CASH-GATE AT DELHI HIGH COURT: NEED TO SEE THE ISSUE BEYOND LEGAL, CLERICAL AND MORAL PRISMS

DIMINISHING PUBLIC INTEREST

Public outcry over cash discovery at residence of a Delhi High Court Judge is slowly dying down. Media reports state that the Chief Justice of India had assured an advocate activist to list a writ on the matter, but the issue appears to be losing its momentum. 

Public memory is very short these days. Media has got busy with more exciting news.     

Lawyers of the Allahabad High Court had tried hard to keep the issue alive for a while. They have been remarkable and brave on this issue. and they have not lost as yet.  

In fact, lawyers, social activists and intelligentsia across the country had appeared genuinely outraged over this episode.

But it should not be obfuscated with moral outrage and false pretensions alone. 

NEED TO SEE THE ISSUE MORE HOLISTICALLY

Those with deeper awareness of society, judiciary and human behaviour can see the issue well beyond the legal and clerical technicalities or moral prisms. 

Corruption in judiciary is rarely talked. This may not be the only issue or malaise afflicting judiciary. But if the menace of corruption has reached judiciary as well, let us be very clear that most other institutions have already been compromised and corrupted.  

But this offers an opportunity to the leadership of the judiciary to go down in the history. It can use an iron fist to set many things right. Both within and outside its own institutions. Its reverberations may force innovations or search for solutions in many sectors that we only talk about.

A functional and transparent criminal justice system is a prerequisite for dignified existence of every Indian.

In the largest, and the most cacophonous democracy of the world, we cannot avoid professional attention seekers. In their quest for publicity, they land up trivializing even the most sensitive matters impacting our society and its people. 

But this does not take away the enormity of shock over disclosure of suspected vulgar underbelly of the most venerable and trusted institution of any open society. What is important that we attempt to see the issue in its entirety with all its potential implications. 

A STREEAK ON INSENSITIVITY UNDERMINING CREDIBILITY OF JUDICIARY

In recent times, a substantial section of our judiciary has displayed a streak of brazen human insensitivity. It has raised doubts about commitment of this institution towards society or its people. Many of its judgments appeared driven by something entirely different than the nobler ethic of law or justice or defence of integrity and cohesion of society or even long-term security of this nation. Listing these out shall distort the focus of this write up. 

But a closer examination suggests that the underlying conditions may be far too deep-rooted and complex. 

But the potential consequences appear too dangerous for entire society and all our aspirations for great power status, if not detected and dealt with.   

    We all read details in media on how our Honourable judiciary inflicted incalculable pain and trauma on a minor - who had already been traumatized by forcible grabbing of her private parts and breaking of strings of her pyjamas -by observing that such actions by her tormentors did not amount to attempted rape. Every stakeholder of this nation, going beyond judiciary, must hang their head in shame. It is difficult to believe such conclusion is possible for any human mind without psychological pathology, including capitulation to underhand pressures or allurements. 

 This is not an isolated incident. There would be scores of these, unreported in media, which undermine popular trust in credibility and ability of Indian state and Indian judiciary to protect unarmed citizenry who trust laws and institutions of state.  

A SYTEMIC DECAY OF THE INSTITUTION

Even a speculation on what drove such observation shall make citizens liable for punishment for contempt of court. But what is undeniable is that Indian society is suffering from such serious pathological disorder that is beyond capacity of legal-clerical framework of rules and laws to address.  

 Public uproar over judicial assault on a highly vulnerable victim saw the Supreme Court descend in damage control mode. It overturned the decision of the High Court. But that is not sufficient to restore credibility of judiciary as an institution or popular trust in its integrity.  

Whether a district court or a High Court or the highest court, they all must have same interpretation of law, if not absolutely than at least substantially. This is what differentiates an institution from a motely crowd of people, where each pursues its own private agenda. An institution of a state is expected to act in the most impartial manner where-  irrespective of individual outlook or orientation of an incumbent- its approach to issues, as an institution, has to be uniform, consistent and logical, in most cases. Integrity and trust provide the bedrock for the same. Today that integrity factor is fast disappearing. 

NO PRE-JUDGING ANY ISSUE OR ANY INCUMBENT

When I wrote the previous post, a well known author, writer and former journalist confronted me and asked whether I genuinely felt that the man at the centre of this controversy was really guilty, if I used my deeper eyes to see and assess, entire society. And should anyone be punished even before a due process of law? Aren't there bigger sharks in this institution or elsewhere?  

Of course no one should be punished without due process of law. Many among the Delhi's legal circles, are vouching absolute innocence of the incumbent in question. 

Some of them advocated incarceration and deterrent punishment for people as any word on such matters amounts to serious contempt of court.

Amidst these, a beautifully drafted letter, purportedly addressed to Chief Justice of the concerned High Court by the so-called "victim judge" is making rounds on the social media. 

One can never vouch for authenticity of such letters but contents of the letter are hint at serious conspiracy cum mischief by some unknown identity. The letter claims that the room in which the cash was not part of the main house and all and sundry used it store various stuff varying from broken furniture, mattresses and speaker etc. 

The "victim" Judge was out of station when all this happened. , with help of Drivers and or personal staff of the judge. However, the urban naxals claim that if Drivers or junior staff managed to get hold of such big cash, they would have disappeared with the same rather plant it on anyone. Of course, eyebrows are raised that our system could only    

I told of course, corruption is unwritten and yet near universal fact of life for every successful Indian. Our systems appear rigged to an extent that even breathing can become challenging for anyone seeking to adhere to norms of absolute incorruptibility. 

WHY BLAME JUDICIARY ALONE WHEN SOCIETAL ECOSYSTEM IS RIGGED

Barring a few spirited and insane idealists, who are practically too naive, if not outright fools, worthy of being jeered, mocked or ridiculed, and almost entirely irrelevant in society, most successful, educated and tactful Indians tread with caution on this issue. And they cannot be blamed. Yet, if someone is caught for any reason, the person has to be sacrificed. That is the risk one takes by turning pragmatist. 

It is irrelevant that how many people are corrupt. This match will go on between the honest and the corrupt. And that alone can force the stakeholders of a society to search for answers where honest becomes viable for dignified existence. Honesty does not become an impediment in either enterprise or success or even prosperity. This is possible and society has to make an effort to move in this direction, it wishes to optimise its overall potential. 

Of course, judiciary alone is not responsible. They are as much outcome of society as any other component of state. But for the sake of security and stability of society, they need to appear better and superior and more virtuous than the rest. Their decisions impact society. 

It is true that entire justice system in our society has been reduced into a legal clerical match. It is time to break through this stereotype. Not for the sake of any rhetoric. But in genuine quest of security and dignity of every Indian. Rich or poor, powerful or vulnerable. 

Indian democracy cannot be dismantled. But efforts to subvert will harm all of us and  far more people beyond our borders. 

Judiciary alone is not responsible for the wider malaise that we are facing as a state and society. But Indian judiciary cannot afford to be overtaken by this malaise. 

