India is an idea, an aspiration, a belief in humanity and its potential to better itself without resorting to forced top down approaches based on imported ideologies and beliefs. If we look to history, the concept of India has been there for a very long time but India as it is today, with its political structure as a nation State is still in a developmental mode. At present, we have a federal India with a strong Centre and with continuing demands for newer States to be carved out from pre-existing ones.
These demands have often been violent and have seen considerable participation from university students with quite a few number of deaths. In this context, it is but natural to ask the question “Will demand for smaller States lead to disintegration of India?”
The demand for a newer, smaller State should be seen in the light of federalism and thus the recognition of the continued wish to remain within India should be recognised. What is demanded is not secession but inclusion and a recognition of the particular needs of the community demanding the separate State. Thus, the idea of disintegration is in direct opposition to the demand for new States.
Despite the presence of a strong Centre, the model of Indian federalism allows for enough control to the respective States to develop and implement policies for the betterment of their States with regards to subjects like education, employment and the like. Thus, disparate developments within a State based on cultural and linguistic differences seem to be the reason for these demands.
There is strong ground to argue against the formation of newer States based on administrative difficulties and unnecessary expenses due to the small size of these new entities. However, only geography cannot be taken into account and reflects a wrong approach. Examples from European countries, which are very small compared to India, have even smaller areas where considerable autonomy has been given. Examples could include Flanders in Belgium, Catalonia in Spain. Thus, the focus only on the size of the new States being demanded reflects a fundamentally flawed thinking.
On the other hand, given the immense cultural ethnic and linguistic differences in India the fear of disintegration seems plausible. After all, proponents of this theory would argue, the example of the Balkans is right before us. The idea of a Balkanised India is however nothing but a wrong way of countering legitimate claims to aspirations. It is also not taking into account historical realities, political culture and ground realities.
Unlike the Balkans, India despite its multitude of ethnicities, language and culture hardly contains any historical enmities. The idea has been of co-existence and accommodation, unlike the Balkans where unity was opposed due to a particular coercive political system. What is present though is a strong sense of local identity along with and not in place of the pride of being an Indian. Thus, there is a need to allow for the feeling of belongingness and a consolidation of the local identity along with the national identity.
Another argument against new States looks at the domino effect that could follow the formation of the states demanded as of now. In fact the current agitations have led to the rise of dormant demands with Vidarbha and Saurashtra prominent among them. This brings us to question the final number that might be reached and whether this process may throw many more such demands. However to deny legitimate aspirations based on these reasons seem to be the failure of Indian democracy. The executive as well as the legislative should be able to analyse between the demands of the people and the vacuous demands of attention mongers and politicians.
In fact, the smallness of States can lead to better administration. Despite the formation of Uttarakhand in 2000, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Mayawati has asked for the formation of newer States for the sake of better governance.
The not so wonderful performance of the newer States leads people to argue that this process does not augur any economic benefits. However, economic results should not be taken in isolation and should be seen in light of other factors which affect such performance. Besides, it takes time for the newer States which usually do not have much development to attract investors and produce better economic results.
A sense of paternalism is being seen with other people deciding what is best. It should be left to the people concerned. Although such decisions affect the rest of India and other Indians as well, the primary people to be affected are the residents of that particular place.
Rational aspirations and the capacity to fulfil them make a democracy. India is a vibrant democracy and has been due to its citizens. The right to protest and demonstrate forms a part of this nation and has been the fabric of the nation since pre- independence times.
The question of newer States is also a test of India’s democratic credentials, which is among the least tainted one in South Asia and the immediate neighbourhood. The initial demands of State reorganisation based on linguistic basis have not brought about disintegration. In fact, it has allowed for the development of democratic principles.
Despite all the reasons in favour of new States, it is imperative to look for alternatives especially when creation of newer States may lead to more problems than solutions. In this regard, if the demands for States are made by a geographically small area, which is administratively unfeasible, there could be the creation of special districts according to the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India.
Hence, the demands for newer States should not be seen as a demand for smaller States leading to a disintegration of India.. Rather it should be viewed in light of its historical, cultural and political scenario reflecting the wishes and aspirations of the people. Only economics cannot be the deciding factor and it should be balanced with the emotion of the people as well.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Crash
A dose of reality
With a crash of cards
Destruction
Splashed all over
Struck once again
How paths go awry
And everything just
Crashes down.
