The flying MPs: Should they get special treatment?

Okay. Get angry. How dare our ‘public servants’ behave like feudals. Why should the taxpayer’s money be wasted on giving them the red carpet treatment? Get more angry.

Here is what is to happen:

Being treated like a Maharaja by Air India alone is not enough for our status-conscious members of Parliament. The aviation ministry now wants all private airlines to also accord royal treatment to nearly 800 members of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha...The red carpet they are expected to roll out will include a designated protocol officer meeting MPs when they reach the airport and escort them to lounge. Check-in will be done by staff when the netas are resting there and having free refreshments. After that, they will be zipped through immigration and/or security checks to an aircraft waiting for them to board so that it can take off! Similar courtesy will have to be accorded on arrival too.

Flashback to not too long ago when Shashi Tharoor had talked about how he would have to travel “cattle class” when the government was pruning expenses. The reaction was that this was insulting to poor people, and perhaps to cattle as well.

Now, how many poor people travel by airplane? So, how would they feel insulted? For that matter, the economy class – why is it blatantly called Economy as opposed to Business or Club Class – also delineates the hierarchy. There is no chance in hell that ministers and VIPs are not treated better irrespective of how they travel.

I find it horribly treacly when I read about how Narayana Murthy and Azim Premji travel coach class. Do let me know when they are squeezed between two Amazons reading newspapers spread out, elbows tugging at them with the bloke in front reclining his seat into their laps.

Besides, many high-powered businessmen do have their staff check in for them, as well as ensure that upon arrival they sail through immigration and customs. You might say these are private individuals. But they are using the system, and therefore become it. Many do become political figures once they decide to get vocal about their positions, and contribute to different parties. When I see people like Suhel Seth, Alyque Padamsee, Sunil Alagh, and lately Capt. Gopinath holding forth on issues of the common man and pampered ministers, I really wonder how much in touch with reality they are. I would also like to know where they seat the ministers at their own sit-down dinners. Knock me down with a feather if the mantriji or mantri saheba is not at the main table.

Regarding special treatment meted out to ministers, one does not need any instruction from the directorate general of civil aviation (DGCA) for it. Private enterprise is largely indebted to, and uses the weaknesses of, those in power. It will bend, if not crawl, as long as it gets its own special benefits, some out of turn. Even if it has to use ‘common’ parlance, like say “people’s car”, which again makes it seem like ‘people’ here are those blokes who manage to scrape together Rs. 1 lakh and ride that little dinky vehicle and wave out to the non-people, the supra people, in their sedans. Even if it has meant dislocating villagers and tribals with political connivance to set up factories, and rob them of natural resources.

All this happens because ministers are the feudal lords, not of the ordinary taxpayer, but of the corporates.

A few years ago, I was quite surprised to see this activist-actress-Rajya Sabha member have a woman employee of a private airline on a domestic flight carry her hand baggage from the lounge to the van to right inside the aircraft. Was there a diktat then? No.

The problem is that we are slaves to VIP culture, which amounts to us wanting the powerful to appear powerful. In a sense, this is a hark-back to the days of rajas. The junta did not wish for them to jump off caparisoned elephants and mingle with the locals. They wanted them to throw pearls and coins. Court patronage was not looked down upon and in fact helped artistes flourish. Today, it is more of a barter system.

Is it a good thing to give such special treatment to ministers?

Good-bad are binaries. I certainly do not like the idea that DGCA would send out instructions for that would make it, in effect, a word of law. But to imagine that ministers and other favoured guests will not be given preferential treatment is rather naïve.

In some ways having an airline staff accompany them is better for security than a PA carrying the minister’s little briefcase, putting it in the overhead locker, even arranging the seat for him and then wishing him a greasy-smile bon voyage, while the flight attendants hover with their hot towels. The first row 1-A or 1-D are always reserved for people like them. Why? Who has asked for this?

The problem is we make a noise over surface issues. How many of us have brought forth the problems of bad landing systems, bird hits, flight delays, airport cleanliness, lounge and plane facilities, erratic fares, and what goes on inside the cockpit before the DGCA? Don’t these affect us more than what a minister gets on a frayed red carpet?

