Escape to the West @Indian Taxpayers’ cost

An intimate connection with the country: Nehru with Kamala Nehru (to his right) and Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit and other family members. Photo: The HIndu Photo Library

An incident towards the end of his life illustrates the strength of his involvement. The family was at the breakfast table at Teen Murti House. A visiting nephew said the country was in a mess, its problems would never be solved and he, for one, was getting out to settle abroad. Nehru who had remained silent suddenly spoke in a rage, ‘Go where you like, but if I am born a thousand times, a thousand times I will be born an Indian.’ (via The Hindu : FEATURES / SUNDAY MAGAZINE : The family perspective).

Chickens come home to roost

After pushing English language, Western Socialism, Soviet Style-Economic Planning, American Technology, what else could have happened in the Nehru household.

For many decades now, the ruling elite in India has created ways and means to ensure that they have ‘passport’ to the West – so that they could ‘escape to the West.’

The elite has captured to system - and are making the poor pay for their 'needs'!

 

Not that it matters

It is not the loss of these people to the West that hurts. It is the blatant abuse of tax-payer money to create a system that churns out products that are acceptable to the West. Not the needs of the people who pay for the system.

What rankles is when the NRIs and the RNIs (Resident Non-Indians) when they gang up to exploit the ‘desis’ – and then turn around and condemn and envy the same desis who have supported them, lauded their success – without envy and toiled for their own success.

Related Articles

• Direct Action Day: Hindus rioted to partition Bengal (teabreak.pk)
• Why Nehru couldn’t accept Hindu parity with Muslims? Cabinet Mission Plan (teabreak.pk)
• Cabinet Mission Plan unmasked Nehru’s deceit & deception (teabreak.pk)
• At book fair, China confronts Nehru’s legacy (thehindu.com)
• Delaying the death of the British Empire (teabreak.pk)
• Nehru,kashmir and Indian Rule (socyberty.com)
• 1920 Nagpur: When Jinnah refused to call Gandhi ‘Mahatma’ (teabreak.pk)
• Mr. Nehru’s Message (thehindu.com)

A case of full blown hubris!

Full blown case of hubris! (Artist - Michael Cummings - Publisher - Daily Express, Britain; Date of publication - 11 May 1958).

In the years after independence, Nehru and Edwina Mountbatten continued to meet, and write, and share a love of India. When she died, suddenly, at the age of 58, Nehru sent an Indian Navy frigate to the spot where she had been buried at sea in the English Channel, to cast a single wreath of marigolds. (via Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire – Alex von Tunzelmann – Books – Review – New York Times).

No one to check him

This is beyond my imagination! Sending an Indian Navy ship to throw flowers at a girl friend’s funeral!

Without a leader of competing stature within the Congress, to check his growing hubris, Nehru’s disconnect grew. Gandhiji was assassinated in 1948. Sardar Patel was no more by the end of 1950. Ambedkar in 1956 and in 1958, Maulana Azad passed away.

From the opposition, Savarakar was rendered toothless after being charged in Gandhiji’s assassination. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee died in 1953, JB Kripalani, JP Narayan, Vinoba Bhave all ‘retired’ from electoral politics. Leaving Nehru to run freely.

On the other hand, Nehru coopted the CPI, Ram Manohar Lohia et al, into espousing radical variations of his socialist policies.

Nehru and Eisenhower

Internationally, Nehru became close to Dwight Eisenhower. Eisenhower’s ideas of the ‘military-industrial’ complex, his infamous ‘domino theory’, in 1954, appealed to Nehru.

Nehru and Zhou Enlai /Chou en lai (Picture courtesy - Outlook)

It was during Eisenhower presidency that both America and India were on the same side regarding the Anglo-French-Israeli Suez invasion and the Hungarian crackdown by the Soviets.

Nehru regarded Eisenhower highly. On the other hand, Nehru’s overtures to Stalin were met with hesitation.

The US also used Tibet and India to confront China – who the US was fighting in the Korean peninsula. It was Eisenhower’s repeated threats to use nuclear weapons which made the Chinese back off to the 38th parallel – and created a North Korean strategy to obtain nuclear weapons.

Nehru’s schizophrenic policy of ‘Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai’ on one hand, and ‘forward positions’ policy on the other hand, without adequate military, diplomatic preparation, tempted the Chinese to ‘teach India a lesson.’ The CIA deluded Tibet into a confrontation with China, by ‘training’ some stragglers and irregulars.

