RELIGIONS -
THE OPIUM THAT DIVIDE PEOPLE
AND COUNTRIES
India was the cradle for various religions, such as, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism.
1. Census Report ( India ) – 2001
Religion Population 10 years
( in crores ) growth %
Hindus 83 20.3
Muslims 14 29.5
Christians 2.40 22.6
Sikhs 1.90 18.2
Buddhists 0.80 25.5
Jains 0.40 26.0
Others 0.60* 103.1
Religion not
specified 0.72**
Total: 103 crores ***
Notes
*6 million belong to ‘Other Religions and Persuasions’ which are not part of the six main religions stated above.
**About 7 million persons have not stated their religion
***The total being 103, the percentage of people of different religions is only a shade lower than the figures given indicating the population.
Comments:
*‘Other religious persuasions: This could be tribals and nomads. Yet the number indicated would appear to be on the higher side
** In a country like India, where people would loathe not to indicate their religious persuasion, it is difficult to accept that over 7 million people had not indicated their religion.
Hindus and Sikhs have the lowest population growth in terms of %age, while Muslims are having the highest growth in %age.
2. Number of adherents to various faiths in the world
Christianity .. 1.9 billion
Islam .. 1.1 “
Hinduism .. 781 million
Buddhism .. 324 “
Sikhism .. 19 “
Judaism .. 14 “
Bahai faith .. 6.1 “
Confusionism .. 5.3 “
Jainism .. 4.1 “
3. Brief description of various religions in India
· Hinduism
There is no clear cut evidence, either anthropological or historical as to when Hinduism as a religion started in India. Hindu religionists have taken the stand that Hinduism is 5000 years old, though some of the experts on the subject are of the view that Hinduism is 2500 to 3000 years old. It is not a practicing religion as Islam or Christianity, in the sense one can claim to be Hindu because he or she is born in a Hindu family, but not practice any of its rituals. In that sense it is an amorphous religion. Secondly, as against one God each in other religions, Hindu religion has got pantheon of Gods, with people of the faith following any one or more Gods. It is probably the only religion with Goddesses also. Often considered a "way of life" rather than a religion, Hinduism differs from many religions in not having a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization.
Islam
Islam in India is the second-most practiced religion after Hinduism. India has the third largest population of Muslims in the world ( after Pakistan and Indonesia ). Islam is a practising religion and members of the faith have to strictly adhere to the various rituals prescribed.
Contrary to popular belief, Islam came to South Asia long before Muslim invasions of India. Islamic influence first came to be felt in the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders. Arab traders used to visit the Malabar region in Kerala, became the carriers of the new religion and they propagated it wherever they went. The first Indian mosque was built in 629 A.D in Kerala. In Malabar the Mappilas may have been the first community to convert to Islam.Sufis (Islamic mystics) played an important role in the spread of Islam in India. They were very successful in spreading Islam, as many aspects of Sufi belief systems and practices had their parallels in Indian philosophical literature, in particular nonviolence.
Islam has two major sects, i.e., Sunni and Shia.
Though Muslim rulers for a few centuries ruled India, mainly from Delhi, the spread of Muslim population was not so much in Central India as was the case with Western India (Pakistan ) and Eastern India ( subsequently Bangladesh ) and to a lesser extent in Kerala. Had Islam in India been converting local population by sword during their reign in India, then there should have been more Muslims in the Central India than in other places indicated above.
· Christianity
The first Christian religious person arrived in India in Kerala in 52 AD. Spread of Christians in India started in earnest around 5the century. Areas in India which have large number of Christian population are: Kerala, Goa and Nagaland
Most of the adherents of Christianity follow two sects, i.e., Catholics and Protestants. There are also other sects, but not very significant in terms of followers.
Christianity is also a practicing religion.
· Jainism
Jainism as a religion started in India in 5th BC. In many respects Jainism is akin to Hinduism. Whether and to what extent Jainism is a practicing religion, the answer can be that it falls in between Hinduism ( non practicing ) and Muslim / Christianity (practicing ) religions.
· Sikhism
Sikhism was established in India in 1500 AD. It was established in the North-West of India ( before partition ). Even now it cannot be said to be a pan India religion, as is the position of other religions, though small numbers of Sikhs have settled down in various parts of the country. Sikhism is by far a practicing religion. There is wide spread belief among non Sikhs that Sikhs tend to be more brawns ( and hence easily get into brawls ) than brains. This is not true at all, though Sikhs themselves like the term of their being full of brawn.
· Buddhism
Buddhism as a religion started in India in 3rd BC. There are no precise estimates of the Buddhist population in the world. 250 to 350 million people follow Buddhism. 89% and 70% of the people of Mymmar and Sri Lanka respectively are Buddhists. Other countries having large population of Buddhists are: India, China, South Korea, Thailand and Cambodia. In the recent times the number of people from Western countries who are opting to Buddhism is increasing. Buddhism by far is not a practicing religion. By nature Buddhists are peaceful in nature.
· Zoroastrianism (Parsis )
Parsis came to India around 1000 AD and initially settled in Gujarat. In the subsequent period, a large number of Parsis migrated to Maharashtra, particularly Mumbai. Zoroastrianism is a practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam. Parsis tend to mind their own business of religion and seldom cross swords with other religionists in the matter of faith and religious practices.
· Judaism (Jews)
Jews started coming to India 2500 years back. They mainly settled in Manipur and Mizoram. This was followed by their settlements in Mumbai and Kochi. The number of Jews in India is quite small. It also in a way practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam.
4. Non institutionalized religions
All the above are institutionalized forms of religion. But there are a bewildering array of communities both outside and within the faith with varied cultural and religious practices. Those outside the faith have their own deities and religious practices. This is more so in the case of tribals. They have their own Gods. They never think of themselves as part of Hinduism or any other religion.
5 Points to be noted
* Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are the religions which originated from India.
* However, in view of the long period of existence of the other religions in India, i.e., it cannot be said that these are religions of other countries. They are as much Indian religions as Hinduism or Sikhism is.
* There is caste system in all the major religions, i.e., Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. To some extent this is the case with some of the other religions also.
* Large scale conversion of people of one faith to another had happened in the bye gone era, but not in the recent history. Off and
on conversions from one faith to another take place on a small scale. Some of those who got converted to major religions are those who are not adherents of any of the major religions, e.g., some of adivasi tribes. Hence conversion charge against Muslims and Christians by Hindus is by and large off the mark.
* Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism are akin to Hinduism in many respects ( some would even term these as co-religions )
* In the recent history there have been no conflicts between various religions, except between Hindus and Muslims and occasionally some minor strife between Hindus and Christians.
* There have been religious wars between Christianity and Islam for hundreds of years in Europe starting from 7th century.
* There were wars between various other religions also but largely in the bye gone era, i.e., Judaism, Zoroastrians, etc.,
* Though Buddhism originated in India, in the subsequent period, it is some of the other countries, such as, Mymmar, Sri Lanka, etc., which had large %age of Buddhists among their population.
* The number of Jews in India has been continuously going down.
6. The United Religions Initiative, USA
This organisation was founded in 1996 inspired to bring people of diverse faith into cooperation for peace by the example of the work of nations of the world through United Nations working to bring peace. It established United Religions Initiative Charter in 2000. The URI is composed of 400 Cooperation Circles (member groups) in 70 countries worldwide as of November 2008. "The purpose of the URI is to promote enduring daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence, and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings."
7. Metamorphosis of religions
Each of the religions took birth / started by an emancipated person to show the people the right way of living. Some of the religions were also started to depart from the degeneration of human beings or because the then existing religions had been essentially converted to rituals. All religions preached brotherhood, good way of living and search of God However, tragically, over a period of time all religions degenerated in varying degrees. Goodness was slowly replaced with rituals. Brotherhood was replaced by alienation and enmity. Followers of each religion slowly got convinced that their religions are far better than other religions. Peace ( with the neighbour / brother ) advocated by all religions was replaced by disfavour, suspicion and enmity of other religions. And the so called spiritual leaders by and large departed from the original teachings of the religions. Instead they preached rituals, separatist feelings and suspicion of other faiths. There is a Catch 22 syndrome here. Disciples want to hear the good things about their religions and not interested to hear the plus points of other religions. Aware of this position, religious leaders cater to the demands of disciples, lest they lose the disciples. And disciples’ belief that their religions are better than other religions gets confirmed again and again whenever the spiritual leaders speak.
Tragically the above mentioned indoctrination has reached such an extent that adherents of most religions co-exist with members of other religions largely on the basis of ‘when needed’. Followers of one religion hardly ever take interest in understanding other religions.
8. Related points and issues ( disjointed comments )
· Main charges of Hindus against Muslims: .Muslims oppose uniform Civil Code ( in respect of marriage and property inheritance by daughters ), do not practice Family planning ( and hence their number may overtake Hindus!!!!), kill cows which is venerated by Hindus, their loyalty is to Pakistan rather than to India, they start communal strife, many of them are terrorists, they are violent, etc.,.
· Counter of Muslims: Why should we all the time try to prove our patriotism and nationalism in respect of India. Hindus destroyed Babri Masjid. Our religious tenets are opposed to Uniform Civil Code. Growth in our population in India is only a shade higher than that of Hindus and why should they make it an issue. We have repeatedly said that terrorists have no religion. Many Hindus consider us ( and occasionally treat us also ) as not being Indians.
· As per original communist ideology, religion should not have any place in the lives of human beings. However, while proclaiming adherence to this ideology, communists have been as religious as other believers are, though outwardly they take the stand of being irreligious.
· Revival of Hindutva movement and demolition of the Babri Masjid led to hardening of the position of many of the Hindus against Muslims particularly and to some extent against Christians also. This has led to increasing polarization of these communities, occasional violence between the communities, increasing distrust between the religionists, etc.,
· Unfortunately, instead of counter acting this development, religious leaders started backing such divisive tendencies. This has led to more emphasis being given by followers of different religions in celebrating rituals, construction of temples, etc.,
· There are not many agnostics and atheists in India.
· That many of the protagonists of Hindu religion, make all out efforts to get admission for their wards in Christian Missionary educational institutions, is not an irony but a double standard.
· Religiosity is being inculcated from childhood – this is one of the unfortunate outcomes of the communal strife or widening of the gulf between various religionists occurred in the recent past.
· Increased organization of rituals is being unwittingly advertised as becoming more religious.
· Religious strife has in the recent past been largely confined between Hindus and Muslims. Should not followers of these two religions look into the reasons for the lack of strife between other religions and also between other religions on the one side and Hindus or Muslims on the other side.
5. Religious intolerance
There are two main forms that intolerance takes. The first is when people who have not gone deeply into the real meaning of their religion and hence don’t practice it in an authentic way, use it as a rallying flag to arouse sectarian, ethnic or nationalist passions. The second is when people who practice their religion sincerely are so deeply, though incorrectly, convinced of the truth of their beliefs that they think any means are justified to impose them on others, since by so doing they are helping them. Their conviction in their faith is admirable, but it is what follows that is so wrong. They don’t know how respect other people’s religious traditions and the diversity of human being.
Dialogue need to start between religious experts and leaders of different faiths on how to achieve ‘ live and let live ‘ between followers of different faiths. The participants in the dialogue should not be politicians or Government, because they have all the time their own agendas.
Why there is a Ministry for Minority Affairs in the Union Government. More so in the charged atmosphere that has been created in the country during the last few decades by the leaders of various major religions. In such a situation, if the Ministry does anything which is perceived to be helping followers of one religion or the other, however justified the action may be, the same is bound to be condemned by other religions. For example, financial assistance for Haj pilgrimage was being give by Government immediately after formation of the Government of India. It is O.K. till the recent times. But now Hindutva leaders have started questioning the action.
According to Anil Thakkar:
‘Cultural myths that is more the norm than an exception today.
The societal penchant for myths is introduced at an early age through fables and fairy tales that form an integral part of a child’s education. Unfortunately, they may be inculcating biases and prejudices instead of the positive life lessons they are supposed to engender. A recent study conducted by at Western Illinois University highlighted the role of physical attractiveness in fairy tales. And along with that, they teach that unattractive people are more likely to be evil. That is as false a lesson for a child to learn as it is pernicious.”
The role of myths in society can expand to fill a much larger space for adults, linked with religion as it often is. There is a twin danger here; that it undermines the tradition of rational and scientific thought and that it can be used as a tool in societal conflicts in a way that exacerbates religious or racial divides. In a country such as India with a multiplicity of communities, this myth making can get out of hand. The results may be mundane – such as an excess of public holidays, many of them based on obscure events of dubious historical and religious relevance – but no less harmful for that. ‘
Concluding remarks
1. Initiative has to be taken by leaders/spokes-persons of different religions, intellectuals, writers, sociologists and persons of repute (and not Government ) to form a loosely knit body comprising of representatives of all religions, like the United Religious Initiative (URI ) formed in USA in 1996 ( Please see ‘ Points to be noted above ) . URI is composed of 400 Co-operation circles ( member groups ) in 70 countries. Alternatively, the Indian chapter of URI could be energised to formulate guidelines to be followed by all religions in ensuring peaceful ‘live and let live’ between followers of different faiths.
2. Governments should maintain strictly equi-distance policy on matters relating to different religions.
3. Changes in law relating to any religion should be based on advice / recommendations of that religion, which should be discussed in URI before Government stepping in with legislation.
4. Activities, such as, demonstrations, violence, denigrating a religion, propaganda against another religion, etc., should be firmly dealt with by Government.
5. Fourth estate should play a crucial role in improving relations between religions. It should be cautious in covering religious activities, inter-religion strife, etc., to ensure that involvement of fourth estate goes to improve inter and intra religious problems.
6. Those who want to avoid religious strife and hatred, should play a positive role in counseling their own Godmen, when the pronouncements of the latter do not help in harmony between religions.
7. School and college text books should be vetted and if required amended to ensure that wittingly or unwittingly the written words go against religious harmony.
8. Community groups should be formed consisting of elders of different faiths whose members are part of the community to ensure that minor differences between members of different faiths do not widen the gap between people and more importantly such differences do not escalate to physical violence or vandalism.
9.Parents / elders in the families should make efforts to educate their wards to follow a path of ‘ live and let live.’
*********
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
RELIGIONS -
India was the cradle for various religions, such as, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism.
1. Census Report ( India ) – 2001
Religion Population 10 years growth %
( in crores )
Hindus 83 20.3
Muslims 14 29.5
Christians 2.40 22.6
Sikhs 1.90 18.2
Buddhists 0.80 25.5
Jains 0.40 26.0
Others 0.60* 103.1
Religion not
specified 0.72**
Total: 103 crores ***
Notes
*6 million belong to ‘Other Religions and Persuasions’ which are not part of the six main religions stated above.