It is like that silly move to call all elected politicians ‘sevaks’. Many of them would be only too happy to please, much in the manner of zamindars who invite you to their 'ghareeb khaana'. Humility is a luxury only the arrogant can afford.

© Farzana Versey

Buoyancy vs. Vibrancy: Modi's Bubble

A Gujarati friend living in London was chuffed. "I think he's done it, he'll make it," she wrote. Her family could be here, but they are not. And will never. The excuse is "The children were brought up in a western culture, they won't adjust."

So, how globalised is it really? Many like my friend are mere cheerleaders. I avoided writing about it, but that note made me think.

Narendra Modi turned out in good form as a salesman during the recently-concluded Vibrant Gujarat Summit.

When a man hawking his state is trumpeted as hero, he is pushed into a slot. The background noises about Modi as national leader and prime ministerial candidate come from soothsayers, not pragmatists.

Modi has scuttled his chances at being a national leader, forget the candidate for the top job by acting as drumbeater. As he said:

  

"Once upon a time, Gujarat was the gateway to the Globe from India. Now it is becoming the Global Gateway to India. Gujarat welcomes you through open arms with this event which has grown far beyond the boundaries of Gujarat."

The statement proves just how regional he is. A good indication of a thriving global economy would be if migrants from the state have returned despite doing well abroad and not because of a slack overseas economy that forces them to invest in their roots.

For foreign investment, Gujarat has always had a thriving middle class. Modi has only given it a visible face, a name. He has made the trader his brand - marketing asmita, self respect. Curiously, this version of swadeshi is essentially based on a western model.

Much has been said about big business tycoons and their syrupy odes to him. Let us see what they really mean.

***

“I am proud to say that RIL is a Gujarati, Indian and a global company. We began from Gujarat and we come back here again and again to invest." - Mukesh Ambani

Indeed, Dhirubhai Ambani started from here. Their major benefactors back in those days were in Delhi. The AGMs of Reliance are held in Mumbai. They've built schools, hospitals in Mumbai. Their showpiece houses are in Mumbai. Their wives' promote cultural activities in Mumbai. They are not investing in Gujarat, but investing in property for their pollution-causing factories there.

***

"Narendra Bhai has been described in different ways. My personal favourite comes from what his name literally means in Sanskrit - a conjunction of Nara and Indra. Nara means man and Indra means King or leader. Narendra bhai is the lord of men and a king among kings." - Anil Ambani

This was probably the most treacly account, but we are a nation that deifies. Narendrabhai himself dresses up in mythological garbs and it pleases the junta, just as any road show would. Anil Ambani, like his brother, will pick and choose the options in Gujarat. They know they are the real kings, as Forbes keeps telling them.

***

“Gujarat has made a remarkable progress. We see almost every state embarking on an investors' summit now - a pro-active approach established with a walk the talk approach of the government here." - Adi Godrej

This is essentially playing politics. Investors' summits have often been organised by business organisations. You don't need a political leader for that. Giving Modi credit for it is the sort of palm-greasing industrial houses do before they get their files pushed. Here, it is a preemptive strike.

   

***

“There is something about the food in Gujarat that makes Gujaratis not just entrepreneurial but they are remarkably free of the fear of failure. And to me, this freedom from the fear of failure is at the root of entrepreneurship and innovation. In future we will talk not just of China model in India, but Gujarat model in China.” - Anand Mahindra

This is the consolidation of the state as a separate entity. When big industrial houses attend summits in Mumbai, do they reduce such talk to Maharashtrian food or the Marathi characteristics? No. It is redundant to their own aspirations. What Mahindra is in fact conveying is that this spirit was there before Modi and shall be there always.

The China reference was cheeky. China has gone ahead with its economy, but internally continues with its heavy-handed policies. It would be more than happy to clone any model and later make cheap fakes that will probably sell like hot dhoklas in Gujarat itself.

***

The state is an option like any other. Those investing here are contributing to its image- building much like a wedding family ensures a sturdy and trussed up mare for the groom to ride on to take back his wife.

