Kabuliwala: Reflections on India-Afghanistan

Recently the US President, Joe Biden, announced the withdrawal of the US troops from Afghanistan by 9/11, typically reminding the day when the attack on the World Trade Center in New York happened two decades ago. The president visited Arlington crematory and pointed to the stone marks around and lamented that so many lives were lost in the past. The major goal of the US – the end of Osama bin Laden and decimation of Al Qaeda – is now realized, the US has no reason to sacrifice the lives of more Americans, the administration reasoned. The announcement expectedly received mixed reactions. While the democrats in the US and many of the US allies support it, some of the republican leaders at home are skeptical that the withdrawal would help the US goal of peace and stability in Afghanistan. Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, was in Kabul recently to engage the Afghan leaders for the withdrawal process and for assuring them of the US support after the withdrawal.

The announcement has sent jitters across the region. Fear of the rise of Taliban, and its support to forces like Al Qaeda and Islamic State, and Islamic extremist groups from all over the world including from Pakistan, has gained ground. Pakistan has a major influence in Afghan politics, due to its geographic proximity, religious and ethnic affinity, and it is known to use these forces as strategic tools against India. The withdrawal of the Soviet forces led to rise of terrorism in Kashmir as Pakistan mobilized these forces to destabilize India, and those memories are still fresh in the mind of the Indian leaders and strategic thinkers. General Rawat’s concern that the withdrawal will give a boost to the ‘disruptors’ makes sense in this context.

But the India of 21st century is not the India of the 20th century. India must play its cards astutely. India’s Foreign Minister, S. Jaishankar, said at the ‘Heart of Asia’ Conference in Tajikistan recently, probably anticipating the withdrawal, that “India has been supportive of all the efforts being made to accelerate the dialogue between the Afghan government and the Taliban, including intra-Afghan negotiations.” During the visit of Afghan foreign minister to New Delhi last month, India’s foreign ministry emphasized “on peaceful, sovereign, stable and inclusive Afghanistan”, which could be realized through “democratic constitutional framework.” India needs to use its rising economic and military clout in the region, and its soft power to gain a leverage in Afghanistan. And this can be possible through astute diplomacy and engaging India’s neighbors Pakistan and Afghanistan and ally Russia. India has contributed to Afghanistan’s development, and it can play a creative role to adjust to the new reality.

It is not that India will not face challenges while initiating peace measures in Afghanistan. Pakistan will play all its cards including Kashmir and Islam to undermine India’s initiatives. It has been established many times in the past how Pakistan inspired terrorist groups target Indian facilities in Afghanistan. China will try to ensure that it fills the vacuum left by the US, and as a major economic and military power, it will try its best to keep democratic India out of the equation. Pakistan, inspired by political Islam, and authoritarian China will not feel comfortable to welcome democratic India’s aspirations in Afghanistan.

But that is not and should not be the end of the tunnel. India’s foreign policy establishment needs to navigate through this complex scenario and explore all possible diplomatic options to engage both China and Pakistan to have its due place in Afghan peace process. Besides engaging these states, India also needs to engage Taliban. As a pragmatic policy, it needs to engage Taliban leaders and motivate them for a peaceful solution of the conflict. Contrary to some beliefs, Taliban would likely be more amenable to India’s soft power attractions. In contrast to Pakistan hard core anti-India policy, it is possible that Taliban, a majorly Pashtun community group, will be interested to develop closer relations with India. Such a scenario will not be easy as Pakistan will play all tricks to keep the Taliban away from India, but India needs to use its hard and soft diplomacy to win Afghan Taliban to its side.

The cultural relations between India and Afghanistan are deep. Unlike Pakistan, Afghanistan as a state has no history of hostility and rivalry with India. Kautilya’s Mandala theory would aptly describe Afghanistan as a natural ally of India. Tagore’s story of Kabuliwala, in which Abdul Rehman Khan from Afghanistan sees his daughter in Mini in Calcutta is not just a creation of the Nobel Laureate’s mind, but a true reflection of deep sociocultural and historical ties between the two countries. Besides reviving these ties, India must capitalize the withdrawal of the US forces to increase its presence in Afghanistan. In this, the US and Russia can support India’s aspiration, and India, with Pakistan and China, can be part of a multilateral and multinational process for peace and stability in the region. The withdrawal is portrayed as a challenge for India, but it can be an opportunity.

This article of mine was published in TOI blogs:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/periscope/kabuliwala-reflections-on-india-afghanistan/  

In Search of Cultural Roots

Early this month I attended a cultural event at Chelmsford, Massachusetts. The festival was organized by Odisha Society of New England (OSNE). OSNE is a cultural group of Odia people, who originated from India’s eastern state of Odisha, in New England region of USA. It started functioning in 1983 in Boston. It is part of the larger Odisha Society of America, the body representing Odias all over USA.