(To continue) 

Cash Bags On Doorsteps of Judiciary: A Symptom of the Highest Stage of Societal Cancer

Cancer Kills. Whether it is individual cancer or societal cancer. Both inflict a slow and painful death to their victims. Death of a society is not in terms of physical annihilation. It leads to destruction of security for its members, erosion of trust towards the state or even among its members and a general debilitation of all organs of state and society. This may make the concerned society, far more vulnerable to clandestine external subversion and even direct military aggression.   

2. Corruption is no less than a cancer for society. But if this societal cancer of corruption takes over even the judiciary in its grip, it implies that all other organs of state and society have already been afflicted by this dangerous cancer. At this pace, everything in that society is certain to be doomed. It is death of hope. 

3. Indian intelligentsia, and especially the legal fraternity of Allahabad High Court, has gone gung-ho to appear saviors of a rotting and sinking institution that used to be the biggest beacon of hope in this country and inspiration and envy for people beyond our borders. They are expressing outrage over exposure of a known secret: serious corruption in Constitutional courts of India.  

4. Until a decade and half back, or at least by the turn of this century, Indian judiciary was held in very high esteem almost globally. Indian judges were marveled across all divides for their brilliance, courage and wisdom.  Our judiciary often overshadowed its counterparts not only in the developing world but even in some of the most established democracies through brilliance, innovation and moral courage to interpret laws beyond finer legal-clerical technicalities to push the state and society towards higher norms of justice, equity and fair-play. But we seem to have somehow lost the direction. We cannot blame the judges alone for this.  

5. I remember a decade and half back, I was addressing students of London School of Economics. My co-panelist was a Law Professor of German origin named Werner Menski. He had married a highly gracious and accomplished lady from Gujrati speaking community of Indian diaspora. This may have played only a minor role in what appeared his unusually deep academic interest in Indian laws, our traditional schools of jurisprudence and more importantly our judicial traditions, practices and principles. He was so well-versed with so-many landmark judgments of our courts, at different levels, during 1950s to 2000 that he explained finer nuances of so many of the judgments and their larger ramifications. It had never struck me earlier. He opined that Indian judges were often able to find innovative solutions to most vexed constraints of legal technicalities to arrive at judgments that adhered to the highest principles of justice and fair-play. It had simply left me in awe of brilliance and integrity of first few generations of jurists of post-independence India.  India still boasts of great judges. But they are too far and few. 

6. Such passionate respect for Indian judiciary was not confined to few academics alone. It was quite widely prevalent. I was also pursuing legal-consular matters on behalf of Indian mission in UK. These involved Govt of India's extradition requests as well as all matters under Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty. More than me, it were the eminent legal experts of UK, including the then Attorney General (with whom I had co-addressed members of Indian diaspora on quite a few occasions representing my High Commissioner) who expressed outrage at the largest democracy of the world, with a judiciary that, despite being a bit sluggish, had impeccable credibility, being placed in the same list  as countries like Somalia, Rwanda, DRC or Pakistan. These were countries in the so-called list-II for the purposes of extradition requests. It was assumed that integrity and autonomy of judicial institutions in these states were doubtful or suspect. Hence, when an extradition request came up from these states, the entire offence and the entire process was examined rather than the extraditable grounds of the offence. 

7. This appeared a clear conspiracy. It also hinted at a degree of racial prejudice. Many experts and veterans of diplomacy argued that the larger powerful opaque forces of the world, who continued to indirectly or clandestinely interfere in post-colonial world, did their best to resist a mechanism of rule of law on soil of the largest democracy of the world. Hence, they wanted an escape route for mega criminals, or even others, operating on Indian soil. They have always been determined to destroy popular trust in the ability of Indian institutions. It was also clear that amidst all constraints, if some insane members of Indian police, enforcement and intelligence agencies decided to chase any mega criminal, irrespective of the clout and might of the latter, who invariably were proxies of these opaque forces, the Indian judiciary was more or less sure to do the right thing. Hence, an escape route to evade Indian laws for such mega proxies was essential part of strategies. Many such experts opined that corruption was deliberately fused in Indian systems and psyche as a well thought out and well-calibrated geopolitical and geostrategic strategy. Of course, external forces may have had a very powerful role. But dynamics of a poorly regulated market, a long history of external occupation, cartelisation of political space of the country, and absence of a strong vision and traditions of statecraft created lethal cocktail. Certain degree of corruption may be tolerable or unavoidable. It is more like a minor infection from which society or institutions can get better. Absence of total corruption is utopia and thus impossible. But normalisation of corruption was outcome of sustained covert war and serious interference in our systems and institutions to shape our psyche with help of our own people. It was a silent but complex weapon by which our optimal rise as a state and civilisation has been scuttled. There were multiple indicators that indirect assault on rule of law was not an innocent and indigenous matter even though immediate villains were locals only. Notwithstanding these, I remember during 2011-12, friends of India in the British legal system did suggest that we make an effort to move out from list List-II to List-I in the British legal extradition regime. London had always been the first refuge of every legally wanted scoundrel in India, and last refuge for people who have lost hope in integrity and efficacy of our legal systems. At that point of time, United Kingdom was part of EU. Hence the friends of India stated that India cannot be placed at the same pedestal as EU or USA but it deserved to be at par with other commonwealth states like Canada, New Zealand and Australia whose judicial processes were not as suspect as that of Somalia or Pakistan.

8. Something has gone wrong since then. We shall never ever be able to establish the real cause and pin-point to anything specific that has ushered in such down-turn in integrity of nearly all our institutions. Credibility of Indian judiciary, especially the public perception about it, has particularly nosedived. 

9. Even before cash-gate episode hitting the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, one was horrified at the kind of orders/judgments and conduct of many judges that one came across. Many could see through the entire picture. A personality no less than a former CJI has openly conceded in media that corruption had increasingly gained acceptance as way of life in India and judiciary was as much impacted by this malaise as any other component of society. Hence, instead of pretending to be scandalized or outraged over the cash-gate, or attempting to cover up the same, or deflect public attention, Indian judiciary and other stakeholders of India need serious introspection.      

10. Corruption in judiciary, or for that matter in any component of state, in not merely a moral issue. It is the most serious threat to national security. As a committed former practitioner of national security, and sustained innovator in this sphere, I can say that corruption kills both society and state. It drastically impacts quality of governance, social trust or community cohesion. It seriously dents war waging and war winning capacities of state. Because it scuttles potential for optimal progress and innovation in every sphere of our existence. Corruption kills the quest for excellence in every human endeavour except perversity. The primary focus or priority of all ventures - private or public- turns into illegitimate, dishonest and unfair profit in collusion with anyone and everyone at any cost. Any society whose majority of elite are suspected to be corrupt, shall lose its basic human empathy. Despite outward aggression and bullying and moral pretensions of its leaders, the national character of a corrupt society turns cruel and yet cowardly. 