1956 Elections – Socialist Gains

Eisenhower’s Domino story seemed to resonate in Nehru’s mind after the 1956 election. A shocked Nehru stampeded towards socialism. CPI and the Praja Socialist Party, won 19.33% of the combined vote – versus Nehru’s Congress which got 47.78% of popular vote. The performance of the Praja Socialist Party, a party formed in 1952, whose founder-members were Jayaprakash Narayan, Ram Manohar Lohia, JB Kripalani, was especially unnerving. This challenge to Nehru within 10 years of Independence from a non-Congress platform made these socialist leaders, legends in their own lifetime.

Echoes from the past

Did the advance of the oppressive Nehruvian State spark the Mohammed Rafi song – Chal ud je ray panchi, Yeh desh hua begaana चल उड़ जा रे पंछी, के अब यह देस हुआ बेगाना from Bhabhi (1957) – starring Balraj Sahni, Nanda, Jagdeep, Durga Khote et al. Music was Chitragupt and lyrics were Rajendra Krishan.

Other 2ndlook posts  on Nehru

• Warped Indian history – By Nehru
• Cong plans defend-Nehru movement
• India & Socialism – Nehruvian Folly?

India-China Timeline (Source – India Today)

1949: India recognises the People’s Republic of China.1950: India opposes UN resolutions branding China as an aggressor in the Korean war. 1954: China and India sign Panchsheel treaty. 1955: India objects to the inclusion of a portion of northern frontier on the official map of China. 1956: Chou en Lai visits India for the second time. The border question is formally raised. 1958: India objects to inclusion of parts of Assam and NEFA as part of Chinese territories in its maps. 1959: Dalai Lama escapes from Tibet, India gives asylum. China refuses to accept the McMohan line. Chinese troops kill nine Indian soldiers and capture 10 in Aksai Chin. 1960: Pushed by Khrushchev, Chou en Lai meets Nehru in Delhi. Talks end in a deadlock. 1961: Border skirmishes intensify. 1962: China captures Bomdilla and then announces an unilateral ceasefire. 1962: Colombo proposals negotiated between Nehru and Chou en Lai.

India’s Forgotten Tryst With Destiny

Forgotten heroes - inflated cut outs!

Lal, Bal and Pal Lala Lajpat Rai, Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Bipin Chandra Pal who hailed from Punjab, Maharashtra and Bengal, respectively, and adopted Swaraj as the destiny of the nation, could form the subject of yet another pavilion. Tilak’s memorable phrase, “Swaraj is my birthright and i shall have it”, his differences with the more moderate Gopal Krishna Gokhale and the split in the Congress into an ‘aggressive nationalist’ wing under him and a moderate wing under the latter may provide some of the themes for this pavilion. The Partition of Bengal and its reversal forced by the swadeshi movement, the visit of King George V and the Delhi-Lahore conspiracy are some additional events the pavilion could exhibit. (via Another Tryst With Destiny – The Times of India).

Victor’s propaganda

Post-colonial Indian history has been completely swamped by Congress propaganda. Leaders in the vanguard, the leading lights, have been have been cursorily dismissed or their names wiped clean. Those who pursued different directions, disagreed with GNP (Gandhi /Nehru /Patel) were villified, ignored or dismissed. Leaders like Lal, Bal and Pal, are completely forgotten. Subhash Chandra Bose is a vague memory today.

Subhash Chandra Bose with Jawaharlal Nehru (Image source and courtesy - im.rediff.com). Click for larger image.

Contributions of leaders like SC Bose was ignored or the importance of the February 1946 joint action by the Indian Armed Forces against the colonial forces, was minimized to the ‘Naval Ratings Mutiny.’ Leaders like VD Savarkar (the first to write a non-colonial history of the War of 1857), or Madan Mohan Malaviya, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee (the founder of the Jana Sangh-BJP) was dismissed as fascism.

A ‘victorious’ Congress, ruling for most of the 60 years of post-colonial India, had three clear propaganda imperatives. One – There is no alternative to the Congress. Two – If you don’t have an enemy create one . Like Pakistan. Three – Gain Western approval.