I am an Odia, but I am not parochial. One can come cross parochial people in parts of India, who are closed to other cultures and ideas, and protest migration of people from other areas as they are afraid of losing job and other opportunities. This parochial mentality prevails not only in India, but also in many other countries. I do not bracket myself in this category. I am an Odia, and at the same time an Indian. Both these identities do not contradict each other. Rather my larger Indian identity embraces my Odia identity. When I rise higher, I consider myself not only as an Indian, but also a member of the globe, a global citizen. To put in a different way, there are diverse identities of one person, and they are not necessarily contradictory. In one direction, this identity may start with oneself identifying with his or her village or town, then expanding to province, country and even the world. Drawing from Sri Aurobindo’s philosophy, I am a human being, and my identity does not stop at my village or closed community as it expands further towards an ideal human unity encompassing whole world. Hence, when I say I am proud to be an Odia – this does not contradict or undermine my other identities.

I got an email from OSNE that there is a regional drama festival organized in the first week of June 2015. I was prevaricating as to whether I should attend the event or not as the place was far from my place, and I did not have a suitable transport system to reach the place. But when I talked to the association president, an energetic and affable person, he suggested that I should come and enjoy the event. He offered to arrange my travel after I use public transport to a certain point. From the red line Savin Hill train stop I took train to Alewife, and from there I took a bus to Burlington Mall. The president picked me up from there in his car, and drove around 15 to 20 minutes to reach the festival venue. When I reached the event, the key members of the association were busy arranging various items for the event. I tried to help them. One lady told me to bring a small table from the outside of the auditorium to the dais. She placed on it a beautiful wooden statue of Lord Jagannath. I was very happy to see the statue. I would not dwell here about Lord Jagannath as one can come across huge material in Internet. Lord Jagannath is the reigning deity of Odisha, and every Odia prays Him. Puri, the city where the Jagannath temple is located, is considered one among the four holiest places for the Hindus. In Odisha, I have seen people remembering the Lord before starting any new venture. I have also seen people touching the ground and uttering His name before embarking on any journey.

Before the program started at 4 PM, there were refreshments. I could see the number of Odias swelling as the time moved ahead. I interacted with some of the kids, who came with their parents to participate in the event and/or enjoy the event. While enjoying the delicious refreshments – particularly the chat and masala – I started chatting with two young boys. I asked them what they wanted to be in future, what are their career goals, etc. One of them – the elder one – said that he wants to be a mathematician. I asked whether he knows Srinivasa Ramanujan, the mathematics legend from India, he replied yes. The other boy replied he does not know what he wants to be. I interacted with some other Odias.

There were very few known faces; hence I was almost a stranger. But I could develop quick rapport with some Odias and started chatting with them. I started talking to a couple, siting next to me. Their daughter participated in the program. I asked the lady whether she misses Odisha. She replied, ‘there is no time to miss Odisha. The life is so busy here – taking care of daughter, managing family and job – all these leave no time to think about other things, including Odisha’. Perhaps that was a true confession. The people are so busy here that they do not have time to devote to other things. But, I took solace in thinking that despite their busy schedules they could organize this event, and prepare their kids to participate in the event, and devote time and energy for it, and this is not a small thing. That itself shows that their hearts and minds are embedded in the Odia culture.

I found the programs that night not only entertaining but also educative. The Odissi and Sambalpuri dances I watched after a long time. I liked the children’s drama Hari Darshana, literally meaning the sight of Hari (the Hindu God, considered to be one among the supreme trinity in Hindu pantheon – Brahma, Vishnu, also known as Hari, and Brahma). The theme of the story is this: the son of demon king Hirankashyapu, Prahlada did not relent in praying Lord Vishnu, despite pressure and ploys to kill him. Finally, the Lord emerges from a pillar as a testimony of faith of Prahlada and kills the king. The morale of the story: a true devotion to God can save from pitfalls. I also liked the dramas – Gopal 60, Muktidana and Elo Elo Mo Boulo. All of them drew from Odia narratives. In Muktidana, a girl fights against patriarchal system; in Gopal 60, three friends search and find their father-figure and mentor; and Elo Elo Mo Boulo reflects a deeper sense of humanity in a member from LGBT community. Some other programs like Bollywood dance, band and karaoke were equally heart-touching.

