ROUND THE WORLD

New Delhi, 20 June 2006

Domestic Politics

Eroding Consensus On Foreign Policy

By Dr. Chintamani Mahapatra

School of International Studies, JNU

As India marches ahead to play a global role, domestic consensus over foreign policy has been fast eroding. Despite having a complex democratic polity with myriad political parties, India has traditionally had the luxury of having a foreign policy based on national consensus.

The Opposition parties did raise their concerns, expressed their distinctive stands on international events and sometimes questioned the Government positions on foreign affairs, but all these were done in a sophisticated manner and in a way that would not adversely affect the national interest. Foreign policy issues were not contested during national elections, despite their importance.

India’s non-aligned strategy had no major critics at home, although some political leaders questioned its relevance at the time of the Chinese invasion in 1962. The Left parties were quite comfortable with it, since the Non-Aligned Movement almost came to make common cause with the Soviet bloc of nations by ritually making resolutions against colonialism, imperialism and giving calls to restructure the West-dominated international economic order and international information order. Cuba’s Castro and former Yugoslavia’s Tito were great leaders of NAM.

The Rightist parties too could not distance themselves from non-alignment and plead for closer ties with the US-led bloc, since Washington itself had no support for them. The Right, the Left and the amorphous Congress all championed the interests of the Third World and the Non-Aligned Movement.

The American alliance with Pakistan, strategic ties between China and Pakistan and the eventual Sino-US cooperation against the Soviet Union gave little opportunity for Indian political groups and parties to quarrel over foreign policy issues. The Indo-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation was welcomed by all Indians. Although during the brief Janata rule in the late 1970s, the Indian Government used the rhetoric of genuine non-alignment, it was short lived.

This rhetoric was used at a wrong time. The US power and influence was on the decline since the US withdrawal of troops from Vietnam and the Soviet influence around the globe was on the ascendant. Genuine non-alignment meant correcting the excessive tilt towards Moscow. But Washington was not too keen to improve its ties with India. President Jimmy Carter did make a Presidential visit to India, but was not prepared to make any concession on the vital nuclear issue. Interestingly, China with tacit support of the US attacked Vietnam when India’s then Foreign Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee was visiting China. This incident probably ended the desire to have a genuine non-alignment.

During the 1980s, as the Soviets became more and aggressive starting with the invasion of Afghanistan and the Americans unleashed a counter-offensive under the leadership of Ronald Reagan, India once again had to stay the course of non-alignment and it was not difficult to manage a domestic consensus over foreign policy.

The end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 made non-alignment strategy an irrelevant instrument of foreign policy. While NAM did not disappear, its activities certainly slowed down. India’s new gesture of friendship and cooperation with the US against the backdrop of far-reaching economic reforms once again did not break domestic consensus. India’s informal entry into the nuclear club and the high rate of economic growth instilled new confidence and the Indian people came to pride themselves in the country’s emergence as a new major power on the international stage.

India sought to improve ties with China, restore cordial relations with Russia and gave a fitting reply to Pakistan’s intrusion into the Kargil sector of Kashmir. There was still internal unity on India’s external policies.

However, steady improvement in Indo-US relations since the March 2000 Clinton visit through the March 2006 Bush visit has threatened to rupture the domestic consensus on India’s foreign policy. When the NDA Government pursued a policy of establishing strategic partnership with the US, the Congress and the Left parties expressed severe reservations. As the Vajpayee Government appeared to be toying with the idea of sending the Indian troops to Iraq under the US request, the Opposition parties were up in arms and ensured that the Government did not do so.

The victory of the UPA Government in the next election initially created an impression that the course of foreign policy would take a turn away from intense cooperation with the US. But soon it was found that the Manmohan Singh Government went several steps ahead of the Vajpayee government in strengthening strategic ties with the US.

Signing of a Defense Framework Agreement between Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee and the US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and a nuclear deal agreed upon between the US President George Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have raised the prospects of further strengthening of Indo-US relations. But these two events simultaneously have created fissures in the ruling coalition.

The Left parties are up in arms against the Government’s foreign policy in general and perceived and alleged tilt towards the United States. Thousands of Left activists demonstrated against the recent Indo-US military exercises. The BJP has also time  and again blamed the Government for compromising on the country’s independent foreign policy under the US pressure.

Significantly, the Left parties and several trade union leaders came out open on the streets to protest against the UPA Government’s policy towards Iran. It was alleged that the Government’s anti-Iranian vote at the International Atomic Energy Agency was cast at the behest of the United States. Several Muslim groups in Uttar Pradesh too openly expressed their anger over the Government’s Iran policy.