The threads of Indian independence

The myth of non-violent Indian freedom movement, served both colonial and Congress interests. It showed the British as ‘civilized’ colonialists – and the Congress as ‘enlightened’ leadership. Just like most Western literature caricatures African-American characters as hard-working, humble, docile, placid, obedient, gentle! Fact is, that Britain was bankrupt and could not hold onto India. Congress decided to re-write history and take all credit for the departure of the British colonialists.

Apart from the War of 1857, there were more than 75 battles, skirmishes, revolts, mutinies, involving thousands, up to lakhs of Indians, across India. And more than double that many conspiracies, plots, hold-ups, explosions, bombings, which were not organized. These more than 200 violent actions have been completely glossed over by post-colonial India’s historians. Obviously, more than 200 incidents of violent opposition to British misrule over 150 years (1800-1947) deserves better treatment by official historians. Especially, the people who were ‘behind’ this.

Fact is, that Britain was bankrupt and could not hold onto India.

Related articles

• Desi Nostalgia For British Raj (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• The British Salt Tax. How Damaging? (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• ‘Opium financed British rule in India’ (quicktake.wordpress.com)
• How British Raj Ended Thugee in India (2ndlook.wordpress.com)
• Canadian Author Unveils Stunning Masterpiece on Website (prweb.com)

‘We needed to make a demon of Jinnah… Let’s learn from our mistakes’

Could Advani have made such a misstep ...!

How seriously has India misunderstood Jinnah?

I think we misunderstood because we needed to create a demon.

We needed a demon because in the 20th century, the most telling event in the entire subcontinent was the partition of the country.

Your book reveals how people like Gandhi, Rajagopalachari and Azad could understand the Jinnah or the Muslim fear of Congress majoritarianism but Nehru simply couldn’t understand. Was Nehru insensitive to this?

No, he wasn’t. Jawaharlal Nehru was a deeply sensitive man.

But why couldn’t he understand?

He was deeply influenced by Western and European socialist thought of those days. Nehru believed in a highly centralised polity. That’s what he wanted India to be. Jinnah wanted a federal polity.

Because that would give Muslims the space?

That even Gandhi understood.

You conclude that if Congress could have accepted a decentralised federal India, then a united India, as you put it, “was clearly ours to attain”. Do you see Nehru at least as responsible for partition as Jinnah?

He says it himself. He recognised it and his correspondence, for example with the late Nawab Sahab of Bhopal, his official biographer and others. His letters to the late Nawab Sahab of Bhopal are very moving.

(via ‘We needed to make a demon of Jinnah… Let’s learn from our mistakes’).

A ‘victorious’ Congress, ruling for most of the 60 years of post-colonial India, had three clear propaganda imperatives.

The Masters Glee - Confusion of Indian Independence

1 – TINA, There is no alternative

They needed to prove that it was only the Congress which could ‘take on’ and  ‘defeat’ the ‘glorious and the mighty’ British Empire on which the sun never set. The logic went, “what could India(ns) have done without the Congress”. This thinking went deeper and dirtier, when a certain Deb Kant Barooah, declared “India is Indira and Indira is India.”

Similarly, Congress decided to re-write history and take all credit for the departure of the British colonialists. Contributions of leaders like SC Bose was ignored or the importance of the February 1946 joint action by the Indian Armed Forces against the colonial forces, was minimized to the ‘Naval Ratings Mutiny.’ Leaders like VD Savarkar (the first to write a non-colonial history of the War of 1857), or Shyama Prasad Mukherjee (the founder of the Jana Sangh-BJP) was dismissed as fascism.

Fact is, that Britain was bankrupt and could not hold onto India. Fact is, that for a 150 years – from 1797-1947, many rebellions, wars, individual hits were made against the colonial British Government. The myth of non-violent Indian freedom movement, served both colonial and Congress interests. It showed the British as ‘civilized’ colonialists – and the Congress as ‘enlightened’ leadership. Just like most Western literature caricatures African-American characters as hard-working, humble, docile, placid, obedient, gentle!

2 – If you don’t have an enemy, create one!

The Congress needed to create an enemy. A demon, who they could blame, use, abuse – and Pakistan fitted the bill perfectly. A failed state (!), a hotbed of terrorism – and to top it all, an Islamic State. What more could the West-Congress combine ask for?