11. I am not saying so as part of some moral polemic or spiritual rant. A sound behavioral biologist or evolutionary psychologist shall confirm that how we behave can be assessed, influenced and shaped and not merely predicted by shape and contours of neuroanatomy as well as social and physical ambience. People with certain types of neuroanatomy are likely to behave in certain ways under certain conditions. A scientific examination of neural circuitry or finer contours of human brain, including overall orientation for hormonal balances, shall demonstrate that unusually corrupt and cruel people, despite showing undue aggression towards the weak, are far more likely to capitulate in face of the stronger.  When great American statesman Abrham Lincoln observed that bullies are always the first lick, he had no access to such knowledge but he was definitely endowed with exceptional power of observation.   

12. A high threshold of tolerance to corruption is the surest route to decimation of any society. It will bring in such genetic alterations in neural anatomy of people over the succeeding generations that it shall push an entire civilisation on a downward spiral of moral and psychological weakness. If one wishes to decimate a society or civilisation, all that is required is to patronize such leaders at the top, in any sector, who will institutionalize corruption and cowardice as moral and psychological attribute. Oppressive and corrupt leaders have always destroyed institutions, states and societies. I do not wish to say any further about the so-called nexuses in this direction. 

13. There can be no bigger horror for any society that aspires greatness or pretends to be Vishwa Guru to stumble upon brazen, rampant and naked corruption in its judiciary. Shamefully, the highest court of the country just chose to transfer the judge rather than investigate the matter. This is grossly unfair for amazingly honest and upright people in nearly every sphere, especially the judiciary. Over the years, judiciary in open societies have suffered bigger setbacks. Deep states, with enormous capacity of surveillance and coercion, have become globally powerful. They are suspected of not merely aggregating and patronizing corruption and crime but have attained far higher degree of sophistication and clout in this direction. No major corruption or institutionalized subversion can ever be possible in any major society on its own or without an organised and institutionalized patronage.    

14. Law has never been perfect anywhere in the world. Law is designed or enacted by supposedly wise people with a vision or aspiration for a just and fairer world and better society. This used to be the truth in the past. But this appears a big lie today if we look at character of legislators in nearly most democracies. Politics and legislation are no longer about total commitment to service. It is more about power grab rather than any deep ideological or principled commitment to anything. It is true that people, especially powerful ones or certain institutions, cannot always be decimated. Hence, a degree of public morality is not yet dead, especially in open societies.

15. As far as law is concerned, there has always been, and there shall always be, multiple gaps or  ambiguities and grey areas. In absence of public pressure, or pressure of moral and legal accountability, or right psychological conditioning, incumbents in judiciary shall always interpret the law or deliver verdicts as it suits them. Professional caliber, quality, integrity and wisdom of judges did impact their interpretation of law in the past. Those endowed with clerical mind-set, were always unempathetic and mechanical in their decisions, oblivious of the larger picture. Those with sluggish brain and lack of courage avoided judgments (Though it is possible that some wiser judges may delay decisions on contentious issues on which a decision, either way, is likely to evoke public unrest). Those with negative and vicious psyche are likely to act with cruelty and vengeance towards anyone. Those who are intellectually and ideologically opposed to the state or distrustful towards the executive, are likely to ignore even the most logical and rational considerations of national security to browbeat the executive on almost every issue.  

16. But today, all my friends in the legal circle state that barring few very rare judges, no one in the entire judiciary of India ever dares goes against the Executive on any serious matter. Interestingly, on important contentious issues, more often the matters up to the High Court level often lands up with such benches that are perceived to be loyal to the Government rather than the law or their own institution. Probably the roaster system software is also scared of the executive. Hence, there are such verdicts that are described as day light murder of justice. Justice in any case has never been equitably accessible to all citizens of our state. But today, we are at an entirely different level. It is not the victims but even the conscientious insiders within judiciary, have described Indian courts, in private, as the biggest slaughterhouse of justice. Only the mode of slaughter varies. Justice has appeared to have turned into more as exception rather than the norm. It is natural that if there is compromise at the behest of, or on behalf of, an all too powerful a patron, the incumbents shall extract their own pound of flesh.  

17. Hence, the Cash-gate of Delhi High Court has not surprised many. It is considered as an open secret of not only judiciary but entire society, especially the high and mighty. Probably, psyche of average successful Indian has been rigged, alongside all our systems. Being corrupt is not disapproved. But if you get caught, you are considered a fool. But many observe that you longer need to be corrupt to get indicted. Our criminal justice system has reached a level where anyone can be established as corrupt and there exists no recourse. Some worldly wise have observed on the cash-gate episode that the era of cash is over. Only the weak and unconnected or unsmart take recourse to cash. The smart or wise avail of services of those in Dubai, London, Hongkong or Singapore or even BVI or so many smarter havens through professional and reliable service providers. Many so-called greats in the legal fraternity have descended on Indian TV channels, whom I doubt anyone takes seriously, to pontificate over their own great virtues. I am sure if some upright incumbents in some of the institutions decides to confront them with proof, these great legal eagles may have to rely only upon their clout and connections and capacity to subvert, rather than moral virtues or knowledge of law, to wriggle out of embarrassment or indictment.      

18. Wise statesmen have always maintained that it is extremely important that judiciary in an open state and society is filled by incumbents with reasonable and rational mind. Unquestionable professional wisdom, moral courage, unqualified commitment to larger norms of justice and absolute financial integrity was part of the larger expectations of reasonableness from incumbents of judiciary. Else, the judiciary itself shall turn into the biggest noose to strangle and choke a society to its eventual death. It is absence of justice or assault on integrity of judiciary that has always destroyed internal virility and resilience of any great society. 

19. However, one has to go beyond cynicism, to commend the stance of Allahabad Bar Association. If handled well, the nascent movement initiated by legal fraternity of the Allahabad High Court has all the potential to turn into harbinger of something far bigger. Any effort to even marginally cleanse the rot in judiciary shall have its reverberations impacting not only other institutions of India but can go beyond our borders. Hence, agencies of Indian state would be on high alert to contain the damages, lest the fire engulfs far too many high and mighty. in any case, corruption is considered virtue, despite all our pretensions. 

20.. Idealism of youth is probably the biggest treasure of hope that a nation or civilisation can possess. There are far too many young lawyers of Allahabad Bar Association and elsewhere, who have shown immense fire and passion.  Similarly, in absence of wisdom of experience, the energy of idealism has the tendency to lose direction and momentum. Hence, there are many experienced lawyers also in this movement. Still, I have very little hope of something bigger and better. Yet, I take this opportunity to commend many good souls and upright members of Indian judiciary and Indian legal community. They are in plenty. I hope, they don't face extinction. But a stand-alone change in judiciary is not viable. A legal action, or impeachment, howsoever tactical, shall have at least a degree of deterrence. But it would never be sufficient to protect the judiciary and entire society from the monster of corruption. I have paid a heavy personal price for advocating comprehensive restructuring of institutions to eliminate space for corruption, cowardice, perversity and human malignancy, by altering institutions and influencing psyche of our people. 