**About 7 million persons have not stated their religion
***The total being 103, the percentage of people of different religions is only a shade lower than the figures given indicating the population.
Comments:
*‘Other religious persuasions: This could be tribals and nomads. Yet the number indicated would appear to be on the higher side
** In a country like India, where people would loathe not to indicate their religious persuasion, it is difficult to accept that over 7 million people had not indicated their religion.
Hindus and Sikhs have the lowest population growth in terms of %age, while Muslims are having the highest growth in %age.
2. Number of adherents to various faiths in the world
Christianity .. 1.9 billion
Islam .. 1.1 “
Hinduism .. 781 million
Buddhism .. 324 “
Sikhism .. 19 “
Judaism .. 14 “
Bahai faith .. 6.1 “
Confusionism .. 5.3 “
Jainism .. 4.1 “
3. Brief description of various religions in India
· Hinduism
There is no clear cut evidence, either anthropological or historical as to when Hinduism as a religion started in India. Hindu religionists have taken the stand that Hinduism is 5000 years old, though some of the experts on the subject are of the view that Hinduism is 2500 to 3000 years old. It is not a practicing religion as Islam or Christianity, in the sense one can claim to be Hindu because he or she is born in a Hindu family, but not practice any of its rituals. In that sense it is an amorphous religion. Secondly, as against one God each in other religions, Hindu religion has got pantheon of Gods, with people of the faith following any one or more Gods. It is probably the only religion with Goddesses also. Often considered a "way of life" rather than a religion, Hinduism differs from many religions in not having a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization.
Islam
Islam in India is the second-most practiced religion after Hinduism. India has the third largest population of Muslims in the world ( after Pakistan and Indonesia ). Islam is a practising religion and members of the faith have to strictly adhere to the various rituals prescribed.
Contrary to popular belief, Islam came to South Asia long before Muslim invasions of India. Islamic influence first came to be felt in the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders. Arab traders used to visit the Malabar region in Kerala, became the carriers of the new religion and they propagated it wherever they went. The first Indian mosque was built in 629 A.D in Kerala. In Malabar the Mappilas may have been the first community to convert to Islam.Sufis (Islamic mystics) played an important role in the spread of Islam in India. They were very successful in spreading Islam, as many aspects of Sufi belief systems and practices had their parallels in Indian philosophical literature, in particular nonviolence.
Islam has two major sects, i.e., Sunni and Shia.
Though Muslim rulers for a few centuries ruled India, mainly from Delhi, the spread of Muslim population was not so much in Central India as was the case with Western India (Pakistan ) and Eastern India ( subsequently Bangladesh ) and to a lesser extent in Kerala. Had Islam in India been converting local population by sword during their reign in India, then there should have been more Muslims in the Central India than in other places indicated above.
· Christianity
The first Christian religious person arrived in India in Kerala in 52 AD. Spread of Christians in India started in earnest around 5the century. Areas in India which have large number of Christian population are: Kerala, Goa and Nagaland
Most of the adherents of Christianity follow two sects, i.e., Catholics and Protestants. There are also other sects, but not very significant in terms of followers.
Christianity is also a practicing religion.
· Jainism
Jainism as a religion started in India in 5th BC. In many respects Jainism is akin to Hinduism. Whether and to what extent Jainism is a practicing religion, the answer can be that it falls in between Hinduism ( non practicing ) and Muslim / Christianity (practicing ) religions.
· Sikhism
Sikhism was established in India in 1500 AD. It was established in the North-West of India ( before partition ). Even now it cannot be said to be a pan India religion, as is the position of other religions, though small numbers of Sikhs have settled down in various parts of the country. Sikhism is by far a practicing religion. There is wide spread belief among non Sikhs that Sikhs tend to be more brawns ( and hence easily get into brawls ) than brains. This is not true at all, though Sikhs themselves like the term of their being full of brawn.
· Buddhism
Buddhism as a religion started in India in 3rd BC. There are no precise estimates of the Buddhist population in the world. 250 to 350 million people follow Buddhism. 89% and 70% of the people of Mymmar and Sri Lanka respectively are Buddhists. Other countries having large population of Buddhists are: India, China, South Korea, Thailand and Cambodia. In the recent times the number of people from Western countries who are opting to Buddhism is increasing. Buddhism by far is not a practicing religion. By nature Buddhists are peaceful in nature.
· Zoroastrianism (Parsis )
Parsis came to India around 1000 AD and initially settled in Gujarat. In the subsequent period, a large number of Parsis migrated to Maharashtra, particularly Mumbai. Zoroastrianism is a practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam. Parsis tend to mind their own business of religion and seldom cross swords with other religionists in the matter of faith and religious practices.
· Judaism (Jews)
Jews started coming to India 2500 years back. They mainly settled in Manipur and Mizoram. This was followed by their settlements in Mumbai and Kochi. The number of Jews in India is quite small. It also in a way practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam.
4. Non institutionalized religions
All the above are institutionalized forms of religion. But there are a bewildering array of communities both outside and within the faith with varied cultural and religious practices. Those outside the faith have their own deities and religious practices. This is more so in the case of tribals. They have their own Gods. They never think of themselves as part of Hinduism or any other religion.
5 Points to be noted
* Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are the religions which originated from India.
* However, in view of the long period of existence of the other religions in India, i.e., it cannot be said that these are religions of other countries. They are as much Indian religions as Hinduism or Sikhism is.
* There is caste system in all the major religions, i.e., Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. To some extent this is the case with some of the other religions also.
* Large scale conversion of people of one faith to another had happened in the bye gone era, but not in the recent history. Off and
on conversions from one faith to another take place on a small scale. Some of those who got converted to major religions are those who are not adherents of any of the major religions, e.g., some of adivasi tribes. Hence conversion charge against Muslims and Christians by Hindus is by and large off the mark.
* Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism are akin to Hinduism in many respects ( some would even term these as co-religions )
* In the recent history there have been no conflicts between various religions, except between Hindus and Muslims and occasionally some minor strife between Hindus and Christians.
* There have been religious wars between Christianity and Islam for hundreds of years in Europe starting from 7th century.
* There were wars between various other religions also but largely in the bye gone era, i.e., Judaism, Zoroastrians, etc.,
* Though Buddhism originated in India, in the subsequent period, it is some of the other countries, such as, Mymmar, Sri Lanka, etc., which had large %age of Buddhists among their population.
* The number of Jews in India has been continuously going down.
6. The United Religions Initiative, USA
This organisation was founded in 1996 inspired to bring people of diverse faith into cooperation for peace by the example of the work of nations of the world through United Nations working to bring peace. It established United Religions Initiative Charter in 2000. The URI is composed of 400 Cooperation Circles (member groups) in 70 countries worldwide as of November 2008. "The purpose of the URI is to promote enduring daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence, and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings."
7. Metamorphosis of religions
Each of the religions took birth / started by an emancipated person to show the people the right way of living. Some of the religions were also started to depart from the degeneration of human beings or because the then existing religions had been essentially converted to rituals. All religions preached brotherhood, good way of living and search of God However, tragically, over a period of time all religions degenerated in varying degrees. Goodness was slowly replaced with rituals. Brotherhood was replaced by alienation and enmity. Followers of each religion slowly got convinced that their religions are far better than other religions. Peace ( with the neighbour / brother ) advocated by all religions was replaced by disfavour, suspicion and enmity of other religions. And the so called spiritual leaders by and large departed from the original teachings of the religions. Instead they preached rituals, separatist feelings and suspicion of other faiths. There is a Catch 22 syndrome here. Disciples want to hear the good things about their religions and not interested to hear the plus points of other religions. Aware of this position, religious leaders cater to the demands of disciples, lest they lose the disciples. And disciples’ belief that their religions are better than other religions gets confirmed again and again whenever the spiritual leaders speak.
Tragically the above mentioned indoctrination has reached such an extent that adherents of most religions co-exist with members of other religions largely on the basis of ‘when needed’. Followers of one religion hardly ever take interest in understanding other religions.
8. Related points and issues ( disjointed comments )
· Main charges of Hindus against Muslims: .Muslims oppose uniform Civil Code ( in respect of marriage and property inheritance by daughters ), do not practice Family planning ( and hence their number may overtake Hindus!!!!), kill cows which is venerated by Hindus, their loyalty is to Pakistan rather than to India, they start communal strife, many of them are terrorists, they are violent, etc.,.
· Counter of Muslims: Why should we all the time try to prove our patriotism and nationalism in respect of India. Hindus destroyed Babri Masjid. Our religious tenets are opposed to Uniform Civil Code. Growth in our population in India is only a shade higher than that of Hindus and why should they make it an issue. We have repeatedly said that terrorists have no religion. Many Hindus consider us ( and occasionally treat us also ) as not being Indians.
· As per original communist ideology, religion should not have any place in the lives of human beings. However, while proclaiming adherence to this ideology, communists have been as religious as other believers are, though outwardly they take the stand of being irreligious.
· Revival of Hindutva movement and demolition of the Babri Masjid led to hardening of the position of many of the Hindus against Muslims particularly and to some extent against Christians also. This has led to increasing polarization of these communities, occasional violence between the communities, increasing distrust between the religionists, etc.,
· Unfortunately, instead of counter acting this development, religious leaders started backing such divisive tendencies. This has led to more emphasis being given by followers of different religions in celebrating rituals, construction of temples, etc.,
· There are not many agnostics and atheists in India.
· That many of the protagonists of Hindu religion, make all out efforts to get admission for their wards in Christian Missionary educational institutions, is not an irony but a double standard.
· Religiosity is being inculcated from childhood – this is one of the unfortunate outcomes of the communal strife or widening of the gulf between various religionists occurred in the recent past.
· Increased organization of rituals is being unwittingly advertised as becoming more religious.
· Religious strife has in the recent past been largely confined between Hindus and Muslims. Should not followers of these two religions look into the reasons for the lack of strife between other religions and also between other religions on the one side and Hindus or Muslims on the other side.
5. Religious intolerance
There are two main forms that intolerance takes. The first is when people who have not gone deeply into the real meaning of their religion and hence don’t practice it in an authentic way, use it as a rallying flag to arouse sectarian, ethnic or nationalist passions. The second is when people who practice their religion sincerely are so deeply, though incorrectly, convinced of the truth of their beliefs that they think any means are justified to impose them on others, since by so doing they are helping them. Their conviction in their faith is admirable, but it is what follows that is so wrong. They don’t know how respect other people’s religious traditions and the diversity of human being.
Dialogue need to start between religious experts and leaders of different faiths on how to achieve ‘ live and let live ‘ between followers of different faiths. The participants in the dialogue should not be politicians or Government, because they have all the time their own agendas.
Why there is a Ministry for Minority Affairs in the Union Government. More so in the charged atmosphere that has been created in the country during the last few decades by the leaders of various major religions. In such a situation, if the Ministry does anything which is perceived to be helping followers of one religion or the other, however justified the action may be, the same is bound to be condemned by other religions. For example, financial assistance for Haj pilgrimage was being give by Government immediately after formation of the Government of India. It is O.K. till the recent times. But now Hindutva leaders have started questioning the action.
According to Anil Thakkar:
‘Cultural myths that is more the norm than an exception today.
The societal penchant for myths is introduced at an early age through fables and fairy tales that form an integral part of a child’s education. Unfortunately, they may be inculcating biases and prejudices instead of the positive life lessons they are supposed to engender. A recent study conducted by at Western Illinois University highlighted the role of physical attractiveness in fairy tales. And along with that, they teach that unattractive people are more likely to be evil. That is as false a lesson for a child to learn as it is pernicious.”
The role of myths in society can expand to fill a much larger space for adults, linked with religion as it often is. There is a twin danger here; that it undermines the tradition of rational and scientific thought and that it can be used as a tool in societal conflicts in a way that exacerbates religious or racial divides. In a country such as India with a multiplicity of communities, this myth making can get out of hand. The results may be mundane – such as an excess of public holidays, many of them based on obscure events of dubious historical and religious relevance – but no less harmful for that. ‘
Concluding remarks
1. Initiative has to be taken by leaders/spokes-persons of different religions, intellectuals, writers, sociologists and persons of repute (and not Government ) to form a loosely knit body comprising of representatives of all religions, like the United Religious Initiative (URI ) formed in USA in 1996 ( Please see ‘ Points to be noted above ) . URI is composed of 400 Co-operation circles ( member groups ) in 70 countries. Alternatively, the Indian chapter of URI could be energised to formulate guidelines to be followed by all religions in ensuring peaceful ‘live and let live’ between followers of different faiths.
2. Governments should maintain strictly equi-distance policy on matters relating to different religions.
3. Changes in law relating to any religion should be based on advice / recommendations of that religion, which should be discussed in URI before Government stepping in with legislation.
4. Activities, such as, demonstrations, violence, denigrating a religion, propaganda against another religion, etc., should be firmly dealt with by Government.
5. Fourth estate should play a crucial role in improving relations between religions. It should be cautious in covering religious activities, inter-religion strife, etc., to ensure that involvement of fourth estate goes to improve inter and intra religious problems.
6. Those who want to avoid religious strife and hatred, should play a positive role in counseling their own Godmen, when the pronouncements of the latter do not help in harmony between religions.
7. School and college text books should be vetted and if required amended to ensure that wittingly or unwittingly the written words go against religious harmony.
8. Community groups should be formed consisting of elders of different faiths whose members are part of the community to ensure that minor differences between members of different faiths do not widen the gap between people and more importantly such differences do not escalate to physical violence or vandalism.
9.Parents / elders in the families should make efforts to educate their wards to follow a path of ‘ live and let live.’
*********
1. Census Report ( India ) – 2001
Religion Population 10 years growth %
( in crores )
Hindus 83 20.3
Muslims 14 29.5
Christians 2.40 22.6
Sikhs 1.90 18.2
Buddhists 0.80 25.5
Jains 0.40 26.0
Others 0.60* 103.1
Religion not
specified 0.72**
Total: 103 crores ***
Notes
*6 million belong to ‘Other Religions and Persuasions’ which are not part of the six main religions stated above.
**About 7 million persons have not stated their religion
***The total being 103, the percentage of people of different religions is only a shade lower than the figures given indicating the population.
Comments:
*‘Other religious persuasions: This could be tribals and nomads. Yet the number indicated would appear to be on the higher side
** In a country like India, where people would loathe not to indicate their religious persuasion, it is difficult to accept that over 7 million people had not indicated their religion.