Easily slipping into colonial legacy of ‘divide et impera’, the Congress went onto a disastrous foreign policy trail of Hindi-Chini bhai bhai. A solid realtionship with Pakistan would have,  arguably, saved Tibet from the Chinese maws – which Nehru’s foreign policy predicated.

Basking in the 'glory' of Western approval

3 – Craven desires

To gain Western approval, acceptance, favours, privileges et al.

Consider the English language policy of the post-colonial Congress Government. It has massively subsidized English education in India so that the children of the elite could ‘escape’ to the West. The demeaning ‘population control theory’, the English language education – all, a result of this need of the Congress Party.

The deliberate colonial distortion of Indian history continues unchecked and unhindered. You only have to read Congress Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh’s speech at Oxford, praising the Raj,  while receiving his honorary doctrate, or Chidambaram’s decision to end “abject poverty” in India that he seems to “have known for 5,000 years.”

Coming to the BJP

When Advani goes to Pakistan and praises Jinnah, it cannot be an accident, or a slip of the tongue. It had to be a deeply thought out, well considered move – one can say, after watching Advani for nearly 30 years now. The man does not go out and missteps so wrongly. The ‘Advani-Jinnah-comments-fracas’ was for media consumption – and BJP party workers. If Advani wanted to re-write history (about time too), that was one way!

And if there were any doubts, then Jaswant Singh’s book, seals the argument.

PS –

1. Dutifully, within 48 hours, the BJP decided to ‘expel’ Jaswant Singh from the party, for his pro-Jinnah book on 19th August, 2009.
2. Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, promptly banned the book, in Gujarat. I see good sales for Jaswant’s book – and rehabilitation of Jinnah in India, BJP willing.
3. On 23rd August Arun Shourie, ‘tore’ into the BJP leadership on the subject of Jaswant’s Singh’s book. India Today reported that he said, “Jaswant Singh’s book is a scholarly work. It deserves to be read,”, criticising the party for pulling the Jinnah remark out of context of the entire book.
4. One day later, on 24th August,  KS Sudarshan, the former head of RSS weighed in on Jaswant Singh’s side. It was reported that

“Jinnah had many facets. If you read history then you will come to know that Jinnah was with Lok Manya Tilak and was totally dedicated to the nation. And when Gandhi started the Khilafat movement, with the idea that currently we are opposing the British and if Muslims join in then their support will help gain independence. But at that time Jinnah opposed it saying that if the Caliph in Turkey has been dethroned, what has India got to do with it. That time nobody listened to him, which saddened him. So he quit the Congress and left for England and only returned in 1927,” Sudarshan said.

5. On August 26th, 2009, newspapers reported that in response to BJP’s Jinnah-offensive the “Cong threatens protests against attack on Nehru”. Additional reports, stated that the “Cong(ress) plans defend-Nehru movement”. Manish Tiwari, the Congress spokesman rationalized that, “approval of Jinnah could easily come from the BJP-RSS leadership because “they had no role in the freedom struggle”.
6. On 30th August, 2009, a former general secretary and vice-president, Pyarelal Khandelwal, wrote a letter suggesting that

“Jaswant Singh’s expulsion should be taken back and the matter should be discussed with him in a respectable manner to resolve the problem,” the letter states. “The case gives the impression that while acting against the senior leader some party leaders had a well-planned intent to corner him and they showed too much haste,” Khandelwal says in the letter. It would have been proper and in keeping with the party’s image if the controversial portions of the book had been seriously discussed before taking action, as was done “in the case of Arun Shourie where a lot of patience was exercised”. Khandelwal also suggests that had Jaswant Singh himself kept the party view in mind and sent in writing details of the book before its release or discussed the issue with the appropriate people in the party, this situation could have been avoided. “The discipline of the party could also have been kept intact,” Khandelwal said.

7. On 5th September, that “though BJP has expelled Jaswant Singh from the party, its parent organisation, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has invited his son Manvendra Singh to its national meeting in Mumbai.”

