I have to say I am singularly disappointed by Obama administration's foreign policy so far. This is especially true in the region where it matters the most: South/Central Asia - a raging Afghan war, Taliban resurgence and Instability in Pakistan, make it at the top of American FP agenda.
In spite of all of B.O's moral posturing, his administration seems to be following a "transactional" Foreign Policy - trading off aid for action in Pak, trading off a go soft approach on Taliban for space to take more aggressive action against Al Qaeda. Simultaneously, the administration feels that by giving Pakistan concessions on Kashmir or on terror against India, they cashore up the weak Pakistani establishment and get action against the Al Qaeda elements within Pakistan.
The policy is short sighted, and ignores a 15-20 year perspective which would show that ultimately all extremists elements are a danger to America and the rest of the world. Al Qaeda, Taliban, ISI, Kashmir Terror groups are one and the same. By selectively dealing with these elements, you are buying minor relief from short term pain for long term misery. It is sort of "peeing into your pants when it is cold" approach - short term gain, long term misery.
Moreover, America has been here before. We just have to go back to 1980s where another time, another Afghan war showed a similarly short sighted foreign policy. The enemy then was the "Evil Soviet Empire" and end justifying the means lead to US support for the mujaheddin and their retainers in Pakistan. How "Evil" Soviet Union really was is a topic for another day...
But it suffices to say that all of today's mess is a direct consequence of that action. By following a similar (if not the same) policy, BO is bent on proving that History does indeed repeat itself!
Footnote: While this merry go round happens, China is making huge strides in it's economy and global standing (while persisting with it's authoritarian political system). History of 2050 in the making today...
Friday, October 23, 2009
Thursday, October 22, 2009
M.K.G
"Generations to come, it may be, will scarce believe that such one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth"
Time Magazine nominated Albert Einstein as the Man of the Millennium. The words above are Einstein's own in describing another of his contemporaries, who is to me the undisputed Man of the Millennium (no disrespect to A.E). I am of course talking of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
Over the last decade as I have learned more and more of this man, my admiration for him has grown exponentially, and I have often found solace in his words and experiences when I am faced with most daunting and insurmountable of challenges at a personal or professional front.
Enough has been said and written about him, and I have no intention of reinventing the wheel. It suffices to say that a lot of his philosphy and ideology needs to looked at beyond the narrow prism of independence struggle against the colonial empire. The moral compass provided to mankind by the Mahatama is worth reading about and ruminating upon any day.
However, what I want to highlight are a few points about this great man that can be adapted by us, lesser mortals, without turning to asceticism or running away completely from our worldly pursuits -
1. Self Learning - The title of his autobiography (The Story of My Experiments With Truth) says it all. Gandhi was not born with a sense of entitlement or a Sai Babaish divinity (the swipe at the Sai Babas of the world is intentional!). He grew and learned from his experiences, his observations and his experiments with life. The journey from Gandhi to Mahatma was entirely his own, and is a motivational parable for everyone who wants to depart a better person than he/she was born.
2. Inner Honesty/Truthfulness - The proclamations of absolute honesty, truthfulness with the rest of the world are controversial and the fact that Mahatma Gandhi achieved them makes it no easier for rest of us (mired as we are in worldly pursuits). However, one aspect of honesty we can readily adopt for our own peace and betterment - Honesty and complete transparency with oneself. That is, to see things and people including oneself (and our near & dear ones) as they are. Not in a brushed up, embellishment form that we create for our own comfort. This objectivity allows the viewing of the world in a dispassionate sense and more importantly allows us to work on self improvement. Finally, this is the easiest path towards accepting others and their viewpoints, with all their virtues and vices.
The best way to understand this point is through Gandhi's own words. He says "Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony" and “One man cannot do right in one department of life whilst he is occupied in doing wrong in any other department. Life is one indivisible whole.”..
3. Dealing with doubts and failure - Several of you would remember these words of Mahatama Gandhi from Indian textbooks of the 80s and 90s -
"I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test.
Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man [woman] whom you may have seen, and ask yourself, if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him [her]. Will he [she] gain anything by it? Will it restore him [her] to a control over his [her] own life and destiny? In other words, will it lead to swaraj [freedom] for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?Then you will find your doubts and your self melt away."
In my view, this is the surest receipe of dealing with disappointments and failures. A narrow reading of the talisman will point you to connotations of the freedom struggle or patriotism. While that is certainly true, another reading of the stanza can be summarized as - when faced with doubt and uncertainty look at those below you, the underprivileged and suffering millions. You will find greater sorrow, failure and dejection in their live, which will put your own doubts in perspective...
4. Non-violence - Of all of Mahatma's philosophies, this one is the most widely known and most widely misunderstood. The popular perception of non-violence is that of a philosophy deployed for a struggle or agitation against external forces. However, there is a much more practical view that focuses on the innner self. The topic is rather complicated and requires a blog entry of it's own - so stay tuned! :-)
Finally a disclaimer: I dont claim to have mastered or learned all of the above points that I make. I only claim to try and hope to get better at some of it over years. That is the best I can hope for...
Footnote: While I consider MKG as the amongst most noble and deserving of historical figures, I cannot resist taking a non-gandhian turn and point out the name of the one I consider most undeserving. That dishonor in my view goes to Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill. An arrogant vain man, clearly racist and imperialist in outlook whose only virtue was tenacity exacerbated by pompous manner and speech.
Time Magazine nominated Albert Einstein as the Man of the Millennium. The words above are Einstein's own in describing another of his contemporaries, who is to me the undisputed Man of the Millennium (no disrespect to A.E). I am of course talking of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.
Over the last decade as I have learned more and more of this man, my admiration for him has grown exponentially, and I have often found solace in his words and experiences when I am faced with most daunting and insurmountable of challenges at a personal or professional front.
Enough has been said and written about him, and I have no intention of reinventing the wheel. It suffices to say that a lot of his philosphy and ideology needs to looked at beyond the narrow prism of independence struggle against the colonial empire. The moral compass provided to mankind by the Mahatama is worth reading about and ruminating upon any day.
However, what I want to highlight are a few points about this great man that can be adapted by us, lesser mortals, without turning to asceticism or running away completely from our worldly pursuits -
1. Self Learning - The title of his autobiography (The Story of My Experiments With Truth) says it all. Gandhi was not born with a sense of entitlement or a Sai Babaish divinity (the swipe at the Sai Babas of the world is intentional!). He grew and learned from his experiences, his observations and his experiments with life. The journey from Gandhi to Mahatma was entirely his own, and is a motivational parable for everyone who wants to depart a better person than he/she was born.
2. Inner Honesty/Truthfulness - The proclamations of absolute honesty, truthfulness with the rest of the world are controversial and the fact that Mahatma Gandhi achieved them makes it no easier for rest of us (mired as we are in worldly pursuits). However, one aspect of honesty we can readily adopt for our own peace and betterment - Honesty and complete transparency with oneself. That is, to see things and people including oneself (and our near & dear ones) as they are. Not in a brushed up, embellishment form that we create for our own comfort. This objectivity allows the viewing of the world in a dispassionate sense and more importantly allows us to work on self improvement. Finally, this is the easiest path towards accepting others and their viewpoints, with all their virtues and vices.
The best way to understand this point is through Gandhi's own words. He says "Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony" and “One man cannot do right in one department of life whilst he is occupied in doing wrong in any other department. Life is one indivisible whole.”..
3. Dealing with doubts and failure - Several of you would remember these words of Mahatama Gandhi from Indian textbooks of the 80s and 90s -
"I will give you a talisman. Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test.
Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man [woman] whom you may have seen, and ask yourself, if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him [her]. Will he [she] gain anything by it? Will it restore him [her] to a control over his [her] own life and destiny? In other words, will it lead to swaraj [freedom] for the hungry and spiritually starving millions?Then you will find your doubts and your self melt away."
