:: Saturday, June 22, 2002 ::

File Under Ironic:

China to Help Nepal Fight Maoists

KATHMANDU: A senior leader of Nepal's ruling Nepali Congress party said on Sunday that China has promised to help the impoverished Himalayan nation fight Maoist rebels seeking to topple the constitutional monarchy.

"They (the Chinese) have promised to provide all the possible help in the fight against the terrorists," Girija Prasad Koirala, president of the Nepali Congress, told reporters after a week-long visit to Beijing. His statement came as the state-run news agency, Rastria Samachar Samiti, reported troops had killed 17 Maoist guerrillas in weekend gun battles across Nepal which has been under a state of emergency since last November when rebels walked out of peace talks and launched a wave of bloody attacks. Koirala did not specify what type of assistance China had promised to give Nepal to help crush the Maoist rebels who draw their inspiration from Chinese revolutionary leader Mao Zedong and are trying to set up a one-party communist republic.

[...]

More than 4,700 people have been killed since the conflict began in early 1996 -- 2,800 of them in the past six months.

Times of India / Reuters

:: Vikash Yadav 2:47 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

"Babu" Culture:

Whispersinthecorridors.com is a site devoted to collecting and disseminating gossip about government civil servants (and some politicians) who are being promoted, demoted, transferred, etc.

I find the idea of this website more interesting than the site itself. Someone really needs to write about the culture of the Indian civil service elite. If you talk to an IAS (Indian Administrative Service) officer about another senior civil servant, they can usually tell you that person's "batch number" and a host of details about that person and all of the other persons in his or her "batch." The amount of time that IAS officers spend gathering and analyzing gossip is fascinating. I am sure it is the same in other large bureaucracies, but I am just amused by some of the idiosyncracies of the Indian system.

What I find really amusing is the way in which IAS officers now jokingly refer to this entire range of obsessive behaviors as "babu" culture. It seems that they have playfully embraced a derisive stereotype about Indian bureaucrats. Like anyone else who has been to India, I have also been terribly frustrated by the bureaucracy and upset by occasional evidence of corruption in such a vital organization, but I still think the culture of the organization is fascinating.

:: Vikash Yadav 10:48 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Dystopias, Technology, and South Asia:

Jason, I think you raise an interesting question when you ask whether South Asia has produced any visions in the science fiction genre that can be classified as a dystopia. But let us back up and ask whether there are any South Asian who even work on science fiction as a genre.

With the exception of Arthur C. Clarke in Sri Lanka, I cannot think of any South Asian writers who work on science fiction (I know that some will object even to the inclusion of Clarke, but I have my own peculiar and highly inclusive definition of what makes someone South Asian --a point which we can debate some other time). Of course the work of Salman Rushdie is filled with a style that some would call magical realism, so there is no lack of imagination but it is true that there is generally a lack of interest in the sub-genre of science fiction.

Perhaps we should ask the question in another way: Why is the US so interested in science fiction? I have two hypotheses. One, the national mythology is obessed with the perpetual rediscovery of the frontier. This obsession with exploration and colonization is also shared with the mother colony, the UK. Two, the disenchantment of the West pushes American/British writers to find new realms of enchantment. In essence, it is the proclaimed death of God in the West that leads to the search for a new mystery outside the realm we inhabit. This argument also helps to explain the sub-genre of science-fantasy (Tolkien, Lewis, et. al.) that is peculiar to the US and UK.

The critical or dystopic perspectives on the future are a natural corrolary of the attempt to imagine the future. At a very basic level, utopias are boring; dystopias are interesting. There is more to talk about and dramatize when people don't get along. At another level of course, the dystopic vision of the future are succesful in the US because of the ways in which they resonate with national fears and hysterias. The sci-fi classics of the sixties were barely masked attempts to express US fears of a Soviet/communist invasion/conspiracy. Give the current climate of hysteria in the US, we should expect to see a flood of sci-fi thrillers about terrorist aliens or alien infiltrators.