Old order changeth …

For the opportunity to make a mark is more at state level, where the administrative unit is small enough for a strong-willed and focused chief minister to be able to make a difference. No one took notice of Nitish Kumar when he was in New Delhi, but he has now made a reputation for himself as chief minister in Bihar, in just 41 months. The same goes for Naveen Patnaik (anyone remember the portfolio he held as a central minister?), who stands tall in Orissa. The examples of Chandrababu Naidu in Andhra Pradesh and Digvijay Singh in Madhya Pradesh have been touted often enough, but there are more contemporary examples too, like Narendra Modi in Gujarat—who has outshone all the BJP leaders in New Delhi who saw themselves as the inheritors after the Vajpayee-Advani era. Vasundhara Raje Scindia had a similar opportunity in Rajasthan, but she muffed it. Now there is growing recognition of Shivraj Singh Chauhan in Madhya Pradesh and Raman Singh in Chattisgarh. Even Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee was beginning to acquire star value, till Nandigram and Singur happened. (via Business-Standard).

Smooth ride ...?

Midnight’s children

Interesting editorial.

It brings out one interesting development. LK Advani (?) and Manmohan Singh are possibly going to be the last colonial-era Prime Ministers of India. The next generation of political leaders will be Indians who have grown in the post colonial India.

Colonialism is hearsay, propaganda, exaggerations – a second hand experience, to most young post-colonial Indians. Brought up on a diet of nation building, socialism, (opportunistic) English education, limited exposure to the rest of the world, they have seen rapid change. From an India, which was a ship-to-mouth basket case, to an emerging power, seems to be have been a facile and an easy experience – with little credit being given to Indian political leadership for managing the post-colonial Indian system.

The One Solution to all problems

In the immediate post-colonial India, for every problem, there were two common remarks. One, “The Government should do something about this.” The second was, “It is not like this in foreign countries.” Whether it was overflowing drain or a pothole on the road. Looking back, things have changed.

Over the years, Indians use this phrase less and less. These phrases are now close to becoming either extinct or may even become a parody. It may make its way into Indian films as a joke.

Success … hubris …caution

On one side it makes them brash – but more dangerously, it makes them see the future simplistically, as a case of just adopting or modifying the Western model to suit Indian requirements. This is in itself may not objectionable, but for the fact, that most of the new leaders have been fed on a staple diet of Western propaganda – where the elephants in the Western rooms have become all but invisible. Don’t believe me – look at Chidambaram saying that he wants to end 5000 years of Indian poverty.

Recycling end-of-life Western models

Elephants in the room

Western models, which have evolved through the prism of slavery, colonialism, genocide, concentration of power are an end-of-life model. To use end-of-life products may seem like a low cost solution in the short run. The bigger issue in most cases is the  lock-in effect that these legacy systems impose on the ‘buyers’ – e.g. Singapore.

This, then may become the biggest risk in the future – the mute and blind acceptance of ‘dominant’ Western models. Aiding this risk is the English language education, which is one such legacy system, which has locked India into a high cost spiral of adopting decrepit Western models with decreasing returns.

India’s successes have been built on Indian models – and Western models have been singularly unsuccessful.

How will India’s young leader’s face up to this challenge? Will they ‘fall into the trap’ of copying successful countries or take the easier path of renewing the Indic model, which may initially, seem difficult.

Addu, Chiddu and Manu – Bankrupt all …

“I have told the PM several times that it would be so nice that like in foreign countries (US presidential debate), we should also have a debate. Instead of a BJP public meeting, the Election Commission could organise a meeting (for the debate),” Party’s prime ministerial candidate Advani told an election rally. (via Now, Advani asks Sonia Gandhi for a debate- Hindustan Times).

Advani wants US style debates

All good ideas are foreign ideas …

Advani is enamored with the idea of having debates – “like in foreign countries.” I mean how much more juvenile can Advani get? And the Congress reaction – no better! “In parliamentary democracy such debates do not take place. It is only in the Presidential system…” a very superior sounding Congress Party spokesman Anand Sharma informed reporters in New Delhi.

Same logic, same ideological bankruptcy!

Just because the US has live debates, does it make the idea more attractive, Mr.Advani? If the UK does not have debates, does it disqualify the idea, Sir Anand Sharma?

The big moneybags call the shots

In both the Congress and the BJP. So, any belief that either one is any different, is all wrong. They are more or less – of the same bankrupt ideas and agenda.

Bankrupt Congress Culture

Shallow thinking

Both have the same limitation in the thinking – set by external agenda and vocabulary. The difference is language. Congress swears by India (a Roman name of Bharata-ah) and BJP swears by Hindustan and Hindutva (a Levantine name for Bharata-ah). Both miss out on the Bharati nature of people.