In my view, this is the surest receipe of dealing with disappointments and failures. A narrow reading of the talisman will point you to connotations of the freedom struggle or patriotism. While that is certainly true, another reading of the stanza can be summarized as - when faced with doubt and uncertainty look at those below you, the underprivileged and suffering millions. You will find greater sorrow, failure and dejection in their live, which will put your own doubts in perspective...
4. Non-violence - Of all of Mahatma's philosophies, this one is the most widely known and most widely misunderstood. The popular perception of non-violence is that of a philosophy deployed for a struggle or agitation against external forces. However, there is a much more practical view that focuses on the innner self. The topic is rather complicated and requires a blog entry of it's own - so stay tuned! :-)
Finally a disclaimer: I dont claim to have mastered or learned all of the above points that I make. I only claim to try and hope to get better at some of it over years. That is the best I can hope for...
Footnote: While I consider MKG as the amongst most noble and deserving of historical figures, I cannot resist taking a non-gandhian turn and point out the name of the one I consider most undeserving. That dishonor in my view goes to Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill. An arrogant vain man, clearly racist and imperialist in outlook whose only virtue was tenacity exacerbated by pompous manner and speech.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
History (Bharat Ek Khoj)
Successive HRD Ministers have been obsessed about "improving" the quality of education in India. The current minister seems to be most competent in last decade and has the zeal and vision to make a difference. But instead of attempting to create a 100 IITs (which will only serve to dilute the brand of existing ones) or import 20 Harvards (they will be the Cartier of education - taking bundles from Nouveau riche of Patiala back to Cambridge, MA), he will be better served by starting with an issue much closer at hand - creating a sense of history amongst the emerging generation.
That Indians have no sense of their own history - is an understatement. The situation is exacerbated by the loss of the sense with each successive generation. Today we either have (A) the Hindu fanatics for whom history consists of delusions of a grand India of 1000 years ago which invented flying chariots and ruled the subcontinent till villainous mughals came and destroyed the temples or (B) Mobile phone obsessed 20 somethings who couldn't tell the name of the last president (no, the answer isn't Atal Bihari Vajpayee!), let alone know about history of the country. This of course is an exaggerated view - there are journalists (Shekhar Gupta, Ram Guha, Vir Sanghvi, Swapan Dasgupta), even politicians (Mani Iyer, Abhishek Singhvi, Pranab Mukherjee) who have an understanding of who we are and how we got here. But such people are far and few, and certainly given the intellectual quotient of the majority, the discussions and debates are NOT framed by them in a historical context.
Why is history important & Which part of history is important ? ?
History or rather the "sense of it" is not defined by knowing the dates of Battle of Panipet or name of the 1st emperor of the Maurya Empire. It is rather defined by knowing how we got to the point where we are, that is why Indian politics, culture, constitution, economy or administration is structured the way it is.
What factors (good or bad), what people (good or bad in your personal view) played a role in all this ? The bottom line is that we need to know how we got here, before we can find out how to get there ("there" being whatever superpower, souped up vision of India you have 20 years hence).
The inane debates about the Chinese model of development or adoption of American policies or whether to have subsidies on fertilizers are just framed by an individuals point of view. They are not framed in the context of "what would work for India given its socio-economic-political structure". This is akin to prescribing coaching tips to Yuvraj Singh based on what Ricky Ponting does, without looking at Yuvraj's past performance, his successes & failures and his strengths & weaknesses.
The other part of not knowing history is that we have few role models (few know of or understand the role of a Mahatma Gandhi or a Jawaharlal Nehru or even of Ashoka in shaping the country). Characters such as Babar are stereotyped without understanding how a ruler of a Mongol tribe came all the way from frigid planes of Central Asia to India and established an empire here. If we understood this, we could maybe comprehend better the churning in Afganistan today and its impact on us.
Contrast this with the Chinese or the Japanese, people with a very strong sense of identity with their histories and which is clearly reflected in their policies and vision. It gives a sense of confidence in their approach to policy and programs, which we could certainly do with.