The message I came across was that despite being far from their native place, the Odia people love their culture, and work hard to retain their cultural memory in their daily lives. The organization of such events reflected this. The first generation Odias are strongly rooted in their culture, and are eager to impart it to their children. While I was watching the children’s drama, I could see many of them born and brought up here speaking native Odia. Only few of them had Americanized Odia. I commend the efforts of the first generation Odias who work hard to retain their culture roots, and impart the culture to the next generation. I also commend the efforts of the second generation Odias, who are American citizens by birth, to learn their parents’ language and culture. As I mentioned in the beginning, different cultures and different identities can survive, or rather prosper together, in same person. Hence, for me it is an amazing experience to see how these children navigate through their American identity and Odia identity, and how they are reconciling these two identities.

After the cultural program, we had a lavish dinner. It was a good experience to see so many people, about 150, from the same community. One Odia professor who teaches at a university in Boston gave me and another Odia ride back to our homes. We had a lively discussion in her car. The professor lamented that some Odias prefer to speak in English  with another Odia even though they know Odia language very well. She was not against the English language, and we all agreed that English is a necessary language, and is considered a global lingua franca, but when one is comfortable in his native tongue, why not use that? When I reached my home, it was late night. I was still relishing the cultural event and reflecting on Odia culture and language, but my eyelids were heavy and soon I fell asleep.

New Dispensation in New Delhi

The absolute majority of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), under the leadership of Narendra Damodar Modi, in the lower house of Indian parliament has made international news. It is the first time since 1947 when India got independence that a political party other than the Congress secured absolute majority in the lower house.

The media mostly reminds Modi, the Prime Minister-designate, of the 2002 riots and offers advice. Some of the writings have expressed doubt whether Modi will rise above his association with a Hindu organization, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and put India before his religion and party.

Modi emerged from a humble background. His father was a tea seller. He does not speak British or American English, and not a regular in Delhi elite circles. He was a RSS pracharak. But the membership of RSS does not make one fundamentalist. RSS is guided by Hindu philosophy, which is eclectic. Also, one can not club all RSS members into same mould. Modi’s mentors, Vajapyee and Advani, are known for their association with the RSS. Vajpayee is known as a moderate in politics. The point is association with RSS does not make one fundamentalist.

Barring the scar of 2002, Modi has no taint. Though sections of people believe his complicity in the communal riots in Gujarat when he was the chief minister, the judicial system in India has not found fault with him.

Modi has strong views, unlike Manmohan Singh who preferred to remain silent on many crucial issues. Whether Telecom scam or Commonwealth Games scam, Singh did not exercise his power his office bestowed on him. It was but natural as he had not the real command. The party high command had the baton of power. Modi will not have that handicap. The elections were fought under his leadership. Manmohan Singh did not rise as a politician from the grassroots; rather the prime ministership was thrust on him, while in case of Modi it is different. Manmohan Singh, a celebrated economist known as father of India’s economic reforms left office of PM in ignominy. This is sad for his political legacy, but certainly he will be remembered as one of India’s best brains, which could have been used more effectively.

I remember the famous debate between the two well known economists – Amartya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati. Bhagwati was a protagonist of Gujarat model of development, while Sen was not. The first one prioritized rapid industrialization and private sector development, while Sen’s model focused on a society-oriented inclusive economic growth. Both models have their merits and demerits. The point is that Congress government under Singh followed Sen’s advice and launched welfare programs (marred by massive corruption), but the electorate of India preferred to vote for Modi.

It is yet to be seen how Modi will replicate the Gujarat model for the country. The people of India, particularly the youth, have high hopes on him.

Some of the great Indian leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were from Gujarat, the home state of Modi. Some of the great saints like Narsinh Mehta, who wrote famous Vaishnav Jana to Tene Kahiye (Gandhi’s favorite) were from Gujarat. Mehta and another saint-poet Kavi Jayachandra, also from Gujarat, had influenced Gandhi and shaped his life philosophy.  Modi particularly talks about Patel, and is apparently influenced by him. Patel was known as Iron Man of India as he played a key role in assimilating disparate regions of India into one single federal union during early years of India’s independence. Will Modi follow Patel’s footsteps?

As Prime Minister, Modi will lead India, not a particular community or religion. Hence, he is not only a leader of Hindu, but also of Muslim or of any other community in India. Pessimists will always bring back the specter of Godhra and paint him black. But, I am not in a hurry to see Modi in that way. I am an optimist, and will prefer to wait and watch.