21. A sturdy rule of law is not a luxury but necessity for security of our people and society. This is especially given our larger external ecosystem and internal constraints as a state. A corrupt judiciary threatens everyone. It destroys hope. It is the biggest weapon of silent and undetectable war against state, society and civilisation. But it would naive, myopic and even perverse to expect that a corrupt societal ecosystem can produce honest and upright judges. Corruption is believed to be as rampant among successful Indian elite as fishes needing water to survive or humans breathing oxygen to live. 

22. But all is still not yet lost. Honest Indians are not characters of fiction. They do exist. Average Indian does not get an option to stay clean or turn corrupt. They are compelled to court varying degrees of corruption as fait accompli for sheer survival.  But then there are those, who have turned incorrigibly sick and malignant. They can't breathe without harming people. The entire dynamics has been pushing more and more people to turn corrupt and hypocritical. Is there mass-criminalization of society? I very often wonder whether our systems have been designed to compel people to turn corrupt and oppress those who refuse to do so? Is this the surest recipe to push us in a Hobbesian state of nature, where each is at war with the other, if not individually then at least collectively as part of their identities? 

23. Yet, there are people in every sector, in all parts of the world who wish to fight for an honest system. They wish to breathe free air and enjoy complete freedom and yet act with total integrity and contribute towards building a better society for the sake of their inner strength. Can we bring some of them with a little brain and perspective together? So that they can persuade the entire society that this cancer of corruption is going to eventually destroy all of us including future of our children?   And explore an option, going well beyond simplistic solutions of the past? We need transformation of our outlook as society as well as large-scale restructuring of all our institutions to foster higher quality of social trust, integrity and human empathy.  This will neither be easy nor quick. This is going to test our character as a state and society.      

GANDHI: AN ICON OF PEACE & YET AN OBJECT OF HATE?

GNADHI: AN ICON  OR A SUPER SOUL?

   In recent centuries, no other man, or woman, has influenced human consciousness as profoundly as an English educated Indian Barrister - Mohan Das Karam Chand Gandhi - turned Mahatma or messiah. The title Mahatma given to Gandhi ji by eminent poet, intellectual and Nobel laureate Rabindra Nath Thakur stuck as forename of the man who was later hailed as father of the Indian nation. 

    Gandhi Jayanti or birth anniversary of Mahatma Gandhi, popularly referred as Bapu, has always been a very special day in history of independent India. Mahatma Gandhi has been acknowledged and respected by last few generations of Indians and others as an apostle of peace, an icon of truth, a practitioner of non-violence, a proponent of universal justice, and an advocate of compassion towards all living beings. 

    Still, he was not perfect. Many have always questioned him; some had even defied him. But, of late, few have charged Mahatma with malice. Social media of 2023 is full of hate towards a man who was once loved, adored and respected by generations of Indians and non-Indians in a way that no other man has ever been in recent history of human race. 

    Gandhi himself never claimed to be an embodiment of absolute perfection and infallibility.  

    He is believed to have always reminded people around him of his own follies. Despite receiving huge adulation during his life-time, Mahatam Gandhi never lost his psychological balance to behave like an incarnation of divinity. 

        No human can ever be absolutely perfect and infallible. Even the most brilliant scientists can't create an absolutely perfect artificially intelligent robot. Hence, expectation of perfection itself is flawed.

    It particularly sounds like a cruel joke when it comes from those who themselves appear morally, ethically and intellectually challenged and spiritually disabled.  

   It is true that Mahatma Gandhi's legacy was hijacked and usurped by people who had no respect for Gandhian principles.  In retrospect, inheritors of his legacy, who were not his biological progenies, were psychologically weak and insecure. They fiddled with democracy and discarded integrity to survive in power.

    Consequently, Mahatma, that Gandhi was, has been attributed with sins that he may never have imagined.  

 GANDHI: AN UNAPARLLELED MASS MOBILISER 

     The generation that had seen Bapu in blood and flesh and had experienced the phenomenon named Mahatma is almost gone. Hence, what we hear, read and understand about Gandhi depends upon who says and writes and with what intent. It also depends upon orientation and capacity of the listener or reader to interpret the same.  

    Probably, the larger social and political context of India itself has undergone such drastic transformation that it would require enormous cerebral energy to even attempt understanding Gandhi and draw right lessons from his life and ideals. 

    To be fair to Mahatma, despite all his flaws and imperfections, he remains peer-less as mass-mobiliser of recent centuries.  He was able to rally nearly one fifth of humanity against the most oppressive, unethical and formidable imperial power in whose domain sun never set. His example inspired not only his own followers, but many a times overwhelmed even his opponents. 

We live in an era, where people all across the world are scared to stand up for truth and justice or utter a word even against their own elected Governments in relatively open societies. Many dread the prospect of foregoing even minor comforts of life.

    His idea of Satyagraha -embodying truth, non-violence, courage and compassion - emerged as the most powerful political weapon of democratic politics. His principles and vision entailed universal and comprehensive well-being of entire humanity and malice towards none. No politician of mass leader had imagined and espoused something like this, which could unify entire human race. 

    Gandhi's ideals of peace and justice gave a big fillip to the very idea of decolonization and democratization. His impact on Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was more than visible, even though he himself did not contribute to the same.   

    Without Gandhi, world may not have experienced the phenomenon of either Martin Luther King, and his racial equality movement, or that of Mandela and his anti-apartheid movement. It is doubtful that without Martin Luther, an Obama could have reached anywhere close to US Presidency or without sacrifices of Mandela, abolition of apartheid was possible.  

  Whether peaceful movement helped India win independence or the British left India out of fear of Subhash Chandra Bose, and his impact on British Indian soldiers, is irrelevant discourse at this juncture. Of course, Azad Hind Fauz and Subhash Bose left a strong impact and generated fear in minds of the British. But Bose, despite all his defiance to Gandhi, had remained respectful towards the latter. Without a unifying mass movement that Gandhi ji spearheaded in a diverse and divided India, Bose or so many other freedom fighters may not have reached the stature or generated the impact for which they are known. 

GANDHI: A SOCIAL TRANSFORMER? 

    It is logical to contend that Mahatma Gandhi and his ideals helped relatively peaceful transition of post-colonial India towards a stable and relatively humanist democracy. We need to cover a lot of distance to build a society that Gandhi had envisioned. But still there is no other example in human history where such a diverse, plural and huge country, with such formidable challenges, has not only held together, defying predictions of naysayers, but emerged as one of the key stakeholders of the global order while staying an open society. 

    Ideals of Gandhi ji had a role in this. But Gandhi ji had also acted as a big unifying force, of course with some imperfections, shortfalls and failures. He did it both during his lifetime and even after his death.

     Most of the first-generation leaders of independent India were proteges of Gandhi ji. They could curb their personal aspirations for the sake of national good to a great extent.  It is true that Gandhi ji could not persuade a large section of Muslim leaders led by Jinnah. But it must be kept in mind that a significant section of Muslim leaders too remained equally committed to Gandhi ji and his ideals of peace, non-violence and universal fraternity among mankind.  

