Wednesday 12 September 2012

Lahore Travails of an Indian Muslim

Firoz Bakht Ahmed. The Statesman,
Kolkata, 22 August 2012
Media reports on the eagerness of umpteen Pakistani Hindu families to settle in India is bothering not only human rights organisations but also governments of the two countries. Kidnappings and forced conversions of young Hindu girls as well as men, especially in the border areas of Peshawar are a violation of human norms.
It’s not only Pakistani Hindus who routinely narrate horror tales. Indian Muslims are terrorised too while on visits to Pakistan as tourists as they are generally taken to be RAW agents or spies. The problem with the Pakistani administration is that it can’t tolerate Hindus and more than them, pious Muslims who profess their loyalty to India. My family and I realised this to our dismay during our recent visit as tourists to Lahore.
The crocodile tears shed in Parliament by Mr Rajnath Singh, the BJP leader or Mr Mulayam Singh, SP supremo, for the harried Pakistani Hindus will serve little purpose until international rights organisations and the Indian government work together to take care of the beleaguered Hindus of Pakistan. It’s time India gives asylum to all Hindu families that want to leave Pakistan for good and settle in this country.
Pakistanis are equally intolerant of Muslims who swear allegiance to India.
We were hounded throughout the tour. It started at Wagah while crossing the border and continued till we had crossed back. Perhaps Pakistani government officials are more cordial towards Indians who hate their motherland and are ready to reveal a secret or two if they are in possession of it.
India might be resuming cricketing ties with Pakistan but that is something it must think twice about. In Lahore, I witnessed dreadful Jamat-ud-Dawa posters (in photograph) at the back of three-wheelers proclaiming hate and death to India! Does the Indian government actually really believe that cricket will cure such deep-seated animosity?
My honeymoon with Lahore, my city of dreams at one time, a city of fun and frolic and institutions such as Aitchison College and Punjab University, eateries such as Salt’n Pepper Village, Food Street and Zaiqa and children’s entertainment areas such as Sozo Water Park Joy Land Park, ended during my second ~ and perhaps last ~ visit there from 4 to 13 June, 2012 accompanied by my wife and children, only to find ourselves at the Sarwar Road police station, Lahore Cantonment towards the end of our tour.
Through the columns of this daily, I implore Muslims of India never and ever to venture into Pakistan as tourists since there is no guarantee that they will return unless they are part of some government delegation. Pakistani authorities hate Indian Muslims and that is the truth. My children, who were enthusiastic about visiting Lahore ~ a city about which famed Urdu writer Kashmiri Lal Zakir once said: “Jinne Lahore nai vekhya/ Wo te jamiya hi naiee! (He, who hasn’t seen Lahore/He isn’t even born!)”, are now absolutely Pakistan-phobic.
It so happened that on 9 June, 2012, the fifth day of our stay in Lahore, the children wanted to go for rides at Joy Land Park around 5 p.m. While we were about to enter the park, we were asked by ISI sleuths (in civilian clothes) who had been following us right from Wagah border all these days without our knowledge, to divert our three wheeler towards the Sarwar Road police station.
At the police station, we were told that we had entered a “prohibited” area. My wife said we were tourists and there was no notice board to ward us off. But the officers had sinister designs and had already readied papers to lock us up. The fact remains that even if some tourist goes to the amusement park unknowingly, he lands in the hands of the ISI only to be put behind bars indefinitely. Time and again, while grilling us, the officers kept repeating that Pakistani tourists received even worse treatment at the hands of Indian agencies, but I kept denying that. These denials demeaned me in their eyes. Besides, Pakistani law enforcement officers have the right to hold any Indian as per the country’s law!
