A response to Vir Sangvi's Islamophobia

I always read him and admire him for his open and honest opinion on diverse topics including food. He is always a delight to read. Even this time when I saw the title "The real challenge before India..." I was confident that he would bring some insight into the challenge that the Indian security and the Indian sovereignty faces in current time. But he has disappointed on many account.

First, two-third of the article was about Umar - Nigerian accused of attempting to blow up American bound plane on December 25. It was so focused on him and his attributes that it hardly seems that it was written in Indian context. It would have been a better article for Fox News in America than for Hindustan Times.

Second, when he comes to India in the end, he without justifying his arguments jumps to the conclusion that the madrasas are center of terrorism. One cannot deny that there might be a few who are involved in anti-India activities but not all. A large number of them are only to preach religious teachings and morality. One can argue that the content they teach is not good for modern society and students cannot have holistic development with limited teachings. But that is a different issue and the Education ministry talk to them about the content and regulate so that they can contribute to the primary education of the children in the country. In many parts of the country, particularly UP, Bihar and West Bengal, children goes to Madrasas irrespective of their religious background. These are considered as center of education rather center for only religious teaching and far from religious fundamentalism.


When the question of home-grown (it sounds like home-cooked mutton) terrorism comes then religion and youth on the basis of religion need not be segregated. As Vir has himself pointed out in the article there is no set profile who could be terrorist. People, individual or masses, -who Vir has called murderer and not soldiers - takes arms when they see and are convinced that there is discrimination and oppression of their society by others. They might be wrong or right depending on their exposure and how they were brain-washed. 


One third of Indian land is already affected by terrorism - Naxalism. Youths have no direction in these areas and they are ready to die believing they are doing good for their society. Why do they need religious fanatics? Dr. Manmohan Singh and P Chidambaram have already accepted, in public, that the biggest challenge Indian security has is Naxalism. More people die in Naxal affected areas in India every year in violence (and side effects, like poverty and hunger) than in any part of the world because of terrorism.


Why Vir is so apprehensive about Muslim youths only? Only he can answer. Perhaps, he is watching too much NBC and Fox News. God bless him.

Happy 60th Republic day but retirement is not in sight

Finally India has turned 60 as a republic. In many culture, especially in India, this is considered the age of retirement - when the old men and women can play with their grand children and enjoy the life. Though it does not happen in reality and a large population have to work till they die. Where this republic is heading? To rest or to work a long way.

A large number of people got involved in the freedom struggle however only a few could understand the meaning of freedom and republic. People of India, and for that matter rest of the world as well, were used to living under the rule of Monarchy. So why they revolted and what should have fascinated them to die for independence? I think the answer lies in the idea of equality and civil rights. They could understand that after the independence they would become owner of their own destiny. They must have not been looking for the right to choose their MPs and MLAs but far beyond that.  They must have be looking for freedom and not independence. This is why the Independence day (15th August) is less important than the Republic day (26th January). India as a republic gave, at least theoretically, that freedom what people wanted.

However, sadly, the freedom could not be passed to the people who desired and needed it most. Most of the people living in villages, tribes, hill men, could not see the benefit of 'freedom' even after sixty years. Three generations have passed in the same situation where they were before the historic day - 26th January 1950. They used to pay taxes and hope that the Zamindar, the DM, the sahib would safeguard their interest that rarely happened. Now, they are bitten up, killed, prisoned, by their own army, police and officers. Who should they complaint now? These are their 'own' people. They are supposed to work for them, with them and not exploit them. There are many examples - killing of innocents in Jammu and Kashmir, North East states, Naxal affected areas, suiciding farmers all over India.

With so many turmoils in the country and far from equal rights, can this nation retire at sixty? Perhaps, not. It still need to work hard to transcend benefit to all. The hope, not only the wish, that that day would come inspire us to say Happy Republic day. That would be the day when this nations would be able to take retirement and observe its children (citizen) to play, giggle and enjoy in the environment offered to them by this nation.

Shameful behaviour of IPL team owners

In my earlier post I said Pakistan cricketers were not discriminated at IPL auction. I still maintain the same belief they were not bid (though I do not like bidding for human beings, it reminds me of 'slaves trade') by any IPL team owner for the security reason. Last year, for the Government of India did not promised to provide security for the reason of National elections at the same time and the game had to be shifted to South Africa. This year the IPL owners were determined to have the games in India so they needed to get security and assurance.

When some, can be counted on fingertips, leaders are threating not to let the Pakistan players to participate in any game in India it becomes a responsibility to have them in the team. That is all right and any commercial decision will be impacted in such security scenario. They took easy route not to bid for them escape all the bureaucratic hurdles later on. But, they cannot deny the fact that they invited the players for bid. So, when they collectively, as a unanimous decision or by chance, did not bid for any of them they are supposed to send a sincere apology letter to the players and the Pakistan Cricket Board explaining their position rather than saying they owe no explanation to anyone. It is not about commercial interest but respecting fellow men who happen to be in the same sports where they are trading.