All these developments and many others are symptomatic of the growing fissures in domestic consensus over Indian foreign policy. Two issues are particularly likely to develop divisions in the country in the matters of foreign policy in coming years. One is of course the extent of India’s support to the US policies and the other are issues and events in the Islamic world. These two issues are indisputably inter-related.

The continuing US war against terrorism unleashed since the 9/11 incident will pose an intermittent challenge to its emerging strategic partner, that is India, which is the second largest Muslim country in the world with a non-Muslim majority. The political parties with keen eyes focused on the vote bank could play havoc with the Indian positions on events and issues in the Islamic world by conveniently interpreting and misinterpreting issues. The real challenge before India is to disenable democracy from disabling Indian foreign policy.---INFA

 (Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

POLITICAL DIARY

NEW DELHI, 10 September 2006

YAWN, WHAT’S NEW?

INTERNAL SECURITY REVIEWED AGAIN

By Poonam I Kaushish

Yawn! Yet another meeting on internal security.  Reflecting once more a seminarian approach.  The same monotonous actions and reactions, with minor changes of a comma here and a full stop there. All to make it appear something spanking new and different. Of a Government on the ball, talking and acting tough. Really? As the old saying goes, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride. Indeed, talk of terror and more terror has become a big, big yawn.

Sitting in New Delhi’s sanitized environs of 7 Race Course Road (Prime Minister’s residence) Manmohan Singh and the Chief Ministers knocked their heads together to find a solution for putting a stop to the shocking internal security failures and the consequent threat that gravely looms large over the country. “We have to meet these threats firmly, with determination and with a will to destroy,” he asserted. His remedy? Marshal resources. Nothing more nothing less.

How? By setting up an Empowered Group of Union Ministers and some Chief Ministers to “closely monitor the spread of the terror and the Naxalite movement, improving intelligence generation and collection, as also the overall strengthening of your intelligence mechanism." Adding, "We need a blend of firm, but sophisticated, handling of Naxalite violence with sensitive handling of the developmental aspects. Chief Ministers must personally take in hand what deliverables are possible even while preparing to meet Naxalite violence through effective law and order measures.”

So far so good. But rewind. Didn’t the Prime Minister speak more or less the same words three months ago at a similar conference with the Chief Ministers. When he made a strong pitch for more of the same---- effective police response, effective intelligence gathering, increasing the financial allocation for anti-Naxal and anti-terrorist operations and a multi-pronged strategy with an emphasis on socio-economic development. His message could not have been blunter: Treat this as “high priority.” Result? Scandalously, the States gave short shrift to his wise words. Leading to this meeting and the same ghisa-pitta Government reaction.

Sadly, instead of taking the States to task for their lackadaisical approach to the gravest challenge to India’s internal security – terror from across the border and Naxalites---the Prime Minister, as in the past, once more droned like a screechy worn-out record, “The terrorist modules are instigated, inspired and supported by elements from across the border….if these are not controlled it would be exceedingly difficult to carry forward the peace process.” Brave words, indeed. Yet, he is all set to hold another guftagu with Musharraf on the sidelines of the NAM Summit in Havana.

Mumbai, Srinagar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh…The tandav of death terror list is unending. None knows where the next hit would be simply because our intelligence sucks. Think. This low cost proxy war has already cost India more than 62,000 civilians and 10,000 security personnel since terrorist activities started in India. Statistics show that Naxalism is presently casting a shadow over 17 States in the country,170 districts and 40 per cent of terrain where the Government’s writ no longer runs. And out of the total of 12,476 police stations, Naxal violence was reported from 509 police stations in 11 States last year.

More. The CPI (Maoist) is trying to increase its influence and activity in parts of Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Uttaranchal and also in new areas in some of the already affected States. With the help from Pakistan’s ISI which is giving financial support to the militant groups all over the country. A “Red Brigade” corridor runs through the entire length of the country, from  Nepal’s Maoists to Sri Lanka’s LTTE and encompasses the North-East’s ULFA. What to say of the Lakshar-e-Taiyyaba, Harkut-ul–Ansar et al.

Several measures need to be taken to tackle the menace. One, the lacunae in the Naxal’s ideological framework and simultaneously launch a political offensive with a humanistic vision has to be exposed. Two, the distortions in the social system need to be tackled on a war footing, to alleviate poverty, ensure speedy development and enforce law and order strictly. Three, take up land reforms with a fresh revolutionary zeal and approach. Look at the present dichotomy. With a majority of India’s population engaged in agricultural pursuits, one would expect the tillers to be rich. Instead, they are not only poor but continue to be at the mercy of the rich landlords.