Modi has the advantages which some of his predecessors lacked. He does not have a dynasty to promote, or not an immediate family to bestow largesse. In that sense, he will be more like Vajpayee who once commented that it is good that he has no family. He said this as a retort to corrupt politicians who put family before the country. Modi will not fill the seats of his official aero plane a la Deve Gowda who flew whole family with him during some of his official trips. Modi will not have to pay bribes to parliamentarians to support his party during no confidence motions as he enjoys absolute majority in the lower house of the parliament, the decisive body for no confidence. He will not have to indulge in horse-trading (a code name for breaking other parties to win majority), nor he will have the need to engage in scams and forgeries.

Modi is known as an effective administrator in Gujarat. One hopes that he will be an effective administrator in New Delhi. His lack of aristocratic mien will be to his advantage.

Modi’s years in New Delhi will be challenging. Any Mumbai style attack coordinated by hardliners from Pakistan will be a big headache for him. While his Pak counterpart, businessman-turned politician, Nawaz Sharif will prefer to work with him, the hardliners in Pakistan will do everything to scuttle the process. They will plan to orchestrate terrorist attacks to generate a violent response from Modi to further paint him anti-Muslim.

As Prime Minister, Modi will have to take decisive actions on matters home as well as abroad. He should not only be acting above religious bias, but also needs to be seen so. Perhaps he needs to be apprised by his officials the messages from The Prince, written by Machiavelli. The key message – the King (read the person in power) must not only be benevolent towards his subjects, he must also be seen benevolent. Already the Godhra aligned with him, any utterance of M word, will be interpreted differently. To address this, he may have to be innovative. He may have a ministry on communal harmony led by Muqtar Abbas Naqvi, or a cell in his office on it led by religious leaders of all communities. Learning from other models may be useful. Akbar’s Din-E-Elahi is perhaps a good model. Modi can take a cue from it. Even otherwise, there is ample guidance from Sanskrit texts: Sarva Dharma Sambhava and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam are two messages which any leader wishing to rule multiethnic and pluralistic societies needs to learn.

India has poverty, unemployment, environmental pollution, population explosion, rising Maoism, communal violence, extremism and terrorism, women insecurity and many other problems. Modi knows all these problems, and has promised to address them. It will take time. It is naive to expect that he will successfully address all these problems in one month. One important thing that Modi needs to do is to appoint persons of merit and vision, not sycophants nor corrupt, to high offices. There is no lack of talent in India, and Modi will be able to find enough merit in India to assist him in the mission to raise India to new heights.

Here, I remember the Indian philosopher Sri Aurobindo who on the eve of India’s independence in 1947 had articulated his five dreams. The fourth dream was India’s role as moral and spiritual conscience of the world. Sri Aurobindo had in his mind the cultural and spiritual capital of India and its transformative power to reshape the human society. It needs emphasis this cultural and spiritual capital is not purely Hindu or purely Muslim, but Indian, rising from thousands of years of India’s rich historical and cultural heritage despite all its deformities. Modi may take a leaf from Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Swami Vivekananda. Both had argued India is a pluralistic society, and emphasized on synthesis. One of them had talked about the need of Hindu intellect and Muslim valor.

Modi can also prove Maulana Azad and Nehru right. Jinnah argued that Hindus and Muslims are different nations; hence they need to have different nation-states. Nehru and Azad had argued differently. They had strongly argued that India is a multicultural and pluralistic country in which Hindus and Muslims can stay together. Modi’s policies need to reflect this pluralistic ethos. During his electoral campaigns Modi promised to take all Indians together along with him. And he needs to fulfill that promise while in office.

Whether dealing with internal or external challenges, Modi will have to tread cautiously. Pakistan will be a big challenge. China will be another one. China-Pakistan nexus has not always proved beneficial for India, and Modi has to keep in mind that. While Russia has proved a traditional friend of India, Modi has to devise strategies to balance relations with Russia with that of the USA. Though the USA denied visa to Modi earlier, now it will be interested to deal with Modi, the leader of the largest democracy and also of one of the fastest rising economies. He may also revive the campaign for India’s claim for permanent membership at the United Nations Security Council, the highest and most powerful international body.

Modi will have a better tool in his hand to lift the nation from the morass of poverty and unemployment – two biggest internal challenges. With a strong determination, and by combining the visions of Patel, Shastri and Vajpayee, Modi will be able to trudge through difficult terrains while keeping his mission high.

I wish Modi good luck!

Multiethnic and Pluralistic States have to Stay

Development in Ukraine is a matter of concern as it has implications not only for Ukraine but also for other multiethnic and pluralistic states in the world. I am strongly in favor of multiethnic and pluralistic states. I had argued after the Kosovo independence that the Kosovo may not be a very good model for the disgruntled regions around the world. I remember after the Kosovo independence the separatists in Kashmir called for referendum in Kashmir, over which India and Pakistan are locked in a bitter rivalry. In case of Kashmir, the referendum may appear more logical than Kosovo as in the case of the former the United Nations had recommended the procedure to which both the rivals had agreed. Now, they have different positions on the issue.