    Had India attained freedom through an armed revolution, or even a military campaign, we may have struggled to build not only a democracy but even political stability or unity. India has suffered in the past on account of hordes and hordes of invaders and even local oppressors.  Strategic myopia of domestic rulers and social decay and generation had built its own momentum. But yet resilience of its values and ethos were manifest in its spirit of defiance, regeneration and resurrection. Violence and coercion on their own are insufficient towards building a trust-based political order that we associate with open, transparent and stable states and societies.   

    French revolution of 1789 was probably the biggest landmark of its kind that fueled the idea of democracy in Europe. There is no bigger example of violent mass resistance to exploitative oppression and coercion by rulers. It had brought almost entire French masses together in fight for a just and fairer society and inspired nearly rest of the mankind. For the first time in recorded human history, it had reminded rulers of limitations of their power. 

    But what followed, in the immediate aftermath of revolution, was the worst possible orgy of violence in form of 'reign of terror". Luckily, rise of Napoleon and his military exploits helped the French stay cohesive for a while. But it took more than a century for France and Europe to transition towards mass democracy, enduring multiple convulsions like 1848 revolutions.  

        Africa, yet another home of Gandhi, where he had perfected "satyagraha" and "non-violent resistance" as political weapons, witnessed far too much of conflict and violence following decolonization. Yet, from Mandela to Desmond Tutu, to a host of idealist leaders, claimed to have drawn inspiration from Gandhi. White races had remained reluctant, for a long time, to relent their grip on resource rich states of the region and induced innumerable domestic squabbles and conflicts. But Gandhian ideals have helped fuel voices for truth and justice. British newspaper -The Guardian - had filed a report a few years back in which it had quoted many African leaders who described Gandhi as their spiritual grandfather. Hence, Mahatma Gandhi remains a powerful symbol of truth and justice even now.   

    It is true that violent partition of the country that accompanied independence, marked a big failure of Mahatma Gandhi and his ideals of truth and non-violence. A receding imperial force unleashed some of the dirtiest principles of covert mass warfare against Indian people and Indian civilisation. It ignited medieval Arab and West Asian identity-based xenophobia and hatred by Muslims against Hindus to script one of the worst man-made carnages, genocides and mass rapes in human history. 

    It created a monster way bigger than any Frankenstein that human mind could conceptualize in the form of Pakistan. Principal collaborator of the British designs in this direction was not an Arab or Turkic Muslim. It was a malignant lot of converts from Hinduism and Sanatan only - like Jinnah- who unleashed mass murders against followers of faith of their own ancestors.  

GANDHI'S SOFTNESS TOWARDS MUSLIMS: AN OUTCOME HUMANIST IDEALS 

    Gandhi's repeated gestures of protecting or even favouring Muslims had no malice. Gandhi never favaoured his own biological children. How do we expect him to act like a parochial Hindu? 

    Gandhi always indulged in practices that involved sacrifices on part of those who were closer to him. This is not considered fare in our era and time. But that was the era, where most respected elders of joint families often promoted their nephews and nieces at the cost of their own biological children.  

    This was a flawed notion. But it was probably necessary for protecting extended families in the prevailing values of that time. This was considered test of benevolence of family heads, who often made such sacrifices to keep their extended families together. 

    We have become wiser with passage of time. Families have become smaller and we acknowledge value of every life. We have evolved. We realise that such measures for fostering artificial cohesion was neither fair nor sustainable. 

    Fairness and equity are more important than appeasement and unfair concessions for keeping families and communities together. Because, there may not be a limit to sacrifice for a few. Simultaneously, no amounts of concessions, privileges and entitlement can satisfy people addicted to these. Besides, this is the surest route to cripple a society, nation and family and make them seriously vulnerable in a competitive world.    

      There is no doubt that India needs firm rule of law and Indian secularism must not be equated with tolerance to Islamic radicalism. We need to find a mutually empowering equilibrium between Sanatan and Islamic values, beliefs and practice systems for a stronger India. A lot of scientific research on anatomy of human mind, human behaviour and evolutionary course of cultures is required alongside actions with integrity to reconcile these. Our Muslim friends must be persuaded that cannot go back to past and Hindu majority should be convinced that all Muslims are not terrorists and radicals. Islamic concept of Iztema may be useful in persuading or even forcing changes in obscurantist forces of Islam and Hindus too need a scientific reconstruction of their beliefs and practice systems.  

    A society that squabbles on follies or failures of the past, instead of learning lessons from the same, digs a hole for itself. Statesmanship is not about exploiting these fissures but about finding ways to building cohesion among societies and states in pursuit of comprehensive excellence.    

     GANDHI: NOT A FUZZY UTOPIAN BUT A ROBUST THINKER

    Mahatma Gandhi was not merely communicating through symbols and actions or simply mobilising masses. He has been acknowledged as a profound thinker and philosopher as well. His world view may appear simple and idealist. But it was based on robust intellect. Given normal human vulnerabilities to lies, deception and selfishness, most may find it too utopian. But these definitely constitute the bedrock of an ideal society.   

    Gandhi's truth, as popularly known, was not a weapon of the weak or timid. His truth required enormous courage and self-belief. Gandhi's ideal of non-violence was not the choice of a helpless timid. It required exceptional psychological strength not to get provoked. This remains relevant for all real and aspiring leaders at any level. 

    But somehow, one feels that his message of non-violence has been badly interpreted. There are many sources that suggest that Gandhi ji is believed to have told that when it came to prevent certain types of violence, especially from rapists and molesters who harm dignity and safety of women, even murder was justified.  He had maintained that violence was preferable over cowardice and in certain contexts violence may become necessary. But still he never faced such extreme and exceptional situation himself and hence it could never be tested.   

    Hence, Gandhian concept of non-violence is neither absolute nor a rigid ritual. 

    One also has to appreciate that Gandhi was a social reformer and not a Military General or a statesman wielding state authority. He never considered anyone as his enemy. He had repeatedly asserted this. To reach a psychological stage where you don't find even your worst detractors or haters as your enemy is simply super-human.

    Gandhi's ideal of trusteeship of public property pushes him closer to socialist ideals. But at the same time, it appears more in tune with ideals of both a healthy social order and even what we describe the most contemporary principles of corporate governance or corporate probity. 

    Only a great society, driven by the highest principles and practices of national or civilisational security has wisdom to invest in quality of human resource. From physical health of people to their education, skills and values as well as ability to harness human energy to both material and moral strength constitutes the bedrock of national security. Gandhi's emphasis on character building, besides cognitive and technical skills, could probably be a game changer. Education is not about memorising information. Education can be real tool only if it empowers people to do what is right for society as a whole or to stand up against what is bad for society.    

    Integrity and truthfulness remain eternally relevant for any great society. Without empathy, altruism and kindness we can never ever have social trust or social cohesion or even a healthy family or community. Violence begets violence. Gandhian philosophy of countering violence through non-violence was not about surrender of a meek with humiliation. What he said may have been relevant in a lawless society where he was seeking a wider transformation. But countering violence from a position of psychological strength and self-belief and not anger or revenge appears a stronger option. 