Who is to blame & how can it be fixed ?
Our primary education teaches history as a colorless dates based subject from sanitized politically correct textbooks. The system ignores the most important part of our history - the period from 1947 onwards, the period that is most heavily reflected in today's paradigm. This part is covered in an even more boring manner in a subject called Civics, the textbooks of which are probably written by planning commissioners of North Korea.
The first step towards fixing this malaise is to take a fresh look at content and the manner of teaching history at a school level. This is an area where looking at the western education system may actually help (as opposed to getting Oxfords of the world to set up SHOP in India).
The second step is to have media content that is actually readable and watchable in a fun entertaining way. Search for a book on De Gaulle and you will find a zillion options, look for a book on Nehru and your options will be very limited. Look for documentaries on Pearl Harbor & you will have a 100s to choose from, do the same for Indian Partition and you are likely to be disappointed. In the 80s, Indian Television ran a series titled Bharat Ek Khoj (Discovery of India, based on Nehru's book of the same name) - the series was actually quite illuminating. We need more of such content (hopefully some Ekta Kapoor clone will take note). This step is harder than the 1st one but I believe by doing the 1st you will pave way for the 2nd.
Oh and by the way, someone could try and maintain, upgrade the Indian national museums. They could do with the creative input of a somewhat intellectually inclined media personality (Aamir Khan take note).
Footnote: I highly recommend this book in case you are interested in learning about the post-1947 period. It is very well structured and is an easy read -
http://www.amazon.com/India-After-Gandhi-History-Democracy/dp/0060958588/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256235028&sr=8-1
That Indians have no sense of their own history - is an understatement. The situation is exacerbated by the loss of the sense with each successive generation. Today we either have (A) the Hindu fanatics for whom history consists of delusions of a grand India of 1000 years ago which invented flying chariots and ruled the subcontinent till villainous mughals came and destroyed the temples or (B) Mobile phone obsessed 20 somethings who couldn't tell the name of the last president (no, the answer isn't Atal Bihari Vajpayee!), let alone know about history of the country. This of course is an exaggerated view - there are journalists (Shekhar Gupta, Ram Guha, Vir Sanghvi, Swapan Dasgupta), even politicians (Mani Iyer, Abhishek Singhvi, Pranab Mukherjee) who have an understanding of who we are and how we got here. But such people are far and few, and certainly given the intellectual quotient of the majority, the discussions and debates are NOT framed by them in a historical context.
Why is history important & Which part of history is important ? ?
History or rather the "sense of it" is not defined by knowing the dates of Battle of Panipet or name of the 1st emperor of the Maurya Empire. It is rather defined by knowing how we got to the point where we are, that is why Indian politics, culture, constitution, economy or administration is structured the way it is.
What factors (good or bad), what people (good or bad in your personal view) played a role in all this ? The bottom line is that we need to know how we got here, before we can find out how to get there ("there" being whatever superpower, souped up vision of India you have 20 years hence).
The inane debates about the Chinese model of development or adoption of American policies or whether to have subsidies on fertilizers are just framed by an individuals point of view. They are not framed in the context of "what would work for India given its socio-economic-political structure". This is akin to prescribing coaching tips to Yuvraj Singh based on what Ricky Ponting does, without looking at Yuvraj's past performance, his successes & failures and his strengths & weaknesses.
The other part of not knowing history is that we have few role models (few know of or understand the role of a Mahatma Gandhi or a Jawaharlal Nehru or even of Ashoka in shaping the country). Characters such as Babar are stereotyped without understanding how a ruler of a Mongol tribe came all the way from frigid planes of Central Asia to India and established an empire here. If we understood this, we could maybe comprehend better the churning in Afganistan today and its impact on us.
Contrast this with the Chinese or the Japanese, people with a very strong sense of identity with their histories and which is clearly reflected in their policies and vision. It gives a sense of confidence in their approach to policy and programs, which we could certainly do with.