Hindus and Sikhs have the lowest population growth in terms of %age, while Muslims are having the highest growth in %age.
2. Number of adherents to various faiths in the world
Christianity .. 1.9 billion
Islam .. 1.1 “
Hinduism .. 781 million
Buddhism .. 324 “
Sikhism .. 19 “
Judaism .. 14 “
Bahai faith .. 6.1 “
Confusionism .. 5.3 “
Jainism .. 4.1 “
3. Brief description of various religions in India
· Hinduism
There is no clear cut evidence, either anthropological or historical as to when Hinduism as a religion started in India. Hindu religionists have taken the stand that Hinduism is 5000 years old, though some of the experts on the subject are of the view that Hinduism is 2500 to 3000 years old. It is not a practicing religion as Islam or Christianity, in the sense one can claim to be Hindu because he or she is born in a Hindu family, but not practice any of its rituals. In that sense it is an amorphous religion. Secondly, as against one God each in other religions, Hindu religion has got pantheon of Gods, with people of the faith following any one or more Gods. It is probably the only religion with Goddesses also. Often considered a "way of life" rather than a religion, Hinduism differs from many religions in not having a single founder, a specific theological system, a single system of morality, or a central religious organization.
Islam
Islam in India is the second-most practiced religion after Hinduism. India has the third largest population of Muslims in the world ( after Pakistan and Indonesia ). Islam is a practising religion and members of the faith have to strictly adhere to the various rituals prescribed.
Contrary to popular belief, Islam came to South Asia long before Muslim invasions of India. Islamic influence first came to be felt in the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders. Arab traders used to visit the Malabar region in Kerala, became the carriers of the new religion and they propagated it wherever they went. The first Indian mosque was built in 629 A.D in Kerala. In Malabar the Mappilas may have been the first community to convert to Islam.Sufis (Islamic mystics) played an important role in the spread of Islam in India. They were very successful in spreading Islam, as many aspects of Sufi belief systems and practices had their parallels in Indian philosophical literature, in particular nonviolence.
Islam has two major sects, i.e., Sunni and Shia.
Though Muslim rulers for a few centuries ruled India, mainly from Delhi, the spread of Muslim population was not so much in Central India as was the case with Western India (Pakistan ) and Eastern India ( subsequently Bangladesh ) and to a lesser extent in Kerala. Had Islam in India been converting local population by sword during their reign in India, then there should have been more Muslims in the Central India than in other places indicated above.
· Christianity
The first Christian religious person arrived in India in Kerala in 52 AD. Spread of Christians in India started in earnest around 5the century. Areas in India which have large number of Christian population are: Kerala, Goa and Nagaland
Most of the adherents of Christianity follow two sects, i.e., Catholics and Protestants. There are also other sects, but not very significant in terms of followers.
Christianity is also a practicing religion.
· Jainism
Jainism as a religion started in India in 5th BC. In many respects Jainism is akin to Hinduism. Whether and to what extent Jainism is a practicing religion, the answer can be that it falls in between Hinduism ( non practicing ) and Muslim / Christianity (practicing ) religions.
· Sikhism
Sikhism was established in India in 1500 AD. It was established in the North-West of India ( before partition ). Even now it cannot be said to be a pan India religion, as is the position of other religions, though small numbers of Sikhs have settled down in various parts of the country. Sikhism is by far a practicing religion. There is wide spread belief among non Sikhs that Sikhs tend to be more brawns ( and hence easily get into brawls ) than brains. This is not true at all, though Sikhs themselves like the term of their being full of brawn.
· Buddhism
Buddhism as a religion started in India in 3rd BC. There are no precise estimates of the Buddhist population in the world. 250 to 350 million people follow Buddhism. 89% and 70% of the people of Mymmar and Sri Lanka respectively are Buddhists. Other countries having large population of Buddhists are: India, China, South Korea, Thailand and Cambodia. In the recent times the number of people from Western countries who are opting to Buddhism is increasing. Buddhism by far is not a practicing religion. By nature Buddhists are peaceful in nature.
· Zoroastrianism (Parsis )
Parsis came to India around 1000 AD and initially settled in Gujarat. In the subsequent period, a large number of Parsis migrated to Maharashtra, particularly Mumbai. Zoroastrianism is a practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam. Parsis tend to mind their own business of religion and seldom cross swords with other religionists in the matter of faith and religious practices.
· Judaism (Jews)
Jews started coming to India 2500 years back. They mainly settled in Manipur and Mizoram. This was followed by their settlements in Mumbai and Kochi. The number of Jews in India is quite small. It also in a way practicing religion, though not as strict as in the case of Islam.
4. Non institutionalized religions
All the above are institutionalized forms of religion. But there are a bewildering array of communities both outside and within the faith with varied cultural and religious practices. Those outside the faith have their own deities and religious practices. This is more so in the case of tribals. They have their own Gods. They never think of themselves as part of Hinduism or any other religion.
5 Points to be noted
* Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism are the religions which originated from India.
* However, in view of the long period of existence of the other religions in India, i.e., it cannot be said that these are religions of other countries. They are as much Indian religions as Hinduism or Sikhism is.
* There is caste system in all the major religions, i.e., Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. To some extent this is the case with some of the other religions also.
* Large scale conversion of people of one faith to another had happened in the bye gone era, but not in the recent history. Off and
on conversions from one faith to another take place on a small scale. Some of those who got converted to major religions are those who are not adherents of any of the major religions, e.g., some of adivasi tribes. Hence conversion charge against Muslims and Christians by Hindus is by and large off the mark.
* Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism are akin to Hinduism in many respects ( some would even term these as co-religions )
* In the recent history there have been no conflicts between various religions, except between Hindus and Muslims and occasionally some minor strife between Hindus and Christians.
* There have been religious wars between Christianity and Islam for hundreds of years in Europe starting from 7th century.
* There were wars between various other religions also but largely in the bye gone era, i.e., Judaism, Zoroastrians, etc.,
* Though Buddhism originated in India, in the subsequent period, it is some of the other countries, such as, Mymmar, Sri Lanka, etc., which had large %age of Buddhists among their population.
* The number of Jews in India has been continuously going down.
6. The United Religions Initiative, USA
This organisation was founded in 1996 inspired to bring people of diverse faith into cooperation for peace by the example of the work of nations of the world through United Nations working to bring peace. It established United Religions Initiative Charter in 2000. The URI is composed of 400 Cooperation Circles (member groups) in 70 countries worldwide as of November 2008. "The purpose of the URI is to promote enduring daily interfaith cooperation, to end religiously motivated violence, and to create cultures of peace, justice and healing for the Earth and all living beings."
7. Metamorphosis of religions
Each of the religions took birth / started by an emancipated person to show the people the right way of living. Some of the religions were also started to depart from the degeneration of human beings or because the then existing religions had been essentially converted to rituals. All religions preached brotherhood, good way of living and search of God However, tragically, over a period of time all religions degenerated in varying degrees. Goodness was slowly replaced with rituals. Brotherhood was replaced by alienation and enmity. Followers of each religion slowly got convinced that their religions are far better than other religions. Peace ( with the neighbour / brother ) advocated by all religions was replaced by disfavour, suspicion and enmity of other religions. And the so called spiritual leaders by and large departed from the original teachings of the religions. Instead they preached rituals, separatist feelings and suspicion of other faiths. There is a Catch 22 syndrome here. Disciples want to hear the good things about their religions and not interested to hear the plus points of other religions. Aware of this position, religious leaders cater to the demands of disciples, lest they lose the disciples. And disciples’ belief that their religions are better than other religions gets confirmed again and again whenever the spiritual leaders speak.
Tragically the above mentioned indoctrination has reached such an extent that adherents of most religions co-exist with members of other religions largely on the basis of ‘when needed’. Followers of one religion hardly ever take interest in understanding other religions.
8. Related points and issues ( disjointed comments )
· Main charges of Hindus against Muslims: .Muslims oppose uniform Civil Code ( in respect of marriage and property inheritance by daughters ), do not practice Family planning ( and hence their number may overtake Hindus!!!!), kill cows which is venerated by Hindus, their loyalty is to Pakistan rather than to India, they start communal strife, many of them are terrorists, they are violent, etc.,.
· Counter of Muslims: Why should we all the time try to prove our patriotism and nationalism in respect of India. Hindus destroyed Babri Masjid. Our religious tenets are opposed to Uniform Civil Code. Growth in our population in India is only a shade higher than that of Hindus and why should they make it an issue. We have repeatedly said that terrorists have no religion. Many Hindus consider us ( and occasionally treat us also ) as not being Indians.
· As per original communist ideology, religion should not have any place in the lives of human beings. However, while proclaiming adherence to this ideology, communists have been as religious as other believers are, though outwardly they take the stand of being irreligious.
· Revival of Hindutva movement and demolition of the Babri Masjid led to hardening of the position of many of the Hindus against Muslims particularly and to some extent against Christians also. This has led to increasing polarization of these communities, occasional violence between the communities, increasing distrust between the religionists, etc.,
· Unfortunately, instead of counter acting this development, religious leaders started backing such divisive tendencies. This has led to more emphasis being given by followers of different religions in celebrating rituals, construction of temples, etc.,
· There are not many agnostics and atheists in India.
· That many of the protagonists of Hindu religion, make all out efforts to get admission for their wards in Christian Missionary educational institutions, is not an irony but a double standard.
· Religiosity is being inculcated from childhood – this is one of the unfortunate outcomes of the communal strife or widening of the gulf between various religionists occurred in the recent past.
· Increased organization of rituals is being unwittingly advertised as becoming more religious.
· Religious strife has in the recent past been largely confined between Hindus and Muslims. Should not followers of these two religions look into the reasons for the lack of strife between other religions and also between other religions on the one side and Hindus or Muslims on the other side.
5. Religious intolerance
There are two main forms that intolerance takes. The first is when people who have not gone deeply into the real meaning of their religion and hence don’t practice it in an authentic way, use it as a rallying flag to arouse sectarian, ethnic or nationalist passions. The second is when people who practice their religion sincerely are so deeply, though incorrectly, convinced of the truth of their beliefs that they think any means are justified to impose them on others, since by so doing they are helping them. Their conviction in their faith is admirable, but it is what follows that is so wrong. They don’t know how respect other people’s religious traditions and the diversity of human being.
Dialogue need to start between religious experts and leaders of different faiths on how to achieve ‘ live and let live ‘ between followers of different faiths. The participants in the dialogue should not be politicians or Government, because they have all the time their own agendas.
Why there is a Ministry for Minority Affairs in the Union Government. More so in the charged atmosphere that has been created in the country during the last few decades by the leaders of various major religions. In such a situation, if the Ministry does anything which is perceived to be helping followers of one religion or the other, however justified the action may be, the same is bound to be condemned by other religions. For example, financial assistance for Haj pilgrimage was being give by Government immediately after formation of the Government of India. It is O.K. till the recent times. But now Hindutva leaders have started questioning the action.
According to Anil Thakkar:
‘Cultural myths that is more the norm than an exception today.
The societal penchant for myths is introduced at an early age through fables and fairy tales that form an integral part of a child’s education. Unfortunately, they may be inculcating biases and prejudices instead of the positive life lessons they are supposed to engender. A recent study conducted by at Western Illinois University highlighted the role of physical attractiveness in fairy tales. And along with that, they teach that unattractive people are more likely to be evil. That is as false a lesson for a child to learn as it is pernicious.”
The role of myths in society can expand to fill a much larger space for adults, linked with religion as it often is. There is a twin danger here; that it undermines the tradition of rational and scientific thought and that it can be used as a tool in societal conflicts in a way that exacerbates religious or racial divides. In a country such as India with a multiplicity of communities, this myth making can get out of hand. The results may be mundane – such as an excess of public holidays, many of them based on obscure events of dubious historical and religious relevance – but no less harmful for that. ‘
Concluding remarks
1. Initiative has to be taken by leaders/spokes-persons of different religions, intellectuals, writers, sociologists and persons of repute (and not Government ) to form a loosely knit body comprising of representatives of all religions, like the United Religious Initiative (URI ) formed in USA in 1996 ( Please see ‘ Points to be noted above ) . URI is composed of 400 Co-operation circles ( member groups ) in 70 countries. Alternatively, the Indian chapter of URI could be energised to formulate guidelines to be followed by all religions in ensuring peaceful ‘live and let live’ between followers of different faiths.
2. Governments should maintain strictly equi-distance policy on matters relating to different religions.
3. Changes in law relating to any religion should be based on advice / recommendations of that religion, which should be discussed in URI before Government stepping in with legislation.
4. Activities, such as, demonstrations, violence, denigrating a religion, propaganda against another religion, etc., should be firmly dealt with by Government.
5. Fourth estate should play a crucial role in improving relations between religions. It should be cautious in covering religious activities, inter-religion strife, etc., to ensure that involvement of fourth estate goes to improve inter and intra religious problems.
6. Those who want to avoid religious strife and hatred, should play a positive role in counseling their own Godmen, when the pronouncements of the latter do not help in harmony between religions.
7. School and college text books should be vetted and if required amended to ensure that wittingly or unwittingly the written words go against religious harmony.
8. Community groups should be formed consisting of elders of different faiths whose members are part of the community to ensure that minor differences between members of different faiths do not widen the gap between people and more importantly such differences do not escalate to physical violence or vandalism.
9.Parents / elders in the families should make efforts to educate their wards to follow a path of ‘ live and let live.’
*********
Sunday, January 18, 2009
HISTORY TELLS US THAT WE ARE LILY WHITE
(But, according to most people in the world including Indians, that is not the case with other countries, particularly in respect of adversaries. But then their history books say the same. The background for inculcating this belief is because History (books) taught in schools/colleges of each country has to be approved by its Government. And no Government is going to admit easily that it was wrong in the past. Further, Governments wittingly or unwittingly eulogize Governments’ actions in the past whereas history of adversaries is depicted in none too positively).
It is reported in the newspapers that among other things history taught in Pakistan school contain the following:
‘ The British began….in conjunction with Hindus, to greatly suppress Muslims.’ Muhammad Ali ( Jinnah ) felt Hindus wanted to make Muslims slaves. As he hated slavery, he left Congress…………….. India, with the help of Hindus living in East Pakistan, instigated people living there, and in Dec. 1971 invaded ….. All of us should receive military training and be prepared to fight the enemy……….In the 1971 India-Pakistan war, the Pakistan armed forces created new records of bravery and the Indian forces were defeated everywhere.