    Gandhi ji may not have had access to knowledge about working of human brain or role of genes, environment and social practices on human behaviour. We are far more aware today on these issues. But Gandhi ji's contribution did push us in direction of trust-based social order where all could thrive better. 

DOWNSIDE OF GANDHI

    Mahatma Gandhi was one of the greatest among the great. He was looking at world from his own unique vantage point. He was trapped in his own context and may be his own priorities. Hence, he too appears to have faltered. But these were  on far too fewer occasions and issues compared to most mass leaders. 

    Gandhi ji definitely does not appear fair to Subhash Chandra Bose. He may have sensed a penchant for a militant armed struggle in Bose. Hence, he wanted to keep Bose away from Congress. But as Mahatma and father figure, he was expected to stay fair and impartial. During Haripura Session of Congress in 1938 when Pattabhi Sita Ramaiah challenged Subhash Bose, Gandhi ji should have stayed neutral. His decision to throw his plight with Pattabhi  projects him in poor light. 

    The Charisma that Subhas Bose enjoyed, especially among youth of his time, was much bigger. Bose won the election but still Gandhi ji made it so difficult for Bose that the latter had to quit Congress and explore independence of India through different means. 

    Gandhi ji also kept quiet on judicial murder by the British of the most romanticist revolutionary and hero named Bhagat Singh. This lapse of Gandhi ji appears unpardonable for most Indians. There cannot be a more romantic ideal image of an innocent young man who decides to happily give up his life for the same cause for which Gandhi ji was spearheading mass movements. Gandhi ji's silence remains baffling and dents his saintly image. 

    This was especially after disclosure that Bhagat Singh was not involved in any murder and the bomb that he had thrown in the Assembly was only for drawing attention to important issues like passage of a draconian Public safety bill besides protests over Simon Commission, Govt inaction over Jallianwalla bagh massacre and killing of Lal Lajpat Rai by police. His actions had not killed or harmed anyone. Bhagat Singh became a more towering persona in death and left a profound impact in the process. 

    Gandhi ji is also seen as someone who made too many concessions to Islamist radicals and restrained and curbed Hindus far too much. From his indulgence with Khilafat to concessions to Jinnah and efforts to appease Muslims and tolerance to genocide by Muslims in Noakhali in East Pakistan and Kolkata in West Bengal to nearly whole of West Punjab and Sindh generated a sense of dejection and pain among large sections of Hindus and his followers. Many believe that Gandhi ji's decisions brought huge sufferings to Hindus and encouraged rabid Islamists with a sense of entitlement to slaughter Hindus and rape their women with impunity. 

    There is no doubt that Gandhi ji's presence gave a sense of security to Muslims in India. But he could not equally persuade Muslim masses either in India or Pakistan to refrain from violence. Even his comrades like Khan Gaffar Khan were largely rendered irrelevant in Muslim majority ideas of Pakistan.

        Alongside these, the most prominent politically family of India has been charged with usurping surname of Gandhi and virtually monopolized his legacy. Earlier also Gandhi ji was considered instrumental for overruling Congress party's internal decision to appoint Sardar Patel as Prime Minister of India and foist Pandit Nehru in his place. There may not have been any devious personal agenda in the same. But in retrospect, Gandhi ji also held responsible for all the ills identified with rule of this family and their associates.  

    Another issue that has invited controversy for Gandhi ji is his so-called experiments to test his own celibacy with much younger women, especially his grand nieces. This appears horrendous from our contemporary sensibilities. Whether Gandhi ji took consent from those young women are not is neither known nor relevant. But that was the era, when a great and even the most empathetic appears to have failed to show enough empathy. Yet we do not know the entire story but something of this nature whether correct or incorrect, remained wrapped up under the cover and none knew or spoke about these.  

  GANDHI: NOT PERFECT AND YET THE GREATEST MASS LEADER OF THE MILLLENNIUM 

     The extent to which Gandhi ji should be hailed as an icon of peace or treated as target fit to be vilified depends upon political orientation of individuals concerned. 

    But his ideals and practices do command a romantic appeal cutting across boundaries of state, civilization and culture.

    But Gandhi ji was a hardcore Indian and nationalist who was not liked by the West. Incidentally, the West never conferred Nobel Peace prize on Gandhi even though the same was given to his proteges like Martin Luther King and Mandela. One can say that Gandhi ji was disliked and distrusted by white colonial powers.  

    Gandhi ji lived in an era and what he contributed in the most selfless manner is exceptional and inspirational. We can neither reject Gandhi nor adopt his values universally. For an individual living in society, both means and ends need to be pure. But when it gets down to use of instruments by state for protection of entire the test of purity rests with their efficacy. 

    Gandhi is one of our greatest icons. He is probably most well-known too in recent times. But we have had far too many other icons too. We must not supplant Gandhi as the sole icon. Each of the icons from the earliest times have shaped and influenced our civilizational journey.  

     Gandhian principles must not be rituals. Whatever we do, we cannot be driven by anger or greed. If an Indian soldier kills a Chinese or Pakistani counterpart or a terrorist, it is a moral and otherwise duty. But after killing the enemy soldier or terrorists, Indians hand these over to family of deceased or perform their last rituals with dignity. Violence of a soldier or deception of a military leader or espionage master is a professional necessity, which too has to be performed without anger, hatred or greed. If a Gandhian state vanquishes the hell created by some criminal lackey of the white imperialists, it must be for ushering in civility and Gandhian society in that land. 

    Hence, without Kautilyan principles of Dharma or protective cover of  Kautilyan State, Gandhian principles can't survive. But without Mahatma Gandhi and his ideals, world and society would indeed be a dangerous and unsafe place for all. Hence, we must progress, howsoever incrementally, towards a Gandhian society protected by a Kautilyan state. 

BBC AND HINDENBURG MUST BE IGNORED BUT INDIA NEEDS SERIOUS INTERNAL DISCOURSE & REFORMS

    Over the last two weeks, two incidents have dominated the discourse in Indian media. One concerns controversial BBC documentary indicting PM Modi of Gujrat riots of 2002. The second concerns Hindenburg report on an Indian tycoon whose wealth has meteorically risen over the last few years defying all logic.  

    Reaction in India’s political and media space has been on the expected lines. People have taken positions depending upon their political loyalties and personal preferences. Entire public domain resembles a psychological or propaganda warzone. 

Under these conditions, I am not sure how an attempt to place a sane perspective in public domain shall go down. 

    The timing of BBC documentary after two decades of a forgettable incident certainly arouses suspicion. It has reopened wounds that had healed over time. Given the track record of BBC, and certain forces in the Western world, especially those known for supporting Pak linked organised crime networks, it would be fair to suspect that the documentary is not driven by noble professional intentions. It has attempted to drive social and political wedge in India and undermine credibility of its institutions, including the apex court. But at the same time, I do not endorse panic bans. Ideally, our institutions and credibility should have been strong enough to prevent something like this. Simultaneously, a strong Supreme Court of India could have hauled up BBC to deter such psychological warfare.  