Ratan Tata spoke about how he first did not invest and then he did, and is now convinced about Gujarat. He forgot to add that he was shunted out of West Bengal where he started his Nano project.

I felt a bit sad when Narendra Modi said in his concluding speech:

"All these people who are greeting us, trying to speak our language, they just want to be part of our economic success."

Foreign diplomats made the right noises and it was to ensure that the huge diaspora in their countries continues to add to the economy from their spice-laden havens in Wembley and New Jersey. Not in Jamnagar and Ahmedabad.

But it does not hurt to look through a bubble and see sudsy rainbows.

© Farzana Versey

Right Said Modi...

This time Modi is right. Why target only Gujarat and not othet states? His adminstration could be using diversionary tactics, and while one size does not fit all in matters of justice, there's got to be a trial room for everyone.

The Narendra Modi government on Friday moved the Supreme Court and sought an independent probe into encounter cases in all states in last 10 years, while venting its ire at Mumbai based human rights activists accusing them of focusing only on incidents in Gujarat. To press its case, the Modi government said, 'It is a matter of record and cannot be seriously disputed that between 1998 and 2000 special squads of Bombay Police ‘cleaned up’ (the expression then used) about 300 strong Bombay underworld dons with an average of 100 encounters a year'.

Having recorded their version, I'd like to know if the Modi government is using this as justification? Is there no difference between underworld dons and people arrested at random? The use of the term clean up reveals the modus operandi. Is the Gujarat government conceding such a possibility?

As far as details are concerned, it is spot on:

The Gujarat government argued that 'The Bombay police went by the Israeli strategy of ‘eye for an eye’ and ‘tooth for a tooth’ as was being unofficially claimed then. Officers who undertook this operation 'clean up’ were feted as super heroes and even immortalized by films.

They still are. From 'Shootout at Lokhandwala' to the supposedly more realistic 'Black Friday', the cops are the heroes to the anti-heroes. Interestingly, you cannot tell the difference.

Around the time-frame mentioned, a few of these officers would routinely pose for pictures with their 'kill'. It was and is a known fact that, besides being feted in the media, promotions are largely dependent on the quota of bodies.

The underworld has primarily operated from Mumbai and their close connections span across drug lords overseas, intelligence agencies, politicians, industrialists, film financiers, and the media.

The arrest of Jigna Vohra in the J.Dey murder case due to what has been played out as professional rivalry had to do with two rival gangsters.

Arun Gawli, the "daddy" of Byculla could contest elections from jail. Politics is not just a refuge for these gangsters but a logical move.

The cops rarely get the big guys. It is a tacit arrangement.

So, if we keep the peeve of the Gujarat government in mind, then indeed Maharashtra and other states need to be given the same treatment.

However, outside of the partisan stance of activists and human rights organisations, is Narendra Modi willing to accept that encounter killings did take place and the criminal officers were transferred?

If yes, then the Supreme Court can pull up the other states and alongside take this as an admission to similar culpability in Gujarat.

We have Modi's word for it, although he hasn't quite said it.

(c) Farzana Versey

Tata’s Serious About Cyrus

It’s a girl…oops, I mean, it’s a Parsi! After the hoopla over a Bollywood star giving birth to a baby, the front pages reverberated with the earth-shaking – or is it game-changing? – news that Ratan Tata, chairman of the Tata Group, has finally found a successor. Cyrus Mistry, besides being humble, intelligent, young, mature, family man, foodie, car-lover, who plays golf, is also bloody rich. He is the son of construction magnate Pallonji Shapoorji Mistry, and already owns an 18.4 per cent share in the company he will now head.

He says he will dissociate himself from the family business to prevent a clash of interests. Socialites who love to throw their danedelion words around are applauding the brave move that does away with dynasty. Idiocy! Cyrus inherited his papa’s business; he is inheriting the chaimanship because besides being humble, intelligent…you get the drift…he also holds the largest outsider stake in the Tata pie.