We were staying at the prestigious, 125-year-old Aitchison College from where our passports, visas and other papers were picked up by the policemen. I kept wondering what possible threat they could face from this unassuming group of enthusiastic tourists ~ three school-going children, my wife and me. But the ISI spies had plotted impeccably to snare us. Our arrest documents had been prepared and passports and other papers confiscated. We were deeply shaken.
Fortunately, the college bursar, Col. Mehboob, is a retired armyman. He assured the ISI men that we were mere tourists and were not to be harried. When even that wasn’t enough, I had to call the editor of The Nation. At the end, it took us five long hours to get out of the dreadful clutches of the ISI officers after tendering a written apology.
Before leaving Pakistan, I was reminded of my grand uncle Maulana Azad’s words: “My dear brothers, today you are leaving our country; did you ever think what will be the outcome of this? If you go away, Muslims in India will become weak. You will be divided into two sects of liberals and fundamentalists. Listen to me carefully, Hindus can differ with your religion but they can’t differ with your qaumiyat (clan), but in Pakistan you will be treated as chattels.” Yet I took the risk and paid for it.
Pakistan, whose safety, progress and prosperity most Indians care about, unfortunately is run by ISI agents and the country’s army. They are suspicious of all Indians. I no longer have a “soft corner” for Pakistan after the treatment I received in Lahore. While I have great regard for its people, Pakistan’s politicians and its Intelligence system are double-faced and routinely indulge in double-speak. That’s why Pakistan is inching towards disaster.
Sitting in the police station, I was ruing what Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s dream had come to represent. The dreamland promised to Muslims after thousands of sacrifices is riven by terrorism, corruption, inflation, honour killings and sectarianism, to name only a few demons.
On the very first day of our visit on 4 June, when I had gone to McLeod Road to change currency, the dealer cheated me out of around four thousand Pakistani rupees. When even my threat to call police did not work, I gave up, thinking it would be immensely preferable to be able to leave the kiosk in one piece. The country is certainly doomed if Intelligence officials think nothing of detaining children aged between three and 16 on the suspicion of spying for India.
Some tourists do manage to stay out of trouble, but many (my family included) fall victims to the horrific machinations of the ISI. Some breathing space for Indian tourists is urgently needed in Pakistan. Our ordeal did not end at the police station. While going back to Delhi, customs officials teamed with five ISI officers grilled us for three hours, ransacked our bags and gave our camera, our cellphones, wallets and external hard disc a thorough going-over. Even medicines and my shaving kit weren’t spared.
All the while, I remained worried that something would be planted in our luggage to make a case for arresting us.
I heaved a sigh of relief after we got out of the clutches of these ISI megalomaniacs. Having crossed over to the Indian side, the sight of Sikh customs officers came as a big relief. The officers were friendly and we cleared customs in no time. After my Pakistani misadventure, my love for my homeland has increased manifold.
Though, as usual, relations are hostile, nevertheless I end with Ali Sardar Jafri’s couplet: “Guftgu band na ho/ Baat se baat chaley/ sar pe hansti hui sitaron ki raat chaley! (Let’s believe in dialogue without any fear/ Just like the cool luminescence of a starry night!)”
The writer, the grandnephew of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, is a social commentator