    While it will be disaster for political dissidents in India to seek solace in such malicious propaganda by a media institution whose sections have always been under influence of Islamic organised crime networks, it will not serve our interests if we ignore deficiencies in our own institutions. Ideally, the twin attacks must inspire our stakeholders to come together to address our deficiencies in this direction. However, it looks improbable at this stage.  

    Over the last few decades or since independence, India has been facing a pernicious psychological warfare from sections of Western media and even their state establishments. They have always sought to put India on the same pedestal, or at times even lower than, as the Pakistani state controlled by a notoriously criminal Army. The objective appears undermining and scuttling rise of a powerful democracy. This is not to say that we do not have strong pockets of support in these states. Unfortunately, most Western democracies themselves have been divided. It is influence of slush funds and lobbying as well as larger organised-crime networks on some of the Western democratic institutions that is worrying.   

    From the turn of 21st Century, there had been noticeable abatement of hostility from the Western states. This is largely due to protests in these states over increasing disclosures of Pakistani involvement in terrorism and organised crime in their territory in the wake of 9/11 attacks. However, the situation is far from satisfactory. Simultaneously, the world has increasingly witnessed a difference in the quality of Indian and Pakistani diaspora. The latter has dominated prisons and ranks of organised crime, whereas the former have been gainfully contributing almost everywhere to economic and technological empowerment of host nations.  

    Over the last many centuries, Islamic identity has been frequently abused not only by hardy marauders but even neo converts to Islam to unleash violence, terrorism, extortion and crime against so-called non-Muslims. Near complete exodus of non-Muslims from Kashmir or prior to that complete cleansing of Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan have been cited as examples of violent parochialism inbuilt in Islamic practices on the subcontinent. These have been backed by pernicious propaganda to paint Hindus negatively all over the world. Indian state remained a moot spectator not only to what has continued to happen against non-Muslims in Pakistan but also in most Muslim majority areas of independent India.

    It was extension of same tendency when 59 Hindu pilgrims were burned alive in a train in Godhra on Feb 27, 2002 without any provocation. The perpetrators had the audacity to do so even in an overwhelmingly Hindu majority state where a Hindu nationalist Government was in power. It would be insane to claim that the Government of the day had colluded in a pre-planned gruesome killing of these train passengers, as state police had failed to detect and prevent. 

    This was not an isolated incident. Terror attacks from Mumbai (1993) and Surat (1993), besides violence in the Kasmir Valley (since late 1980s), had built a momentum of their own. A strong clandestine infrastructure of Islamist terrorism and organised crime networks had come up in different countries as well as in different parts of India, including the economically important and peaceful state of Gujrat. Innocent civilians were regularly killed in such attacks.  It is no surprise that India had remained the second most impacted state by terrorism as per Global Terrorism index (GTI) since 2001. 

    The Godhra train carnage had outraged people in the state. Tempers were running high as Indian state had appeared incapable of protecting Hindus from violence in name of Islam. Ideally, the Indian state should have acted promptly and arrested all the culprits involved in this mass murder and launched a massive hunt for such Islamic terrorism and crime networks in the state and beyond. Probably our institutions were not strong enough to do so. 

    The media reports stated that the then Gujrat Government had sought reinforcement of security forces from neighbouring states and Government of India. Bureaucratic procedures and political considerations appear to have delayed the process. These gave opportunity to malignant sections of society to take law into their own hands. Whatever happened was a shameful chapter in history of India. It was one of the rare episodes in independent India where spontaneous gangs of thugs came up killing scores of innocent people. But it would be unfair to assume that Muslims alone were killed in this so-called retaliatory violence. Against 790 Muslim killed, 254 Hindus were also killed. However, none of the Western or even secular media at home have ever highlighted this fact. Would 250+ Hindus have been killed if the entire state machinery was partisan and 90%  Hindu population of the state were communal? 

    The rampaging mobs did not spare even some of the high-profile privileged Muslim families who had traditionally enjoyed wider respect and influence in their localities. This was reminiscent of attack on wealthy Hindus in West and East Pakistan before partition. But the scale was much lower. Such failure of police institutions drew immense flak from all concerned including their Hindu friends and civil society groups. There were some gruesome attacks that could have been easily avoided and social cohesion could have been protected. Despite such allegedly state-backed violence against Muslims, vigilante and criminal groups were also able to do the same thing in name of their Muslim identity against Hindu families right under the nose of a "biased" police institution. Efforts were made to use these episodes for political gains. In the process, the larger failure of the state and even pain of ordinary masses - both Muslims and Hindus - never received due attention.

Another unfortunate part of 2002 episode was emergence of a few criminals and rioters as mass heroes and saviours of people. Some of them have joined politics even though a large number of them were indicted and sentenced.  But on a positive side, a large number of Muslims have also been in the inner circle of PM Modi. 

    There is absolutely no justification for any mob-killing of anyone- whether a Muslim or Hindu. It was shameful that our police institutions failed to protect innocent train passengers and subsequently they looked the other way when approached by Muslim civilians for help. Malignant lot in Indian police and security forces have had a long history. Some of them have been suspected of collaborating with organised crime networks linked with Islamist groups and act otherwise only to protect their turf or themselves. But large sections of them definitely protected all people irrespective of their identity. But a credible democracy like India needs absolute levels of impartiality and efficiency from its police institutions. 

    Political opponents of Shri Modi, who was Chief Minister of Gujrat at that point of time, targeted him individually. As head of the government, he was responsible for collapse of state institutions. But none of the agencies could ever establish his direct role in abetting violence against Muslims. It is pertinent to mention that a different political party had ruled at the centre for 10 years. Rather, it was his resolute handling of the episode that helped near complete elimination of well-entrenched organised crime cartels in Gujrat. No major communal violence ever recurred in that state. People praised him for securing public spaces and eliminating crime. But the damage had already been done. 

    It was a Catch 22 situation for the Indian state.  Enemies waging all out covert war against India seemed to be mocking: “Heads I win; tails you lose”. If the CM had allowed the situation to drift and terrorists to have their sway, he may have been doomed. If he acted decisively, he could still be discredited with charges of excesses. 

     But people of India gave him a resounding mandate. The Indian state has also been able to significantly fend off sustained covert war from Pakistan, which was eventually exposed globally over its complicity in terrorism and organised crime. Simultaneously, several clandestine cartels are believed to have quietly changed their colour in quest of state patronage, without which they just can't survive. They are suspected of sabotaging any transition to real rule of law for which reforms in political parties and criminal justice system are unavoidable. Indian PM has consistently spoken of these, but such strategic reforms are nowhere on the horizon. 

    Dysfunctional and subverted institutions have remained a long-term reality in India. These have given rise to powerful forces with strong vested interest in status quo. Most astute politicians have been cautious in dealing with them to avoid risk of public disorder and unmanageable levels of turbulence. But visionary statesmen do find ways and means to address such difficult challenges.  A robust security and dynamic criminal justice system is a fundamental necessity for a stronger India. 