India does not have the Anglo-American obsession with frontiers or the need to re-enchant the land. However, this does not mean that Indians do not have a particular vision of technology. I believe to a large extent the Nehruvian vision of dams, bridges, and power plants as the new temples and monuments is still current in India. I believe that the BJP has played on this legacy of Nehru, while generally abandoning the secular undertones of such a vision. If Indian popular culture appears uncritical toward technology, particularly nuclear technology, then the legacy of the Nehruvian vision deserve critical re-examination.

I should add though that there were demonstrations against the nuclear test and even against the recent brinkmanship. I know that these voices are still frail in South Asia, but I have tried to post photos of these demonstration whenever I have come across them. I think to a large extent, the Western media has little interest in portraying these voices of dissent. I think that South Asians have been scripted in the west as raving savages maddened by the heat and ancient hatreds, or as harmless nerds obsessed with computer technology. I guarantee that you will always see tulwar wielding RSS types on the front cover of the NYTimes or Washington Post, before you see the parallel images of sincere people protesting militarism across the sub-continent. I guess it just makes for better political theater or it helps to confirm the racist gaze that dominates the West.

:: Vikash Yadav 7:14 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Deterrence:

It is quite interesting that Kalam unwittingly posited his deterrence theory on the same day that Musharaff also claimed that nuclear weapons deterred war. Jason is right on target when he states that this was a case of attempted compellance rather than deterrance. It is sad that those who are so invested in brinkmanship do not learn the proper terminology for their behavior.

To the extent that India and Pakistan were playing to the US, it would appear that India won this round. Rumsfeld's announcement that Al Quaeda cells were operating in Pakistan Administered Kashmir, must certainly have been a major blow to Musharaff. I am also still curious about the shuffle amongst the top foreign policy officials in Pakistan just after Rumsfeld left the country. I am sure the details will remain buried for many years, but I wonder what specifically happened to cause the diplomatic shuffle.

:: Vikash Yadav 6:39 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Kalam on Technology and "Deterrence" & Some Questions about Popular Culture Perspectives:

Kalam's public comments about technology's potential and his reticence on the issue of communal violence are revealing, I think. This relates more generally to the discussion (see Konana and Balasubramaniam's critical article in Frontline) on the potential of IT (and, I would say, technology more generally) for India. The enthrallment with technology becomes a way of avoiding or wishing away tough questions about society: the status of minorities, distribution of asset ownership, social justice, etc. It is the modernization mindset in its most basic and naked form. It sounds like for Kalam the processes are related: technological progress and the "graduation" into compassionate spiritualism will occur simultaneously.

I'm also intrigued by his views on Indo-Pak "deterrence." If some hapless political scientist is already busy at work on a treatise on this subject, they'd be wise to review Thomas Schelling and Robert Art on the general functions of force and recognize that what is really taking place here is "compellence," and it isn't the bilateral dynamic that is so critical (though that could lead to war!) as it is both sides trying to persuade the United States to get involved, albeit for different reasons. There's an article in today's New York Times which suggests, correctly I think, that India in the past few months has joined Pakistan in a game of brinkmanship with an international audience. Pakistan has long felt that outside, especially U.S., mediation would help its cause more than India's, and until recently it was probably right. India has recognized that post-9/11, the reverse may be true. Unfortunately, it is precisely the fact that both sides are playing to the U.S., and making different calculations about how the U.S. will define its own best interests with respect to the conflict, that makes this situation so dangerous. The situation is more dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis, but not for the patronizing and veiled racist reasons that the NYT suggested a few weeks ago. The situation is fundamentally different because in 1962, Kennedy and Kruschev recognized one another as their only really relevant interlocutor (yes, bureaucratic politics were also important, and Berlin, NATO allies and Cuba were important audiences) whereas in 2002 signaling by India and Pakistan is intended as much if not more for international consumption as for one another. In my view, this makes miscalculation much more likely. Besides, the U.S. doesn't even know what its long-term priorities are with respect to South Asia, so how can India and Pakistan expect to expertly calibrate escalation to induce a desired U.S. response without crossing the fuzzy line of acceptable risk for the other side?