Sunday 9 September 2012

Manmohan ineffectual, presides over corrupt government: US daily

Washington, Sep 5 (IANS): The Washington Post says it will not apologize for calling Manmohan Singh an ineffectual bureaucrat. Indian Prime Minister was described as "a dithering, ineffectual bureaucrat presiding over a deeply corrupt government" by the leading US daily that said his reputation was damaged by the "accusation that he looked the other way and remained silent as his cabinet colleagues filled their own pockets".
In an article "India's 'silent' prime minister becomes a tragic figure", the Post said that Manmohan Singh helped set India on the path to modernity, prosperity and power, but critics say the soft-spoken 79-year-old is in "danger of going down in history as a failure".
"The architect of India's economic reforms, Singh was a major force behind his country's rapprochement with the United States and is a respected figure on the world stage.
"But the image of the scrupulously honourable, humble and intellectual technocrat has slowly given way to a completely different one: a dithering, ineffectual bureaucrat presiding over a deeply corrupt government," it said.
The daily said that for the past two weeks, everyday the Indian parliament has been adjourned as the opposition demands Singh's resignation over allegations of waste and corruption in the allocation of coal-mining concessions.
"The story of Singh's dramatic fall from grace in his second term in office and the slow but steady tarnishing of his reputation has played out in parallel with his country's decline on his watch.
"As India's economy has slowed and as its reputation for rampant corruption has reasserted itself, the idea that the country was on an inexorable road to becoming a global power has increasingly come into question," said the daily.
It went on to say that the irony is "Singh's greatest selling points - his incorruptibility and economic experience - are the mirror image of his government's greatest failings".
"Under Singh, economic reforms have stalled, growth has slowed sharply and the rupee has collapsed. But just as damaging to his reputation is the accusation that he looked the other way and remained silent as his cabinet colleagues filled their own pockets," it added.
Singh spoke last week to rebut criticism from the government auditor that the national treasury had been cheated of billions of dollars after coal-mining concessions were granted to private companies for a pittance. He denied that there was "any impropriety".Meanwhile, the govt called the Post article baseless and strongly objected to its calling the PM a "tragic figure". Information and Broadcasting Minister Ambika Soni said India would register a strong protest over it.The Post also said that they will publish the PM's report on "Coalgate".The Indian prime minister's criticism came less than two months after Britain's The Independent ran a report with the headline "Manmohan Singh - India's saviour or Sonia's poodle?"
The July 16 report observed that the Indian prime minister's reforming zeal had evaporated and slowed the country's growth.
The British daily cited observers to say he had "no genuine political power" and owed his position to Congress president Sonia Gandhi.
The story came close on the heels of Manmohan Singh being dubbed an "underachiever" by Time magazine, which asked whether the architect of 1991 economic reforms could rouse himself and put India back on the high growth path.
"Narrowing the gap between heightened expectations and the nation's capacity to deliver, should be a job for the man who launched those expectations 21 years ago with such oratorical flourish," Time said in the cover story of its Asia edition.

India’s ‘silent’ prime minister becomes a tragic figure

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s second term in office has been damaged by corruption scandals and policy paralysis.

By Simon Denyer, September 5, The Washington Post

NEW DELHI — India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh helped set his country on the path to modernity, prosperity and power, but critics say the shy, soft-spoken 79-year-old is in danger of going down in history as a failure.

The architect of India’s economic reforms, Singh was a major force behind his country’s rapprochement with the United States and is a respected figure on the world stage. President Obama’s aides used to boast of his tremendous rapport and friendship with Singh.

But the image of the scrupulously honorable, humble and intellectual technocrat has slowly given way to a completely different one: a dithering, ineffectual bureaucrat presiding over a deeply corrupt government.

Every day for the past two weeks, India’s Parliament has been adjourned as the opposition bays for Singh’s resignation over allegations of waste and corruption in the allocation of coal-mining concessions.

The story of Singh’s dramatic fall from grace in his second term in office and the slow but steady tarnishing of his reputation has played out in parallel with his country’s decline on his watch. As India’s economy has slowed and as its reputation for rampant corruption has reasserted itself, the idea that the country was on an inexorable road to becoming a global power has increasingly come into question.

“More and more, he has become a tragic figure in our history,” said political historian Ramachandra Guha, describing a man fatally handicapped by his “timidity, complacency and intellectual dishonesty.”

The irony is that Singh’s greatest selling points — his incorruptibility and economic experience — are the mirror image of his government’s greatest failings.

Under Singh, economic reforms have stalled, growth has slowed sharply and the rupee has collapsed. But just as damaging to his reputation is the accusation that he looked the other way and remained silent as his cabinet colleagues filled their own pockets.

In the process, he transformed himself from an object of respect to one of ridicule and endured the worst period in his life, said Sanjaya Baru, Singh’s media adviser during his first term.

Attendees at meetings and conferences were jokingly urged to put their phones into “Manmohan Singh mode,” while one joke cited a dentist urging the seated prime minister, “At least in my clinic, please open your mouth.”

Singh finally did open his mouth last week, to rebut criticism from the government auditor that the national treasury had been cheated of billions of dollars after coal-mining concessions were granted to private companies for a pittance — including during a five-year period when Singh doubled as coal minister.

Singh denied that there was “any impropriety,” but he was drowned out by catcalls when he attempted to address Parliament on the issue. His brief statement to the media afterward appeared to do little to change the impression of a man whose aloofness from the rough-and-tumble of Indian politics has been transformed from an asset into a liability.

