu Rashtra in conceptual terms and its true meaning, communists and left-leaning “intellectuals” — sans engagement or debate — will define it only as narrow, divisive and exclusive. They will quote some old letters or an article and copy, paste and reproduce it without any allusion to historical context or deliberation. They will never pay heed to what RSS leaders have been saying during these years and continue to say till today. The reason is simple — it’s their Orwellian response of “two legs bad”!

However, just because they choose to look away and obfuscate at every given opportunity, the irrefutable fact remains that there are Muslims and Christians in the RSS. As Hindus, we do not believe in conversions, hence these Swayamevaks keep following their religious practices freely. In 1998, there was a three-day camp of the Vidharbha Prant (in Maharashtra) where 30,000 Swayamsevanks participated in full uniform, staying in tents. These camps normally take place only over the weekend and a headcount in undertaken of participants to make special food arrangements for those who observe a fast on Saturdays.

During the headcount, it emerged that as it was the holy month of Ramzan and there were 122 Swayamsevaks who were keeping rozas, they needed to break their fast after sundown. Accordingly, arrangements were immediately made to facilitate this. Had it not been the month of Ramzan, no one would have noted that there were Muslims among Swayamsevaks in the camp.

These are stories drawn from real- life experience which do not usually make it to the hallowed pages of mainstream publications. However, if you observe carefully and eschew the rhetoric that is peddled therein, their stark intolerance and fascist approach to heterogeneity of ideas is clearly visible and increasingly stands exposed.

A recurring theme of their commentary in recent days has been that Pranab da has shown the RSS a mirror; well, the Sangh is quite open to looking into the mirror and does so every year at Chintan Shivirs and the Pratinidhi Sabha! In these meetings, a careful examination of the activities undertaken and course correction if necessary is deliberated upon. Such a meeting took place as recently as in the month of April in Pune.

But when will ‘left-liberals’ who stake claim to the progressive values of inclusiveness but display every aspect of intolerance in their actions look in the mirror as see beyond their hatred of the RSS? Whether or not they choose to look into the mirror, their truth is reflected in their actions and the public continues to take note of the rampant hypocrisy, between words and actions.

On a lighter note, one must express one’s gratitude. Had it not been for their shrill display of intolerance, the media would not have turned the lens on a program that is an annual RSS event and always has distinguished guests invited to speak.

Thanks to the intolerance of communists and those inspired by their hollow rhetoric, the general public got to witness live transmission of the programme.

From June 1 to June 6 the official RSS website received an average of 378 hits/requests each day; on the day of the program attended by Dr Pranab Mukherjee we got 1,779 hits/requests. Need one say more?

(Concluded)

(The writer is Sah Sarkaryavah, RSS)

Writer: Manmohan Vaidya

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Former President Pranab Mukherjee visit to the RSS headquarters shows the Indian tradition of acceptance without annoyance and appropriation.

Despite the staunch protest by his own party, Dr Pranab Mukherjee remained resolute in his decision to participate in the closing ceremony of the Tritiya Varsh Sangh Shiksha Varg of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). His conviction in the democratic principle of open engagement is worth acknowledging with gratitude. During his visit to Nagpur, the former President visited Dr KB Hedgewar’s ancestral home and offered homage to a man he considered “a great son of India”.

He also paid his respects at Smriti Mandir, dedicated to the memory and service of Dr Hedgewar and Shri Guruji Golwalkar at the RSS headquarters and went on to place his thoughts before the gathered audience with unflinching honesty. Before the program and away from the camera lens there was a meet-and-greet program with senior RSS functionaries and special invitees, in which he participated with endearing simplicity. At the time of personal introductions, he suggested all present introduce themselves and, leading by example, offered: “I am Pranab Mukherjee.” For a man who needs no introduction, his simplicity was heart-warming.

Pranab da had come with a written speech in English whilst RSS Sarsanghachalak Dr Mohan Rao Bhagwat spoke in Hindi. Both speeches, however, met at the confluence of — Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadantior That which exists is ONE, sages call it by various names. Furthermore, Pranab Da explained very clearly that the Bharatiya concept of the nation based on a unique, integral view is entirely different from the state-nation concept in the West. He emphasised our 5000-year old civilisational history with eloquence, highlighting the beliefs embedded in our view of life — Vasudhaiva Kutumbhakam and Sarve Bhavantu Sukhina which are values of diversity, secularism and tolerance that are further enshrined in our Constitution. Dr Bhagwat also expressed the same views in different words. Instead of ‘tolerance’ he used acceptance of all. He emphasised that no Bharatiya can be treated as ‘other’ or alien as we all come from the same ancestors. Both stalwarts emphasised in their speeches that the national life of Bharat did not flourish on the basis of one religion, language or race but on the basis of a spirituality-based integral, holistic view of life and the values that stemmed out from it. Dr Bhagwat also clearly articulated that the “Sangh would remain the Sangh and Pranab da, Pranab da” as this is the Bharatiya tradition of acceptance; neither imposition nor appropriation but acceptance.

This very view of life and value system is reflected in our Constitution. This humane worldview is also our greatest inheritance. Our neighbour Pakistan (which was once a part of Bharat) also gave itself its Constitution at the same time as us. However, its Constitution does not speak of these values that are inclusive; it neither takes note of inherent diversity nor celebrates it. Now the obvious question that arises is that when both were one country and one people, then why did this distinction emerge going forward?