And while it is sad that he may not have enough time for golf (I am not saying this; it has been quoted), he will still be the good boy who made it better. His being a Parsi is also a sort of dynastic thing considering the dwindling population. I say this because Ratan Tata had mentioned last year that his successor need not be from the community. Not just that, he also said, “In my opinion the successor should be a suitable person for the job. He need not be a pro-Parsi or anti-Parsi.”

Well, from the looks of it, Cyrus will have to walk the razor’s edge. But then, according to an insider, “Mistry is one person who can laugh at himself.” Great. I was kind of worried for this Irish citizen who will have to deal with such Indian things.

- - -
For my take on his earlier Parsi comment, here is Tata, goodbye

NGOs, Kiran Bedi, the Media: Who’s the ‘farest of them all?

Kiran Bedi is indeed wrong, but when media persons sit to judge her it is a bit of a laugh. Clearly, they do not look in the mirror.

Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to question all sorts of voluntary agencies and their modus operandi, we have a situation where a person is pinned down for wrongdoing without a backward glance at how the whole NGO business works, often with the media’s involvement.

Kiran Bedi has been fudging her bills, where she charged inflated amounts from her hosts. The main source was airline tickets. She would travel by economy class, that too at a discount because of her gallantry award, and charge business class fares. We now have these sanctimonious NGOs tell us that they took it at “face value”. Most NGOs send the tickets themselves. So, why did they let her use her travel agent? And what sort of auditing departments do they run? The reason for keeping quiet is not that they were afraid of Ms. Bedi’s wrath – they obviously did not mind shelling out Business Class fares – but because their finances will lead to many question marks.

This is my point. The media and certain activists have taken a convenient yo-yo stand on the Jan Lokpal Bill campaign. They propped him up and were completely besotted by Team Anna. After they were done with the photo-ops of the caps and the fasting and dancing, they realised that there were chinks in the armour. No one was interested in the deeper questions – it came down to superficial put-downs.

Let us get this fudging business clear. Kiran Bedi has admitted to it and says she will return the excess money that she wanted to use for her own NGO. Where do the NGOs get this kind of money that they can afford to invite people from different cities for seminars? I have often posed this query when we rubbish other institutions. Do you know that most of the activists themselves travel Business Class, stay at fancy hotels, and order the best food – for what? To gupshup about the state of the nation, the homeless, female foeticide, dowry, terrorism, communalism?

Check out the number of people who have left their high-paying corporate and bureaucratic jobs to “serve the nation” or, “become useful members of society” or, “fight communalism”. They could do all of these by continuing to work. The reason is that activism has become a paying proposition. Have you seen the huge ads put up in newspapers inviting you to attend some conclave or the other? Is it affordable or even appropriate to shell out this kind of money on overheads? Besides government grants, there is a good deal of foreign sponsorship and donations from industrial houses. While the international ‘intervention’ often comes with some amount of side-effects (pushing of substandard products and services clubbed with the do-good, feel-good stuff), some of the Indian business black money that is not stashed away in banks abroad is routed to charitable organisation, with income tax exemption.

Why does the media not raise a voice about this? Has the media ever questioned journalists who attend these same seminars? Oh yes, the same journalists who give inflated bills to their accounts departments for their travels and hotel stays and “related expenses”. Journalists who sit at the desk and make phone calls but charge taxi fare for the quotes. Journalists who try to get tickets and freebies because they think they are in a position to ‘arrange something’. Journalists who do not have to spend a paisa at restaurants and spas because they just might mention it, in passing, in their next column. Journalists who give us scoops that are fed to them by interested parties or who conduct sting operations that are again paid for by interested parties.

Of course, it is not only the media at fault, but also those who host such talks. Corporate India’s ladies who lunch get a big high when they invite a person who can indeed talk and add to their resume. They flash such people as trophies to display their own worth as ‘aware citizens’. That some media people are doing their evening show with this group should be an eye-opener rather than a can-opener.

If, as some commentators wish to know, why people from public office enter the fray late in the day to become part of NGOs, then one might wish to ask them why they have timed their queries now and not for all these years. Do they ponder about it when they go on government-sponsored junkets?

