Saturday, May 26, 2007

Palestine and US follies

Dondu sir,

If Bin Laden wants to target Christianity, he would have attacked the Vatican first. He was
supported and sponsored by US during the cold war ; in Afhagnistan. (so was Saddam to contain Iran). Bin laden is neither
crazy nor a fool to turn aginst US for religious reasons. I had quoted his statement after 9/11.
US paid a dear price for its folly.
Germany will never be targeted by any terrorists because after learning a bitter lesson in WW 2, they have kept themselves aloof from all world affairs and remain low profile and neutral..

I too admire Israel for its acheivemnts and courage under adversity. and their economic miracle and ingenuity is great. they invented the drip irrigation and many innovative methods.
all this until 1990s.

now they are a powerful and arrogant bully who never learnt to make peace. Pls read about the peace movements within Isreal and the opinion of many Isrealis.
those 3 mossad chief's were realistic and pragmatic ; they never have any political ambitions.
and Sharon, the crafty politician who unleashed the current intifida to save his career is now in coma for over a year. karma vinay and ool vinai...he has the blood of thousands in his hands.

hopefully the recent debacle of attacking Lebnon and the conflict within PLA (hamas vs fatah) has made a unstable peace and makes the road map for peace a bit easy...

and US has a talent for creating a severe headache for itself and the world after spending a trillion dollars !!. Remember its Viatnam adventure. And Iraq (and esp arming Saddam in the 80s). They are somewhat crazy.

The only US (and NATO) action that
i wholeheartedly support was their
bombing of Serbia in 1999 to stop the Serbian genocide of mulims in
Bosnia. but for NATO bombing the
genocide would have continued.
US should have used the Bosnian
muslims it saved as a propoganda
weapon against 'Islamic' terrorits.

anbudan
Athiyaman

demillitarisation of Kashmir

an excellent suggestion. must be implemented at the earliest.

reminds me of another thing: regarding how to control islamic terrorism, somebody suggested that the rulers of the middle east , pakistan, etc should not be allowed to send their children to settle or work in the western countries. then they will be forced to improve their countries for their children's sake at least!

even osama's niece is in europe! i am sure that the kashmiri elites of all hues have sent away their children to safety, as had done our LTTE chief!

i wish all the very best for the people who support these leaders and make their children's future unsafe.
-gopalan

Athiyaman Karur R wrote

Dear Sir,

Reduction of troops in Kashmir can begin with
the withdrawl of special forces of security for
former CM Mufti Mohamad Sayeed and his family.
May be then, he may change his stand.

Regards

K.R.Athiyaman

arguments thru emails

Dear shantha,

I am fine and rains are wreaking havoc here.

We shall continue our debates thru mails
which is better than even face to face
arguments. Impersonal and unemotional...

one more : why did Dawood Ibrahim mastermind
Mumbai blasts at a great personal risk.
Hitherto he was a hardened criminal after
money and power ; but he was never an idealist
like the suicide bombers of Jihadists.
Ans : revenge for the pograms against
muslims in the aftermath of babri masjid
demolitions in jan 03.

Unless and until Palestine and Kashmir
issues are settled amicable and demcratically,
(also US should get out of middle east while
Isreal should pull back, make peace and
recognise Palestinian statehood), Islamic
'terrorism' will never end.

I agree that jihad elements are insular
and fanatics and do no belive or understand
democracy or secular ideals. But the monstor
has been created by US, Isreal and stubborn
Indian govt which holds on to Kashmir at
all costs.

during partition in 1947, Punjab and Bengal
were divided by a surgical operation. The
same logic should have applied to J n Kashmir.
the muslim majority Kashmir should have gone
to Pakistan (the K in Pakistan (acronymn)
stands for Kashmir) while we should have
retained Hindu majority Jammu. this
unfinished business of partition is still
haunting us and cost dear...

did you read Tavleen Singh's account about
Kashmir that i had sent ?

see you later.

Anbudan
Athiyaman

Gandhiji

Dear Shiva,

I too is a Gandhi buff. Was fortunate
enough to visit Sabarmathi Ashram at
Ahamadabad in 1988. Spent some hours
there reliving the past...

And i couldn't control my tears when
i first visited Raj Ghat in Delhi in 1992.
Same at Birla Hosue at where i bought the
book "Gandhi" movie screeplay ; it is
a remarkable screeplay, better than the
film.

He was a great man but still had his
defects and blunders, esp in his personal
life. His fanatic belief is naturopathy
made him stop the rare Pencillin injection
for his very sick wife in 1944 at Pune
prison. the British had specially flown
in the medicine from war torn UK. But
without the injection Ba died and he
was forlorn with greif and guilt....
Also his experiments with his grand nieces
were unneccessary and unscientific...

I have a biography of him by Vincent
Sheean (Lead Kindly Light) and another
one by Louis Fisher, apart from
Sathya Sothanai.

And i am an ardent fan of Rajaji who was
a close friend, associate and sambandhi
of Gandhiji. I try to read all the works of
Rajaji. His "Sathyameva Jeyathe" collection
of 4 volumes from his journal Swarajya is
a must read for us. His vison and depth
are peerless ; he is easily the greatest
leader and visonary of our times. His
warnings about pseudo socialism and
'license, permit, quota' raj are
remarkable.

I treausre an autobiography of Kovai
Ayyamutu (1898-1977) who was a sisya of
Rajaji and Gandhiji. He was a freedom fighter,
established Khadar movement in Tirupur ;
was a writer, poet and movie director ;
an entreupreuner and agriculturist and
finally an active memeber of Swathanthra
Party. He was a collegue and friend of
EVR Periyar in Vaikam movement in 20s.
Served in army in Baghdad in 1918..
I re-read this book once in a while for
inspiration. Kamaraj, C.Subramaniam,
G.D.Naidu and EVR's activities and anecedotes
are there....

Hope you have read JJ Sila Kuripugal of
Nagarkovil SuRa.

Also i was a fan of Writer Sujatha and have
read almost all his works. Met him twice
and regulaly chat with him every saturady
thru ambalam.com. a versatile writer who
has been under rated.

ok. see you later.

anbudan
Athiyaman

Humour Trapped !!