The British had the objective to takeover India and to achieve this, they made Hindus join them and Hindus were very glad to side with the British. After capturing the sub-continent, the British began on the one hand loot of all the things produced in this area, and on the other in conjunction with Hindus, to greatly suppress the Muslims.
Their ( Muslim saints ) teachings dispelled many superstitions of the Hindus and reformed their bad practices. Thereby Hindu religion of the olden times came to an end.
And so on and so forth.
Long back, when countries were ruled by kings, courtiers had no other choice ( the king could behead them ) but to laud their kings and even when this or that king was defeated in a war, cover up the defeat. On to modern history. Kings continued to rule some countries. Some were ruled by Governments of various hues. Courtiers were replaced by Government machinery. Paeans of praise were replaced by cover ups and justifications.
The above position has to be expected. German History books ( As said above, history books in most, if not all, countries have to be approved by the respective governments ) cannot state that it started a mindless war. American history writing cannot question the justification of why the atom bomb was dropped on Japan instead of on Germany which was the main villain for the holocaust or that it was foolhardy for America to go to war in Korea or Vietnam. Objective writing by Historians of any country ran the risk of creating animosity with the Government and readers, the latter group also wanting to see their history from the prism of partisanship. It is only during the last five or six decades that books with somewhat objective enumeration of history by independent historians are available for the public. But Government has to stick to the position taken on any matter.
The matter is further complicated by the fact that Governments usually put out only their versions on the stand taken by Government and the supporting arguments for that stand. Counter views of other countries are not highlighted. Unfortunately fourth estate, either because of lethargy to ascertain facts from the other side or to be on the right side of Government or taking the view that ‘ our country ‘ must be right, do not publish contrarians views.
The somewhat elaborate preface as above was required for the reader to have better understanding of what is explained below.
Major events in the Indian history in the 20th century
1. Our independence from British yoke
British was forced to leave India by the agitation started by the people of India. That is our claim and history. But there is another theory and that is that British had decided to leave India at some stage of our starting the agitation. Had the British wanted, it could have recruited more people to the Army and repressed the agitation. But the folklore of our agitation winning freedom from British is ear soothing and gladdening our hearts, that we would not like to dwell too deeply on such matters.
2. Partition
For agreeing to have a united India ( including Pakistan ), Jinnah bargained for the post of the first Prime Minister of United India and further demanded a few of his Muslim friends being given important portfolios in the Cabinet. Gandhiji was fully aware of the unreasonableness of the demand. Yet to ensure that the country remains a single unit, Gandhiji was inclined to accept the proposal, though the Congress was strongly opposed to the demand. To be fair to Congress, it was an unreasonable demand. And further nobody at that time envisaged that bifurcation of the country would lead to such a large scale carnage immediately in the after math of partition of the unified country. It spawned mistrust between the two countries and populace of the same and culminating in military skirmishes and wars. Yet another offshoot of the carnage was the polarization of Muslims and Hindus in India.
3. Annexation of the erstwhile independent countries as States of India and Pakistan
Under the Indian Independence Act each princely State had the choice of joining either India or Pakistan. Obviously the choice of each princely State would be spelt out by the Government of the state, which meant the ruler ( king ) of the state.
But what actually happened was as below:
Kashmir: The ruler of Kashmir indicated that it wanted to join India. So India sent troops to Kashmir to thwart the move by Pakistan ( through liberation forces ) to annex Kashmir with Pakistan. India succeeded in this, though a small part got occupied by Pakistan. Subsequently the issue came up before the UN and India agreed to hold a plebiscite. However, the plebiscite was never held.
(After 60 years of Kashmir being part of India, holding elections there as in other parts of the country, spending much more money there than any where else in the country, giving a special status to that State ( No Indian can own property there ), posting a large contingent of military there for the protection of Kashmiris, Government of India is wary of holding a plebiscite in Kashmir on whether the people there want to opt to be part of India or Pakistan or an independent country, though the last option was not part of Indian Independence Act. It is difficult for Kashmir to exist, much less progress, if it becomes an independent country, given its geography, infra structure, economic development, etc., Yet, Government of India is not confident whether Kashmiris would vote for continuing to be part of India, should a plebiscite is held ).
Junagarh: The Nawab of Junagarh ( a Muslim ) declared that his State would join Pakistan. Majority of the people of Junagarh were Hindus. Indian forces moved to Junagarh and occupied the state. Then, to confirm the legitimacy of India’s action, India held a plebiscite in which overwhelming majority of people voted for joining India. ( Note he difference in the approach of India between Kashmir on the one hand and Junagarh on the other )
Hyderabad: The Nizam of Hyderabad wanted to continue Hyderabad as an independent country. The Nizam also started some dialogue with Pakistan. Indian Government through police action annexed Hyderabad on the ground that there cannot be an independent country surrounded by Indian regions.
Goa: Goa was ruled by Portugal for a long time. Portugal was not in favour of Goa joining India. In the 60s, people of Goa started agitation for Goa joining India. On the ground (pretext) of ensuring peace, India marched police forces to Goa. Government of Portugal, probably felt that with Indian police force in Goa and indications of Indian Army marching to Goa, it may be better to allow Goa to join India. And this happened.
Pondichery and Mahe: These were French colonies within India. French voluntarily decided to allow these regions becoming part of India.
Summation: Strategically all actions taken by India, as above, were in the interests of India. Morality was not the issue. These were pragmatic actions. The will of the rulers or wishes of people were not the prime criteria. It is all history now. Yet, the fact remains that India cannot take a ‘ holier than thou attitude ‘ on such matters.
4. Arunachal Pradesh
Before British annexation in 1858, most of the region of now christiand Arunachal Pradesh was more or less under the loose control of Tibet and Bhutan.
In 1913-1914 representatives of China, Tibet and Britain ( meaning British Goernment ruling India ) negotiated a treaty in India: the Simla Convention.. British administrator, Sir Henry McMahon, drew up the 550 mile (890 km) McMahon Line as the border between British India and Outer Tibet during the Simla Conference. The Tibetan and British representatives at the conference agreed to the line, which ceded Tawang and other Tibetan areas to the imperial British Empire.The Chinese representative had no problems with the border between British India and Outer Tibet. However on the issue of the boder between Outer Tibet and Inner Tibet the talks broke down. Thus, the Chinese representative refused to accept the agreement and walked out. The Tibetan Government and British Government went ahead with the Simla Agreement and declared that the benefits of other articles of this treaty would not be bestowed on China as long as it stays out of the purview. The Chinese position since then has been that since China had suzerainty over Tibet, the line was invalid without Chinese agreement. Furthermore, by refusing to sign the Simla documents, the Chinese Government had escaped according any recognition to the validity of the McMahon Line.
The situation developed further as India became independent and the People's Republic of China was established in the late 1940s. With the China poised to take over Tibet, India unilaterally declared the McMahon Line to be the boundary in November 1950, However, China never recognized the McMahon Line which meant that China did not accept the position of the whole of present Arunachal Pradesh being part of India.
In a nutshell, the stand of Indian Government is that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India and that has been the position for long. However, China disputes this position.
5. Creation of Bangladesh
After the creation of Pakistan, with two segments, one in the West and another in the East ( which later became Bangladesh ), East Pakistanis noticed that whenever one of them was elected as Prime Minister of Pakistan, he was swiftly deposed by the Pakistan Government ( essentially establishment manned by West Pakistanis ). Secondly, East Pakistan received a step motherly treatment on various matters from the Government of Pakistan.
The situation reached a climax in 1970 when the Awami League, the largest East Pakistani political party, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, won a landslide victory in the national elections. The party won 167 of the 169 seats allotted to East Pakistan, and thus a majority of the 313 seats in the National Assembly. This gave the Awami League the constitutional right to form a government. However, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (a Sindhi), the leader of the Pakistan Peoples Party, refused to allow Rahman to become the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Instead, he proposed the idea of having two Prime Ministers, one for each wing.
Repression of the people, particularly Hindus, of East Pakistan started by the Armed forces of West Pakistan stationed in East Pakistan. Refugees started pouring into India, creating a major problem for India.
India also started indirect assistance to liberation movement of East Pakistan. Apprehending further involvement of India in the affairs of East Pakistan, Government of Pakistan attacked India on the Western side. India declared war with Pakistan and liberated East Pakistan from the rulers of West Pakistan.
Hence essentially the reasons for India attacking Pakistan were two: (1) Influx of large number of refugees from East Pakistan to India, and (2) Pakistan’s attack of India on the Western side. ( However, many of the observers of the developments on this subject were of the view that India wanted to vivesect Pakistan and also weaken Pakistan.) By going to war and winning the same, the then Government of India ( which meant the Congress Party ) also received encomiums from the people of India.
Pakistan never forgot and never forgave India for the creation of Bangladesh.
6. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam ( LTTE ), Sri Lanka
· Sri Lanka became an independent country in 1948.
· Population: 70% Budhists, 15% Hindus, 8% Muslims & 7% Christians
· Tamil population in Sri Lanka: 5% ( 8.55 lakhs )
· Historically Sri Lankan monarchs had used the services of South Indian labour since centuries BC. Further, Tamils in large numbers came to Sri Lanka in the 19th and 20th centuries essentially to work in plantations. In 1964 a large percentage were expatriated back to India most of whom were then absorbed as workers in Tamil Nadu Tea plantions.
· The socio economic indicators of the Tamil community was amongst the worst in the country. The community in general was isolated with little contact with Sinhalese, which consistituted the major ethnic people of Sri Lanka.
· LTTE was formed in the 70s to carve out an independent Tamil State ( country ).
· 31 countries ( India among them ) have currently proscribed LTTE on the ground of it being a terrorist organisation.
· In 1987, faced with growing anger amongst its ( India’s ) own Tamils, and a flood of refugees to India, India intervened directly in the conflict for the first time by initially airdropping food parcels into Jaffna ( by way of helping Tamils).
· After subsequent negotiations, India and Sri Lanka entered into an agreement. The peace accord assigned a certain degree of regional autonomy in the Tamil areas with Eelam People's Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) controlling the regional council and called for the Tamil militant groups to lay down their arms.
· Furthermore, India was to send a peacekeeping force, named the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka to enforce the disarmament of Tamils and to watch over the regional council.
· That led to LTTE getting itself engaged in military conflict with the Indian Army. Indian Army launched number of assaults on the LTTE. The ruthlessness of this campaign, and the Indian army's subsequent anti-LTTE operations made it extremely unpopular amongst many Tamils in Sri Lanka.
· The Indian intervention was also unpopular amongst the Sinhalese majority, and the IPKF became bogged down in the fighting with the Tamil Tigers for over 2 years, experiencing heavy losses. IPKF left Sri Lanka in 1990 on request of the Sri Lankan government.
· Fighting continued throughout the 1990s, and was marked by two key assassinations carried out by the LTTE, that of former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991, and Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993.
· In 2001 the LTTE dropped its demand for a separate state. Instead, they stated that a form of regional autonomy would meet their demands In March 2002 both sides signed an official Ceasefire Agreement. As part of the agreement, Norway and the other Nordic countries agreed to jointly monitor the ceasefire through the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission.
· Even though LTTE was formed as a military group, it later transformed itself to a de facto Government. LTTE controls sections in the north of the island,. LTTE has implemented a judicial system and has also established a police force Another state function of the LTTE administration is social welfare. This humanitarian assistance arm is funded by tax collection internally . LTTE has also established an education and health sector that offers services to the people under their control. They have also created a human rights organization, called Northeast Secretariat on Human Rights, that functions to advocate the rights of Tamils.
· In 1984, LTTE created a unit of female squad called the Freedom Birds. This unit was the first group of women to be given military training in India ( Tamil Nadu ).
Summing up
· Present position is that Sinhalese and Tamils as well as Srilankan Government and LTTE are wary of Indian Government.
· People and Government of Tamil Nadu are sympathetic to the cause of LTTE and have been influencing Government of India to take pro active approach in protecting the intersts of Tamilians in Sri Lanka and also LTTE.
· In Tamil Nadu politics, particularly in respect of vote banks, LTTE issue is an extremely sensitive one.
· It has been said ( though not confirmed ) that financial assistance to LTTE is being provided by Tamil Nadu political parties.
· Similarly, earlier it was said that LTTE soldiers were being trained in Tamil Nadu.
Conclusion:
Actions taken by Government of India in this vexatious issue had boomranged on the Government of India. If the Government of India does not help Tamils / LTTE, then both Tamil Nadu Government and a large number of Tamils in India would be alianated. On the other hand if the Government helps then it would create further tension between the Governments of India and Sri Lanka.
In other words, Government of India has only a Hobson’s choice.
7. Dalai Lama’s agitation against China
Yes, the agitation against Chinese rule in Tibet so far has been peaceful. And considering Buddhist ideology, it can be expected to continue peaceful. Yet one cannot close our eyes to facts, such as, India is providing financial help to Dali Lama and his disciples and while accepting the fact of Tibet being part of China, from Indian soil Dalai Lama is allowed to peacefully agitate seeking special status for Tibet as compared to other provinces of China.
Hardly anybody would oppose Government of India giving more or less asylum to Buddhist people in Dharmasala and financially helping them. But how will Chinese view this development. Obviously with considerable disfavour. After Tibet becoming a part of China and this position willingly or unwillingly having been accepted by other countries in the world, Indian Government is not on firm footing in giving a helping hand to Dalai Lama in his efforts to get some sort of autonomy or special status for Tibet within the larger Chinese frame.
8. Malaysia:
Malays, Indians ( mainly Tamils ) and Chinese constitute the population of Malaysia. Both Indians and Chinese have been there for long. Chinese, who came later, are mainly into business and Indians in various professions. Malays are not able to compete with either of the ethnic groups with the result that while Chinese and Indians have prospered, Malays have been not doing well. Inevitably the heart of the Malaysian Government and politicians is with Malays. So the Government started reserving Government jobs for Malays ( a la ‘ people of the soil’ syndrome in India ). Since Malays are hardly into business, Chinese were not affected by this policy, whereas it affected Indians there, who were in the service class. Tamils mounted some agitation and sought help of Indian Government. Of course, whenever and wherever Tamils are involved, the State Government of Tamil Nadu starts exercising pressure on Government of India to do something. Now in this case, Government of India can do precious little, except to suggest to Malaysian Government to be sympathetic to the wishes of Tamils there. And that precisely is what Government of India did.