The problem is that this whole Anna Hazare campaign has been a sham, and revealed more shams both on the inside as well as on the outside. It showed us how the ruling party and the opposition got to pay politics; the arrests also reveal a lot about those who got away without a scratch to their reputations. It is rather disingenuous of Digvijay Singh to say that if Kiran Bedi can offer to return the money, then every bribery case can be closed by saying the bribe-taker will return the money, including, A. Raja.

This is some gumption. A minister in the government of India is caught in a scam of frightening proportions and another government person uses this as an analogy. He is also quite gung-ho about such a thing happening at the highest level. The 2G Spectrum scam is not just about bribes, but also about how the nation was taken for a ride with the government, big industrialists and lobbies involved. It is about how the government functions and not merely who took how much. This case has come under scrutiny; many others do not.

If political agencies get a chance, they try to co-opt the activist groups. Most are willing to go along because it is the easy option. In some cases where they need the government to act, it does become a crucial mutual involvement. Therefore, if a political party invites activists, and they fudge figures about travel expenses, then what will the political parties do? Why not question the complete lack of balance by media groups? One can understand individual commentators taking a particular position, but why do they blatantly follow the newspaper/TV channel line? Where is their independence? Those who talk about objectivity should really look in their own backyards. There is favouritism everywhere and the media indulges in it as much as politicians, and the ‘activist’ role of the media should also come under scrutiny.

Tavleen Singh, Indian Express columnist, while raising some important points, makes a rather shocking comment:

“My own observation is that many NGOs working in India appear to be funded by organisations bent on ensuring that India never becomes a developed country… In order for India to become a halfway developed country, we need new roads, airports, ports, modern railways and masses more electricity. In addition, according to experts, we need 500 more cities by 2050. The odd thing is that the NGOs who oppose steel plants, nuclear power stations, dams and aluminum refineries in India never object to the same things in China.”

Is this the definition of development, and the only model? As I have already said, many NGOs do have an agenda, but not only if they are funded by organisations that do not wish to see a developed India. By this logic, Gujarat should have no NGOs. And why must Indian NGOs object to what happens in China? Has the Indian government opposed the self-immolation of Tibetan monks and nuns in support of the Dalai Lama’s return? Has the BJP done so? Has the media done so?

Forget the NGOs for a while. Think about how these plants were to come up, who was to be uprooted and how it would affect the environment. If this development is only for those setting up factories and making India technologically advanced, then why are we still the hub of western-powered outsourcing? Are the NGOs involved here?

Why absolve the fat cats of business only to hit out at the NGOs unless they are specifically playing dirty? How many media people have taken free jet rides, attended fancy wedding functions abroad and written glowing accounts of them? Will they be sanctified as the facilitators of development? Or do they need to get closer to the seats of such power or perhaps such development? These are trick or treat queries. Ask them we must, for there is much beyond Kiran Bedi, whose banshee persona was in fact given a boost by the media when they needed her sound bytes. They were birds of a feather, until she was grounded.

The still-feathered ones have taken wing and are giving us a bird’s eye-view.

(c) Farzana Versey

Also published in Countercurrents

- - -

My earlier related piece on such superficiality: Kiran's Dance, Illiteracy and Symbolism

Radiation alert: Don't read this

I am supposed to keep a cloth ready and swab the skin on my neck with betadine because radiation hits the thyroid area first. This is one among the many text messages I have got and I realise that the smart phone I am using would cause me more immediate damage than the spill in Japan. 'Flash news' is moving at great speed because the BBC mentions Asian countries. Indians love being Asians and any other thing when they know they are world players, even if it is a threat perception. Radiation is real and one is not reducing what has happened in Japan. But these chain SMSes can be lethal as much as they are ignorant.

The sun’s rays and the stuff in natural sources of water emit radiation. So stay indoors (that’s what the messages are saying: “If it rains, don’t step out for 24 hours”). Electronic goods that we use daily have radioactive emissions. So don’t watch TV, don’t wear those fancy watches and don’t use mobile phones. Medical diagnostic tools cause radiation. So don’t bother about X-rays. Don’t go through metal detectors and do not visit the loo on a flight because while they will keep an eye on whether you are smoking or not, that little device is a source of radiation. Industrial units that produce most of the stuff you need are radioactive agents.

