the telegraph article--26th july, 2013

XXCE

FRIDAY 26 JULY 2013 VOL. XXXII NO. 20

T

14

T he ghost of the late Suresh Tendulkar, theeconomist who headed a panel of expertsthat in 2009 recommended a methodology

to measure the poverty line in India, must betwitching. On July 23, the Planning Commissionsaid that the number of people living below thepoverty line at the end of 2012 haddeclinednearly22 per cent since 2005— to 269.3million from 407.1million people. Predictably,while the governmenttook credit for the development, critics said thatthe decline was overstated and the methodologywas suspect. Several experts questioned the gov-ernment’s definitionof poverty,which is basedonconsumption levels; per capita spending of Rs 27in rural areas and Rs 33 in urban areas weredeemed as living in poverty.

To many, that is too low a number, especiallygiven persistently high inflation (particularly infood prices) and rising commodity prices; the bigconcern here is that by setting the poverty line solow, fewer people would qualify for the govern-ment’s food subsidy programmes. There is a lot atstake in the accuracy of the poverty numbers;while the Congress-led government is touting thereduction in poverty as a result of its policies, Op-position parties attack their credibility, and ex-pectedly so, with national elections barely a yearaway. Which begs the question: do the PlanningCommission’s estimates stand up to economicscrutiny, compared to estimates by other agenciessuch as theWorld Bank or the United Nations De-velopment Programme?

TheWorldBank’spoverty line is $1.25adaypercapita; estimated in purchasing power parityterms, that translates intoRs27.50, orhalf a rupeeabove the Planning Commission’s figure. But formiddle-income countries — the World Bank de-fines Indiaasa ‘blend’ economy,betweenpoorandmiddle-income—theWorldBank’s poverty line is$2 a day, or Rs 44; by that yardstick, the number ofpeople living below the poverty line could well beover 300million. In 2010, theUNDPestimated thatnearly 30 per cent of all Indians live below thepoverty line; others like the Oxford Poverty andHuman Development Initiative found that eightIndian states hadmore people than the combinedpopulation of 26 African countries, which makeup about 410 million people. An April 2013 WorldBank report, “The State of the Poor: Where arethe Poor andWhere are They Poorest?” underli-nes another troubling statistic: India nowaccoun-ts for one third of the world’s poor, when 30 yearsago, it accounted for a fifth. So where the povertyline is drawn for India depends onwhomyou ask.Many experts also acknowledge that the poor aredefinitely consuming more; Arvind Panagariya,professor of economics at Columbia University,believes that India’s poverty line is reasonable.The trouble is reconciling the views of so manyrespected expert opinions; in measuring poverty,the number ismore than just a number.

SCRIPSIThat is what learning is. You suddenly under-stand something you’ve understood all your life,but in anewway.—DORISLESSING

T he stock response of theBharatiya Janata Partyto the argument thatGodhra makes Naren-dra Modi politically un-

touchable is “What about 1984?”There are several inadequate come-backs to that question and the bestof them is that no one should useone pogrom to justify another. Ionce heard this used to good effectby the columnist, Aakar Patel, in atelevision discussion. This answerhas thevirtue of not beingparty-po-litical nor attempting in somegrotesque way to demonstrate thatthe pogrom permitted and encour-aged by the Congress governmentin Delhi in 1984 was morally lesshorrible than the pogrom thatoccurred on the BJP’s watch inGujarat in 2002.

The problemwith this response,though, is that it doesn’t answer thequestions that fly in close formationbehind the “What about 1984?”question, namely, “Why is the BJPworse than the Congress?” and, re-latedly, “Why is NarendraModi anyworse than Rajiv Gandhi?” special-ly given the latter’s infamous com-ment, “When a big tree falls, theearth shakes,”which seemed, retro-spectively, to rationalize the system-atic killing of Sikhs in the days thatfollowed Indira Gandhi’s assassina-tion.

These are important questionsregardless of who asks them. Thefact that they are often asked byNarendraModi’s unlovely support-ers isn’t a good reason fornot takingthem seriously.

It has been nearly thirty yearssince the earth shook, and for thosewho didn’t live through the horrorof those days as reasoning adults, itisworth rehearsing the hideous sig-nificance of 1984 in the history ofthe republic.