9. Indians living in other countries
Large numbers of Indians have been living in other countries for a long time, i.e., Gulf countries, USA, UK, and Malaysia. The trend during the last two or three decades indicate that the number of Indians migrating to those countries for work would continue. Many of the Indians now in those countries are second ( and a few third ) generation Indians. Increasingly the number of Indians settling down permanently in those countries is going up. While assimilating partly with the country of their stay, most of them have naturally affinity towards India. But what becomes tricky is how far the Government of India should go in supporting those Indians settled in those countries when they oppose some policy changes made by the Governments in those countries which are inimical to the interests of Indians there. .
The point to be noted is that in such matters there is no straight line and no uniform approach can also be taken. Fairness will have to be tempered with pragmatism.
10. India producing nuclear weapon
Had Pakistan produced nuclear bomb before India did the same, the Government and people of India would have castigated Pakistan for starting a race with India on the matter with no option for India but to produce similar weapon, converting this area into a nuclear war zone, etc., And Indian Government would have sought intervention of major world powers to restrain Pakistan from such a venture. Indian stand would be as follows. Unlike India, Pakistan is not a peace loving nation, past record of Pakistan shows that it can behave in an extremely irresponsible manner related to relations with India, Pakistan is essentially ruled by military and a nuclear weapon in the hands of military is a dangerous development and now that Pakistan has a nuclear weapon, India has no other alternative but to produce a similar weapon and India being a peace loving country it would desist from ‘ first use’ of the nuclear bomb to be produced.
India produced the bomb first. Pakistan felt that it has no alternative but to produce nuclear weapon. How else would Pakistan react, especially when the military there has a strong grip on the political leadership.
11. Pakistan a failed State
That has been glib statement emanating from fourth estate and many of the politicians and experts in India during the recent times, i.e., after the terror strikes on Mumbai. It is also repeatedly stated that Pakistan has hardly any control on its Military, particularly its ISI wing and no control on terrorists. The conclusion drawn is that Pakistan Government cannot contain either its military or the terrorists. There is lot of truth in these statements and appraisal of ground reality.
But then consider the following two facts in respect of India
1 ) It is said by many experts that in respect of over 60 districts in the country, the writ of Moaists runs and that local administration is powerless in implementing law and order and administration.
2 ) According to Sainath’s wonderful book ‘ Everybody likes a draught ‘
whatever economic development India has achieved during the last 60 years, has bye-passed millions people, including Adivasis. Sainath has described in detail the harrowing conditions under which these people live.
When this is the position, how can we do finger pointing at Pakistan as a failed State.
Conclusions
· Churchill said ‘ We have no permanent enemies or friends but only permanent interests.’ That is true for all countries.
· There is frequent diplomatic pressure on all Governments when it comes to actions taken by the Governments which have ramifications on other countries. What is put out for public consumption would not be the whole truth. That is how diplomacy works. And Governments have to give due consideration to such pressures.
· Intelligence inputs. Government approaches are sometimes influenced, and it should be so, by intelligence inputs, which it cannot share with public. Sometimes this leads to people being baffled by Government actions.
· Quite often Governments are faced with Hobson’s choice. Act, and it will be condemned. Not act, then also it will be condemned.
· Finger pointing by public is easy. While appreciating the sentiments of people, Governments have to be pragmatic and more importantly Governments have to weigh between public approbation and long term interest of the country.
· Uniform policies or approaches cannot be taken by Governments in respect of problems with other countries. Certain adhocism is bound to be there and rarely though there could also be contradictions.
Foot-note:
The trouble with history in such matters is the changing scenario. The position as obtained thousand years back might have been changed five hundred years back and then further changed 300 years back, with one country or another dissenting with the position obtained at any stage. A country may repudiate covenants signed by its erstwhile rulers. Ethnicity, contiguous areas, etc., would be brought up to back the claim. There is no right and wrong in such matters. Expediency, self interest, etc., cannot be brushed aside. Solutions can be found only through discussions, at times with involvement of third countries.
Hitler felt that other countries had given a raw deal to West Germany and hence the attack against other countries was justified.
USA, the self appointed guardian of world, righteously attacked Iraq on the premise that a rogue state like Iraq should not be allowed to proceed with nuclear ( weapon ) research.
USSR wanted to ensure that the world does not come under the hegemony of USA and built a mighty military state, to repel Western World from any attack on USSR or its allies.
The above examples could be multiplied.
In short, each country justifies its actions, though many of which are inimical to the interests of other countries.
It is the same in societies. ‘Yes, there may be a few blemishes in us. But on the whole we are O.K, but not our neighbours. Look at what they did on this or that issue ‘ - that is the generally held view of all. It is the same with societies, countries, religions. In brief, ‘ the other guy is at a fault.’ Nobody thinks of grey areas or that both could be right from their own perspectives.
LTTE has been seeking separate Tamil Elam. Dalai Lama is seeking special status for Tibet. While the two demands are not the same, is there not similarity.
Signing off
A wag said something like the following:
‘ Why not exchange the history books of various countries to find out how the same facts / developments related to history are told differently by each country.’
***
It is reported in the newspapers that among other things history taught in Pakistan school contain the following:
‘ The British began….in conjunction with Hindus, to greatly suppress Muslims.’ Muhammad Ali ( Jinnah ) felt Hindus wanted to make Muslims slaves. As he hated slavery, he left Congress…………….. India, with the help of Hindus living in East Pakistan, instigated people living there, and in Dec. 1971 invaded ….. All of us should receive military training and be prepared to fight the enemy……….In the 1971 India-Pakistan war, the Pakistan armed forces created new records of bravery and the Indian forces were defeated everywhere.
The British had the objective to takeover India and to achieve this, they made Hindus join them and Hindus were very glad to side with the British. After capturing the sub-continent, the British began on the one hand loot of all the things produced in this area, and on the other in conjunction with Hindus, to greatly suppress the Muslims.
Their ( Muslim saints ) teachings dispelled many superstitions of the Hindus and reformed their bad practices. Thereby Hindu religion of the olden times came to an end.
And so on and so forth.
Long back, when countries were ruled by kings, courtiers had no other choice ( the king could behead them ) but to laud their kings and even when this or that king was defeated in a war, cover up the defeat. On to modern history. Kings continued to rule some countries. Some were ruled by Governments of various hues. Courtiers were replaced by Government machinery. Paeans of praise were replaced by cover ups and justifications.
The above position has to be expected. German History books ( As said above, history books in most, if not all, countries have to be approved by the respective governments ) cannot state that it started a mindless war. American history writing cannot question the justification of why the atom bomb was dropped on Japan instead of on Germany which was the main villain for the holocaust or that it was foolhardy for America to go to war in Korea or Vietnam. Objective writing by Historians of any country ran the risk of creating animosity with the Government and readers, the latter group also wanting to see their history from the prism of partisanship. It is only during the last five or six decades that books with somewhat objective enumeration of history by independent historians are available for the public. But Government has to stick to the position taken on any matter.
The matter is further complicated by the fact that Governments usually put out only their versions on the stand taken by Government and the supporting arguments for that stand. Counter views of other countries are not highlighted. Unfortunately fourth estate, either because of lethargy to ascertain facts from the other side or to be on the right side of Government or taking the view that ‘ our country ‘ must be right, do not publish contrarians views.
The somewhat elaborate preface as above was required for the reader to have better understanding of what is explained below.
Major events in the Indian history in the 20th century
1. Our independence from British yoke
British was forced to leave India by the agitation started by the people of India. That is our claim and history. But there is another theory and that is that British had decided to leave India at some stage of our starting the agitation. Had the British wanted, it could have recruited more people to the Army and repressed the agitation. But the folklore of our agitation winning freedom from British is ear soothing and gladdening our hearts, that we would not like to dwell too deeply on such matters.
2. Partition
For agreeing to have a united India ( including Pakistan ), Jinnah bargained for the post of the first Prime Minister of United India and further demanded a few of his Muslim friends being given important portfolios in the Cabinet. Gandhiji was fully aware of the unreasonableness of the demand. Yet to ensure that the country remains a single unit, Gandhiji was inclined to accept the proposal, though the Congress was strongly opposed to the demand. To be fair to Congress, it was an unreasonable demand. And further nobody at that time envisaged that bifurcation of the country would lead to such a large scale carnage immediately in the after math of partition of the unified country. It spawned mistrust between the two countries and populace of the same and culminating in military skirmishes and wars. Yet another offshoot of the carnage was the polarization of Muslims and Hindus in India.
3. Annexation of the erstwhile independent countries as States of India and Pakistan
Under the Indian Independence Act each princely State had the choice of joining either India or Pakistan. Obviously the choice of each princely State would be spelt out by the Government of the state, which meant the ruler ( king ) of the state.
But what actually happened was as below:
Kashmir: The ruler of Kashmir indicated that it wanted to join India. So India sent troops to Kashmir to thwart the move by Pakistan ( through liberation forces ) to annex Kashmir with Pakistan. India succeeded in this, though a small part got occupied by Pakistan. Subsequently the issue came up before the UN and India agreed to hold a plebiscite. However, the plebiscite was never held.
(After 60 years of Kashmir being part of India, holding elections there as in other parts of the country, spending much more money there than any where else in the country, giving a special status to that State ( No Indian can own property there ), posting a large contingent of military there for the protection of Kashmiris, Government of India is wary of holding a plebiscite in Kashmir on whether the people there want to opt to be part of India or Pakistan or an independent country, though the last option was not part of Indian Independence Act. It is difficult for Kashmir to exist, much less progress, if it becomes an independent country, given its geography, infra structure, economic development, etc., Yet, Government of India is not confident whether Kashmiris would vote for continuing to be part of India, should a plebiscite is held ).
Junagarh: The Nawab of Junagarh ( a Muslim ) declared that his State would join Pakistan. Majority of the people of Junagarh were Hindus. Indian forces moved to Junagarh and occupied the state. Then, to confirm the legitimacy of India’s action, India held a plebiscite in which overwhelming majority of people voted for joining India. ( Note he difference in the approach of India between Kashmir on the one hand and Junagarh on the other )
Hyderabad: The Nizam of Hyderabad wanted to continue Hyderabad as an independent country. The Nizam also started some dialogue with Pakistan. Indian Government through police action annexed Hyderabad on the ground that there cannot be an independent country surrounded by Indian regions.
Goa: Goa was ruled by Portugal for a long time. Portugal was not in favour of Goa joining India. In the 60s, people of Goa started agitation for Goa joining India. On the ground (pretext) of ensuring peace, India marched police forces to Goa. Government of Portugal, probably felt that with Indian police force in Goa and indications of Indian Army marching to Goa, it may be better to allow Goa to join India. And this happened.
Pondichery and Mahe: These were French colonies within India. French voluntarily decided to allow these regions becoming part of India.
Summation: Strategically all actions taken by India, as above, were in the interests of India. Morality was not the issue. These were pragmatic actions. The will of the rulers or wishes of people were not the prime criteria. It is all history now. Yet, the fact remains that India cannot take a ‘ holier than thou attitude ‘ on such matters.
4. Arunachal Pradesh
Before British annexation in 1858, most of the region of now christiand Arunachal Pradesh was more or less under the loose control of Tibet and Bhutan.
In 1913-1914 representatives of China, Tibet and Britain ( meaning British Goernment ruling India ) negotiated a treaty in India: the Simla Convention.. British administrator, Sir Henry McMahon, drew up the 550 mile (890 km) McMahon Line as the border between British India and Outer Tibet during the Simla Conference. The Tibetan and British representatives at the conference agreed to the line, which ceded Tawang and other Tibetan areas to the imperial British Empire.The Chinese representative had no problems with the border between British India and Outer Tibet. However on the issue of the boder between Outer Tibet and Inner Tibet the talks broke down. Thus, the Chinese representative refused to accept the agreement and walked out. The Tibetan Government and British Government went ahead with the Simla Agreement and declared that the benefits of other articles of this treaty would not be bestowed on China as long as it stays out of the purview. The Chinese position since then has been that since China had suzerainty over Tibet, the line was invalid without Chinese agreement. Furthermore, by refusing to sign the Simla documents, the Chinese Government had escaped according any recognition to the validity of the McMahon Line.
The situation developed further as India became independent and the People's Republic of China was established in the late 1940s. With the China poised to take over Tibet, India unilaterally declared the McMahon Line to be the boundary in November 1950, However, China never recognized the McMahon Line which meant that China did not accept the position of the whole of present Arunachal Pradesh being part of India.
In a nutshell, the stand of Indian Government is that Arunachal Pradesh is an integral part of India and that has been the position for long. However, China disputes this position.
5. Creation of Bangladesh
After the creation of Pakistan, with two segments, one in the West and another in the East ( which later became Bangladesh ), East Pakistanis noticed that whenever one of them was elected as Prime Minister of Pakistan, he was swiftly deposed by the Pakistan Government ( essentially establishment manned by West Pakistanis ). Secondly, East Pakistan received a step motherly treatment on various matters from the Government of Pakistan.
The situation reached a climax in 1970 when the Awami League, the largest East Pakistani political party, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, won a landslide victory in the national elections. The party won 167 of the 169 seats allotted to East Pakistan, and thus a majority of the 313 seats in the National Assembly. This gave the Awami League the constitutional right to form a government. However, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (a Sindhi), the leader of the Pakistan Peoples Party, refused to allow Rahman to become the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Instead, he proposed the idea of having two Prime Ministers, one for each wing.
Repression of the people, particularly Hindus, of East Pakistan started by the Armed forces of West Pakistan stationed in East Pakistan. Refugees started pouring into India, creating a major problem for India.
India also started indirect assistance to liberation movement of East Pakistan. Apprehending further involvement of India in the affairs of East Pakistan, Government of Pakistan attacked India on the Western side. India declared war with Pakistan and liberated East Pakistan from the rulers of West Pakistan.
Hence essentially the reasons for India attacking Pakistan were two: (1) Influx of large number of refugees from East Pakistan to India, and (2) Pakistan’s attack of India on the Western side. ( However, many of the observers of the developments on this subject were of the view that India wanted to vivesect Pakistan and also weaken Pakistan.) By going to war and winning the same, the then Government of India ( which meant the Congress Party ) also received encomiums from the people of India.
Pakistan never forgot and never forgave India for the creation of Bangladesh.
6. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam ( LTTE ), Sri Lanka
· Sri Lanka became an independent country in 1948.
· Population: 70% Budhists, 15% Hindus, 8% Muslims & 7% Christians
· Tamil population in Sri Lanka: 5% ( 8.55 lakhs )
· Historically Sri Lankan monarchs had used the services of South Indian labour since centuries BC. Further, Tamils in large numbers came to Sri Lanka in the 19th and 20th centuries essentially to work in plantations. In 1964 a large percentage were expatriated back to India most of whom were then absorbed as workers in Tamil Nadu Tea plantions.