Humour Trapped !!
1. Our complainant, who was working as a wireless operator in Motor Transport Section of Mumbai Police, came to Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) and lodged a complaint that his in-charge Hawaldar was demanding money for showing favor in the matter of distribution of duties. A trap was laid at the quarters of the said hawaldar. He was sleeping in the room. He woke up, accepted the bribe of Rs. 500, kept the bribe, amount under his pillow and again went to sleep! The Hawaldar had to be woken up and told that this was a trap from the Anti - Corruption Bureau. He pleaded that he was sleeping and that he was not aware as to who had kept the said amount under his pillow. However, this was untrue as the entire transaction had taken place in presence of independent witnesses.
2. A complainant lodged a complaint with us against a Mukadam of M - Ward, BMC, Mumbai, of a bribe demand of Rs. 1500. A trap was laid at the office of the M - Ward, BMC. Some of the raiding party members went to the second floor along with the complainant and the witnesses, while the remaining raiding party were waiting in front of the office near a Pan shop. The Mukadam met the complainant and asked him to accompany him outside the BMC office. They came to the same pan shop where the remaining members of the raiding party were waiting! The Mukadam asked for a paper bag from the pan shop owner and after blowing into the bag, he asked our complainant to drop the bribe inside the bag in the presence of entire raiding party! Thereafter, he was trapped. ( Normally we find it very difficult to get the raiding party to witness the bribe taking, since the bribe taker takes precautions.) At that time, he was aged about 57 years and 11 months and was to retire in a month's time. The Mukadam was convicted by the Court.
3. A complainant telephoned to the ACB office and informed that one Rationing official was demanding Rs. 50 from him for not deleting the name of his deceased father from the Ration Card saying that " Mare Huain Aadmi ke Naam Pe Ration khate Ho, Tumhare Upar main Case kar Doonga " ( You are taking the Rations of a dead man. I will register a case against you. ) The complainant was asked to come to ACB for lodging his complaint, but he could not come, as the Rationing officer insisted on immediate payment of the bribe. Our complainant wisely made a photo copy of the Fifty Rupee note he was going to pay as bribe to the Rationing official. Complainant also had another work of change of his residential address for which the same Rationing Officer demanded another bribe of Rs. 200. The complainant came to ACB the next day and lodged his complaint. A trap was laid at the kandivli Rationing Office and the Rationing official was trapped while accepting Rs. 200. During his personal search, another Rs. 50 was found in his pant pocket and which was the same that had been accepted by him on the earlier day!
4. A complainant came to ACB for lodging a complaint of demand of bribe against a an official of the Municipal Corporation of Mumbai. The Addl. DCP, ACB asked one of the ACsP of the Bureau to record the complaint and lay a trap. The ACP told the Addl. DCP that he was busy in some other matter and had no time for a fresh case. Ultimately, the Addl. DCP entrusted this work to one of the Police Inspectors of the Bureau. A trap was laid at the BMC office and the BMC official was trapped while accepting a bribe of Rs. 4500. When the BMC official was detained, he immediately disclosed that his son - in law is an ACP and is serving with Anti - Corruption Bureau. We were surprised to learn that that he was the same ACP to whom this trap has been entrusted earlier!!
5. Our complainant who was a policeman attached to the Sakinaka Police Station came to ACB to logged a complaint against a Junior Engineer of BMC L - Ward, Kurla, who was demanding a bribe of Rs. 17000 for showing favor in not demolishing the complainant's home. A Brihan Mumbai Muncipal Corporation Engineer was demanding bribe from a Policeman - a custodian of Law! A trap was laid at BMC L - ward office and the Engineer and his assistant were trapped. The Engineer was later convicted in the Court of Law.
6. Our complainant had approached a clerk in Tahsildar Office, Mulund and submitted an application for obtaining copy of the Electoral Roll, for which the official fee was Re.1. The clerk, however, demanded Rs. 200. Our complainant tried bargaining to reduce the amount of bribe but the clerk insisted on getting Rs. 200. The complainant reluctantly agreed to pay Rs. 200. At the same time, a neighboring lady clerk also demanded Rs. 200 saying "Mera Kya " ( What about me ) as she would also be doing part of the work!! The complainant approached ACB and a trap was laid at the Tahsildar office, Mulund and both these clerks were trapped while accepting Rs. 200 each. The case ended in conviction in Court.
7. A complainant lodged a complaint with ACB against a Police Sub Inspector attached to Pydhonie Police Station regarding demand of bribe of Rs. 4000=00. The surprising modus operandi of accepting the bribe was that the Sub Inspector gave our complainant a credit slip of his Bank and instructed him to deposit Rs. 4000 in his account! The officer filled in the details in the credit slip and after duly signing the same, handed it over to the complainant! After the complainant deposited the said amount in the bank, the PSI was trapped. He was convicted by the Court.
8.A complainant came to ACB and lodged a complaint against a Judicial Clerk for demand of bribe of Rs. 100 for issuing him a copy of the Judgment Order. The trap was laid in the premises of the Court. At the time of the trap, the Court typist and peon were also present in the vicinity. The complainant was about to pay Rs. 100 ( 10 currency notes of Rs. 10 ) to the Judicial Clerk, when the typist and the peon intervened saying " Hamara Kya" ( What about us ) to the complainant, who then had to distribute the trap amount Rs. 50 to the Judicial Clerk, Rs. 30 to typist and Rs. 20 to the peon! After this trap, the Court's work came to a stand still as there was nobody to assist the Honorable Magistrate!
9. A complainant came to ACB and lodged a complaint against a Junior Security Officer attached to F - South Ward, BMC for demand of bribe of Rs. 1500=00. When the trap was laid at his office, the officer was not present in his cabin. On enquiry, it was learnt, that the said officer was busy in a meeting with the Ward officer, in which the topic for discussion was "Prevention of Corruption in BMC" !! The complainant gave an intimation through a BMC Security Guard about his arrival, where upon the Security Officer came out, leaving the meeting with permission, and accepted bribe from the complainant!! He was trapped.
10. A complainant who is a hotelier and builder came to the ACB office and lodged a complaint of demand of bribe of Rs. 40, 000 by a Senior Police Inspector. During Pre - trap panchanama, the said Senior Inspector telephoned our complainant and demanded not only Rs. 40,000 but also a flat!. The complainant requested the officer to reduce the bribe amount, whereupon Inspector said " Paise Ka Baat Telephone Par Pe kar ke Mujhe Mar Do Ge Kya" ( By talking of money on the telephone, will you trap me ? ) The conversation was duly recorded by ACB officials. A trap was laid at the Police Station. He was, however, not present in his office chamber. The complainant approached his orderly, who rang up the officer at his residence. The Inspector told his orderly on telephone " Paise Jast Aahet, Lafda Nako, Room Madhye Thevu Nako, Baju Chya Dukandara Kade Thev " ( The money is large. I do not want any hassle. Don't keep it in the room. Keep it with the shop keeper next door. ) Accordingly, complainant handed over the bribe of Rs. 40, 000 to his orderly, who then kept that amount in the neighboring shop. The Senior Police Inspector, his orderly and the shop keeper were arrested.

a treasured possesion

To : Thriru Sujatha

Dear Sir,

"Enadu Ninavugal" by Kovai Ayyamuthu (1898-1975)
is a remarkable autobiography of a remarakble
personality. Freedom fighter, Gandhian, poet,
writer-director,entreupreuner and agriculturist,
whose career took many turns. Served in WW 1 in Iraq,
worked in Rangoon, became a mechant in Coimbatore ;
after hearing Gandhiji's call, joinned Congress
and established Kadar movement in Tirupur
and TN ; was collegue of EVR,C.S and Kamaraj and
Kalki Sadasivam in 1930s and 40s.(jailed in Vaikom
struggle).

And was a sisya of Rajaji till the end. Helped
establish the Gandhi Ashram near Tiruchengode in 1925.
Quaerelled with Gandhiji over an issue and resigned
from Khadi movement in 1942 and went on to become a
successful trader and businessman in Coimbatore ;
wrote and directed the film "Kanchan" in 1947 at
Coimbatore Central Studios (jupiter films) ; and
finally settled down as agriculturist near Pollachi
in 1950. N.Mahalingam was his sisya.Subsequently
joined Swatanta party under Rajaji.
Worked tirelessly till the end.

His book continues to inspire me and i treasure it.

Thanks & Regards
Athiyaman

Kamaraj, the 'kingmaker'

To : Mr.Ramachandra Guha

Dear Sir,

With regards to your article in Hindu :

Kamaraj was no doubt a great and honest leader and
freedom fighter. But he was not as noble or inncoent
as generally viewed by the masses. He (and the
syndicate) wanted to hold the levers of power behind
the screens. But for his efforts, Indira Gandhi would
never have been accepted as PM by Congressmen.

After Shastri's death, Morarji Desai was the tallest
and ablest leader ; honest and independent ;
Kamaraj and the syndicate feared that if Morarji
became PM, then they cannot control him ; so he
proposed Indira (a new face and young women), whom he
wrongly belived, can be controlled and maipulated from
behind the screens. Unfortunately for him, Indira Gandhi
turned out to be different and was ungrateful to him and
outmaouvered him ; subsequently he died a dis-illusioned
and unhappy man in 1975.

Pls refer M.O.Mathai's "Reminesenses of Nehru age"
and "Crisis of Conscience" by Rajinder Puri for more
details.

And India had to pay a very dear price for the 17
years of dictatorial and populistic rule of Indira Gandhi,
who over centralised power and destroyed the inner
characters of many public institutions. and economy
and public morals were wrecked for ever.


Regards
Athiyman
Chennai

arguments with dondu sir about Palestine & Israel

sir,

Israel was fighting for its survival until the 80s and
the end of the cold war in 1991 changed the equations.
Since the Oslo accords, Israel missed many excellent
oppurtunities to make lasting peace with Palestinians.

Isaeli politicians are like our own
communal and caste based politicians. they whip up
mass hysteria to up their careers. Netaynhu (spelling
!!) was one such guy. In 2000 he purposely visted a
controverisial area and mosque to stir up the current
infitida. His politcal career was ending and he played
a machiavillian role to re-surrect it. Pls re-read
about that.

Israeli people are as naive and gullible and
ill-informed like us. Three former Mossad chief's had
issued a joint statement some years ago, condmening
the actions of Israeli politicians in perpetuating the
violence. They argued that many actions of the state
will create further rift and create more Palestinian
anger.These there men must be knowing the
ground reality better than anyone..

US (because of the short-sighted lobbying by its
powerful Jewish lobby) blindly supported whatever
Israel did ; vetoed many UN resolutions which were
fair and correct. Bin Laden, who was sponsored by US
in the 80s turned against US mainly because of this.
Religious feelings (Islamic terrorism) is a misnomer.
after 9/11 he declared that US will know no peace
until the Palestinians do.

In my opinion, both US and Isarel acted foolishly and
arrogantly and US paid a very dear price for its
folly. I am not justifying bin laden,etc nor do i
support the Palestinian PLA blindly. But if a people
feel that injustice is meted out to them and they have
nothing to loose but thier lives,
then no one can stop suicde bombers
and rebellion.

Until and unless Israel and US understand this, there
will be no solution. and recently one Israli ex-mossad
man had asked the Palestinian leadership to bypass the
Israel govt and go to the Israeli people directly for
peace talks. Live and let live should be the motto ;
and the entire Arab world is now ready to recognise
Israel if it can recognise Palestine state.

We praise our Bhagath Singh, Vanjinathan and Subash
Bose. They were 'terrorists' in the eyes of the
British. So who is correct ? one man's terrorist is
another man's freedom fighter..

But Palestinian leadership is corrupt and divided. and
they do not seem to understand and accept the core
values of democracy...

When will all this end ?

athiyaman.blogspot.com



____________________________________________________________________________________Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting

Friday, May 25, 2007

a mail to Reader's Digest

From: <RDEditorial_RDW@ReadersDigest.com>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 11:30 PM
Subject: content


Dear K.R.Athiyaman:

Thank you for your interest in Reader's Digest World and
for your response to some of our past articles. We appreciate
your taking the time to share your feedback as one of our
longtime subscribers. Comments like yours -- and those
from other readers -- give us useful insights into subjects
of importance to our readers. We will be certain to share
your views with our editorial staff.