More. There is an urgent need for the badly-affected States to undertake joint operations and set up joint unified commands for continuous monitoring of the arms profile of various Naxal groups, as the Prime Minister highlighted during his meeting with the CMs. Urgently needed alongwith this, is identification of sources and networks, coordinated intelligence gathering, and a well-equipped police force, if this grave security threat is to be combatted. 

The Prime Minister is correct when he asserts that an efficient and vigilant police could surely prove to be an effective deterrent to the terrorists in any mohalla, district or the State. A well-equipped police force alone can be effective in intelligence gathering. From the beat constable right up to the Director General of Police. But do we have such a force? No. Are we taking measures to build one? No, again.

Look at two absurdities. The national average of the police-population ratio is about 1.3 policemen per 10,000 citizens. Yet in Bihar, a Naxal-prone State, the ratio of policemen to the public per 10,000 is a meagre 0.9 i.e hardly one policeman for 10,000 people. With the result that times out of number, the police and civil administration are missing in the Naxal areas. Gujarat, not only lacks an anti-terrorist and detection squad but the Government Railway Police (GRP) still works on a staff strength sanctioned in 1962, despite increasing vulnerability of its railway stations. The State has around 500 policemen as against the sanctioned strength of 1,940 in the State.

Thus, there is need to strengthen the local police on all fronts --- and ensure that it is better trained and equipped, with improved weapons and greater mobility. Competent officers should be posted in the affected districts and given a stable tenure of at least 2 to 3 years to make a difference. Over-centralisation should be replaced by decentralization and functional autonomy to the police from the Thana level onwards and their goals and objective set with the cooperation and consultation of the local population.  A properly structured and representative body of local residents should be associated with setting priorities and goals as also monitoring.

New Delhi fails to realize that normal deterrence doesn’t work against a faceless and fearless enemy who has no borders and no scruples. When the State’s existence is in peril, the only way to hit back is to carry the fight into the enemy camp effectively. It is not enough to assert ‘we have might and muscle. One has to display that power.

The tragedy is that government after government continue to miss the wood for the trees. The terrorist is an invisible enemy who uses our resources, freedom and laxities to hit at us. Adept in exploiting the latest communication technologies, he identifies and exploits our weakness. While we talk, he acts. Inflicting maximum loss at minimum cost. All at our expense.

Add to this an effete polity bereft of any out-of-the-box ideas, wallowing inane, obsolete and muddle-headed formulations to complex and important strategic issues. Resulting in a complete paralyses in policy-making and the operational command of enforcement and security agencies. Addressing which has become critical within the context of relentless, utterly unscrupulous and unconstrained movements of terrorism within India.

In sum, terrorism is no longer terror in someone else’s backyard. Or, the prerogative of spy thrillers. Malegaon’s horrendous blasts on Friday last is a case in point.  New Delhi must stop groping in the dark and face the reality. Terrorists and so-called jehadis are not liquidated through battles of the mind but by cold-blooded wars of flesh and blood. Remember, when our liberalism and freedom becomes the enemy’s Kalashnikov, it is time for India to wake up, think beyond the headlines do some honest soul searching and act decisively.  --- INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)

POLITICAL DIARY

NEW DELHI, 10 November 2006

Reserved For Muslims

WHERE ARE THE JOBS?

By Poonam I Kaushish

Circa July 2004 - November 06: The Congress-led Andhra Pradesh Government promises five per cent reservation for Muslims in government jobs and educational institutions. No matter, it is struck down by the High Court. The Congress-led UPA Government at the Centre reserves 50 per cent seats for Muslims in the 140-year-old Aligarh Muslim University.  Followed by a National Commission to examine the question of quotas for socially and economically backward sections among the religious and linguistic communities. Next came the Justice Sachar Committee “on social, economic and educational status” of the Muslim community. To a Ministry of Minority Affairs.

Circa November 06: “Pyare Musalman. What more can I do for you?” This dear reader, is the latest political vote-catching line. Simplistically, minorityism has replaced cronyism as the nouvelle fashion statement of the week. Take a 360-degree turn anywhere and minority appeasement hits you in the face. All in the garb of improving their quality of life (sic) which translates into “please give me your vote.”