The answer lies in the very spirituality-based, integral and holistic view of life which we have inherited. Former President Dr Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan and Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore have described it as the “Hindu View of Life”. Pakistan rejected it and Bharat accepted it. Actually, our Constitution is not the reason for our liberal and inclusive values enshrined in it but the result of our age-old integral and holistic view of life.These liberal, plural values have not come to us from our Constitution but through our Constitution. As Kahlil Gibran writes in his poem Children — Your children are not your children.They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself.They come through you but not from you. And though they are with you, yet they belong not to you.

Similarly, we are traditionally liberal, secular and inclusive not because of our Constitution but our Constitution has enshrined these values because we have been like this since ages, for at least 5,000 years. Hence, it is our duty to honour and follow the Constitution. The RSS has stayed steadfast in this pursuit. Despite the unfair, unjust ban on the RSS imposed by the then regimes twice, the satyagraha carried out in protest on both occasions was countrywide, disciplined and peaceful; an unparalleled example of protest in the history of independent Bharat, and one that was absolutely Constitutional. No other organisation or party can claim such a history. But consider the dissonance — those who violate every tenet of the Constitution, take the path of violence, attack our own armed forces, and those who support divisive, unconstitutional activities are the ones who preach the virtues of the Constitution to the RSS.

On April 2 this year, the “Bharat Bandh” called only in six BJP-ruled States which witnessed despairing scenes of unprovoked violence was actively supported by Rahul Gandhi and the “secular-liberal” lobby, without any consideration for the Constitutional and democratic values propounded by Dr BR ‘Babasaheb’ Ambedkar and  enshrined in our Constitution. After Pranab da’s speech, those who had been anxious about what this engagement might reveal were quick to come up with sanctimonious summations that explained away this engagement. These reactions confirmed that the Left still has influence over the political and intellectual space of our country. This very Left ideology lacks space for dissent, liberty and tolerance — and being non-Bharatiya does have something to do with it. Left intellectuals discarded analysis and commented with farcical haste that Pranab da had shown the RSS “a mirror” by speaking of secularism and Jawaharlal Nehru from an RSS platform et.al.

It is important to note, however, that critics of Pranab da’s visit to Nagpur had nothing to say of Dr Bhagwat’s speech. It’s possible that they didn’t hear his speech; maybe it wasn’t worth their time. After all, that would be in sync with their elitist definition of ‘free speech’ which prescribes that all they say is correct and all else is falsehood. Essentially, they were saying ‘We are right and you are wrong’, on the lines of “Four legs good, two legs bad”, the famous analogy used by George Orwell in Animal Farm to expose the authoritarian tenets and hypocrisy of the communists. Hence, listening to “two legs” would obviously be blasphemy. The inclusiveness of Vasundhara Parivar Hamara (the song recited before the speeches in Nagpur) includes everybody, even those who practice intolerance. But those who believe “four legs only are good” would prefer to reside in the darkness of their ignorance.

In all those negative articles that followed the Nagpur visit, not one writer spoke of his/her own experience of interaction with the RSS as to be in conversation with the RSS is considered blasphemous and results in instant ostracisation by the “liberal left”, an oxymoron if there ever was one. Under such pressure, paying heed to what the RSS Sarsanghachalak says is not even an option.

(To be continued in these columns tomorrow)

(The writer is Sah Sarkaryavah, RSS)

Writer: Manmohan Vaidya

Courtesy: The Pioneer

Learning to drive will still depend on the goodwill of males – but for many Saudi women, the end of the ban offers a first taste of independence. Saudi Arabia lifted its ban on women driving. While the few women who have driver’s licenses are thrilled about hitting the road, activists warned that the journey to full women’s rights will be a long one.

The wheels of justice turn slowly but the wheels on their vehicles turned exceedingly well for women in Saudi Arabia who took to the streets in their cars on June 24 after the conservative Muslim Kingdom finally lifted the ban on women driving, seen for a long came as a symbol of the gamut of oppression women in the Islamic world undergo. From the capital city of Riyadh to the most confined areas of Jeddah, women were seen celebrating even as there were bitter moments due to the barrage of vicious comments from many men as they struggled to come to terms with this new reality. Allowing women to drive will mean greater independence for them as it gives them access to mobility independent of male members of their family, create more employment opportunities and allow for a greater, more visible role for women in day-to-day life. The decision to lift the ban on women driving was pushed through by the reformist faction of the Saudi Government led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. It follows on a series of decisions taken earlier: Since 2015, women have been allowed to vote and stand for municipal elections, allowed to celebrate in sports stadia and encouraged to enrol in universities across the country which have witnessed more women graduating than men. The reforms that the Saudi King and the Crown Prince have undertaken are to achieve ‘Saudi Vision 2030’ which believes in the economic and social liberation of the Kingdom’s subjects to end the country’s dependence on a foreign workforce and oil. Women are, at least on paper, equal participants in this effort. But let’s not get carried away.

The present move must be seen as a  baby step towards ending gender segregation in that country. The biggest hurdle is to repeal the draconian Guardianship System which stipulates that all women in Saudi Arabia must have a male guardian whose consent is essential for any activity undertaken by women — to marry, divorce, travel. study or even get access to medical care. Thankfully, the monarchy has called for a review of the law but there are miles to go before this system is finally thrown into the dustbin of history. Saudi women are still expected in public to be fully covered with an abaya. They are also not allowed to swim, interact with men other than their close relatives or to try on clothes while shopping. Seriously. Sure, let’s celebrate the lifting of the driving ban. But there’s miles to go yet.

Writer: Pioneer

Courtesy: The Pioneer