· The socio economic indicators of the Tamil community was amongst the worst in the country. The community in general was isolated with little contact with Sinhalese, which consistituted the major ethnic people of Sri Lanka.
· LTTE was formed in the 70s to carve out an independent Tamil State ( country ).
· 31 countries ( India among them ) have currently proscribed LTTE on the ground of it being a terrorist organisation.
· In 1987, faced with growing anger amongst its ( India’s ) own Tamils, and a flood of refugees to India, India intervened directly in the conflict for the first time by initially airdropping food parcels into Jaffna ( by way of helping Tamils).
· After subsequent negotiations, India and Sri Lanka entered into an agreement. The peace accord assigned a certain degree of regional autonomy in the Tamil areas with Eelam People's Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) controlling the regional council and called for the Tamil militant groups to lay down their arms.
· Furthermore, India was to send a peacekeeping force, named the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) to Sri Lanka to enforce the disarmament of Tamils and to watch over the regional council.
· That led to LTTE getting itself engaged in military conflict with the Indian Army. Indian Army launched number of assaults on the LTTE. The ruthlessness of this campaign, and the Indian army's subsequent anti-LTTE operations made it extremely unpopular amongst many Tamils in Sri Lanka.
· The Indian intervention was also unpopular amongst the Sinhalese majority, and the IPKF became bogged down in the fighting with the Tamil Tigers for over 2 years, experiencing heavy losses. IPKF left Sri Lanka in 1990 on request of the Sri Lankan government.
· Fighting continued throughout the 1990s, and was marked by two key assassinations carried out by the LTTE, that of former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1991, and Sri Lankan President Ranasinghe Premadasa in 1993.
· In 2001 the LTTE dropped its demand for a separate state. Instead, they stated that a form of regional autonomy would meet their demands In March 2002 both sides signed an official Ceasefire Agreement. As part of the agreement, Norway and the other Nordic countries agreed to jointly monitor the ceasefire through the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission.
· Even though LTTE was formed as a military group, it later transformed itself to a de facto Government. LTTE controls sections in the north of the island,. LTTE has implemented a judicial system and has also established a police force Another state function of the LTTE administration is social welfare. This humanitarian assistance arm is funded by tax collection internally . LTTE has also established an education and health sector that offers services to the people under their control. They have also created a human rights organization, called Northeast Secretariat on Human Rights, that functions to advocate the rights of Tamils.
· In 1984, LTTE created a unit of female squad called the Freedom Birds. This unit was the first group of women to be given military training in India ( Tamil Nadu ).
Summing up
· Present position is that Sinhalese and Tamils as well as Srilankan Government and LTTE are wary of Indian Government.
· People and Government of Tamil Nadu are sympathetic to the cause of LTTE and have been influencing Government of India to take pro active approach in protecting the intersts of Tamilians in Sri Lanka and also LTTE.
· In Tamil Nadu politics, particularly in respect of vote banks, LTTE issue is an extremely sensitive one.
· It has been said ( though not confirmed ) that financial assistance to LTTE is being provided by Tamil Nadu political parties.
· Similarly, earlier it was said that LTTE soldiers were being trained in Tamil Nadu.
Conclusion:
Actions taken by Government of India in this vexatious issue had boomranged on the Government of India. If the Government of India does not help Tamils / LTTE, then both Tamil Nadu Government and a large number of Tamils in India would be alianated. On the other hand if the Government helps then it would create further tension between the Governments of India and Sri Lanka.
In other words, Government of India has only a Hobson’s choice.
7. Dalai Lama’s agitation against China
Yes, the agitation against Chinese rule in Tibet so far has been peaceful. And considering Buddhist ideology, it can be expected to continue peaceful. Yet one cannot close our eyes to facts, such as, India is providing financial help to Dali Lama and his disciples and while accepting the fact of Tibet being part of China, from Indian soil Dalai Lama is allowed to peacefully agitate seeking special status for Tibet as compared to other provinces of China.
Hardly anybody would oppose Government of India giving more or less asylum to Buddhist people in Dharmasala and financially helping them. But how will Chinese view this development. Obviously with considerable disfavour. After Tibet becoming a part of China and this position willingly or unwillingly having been accepted by other countries in the world, Indian Government is not on firm footing in giving a helping hand to Dalai Lama in his efforts to get some sort of autonomy or special status for Tibet within the larger Chinese frame.
8. Malaysia:
Malays, Indians ( mainly Tamils ) and Chinese constitute the population of Malaysia. Both Indians and Chinese have been there for long. Chinese, who came later, are mainly into business and Indians in various professions. Malays are not able to compete with either of the ethnic groups with the result that while Chinese and Indians have prospered, Malays have been not doing well. Inevitably the heart of the Malaysian Government and politicians is with Malays. So the Government started reserving Government jobs for Malays ( a la ‘ people of the soil’ syndrome in India ). Since Malays are hardly into business, Chinese were not affected by this policy, whereas it affected Indians there, who were in the service class. Tamils mounted some agitation and sought help of Indian Government. Of course, whenever and wherever Tamils are involved, the State Government of Tamil Nadu starts exercising pressure on Government of India to do something. Now in this case, Government of India can do precious little, except to suggest to Malaysian Government to be sympathetic to the wishes of Tamils there. And that precisely is what Government of India did.
9. Indians living in other countries
Large numbers of Indians have been living in other countries for a long time, i.e., Gulf countries, USA, UK, and Malaysia. The trend during the last two or three decades indicate that the number of Indians migrating to those countries for work would continue. Many of the Indians now in those countries are second ( and a few third ) generation Indians. Increasingly the number of Indians settling down permanently in those countries is going up. While assimilating partly with the country of their stay, most of them have naturally affinity towards India. But what becomes tricky is how far the Government of India should go in supporting those Indians settled in those countries when they oppose some policy changes made by the Governments in those countries which are inimical to the interests of Indians there. .
The point to be noted is that in such matters there is no straight line and no uniform approach can also be taken. Fairness will have to be tempered with pragmatism.
10. India producing nuclear weapon
Had Pakistan produced nuclear bomb before India did the same, the Government and people of India would have castigated Pakistan for starting a race with India on the matter with no option for India but to produce similar weapon, converting this area into a nuclear war zone, etc., And Indian Government would have sought intervention of major world powers to restrain Pakistan from such a venture. Indian stand would be as follows. Unlike India, Pakistan is not a peace loving nation, past record of Pakistan shows that it can behave in an extremely irresponsible manner related to relations with India, Pakistan is essentially ruled by military and a nuclear weapon in the hands of military is a dangerous development and now that Pakistan has a nuclear weapon, India has no other alternative but to produce a similar weapon and India being a peace loving country it would desist from ‘ first use’ of the nuclear bomb to be produced.
India produced the bomb first. Pakistan felt that it has no alternative but to produce nuclear weapon. How else would Pakistan react, especially when the military there has a strong grip on the political leadership.
11. Pakistan a failed State
That has been glib statement emanating from fourth estate and many of the politicians and experts in India during the recent times, i.e., after the terror strikes on Mumbai. It is also repeatedly stated that Pakistan has hardly any control on its Military, particularly its ISI wing and no control on terrorists. The conclusion drawn is that Pakistan Government cannot contain either its military or the terrorists. There is lot of truth in these statements and appraisal of ground reality.
But then consider the following two facts in respect of India
1 ) It is said by many experts that in respect of over 60 districts in the country, the writ of Moaists runs and that local administration is powerless in implementing law and order and administration.
2 ) According to Sainath’s wonderful book ‘ Everybody likes a draught ‘
whatever economic development India has achieved during the last 60 years, has bye-passed millions people, including Adivasis. Sainath has described in detail the harrowing conditions under which these people live.
When this is the position, how can we do finger pointing at Pakistan as a failed State.
Conclusions
· Churchill said ‘ We have no permanent enemies or friends but only permanent interests.’ That is true for all countries.
· There is frequent diplomatic pressure on all Governments when it comes to actions taken by the Governments which have ramifications on other countries. What is put out for public consumption would not be the whole truth. That is how diplomacy works. And Governments have to give due consideration to such pressures.
· Intelligence inputs. Government approaches are sometimes influenced, and it should be so, by intelligence inputs, which it cannot share with public. Sometimes this leads to people being baffled by Government actions.
· Quite often Governments are faced with Hobson’s choice. Act, and it will be condemned. Not act, then also it will be condemned.
· Finger pointing by public is easy. While appreciating the sentiments of people, Governments have to be pragmatic and more importantly Governments have to weigh between public approbation and long term interest of the country.
· Uniform policies or approaches cannot be taken by Governments in respect of problems with other countries. Certain adhocism is bound to be there and rarely though there could also be contradictions.
Foot-note:
The trouble with history in such matters is the changing scenario. The position as obtained thousand years back might have been changed five hundred years back and then further changed 300 years back, with one country or another dissenting with the position obtained at any stage. A country may repudiate covenants signed by its erstwhile rulers. Ethnicity, contiguous areas, etc., would be brought up to back the claim. There is no right and wrong in such matters. Expediency, self interest, etc., cannot be brushed aside. Solutions can be found only through discussions, at times with involvement of third countries.
Hitler felt that other countries had given a raw deal to West Germany and hence the attack against other countries was justified.
USA, the self appointed guardian of world, righteously attacked Iraq on the premise that a rogue state like Iraq should not be allowed to proceed with nuclear ( weapon ) research.
USSR wanted to ensure that the world does not come under the hegemony of USA and built a mighty military state, to repel Western World from any attack on USSR or its allies.
The above examples could be multiplied.
In short, each country justifies its actions, though many of which are inimical to the interests of other countries.
It is the same in societies. ‘Yes, there may be a few blemishes in us. But on the whole we are O.K, but not our neighbours. Look at what they did on this or that issue ‘ - that is the generally held view of all. It is the same with societies, countries, religions. In brief, ‘ the other guy is at a fault.’ Nobody thinks of grey areas or that both could be right from their own perspectives.
LTTE has been seeking separate Tamil Elam. Dalai Lama is seeking special status for Tibet. While the two demands are not the same, is there not similarity.
Signing off
A wag said something like the following:
‘ Why not exchange the history books of various countries to find out how the same facts / developments related to history are told differently by each country.’
***
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Reading of Books and Book shelves in homes
Occasionally TVs telecast interviews with authors, thinkers, VIPs, etc., Invariably the interviewed would have in the background his bookshelves, containing innumerable number of books, many voluminous and bound. Such interviews could be given anywhere, in the studio, in the lawn, in the sitting room, etc., But if the person interviewed is the reading type, then presto, the background of book shelf becomes a must. These people would have achieved higher positions in different walks of life. They may talk humbly. Yet the background is a give away. They want the viewers to know that they are the cerebral type and from there to thinking type. If that is not vanity, then what else is.
I am yet to find a book-shelf in a house which did not have glass doors, i.e., not covered doors obliterating the view of books. And then again most people would have book-shelves in the sitting room. Otherwise, how will the visitors know that the host is a reading type. Forget the fact that most of the books would be fictions. Chances are that few of the serious books on the shelf would not have been read by the owner ( nor any intention of reading). Such books would have been gifted to the owner or he would have purchased the same with the intention of reading at a later date. But hardly that later date materializes. I say that the serious books, particularly religious books, are for advertisement of the host’s tastes in reading and religious bent of mind. Many of the books would have been borrowed ones. People are notorious in not returning borrowed books.
This exhibitionism started long back. There were only few people then with knowledge of English. Those who learnt English wanted people to know that they know English, which at that time set them apart from the ordinary folks. So they started the (book) exhibition business in earnest. At that time even an old Railway Time Table was kept in the bookshelf since it was in English. So also old English magazines. Then paper back novels.
Then there is the human tendency to accumulate. The novels may never be read again. But people are chary of lending books, not to talk of parting with books ( even though some of them may be borrowed ones).
I have been purchasing regularly books and also lending them to friends. In fact I often insist my friends to take some of the books from me. I never ask them to return the books, except a few ones which I may think of reading again later. But I have never felt the loss of the books.
Let me end this write up with a quote from Christopher Morley:
“ I give humble and hearty thanks for the safe return of this book, which having endured the perils of my friend’s book case, and the book cases of my friend’s friends, now returns in reasonably good condition.
I give my humble and hearty thanks that my friend did not see fit to give this book to his young son to scribble what he liked or to exhibit the youngster’s mastery in tearing.
When I lent this book I deemed it to be lost. I was resigned to the bitterness of parting. I never thought to look upon its pages again.
But now that my book has come back to me I rejoice and I am exceedingly glad. I am going to bind it and sit it on the shelf of honour, for the book was lent, and yet returned.
Presently, therefore, I may return some of the books that I myself have borrowed.’
I am yet to find a book-shelf in a house which did not have glass doors, i.e., not covered doors obliterating the view of books. And then again most people would have book-shelves in the sitting room. Otherwise, how will the visitors know that the host is a reading type. Forget the fact that most of the books would be fictions. Chances are that few of the serious books on the shelf would not have been read by the owner ( nor any intention of reading). Such books would have been gifted to the owner or he would have purchased the same with the intention of reading at a later date. But hardly that later date materializes. I say that the serious books, particularly religious books, are for advertisement of the host’s tastes in reading and religious bent of mind. Many of the books would have been borrowed ones. People are notorious in not returning borrowed books.
This exhibitionism started long back. There were only few people then with knowledge of English. Those who learnt English wanted people to know that they know English, which at that time set them apart from the ordinary folks. So they started the (book) exhibition business in earnest. At that time even an old Railway Time Table was kept in the bookshelf since it was in English. So also old English magazines. Then paper back novels.
Then there is the human tendency to accumulate. The novels may never be read again. But people are chary of lending books, not to talk of parting with books ( even though some of them may be borrowed ones).
I have been purchasing regularly books and also lending them to friends. In fact I often insist my friends to take some of the books from me. I never ask them to return the books, except a few ones which I may think of reading again later. But I have never felt the loss of the books.
Let me end this write up with a quote from Christopher Morley:
“ I give humble and hearty thanks for the safe return of this book, which having endured the perils of my friend’s book case, and the book cases of my friend’s friends, now returns in reasonably good condition.
I give my humble and hearty thanks that my friend did not see fit to give this book to his young son to scribble what he liked or to exhibit the youngster’s mastery in tearing.
When I lent this book I deemed it to be lost. I was resigned to the bitterness of parting. I never thought to look upon its pages again.
But now that my book has come back to me I rejoice and I am exceedingly glad. I am going to bind it and sit it on the shelf of honour, for the book was lent, and yet returned.
Presently, therefore, I may return some of the books that I myself have borrowed.’