How else should one react to the Prime Minister’s latest bonanza for the minorities of getting them a "fair share" in central and state government and private sector jobs.  Asserting that the nation "does not belong to any single race,” he grandiosely made it an “essential” perquisite of maintaining “communal peace and harmony”. Speaking at the Conference of State Minorities Commission in the Capital last week, Manmohan Singh also stressed the need for providing the youth from minority communities with skills to enable them to get their legitimate share in employment.

More. He asked the Chief Ministers to put in place a monitoring mechanism for better implementation of minority welfare schemes. Adding that a Bill to provide constitutional status to the National Commission for Minorities for it to play a more proactive role for the benefit of the minority communities would be taken up during the forthcoming winter session of Parliament. 

True, statistically speaking none can deny that the Muslims need a better quality life. Data collated by various commissions bring out the fact that socio-economic indicators for Muslims were below those for OBCs. About 59 per cent were illiterate, only 10 per cent went to school and a mere eight per cent opted for higher education. Worse, even as they were vastly under-represented in official jobs, they were grossly over-represented in India's prison population. None can deny that the Government’s fundamental mission is to provide job opportunities, education and upliftment of the minorities and backward classes.

But the moot point: Is reservation based on religion and community the answer? How does it better the lot of the mass of Muslims, if a few persons get jobs? Whatever happened to merit and excellence? When does justice supercede competence? Questionably is reservation an end in itself? Is the Muslim identity distinct from that of the Indian? Is he an Indian Muslim or a Muslim Indian?

Given the level of dishonesty and irresponsibility which increasingly governs our political system, this step will be an invitation to disaster. One, it would open once gain open the political-judicial can of worms. Remember, first the Andhra High Court struck down any reservation in jobs for Muslims as it went against the tenets of equality. Later the Supreme Court struck down reservation in private educational institutions as unconstitutional. Not only that. Barely had the controversy over job quotas in the private sector been strangulated by an incensed India Inc who politely told the Government to bugger off.

Besides, if reservation based on castes is bad, affirmative action on communal basis is horrendous. Ominous reasoning is being appendaged. It would bring the Muslims into the mainstream. Ensure harmony between the majority-minority communities. It would prevent Muslims from being exploited any more as vote-banks by the so-called secular parties. Really? Aren’t the Congress’s intensions just that? Exploitation in the name of social and economic upliftment. With our netagan merrily converting positive affirmation into vote percentage. Specially when they can reap a political windfall of over 70 per cent votes via reservation. Never mind if it pushes India back by a century.

Arguably, the Congress has ruled the country for nearly 50 years since Independence. What has it done to better their lot? Zilch. Only used it as a milching cow for votes in return for promises galore of a better deal. Post Independence, Nehru increasingly politicized religious energy. At the height of his popularity he never got more than 43.6 per cent of the popular mandate. Of this, the Muslim vote constituted 12 to 15 per cent of the total Congress vote, the largest block it received in the first few general elections. His daughter Indira went to the extent of acquiescing in the carving of a separate Muslim district of Mallipuram in Kerala by the CPM Government of the State to keep its nationwide vote bank in tact.

Thus, Muslim appeasement was no longer viewed by Congressmen as a luxury but as a matter of life and death. To be manipulated and held hostage by dubious promises. The reason why the Congress came out in favour of a reservation policy on religious basis in the Common Minimum Programme of the UPA Government and why Sonia chose to play footsie with the Jamiat-ul-Ulema not so long back. Even today, the Prime Minister’s job offer was clearly aimed at enabling the Congress to wean the minority vote bank back to its fold in the just concluded nagar pallikas polls in UP. Considered a mini-referendum before the State Assembly elections next year.

Clearly, UP is vital in the electoral sweepstakes on who sits on Delhi’s gaddi. Accounting for 80 Lok Sabha seats, the Congress knows only to well that unless it gets a sizeable chunk of these, its plans to occupy centrestage will come to naught. As Muslims account for 15 per cent of the population. It is another matter that it ended up with mud on its electoral face. Specially as it lost in Gandhi bastion Amethi.

That apart, the danger in imposing arbitrary quotas in job reservation is two fold. One, any deterioration in work output which reflects in short-changing Brand India could jeopardize the country’s remarkable story of economic growth. Whose USP lies in the brain, skills and expertise of its educated and skilled manpower. This, in turn, would lead to a subsequent slowdown in the economy and end up hurting the chances of economic upliftment for the people who are at the bottom of the economic ladder. Further, it would lead to a brain drain and disillusionment among the meritorious and qualified denied employment.

