POLITICS
Hopes for the future
RAJNATH SINGH
|
The challenges: internal security, rural poverty, moral values
|
India has completed 60 years of its Independence. During this span of 60 years, it has evolved from a conglomeration of more than 500 princely states to the world’s biggest, and a vibrant, democracy. The process of percolation of democratic values took a few decades. At the national level I can divide these 60 years into two parts. One, from 1947 to 1977, this was the era of single-party rule. Second, 1977 to 2007: in this era various political parties ruled India.
In post-Independence history, the biggest challenge to democracy came in the form of the Emergency in 1975. But this actually led to a great upheaval in the Indian polity and in turn eclipsed the perpetual Congress era. A great movement led by Jayaprakash Narayan transformed the Indian polity into a true democracy. I think this was the first paradigm change in the polity of independent India.
In my opinion, the second paradigm change started a decade later when the Sri Ram Janmabhoomi Movement gained momentum. This movement eventually turned the Indian polity into a bipolar one. I think that if the JP Movement laid the foundation of democratic vibrancy, the Ram Janmabhoomi Movement laid the foundation of cultural nationalism in Indian politics. In this way these two movements were landmarks of the last 60 years as they have changed the entire political chemistry of India.
During these 60 years India transformed itself from a country that was not capable of even feeding its own people, to an emerging economic superpower, its present status. In my opinion, whatever India has achieved in the economic sector is much less than its actual potential. Because we were so obsessed with the western models of economy, we never tried to explore the inherent economic potential hidden traditionally in Indian society. Our leaders did not have an actual vision and perspective about the economic development of India. In the Nehru-Indira Gandhi era, the model of economy adopted was nothing but a copy of the socialistic pattern adopted by the Soviet Union. Later, after the global disenchantment with the socialist model of economy, the same Congress party started copying the American model in the guise of liberalism. I think both these models were incapable of addressing the actual needs of Indian society.
Today India is emerging as one of the biggest capital markets of the world. Our corporate giants are doing wonders abroad. The takeover of Arcelor and Corus can make any Indian feel proud. But still, more than two-thirds of India’s population is dependent on agriculture and almost unaffected by the achievements of globalisation. The model of transforming India from an agrarian economy to a totally industrialised economy can never work. Since India has the biggest areas of cultivable land in the Indo-Gangetic Plain and huge human resources, how can we think of living apart from or undermining agriculture in this area? How viable will it be?
Today western models acknowledge the importance of group networks in industrial development. In India we have several districts involved in commercial industries based on their traditional community as a group network. From the clothing industry of Tirupur in Tamil Nadu to the chikan fabric industry of Lucknow, there are examples of enormous potential based on tradition, similar to the western model of community networks. The presence of several business communities with expertise in various industries is a unique feature of Indian society. Such potential should not be annihilated; instead, these sources should be tapped for economic growth and for equitable distribution of the fruits of globalisation.
Globalisation and liberalisation have become the order of the day. But if we are able to accommodate our own inherent, indigenous and unique features, then we can give a new, improvised model of economic development based on the true spirit and ethos of India.
The field of technology in India has been transformed from the stage of not being able to make even a sewing machine to the present stage of being an information technology superpower. It is definitely a tremendous achievement. In the decades of the 1950s and the 1960s, the establishment of steel plants, power projects and institutions such as the Indian Institutes of Technology, the Indian Institute of Science and agricultural universities were good attempts in a positive direction, but they lacked the vision of the Indian spirit or Bhartityta. Today the world scientific community is accepting a number of things that were a part of India’s traditional knowledge as being fruitful and scientific. The present global cry for awareness of environmental protection, the gradually increasing attraction to naturopathy, yoga, meditation and even pranic healing, are examples. Ayurveda and organic farming are gaining acceptance as a better, alternative method of healthcare and food production. These were ignored and discarded during the decades of the 1950s and 1960s. I think our leadership of that time did not have confidence in the capacity of traditional Indian knowledge, because they were groomed and influenced so much by western and leftist thought. Instead of confidence, they had a guilty feeling about our traditional knowledge. Had research started in these areas in certain institutes 30 to 40 years back, by now we would have established ourselves as a leader in these emerging areas of technology.