Saturday, January 10, 2009
POPULAION GROWTH IN INDIA
Both Government and people have become somewhat deaf to the ticking of this time bomb because we have become accustomed to the noise created by the ticking
This is the most important and serious fault-line of the Indian Government in governance since independence
Mind boggling facts
Population of India as on July 2008: 114 crores*
*As estimated by Government.
Population as per 1951 census: 36 crores
Population as per 1991 Census: 84.6 crores
Population as per 2001 Census: 102.8 crores,
i.e., 21.3% increase in a period of 10 years
Population growth rate: 1.38% per annum
Population projected:
2010: 117.5 crores
2015: 125.6 “
2020: 133.1 “
Population of Mumbai: 1.3 crores. Delhi: 1.1 crores
One out of six people of world live in India
We all know that we have a huge population and further that the same is increasing at a fast pace. Yet, for a better perception of the magnitude of the issue, some comparisons are required, as below:
· Uttar Pradesh with a population of 16.6 cr. is the fifth largest ( country/State ) when compared with countries having large population, i.e., China ( 131 cr. ), USA (29.8 cr. ), Indonesia ( 24.5 cr. ), and Brazil (18.8 cr. ) and Pakistan (16.5 cr. ).
· Maharashtra ( 9.67 cr.) and Bihar ( 8.28 cr. ) each have higher population than Germany ( 8.20 cr. )
· West Bengal ( 8.02 cr. ) is ahead of Egypt ( 7.8 cr. )
· Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh with population of 6.2 cr. and 6 cr. respectively have more or less have population equal to that of UK ( 6 cr. ), France ( 6 cr.) and would be rushing ahead to overtake Iran ( 6.8 cr. )
· The small State of Kerala with a population of 3.18 cr. will be rushing to be ahead of Canada ( 3.3 cr.)
· Population of Bangla Desh: 14.7 cr. Russia: 14.2 cr. and Japan: 12.7 cr. ( With our propensity to produce children, one would not be surprised if some of the Indian States overtake these countries in a few years in comparison to their population ).
· Both Mumbai and Delhi cities have already crossed one crore of population which is higher than the population of
many countries. e.g., Sweden ( 90 lakhs ), Switzerland
( 75 lakhs ), Israel ( 63 lakhs ) and Finland ( 52 lakhs ).
· At our current level of growth in population, figuratively we are adding each year another Australia ( 2 cr. ) to India in terms of population.
Note:
Population growth level in the last two few decades in the developed countries has been minimal. In fact some of the countries have reached stagnant population levels, with birth and death almost equaling. On the other hand there has been significant population growth in developing countries. And in the near future this trend would continue.
What are the implications of the above dichotomy?
1. Average standard of living of developed countries would go on increasing whereas the reverse would happen in the case of developing countries, i.e., the average standard of living.
2. More and more people from developing countries would try to migrate to developed countries. Since such a development would have socio economic problems in the developed countries, developed countries may impose checks and balances.
3. Influx of people from villages to cities in India would go on increasing.
4. The gap in terms of income of rich / middle class and the poor people in India would go on widening, creating social unrest.
Comments:
1. All other problems which faced India since Independence are not as gigantic as the population problem. What is worse is that not only the problem would continue in the future but would nullify to a large extent and in respect of a large number of people the benefits of economic growth.
2. The problem has been with us for so long that we have largely become immune to the same.
3. In the 50s, when the new Government of India started looking into various major problems afflicting the country, it had some inkling of the problem ahead on this front and had attached considerable importance to family planning. Yet, at the level of implementation, the record has been even less than patchy.
4. Unfortunately political parties from the beginning were lackadaisical in their getting involved in this issue.
5. The role of civil society and NGOs were only peripheral.
6. Sanjay Gandhi’s experiment on this front backfiring, there was less enthusiasm in getting involved in this subject.
7. Even a dictatorial regime like China had to soften the policy of ‘ one child per couple ‘ since abortions and forced sterilization had become thoroughly unpopular.
8. The truism has to be realized and accepted that it is too serious a matter left to the Government alone.
9. States which achieved high female literacy have witnessed significant reduction in the growth rate of population ( e.g., Female Literacy in Kerala: 88%. Bihar: 33.6% ).
10. Already States which have not been able to achieve lowering the rate of growth of population in any significant manner are being left out by States which have achieved moderate success on this front. This gap would widen further with its own ramifications, e.g., migration of people from more populous States to others.
11. Population growth in the cities, coupled with the problem cited in Point No. 10 above, would create new problems in managing cities.
Conclusions:
· Central / State Governments have to accord top priority to this mind boggling problem.
· Apart from allocating vast resources for containing unbridled growth of population, Governments have to take up steps for effective and imaginative programmes to reduce population growth.
· Civil societies have to involve in the implementation of Government programmes.
· Panchayats have the capability to play a major role in the matter. But it would appear that Government has not empowered them fully to involve in this gigantic problem.
· Fourth estate can play a significant role by continuously highlighting the enormity of the problem and also pointing out lacunae in the implementation of Government programmes.
· The focus of action should be on the illiterate and poor because in the recent past the growth in child birth in these segments had not come down drastically, unlike in the case of middle and upper income segments which had voluntarily opted for ‘two child’ policy.
· It should be noted that the middle and upper income segments have opted for ‘one child or two child’ policy largely due to their realization that for the well being of the family that is the right choice. It is hardly due to Government programmes on Family Planning.
· Hoardings in cities and towns on family planning with a boy and girl in the hoarding, ads. on family planning in the print media, particularly English media ( read by people most of whom had already opted for one child or two children), organizing seminars and workshops on the subject, mouthing platitudes on the subject by powers that be, et all, are waste of money and energy. Role of Government should be minimal. Panchayats and Civil societies have to take the lead. Instead of the babus deciding the course of action, it is the social scientists who should mould the action plan.
Signing off:
Any Government paper on population issues invariably has a comparison of the number of people and the land mass in the country. e.g.,
India: 2.4% of land area of the world
17.5% of the population of world
With vast changes that have occurred in technology, production and distribution of goods and world becoming one in trading of goods, this comparison is inapt. Probably this started long back when agriculture was the prime activity and countries were insular in the matter of world trade. At that time the focus was on how much land is needed for production in the land to meet the requirements of a particular number of people. That is not the case now. e.g., Japan and Israel. Land mass is not large. Yet because of high productivity from their land and their high GDP enabling them to import agricultural goods, they are able to meet the requirement of their people. On the other hand, many of the Arab and African countries have large land mass and yet their agricultural production level is not high resulting in those countries forced to import agricultural goods to meet the requirements of their people.
-------
This is the most important and serious fault-line of the Indian Government in governance since independence
Mind boggling facts
Population of India as on July 2008: 114 crores*
*As estimated by Government.
Population as per 1951 census: 36 crores
Population as per 1991 Census: 84.6 crores
Population as per 2001 Census: 102.8 crores,
i.e., 21.3% increase in a period of 10 years
Population growth rate: 1.38% per annum
Population projected:
2010: 117.5 crores
2015: 125.6 “
2020: 133.1 “
Population of Mumbai: 1.3 crores. Delhi: 1.1 crores
One out of six people of world live in India
We all know that we have a huge population and further that the same is increasing at a fast pace. Yet, for a better perception of the magnitude of the issue, some comparisons are required, as below:
· Uttar Pradesh with a population of 16.6 cr. is the fifth largest ( country/State ) when compared with countries having large population, i.e., China ( 131 cr. ), USA (29.8 cr. ), Indonesia ( 24.5 cr. ), and Brazil (18.8 cr. ) and Pakistan (16.5 cr. ).
· Maharashtra ( 9.67 cr.) and Bihar ( 8.28 cr. ) each have higher population than Germany ( 8.20 cr. )
· West Bengal ( 8.02 cr. ) is ahead of Egypt ( 7.8 cr. )
· Tamil Nadu and Madhya Pradesh with population of 6.2 cr. and 6 cr. respectively have more or less have population equal to that of UK ( 6 cr. ), France ( 6 cr.) and would be rushing ahead to overtake Iran ( 6.8 cr. )
· The small State of Kerala with a population of 3.18 cr. will be rushing to be ahead of Canada ( 3.3 cr.)
· Population of Bangla Desh: 14.7 cr. Russia: 14.2 cr. and Japan: 12.7 cr. ( With our propensity to produce children, one would not be surprised if some of the Indian States overtake these countries in a few years in comparison to their population ).
· Both Mumbai and Delhi cities have already crossed one crore of population which is higher than the population of
many countries. e.g., Sweden ( 90 lakhs ), Switzerland
( 75 lakhs ), Israel ( 63 lakhs ) and Finland ( 52 lakhs ).
· At our current level of growth in population, figuratively we are adding each year another Australia ( 2 cr. ) to India in terms of population.
Note:
Population growth level in the last two few decades in the developed countries has been minimal. In fact some of the countries have reached stagnant population levels, with birth and death almost equaling. On the other hand there has been significant population growth in developing countries. And in the near future this trend would continue.
What are the implications of the above dichotomy?
1. Average standard of living of developed countries would go on increasing whereas the reverse would happen in the case of developing countries, i.e., the average standard of living.
2. More and more people from developing countries would try to migrate to developed countries. Since such a development would have socio economic problems in the developed countries, developed countries may impose checks and balances.
3. Influx of people from villages to cities in India would go on increasing.
4. The gap in terms of income of rich / middle class and the poor people in India would go on widening, creating social unrest.
Comments:
1. All other problems which faced India since Independence are not as gigantic as the population problem. What is worse is that not only the problem would continue in the future but would nullify to a large extent and in respect of a large number of people the benefits of economic growth.
2. The problem has been with us for so long that we have largely become immune to the same.
3. In the 50s, when the new Government of India started looking into various major problems afflicting the country, it had some inkling of the problem ahead on this front and had attached considerable importance to family planning. Yet, at the level of implementation, the record has been even less than patchy.
4. Unfortunately political parties from the beginning were lackadaisical in their getting involved in this issue.
5. The role of civil society and NGOs were only peripheral.
6. Sanjay Gandhi’s experiment on this front backfiring, there was less enthusiasm in getting involved in this subject.
7. Even a dictatorial regime like China had to soften the policy of ‘ one child per couple ‘ since abortions and forced sterilization had become thoroughly unpopular.
8. The truism has to be realized and accepted that it is too serious a matter left to the Government alone.
9. States which achieved high female literacy have witnessed significant reduction in the growth rate of population ( e.g., Female Literacy in Kerala: 88%. Bihar: 33.6% ).
10. Already States which have not been able to achieve lowering the rate of growth of population in any significant manner are being left out by States which have achieved moderate success on this front. This gap would widen further with its own ramifications, e.g., migration of people from more populous States to others.
11. Population growth in the cities, coupled with the problem cited in Point No. 10 above, would create new problems in managing cities.
Conclusions:
· Central / State Governments have to accord top priority to this mind boggling problem.
· Apart from allocating vast resources for containing unbridled growth of population, Governments have to take up steps for effective and imaginative programmes to reduce population growth.
· Civil societies have to involve in the implementation of Government programmes.
· Panchayats have the capability to play a major role in the matter. But it would appear that Government has not empowered them fully to involve in this gigantic problem.
· Fourth estate can play a significant role by continuously highlighting the enormity of the problem and also pointing out lacunae in the implementation of Government programmes.
· The focus of action should be on the illiterate and poor because in the recent past the growth in child birth in these segments had not come down drastically, unlike in the case of middle and upper income segments which had voluntarily opted for ‘two child’ policy.
· It should be noted that the middle and upper income segments have opted for ‘one child or two child’ policy largely due to their realization that for the well being of the family that is the right choice. It is hardly due to Government programmes on Family Planning.
· Hoardings in cities and towns on family planning with a boy and girl in the hoarding, ads. on family planning in the print media, particularly English media ( read by people most of whom had already opted for one child or two children), organizing seminars and workshops on the subject, mouthing platitudes on the subject by powers that be, et all, are waste of money and energy. Role of Government should be minimal. Panchayats and Civil societies have to take the lead. Instead of the babus deciding the course of action, it is the social scientists who should mould the action plan.
Signing off:
Any Government paper on population issues invariably has a comparison of the number of people and the land mass in the country. e.g.,
India: 2.4% of land area of the world
17.5% of the population of world
With vast changes that have occurred in technology, production and distribution of goods and world becoming one in trading of goods, this comparison is inapt. Probably this started long back when agriculture was the prime activity and countries were insular in the matter of world trade. At that time the focus was on how much land is needed for production in the land to meet the requirements of a particular number of people. That is not the case now. e.g., Japan and Israel. Land mass is not large. Yet because of high productivity from their land and their high GDP enabling them to import agricultural goods, they are able to meet the requirement of their people. On the other hand, many of the Arab and African countries have large land mass and yet their agricultural production level is not high resulting in those countries forced to import agricultural goods to meet the requirements of their people.
-------
Thursday, January 1, 2009
GOSSIPING - Spoof
GOSSIPING – The art of doing it effortlessly.
All indulge in. And all deny.
Gossip column in a paper or magazine is respectable and avidly read with eagerness, though no newspaper would admit that it is a Gossip column. They would aver that they are only putting in print behaviour of individuals and human peccadillo, i.e., trifling offence. Gossipmonger is publicly shunned and looked askance at but privately is very much in demand.
A wag once said ‘ I never believe a gossip which I have not started.’ Gossip is the life of parties. Without gossip, however, tasty the food may be, whatever vintage the wine may be, however gracious the hostess may be, there will not be any spark in the party. After all what for are parties. Not just for free food and drinks. For meeting friends and families? To enquire about their health? No, Sir, it is mainly for gossiping, though nobody would admit that. What happens in parties, apart from boozing, gulping food and ogling at ladies. Men talk shop. Ladies take stock of the latest fashions. But all these are peripheral or secondary activities. Unsaid but known to all, it is gossip that gives life and cheer to any party.
In a party gossip starts about those who are absent from the party or those who are late comers or leave the party early. ‘ Don’t talk about yourself, it will be done when you leave, ‘ said Wilson Magner. In a party the excitement and gossip start together. And the next day both the husband and wife think alike. ‘ Office work be damned for an hour. So what if I postpone house hold chores.’ Both can’t wait to share with somebody the latest gossip heard the night before. That cannot be postponed because the liveliness of gossip would be lost if it is not hot. And then again in postponing the sharing of gossip you run into a chance of somebody else overtaking you in sharing the gossip with the person with whom you were to share the gossip. And while transmitting the gossip, rarely can anybody resist the temptation to add his own little bit, twist the gossip at the edges and give some colour to it. I must say that in this ladies are far ahead of men folk because women have the instinct to gossip and change the shape of the gossip. When one lady conveys the gossip to another the former is able to establish that the gossip is absolutely true but also in effortlessly making quantitative addition and qualitative twist to the gossip. While subconsciously some of the listeners of the gossip may doubt the veracity, the juicy aspect of gossip ensures that the subconscious mind goes to sleep or the person asks the subconscious mind to mind its own business and not to meddle with what he wants to believe.