No second chances abound
Neither do any happy endings
Just the wind, the fall
And then complete silence.
With a crash of cards
Destruction
Splashed all over
Struck once again
How paths go awry
And everything just
Crashes down.
No second chances abound
Neither do any happy endings
Just the wind, the fall
And then complete silence.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Indian/Nepali/South Asians- The value of our lives?
Just came back from the common room after catching a bit of the Doha debate where the motion was- 'This House believes Dubai is a bad idea.'
The debate was interesting and I personally felt that with such a specific wording of the motion, the opposition were bound to score a victory which they did with 62 percent of the votes. they discussed finance, education, Arab culture, Emirati rights, discrimination, propaganda etc and lofty grandiose words like how Dubai is a beacon to the world.
All of this was good and interesting, but what really shook me was the lack of apathy and concern for the real builders of Dubai- the migrant workers, most of them from South Asia, working on less than 2 dollars a day in squalid conditions and with so many violations of their rights that it might be worthless to even attempt to count.
Against claims of abuse, the simple answers given were downright degrading.
Numbers were used to show how the few workers might have been exploited but most of the population of Dubai was benefiting from it. to be precise numbers of 1,60,000 against some 4.8 million was used.
No matter what the number, you cannot allow the violation of such rights. if you do, then Dubai is not a beacon to be followed. There are no two ways about it, it is SLAVE labour.
But then another argument comes up. they came out of their own free will and where they come from , they get less than 2 dollars a day.
Yes, we are poor and that forces us to go to Dubai, to work, to provide something for our families. Does that give the companies the rights to exploit these people to the hilt? They are humans too, right? And true they might have come out of their own will, but are they allowed to go back on the same terms? Are they given the benefits as mentioned in their contracts? is a contract even signed?
To use the idea of a free will and abstain from its own responsibilities does show that Dubai is a bad idea for the rest of the Arab world to follow; to be built on slave labour.
Another argument used was the lack of ability of any governments worldwide to enforce all of its laws and all they could do was try. Thus, it was the companies and not the government of Dubai, who bore responsibility for these workers.
What??? The government has no responsibility and it can only try? So, does that mean that if the companies decide to flout other laws, which are detrimental to the vision of Dubai, the architechtural glory, they won't be punished using the same logic?
The debate clearly showed that the value of the life of these migrant workers means nothing to the Sheikhs of Dubai, perhaps it is a reflection of the value of our citizenship.
perhaps, it is power politics and how the relative economic, military clout of one's State reflects in one's treatment.
However, the audience in the debate proved me wrong. There were quite a few Indians and Pakistanis who thought Dubai was a good idea and who were clearly treated well by Dubai. That for me, kicked citizenship out of the issue. Its more about the money.
When you have Burj Khalifa to build, who cares about those poor exploited South Asian labourers? Surely, they dont even matter, right? I wish they had been in the audience and then we would have seen, "Is Dubai really a good idea?"
The debate was interesting and I personally felt that with such a specific wording of the motion, the opposition were bound to score a victory which they did with 62 percent of the votes. they discussed finance, education, Arab culture, Emirati rights, discrimination, propaganda etc and lofty grandiose words like how Dubai is a beacon to the world.
All of this was good and interesting, but what really shook me was the lack of apathy and concern for the real builders of Dubai- the migrant workers, most of them from South Asia, working on less than 2 dollars a day in squalid conditions and with so many violations of their rights that it might be worthless to even attempt to count.
Against claims of abuse, the simple answers given were downright degrading.
Numbers were used to show how the few workers might have been exploited but most of the population of Dubai was benefiting from it. to be precise numbers of 1,60,000 against some 4.8 million was used.
No matter what the number, you cannot allow the violation of such rights. if you do, then Dubai is not a beacon to be followed. There are no two ways about it, it is SLAVE labour.
But then another argument comes up. they came out of their own free will and where they come from , they get less than 2 dollars a day.
Yes, we are poor and that forces us to go to Dubai, to work, to provide something for our families. Does that give the companies the rights to exploit these people to the hilt? They are humans too, right? And true they might have come out of their own will, but are they allowed to go back on the same terms? Are they given the benefits as mentioned in their contracts? is a contract even signed?