And when your country tests nuclear power, instead of singing ‘Jai Ho’ or whatever people in Burkina Faso sing, just hide beneath the covers not because someone will get jealous of the nation’s pride bombing and give it back but because of all the radiation it has caused in the environment.

You are under threat all the time, but no one will tell you. It is indeed a state secret. So, why are they telling you now? Because it is helping business. The media, the governments and those medical units will put the fear in your heads and you will go out and buy betadine without even thinking how its overuse can have an adverse effect. It happens to be available over-the-counter, without prescription - your poor doctor won’t get his or her little ‘cut’.

Now please do me a favour and forward this to as many people as possible after reading this quickly. Write it down on a piece of paper and mail it or distribute it. You don’t want no radiation from your computer, do you?

Japan's nuclear tragedy as opportunism

We told you so. It can affect us. Questions about nuclear power.

This has been the tone of the indepth analyses. Japan’s devastation by earthquake and the tsunami have been submerged beneath the discussions over the Fukushima nuclear plant blowing up and reports of leakage and radiation. As one who is absolutely against a ‘nuclearised’ world, I am afraid that the questions about atomic energy will be relegated to only certain countries in order to keep them in their place.

Even the most powerful nations can go wrong, but before talking about how Japan was told about the possibility of such an outcome given its earthquake-prone history there should have been some introspection. California is prone to quakes and has two nuclear plants; two others were 'retired'. Surely, they have measures to handle an emergency as would Japan.
 
The US administration that is among the first to land with a thud of commentary will not, interestingly enough, desist from providing nuclear energy in small doses at high cost with a lot of hoopla.

The Shiv Sena is also using the Japan incident to oppose the proposed nuclear power plant at Jaitapur, which has a French connection. There is already opposition to it for our own reasons, primarily the taking over of tribal land. By clubbing it with another tragedy, not only will there be foreign expertise involved in its setting up, should it take place, but also to ‘keep an eye on it’ later. This would be damaging at many levels.

I say this to transpose it against the Union Carbide gas leak in Bhopal. Did the world get concerned about how it would affect all of mankind when industrialisation from outside forces without checks and balances has caused greater devastation?

Just wondering…

Not just patriotism of a kind

Why the heck is it so important to be a patriot of any kind? This reveals the utter desperation and inability to deny a stratified concept completely.

Here is what the newspapers say:

Writer-activist Arundhati Roy on Sunday described Maoists as "patriot of a kind" and accused the prime minister and home minister of "violating the Constitution and Panchayat (Extension of Scheduled Areas) Act by allowing corporates to use tribal land". "Patriot of a kind, they (Maoists) are. But here patriotism is very complicated. So at the moment what people are fighting for is to keep this country from falling apart," Roy said after addressing a meet on Cultural Resistance to War on People in Corporate Interest, organised by a magazine.

Patriotism is not complicated if you know your mind and the minds of the people on whose behalf you speak. There are indeed different kinds of fidelity – whether to the nation or in relationships or from your pet dog. The whole credo of ‘someone’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter’ has been going on for years and it is understood as a complex theory.

However, to say that they are fighting to keep this country from falling apart is a stretch. These are insurgency movements and they are protesting against the policies of various governments and the establishment; they are not sewing patches and not one separatist movement has any alliance with another in any part of the country. All those verbal pebbles in Kashmir did not cause even a minor ripple in the Naxal forest lakes.

"The whole world has been intently watching the poor tribal people of Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand and Lalgarh (West Bengal). Nowhere in the world have movements (against corporate invasion) so big, beautiful and successful been carried," she said.

The whole world does not care and we should not be concerned about how the whole world is viewing movements within our country that are truly fighting for space and a say. I am quite certain that for Ms. Roy the world does not mean what Papua New Guinea or Burkina Faso or even Bangladesh and Nepal think; it is the huge conglomerate nations, the G-Summiteers who need to be impressed. That’s where the big-ticket seminars are held.

There is no doubt that the poor have raised their voices but it has come at a huge cost. There is nothing “beautiful” about it, unless you want to print glossy pamphlets that show up clotted blood in high resolution pixels. Quit romanticising the travails of the poor.