T herehadbeen communal vio-lence right through the earlyhistory of the republic with

mostly Muslims at the receivingend. The complicity of the lowerechelons of the state apparatus inthis violence — Uttar Pradesh’sProvincial Armed Constabularywas notorious for its institutional-ized animus against Muslims —was widely recognized. But thescale on which Sikhs were killed,the participation of Congressmenat every level, the total complicity ofthe police and the fact that thebutchery happened in the country’scapital, in Delhi, made 1984 awater-shed in the history of the republic.

In a previous column, I wroteabout Modi doubling down on the

Gujarat killings by refusing any ex-pression of regret or responsibilityand also by continuing to sponsorindividuals likeMaya Kodnani whohad taken an active part in the vio-lence. In this context, we should re-member the way in which RajivGandhi’s Congress exploited theDelhi pogrom by running a fear-mongering election campaign thatsuggested that 1984 was a featurenot a bug.

I remember a Congress adver-tisement that unsubtly suggestedthat Indians ought to vote for theparty of firm governance if theirtaxi-drivers made them nervous,this, remember, at a time whenSikhs drove taxis in large numbersin Indian cities. I remember theCongress’s election doggerel: “Chu-nauti nayi, ek sandesh,/ Mazboothai haath, akhand hai desh.” This,

roughly translated, encouraged vot-ers to vote for the ‘Hand’ (the Con-gress’s election symbol) if theywanted a government capable ofpreserving India’s unity. The use ofthe word, akhand, to indicate theunity and integrity of the nationwas significant: the Congress, un-precedentedly, was using a wordfrom the sangh parivar’s playbook,stealing the idea of a majoritarian“akhandBharat”.

Similarly, the reluctance of theCongress to purge itself of mem-bers accused of participating in the1984 pogrom, its willingness to fieldthem as parliamentary candidatesand to appoint them to ministerialoffice, doesn’t add up to a recordthat can be virtuously contrastedwith theBJP’sandNarendraModi’sbrazenness afterGodhra.

1984 had two major conse-quences. First, it radically under-mined theCongress’s claim tobeing

a secular party that respected thepolitical tradition of pluralism pio-neered by its colonial avatar andconsolidated by Nehru in the earlyyears of the republic. The willing-ness of the Congress under IndiraGandhi to use sectarian issues forpolitical ends had been evident be-fore 1984 but the party’s willingnessto sell its pluralist soul for immedi-ate political advantage was mostvividly illustrated in the days andmonths after her death. The Con-gress, after 1984, stood outmore andmore clearly as a party that couldn’teven be accused of not having thecourage of its convictions becauseit didn’t have any convictions at all.Pluralism and its traditional oppo-sition to majoritarianism becamelabels that the Congress used forbrand management in particularpolitical contexts, not as principles

that shaped its political agenda.The second consequence of 1984

was that Indira Gandhi’s assassina-tion sealed theCongress’s long tran-sition to dynastic rule in blood. Therhetoric of martyrdomthat debasesthe political utterances of the Con-gress faithful dates back to thattime.Frombeingagreat pan-Indianparty that made a subcontinentcohere into a republic, theCongressafter 1984 regressed into a de-natured dynastic rump.

Let us return to our question,

namely, “What makesModi and theBJP worse than the Congress andits dynasts, given the horror of1984?” The answer is simple andunedifying. TheCongress, by akindof historical default, is a pluralistparty that is opportunistically com-munal while the BJP is an ideologi-cally communal (or majoritarian)party that is opportunistically ‘sec-ular’. The difference between theCongress and the BJP doesn’t liemainly in thewillingness of the for-mer to express contrition aboutpogroms it helped organize; it is,perhaps, best illustrated by the factthat twenty years after the 1984pogrom, the Congress assumedoffice with a Sikh at the helm whoserved as prime minister for twoterms.