We surely hope that despite your disappointment with
the focus of some of our material, you'll find much to enjoy
in upcoming issues. We're continually striving to bring a
wide variety of quality articles to our readers -- your
feedback here helps us plan those future issues. We are
pleased to learn you are an admirer of our publication.
Thank you for your support. Keep in touch
http://www.readersdigest.com

Sincerely yours,

The Editors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From
K.R.Athiyaman

To

The Editor,
Readers Digest

Dear Sir,

I am a long time reader and admirer of RD.Most of the
articles are objective, informative and unbiased.

Since your political views are right of center (I have no
objection to them), you have published a number of articles
justifying the American involvement in the Vietnam war.
It is not an unbiased or neutral viewpoint.Millions of Americans
(including Bill Clinton) had opposed the war vehemently.

There can be no justification (moral or ideological)
for the war.Questions about National sovereignty and
human right violations are not raised in your columns.
Just imagine if Mexico or Argentina had intervened
similarly in the American civil war of 1860s!
That after all these years, RD still tries in vain to
justify the sordid chapter in American history is ironical.
But I support American actions in Yugoslavia and and
I am not a communist.

While you publish articles about the private lives of
Mao Tse Tung,Castro and other left wing dictators,
no word about the personal affairs of John.F.Kennedy,
who was equally bad in his abuse of women.
It is not an objective or unbiased viewpoint.

Anyway if you can correct these flaws, RD will
be a truly great magazine.

I have enclosed an article about the havoc wrecked
in India in the name of socialism.

Thanking You,

With Regards,
K.R.Athiyaman.

MACAULAY'S MINUTE ON EDUCATION

19. MACAULAY'S MINUTE ON EDUCATION, 2ND FEBRUARY, 1835

19. 1. LEGISLATIVE ACT NECESSARY TO CHANGE CURRENT PRACTICE?

MACAULAY'S MINUTE

As it seems to be the opinion of some of the gentlemen who compose the Committee of Public Instruction, that the course which they have hitherto pursued was strictly prescribed by the British Parliament in 1813, and as, if that opinion be correct, a legislative act will be necessary to warrant a change, I have thought it right to refrain from taking any part in the preparation of the adverse statements which now before us, and to reserve what I had to say on the subject till it should come before me as a member of the Council of India.

19. 2. THE CHARTER OF 1813 DOES NOT SPEAK ABOUT THE CHOICE OF LANGUAGES: THE DEFINITION OF LITERATURE

It does not appear to me that the Act of Parliament can, by any art of construction, be made to bear the meaning which has been assigned to it. It contains nothing about the particular languages or sciences which are to be studied. A sum is set apart 'for the revival and promotion of literature and the encouragement of thelearned natives of India, and for the introduction and promotion of a knolwdge of the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories.' It is argued, or rather taken for granted, that by literature, the Parliament can have meant only Arabic and Sanscrit literature, that they never would have given the honorable appellation of 'a learned native' to a native who was familiar with the poetry of Milton, the Metaphysics of Locke, and the Physics of Newton; but that they meant to designate by that name only such persons as might have studied in the sacred books of the Hindoos all the uses of cusa-grass, and all the mysteries of absorption into the Deity. This does not appear to be a very satisfactory interpretation. To take a parallel case: suppose that the Pacha of Egypt, a country once superior in knowledge of the nations of Europe, but now sunk far below them, were to appropriate a sum for the purpose of 'reviving and promoting literature, and encouraging learned natives of Egypt,' would anybody infer that he meant the youth of his pachalic to give years to the study of hieroglyphics, to search into all the doctrines disguised under the fable of Osiris, and to ascertain with all possible accuracy the ritual with which cats and onions were anciently adored? Would he be justly charged with inconsistency, if, instead of employing his young subjects in deciphering obelisks, he were to order them to be instructed in the English and French languages, and in all the sciences to which those languages are the chief keys?

19. 3. MONETARY PROVISIONS ONLY? NO!

The words on which the supporters of the old system rely do not bear them out, and other words follow which seem to be quite decisive on the other side. This lac of rupees is set apart, not only for 'reviving literature in India,' the phrase on which their whole interpretation is founded, but also for 'the introduction and promotion of a knowledge of the sciences among the inhabitants of the British territories,' -words which are alone sufficient to authorize all the changes for which I contend.

If the Council agree in my construction, no legislative act will be necessary. If they differ from me, I will prepare a short Act rescinding that clause of the Charter of 1813, from which the difficulty arises.

19. 4. NO PLEDGE GIVEN ON SUPPORT TO INDIAN LANGUAGE EDUCATION

The argument which I have been considering, affects only the form of proceeding. But the admirers of the Oriental system of education have used another argument, which, if we admit it to be valid, is decisive against all change. They conceive that the public faith is pledged to the present system, and that to alter the appropriation of any of the funds which have hitherto been spent in encouraging the study of Arabic and Sanscrit, would be down-right spoliation. It is not easy to understand by what process of reasoning they can have arrived at this conclusion. The grants which are made from the public purse for the encouragement of literature differed in no respect from the grants which are made from the same purse for other objects of real or supposed utility. We found a sanatarium on a spot which we suppose to be healthy. Do we thereby pledge ourselves to keep a sanatarium there, if the result should not answer our expectation? We commence the erection of a pier. Is it a violation of the public faith to stop the works, if we afterwards see reason to believe that the building will be useless? The rights of property are undoubtedly sacred. But nothing endangers those rights so much as the practice, now unhappily too common, of attributing them to things which they do not belong. Those who impart to abuses the sanctity of property are in truth imparting to the institution of property the unpopularity and the fragility of abuses. If the Government has given to any person a formal assurance; nay, if the Government has excited in any person's mind a reasonable expectation that he shall receive a certain income as a teacher or a learner of Sanscrit or Arabic, I would respect that person's pecuniary interests-I would rather err on the side of liberality to individuals than suffer the public faith to be called in question. But to talk of a Government pledging itself to teach certain languages and certain sciences, though those languages may become useless, though those sciences may be exploded, seems to be quite unmeaning. There is not a single word in any public instructions, from which it can be inferred that the Indian Government ever intended to give any pledge on this subject, or ever considered the destination of these funds as unalterably fixed. But had it been otherwise, I should denied the competence of our predecessors to bind us by any pledge on such a subject. Suppose that a Government had in the last century enacted in the most solemn manner that all its subjects should, to the end of time, be inoculated for the small-pox: would that Government be bound to persist in the practice after Jenner's discovery? These promises of which nobody claims the performance, and from which nobody can grant a release; these vested rights, which vest in nobody; this property without proprietors; this robbery, which makes nobody poorer, may be comprehended by persons of higher faculties than mine. I consider this plea merely as a set form of words, regularly used both in England and in India, in defence of every abuse for which no other plea can be set up.

I hold this lac of rupees to be quite at the disposal of the Governor-General in Council, for the purpose of promoting learning in India , in any way which may be thought most advisable. I hold his Lordship to be quite as free to direct that it shall no longer be employed in encouraging Arabic and Sasnscrit, as he is to direct that the reward for killing tigers in Mysore shall be diminished, or that no more public money shall be expended on the chanting at the cathedral.

19. 5. WHAT IS THE MOST USEFUL WAY OF USING THE MONEY ALLOCATED FOR THE INTELLECTUAL IMPROVEMENT OF THE PEOPLE OF INDIA?

We now come to the gist of the matter. We have a fund to be employed as government shall direct for the intellectual improvement of the people of this country. The simple question is, what is the most useful way of employing it?

All parties seem to be agreed on one point, that the dialects commonly spoken among the natives of this part of India, contain neither literary nor scientific information, and are, moreover, so poor and rude that, until they are enriched from some other quarter, it will not be easy to translate any valuable work into them. It seems to be admitted on all sides, that the intellectual improvement of those classes of the people who have the means of pursuing higher studies can at present be effected only by means of some language not vernacular amongst them.

19. 6. WHAT THEN SHALL THAT LANGUAGE BE?

What then shall that language be? One-half of the Committee maintain that it shouldbe the English. The other half strongly recommend the Arabic and Sanscrit. The whole question seems to me to be, which language is the best worth knowing?

I have no knowledge of either Sanscrit or Arabic. -But I have done what I could to form a correct estimate of their value. I have read translations of the most celebrated Arabic and Sanscrit works. I have conversed both here and at home with men distinguished by their proficiency in the Eastern tongues. I am quite ready to take the Oriental learning at the valuation of the Orientalists themselves. I have never found one among them who could deny that a single shelf of a good European library was worth the whole native literature of India and Arabia. The intrinsic superiority of the Western literature is, indeed, fully admitted by those members of the Committee who support the Oriental plan of education.

It will be hardly disputed, I suppose, that the department of literature in which the eastern writers with any Orientalist who ventured to maintain that the Arabic and Sanscrit poetry could be compared to that of the great European nations. But when we pass from works of imagination to works in which facts are recorded, and general principles investigated, the superiority of the Europeans becomes absolutely immeasurable. It is, I believe, no exaggeration to say, that all the historical information which has been collected from all the books written may be found in the most paltry abridgments used at preparatory schools in England. In every branch of physical or moral philosophy, the relative position of the two nations is nearly the same.