“It has been my general practice not to respond to motivated criticism directed personally at me,” he said. “My general attitude has been, ‘My silence is better than a thousand answers; it keeps intact the honor of innumerable questions.’ ”

Singh probably will survive calls for his resignation, but the scandal represents a new low in a reputation that has been sinking for more than a year.

Singh was born in 1932 into a small-time trader’s family in a village in what is now Pakistan, walking miles to school every day and studying by the light of a kerosene lamp. The family moved to India shortly before partition of the subcontinent in 1947, and Singh pleaded with his father to be allowed to continue with his studies rather than join the dry-fruit trade.

A series of scholarships allowed Singh to continue those studies first at Cambridge and then at Oxford, where he completed a PhD. Marriage was arranged with Gursharan Kaur in 1958; they have three daughters.

A successful career in the bureaucracy followed, but it was in 1991 that Singh was thrust into the spotlight as finance minister amid a financial crisis.

With little choice, Singh introduced a series of policies that freed the Indian economy from suffocating state control and unleashed the dynamism of its private sector.

More than a decade later, in 2004, Singh again found himself on center stage, becoming in his own words an “accidental prime minister.”

The Congress party led by Italian-born Sonia Gandhi had surprised many people by winning national elections that year, but she sprang an even bigger surprise by renouncing the top job and handing it to Singh.

In him she saw not only the perfect figure­head for her government but also a man of unquestioning loyalty, party insiders say, someone she could both trust and control.

“I’m a small person put in this big chair,” Singh told broadcaster Charlie Rose in 2006. “I have to do my duty, whatever task is allotted of me.”

From the start, it was clear that Sonia Gandhi held the real reins of power. The Gandhi family has ruled India for most of its post-independence history and enjoys an almost cult-like status within the Congress party. Sonia’s word was destined to remain law.

But Singh made his mark during his first term in office, standing up to opposition from his coalition partners and from within his own party to push through a civil nuclear cooperation deal with the United States in 2008, a landmark agreement that ended India’s nuclear isolation after its weapons tests in 1974 and 1998.

It was a moment that almost brought his government down, an issue over which he offered to resign. While no electricity has yet flowed from that pact, it marked a major step forward in India’s relations with the United States.

The Congress-led coalition went on to win a second term in 2009, in what many people saw as a mandate for Singh.

The 2009 election “was a victory for him, but he did not step up to claim it — maybe because he is too academic, maybe because he is too old,” said Tushar Poddar, managing director at Goldman Sachs in Mumbai. “That lack of leadership, that lack of boldness, lack of will — that really shocked us. That really shocked foreign investors.”

‘He suffers from doubts’

In a series of largely off-the-record conversations, friends and colleagues painted a picture of a man who felt undermined by his own party and who sank into depression and self-pity.

His one attempt in 1999 to run for a parliamentary seat from a supposedly safe district in the capital, New Delhi, had ended in ignominious defeat. His failure to contest a parliamentary seat in 2009, making him the only Indian prime minister not to have done so, further undermined both his confidence, his friends and colleagues say, and his standing in the eyes of the party.

Congress, insiders say, never accepted that the 2009 election was a mandate for Singh and jealously resented the idea that he could be seen to be anywhere near as important as a Gandhi. Rahul, Sonia’s son, was being groomed to take over from Singh, and the prime minister needed to be cut down to size.

He soon was openly criticized by his own party over attempts to continue a peace process with Pakistan despite the 2008 attack on Mumbai by Pakistani militants.

Singh became even more quiet at his own cabinet meetings, to the point of not speaking up for the sort of economic changes many thought he ought to be championing.

“His gut instincts are very good, but sometimes he suffers from doubts about the political feasibility, about getting things done,” said Jagdish N. Bhagwati, a Columbia University professor who has been friends with Singh since their Cambridge days.

Singh will go down in history as India’s first Sikh prime minister and the country’s third-longest-serving premier, but also as someone who did not know when to retire, Guha said.

“He is obviously tired, listless, without energy,” he said. “At his time of life, it is not as though he is going to get a new burst of energy. Things are horribly out of control and can only get worse for him, for his party and for his government.”