T ry to imagine a BJP govern-ment headed by aMuslim tenyears from now. It doesn’t

work even as a thought experiment.And the reason it doesn’t work isthat the BJP’s ideology is essential-ly the encrustation of prejudicearound an inconvenient and irre-ducible fact: the substantial and un-deferential presence of minoritycommunities in the republic, spe-cially Muslims who, for the sanghparivar, are the unfinished busi-ness of Partition. The idea that theBJP might appoint a Muslim headof government (as opposed to, say,the nomination of President Kalamto titular office) is unthinkable.

It doesn’t follow from this thatManmohanSingh’s primeminister-ship is a signof theCongress’s polit-ical virtue; it isn’t. It is, if anything,a symptom of the dynastic dysfunc-tion that has diminished the Con-gress.But the reasonhisprimemin-istership is possible is that the Con-gress isn’t ideologically committedto anti-Sikh bigotry (despite 1984)in the way that the BJP is commit-ted to Hindu supremacy and thesubordination of Muslims. That’swhy Narendra Modi so excites thesangh parivar’s rank and file: theGujarat Model is the BJP’s test runfor India, and it isn’t the economicsof it that sets thepulsesof its cadresracing.

So the reason the dynasticCongress isn’t as dangerous asModi’s BJP is dispiriting butstraightforward: while the Con-gress is capable of communalism, itisn’t constituted by bigotry. WithModi, even when he’s talking eco-nomics and good governance, weget the “burqa of secularism” andMuslims as road kill. It’s not hisfault; from the time that Golwalkarsketched out his vision of an Indiawhere religious minorities weredocile helots, bigotry has beenHindutva’s calling card.

Pogroms and political virtue

What about 1984?MUKULKESAVAN

While theCongress is capableof communalism, itisn’t constituted by

bigotry

’‘

mukulkesavan@hotmail.com

NOTHINGNEW

TOADD

MALVIKASINGH

BONA FIDE

A sNarendraModi takescomplete charge of hisparty andhimself, plan-

ning, grabbing eyeballs regard-less of all the faint cries ofprotest from some of his collea-gues and louder chants fromthosewho are not on the samepage as he is, some over-excitedand enthusiastic televisionchannels have began to alloca-te himmanyhours on primetime, followed, needless to say,by endless ‘repeats’— specula-tions on future poll outcomesbased on commissioned surv-eys. It is always amusing to seethe reaction and body languageof the anchor andhis panelwhen theCongress gets a legup. The disbelief writ large ontheir faces shows the inherentbiases that give the game away,only to emphasize that discus-sion and debate have becomepredictable and obvious.

The same faces are invitedagain and again. They voicetheirwell-known stances andpositions, adding nothing new,different or provocative. It is asif India has only two dozenthinking people and intellectu-als, frozen in their tracks andin time. Theyhop fromonechannel to the other, saying thesame thing, reacting in thesameway,wearing the sameclothes, smirking in the samemanner, killing viewer inter-est. Television could have beena platform for intelligent, com-bative debate among activeminds, peoplewho read, think,and communicate. The sense-less interruptions by anchorswhenever someview is statedthat goes against the anchors’personal proclivity, jar andcompel channel-surfing.

Indian televisionneeds togrowup andmature. BBC,CNN,Al Jazeera,NDTVProfitare a few that are a class apartwhen compared to the other In-dian 24-hour news channels intheEnglish language. Iwonderwhatwill happen to the high-pitched, loud and grand decla-mations of theEnglish speak-ing national anchors if andwhen the recent call,made bysome in theBharatiya JanataParty, to ‘discard’ English,kicks in.

BadmealWill they retire orwill theylobby forRajya Sabhanom-inations?Viewers long to learnsomething they donot knowal-ready. Theywant to be empow-eredwith new ideas. Theywant to feel included in thelarger game as real stakehold-ers. It is unfortunate that in re-cent years,with technologyreaching newheights, enablingaccessibility formore andmore people to amuch largerpool of information,we inIndia have not been able to cap-italize on this enormous re-source for the betterment ofthe people.

We could have enlarged thelens and triggered the latent in-tellect of millions of anony-mous individuals, to absorband share in the best fromother nations and civilizations.Today, technology, and televi-sion in particular, allows forthe extraordinary possibilityof inclusion of more andmorepeople, children and adults, inthe quest for knowledge,growth, conservation of skillsandmaterial heritage, and incrossing boundaries of themind, body and soul thatwereonce ‘forbidden’.