I'm curious about popular culture perspectives in India on both the broader technology infatuation issue and the nuclear issue. I'm thinking along these lines because I'm in the midst of my first foray into the science fiction of Phillip K. Dick. I've finally gotten around to reading "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?", the novel that inspired one of my all-time favorite films, "Blade Runner." This has me thinking more generally about the Western sub-genre of science fiction that deals in negative future utopias, in which amazing technological advances have done not a thing to address societal inequities and injustices. I'm wondering if either of you is aware of any literary or media movement in India that explores similar themes with respect to technology. I don't pose this question as an example of Western sophistication vs. Indian simple-minded naivete on technology's promise; indeed, I think the deeper themes of this kind of work are often lost on the American public. I'm sure millions will go see the new Dick-inspired film "Minority Report" for the special effects and completely ignore whatever deeper social commentary it offers. But I am curious about the potential existense of a similar fledgling genre in India. Obviously, I'm talking about a miniscule strata of the educated elite. But to my mind, too many in this group have uncritically embraced high technology as the key to Indian development, and it would be interesting to explore contrary views.

Along similar lines, are you aware of popular culture exploration of the nuclearization of South Asia (other than explicit activism of folks like Arundhati Roy)? India Today had a silly/sensationalistic cover last week that featured a CG image of a panicked mob (all men) running frantically through the streets of new Delhi with a mushroom cloud rising behind India Gate. I know that in the United States it took a little while for critical works such as "Dr. Strangelove" and "On the Beach" to appear, and these aren't exactly the kinds of things I see Bollywood or the now somewhat derivative English fiction industry in India embracing anytime soon, but I wondered if you knew of any examples. I think there's a tendency in the United States, on the part of both intellectuals and Joe Six-pack, to think that South Asians either don't understand or don't care about nuclear risks in the same way we do. Discussions move very quickly to partial understandings of partially familiar concepts like jihad and karma. Highlighting works of popular culture that defy these stereotypes would be a worthwhile exercise, if they do in fact exist.

:: Jason Kirk 11:26 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

The Re-Discovery of India:

Tonight is the premier of Andew Lloyd Webber's "Bombay Dreams." Although I have no plans to rush over to London's West End to see this play/musical, I am bemused at the rediscovery of India by the West. The new orientalism displayed in Moulin Rouge and some recent hip-hop videos is both charming and awkward.

They are charming in that they present a seductive gaze upon a stylized version of a culture; awkward to the extent that like India's own entertainment industry, these visions of India are escapist and materialist.

In any case, here is a link to the Bombay Dreams Website.

:: Vikash Yadav 12:34 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Assassinations Continue:

According to the Telegraph, Abdul Rashid, the 60-year-old block president of the ruling National Conference in Kashmir, was shot in the Khanyar district as he waited for a bus. He died on his way to hospital. Rashid was a "pro-India" politician. More than 35,000 people have died in Kashmir since 1989 when militants launched an anti-Indian rebellion in the Himalayan region.

Regardless of how one feels about Kashmir, it is quite disturbing that politicians are being assassinated for their views.


:: Vikash Yadav 10:38 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

The President-to-be Gives the Media a Lecture:

Finger-wagging lecture

Few journalists who regularly cover Delhi's political circuit could have been prepared for Wednesday's news conference. Mr Kalam distributed copies of his "Song of Youth" - described as his vision of India's future. Beaming from ear to ear, he said that by putting him forward for president, the government had shown "technology is going to be used for development of the nation". The scientist's most recent role has been that of college professor - something that was very evident in his approach to the media. He gently chided persistent questioners, emphasised his key arguments by repeating them slowly for his listeners and, when in doubt, turned to his trusty notes. Mr Kalam, who is Muslim, was also pushed hard to respond to the recent Hindu-Muslim violence in Gujarat which has led to nearly 1,000 deaths. But he refused to be drawn into a direct reply, saying instead that "what has happened in Gujarat is very painful". The answer to such violence, he said, was for religion to "graduate" into spiritualism, and for political leaders to become more compassionate.