Was the magazine that organised the lecture a tribal one or sponsored by the poor? No. This is a business sector, and Ms. Roy is a part of it. Let us just say this too is corporatisation of a kind.

Tata, goodbye

So the next head of the Tata group need not be a Parsi. Is it good news? Does it mean that the great big Indian industries are getting out of their little family holes?

Not really. The simple reason for looking for "the right person" is that Ratan Tata has no direct heir. It happened even when JRD was around and poor Rusi Mody had to go back to playing his piano as Ratan was called upon to wear the mantle. This time around, there could be absolutely no right person within the family ranks.

I am quite certain that the Parsi community will be disappointed. The Tatas, for whatever reason, stood for a certain different class of business that got associated with the community. Just as Marwari, Gujarati business houses are. If they can stick to their lineage, why can the Tatas not?

I find it curious that Ratan Tata is emphasising that it is an Indian company. Of course, it is. Does being a Parsi take away from that? It might be considered an extremely liberal attitude on his part, but let us not forget that there is a difference between a stake-holder and the chief. The latter will perform a role; s/he will not inherit the empire.

There is this superficial liberalism that does not amount to much. Narayan Murthy’s son gets engaged and it makes front page news and he and his fiancée, who is also from a business family, are portrayed as royalty of sorts.

Another gem from Ratan:

“In my opinion the successor should be a suitable person for the job. He need not be a pro-Parsi or anti-Parsi.”

If he is not interested in the Parsi angle, then how does it matter? Do head honchos have to take an oath that they don’t care one way or another for Parsis?

Now if he had said he need not be pro-Modi or anti-Modi, then that would be talking.

USA to teach Indian MPs?

You would not catch them attending a leadership programme at one of our universities or management institutes.

But twelve of our ministers will be off to Yale University to attend the fourth annual Programme for India’s Parliamentarians that was launched in collaboration with the Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry and India-US Forum of Parliamentarians.

From the fairly seasoned Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi to the young Union ministers of state Ajay Maken and Agatha Sangma, from the ruling party to the regional and religion-oriented ones it is a diverse mix.

What do these people hope to learn? What is the India-US Forum of Parliamentarians about? Is it a lobbying group? Or will it help brainwash our MPs to understand the American system better?

Besides undergoing a seven-day leadership programme at the Yale University campus beginning June 9, the MPs would travel to New York and Washington for meetings, discussions and interactions with US politicians, policy analysts and senior government officials. “The India-Yale Parliamentary Leadership Programme is pioneering in the amazing diversity of topics explored; in the outstanding, cutting edge quality of the world-renowned lecturers; in the truly bipartisan nature of the multiparty delegation,” said Singhvi.

This is not about individuals going abroad for education or even professionals attending seminars or conferences. These are our elected representatives who will shamelessly sit and listen to some American on how to be leaders in India, a country that is vastly different in every way. Mr. Singhvi is the spokesperson of the ruling party and has been holding forth on policy decisions. What are we to make of the things he has been saying? That he needs an education?

Will any of these ministers be asked to speak and address US parliamentarians?

Since FICCI is involved, there is obviously the economic angle. The angle of how to pass files for industrial houses and possibly multinationals. Who is paying for their trip?

Forget all this leadership baloney. They are being had and, worse, loving it.

Where is our self-respect?

Mukesh Ambani's India

Mukesh bhai is a smart cat – he used the Mumbai/Marathi taxi driver controversy to push the Indian liberalisation idea.

During a panel discussion at the London School of Economics he reportedly said that while India’s corporate world had moved away from ‘licence Raj’ after economic liberalisation, Mumbai’s “poor taxi-wala is still dealing with licence Raj”. The gathering applauded.

He was telling the diaspora achievers, “The achievements of our diaspora help India, but now is the time to come back. There are more opportunities in India.”

How have the achievements of the diaspora helped India? What diaspora is he talking about? The LSE-Ivy League one. The success stories. The return carrot is being dangled because it will make the liberalisation more acceptable.