The glib and superficialposturing on television thatwehave to swallow 24x7 because ofno alternative source of enter-tainment and informationhascompelled the ‘minds’ of cap-tive viewers to become obeseandnon-critical of what isbeing doled outmuch like abadly cookedmiddaymeal.Mediocrity, and often,moronicbehaviour, are celebrated onthe small screen.A conde-scending attitude towards theviewer has forced us to eatbadly cooked fare, put togetherwith inferior ingredients, withtoomuch chilli powder, andwith no concern for a balanceddiet. It has led to unidentifiedviral diseases and deteriorat-ingmental health. In this excit-ing technological and informa-tion age, the creativeminds ofmillions of Indians have beendenied sustenance, forcing thelargest pool of human resourcetowallow in frustration.

POORFIGURES

TRAVELPLANS

L ike the declaration of the northern provin-cial council elections some days ago, theSri Lanka government’s latest announce-

ment to reduce troops in the northern civil warzone is bound to create positive vibes in favour ofthe Mahinda Rajapaksa government. Given theamount of criticism that has come itsway recent-ly, the government could not but be looking for-ward to some good publicity. This will help it tocreate the right atmosphere before the countryhosts the meeting of Commonwealth heads ofgovernment inNovember. Yet, nomatter howwel-come the decisions regarding the northern prov-ince are, the Damocles’ sword over the 13th amen-dment has been left hanging. The Rajapaksagovernment has made no bones about wanting todo away with this cornerstone piece of legisla-tion,whichgrants adegreeof economicandpolit-ical autonomy to the Tamil-dominated provinces.The government sees the amendment as a threatto theunitary structure of the country andhas re-fused to buckle under pressure from India. Eversince India’s vote against Sri Lanka last year inthe United Nations human rights council, Sri La-nka has been intent on avenging its humiliationby treading on India’s toes. It has found the target-ing of the 13thamendment thebestway todo that.

Scrapping the amendment may bring immedi-ate gratification to the Rajapaksa governmentand even go a long way in boosting its imageamong the majoritarian population. But it mightdamage Sri Lanka’s chances of peace in the longrun.Bydenying theneed togiveanyconcession toa minority population that has been discriminat-ed against, and thereby the need for reconcilia-tion, Sri Lanka is trying to obfuscate the truth.This tendency, which is already affecting the Sin-hala majority population’s interface with otherminorities such as the Muslims, could set thecountry back on a road it has travelled.

■Sir— In the past fewyears,moreandmore scamshave come to lightin the country, and corruption haspenetrated every sphere of govern-ance (“Thieving galore”, July 22).India ranked 94th in theTranspa-rency International’s CorruptionPerception Index in 2012. Graft andbribery in the public distributionsystemhas taken aheavy toll on thewelfare of the commonpeople andis severely hurting the economy.TheUnited ProgressiveAlliancegovernment recently issued an or-dinance on food security. However,it only seems bent on securing itsvote-bank, given themanner inwhich it disregarded theOpposit-ion’s suggestions for amendments.The government should not havepassed the important ordinance insuch ahurry, andwithout extensivedebates in Parliament. It is interes-ting that theUPAchose to pass theordinance at a timewhen the gene-ral elections are less than a yearaway.

Food grains rot in godownsacross the countrywhile large sec-tions of the country’s population gohungry. Severalmembers of theruling dispensation aswell as otherpolitical parties are facing chargesof corruption. But political satrapshave a history of ensuring that thevarious agencies, such as theCent-ral Bureau of Investigation, toe thegovernment’s line. The campaignfor a strong lok pal, that could havelanded somemembers of the gov-ernment in trouble,was quelled.

Themenace of blackmoney isalso rampant—according to the fi-nancial think tank,Global Finan-cial Integrity, Rs 25 lakh crore havebeen illegally stashed away abroadby Indians in foreign banks. The In-dian governmentwas reportedlygiven a list of names of 700 Indianswhowere said to have siphoned offblackmoney to store in Swiss bankaccounts. The government has notmade any serious enquiries intothis. S.L. Rao has correctly pointedout that “politicians at every levelandmany senior officials join in

this loot of the exchequer.” Thesefunds could have beenused to fundsocialwelfare programmes. Politi-cal paralysis has gripped India andinflation is debilitating the econo-my.With the elections due to takeplace next year one can only hopefor change.