19. 7. INDIANS CANNOT BE EDUCATED BY MEANS OF THEIR MOTHER-TONGUE: ENGLISH IS THE LANGAUGE

How, then, stands the case? We have to educate a people who cannot at present be educated by means of their mother-tongue. We must teach them some foreign language. The claims of our own language it is hardly necessary to recapitulate. It stands pre-eminent even among the languages of the west. It abounds with works of imagination not inferior to the noblest which Greece has bequeathed to us; with models of every species of eloquence; with historical compositions, which, considered merely as narratives, have seldom been surpassed, and which, considered as vehicles of ethical and political instruction, have never been equaled; with just and lively representations of human life and human nature; with the most profound speculations on metaphysics, morals, government, jurisprudence, and trade; with full and correct information respecting every experimental science which tends topreserve the health, to increase the comfort, or to expand the intellect of man. Whoever knows that language has ready access to all the vast intellectual wealth, which all th wisest nations of the earth have created and hoarded int 4he course of ninety generations. It may be safely said, that the literature now extant in that language is of far greater value than all the literature which three hundred years ago was extant in all the languages of the world together. Nor is this all. In India, English is the language spoken by the ruling class. It is spoken by the higher class of natives at the seats of Government. It is like to become the language of commerce throughout the seas of the East. It is the language of two great European communities which are raising, the one in south of Africa, the other in Australasia; communities which are every year becoming more important, and more closely connected with our Indian empire. Whether we look at the intrinsic value of our literature, or at the particular situation of this country, we shall see the strongest reason to think that, of all foreign tongues, the English tongue is that which would be the most useful to our native subjects.

19. 8. DO WE ABDICATE OUR RESPONSIBILITY?

The question now before us is simply whether, when it is in our power to teach this language, we shall teach languages, by which, by universal confession, there are not books on any subject which deserve to be compared to our own; whether, when we can teach European science, we shall teach systems which, by universal confession, whenever they differ from those of Europe, differ for the worse; and whether, when we can patronise sound Philosophy and true History, we shall countenance, at the public expense, medical doctrines, which would disgrace an English farrier, --Astronomy, which would move laughter in girls at an English boarding school,--History, abounding with kings thirty feet high, and reigns thirty thousand years long,--and Geography, made up of seas of treacle and seas of butter.

19. 9. THE PRECEDENTS: EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE

We are not without experience to guide us. History furnishes several analogous cases, and they all teach the same lesson. There are in modern times, to go no further, two memorable instances of a great prejudices overthrown, --of knowledge diffused,--of taste purified,--of arts and sciences planted in countries which had =recently been ignorant and barbarous.

The first instance to which I refer, is the great revival of letters among the Western nations at the close of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century. At that time almost every thing that was worth reading was contained in the writings of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Had our ancestors acted as the Committee of Public Instruction has hitherto acted; had they neglected the language of Cicero and Tacitus; had they confined their attention to the old dialects of our own island; had they printed nothing and taught nothing at the universities but Chronicles in Anglo-Saxon, and Romances in Norman-French, would England have been what she now is? What the Greek and Latin were to the contemporaries of More and Ascham, our tongue is to the people of India. The literature of England is now more valuable than that of classical antiquity. I doubt whether the Sanscrit literature be as valuable than that of classical antiquity. I doubt whether the Sanscrit literature be as valuable as that of our Saxon and Norman progenitors. In some departments, --in History, for example, I am certain that it is much less so.

Another instance may be said to be still before our eyes. Within the last hundred and twenty years, a nation which had previously been in a state as a barbarous as that in which our ancestors were before the crusades, has gradually emerged from the ignorance in which it was sunk, and has taken its place among civilized communities. -I speak of Russia. There is now in that country a large educated class, abounding with persons fit to serve the state in the highest functions, and in no wise inferior to the most accomplished men who adorn the best circles of Paris and London. There is reason to hope that this vast empire, which in the time of our grandfathers was probably behind the Punjab, may, in the time of our grandchildren, be pressing close to on France and Britain in the career of improvement. And how was this change effected? Not by flattering national prejudices: not by feeding the mind of the young Muscovite with the old women's stories which his rude fathers had believed: not by filling his head with lying legends about St. Nicholas: not by encouraging him to study the great question, whether the world was or was not created on the 13th of September: not by calling 'a learned native,' when he has mastered all these points of knowledge: but by teaching him those foreign languages in which the greatest mass of information had been laid up, and thus putting all that information within his reach. The languages of Western Europe civilized Russia. I cannot doubt that they will do for the Hindoo what they have done for the Tartar.

19. 10. THE LEARNERS CANNOT PRESCRIBE WHAT THE TEACHERS SHOULD TEACH: INDIANS ACTUALLY DESIRE TO LEARN ENGLISH AND WESTERN SCIENCES

And what are the arguments against that course which seems to be alike recommended by theory and by experience? It is said that we ought to secure the co-operation of the native public, and that we can do this only by teaching Sanscrit and Arabic.

I can by no means admit that when a nation of high intellectual attainments undertakes to superintend the education of a nation comparatively ignorant, the learners are absolutely to prescribe the course which is to be taken by the teachers. It is not necessary, however, to say anything on this subject. For it is proved by unanswerable evidence that we are not at present securing the co-operation of the natives. It would be bad enough to consult their intellectual taste at the expense of their intellectual health. But we are consulting neither, -- we are withholding from them the learning for which they are craving, we are forcing on them the mock-learning which they nauseate.

This is proved by the fact that we are forced to pay our Arabic and Sanscrit students, while those who earn English are willing to pay us. All the declamations in the world about the love and reverence of the natives for their sacred dialects will never, in the mind of any impartial person, outweigh the undisputed fact, that we cannot find, in all our vast empire, a single student who will let us teach him those dialects unless we will pay him.

I have now before me the accounts of the Madrassa for one month, -- the month of December 1833. The Arabic students appear to have been seventy-seven in number. All receive stipends from the public. The whole amount paid to them is about 500 rupees a month. On the other side of the account stands the following item: Deduct amount realized from the out-students of English for the months of May, June and July last, 103 rupees.

19. 11. DO WE PAY PEOPLE TO LEARN WHAT THEY WANT TO LEARN?

I have been told that it is merely from want of local experience that I am surprised at these phenomena, and that it is not the fashion for students in India to study at their own charges. This only confirms me in my opinion. Nothing is more certain than that it never can in any part of the world be necessary to pay men for doing what they think pleasant and profitable. India is no exception to this rule. The people of India do not require to be paid for eating rice when they are hungry, or for wearing woolen cloth in the cold season. To come nearer to the case before us, the children who learn their letters and a little elementary Arithmetic from the village school-master are not paid by him. He is paid for teaching them. Why then is it necessary to pay people to learn Sanscrit and Arabic? Evidently because it is universally felt that the Sanscrit and Arabic are languages, the knowledge of which does not compensate for the trouble of acquiring them. On all such subjects the state of the market is the decisive test.

Other evidence is not wanting, if other evidence were required. A petition was presented last year to the Committee by several ex-students of the Sanscrit College. The petitioners stated that they had studied in the college ten or twelve years; that they had made themselves acquainted with Hindoo literature and science; that they had received certificates of proficiency: and what is the fruit of all this! 'Notwithstanding such testimonials,' they say, 'we have but little of bettering our condition without the kind of assistance of your Honorable Committee, the indifference with which we are generally looked upon by our countrymen leaving no hope of encouragement and assistance from them.' They therefore beg that they may be recommended to the Governor General for places under the Government, not places of high dignity or emolument, but such as may just enable them to exist. 'We want means,' they say, 'for a decent living, and for our progressive improvement, which, however, we cannot obtain without the assistance of Government, by whom we have been educated and maintained from childhood.' They conclude by representing, very pathetically, that they are sure that it was never the intention of government, after behaving so liberally to them during thei education, to abandon them to destitution and neglect.

19. 12. THE CONTEST BETWEEN TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD

I have been used to see petitions to Government for compensation. All these petitions, even the most unreasonable of them, proceeded on the supposition that some loss had been sustained-that some wrong had been inflicted. These are surely the first petitioners whoever demanded compensation for having been educated gratis, -- for having been supported by the public during twelve years, and then sent forth into the world well furnished with literature and science. They represent their education as an injury which gives them a claim on the Government for redress, as an injury for which the stipends paid to them during the infliction were a very inadequate compensation. And I doubt not that they are in the right. They have wasted the best years of life in learning what procures for them neither bread nor respect. Surely we might, with advantage, have saved the cost of making these persons useless and miserable; surely, men may be brought up to be burdens to the public and objects of contempt to their neighbours at a smaller charge to the state. But such is our policy. We do not even stand neuter in the contest between truth and falsehood. We are not content to leave the natives to the influence of their own hereditary prejudices. To the natural difficulties which obstruct the progress of sound science in the East, we add fresh difficulties of our own making. Bounties and premiums, such as ought not to be given even for the propagation of truth, we lavish on false taste and false philosophy.