At the same time, none has given a thought to the demoralising impact on the psyche of the qualified individuals denied jobs. What happens to them? And, where do they head? According to Labour Ministry statistics, unemployment on a Current Daily Status basis rose from 6.0 per cent in 1993-94 to 7.3 per cent in 1999-2000 resulting in an additional 27 million job seekers. The most disturbing fact is that of these, 74 per cent are in the rural areas and 60 per cent among them are educated. In addition, while India's labour force is growing at a rate of 2.5 per cent annually, employment is growing at only 2.3 per cent. Thus, the country is faced with the challenge of not only absorbing new entrants to the job market (estimated at seven million people every year), but also clearing the backlog. Where do quotas fit in?

Importantly, there is no place for double standards or the Orwellian concept of ‘more equal than others’ in a democracy. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The Fundamental Rights provide for equal opportunities for all irrespective of caste, creed or sex. Let’s not fudge or forget this. India of 2006 is not the India of 1989. Where a young 18-year old student, Rajiv Goswami, immolated himself in public. Today are polity has to realize that it has to deal with a savvy Rang de Basanti generation of youngsters who believe in action not reaction.

Clearly, the Government has to end this evil of separatism. Reservations are no answer for fulfilling the peoples’ aspirations. It will not only further divide our people on creed-caste lines but is also short-sighted and antithetical to any hope of narrowing India's burgeoning divide between the haves and have-nots. The Government has no right to limit opportunities for the deserving or to shrink the public space for autonomy and free association.

In the ultimate, our petty power-at all-cost polity has to think beyond vote-bank politics and look at the perilous implications of these decisions. What exactly is the message the government proposed to send across the country by this? Does it want to be the first to sow the seeds of another partition? It is willy-nilly encouraging the Muslim leadership to go communal and resurrect the Muslim League. Which could in turn result in reservation for Muslims in Parliament and State Assemblies and even separate electorate a la the British Raj?

How long will we allow this vote-bank politics to continue and play havoc with India’s unity and integrity? Alas, no one remembers Ambedkar’s wise words of caution against appeasement and the hidden monsters behind it. Said he, “Reservation too should be done away with because it becomes a hindrance to development.” The buck stops at Manmohan Singh’s door. ------ INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)

NEW DELHI, 10 November 2006

POLITICAL DIARY

NEW DELHI, 2 September 2006

Vande Mataram

MUCH ADO ABOUT NATIONAL SONG

By Poonam I Kaushish

 Much ado about nothing! That is the sum total of the great big hungama over Vande Mataram. The beautiful and melodious national song has turned behsura, in the hands of our political drumbeaters!

Each political party is singing a different tune of Vande Mataram to suit its petty parochial ends, read vote-bank politics. It all started with an innocuous order by the Human Resource Ministry to all the State Governments, making singing of Vande Mataram compulsory in all schools on 7 September to mark completion of the centenary celebrations commemorating adoption of the national song. Little realizing that it would have the Muslims up in arms and lead to a cacophony of discordant political notes.

Muslim clerics in UP opposed the order on the ground that singing of Vande Mataram was anti-Islamic and amounted to worshipping the motherland. This went against the concept of tawheed (oneness of God), according to which a Muslim cannot supplicate to anyone except Allah. Expectedly, HRD Minister Arjun Singh hurriedly retracted the order, making the song's recitation voluntary. First at a madrassa in Uttar Pradesh and then in the Lok Sabha. Notwithstanding the fact that Vande Mataram is compulsorily played at the end of every session of Parliament.

Predictably, this was musical manna for the BJP to launch a national tirade against the ‘political infidels’ for their flip-flop on Vande Mataram. Raising its old, tired slogan: "Is desh mein rahna hai to Vande Mataram ganna hoga,” it asserted the recitation of the national song was a matter of regard for the motherland and the duty of all citizens. Adding, those who did not conform to this ideology could seek refuge in countries where Vande Mataram was not a national song. More. It ordered the State Governments to ensure that students in all schools sang Vande Mataram on 7 September. Forgetting that in 1998, the NDA like the UPA, too had withdrawn a similar circular by the then UP Government making the recitation of Vande Mataram compulsory.

Soon the double-speak in the Sangh Parivar came to the fore. The Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi was the first to tow the HRD line: voluntary recitation. The BJP spokesman dittoed the same. "It is not a question of mandatory or compulsory. It is a question of respect for the national song, a national symbol.” Countered the RSS Sanghsarchalak Sudershan: “One who does not consider mother India one's own mother cannot be a citizen of India.” But mum was the word when it came to spelling out the action a Government could take against non-compliance of its directives on the national song.