No scientific studies have been made on gossip or any theories have been formulated on how gossip works. There is a reason for this. Unlike magnet, gravitation, electricity, etc., each gossip has its own momentum, changing shape in transmission and may have prolonged life or instantaneous death. How can then anybody make a general theory, not to talk of any precise mathematical evaluation. Andrew Mathews in his famous book ‘ Be happy’ had a page with caricatures of people talking in a party. In enters a couple and the husband tells the first person ( les us call him Shifty ) they meet ‘ I am fatso and this is my wife and we are an extremely happy couple.’ From Shifty the statement of the husband is transmitted from one to another in the party, with each person adding a twist to the statement. The last person who does not recognize the fatsos, conveys the gossip to them saying ‘ the wife of fatso has committed suicide because of fatso’s affair with his Secretary and fatso is in jail.’ I quoted this just to prove the fact that gossip has a momentum of its own, shedding some mass and gathering more colour on its journey, which no scientific formula will fit in or capture.
A small town is one where everybody knows whose cheque is good, and whose husband is not – so said somebody. The point is not whether it is truth or false. The essence is that gossip travels very fast and juicy gossip is one which has plenty of listeners.
I have a board in my dining room reading ‘ Gossip is welcome.’ Each one of my guests who reads the board would smile and tell me that he/she does not indulge in this harmless or horrible vice. The qualification attached go gossip would depend on whether one is straight faced liar or afflicted with amnesia. Further comment would be that someone / everyone else does / do, depending on whether the person is individualistic or sees the universe as a whole. Some go to the extent of telling me who all we know indulge in this age old practice ( without realizing that what he just did was also gossip ). Invariably within a few minutes I am the lucky recipient of some sweet gossip from the person who looked down at gossiping, some adding – perhaps thinking of the board – that what he/she has said is the absolute truth and nothing but the truth and not gossip.
It is not that only ordinary mortals like us practice this enjoyable habit, but even Presidents and Prime Ministers are at it. It is said that within five minutes of American President and British Prime Minister meeting in closed doors, they throw away the agenda notes and share the latest gossips they had heard about the French President . So also business tycoons, artists, barristers and tea shop boys. Of course nobody can beat journalists and cine stars in the high proficiency they have in this art of gossiping to which they add sufficient bitching to give the gossip a glow. Incidentally it is the cine stars and journalists who made gossiping a fine art. For example, a journalist would write that he saw the car of this famous actor parked outside the house of that equally notorious actress at two in the morning and then goes on to say that he met the actor next day morning and found him tired but with a glow in his face. Pure gossip and bitching, but at the same time not sufficient enough for any libel action against the writer. I think that this admirable talent of journalists made Mark Twain to say ‘ I became a newspaper man. I hated to do it, but I could not find honest employment.’
Gossip is the spice of life. Without it all of us will live unexcited, moody and with headaches. You don’t believe. Take a lady with a headache. The moment she hears a juicy gossip, presto, the headache vanishes. If the gossip is about her best friend then she becomes very cheerful and headache has no way of penetrating her head for another twenty four hours atleast. If pharmaceutical people knew this secret they will throw their hands in despair. Same is the story of politicians, babus, professionals and even criminals. You still don’t believe it. Try this. In the office the boss fires a professional. The professional goes back to his seat disenchanted. He phones a friend and starts gossiping about his boss. Phone conversation ends. The man’s spirit is back to normal. Morning paper. Who is bothered with the downward momentum of investment and economic growth. There is a scandal. All go through it avidly. The morning becomes cheerful. Suppose a TV channel telecasts gossip about a politician. Would anybody miss it. Everybody would lap it up. Nobody would disbelieve. The earlier tiredness is gone.
If you still don’t believe, I will give another chance. Page 3 of dailies now devote considerable space for gossip on the lovely and mighty. Would any lady miss it. No. And that would be the talking point when two ladies meet. At the same time she would just glance through stories about millions being affected by floods.
How does a gossip start. People share their problems with friends, and sometimes even with strangers. Stranger may sympathise and so also some of the friends. But some of the friends would be glad that you are getting it at last. Not that they are not good friends. Bust gossip has a way of twisting the level of friendship. They just don’t leave at that. It is a gold mine of information to be shared. With a certain glib mastery of verbiage, they share the gossip with mutual friends who are just as eager to hear. In a nutshell gossip is a powerful art. The masters at the game give substance to shadow and content to myth. With the right inflection of the tone, an emphasis here and there, with a look of being a conspirator at the appropriate time of passing on the gossip, always wondering whether it is true and sighing that this is happening to my best friend, the friend is sure to give solid base to the gossip.
‘ Gossip is good for office’ was the conclusion arrived at a conference held a few years back at the Warwick Business School, England. The consensus was that gossiping over lunch or a coffee break is one of the joys of office life. Gossip is a much undervalued communication system. Kathryn Waddington, senior lecturer at the South Bank University, London had stated some time back that ‘ Gossip is an important feature of organizational communication which is worthy of further recognition in terms of the development of theory and research.’ She said gossip had not been studied adequately because of the maliciousness with which it was often associated, but insisted that it had numerous beneficial effects, not least helping newcomers understand an organization’s culture and history. Gossip also played an important part within informal communication networks used in the creation of power bases. ‘ Knowledge is also a power base as it relates to the control of unique information and gossip plays an important role here,’ she said. She claimed that ‘ investigative gossip ‘ involved testing for truth and exploring hunches. ‘ It is a form of discourse occurring between a small group of people.’ It was also used as a way of eliciting information or knowledge about people, situations or organizations, and, as such could have an important positive influence, ‘ according to Kathryn.
So, you have to understand that it is not only that I am saying that gossip is good. The lady has come up with investigative gossip. I have not studied this angle, though the potential to do research on this angle is immense.
The only person who had taken a practical approach to gossip was the famous yester year cine artist Katherine Hepburn who said ‘ I don’t care what is written about me so long as it is not true.’
Obvious conclusion: Gossip will thrive.
While gossip among women is universally ridiculed as low and trivial, gossip among men, especially if it is about women, is called theory, or idea, or fact
**
All indulge in. And all deny.
Gossip column in a paper or magazine is respectable and avidly read with eagerness, though no newspaper would admit that it is a Gossip column. They would aver that they are only putting in print behaviour of individuals and human peccadillo, i.e., trifling offence. Gossipmonger is publicly shunned and looked askance at but privately is very much in demand.
A wag once said ‘ I never believe a gossip which I have not started.’ Gossip is the life of parties. Without gossip, however, tasty the food may be, whatever vintage the wine may be, however gracious the hostess may be, there will not be any spark in the party. After all what for are parties. Not just for free food and drinks. For meeting friends and families? To enquire about their health? No, Sir, it is mainly for gossiping, though nobody would admit that. What happens in parties, apart from boozing, gulping food and ogling at ladies. Men talk shop. Ladies take stock of the latest fashions. But all these are peripheral or secondary activities. Unsaid but known to all, it is gossip that gives life and cheer to any party.
In a party gossip starts about those who are absent from the party or those who are late comers or leave the party early. ‘ Don’t talk about yourself, it will be done when you leave, ‘ said Wilson Magner. In a party the excitement and gossip start together. And the next day both the husband and wife think alike. ‘ Office work be damned for an hour. So what if I postpone house hold chores.’ Both can’t wait to share with somebody the latest gossip heard the night before. That cannot be postponed because the liveliness of gossip would be lost if it is not hot. And then again in postponing the sharing of gossip you run into a chance of somebody else overtaking you in sharing the gossip with the person with whom you were to share the gossip. And while transmitting the gossip, rarely can anybody resist the temptation to add his own little bit, twist the gossip at the edges and give some colour to it. I must say that in this ladies are far ahead of men folk because women have the instinct to gossip and change the shape of the gossip. When one lady conveys the gossip to another the former is able to establish that the gossip is absolutely true but also in effortlessly making quantitative addition and qualitative twist to the gossip. While subconsciously some of the listeners of the gossip may doubt the veracity, the juicy aspect of gossip ensures that the subconscious mind goes to sleep or the person asks the subconscious mind to mind its own business and not to meddle with what he wants to believe.
No scientific studies have been made on gossip or any theories have been formulated on how gossip works. There is a reason for this. Unlike magnet, gravitation, electricity, etc., each gossip has its own momentum, changing shape in transmission and may have prolonged life or instantaneous death. How can then anybody make a general theory, not to talk of any precise mathematical evaluation. Andrew Mathews in his famous book ‘ Be happy’ had a page with caricatures of people talking in a party. In enters a couple and the husband tells the first person ( les us call him Shifty ) they meet ‘ I am fatso and this is my wife and we are an extremely happy couple.’ From Shifty the statement of the husband is transmitted from one to another in the party, with each person adding a twist to the statement. The last person who does not recognize the fatsos, conveys the gossip to them saying ‘ the wife of fatso has committed suicide because of fatso’s affair with his Secretary and fatso is in jail.’ I quoted this just to prove the fact that gossip has a momentum of its own, shedding some mass and gathering more colour on its journey, which no scientific formula will fit in or capture.
A small town is one where everybody knows whose cheque is good, and whose husband is not – so said somebody. The point is not whether it is truth or false. The essence is that gossip travels very fast and juicy gossip is one which has plenty of listeners.
I have a board in my dining room reading ‘ Gossip is welcome.’ Each one of my guests who reads the board would smile and tell me that he/she does not indulge in this harmless or horrible vice. The qualification attached go gossip would depend on whether one is straight faced liar or afflicted with amnesia. Further comment would be that someone / everyone else does / do, depending on whether the person is individualistic or sees the universe as a whole. Some go to the extent of telling me who all we know indulge in this age old practice ( without realizing that what he just did was also gossip ). Invariably within a few minutes I am the lucky recipient of some sweet gossip from the person who looked down at gossiping, some adding – perhaps thinking of the board – that what he/she has said is the absolute truth and nothing but the truth and not gossip.
It is not that only ordinary mortals like us practice this enjoyable habit, but even Presidents and Prime Ministers are at it. It is said that within five minutes of American President and British Prime Minister meeting in closed doors, they throw away the agenda notes and share the latest gossips they had heard about the French President . So also business tycoons, artists, barristers and tea shop boys. Of course nobody can beat journalists and cine stars in the high proficiency they have in this art of gossiping to which they add sufficient bitching to give the gossip a glow. Incidentally it is the cine stars and journalists who made gossiping a fine art. For example, a journalist would write that he saw the car of this famous actor parked outside the house of that equally notorious actress at two in the morning and then goes on to say that he met the actor next day morning and found him tired but with a glow in his face. Pure gossip and bitching, but at the same time not sufficient enough for any libel action against the writer. I think that this admirable talent of journalists made Mark Twain to say ‘ I became a newspaper man. I hated to do it, but I could not find honest employment.’
Gossip is the spice of life. Without it all of us will live unexcited, moody and with headaches. You don’t believe. Take a lady with a headache. The moment she hears a juicy gossip, presto, the headache vanishes. If the gossip is about her best friend then she becomes very cheerful and headache has no way of penetrating her head for another twenty four hours atleast. If pharmaceutical people knew this secret they will throw their hands in despair. Same is the story of politicians, babus, professionals and even criminals. You still don’t believe it. Try this. In the office the boss fires a professional. The professional goes back to his seat disenchanted. He phones a friend and starts gossiping about his boss. Phone conversation ends. The man’s spirit is back to normal. Morning paper. Who is bothered with the downward momentum of investment and economic growth. There is a scandal. All go through it avidly. The morning becomes cheerful. Suppose a TV channel telecasts gossip about a politician. Would anybody miss it. Everybody would lap it up. Nobody would disbelieve. The earlier tiredness is gone.
If you still don’t believe, I will give another chance. Page 3 of dailies now devote considerable space for gossip on the lovely and mighty. Would any lady miss it. No. And that would be the talking point when two ladies meet. At the same time she would just glance through stories about millions being affected by floods.
How does a gossip start. People share their problems with friends, and sometimes even with strangers. Stranger may sympathise and so also some of the friends. But some of the friends would be glad that you are getting it at last. Not that they are not good friends. Bust gossip has a way of twisting the level of friendship. They just don’t leave at that. It is a gold mine of information to be shared. With a certain glib mastery of verbiage, they share the gossip with mutual friends who are just as eager to hear. In a nutshell gossip is a powerful art. The masters at the game give substance to shadow and content to myth. With the right inflection of the tone, an emphasis here and there, with a look of being a conspirator at the appropriate time of passing on the gossip, always wondering whether it is true and sighing that this is happening to my best friend, the friend is sure to give solid base to the gossip.
‘ Gossip is good for office’ was the conclusion arrived at a conference held a few years back at the Warwick Business School, England. The consensus was that gossiping over lunch or a coffee break is one of the joys of office life. Gossip is a much undervalued communication system. Kathryn Waddington, senior lecturer at the South Bank University, London had stated some time back that ‘ Gossip is an important feature of organizational communication which is worthy of further recognition in terms of the development of theory and research.’ She said gossip had not been studied adequately because of the maliciousness with which it was often associated, but insisted that it had numerous beneficial effects, not least helping newcomers understand an organization’s culture and history. Gossip also played an important part within informal communication networks used in the creation of power bases. ‘ Knowledge is also a power base as it relates to the control of unique information and gossip plays an important role here,’ she said. She claimed that ‘ investigative gossip ‘ involved testing for truth and exploring hunches. ‘ It is a form of discourse occurring between a small group of people.’ It was also used as a way of eliciting information or knowledge about people, situations or organizations, and, as such could have an important positive influence, ‘ according to Kathryn.
So, you have to understand that it is not only that I am saying that gossip is good. The lady has come up with investigative gossip. I have not studied this angle, though the potential to do research on this angle is immense.
The only person who had taken a practical approach to gossip was the famous yester year cine artist Katherine Hepburn who said ‘ I don’t care what is written about me so long as it is not true.’
Obvious conclusion: Gossip will thrive.
While gossip among women is universally ridiculed as low and trivial, gossip among men, especially if it is about women, is called theory, or idea, or fact
**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