19. 13. EXPENDITURE ON SANSCRIT AND ARABIC LEARNING IS DEAD LOSS

By acting thus we create the very evil which we fear. We are making that opposition which we do not find. What we spend on the Arabic and Sanscrit colleges is not merely a dead loss to the cause of truth; it is bounty-money paid to raise up champions of error. It goes to form a nest, not merely of helpless place-hunters, but of bigots prompted alike by passion and by interest to raise a cry against every useful scheme of education. If there should be by opposition among the natives to the change which I recommend, that opposition will be the effect of our own system. It will be headed by persons supported by our stipends and trained in our colleges. The longer we persevere in our present course, the more formidable will that opposition be. It will be every year reinforced by recruits whom we are paying. From the native society left to itself, we have no difficulties to apprehend; all the murmuring will come from that oriental interest which we have, by artificial means, called into being, and nursed into strength.

19. 14. THE REAL DESIRE OF INDIANS

There is yet another fact, which is alone sufficient to prove that the feeling of the native public, when left to itself, is not such as the supporters of the old system represent it to be. The Committee have thought fit to lay out above a lac of rupees in printing Arabic and Sanscrit books. Those books find not purchasers. It is very rarely that a single copy is disposed of. Twenty-three thousand volumes, most of them folios and quartos, fill the libraries, or rather the lumber-rooms, of this body. The Committee contrive to get rid of some portion of their vast stock of oriental literature by giving books away. But they cannot give so fast as they print. About twenty thousand rupees a year are spent in adding fresh masses of waste paper to a hoard which, I should, is already sufficiently ample. During the last three years, about sixty thousand rupees have been expended in this manner. The sale of Arabic and Sanscrit books, during those three years, has not yielded quite one thousand rupees. In the mean time the School-book Society is selling seven or eight thousand English volumes every year, and not only pays the expenses of printing, but realizes a profit of 20 per cent. on its outlay.

19. 15. THE INDIAN PENAL CODE WILL REPLACE SANSCRIT AND ARABIC TEXTS

The fact that the Hindoo law is to be learned chiefly from Sanscrit books, and the Mahometan law from Arabic books, has been much insisted on, but seems not to bear at all on the question. We are commanded by Parliament to ascertain and digest the laws of India. The assistance of a law Commission has been given to us for that purpose. As soon as the code is promulgated, the Shastras and the Hedaya will be useless to a Moonsief or Sudder Ameen. I hope and trust that before the boys who are now entering at the Madrassa and the Sanscrit college have completed their studies, this great work will be finished. It would be manifestly absurd to educate the rising generation with a view to a state of things which we mean to alter before they reach manhood.

19. 16. INDIA GOVERNMENT WILL BE TOLERANT AND NEUTRAL TO ALL RELIGIONS

But there is yet another argument which seems even more untenable. It is said that the Sanscrit and Arabic are the languages in which the sacred books of a hundred millions of people are written, and that they are, on that account, entitled to peculiar encouragement. Assuredly it is the duty of the British Government in India to be not only tolerant, but neutral on all religious questions. But to encourage the study of a literature admitted to be of small intrinsic value, only because that literature inculcates the most serious errors on the most important subjects, is a course hardly reconcileable with reason, with morality, or even with that very neutrality which ought, as we all agree, to be sacredly preserved. It is confessed that a language is barren of useful knowledge. We are to teach it because it is false History, false Astronomy, false Medicine, because we find them in company with a false religion. We abstain, and I trust shall always abstain, from giving any public encouragement to those who are engaged in the work of converting natives to Christianity. And while we act thus, can we reasonably and decently bribe men out of the revenues of the state to waste their youth in learning how they are to purify themselves after touching an ass, or what text of the Vedas they are to repeat to expiate the crime of killing a goat?

19. 17. INDIANS CAN ATTAIN EXCELLENCE IN ENGLISH

It is taken for granted by the advocates of Oriental learning, that no native of this country can possibly attain more than a mere smattering of English. They do not attempt to prove this; but they perpetually insinuate it. They designate the education which their opponents recommend as a mere spelling book education. They assume it as undeniable, that the question is between a profound knowledge of Hindoo and Arabian literature and science on the one side, and a superficial knowledge of the rudiments of English on the other. This is not merely an assumption, but an assumption contrary to all reason and experience. We know that foreigners of all nations do learn our language sufficiently to have access to all the most abstruse knowledge which it contains, sufficiently to relish even the more delicate graces of our most idiomatic writers. There are in this very town natives who are quite competent to discuss political or scientific questions with fluency and precision in the English language. I have heard the very question on which I am now writing discussed by native gentlemen with a liberality and an intelligence which would do credit to any member of the Committee of Public instruction. Indeed it is unusual to find, even in the literary circles of the continent, any foreigner who can express himself in English with so much facility and correctness as we find in many Hindoos. Nobody, I suppose, will contend that English is so difficult to a Hindoo as Greek to an Englishman. Yet an intelligent English youth, in a much smaller number of years than our unfortunate pupils pass at the Sanscrit college, becomes able to read, to enjoy, and even to imitate, not unhappily, the compositions of the best Greek Authors. Less than half the time which enables an English youth to read Herodotus and Sophocles, ought to enable a Hindoo to read Hume and Milton.

19. 18. TO SUM UP

To sum up what I have said, I think it clear that we are not fettered by the Act of parliament of 1813; that we are not fettered by any pledge expressed or implied; that we are free to employ our funds as we choose; that we ought to employ them in teaching what is best worth knowing; that English is better worth knowing than Sanscrit or Arabic; that the natives are desirous to be taught English, and are not desirous to be taught Sanscrit or Arabic; that neither as the languages of law, nor as the languages fo religion, have the Sanscrit and Arabic any peculiar claim to our engagement; that it is possible to make natives of this country thoroughly good English scholars, and that to this end our efforts ought to be directed. In one point I fully agree with the gentlemen to whose general views I am opposed. I feel with them, that it is impossible for us, with our limited means, to attempt to educate the body of the people. We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect. To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country, to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrow2ed from the Western nomenclature, and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.

19. 19. I SHALL HONOR ALL EXISTING COMMITMENTS

I would strictly respect all existing interests. I would deal even generously with all individuals who have had fair reason to expect a pecuniary provision. But I would strike at the root of the bad system which has hitherto been fostered by us. I would at once stop the printing of Arabic and Sanscrit books, I would abolish the Madrassa and the Sanscrit college at Calcutta. Benares is the great seat of Brahmanical learning; Delhi, of Arabic learning. If we retain the Sanscrit college at Benares and the Mahometan college at Delhi, we do enough, and much more than enough in my opinion, for the Eastern languages. If the Benares and Delhi colleges should be retained, would at least recommend tht no stipends shall be given to any students who may hereafter repair thither, but that the people shall be left to make their own choice between the rival systems of education without being bribed by us to learn what they have no desire to know. The funds which would thus be placed at our disposal would enable us to give larger encouragement to the Hindoo college at Calcutta, and to establish in the principal cities throughout the Presidencies of Fort William and Agra schools in which the English language might be well and thoroughly taught.

19. 20. RELIEVE ME IF MY PROPOSAL IS NOT ACCEPTED

If the decision of his Lordship in Council should be such as I anticipate, I shall enter on the performance of my duties with the greatest zeal and alacrity. If, on the other hand, it be the opinion of the government that the present system ought to remain unchanged, I beg that I may be permitted to retire from the chair of the Committee. I feel that I could not be of the smallest use there-I feel, also, that I should be lending my countenance to what I firmly believe to be a mere delusion. I believe that the present system tends, not to accelerate the progress of truth, but to delay the natural death of expiring errors. I conceive that we have at present no right to the respectable name of a Board of Public Instruction. We are a Board for wasting public money, for printing books which are of less value than the paper on which they are printed was while it was blank; for giving artificial encouragement to absurd history, absurd metaphysics, absurd physics, absurd theology; for raising up a breed of scholars who find their scholarship an encumbrance and a blemish, who live on the public while they are receiving their education, and whose education is so utterly useless to them that when they have received it they must either starve of live on the public all the rest of their lives. Entertaining these opinions, I am naturally desirous to decline all share in the responsibility of a body, which, unless it alters its whole mode of proceeding, I must consider not merely as useless, but as positively noxious.

*** *** ***

Isai Gyani's wisdom, Malaysia's prospertry Vs India, etc

Dear Charu,

I like Ilayaraja's music and compositions like "How
to name it ?", etc. Not all his songs are good and
many are memorable and will stand the test of time.
I wanted to write a long letter to him about his
financial mis-management and debts. One of my friend
maintains Tamil Mayyam website for Father Casper Raj
and he told me a lot about Ilayaraja.

Raja was continiously in debt for many years due to
the ostentanious life style of his family, massive
donations to temples ,etc. A gyani should be free from
hypocrisy, false prestige and debts. Alas, he is as
unwise as any normal cinemawallah. He could have sold
all his assets and cleared his debts and lived in
a flat, use a auto and still enjoy secure and decent
life. Should have controlled his family's spending
habits. I know an officer of his bank who told me
about Mrs.Raaja beging him to hold cheques to TNEB
bills and about bills owed to Nalli silks, etc.
He is under maaya even though he belives he is simple
and pious and humble. (he is a Taurus : 3rd May).
He fits my favourite kural : "Odiyum unarndum
pirarkkuraithum, thaan adangaa pedaiyin pedai ill."
suits many of us. And he abandoned Father Raj and
Tamil Mayyam with debts of Rs.60 lacs after
Thiruvasagam release. A genius and a vain fool, he is.
Yet i admire him for his music....