It is disgusting and shameful act not to accept the change in the situation and their inability to include Pakistan cricketers who are out performing individuals. These owners do not even consider that their behavior hurts the sentiments of the people of two countries who love to hate each other.

Pakistan players are not discriminated at IPL

Media is after the IPL teams for not bidding for any of the players from Pakistan. Initially, I was surprised and furious too on their behavior. Why on earth they did not bid for Shahid Afridi? He is not only all-rounder player but also crowd puller. Some people started suggesting that it must be the government's dictate to avoid bidding for them. But the data and the economics says it was otherwise. In the bidding process 66 players applied for the 11 available post for one year contract.

Only one in six players is picked so by random distribution, at best, only two players of Pakistan team could have been selected for the IPL. It is sad that this did not happen. They could have brought warmth to the cricket nevertheless the contract was only for one year, IPL 2010, third season. Next year, contracts for all the players would end and a fresh bidding process would start for all the teams.

At the moment, some of the Pakistani cricketers are saying they are humiliated by being invited for the bidding process and then not being bid by any one. But it should be considered as a purely commercial decision by the teams rather than a policy to discriminate them. There were another 44 players (other than 11 from Pakistan) who had to go without any contract. At present, when India-Pakistan's political, I stress the word - political, relationship are not good (personally I cannot understand, why? Why can the leaders of these two countries talk regularly? but it is out of the scope of this piece) and the players have to get visa clearance from the external ministry of the Pakistan then it is advisable to avoid those players, even if they are good, who cannot come and participate in training and games. This happened last year, external ministry of Pakistan advise players not to visit India. No team, they are commercial entities, wants to lose money on absent players.

It should be noticed that there are some players from Pakistan (Sohail Tanveer, Kamran Akmal etc.) who are regularly playing for some IPL teams. So they are there and performing.

Government of India's role can not be denied but not as a dictate not to take any player from Pakistan, rather as a body who denied responsibility and accountability for the security of the Pakistan's players in India. What happened on Sri Lankan players in Pakistan if something, or even milder, happens to Pakistan players in India then the two countries would start war. In any case it is a private game why should government bother for Shahrukh Khan and Shipa Shetty or Priety Zinta? These are the people who benefit in terms of money and fame and media coverage for the event. Government should not risk its reputation with its neighboring country for these private enterprises.

Of course if none of the player is bid at the next years IPL bidding when the new teams would be constructed then that would be a matter of concern. That would be indicate that they are being discriminated as a policy rather than commercial interest of the team owners till then we can wait for the IPL 2010 to start and we can enjoy the cricket.

Gandhi lost to British empire

Recently I was watching a documentary on Mahatma Gandhi that reminded me of his becoming Mahatma from a ordinary London educated barrister. He was a sincere and obedient subject of the British empire until 1906 when a draft law, Asiatic Law Amendment, fumed him. He could not bear the insult this new law was going to do to the people, of Asian origin, of British empire. He, as a lawyer, wanted equal rights for everyone and saw this law as a discrimination of people based on their origin. Amendment made this mandatory for every Asian living in Traansval region of South Africa to go to the office of registrar and get a identity card that would carry his (it was for male only) fingerprints. At that time only criminals were supposed to give their fingerprints to the authorities. Gandhi thought that this law would equate all the Asian people in that region to the criminals. It was a insult to him.

This was the single event that forced him to become political and he developed his fighting tool, Satyagraha (it loosely means, a resistance using truth and non-violence. Though Gandhi objected English translation of the word as "Civil disobedience or "Civil resistance". What Gandhi meant by this word was more moral power to resist the might and it is difficult to have English word for this.). He convinced thousands of Asians, mainly Indians, not to register. He started marching in Johannesburg against this law and he went to jail for this cause. This law was repealed, again applied and again repealed. Overall Gandhi won his first fight against the British empire. People resisted and, finally, they could live there without carrying fingerprints in pocket.

But the situation has changed in last 100 years. All the people coming to UK (and USA and some other countries as well but Gandhi fought against British empire so I would use UK that still, though only a fraction, represent British empire.) have to give their finger prints and immigration office would check that at the UK borders. So, in future, carrying valid visa is not enough. People will have to show fingerprints to prove they are who they say they are. You think this is humiliating. Not at all. Police plans to give digital devices to their cops on the streets so that they can catch anyone and police can confirm their fingerprints against the database on the street (other countries would use similar devices in future). The argument is that they want to control the illegal immigration and crime but this is the same argument given 100 years back and they had to repeal this similar law. And now UK would even share this data with other countries. Only difference is that this time they would have fingerprints of everyone, in the original Asiatic law in South Africa only male above the age of 8 were supposed to provide fingerprints.

After 100 years, his fight has become irrelevant and he has lost his first battle that made him Mahatma. Should we still call him Mahatma?