To use the idea of a free will and abstain from its own responsibilities does show that Dubai is a bad idea for the rest of the Arab world to follow; to be built on slave labour.
Another argument used was the lack of ability of any governments worldwide to enforce all of its laws and all they could do was try. Thus, it was the companies and not the government of Dubai, who bore responsibility for these workers.
What??? The government has no responsibility and it can only try? So, does that mean that if the companies decide to flout other laws, which are detrimental to the vision of Dubai, the architechtural glory, they won't be punished using the same logic?
The debate clearly showed that the value of the life of these migrant workers means nothing to the Sheikhs of Dubai, perhaps it is a reflection of the value of our citizenship.
perhaps, it is power politics and how the relative economic, military clout of one's State reflects in one's treatment.
However, the audience in the debate proved me wrong. There were quite a few Indians and Pakistanis who thought Dubai was a good idea and who were clearly treated well by Dubai. That for me, kicked citizenship out of the issue. Its more about the money.
When you have Burj Khalifa to build, who cares about those poor exploited South Asian labourers? Surely, they dont even matter, right? I wish they had been in the audience and then we would have seen, "Is Dubai really a good idea?"
Monday, January 4, 2010
Randomly Random...if any such thing exists
The title says it all
Its that time of the year where no matter what thoughts seem to be positive and resolutions remembered, akin to a honeymoon period.
New Year was ushered in a random nowhere perhaps in keeping with law school tradition.
And in keeping with traditions of people all around, I ventured into some of my own. No the post is not about my 'wonderful' resolutions or the strain already being felt by such resolutions.
I got a lift on an auto to class today. After never getting one from countless bikers outside Gate 3, a lift on an auto felt awesome. Followed by 4 hours of sleepy lectures. Lunch and 3 hours of sleep as a crumpled heap on the carpet in my room ( where I was supposed to have a power nap of 20 mins), the day is strange. But keeping it in the New year mood, it is still different not depressing.
And there is the music too, always something to lift my mood;something randomly playing in my library and if nothing else there is always Dylan.
Ah but all thoughts and no action made Tom a dull boy, so cannot caontinue longer on my procrastination. Have a team member arrivng from the WUDC at Turkey tomorrow and I am yet to show something substantial on my work.
But as they say, Raat Baaki Baat Baaki.
Off to work!!!
Its that time of the year where no matter what thoughts seem to be positive and resolutions remembered, akin to a honeymoon period.
New Year was ushered in a random nowhere perhaps in keeping with law school tradition.
And in keeping with traditions of people all around, I ventured into some of my own. No the post is not about my 'wonderful' resolutions or the strain already being felt by such resolutions.
I got a lift on an auto to class today. After never getting one from countless bikers outside Gate 3, a lift on an auto felt awesome. Followed by 4 hours of sleepy lectures. Lunch and 3 hours of sleep as a crumpled heap on the carpet in my room ( where I was supposed to have a power nap of 20 mins), the day is strange. But keeping it in the New year mood, it is still different not depressing.
And there is the music too, always something to lift my mood;something randomly playing in my library and if nothing else there is always Dylan.
Ah but all thoughts and no action made Tom a dull boy, so cannot caontinue longer on my procrastination. Have a team member arrivng from the WUDC at Turkey tomorrow and I am yet to show something substantial on my work.
But as they say, Raat Baaki Baat Baaki.
Off to work!!!
Friday, January 1, 2010
A New Year
This has been a long time coming and hopefully the plan was to usher in 2010 after this post but then it is going to be the first post of 2010..Not bad.
The month gone by seems like a blur as do most things in law school. To quote Sartaj's words, "This too shall pass has lost its meaning in law school." In fact, it has; things come, go and somehow we survive and sometimes drown.
Last month, I was surprised at the amount of interest I had in things political, high even by my own standards of interst in politics and constitution writing back home. Spending an insane amount of time on the internet made me realise the extent of polarisation faced by Nepali society. It is almost like a clear case of black and white without any shades of grey in terms of people's liking and backing for political parties. Issues like providing justice for victims of the Maoist insurgency and the State response are extremely divisive and people have differing logics based on different planes of reasonings, theories and plain emotions of support and hate.