Can a state be monistic (I am using the word ‘monistic’ – primarily a theological and philosophical term – in a broader sense, implying the basis of state is only one identity traditionally defined – religion, race, ethnicity, etc.)? Or, rather – should all states be monistic? In the modern, globalized world, can a state’s identity be related purely to one race or one religion or one ethnicity? One of the political leaders in the 20^th century opined, pure race is a myth – there is no such thing as a pure race. The matter may seem different in case of religion (though every religion has many sects, factions, etc), but this may not be possible in case of ethnicity.

Somewhere I came across a viewpoint that if we restructure the existing states on the basis of monism, we will have hundreds of new states on the international scene. The counter argument may be true. The question is – is it possible? And how far will it help better organize human life?

The answer is not that simple. Identities clash. Some religions may believe that religion should be the sole basis of state formation and state boundary – other identities are subsidiary to religious identity. The application of this kind of logic is far-reaching. Take the case of India. It has population belonging to all religions. India has Jews, Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas – it has hundreds of languages though its constitution gives official status to about two dozen languages – it has people of many ethnicities. Due to these myriad diversities some analysts prefer to refer India a multinational state. If we apply the logic of monistic state, then India needs to be divided to dozens of states. One of the founders of the modern India, Jawaharlal Nehru was fond of arguing that though India is diverse it is united. This is famously known unity in diversity.

Go to the north east of India – we have China, full of diversities. Whether Tibet in the south east or Xinjiang in north east – the people inhabiting these regions are different from the Han Chinese. One of my friends told me that differences persist within Han Chinese – there are differences between the Chinese of the south and the Chinese of the east. Go to the north of China – we have Russia. Though the Slavic Russians rule the country, the population belonging to different religions and races has grown tremendously. Some reports suggest that cities like Moscow may have a Muslim majority population in 30 or 40 years. I do not know how far this prediction will be true. But Russia has vastly diverse population, belonging to diverse races, religions, languages and ethnicity. Russia has Chechens, Tatars, Ingush ethnic communities, and has besides Orthodox Christianity have people practicing Islam, Buddhism, and even Shamanism.

Across Bering Strait from Russia is the United States of America – perhaps the most diverse country in the world. All kinds of religions, practices, identities, cultures, and what not are found in USA. Perhaps that is its beauty, and keeps it young, dynamic and developed. People migrate to the country every year, mingle with the people and its richness, and in turn enrich it. I would say the founders of the country were great visionaries and could foresee that to develop and prosper the country must adopt diversity and pluralism, instead of monism. Hence, when one says the identity is American, or the US identity, it embodies in itself diversity, multiethnic and pluralism. When we say America or the USA – it does not imply any religion, race, color or ethnicity. Barack Obama before becoming President told the audience (in Chicago in 2008 as I remember) that it (implying the USA) is not Black America or White America; it is the United States of America. Arguing in a Durkheimian way, America has welded a new identity –a multiethnic and pluralistic identity.

We know Europe champions multiculturalism and pluralism despite noises from some quarters. In fact the European Union is an embodiment of pluralist values.

I have nothing against the existing monistic states. The question is – How many more monistic states? Is it possible to have more monistic states in a globalized interconnected world? Will the attempts to create monistic states lead to more violence as seen in some parts of the world? Multiethnic and pluralistic states have to stay. Rather they should be the hallmark of the 21^st century globe. Religion, ethnicity, color, race, and other identity markers may have utility in human life, but they do not give all meaning to a peaceful and happy existence. And particularly in the context of state building, arguments favoring monism have increasingly proved obsolete, even devastating.

I know it is a complicated formulation. One may argue what about oppression of a minority community by a majority community in a state, which calls itself pluralistic and multiethnic? This is a valid question. I have hopes on both minority and majority communities within a state to resolve the differences. The majority community needs to come forward to address the concerns of the minority community. The developments in some conflict zones in which minority protests were crushed violently is unfortunate deplorable. There should be a fair law to apply against unlawful activities conducted by any person – whether belonging to majority or minority. I emphasize the law must be fair. The international organizations – particularly the United Nations – can play a meaningful role in reinforcing multiethnic and pluralistic values. But for that its politicization must stop, also must stop the power rivalry in its decision making bodies. There should be some global norms, reinforced by the global body. For that there needs to be consensus among the big powers. That can be possible when the big powers do not transgress the laws of the UN when it suits their national interests and enforce the international laws when they suit their national interests.

A modified version of this article was earlier published at www.opendemocracy.net