You had compared Malaysia's prosperity with India's
poverty. Yes, but in 1950, Malaysia, Singapore,
Taiwan, S.Korea,and Japan were much worser off than
India, due to devastation in World War 2. But after
independence, they did not have the benefit of
Nehruvian Socialism as India had, but followed
free market capitalism. Their economiies boomed and
poverty was reduced greatly while we did the opposite
and perpetuated poverty and hunger. more about this
later...

Economics is the basic issue as, everyone of us are
affected due to shrinking income, lack of cash and
decent livelihoods. And i apprecite your deep anguish
about the plight of the poor and helpless. the this
poverty and corruption are only symptoms and we have
to understand the casues. the kural "noi naadi, noi
mudal naadi..." can be invoke here. defict financing,
high tax regime, license, permit raj can only increase
poverty and corruption. and even worse is the
degradation of our moral and ethics due to ill effects
of socialism. Work ethics has eroded, esp in the
organised (and govt) sector, while oc mentality has
been perpetuated thru freebies. For e.g the govt loose
Rs.200 per cylinder of LPG gas, while consumers like
you and I can easily bear the real price. Rs.8000
crores per year is wasted on this alone while more
hosiptals, schools and roads could have been built
with this money. Haj susidy costs some 250 crores per
year which is neither secular nor wise. all this is
the tip of the iceberg. more later.

see you next friday.

Anbudan
Athiyaman


____________________________________________________________________________________Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433

India, that was Bharath

A hypothetical question :

If there were no foreign or
alien invasions and empires
in India (incl Alexander)
and esp the Muslim and Bristish
invasions , would India be
a political union as formed
in 1947 ?

My view is that we would have
become a cluster of nations
like Africa or Europe with
a common culture and heritage
but no political union.

even in 1947, with mass movements
of Congress and awareness of
people, Sardar Patel had a very
tough time in integrating the
reluctunt and rebellioous Princes
and Maharajas with India (or Pak).
Nawab of Hyderabad and Junagedh ;
and Travancore Maharaja with
C.P.Ramasamy Iyer's help
declared independence.....

It is inconceivable that these
warring states (like Chola, Cheras)
would have willingly united to
form unified India.

the British Raj created some very
useful and fruitful institutions
as a side effect. English language,
common civil service, Railways,
Macaluay system of education and
independent judiciary ; and the
rudiments of paliament. We use
the Westminister model of parliamentary
democracy with universal adult
franchise.

the Bristish empire was bad and
exploitative no douubt. But it
gave us political unity like
never before....


____________________________________________________________________________________Choose the right car based on your needs. Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder tool.
http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/

Kashmir: A View from India (by Tavleen Singh)

Kashmir: A View from India
by Tavleen Singh

There was a sideshow at the Agra Summit that told its
own story about Kashmir. In the lobby of the Moghul
Sheraton Hotel journalists from both countries
gathered from dawn to dusk awaiting news from the
summiteers who met not just in another hotel but
behind doors so completely closed that even titbits of
news were hard to come by. With so much time on our
hands us waiting hacks devised ways to entertain
ourselves. Some invented gossip, others sought
solace in chilled beer while still others made efforts
to befriend the Pakistani journalists among us.
Talking to Pakistani journalists became the most
popular activity and there was bonhomie, friendship
and (with the help of chilled beer)general agreement
that peace between India and Pakistan was an idea
whose time had come. If the Berlin wall could come
down, if Israelis could talk to Palestinians, why
should there not be peace between our two countries so
linked by ties of culture, language and history. This
was the mood on day one of the summit when things
seemed to be going well between the summiteers.

Then, came day two and General Pervez Musharraf's
unforeseen decision to allow his breakfast with Indian
editors to be televised worldwide and suddenly it was
not just ennui that was dispelled in the Moghul
Hotel's lobby but bonhomie as well. Pakistanis
coalesced into tight huddles and the Indians into
theirs. Mistrust replaced bonhomie. 'Isn't that the
woman who was on Star TV yesterday being really
hawkish about Kashmir?'
'Yes, and that's that columnist from Karachi who was
invited because he sounded so reasonable in his
columns but on television he turned out to be just
another hawkish Paki'.

As if some evil creature had cast a powerful spell an
ugliness suddenly manifested itself. An us versus
them thing that bred suspicion and misgivings. When
Pakistani journalists were – or seemed to be – the
recipients of privileged leaks from inside the Summit
the Indian journalists whispered about how strangely
journalists behaved in countries without a free press.

When the Indian media seemed to have access to
privileged information from our Foreign Ministry
spokesman Pakistani journalists nearly attacked the
poor lady physically and by the end of the day the
atmosphere in the lobby of the Moghul was as fraught
as among the summiteers. We knew by then that
Musharraf's breakfast show had put the Indian Prime
Minister into a furious and unforgiving mood.

Even without this information, though, you could have
told that the summit had failed from the atmosphere in
the Moghul Hotel's self-consciously Moghul lobby. If
you were in a Pakistani huddle you would be blaming
India for the failed summit. How can there be
progress as long as India refuses to discuss Kashmir?
If you were in an Indian huddle you would be blaming
the failure on General Musharraf's obsession with what
he called the core issue and his puzzling decision to
make his thoughts on the subject public mid-summit.
Even those who thought he won the propaganda war by
doing precisely this were unimpressed with his views.
All he had done was restate the Pakistani position in
clear, plain-speaking terms but no Indian journalist I
talked to saw it this way. The journalists in Agra
were some of the finest in the sub-continent but were,
inadvertently, taking exactly the positions their
governments had.

It is, alas, always this way. Whether in Lahore's
elegant drawing rooms or in Karachi's crowded streets
I have found all talk of friendship and common
culture, all bonhomie, disappear the minute the K-word
creeps into a conversation. As an Indian journalist
who has spent many years covering Kashmir what also
never ceases to amaze me is the confused impressions
of history on which many Pakistanis – especially
ordinary people – base their passions. Over and over,
when I have talked to the man in the street I have
been told that Kashmir was part of Pakistan when India
was partitioned and was taken by force.

If I have tried to explain that Indian troops only
went into the Kashmir Valley after the Maharajah
acceded to India I have – at least in the streets of
Lahore and Karachi - come close to causing a riot.
How dared I tell such lies, it must be because I was
Indian that I talked like this and more along the same
lines. The question of conversation, leave alone
debate, never begins.

The truth is – as seen from India – that for a couple
of months between August 14, 1947 and the end of
October that year Kashmir was de facto an independent
country. Its Hindu prince disliked the idea of
allowing his beautiful kingdom to be absorbed into the
vast amorphousness of India and liked the idea of
Pakistan even less. The biggest political party in
his kingdom, Sheikh Abdullah's National Conference,
was totally against the Maharajah but shared some of
his ambiguity about where to be. Sheikh Abdullah was
happier with the idea of a secular, democratic India
than an Islamic, Punjabi-dominated Pakistan but was
unsure of whether the autonomy he believed was vital
to Kashmir would be allowed to remain.

So, Kashmir went to neither India nor Pakistan until
the so-called 'tribals' invaded from Pakistan.
Indians believe that the Pathan tribesmen included
Pakistani troops and had the full backing of the
Pakistani government. The average Pakistani sees what
happened as some sort of early version of the
intifada, a spontaneous uprising.

Unluckily, for Pakistan the Kashmiris did not see it
that way. The men who came from Pakistan looted,
raped and pillaged their way to Baramulla causing
hatred and revulsion among the local population. The
Maharajah remained immobile and dithering until he
heard that they were less than two hours from
Srinagar. Indians believe that it was at this point
that he asked the Indian government for military
support.

The Indian government pointed out that any military
support would be seen as an invasion unless the
Maharajah signed a document of accession. This he did
on October 27 (CHECK) before fleeing with his jewels
and minions to the safety of Jammu leaving his people
to face an uncertain future.

This is the first event in Kashmir's post-Partition
history and it is right from here that the problem
begins. It is hard to find Pakistanis, even the most
moderate, who believe that Maharajah Hari Singh signed
a document of accession before Indian troops moved
into the state. Those who concede that some kind of
document was signed believe that it was signed under
Indian pressure and therefore invalid. There is also
a peculiar pride in the UN resolutions that came soon
after as if it were somehow Pakistan who had taken the
matter to the United Nations.

The truth, as most Indians know, is that it was
Jawaharlal Nehru who foolishly decided to take the
matter to the UN thereby unintentionally
internationalising the Kashmir problem. He went with
the idea of having Pakistan punished for what he
believed everyone would see as its attempt to take
Kashmir by force. With the hindsight of history most
Indians believe Nehru made a mistake by going to the
UN and also believe that he would have held the
promised plebiscite if Pakistani troops had withdrawn
from what Pakistanis like to call azaad Kashmir. I
have never met a Pakistani who believes that India was
ever serious about holding a plebiscite, nor one who
believed that Nehru was sincere in his offer to hold
one.