When as the Education Minister of Uttar Pradesh in 1991-1992 I tried to include a supplement on Vedic Mathematics for mathematics students, I was dubbed a conservative trying to paint the syllabus saffron. But what will my critics say about the same Vedic Mathematics getting recognition in several western universities and institutions including the London School of Economics?
In the 21st century we must shed the inferiority complex of the colonial era and feel confident about our great nation . You cannot find anywhere in the world mathematics, health science and architecture as a part of a religious text as in the case of the vedas in India. So India should start research on the hidden treasures of our so-called traditional knowledge.
India has never invaded another country. Our image on the international scene is symbolised by the Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi. But the defence and external affairs policies adopted by successive governments were such that we became a state usually succumbing to external pressures and which is porous in security terms.
From the Kabaili attack of 1948 to the Kargil war of 1999 we have faced five external aggressions. Of these, Kargil of 1999 was the only one in which India did not forgive anything on the battleground or on the table of diplomacy. In all the other cases the grand success of our armed forces (except in 1962), achieved by means of exemplary valour and sacrifice, were overshadowed by diplomacy caving in under international pressure. In 1948, despite having the capability to take over all of Kashmir, we strangled the whole issue with the U.N. The backdrop of the defeat of 1962 is itself a painful instance of diplomatic failure. In 1965 the victory was left in vain in Tashkent, and we were unable to take even the tumultuous victory of 1971 to a logical conclusion in Shimla.
After the successive diplomatic failures of Congress governments, India started becoming a victim of terrorism from the 1980s. Terrorism established its roots in the entire country (Kashmir, Punjab, the North-East and Tamil Nadu) during the 1980s. Ironically, although during that decade India had the most powerful governments in history —Indira Gandhi’s government with a two-thirds majority and Rajiv Gandhi’s with a three-fourths majority — they were unable to tackle terrorism even in its early stages. Now the dimensions of terrorism have become monstrous.
The chronic failures of successive Congress governments on the external diplomacy and internal security fronts have turned India into a soft state. Now India should change its image into that of a state strong in strategic defence and tough on terrorism. The Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government had some significant successes in this regard.
There were numerous constitutional amendments made during this period. Even the Preamble to the Constitution was altered. I personally think the biggest constitutional amendment that is needed is in the first letter of the Constitution, which says “India that is Bharat.” Even in the 21st century, why should the first name of our country mentioned in the first sentence of the Constitution be one given by its former colonial rulers. If Sri Lanka can abandon “Ceylon,” Myanmar can abandon “Burma,” Cambodia can abandon “Kampuchea,” Zimbabwe can abandon “Rhodesia,” why can’t Bharat abandon the word India? The entire country should come up with a consensus on this.
In my opinion, India’s economic capi tal and intellectual capital are its biggest assets for the future.
The biggest challenges are internal security, rural poverty and depleting moral values in society. For internal security the political leadership will have to be tough, leaving aside vote bank politics. For rural poverty, our economic policies should be in sync with the needs of poor farmers and villagers.
The wealth generated from globalisation should be distributed and reach all legitimate recipients.
With respect to depleting moral values in society, two things need to be done. At the macro-level, political leaders should introspect and try to get rid of the crisis of credibility in politics. At the micro-level, family as an institution should be protected and strengthened so that the tsunami of western values originating from the sea of globalisation will not eventually demolish the personal sanskar of an average Indian family member.
If it takes a few decades to create prosperity in a country or society, it takes centuries or even millennia to establish values. In the process of making capital out of a few years, we should not destroy capital made over a thousand years.
I am hopeful and confident of a great future for India, as envisaged by great visionaries such as Swami Vivekananda, Mahatma Gandhi, Maharishi Arvind and Shri Guru Golwalkar.
Rajnath Singh, MP, is BJP President.
Independent India at 60