From BBC News

What was not reported in this article is that Dr. Kalam has recently stated that India's nuclear weapons created an effective deterrent. I found this comment almost farsical, but I am sure that my colleagues in political science are hard at work writing a paper about how India and Pakistan "deterred" one another. Kalam went on to say that India has constantly been invaded by foreigners and that the invasions were successful because of India's technological backwardness. He said that when they had guns we had swords, etc. This entire rhetoric, particularly the belief that there was such a thing as "India" to be invaded is deeply problematic and yet very symptomatic of the right's vision of India as martyr and historic victim.


:: Vikash Yadav 10:32 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

India's IT Technology:

We may want to discuss the following article which is available on Frontline. The article touches on several aspects of the IT (information technology) sector within the Indian economy. I have long been critical of this sector on which Indian leaders and elites are increasingly tying the country's future. I have never heard a convincing explanation of how the IT industry will propel India beyond the modern equivalent of assembly line work. It has never been shown how the IT sector will promote greater savings rates or reinvestment in other sectors of the Indian economy. In essence, there is no evidence that the IT sector is a catalyst for sustainable economic development.

This is a particularly good time to review the IT sector as the end of the speculative bubble in the US has brought more critical attitudes towards the Internet and its potential. We may want to critically reexamine the (pseudo-Gerschenkronian) "leapfrogging" hypothesis/rhetoric that so inspired Indian politicians and elites only a few years ago.

There is a larger underlying political question beneath the economic analysis of IT's developmental potential -- how is that economic policies that benefit so few people become so prominent in a democracy? Is it not the case that the resources devoted to promoting the IT sector (much like the massive resources that were allocated to building large dam projects and displacing peasants) reveal the impotence of the masses to determine their own destiny? If so, what is to be done to change the situation?

ARTICLE ABSTRACT

"India as a knowledge economy: Aspirations versus reality"

The Indian vision of a knowledge-based economy will be realised only when it is based on the foundation of a robust industrial economy. To be truly beneficial, the rain of IT must fall at the right place, in the right quantity, at the right time and for the right purpose.

Prabhudev Konana and Sridhar Balasubramaniam

:: Vikash Yadav 9:39 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

The President as Guardian:

What, if anything can the President do to protect the rights of minorities and of us all as Indian citizens? I am not a constitutional expert but I think some aspects of the President's role have been obscured in this regard. Most importantly, the President is sworn to "preserve, protect and defend" the integrity of the Constitution. Although he is bound to act on ministerial advice - which has tended to be a euphemism for carrying out the wishes of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers, he should also refuse any advise that would ask him to violate the constitution; crucially this would mean that laws restricting the freedom of religion, civil rights or that are discriminatory can be refused by him and arguably under the Constitution the President would be acting to defend the constitution if he were to dismiss a government that would ask him to act in such a manner. Apart from these clear injunctions to safeguard the constitution the President's powers have no clear limit put on them and he can intervene in a number of selective ways. President Venkitaraman ordered repolling in several districts in Rajiv Gandhi''s parliamentary constituency after there was substantial violence during the election campaign organised by Congress party activists in 1989. President's can also ask Parliament to reconsider the imposition of President's rule in a state, if he feels the step is unjustified, in a time when many coalitions at the centre are made up of regional parties this can be an important way to ensure that the central government doesn’t misuse it's power to apply pressure to allies/rivals in the state governments and also avert a crisis in the peripheral states, President Venkitaraman refused to dismiss the DMK state government in Tamil Nadu as did President Narayan for the state government in Uttar Pradesh for what were seen as dubious grounds. The Punjab and Kashmir problems were due in no small part to the cavalier misuse of Article 356, which allows the central government to take this step. This power has also been abused in the north-eastern states where democratically elected state governments have been frequently dismissed to be replaced by long and continuous periods of President's Rule: given the disastrous effects in displacing conflict from the electoral arena to the arena of armed insurrection this has had in Kashmir, it is worrying to see this being repeated in another disturbed and restless region where the expansion of democracy has not been allowed to put down deep roots. Lastly, he can make use of the numerous public occasions he has to speak to criticise the government. The outgoing President - Narayaran did so on several occasions, pointing out the social inequities in Indian society and the dangers of religious violence and several other sensitive areas, which were widely seen as criticisms of the BJP coalition's public rhetoric and policies. Interestingly, Narayan was the first President I can recall who had been so openly critical of the current government. Such public pronouncements have usually acted as a dampener on the vigorous pursuit of the aforementioned controversial policies.