Kashmiris believed him, though, and when it did not
happen and the political problems began they rallied
around the fact that he had offered them a plebiscite
that was never held. Indian officials when asked
about why it was never held point out that it could
only have taken place if Pakistani troops had
withdrawn from the territories they occupied in
Kashmir but, again, to the average Pakistani this is
just another Indian excuse.

The irony is that if Nehru had been courageous enough
to order the plebiscite immediately after Independence
Kashmir would almost certainly have voted for India
and there would have probably been no Kashmir problem.
Again, though, nobody is sure that there would have
been peace between India and Pakistan if there had
been no Kashmir problem and the reason is that the
average Indian totally mistrusts Pakistan and believes
that it is a country whose main objective is to break
India up and if it were not the Kashmir problem it
would have been some other excuse that would have been
used.

Unfortunately, the average Indian also believes that
the Kashmiri cannot be trusted. Indian government
propaganda with the national press being the willing
vehicle of it are the reason. In 1981 when I first
went up to do a political story on Kashmir – Farooq
Abdullah's installation as the Sheikh's heir – I was
shocked to find that there was not a single Muslim
journalist employed by the national press. If
Kashmiris were employed as correspondents of national
newspapers they were invariably Kashmiri Pandits.
But, since Srinagar was a beautiful, relatively
comfortable posting senior journalists from Delhi were
eager to go and usually ended up treating the
political sentiments of the average Kashmiri with
total disdain. So, most Indians to this day remain
only vaguely aware that Kashmir was denied fair
elections between 1953 and 1977, when under Prime
Minister Morarji Desai, a truly fair election was
held. Journalists from Delhi, who liked to joke about
the fact that they were India's 'viceroys', also went
out of their way to increase the average Indian's
dislike and distrust of the Kashmiri Muslim and of all
Kashmiri politicians.

In 1983 I was sent up by The Telegraph newspaper, of
which M.J. Akbar was Editor, to cover elections to the
state legislature. It was the first election after
Sheikh Abdullah's death and within days of arriving in
Srinagar it became evident to me that his National
Conference party had no chance of losing it because
ordinary Kashmiris felt they owed this one election to
the memory of the old Sheikh.

What also became evident, equally quickly, was that
this was not how the election was going to be reported
in the national press. I drove up from Jammu in the
company of an old Kashmir hand who told me that he had
spent many years in Srinagar as a Viceroy. We had
spent some time in Jammu covering Indira Gandhi's
campaign whose main characteristic had been to play
what we liked in those days to call the Hindu card.
She manipulated the sentiments of Jammu's large Hindu
population by making campaign speeches that hinted
darkly at the dangers of Muslims 'from across the
border' being allowed in by the hoard if Farooq
Abdullah came to power. It was the sort of patently
communal campaign that should have drawn the attention
of the national press and it surprised me that it had
not found its way onto front pages. My travelling
companion explained that this was because 'us Viceroys
like to highlight the communalism of the other side'.

In the next three weeks that I spent in the Kashmir
Valley I understood exactly what he meant. Delhi
newspapers were filled with stories of Farooq
Abdullah's 'communal campaign'. As one of the few
journalists who accompanied him on his travels – most
others preferred to drink chilled beer provided by the
Congress Party in Srinagar's Nedou's Hotel – I asked
colleagues when they had heard him make 'communal'
remarks. They said that he usually made these remarks
only in Kashmiri so I would naturally have missed
them. Farooq Abdullah was painted throughout the
election as an unashamed secessionist. The national
press also went out of its way to create the
completely untrue impression that the Congress Party
was in a neck-and-neck fight with the National
Conference. So successful were they in perpetrating
this lie that it was believed enough by Indira Gandhi
for her to be furious with Farooq's landslide victory,
so furious that the Congress Party immediately after
the election set about trying to topple Farooq's
government. Baseless charges of 'massive rigging'
were made, ironically, by the only party that had ever
till then rigged elections in Kashmir.

These charges were reported as credible by the
national newspapers so there was hardly any criticism
of Indira Gandhi when, barely a year after the
assembly election, she brought down Farooq Abdullah's
government. This, in my view, was the beginning of
the current Kashmir problem. The historic problem
died in the seventies when the Bangladesh war and the
execution of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto made the average
Kashmiri suddenly see Pakistan through new eyes.
During the 1983 assembly election I visited every
constituency in the Valley – other than Uri – and
everywhere I went I asked if plebiscite was still an
issue and everywhere the answer was, 'No, this
election is one in which we are participating as
Indians'.

If Indira Gandhi's hubris had not got the better of
her we would probably never had the uprising of 1989
that began the violence that has now resulted in a
death toll of more than 50,000. Till 1986, despite
the toppling of Farooq Abdullah's government, the
situation in Kashmir was retrievable. All that Rajiv
Gandhi, Prime Minister by then with the largest
mandate in Indian history, needed to have done was
order fresh elections. Farooq, still hugely popular,
would have won and the Congress Party which managed to
get nearly 25% of the vote in 1983 could have built
itself up to take on the National Conference at the
next election. Rajiv, sadly, made the most crucial
mistake of all: he insisted that the National
Conference fight the 1987 assembly election in
alliance with his Congress Party thereby causing both
Kashmir's centrist parties to commit political
suicide.

Farooq Abdullah's kowtowing to Rajiv after having been
called a terrorist by the Congress Party and after the
public humiliation of his government being dismissed
for no reason was seen by the average Kashmir as yet
another attempt to rub Kashmir's nose in the dirt.
Yet another reminder that India's only Muslim-majority
province would never be trusted. Inevitably, memories
of Kashmir's historical problem with India came back
to the surface and the old, secessionist forces
–dormant since Sheikh Abdullah's return as chief
minister – came back to haunt his son.

In a fair election these forces, which united to form
the Muslim United Front (MUF), would probably have won
no more than fifteen seats in the Kashmir Assembly.
But, Farooq panicked and although he continues to deny
that the 1987 assembly election was rigged the charges
have managed to stick and are ironically still made by
political leaders including Atal Behari Vajpayee.
Farooq, in his second term as chief minister was too
discredited to be able to hold Kashmir together and
within months of his taking over – although the
tourists still continued to come and Hindi movies
continued to be made – there were rumours of young men
having gone across the border to train as terrorists.

The Pakistan government was barely involved at this
stage, the violent uprising that began after the
Indian Home Minister's daughter was kidnapped in
December 1989 took Pakistan by surprise. But, the
average Indian does not see it this way. The Indian
press and most Indian politicians have encouraged the
belief that the Kashmir problem is entirely a creation
of Pakistan. After the violence began Farooq Abdullah
tried to prevent Jagmohan – hated for his role in
conniving to bring Farooq's earlier government down –
being sent up once more as Governor. When Delhi, now
ruled by a weak, amateurish government under
Vishwanath Pratap Singh, refused to listen Farooq
resigned. Kashmiri anger exploded into the streets in
the form of massive protests and these may have died
their own death –when Kashmiris realized that azaadi
was not going to come so easily – but Jagmohan, a
municipal official from Delhi with no political
sensitivity – decided to use the jackboot. Peaceful,
unarmed protesters were fired upon and so began a
process of alienation from India that had never
existed in the past.

Till the nineties if the Kashmiris had complaints
about India they were mainly to do with the denial of
basic political rights and the denial of the special
status Kashmir was promised in 1947.

There were, till the nineties, no 'martyrs graveyards'
filled with the graves of innocent men, women and
children killed in 'crossfire'. Ironically, in one of
them is buried Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq, traditionally
one of Kashmir's most important religious leaders, who
was killed by a militant group but whose death is
blamed on the Indian government by most Kashmiris. So
discredited did the Indian government become in the
six months that Jagmohan was Governor in 1990 that it
was unable to convince ordinary Kashmiris of the truth
even when it was the truth.

It was in early 1990 that Pakistan began to involve
itself in fomenting violence in the Valley. As almost
its first move it set up a militant group called the
Hizb ul Mujahideen (HUM) to take on the JKLF (Jammu
Kashmir Liberation Front) which had started the
violence by kidnapping Home Minister Mufti Mohammed
Syed's daughter in December 1989. The JKLF was
inconvenient for Pakistan because of its determined
stand that the only solution to the Kashmir problem
was to give the state independence. The HUM was more
cooperative because, like the Jamaat-e-Islami whose
militant wing it is believed to be, it takes the view
that Kashmir should be merged with Pakistan.

Nearly all the militant groups that have come up since
have been creations of Pakistan with the clear
objective of establishing Pakistan's right over
Kashmir. And, since Pakistan is one of the only two
countries in the world – Israel being the other –
which was created in the name of religion it was
important to make Kashmiris aware that they were
Muslims and so should recognize their natural affinity
with Pakistan's Islamic republic.

In order to do this the nature of the militancy had to
be changed and by the mid-nineties the beginnings of
the change were became obvious. The militant groups,
increasingly filled with foreign recruits from
Afghanistan, Pakistan and other Muslim countries,
began to enforce their version of Islam. Bars,
cinemas, video libraries and beauty salons were
forcibly closed as being un-Islamic.