All of this should not have come as a surprise to me, but strangely it did. Contrary to my expectations, these are people who are well read, have an idea of issues both local and international, care for the country and its future and yet have exactly differing opinions on the same issues. Perhaps, it comes down to an issue of social identity and the interests of class or perhaps it is just looking out for a better deal for oneself.
Still, between all of this we have a country which is seeing a rapid exodus of the youth both as students and workers to various countries around the world, a lack of opportunities in the country and a very murky socio-political environment. And then, the task of writing a proper constitution in which people can have belief. Althought he idea is to remain optimistic, Nepal at present seems divided and the division is not only ideological, it is multi layered and crosses over with different fault lines. Ethnicity is an issue and so is gender and language. Caste affiliations are suddenly important. It almost seems as if time is moving backwards, with solidarity being based on terms like ethnicity, caste, language. The fear of national disintegration seems almost true to laugh it off now.
On the positives, we apparently have a lot of political consciousness and an idea of the issue at stake to let peace fail. We know the world has its eyes on us, even the beleaguered UN wants us to succeed so as to show some success or reason for its existence. And big brother India would not want another super troubled neighbour on its borders.
Is there a solution to all of this? Or should there ever be a solution? Because, no matter what we do, society is bound to have issues of some sort or the other at all times. Subjects may change and the substance may differ but there will always be problems for the society to deal with. At present though, the best would be to make efforts to have a vigorous dialogue and involve the citizens much more. At present, everything appears to be stage managed with some top honchos reaching a last minute conclusion. Even the constitution seems to be heading that way; a hastily written last minute compromise.
In a polarised society like Nepal, is compromise then the best way? Where at best, parties will be partly happy and wishing for more and at worst the different actors will feel cheated. I dont know and it seems only time will tell.
Wishing a good year and wonderful days ahead to everyone and especially to my fellow countrymen/women from Nepal.
The month gone by seems like a blur as do most things in law school. To quote Sartaj's words, "This too shall pass has lost its meaning in law school." In fact, it has; things come, go and somehow we survive and sometimes drown.
Last month, I was surprised at the amount of interest I had in things political, high even by my own standards of interst in politics and constitution writing back home. Spending an insane amount of time on the internet made me realise the extent of polarisation faced by Nepali society. It is almost like a clear case of black and white without any shades of grey in terms of people's liking and backing for political parties. Issues like providing justice for victims of the Maoist insurgency and the State response are extremely divisive and people have differing logics based on different planes of reasonings, theories and plain emotions of support and hate.
All of this should not have come as a surprise to me, but strangely it did. Contrary to my expectations, these are people who are well read, have an idea of issues both local and international, care for the country and its future and yet have exactly differing opinions on the same issues. Perhaps, it comes down to an issue of social identity and the interests of class or perhaps it is just looking out for a better deal for oneself.
Still, between all of this we have a country which is seeing a rapid exodus of the youth both as students and workers to various countries around the world, a lack of opportunities in the country and a very murky socio-political environment. And then, the task of writing a proper constitution in which people can have belief. Althought he idea is to remain optimistic, Nepal at present seems divided and the division is not only ideological, it is multi layered and crosses over with different fault lines. Ethnicity is an issue and so is gender and language. Caste affiliations are suddenly important. It almost seems as if time is moving backwards, with solidarity being based on terms like ethnicity, caste, language. The fear of national disintegration seems almost true to laugh it off now.
On the positives, we apparently have a lot of political consciousness and an idea of the issue at stake to let peace fail. We know the world has its eyes on us, even the beleaguered UN wants us to succeed so as to show some success or reason for its existence. And big brother India would not want another super troubled neighbour on its borders.
Is there a solution to all of this? Or should there ever be a solution? Because, no matter what we do, society is bound to have issues of some sort or the other at all times. Subjects may change and the substance may differ but there will always be problems for the society to deal with. At present though, the best would be to make efforts to have a vigorous dialogue and involve the citizens much more. At present, everything appears to be stage managed with some top honchos reaching a last minute conclusion. Even the constitution seems to be heading that way; a hastily written last minute compromise.
In a polarised society like Nepal, is compromise then the best way? Where at best, parties will be partly happy and wishing for more and at worst the different actors will feel cheated. I dont know and it seems only time will tell.
Wishing a good year and wonderful days ahead to everyone and especially to my fellow countrymen/women from Nepal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)