As the President is the head of the Executive and has a responsibility to defend the constitution and the rights it confers on all Indian citizens, he definitely not only has a moral duty but constitutional obligation to act if he feels the rights of Indian citizens or the constitutional process is being abused by either a state or the central government. Having said this the record of most Presidents since Independence does not inspire me with confidence; as most have tended to be rubber stamps for the Prime Minister and the ruling party. In the current scenario, with such events as: the Gujarat riots, the simmering Ayodhya temple judgement by the Supreme court and the tensions with Pakistan over the conflict in Kashmir; we can no longer afford to have such a President and the need for one that will act in the interests of all citizens has never been greater.


:: Conrad Barwa 11:13 AM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Presidential Power:

Article 61 in the Consitution states that a President can only be impeached for violation of the consitution. This requires a charge to be made in either the Lok or Rajya Sabha, where it must be endorsed by two-thirds of the total memebership of the House, not two-thirds of those present. Then the other House investigates the charge, if it then endorses the charge with two-thirds of its total memebership stating that the charge has been sustained the President is removed from office. This makes the impeachment of the President an incredibly cumbersome and lengthy process and one that only a government with a secure and broad-based mandate in both Houses of Parliament could embark upon with any chance of real success: needless to say in the era of coalition politics this kind of support is largely absent.

Under the Consitution the President does have some key powers: including Supreme command of the Defence forces, the power to appoint the Prime Minister, Supreme Court Judges and Governors of States, the power to declare a state of National Emergency (though after 1977 this now requires the written consent of the Cabinet) and the power to dissolve the Lok Sabha. He also has the power to decline giving assent to all parlimenatary bills excluding money bills and all state legisaltion (though in the case of Parliament he can decline assent only once and then when presented with the bill again has to give his assent). By far the most important power is choosing who to invite to become Prime Minister at the start of a new Lok Sabha, in the event of a hung parliament this does give the President a large amount of influence in determining the potential make up of the government at the centre.

" A President who chooses to play politics can in fact make himself a formidable power because the only restraint which Parliment can exercise upon him is impeachement which requires a ... majority and a President who has played his political game with skill can never fail to obtain sufficient support in Parliament to thwart this."

Jagjivan Ram in an interview with Pran Chopra, 1970.

:: Conrad Barwa 8:44 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Pearls of Wisdom from the Missile Man:

A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, left, India's top nuclear expert, tours exhibits at the Defense Expo in New Delhi on October 12, 1999. (AP Photo/John McConnico).

Here is a web site created by some of the fans of the Presidential candidate, Abdul Kalam: www.abdulkalam.com. Although this man seems to have been involved in some impressive achievements, one cannot help but wonder where he was during the Gujarat massacres. I have serious doubts that this man will do anything to protect minorities in India if he is elected President.

:: Vikash Yadav 6:02 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............

Growth Rates of Real GDP per Person:

JAPAN
1820-1870___0.1
1870-1913___1.4
1913-1950___0.9
1950-1973___8.0
1973-1996___2.5

Source: IMF (2000) World Economic Outlook

:: Vikash Yadav 5:31 PM [Permanent Link] :: ::
..............