Liquor bottles were smashed in the streets, women
ordered to wear the burqa or risk having acid thrown
in their faces and in the mosques –where Kashmiri
women had always been allowed to worship – there were
now more rigid Islamic rules applied so that women
could no longer go. Shrines and dargahs at which both
Hindu and Muslim Kashmiris worshipped like Hazratbal
and Charar-e-Sharif also came under attack.
Charar-e-Sharif was burned down in a battle with the
Indian army and Hazratbal witnessed a siege for
several days when militants opened fire on Indian
troops from inside. Do the Kashmiris like this new
version of Islam? Groups like the JKLF and Kashmiri
leaders like Shabir Shah have tried to maintain the
secular character of their struggle for freedom but
have failed. They have spoken often about the tragedy
of Kashmiri Hindus being forced out of the state but
their appeals lack popular support. Ordinary Kashmiris
are so bitter about Indian repression that Islamist
militants –called guest mujahideen – are given support
that they would not normally have had. Since the
attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon on
September 11 there appears to be less support for the
idea of drawing Kashmir's freedom movement into some
kind of jehad for Islam but with the government of
Atal Behari Vajpayee seen as a Hindu government the
choice comes across as being between Hinduism and
Islam.

So, will Kashmir be allowed one day to make the choice
between India and Pakistan? Unlikely. No Indian
government could survive a single day if it even
considered the possibilities of a plebiscite under the
UN resolutions. Kashmir has never been an election
issue in India and south of Delhi there is little
interest in Kashmir – unless there is a war – but most
Indians are convinced that giving Kashmir up would be
a threat to India's security. Between keeping Kashmir
under control and fighting to keep the Siachen Glacier
the Indian government is believed to be spending more
than Rs 7 crores a day but nobody seems to mind
because this is seen as vital investment in the
country's security.

The average Indian does not trust Pakistan. After the
Kargil episode this mistrust has assumed huge
proportions. Indians believe that Atal Behari
Vajpayee made a genuine attempt at friendship by going
to Lahore on a bus in February 1999 and Pakistan's
response in Kargil, two months later, is widely seen
as evidence that Pakistan wants not peace with India
but its total destruction. Pakistanis I have met in
positions of high office – both Generals and
politicians – admit that they believe that if India
loses Kashmir it will be the beginning of some kind of
domino effect and that other states will also demand
secession. This is very far from being true because
the one thing that India has succeeded in achieving in
the past fifty years is a sense of national identity.
Pakistanis also seem to believe that it is the 'myth'
of Indian secularism that India seeks to protect by
hanging on to Kashmir but, again, this is not true
because secularism is no longer considered as
important to the average Indian as economic growth and
improved standards of living.

But, even Indian liberals admit that if India's
borders are redrawn once more in the name of Islam or
the 'unfinished agenda of Partition' it will become
extremely difficult for Indian Muslims outside the
Kashmir Valley. Unfortunately, since September 11, the
belief that all Muslims are basically fanatics has
increased among ordinary Hindus so there is little or
no sympathy for the Kashmiris. This makes it harder
for a government in Delhi to solve the domestic
aspects of the problem although it needs to be said
that the Vajpayee government has failed singularly to
even come up with a policy for Kashmir.

Changed international realities have made it easier
for them to evade the domestic side of the problem and
to blame the whole thing on cross-border terrorism.
Sadly, the government has the support of Indian public
opinion where this is concerned so there is
insufficient pressure on it to evolve a policy that
would seek to make internal peace in Kashmir.

Which brings us to the question of whether the
international aspects of the Kashmir problem would
once more fade into the background – as happened
between 1971 (Simla Agreement) and 1989 – if the
Kashmir Valley became once more a peaceful place where
tourists could flock and Hindi movies could once more
be made.

This is possible but what then would happen to
Pakistan's 'core issue' case? How can Pakistan now
withdraw from its position that the only solution to
the Kashmir problem is an international one that
involves redrawing boundaries? How can it sustain its
argument that the only thing preventing peace on the
sub-continent is the absence of a solution in Kashmir?
Through the nineties Pakistani leaders have used
Kashmir to whip up political support for themselves.
I saw how well they had succeeded during a trip to
Pakistan in the summer of 2001. Among the people I
interviewed in the streets of Lahore and Karachi were
unemployed workers who complained bitterly about
General Pervez Musharraf's economic policies. Workers
were being laid off, they said, and factories closed
to meet conditions set by the International Monetary
Fund. The general economic malaise in the country
bothered them, they said, because things seemed to be
getting worse by the day. They wanted friendship with
India because they felt that if there was peace
between the two countries they could cross the border
and find work in India if they could not find it in
Pakistan.

But, they added, they were prepared to die in the
fight for Kashmir. First, Kashmir has to be given to
Pakistan, they said, only then could there be peace.
When I pointed out that this might never happen they
were adamant that it would happen because they were
all prepared to join the jehad. Shopkeepers, small
businessmen and even villagers all said the same
thing. So, we have a situation in which public
opinion in India is almost unanimous that there can be
no more redrawing of our borders and public opinion in
Pakistan is almost unanimous that Kashmir has to come
to Pakistan.

This leaves the sub-continent's leaders very little
room for manoeuvre. No Indian leader can even
consider giving Kashmir away and no Pakistani leader
can give up the 'core issue'. Meanwhile, the people
of Kashmir continue to be caught between the guns of
India's security forces on one side and the guns of
the militants on the other. Their faith in azaadi has
waned as the years of violence have gone relentlessly
by as has their faith in the militant groups who began
the struggle for it. A whole generation of young
Kashmiris has grown up without remembering a time when
their lives were normal. Kashmir's political leaders,
whether Farooq Abdullah or those that constitute the
All Party Hurriyat Conference, seem unable to do much
in the face of the governments of India and Pakistan
taking it upon themselves to solve – or prevent
solution – of the problem.

So, where do we go from here? There appear to be two
roads to peace. The one favoured by India is peace
without redrawing borders. This is based on the
belief that if Pakistan stops cross-border terrorism
the movement for azaadi will die a natural death
because the average Kashmiri is weary of violence.
When the next election is held – and these days they
tend to be proper elections – then former militant
leaders like Yasin Malik of the JKLF and Shabir Shah
could contest and possibly defeat Farooq's National
Conference. We could then go back to politics as
usual as happened in Punjab and in Northeastern states
like Assam and Nagaland. This can only happen,
though, if Pakistan in view of its decision since
September 11 to joint the coalition against terrorism
decides to let Kashmir alone.

If it does not and the violence in the Valley
continues to remain beyond the control of the Indian
government then an international solution will have
to, at some point, be sought. There is a growing view
in India, though not in the government, that perhaps
international mediation could be the way forward since
Pakistan and India seem incapable of even speaking the
same language any more. Even if this happens there is
little likelihood of India agreeing to redraw its
borders.

The very most it could agree to would be a softer
border that would allow movement between the two
halves of Kashmir and, perhaps, greater autonomy to
the state in keeping with the original promise to give
it a special status. Even to give this much, though,
would require a strong government in Delhi and this
seems unlikely in the near future. If the coalition
led by the Bharatiya Janata Party is defeated in the
general election due in 2003 it will, in all
likelihood, be replaced by a coalition led by the
Congress Party. Since the Congress is currently led
by a leader of Italian birth this government would
have even less wiggle room than the present one
because it would have to prove its nationalistic
credentials at every step with Hindu nationalists
breathing down its neck.

Besides, since Agra, the general view in India is that
there can never be peace with Pakistan because
Pakistani leaders – whether in uniform or civvies –
cannot deliver it. Since the hunt for Osama bin Laden
began and the United States chose to forget its
earlier aversion to military dictators and take
General Musharraf on board as a valued ally there is a
certain loss of trust in the Americans as well. How
can you fight terrorism if you take the support of
countries that support terrorism is a question that is
widely asked with many Indians, even in positions of
power, concluding that the Americans are only
interested in fighting their own war against terrorism
not in the one India believes it is fighting in
Kashmir.

The militancy in Kashmir has of late taken a very ugly
turn with Hindu villagers and even priests being
targeted in Jammu. The attempt to blow up the
legislative assembly in Srinagar with a car bomb,
shortly after September 11, has added to the
impression that what India faces in the Kashmir Valley
is not a cry for azaadi based on genuine grievances
but an Islamic fundamentalist jehad. So, Osama bin
Laden's war on the West has added an unexpected new
dimension to the Kashmir problem.

There may, one day, be a solution in Kashmir that
satisfies India, Pakistan and ordinary Kashmiris but
right now not even the faintest glimmer of it is
visible on the horizon. We should not conclude from
this that we should just let things fester until there
is a glimmer of hope. It is vital that India and
Pakistan continue talking to each other, vital that we
start some kind of peace process if only because two
nuclear powers cannot afford to remain in a state of
permanent hostility, vital that the process that began
in Agra go forward even if we do not really even speak
the same language any more.

This article, published by permission of Ushba
International Publishers was selected from the
forthcoming volume The Agra Summit and Beyond.



____________________________________________________________________________________Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's
Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when.

http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222