No talk of Third currency

Neither (the Congress or the BJP) has the imagination or the strategic depth to think out of the Western box. They are all trying out the same tired Western cliches of IMF and World Bank reform – which is going nowhere. It is the IMF and World Bank which keep the Third World poor and backward.

India’s Prime Minister, Finance Minister and Star PM aspirant …

Sometime back Chiddu came back saying that he wanted to end 5000 years of poverty! Supposedly India’s star finance minister, and a Government headed by an ex-RBI governor, says this! As though that was not enough, he now says, “

“Unless the developed world puts together a well-regulated financial system and revives its financial institutions, the shadow of failure of the western world’s financial system will fall upon all developing countries,” Chidambaram said.

Why will the developed world do anything that will benefit India! It is not their duty, their job – and they are not even capable.

It is your job, Addu, Manu and Chiddu! Get up and get going!

Sad.

Rahul Gandhi needs Paris Hilton for tutorials in politics – l’affaire Milliband

The clue is in the body language

Socialite Paris Hilton showed off her ignorance recently when she thought Gordon Ramsay was the British prime minister.

She said: “I love Britain. London is my favourite city in the world.” But when asked if she knew who the British prime minister was, she replied, “Yes, it’s Gordon Ramsay, isn’t it?” (via Paris Hilton thinks Gordon Ramsay, and not Brown, is British PM).

I think Rahul Gandhi needs to learn from Paris Hilton. After all, why waste time with Britain – a nation, 5 times over its GDP, in debt. A nation, that is a nobody in manufacturing, services, currency – a nation in terminal decline into anonymity?

Rahul Gandhi’s dalliance with Milliband reminded me of Nehru’s dalliance with the Mountbattens. I am still unclear who Nehru was having an affair with – Lord or Lady Mountbatten?

Nehru-Edwina-Louis Mountbatten - Ménage à trois

And I think, it was the reporters that got it all wrong. Why did this reporter think that Paris Hilton should know who the Prime Minister of Britain was?

Kashmir and the forgotten Sheikh

Sixty years after Kashmir threw in its lot with India, the state remains an enigma for policymakers. Even back then, the Kashmiri Muslims – the majority in the state – led by Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, had defied popular perception that Muslim majority states would prefer joining Pakistan. Abdullah had snubbed Jinnah by refusing to even meet him when the latter came to the Valley in the hope of convincing the young leader to support Pakistan. (via The forgotten Sheikh).

An enigma, inside a puzzle wrapped in a mystery …

Kashmir remains an interesting complication – from a historical perspective. It was Muslim majority – so Pakistan could take a technical refuge under the Indian actions in Junagadh and Hyderabad. Since, it had a Muslim majority, Pakistan could lay claim to it.

The Hindu ruler wished to remain independent – and then changed his mind – and decided to join India. Popular leaders of Kashmir, like Sheikh Abdullah, also wanted Kashmir to be a part of India. Hence the legitimacy of Indian claim.

Note the body language

Colonial detritus

The jokers in the pack were the legacy Colonial rulers – in India and Pakistan. The Governor General of India was Mountbatten – and the Pakistani Generals and some Indian army officials were British.

The collusion between these colonial agents in the dying days of the Raj, has created a festering problem – which India and Pakistan are still fighting over.

We can continue with this problem for the next 60 years – without success. Instead, a better idea may be to put the Kashmir problem into a cryogenic chamber and revive this issue 50 years later.

Westernization of the sub-continent

India’s independent movement created leaders like Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and Sheikh Abdullah – who have been forgotten. Instead we now see only the Taliban – created by the West.

Robert D. Kaplan gives gyaan on India in NYTimes.com

It was apparent to all (including one British cartoonist) that Jinnah was staging objections under false 'allusions'! (Artist - David Low (1891-1963) Published - Evening Standard, 04 Sep 1946).

Hindu-Muslim relations have historically been tense. Remember that the 1947 partition of the subcontinent uprooted at least 15 million people and led to the violent deaths of around half a million. Given this record, the relatively peaceful relations between the majority Hindus and India’s 150 million Muslims has been testimony to India’s successful experiment in democracy. Democracy has so far kept the lid on an ethnic and religious divide that, while its roots run centuries back, has in recent years essentially become a reinvented modern hostility. (via Op-Ed Contributor – Trouble in the Other Middle East – NYTimes.com).