Who is to blame & how can it be fixed ?
Our primary education teaches history as a colorless dates based subject from sanitized politically correct textbooks. The system ignores the most important part of our history - the period from 1947 onwards, the period that is most heavily reflected in today's paradigm. This part is covered in an even more boring manner in a subject called Civics, the textbooks of which are probably written by planning commissioners of North Korea.
The first step towards fixing this malaise is to take a fresh look at content and the manner of teaching history at a school level. This is an area where looking at the western education system may actually help (as opposed to getting Oxfords of the world to set up SHOP in India).
The second step is to have media content that is actually readable and watchable in a fun entertaining way. Search for a book on De Gaulle and you will find a zillion options, look for a book on Nehru and your options will be very limited. Look for documentaries on Pearl Harbor & you will have a 100s to choose from, do the same for Indian Partition and you are likely to be disappointed. In the 80s, Indian Television ran a series titled Bharat Ek Khoj (Discovery of India, based on Nehru's book of the same name) - the series was actually quite illuminating. We need more of such content (hopefully some Ekta Kapoor clone will take note). This step is harder than the 1st one but I believe by doing the 1st you will pave way for the 2nd.
Oh and by the way, someone could try and maintain, upgrade the Indian national museums. They could do with the creative input of a somewhat intellectually inclined media personality (Aamir Khan take note).
Footnote: I highly recommend this book in case you are interested in learning about the post-1947 period. It is very well structured and is an easy read -
http://www.amazon.com/India-After-Gandhi-History-Democracy/dp/0060958588/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256235028&sr=8-1
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Why do it And Why do it now!
I admit I am a blogging skeptic. The plethora of such creations splashed across the internet makes the enterprise akin to pouring a bucket of water into the sea -the sea doesnt need it and moreover the bucketful is likely to get lost (carrying with it wasted time and effort). On the other hand, I do have something to say (or a bucket to pour), whether it is lost or not is immaterial.
Now to the real reason for doing this now - prodding from my wife. I guess she is tired of enduring my ramblings alone and wants (a part of ) the world to suffer with her :-). Jokes apart, she thought I should give it a shot and for once I agreed.
What do I plan to write about ? 3 or 4 things really. I think mainly about Philosophy, (Indian)Politics, Current (Foreign) Affairs and History. I have varied amounts of interest in each of these areas and though I dont claim to be an authority on any, I do claim to have an opinion on many. That said, we'll see..I will write on whatever comes to mind.
Finally, who is the audience for all this ? It is hard to pontificate without a target population, or as they say in Marketing 101, know your customer before you create your product.
I would like to think of my audience as really 2 people. First is my 2 year old son. Yes, I said T-W-O! His world is of course far removed from any of this, he neither knows nor cares about blogs or opinions. But my keeping him in front, by thinking I am somehow talking to him (13-14 years fast forwarded) makes the effort easier and makes me want to write....
Enough for a first post! And now onto the second....
Now to the real reason for doing this now - prodding from my wife. I guess she is tired of enduring my ramblings alone and wants (a part of ) the world to suffer with her :-). Jokes apart, she thought I should give it a shot and for once I agreed.
What do I plan to write about ? 3 or 4 things really. I think mainly about Philosophy, (Indian)Politics, Current (Foreign) Affairs and History. I have varied amounts of interest in each of these areas and though I dont claim to be an authority on any, I do claim to have an opinion on many. That said, we'll see..I will write on whatever comes to mind.
Finally, who is the audience for all this ? It is hard to pontificate without a target population, or as they say in Marketing 101, know your customer before you create your product.
I would like to think of my audience as really 2 people. First is my 2 year old son. Yes, I said T-W-O! His world is of course far removed from any of this, he neither knows nor cares about blogs or opinions. But my keeping him in front, by thinking I am somehow talking to him (13-14 years fast forwarded) makes the effort easier and makes me want to write....
Enough for a first post! And now onto the second....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)