Yours faithfully,Kanishka Pathak,Dhanbad

■Sir—Ethical standards in gover-nance are often severely compro-mised owing to corrupt public ser-vants and officials. It is the comm-on peoplewho always have to bearthe brunt, aswas seen in the Sarandistrict of Bihar,where 23 childrenlost their lives after eating a con-taminatedmid-daymeal. Althougha fewbig scams are unearthed bythemedia, there are several othersthat do not surface at all.Most ofthe cases of graftwhich take placein publicworks departments—such as during the construction ofroads and dams—gounnoticed.TheCentral aswell as the state gov-ernmentsmust see to it that suchventures and activities are careful-ly audited to root out such corruptpractices.

Yours faithfully,AlokGanguly,Calcutta

■Sir— In the article, “Thieving ga-lore”, S.L. Rao has explained howcorruption has entered all spheresof public life in India—defence,law, governance, health, sports andso on. It iswell known that in pres-ent times, even jobs in the public orprivate sectors can be easily secur-ed by offering bribes. Rao has aptlysaid that, “the poor pay the bribe;the rich pay a ‘tip’”.

In order to put an end to suchunlawful activities, electoral and ju-dicial reformsmust be strictly im-plemented.However, thismay re-main a pipe-dream since the peopleoffering bribes and those takingthemare hand in glovewith one an-other. A firm resolve to not indulgein dishonest practices is requiredon the part of the government andthe ordinary people in order to curbthismenace.

Yours faithfully,Govinda Bakshi, Calcutta

Crimeandpunishment■Sir—The editorial, “Longwait”(July 18), says that “[i]t is never toolate to seek justice”. The recentevents inBangladeshhave provedthis to be true. The former leader of

the Jamaat-e-Islami, GhulamAzam, and some of his party associ-ateswere found guilty by the Inter-national CrimesTribunal inDhakaof planning and executing heinouscrimes during the liberationwar of1971. Records suggest that aroundthreemillion peoplewere killed inthesewar crimes 42 years ago; thejudges atAzam’s trial said this cou-ld easily be called theworst geno-cide sinceWorldWar II. Azamhasbeen sentenced to 90 years in pris-on.Hewas spared the death sent-ence owing to his advanced age.Hehadmanaged to escape to Pakistanbefore the end of thewar; he re-turned toBangladesh in 1978.

TheBangladeshi government,led by the primeminister, SheikhHasinaWajed, hadmade the trials apart of itsmanifesto during theparliamentary elections in 2008.However, it is no secret that Jamaatagitators, responsible for creatingdisturbances inBangladesh, arestrongly backed by theBangladeshNationalist Party.Wajedmust beprepared to face a great deal of op-position and even a possible defeatin the next general elections inBangladesh.However, she has notbeen deterred frombringing thecriminals to book.One only hopesthat Bangladesh is able to dealwiththe ghosts of its troubled past to en-sure peace and prosperity for itspeople.

Yours faithfully,DipakBanerjee, Calcutta

Letters to the editor should be sent to:The Telegraph

6 Prafulla Sarkar Street, Calcutta 700001email: ttedit@abpmail.com

Northeast: Third Floor, Jupitara Place,Bhangagarh, G.S. Road,

Guwahati 781005Jorhat: Janambhumi Press Pvt Ltd,T.N. Sarma Path, Jorhat - 785001

Jharkhand: Shantiniketan Building,Second Floor, Main Road, Bistupur,

Jamshedpur: 831001;or, C/o Union Club& Library, Hazaribagh Road,

Ranchi - 834001Bihar: TheTelegraph, 1st Floor,

Ojas Mansion,Near Akashvani, Fraser Road,

Patna - 800001Orissa:185 Janpath, Second Floor,

Bhubaneswar- 751001All letters (including email) should havethe sender’s name and postal address

Rotten core

GhulamAzam: grisly crimes

LETTERS