All this came as a boon to the beleaguered Samajwadi Party’s Mian Mulayam, who was thrilled. With UP set for the Assembly polls in March next year, he promptly used Vande Mataram too serenade his Muslim vote-bank by simply humming their tune. For the Left, it was a toss between crooning minority- appeasement one day and rooting for Vande Mataram’s Bengali author Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, the next day. The southern allies of the UPA could not, however, understand the musical chairs being played over a song.

Strangely, the Congress, which made Vande Mataram India’s national song was non-committal in the entire controversy generated by one of its senior leaders. In fact, there are many red faces at the Party headquarters in New Delhi following its State Government in Assam making the singing of Vande Mataram compulsory in schools. In this context, it is pertinent to understand how and why Vande Mataram came to be recognized as a national song. Set in 19^th Century India, Vande Mataram was written in 1875 and published for the first time in Bankim Chandra Chatterjee’s novel, Anandamatha in 1882.

Anandamatha is the story of a Bengal ravaged by the famine of 1770, then under de facto rule of the East India Company, which had reduced the nawab to a puppet after the Battle of Plassey in 1757. The famine was caused when the East India Company forced the farmers to cultivate neel (cloth whitener) instead of foodgrains as it was a big export earner for the Company. The cultivation of neel also made the fields uncultivable for the next crop, precipitating matters and triggering an  anti-gora (British) peasant revolt.

From the fields to the streets, Vande Mataram soon became the popular battle cry for freedom from the British Raj. Large rallies all over the country worked themselves to a feverish pitch by shouting Vande Mataram. Many were jailed and the song was banned. But it failed to stop the patriotic fervour. Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore sang it in 1896 at the Calcutta Congress Session and Lala Lajpat Rai started a journal called Vande Mataram from Lahore.

The Congress formally adopted it as a national song through a resolution at its Varanasi Session on September 7, 1905. Thereafter, it became the opening note for all the Congress meetings and sessions. Its powerful patriotic lines stirred the whole nation. Neta Subhash Chandra Bose made it the Indian National Army's principal song and his Singapore-based radio station regularly broadcast it.

In October 1937, some Muslim leaders objected to Vande Mataram on the ground that it contained verses that were in direct conflict with the beliefs of Islam. True, the first two stanzas of the hymn eulogise Mother India and its beautiful natural bounties with “hurrying streams, gleaming orchards…..” But the fourth stanza of the song, for instance, addressed Mother India as, "Thou art Durga, Lady and Queen, with her hands that strike and her swords of sheen, Thou art Lakshmi lotus-throned…." It was argued that by singing this, a Muslim was forced to equate his country with the Hindu goddesses Durga and Lakshmi. This went against the concept of Islam according to which a Muslim could not supplicate to anyone except Allah.

Nehru understood his Muslims brethrens’ religious predicament and soon worked out a compromise formula through some fine balancing. Even as he underscored the hymn’s national importance in the freedom struggle. The Congress Working Committee met in Kolkata in 1937 under Nehru’s presidentship and adopted a resolution, whereby only the first two stanzas of Vande Mataram would be sung. Moreover, freedom was given to the organisers to sing any other song of an unobjectionable character, in addition to, or in the place of, Vande Mataram.

Interesingly, while Vande Mataram was treated as India’s national anthem for long, Jana Gana Mana was chosen as the national anthem of free India following Independence. The song was rejected on the ground that Muslims felt offended by its depiction of the nation as "Ma Durga"—a Hindu goddess— thus equating the nation with the Hindu conception of Shakti, divine feminine dynamic force. What is more, objection was taken to its origin as part of Anandamatha, viewed as a novel with an anti-Muslim message.

But 2006 is not 1937. And Arjun Singh is no Nehru. Nor is today’s Congress the Grand Old Dame of Indian politics and of patriotic freedom fighters. The tragedy of it all is that our polity has trivialized and trashed a national song, which instilled pride in Mother India, ignited patriotism, galvanised Indians to gang up against the British Raj and throw the firangis out and won India its freedom. It has also ignored the decision of the Constituent Assembly on 24 January 1950 that Vande Mataram would enjoy “equal status” with Jana Gana Mana. All to appease the minority community, garner their votes to keep their kursi intact. Never mind the nation and its sacred national symbols!  ----- INFA

(Copyright India News and Feature Alliance)

.