Wishful thinking or ignorance Mr.Kaplan

Actually neither. It is propaganda.

The West has the lowest levels of religious diversity – and the way they have dealt with it is simple – genocide. Native Americans in Canada, USA, Native Aborigines in Australia are excellent examples.

India however, is exactly – and unfortunately, the only country of its kind. No country offers the religious freedom that Muslims have in India – including Muslim countries. Christians cannot proselytize with as much freedom (and arrogance) in any other country as in India.

That is inconvenient truth (for the West) Mr.Kaplan.

History of Hindu Muslim Feud …?

For starters, you must consider how the Muslims fought for the overthrow of British colonialism from 1857 War to 1947. The Deoband Seminary, Sheikh Abdullah were all popular Muslim leaders – who did not wish for or support the formation of Pakistan. The State of Pakistan was an artificial creation – and Sheikh Abdullah refused to even meet up with Jinnah – and who was deemed irrelevant.

The Deoband seminary issued a call to Muslims, against the idea of Pakistan – and now Deoband is again renewing its campaign, with its anti-terror agenda. Deoband seminary was set up after the 1857 War, as a religious institution to ‘escape’ British repression. 75 years after its establishment, the Deoband school became famous during Independence, due to its strong anti-Jinnah, anti-Partition stand. And 60 years after Indian independence, the Deoband seminary is again, leading an anti-terror campaign in India.

As for the India-Pakistan Partition riots, you must remember, that worst of these riots happened in British ruled areas. The feudal Nawabs of India, the ‘oriental despots’ as you probably know and call them, were able to avert these riots. How come?

Mr.Kaplan, it was a lot like ‘abdication of authority’ by the British colonial Government – if not active connivance! In history, it is called scorched earth tactics, usually used by retreating armies and forces.

In this case, the British Raj.

How about this?

Indian Naval Ratings March For Indian Independence

Of course, the colonial narrative does not mention how the Naval Ratings declaration threatened an ignominious defeat to the Empire, as a fait accompli. Mr.Kaplan, you must check out how the Naval Ratings (both Hindus and the Muslims together) co-ordinated – and it were these Naval Ratings who raised the flag of Indian Independence.

Post WW2, a two million strong, Indian defence units, battle hardened and exposed to global war theaters, were a force that the British would not dare to take on.

Allama Iqbal (now the iconic figure in Pakistan) converted to the a very nascent two-nation theory after his stint in England – circa 1909. Poets like Sahir Ludhianvi moved from Pakistan to India. MJ Akbar’s family was another that moved from Bangladesh (then part of Pakistan) to India.

Like the colonial detritus in many ex-colonies, the two-nation theory was a British creation.

And remains a colonial legacy.

As for now …

The root of the problem is the US intervention – and you are calling for more of it. My advice, Mr.Kaplan  – simple and will not the cost the US anything.

Lay off.

Indian Industry In 19th Century

Understanding Business: A … – Google Book Search

The Vijaynagar kingdom (after the sacking in 1565, and the rump rulers)was the center of trade for India’s main exports – spices (from the South India and SE Asian archipelago), Wootz steel from the Deccan plateau, Shipbuilding (the British Navy was one of its major customers) was a major industry. Precision cutting tools was another area of expertise – remember that diamonds were an Indian monopoly till the mid-18th century.a multitude of silk centers from the Deccan and Southern coastal towns were the major exports.

India’s biggest import was gold.

3 significant sectors which contributed to this boom. Apart from significant agrarian output – spices, timber, Indigo, etc. Indian industrial output was a major item in our goods basket – fabric, gems and jewellery and metals. India was a technology leader in these
industrial sectors.

But at the end of the 19th century, Colonial India was de-urbanising. Populations in Indian agrarian network was increasing. Agricultural taxes were high. Hence, food production declined. Famines had become a regular feature. Industrial production was a distant memory. The cause – The rise of the West by use of slavery and the loot of gold. In America and Africa. Red Indians were wiped out. Australian aborigines have become tourist attractions. Blacks were enslaved. Rivers of Blood and fields of dead.

For More On Indian Industry click here

1857 – Some History … Some Propaganda