His is a limited perspective. “We are all Indians first. Mumbai, Chennai and Delhi belong to all Indians. That is the reality.”

What about Jamshedpur, Junagadh, Singur, Nandigram? Why are the areas where the real money is made left out? They must not belong to everyone because that is where the riches will spurt from.

If we return to the first statement I quoted, his amnesia is palpable. Dhirubhai Ambani can be called the father of the Licence Raj. It was used rather effectively. Now, just because the son is sanctified by Forbes and, don’t forget, the brothers had managed to get the father legitimised by Wharton, the licence Raj is considered wrong. The “poor taxi-wala” got applause from an audience that will never have to deal with such situations; they are reaping the harvest of this same licence Raj that their parents made use of.

The issue is not of getting permits, but of not being permitted on parochial lines. Has Mukesh Ambani asked the cab drivers or the masala-papad waalas abroad to return? They too face discrimination in countries they have migrated to – be it on the basis of religion, language or place of origin.

We Indians don't get it

This Aman ki Asha surely won’t be a free lunch. We are still talking about peace this and peace that in a bubble gum manner. It’s getting to be a bit irritating. The TOI that has come to rhe forefront with this initiative devoted a whole page on how the “Gen-Now Flicks” will send us all in a tizzy because “India and the world love Pakistan’s BRAVE NEW CINEMA”. Aww.

Indians have loved Pakistani drama serials for years, and they were pretty brave and subtle. The reason for applauding this brave new cinema is because we want to extend our commercial space. The whole deal is collaboration, and it has nothing to do with political peace. So, we should just cut this and talk about what is on everyone’s mind – market economics.

Along with the main article there was a smaller piece by a Pakistani and I was quite amused to read some of it:

They (the audience) also love the man who played Munnabhai — Sanjay Dutt, fondly called “Nargis ka beta”.

This is utter rubbish and playing to some imagined gallery. I know people in the entertainment industry and I have met people of all kinds there. They do not refer to him as anyone’s beta; they might call him Sunju baba because they read our gossip columns and they know about his drug addiction and his prison term.

Even the ‘gay’ comedy Dostana had the women in hijab in splits.

Geez. This is a Pakistani woman and she is stereotyping the female population. Even if the women in hijab did go and watch Dostana, why is it so important that their being in splits about a gay comedy should be emphasised? Were the bearded guys wearing skull caps also in splits? And the women in jeans and the men wearing baseball caps backwards?

Come on. Grow up. Aman ki Asha is not going to happen by going along with this sort of cheesy and cliched caravan.

- - -

Juvenile ideas of culture seem to prevail. Now, you can dine at the local Eiffel Tower. Why? Because we need to strengthen our French connection. I know many other ways we can do so, but shall let it pass.


Puducherry – Pondicherry – does have a French influence even today, but it makes no sense for this gross expenditure for a Rs 25 crore-replica because not many in France dine at the real place and this is not going to be a replacement for a trip to Paris for those who can afford to or wish to visit. With competitive travel opportunities, people are in fact travelling quite a bit and not many would eat there, anyway.

What will the replica offer?

If things go according to plans, you could dine at the multicuisine restaurant on the desi Eiffel Tower offering a panoramic view of the Godavari river, the Bay of Bengal, the ruined Dutch port, the seaside town of Kakinada, the Reliance gas plants and the lush green coconut groves of the Konaseema belt.

Honestly, they could just build a tower. The French who have made Puducherry their home prefer cycling down the roads or spending time at Auroville. This might give a kick to some neighbouring city dwellers for a while. That’s it. Why multi-cuisine? Camembert soufflé wrapped in paper dosa? Or crepes sprinkled with mulgapudi?

There are interesting little French restaurants serving pretty authentic food and don’t cost a bomb and don’t look down at gas plants. If the Ambani clout is at work we might have some Gujju fare too…pure veg and no frog legs. Thenk yoo.

- - -

End note

As reports of another Indian being attacked in Melbourne ruled the airwaves on Saturday, the government appealed for “restraint’’ in reporting the incident, expressing fears that it would damage bilateral relations with Australia.

Is this what makes us want to be proud nationalists?