        Simultaneously, corporate sectors all over the world have been battling varying degrees of erosion in integrity and transparency. Only the means and methods have varied. Congressional Research Committee of United States to various Nobel prize winning economists have alleged that mega corporates have rigged the entire regulatory capacity of state even in the West. Ill-effects of unrestrained privatisation or unhealthy nexus between politicians and corporates, to the detriment of collective interests of the communities, is a global reality. However, the entire process is too discreet and sophisticated in the West compared to what we have in India. Democracies need to find an answer to this both for the sake of their credibility and optimal governance efficiency.  

    If we adhere to the strictest levels of probity and integrity, probably no mega corporate entity anywhere in the world can come clean. Some of the local detractors of PM Modi have been flagging that crony capitalism has been a longstanding reality in India but the scales were never that high and mode never so direct. We all know that crony capitalism and opaque political funding share a symbiotic relationship. Many political and corporate leaders have admitted in private that high levels of integrity and transparency were simply not viable in our ecosystem. This is neither a new nor an isolated phenomenon. With onset of strict anti-graft laws in the West, Indian corporates run the risk of being targeted by their global rivals over such soft underbelly. Sharp decline in stock prices of such entities, directly hits average consumers or investors for no fault of theirs. Govt is duty bound to protect such people for which it needs to build a much broader consensus and understanding among various stakeholders.  

    I have always maintained that an economy of our size cannot afford so many billionaires. Such sudden rise in wealth of any individual does not appear possible under normal circumstances.  Real economic strength of a nation like ours does not rest on number of mega corporates and billionaires. It needs a larger culture of industry, enterprise and innovation where several smaller enterpreneurs rise on the strength of innovation and excellence in multiple niche areas. 

     Under-performing institutions and deficient criminal justice systems have remained a perennial reality in India. But at the same time, India is the only stable democracy in the entire post-colonial world whose rise is often linked with larger stability and security of this region and beyond. Hence, both BBC and Hindenburg reports do not deserve the kind of attention that they are enjoying. But we shall ignore need for serious reforms in both political parties as well as corporate sector of India, only to our own peril. These reforms are not luxury but critical necessity for optimising our economic strength and external security.   

    I am also posting a clip of part of a lecture of Jan 2020 during which I had emphasized on centrality of reforms in political parties and private sector.     

TURMOIL IN BRAZIL: LESSONS FOR DEMOCRACY

 

Rioting in Brazil Over Disputed Electoal Results

The ongoing turmoil in Brazil over disputed electoral results is a stark reminder of fragility of the entire idea of democracy in most parts of the world. It appears increasingly unsustainable in countries with long traditions of authoritarianism, heavy clout of corporate leaders or organized crime networks and deficient mechanisms of rule of law. 

Barely a week after incoming President took office, violent supporters of his predecessor and right-wing populist former President Jair Bolsonaro stormed the main city centre in Brasilia. Wrapped in yellow green colors of national flag or official jersey of Brazilian soccer team, they shouted slogans in favor of their fatherland and liberty to claim their rioting as acts of patriotism to salvage the nation. They tried to avoid confrontation with police by shouting at them “may God bless you and prevent you from attacking us patriots”

Protestors vandalised Presidential office building - Planalto Palace, Congress and Supreme Court premises and occupied the main public square in the area, in what appeared a clear replay of insurrections at Capitol in Washington DC two years back. Security forces claimed that by the evening of January 8, they had cleared all government buildings from rioters, arresting nearly 1200 of them and charging 700 of them with violence. But thousands were on the run following five hours long pitched battle with the police. The incident has scarred democracy in Brazil and invited world-wide condemnations.

These attacks have been described by sections of media as the biggest assault on rule of law and democracy since 1964 military coup that had deposed the elected government of President Joao Goulart a.k.a. ‘Jango’ of Brazillian Labour Party. It took 21 years for this Latin American behemoth to transition to what is described as 6^th Republic since 1985 through protracted negotiations with Military leadership that had led to enactment of 1988 Constitution, which came into force on Jan 01, 1990.

A Planned Insurrection?

Available media inputs suggest that the so-called mass-eruption in Brasilia was not spontaneous. Rather it was well-planned and well organised. Social media posts have been detected inviting “patriots” to take part in this march with promises of free food and free bus rides. Bolsonaro supporters, from countryside and other cities, had started milling around the protest venue as the weekend approached.

There are videos of Bolsonaro instigating violence by urging his supporters to take arms much before these protests. In fact, there are far too many indicators suggesting that more than a year back, he had expressed apprehension of elections being rigged to deny him a second term. Many Brazilian experts had predicted in 2021 itself that in case Bolsonaro lost lections, he could act like Trump to debunk results, cry foul, and incite his supporters to take up arms to overthrow democracy.

One such video of discussion of 2021 by David Rockefeller Centre of Latin America, captioned as “The State of Democracy in Latin America” is available at:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3YVP1Shpyc.

Bolsonaro did not disappoint such predictions. Once he lost elections, he skipped inauguration ceremony of the incoming President Lula. Rather he left the country and camped at a location in Florida in the United States and kept drumming up charges of stolen election results. He not only kept quiet when the riot was building up, he rather actively abetted it. There are also videos, though one does not know how authentic, where he describes Brazilians as martial race, urging them to take up arms or spurring even military to take over government. Even his supporters demanded military takeover to prevent Lula from returning to the helm after 12 years. He showed immense reluctance to even condemn the violence initially. Later when he did so, he only disapproved of invasion of public buildings but added qualifiers that protests were part of democracy. In the same vein, he also went on to charge his opponents of organising unlawful protests in the past to overthrow democracy that needed to be investigated. 

Brazil's Record On Democracy

Brazil has never been a model democracy. As per leading institutions like freedom House and V-Dem, Brazil ranks much lower on parameters of democracy, governance, social peace and corruption perception compared to its smaller neighbour like Uruguay, Costa Rica and Chile. This is despite its early foray with democracy and republicanism that commenced way back in 1889, when a cartel of coffee planters of Brazil, who accounted for nearly 65% of the world-wide coffee output, had overthrown 67 years of independent monarchic rule that had parted ways with imperial homeland of Portugal in 1822.  

Frequent disruptions of democracy, with phases of authoritarianism and military dictatorship, have hindered rise of robust institutions and traditions of participative governance in Brazil. But following last transition to democracy in 1985, Brazil had shown immense promise. At the turn of the Century, as the biggest South American state, and the fifth largest in the world, accounting for more than half the population of the continent, Brazil was hailed as one of the rising major economic powers along with China, India and South Africa.

With its formidable economic and military prowess and world-wide influence, Brazil was expected to play a stabilising role in the region and spearhead the larger process of democratisation in whole of Latin America. The region is known for fragile democracies and weak institutions. We already have serious conflict going on in Peru where dozens have been killed. Democracy deficit has resulted in serious misgovernance, with transnational organised crime cartels perennially influencing politics in many neighbouring states and sparing virtually none. Under these circumstances, political stability and efficient governance in Brazil gains significance for security and stability of the entire region.

          Tumltuous Journey Of 6^th Republic

The 6^th Republic in Brazil has had a somewhat tumultuous journey so far. The first President– Tancredo Neves of Brazilian Democratic Movement - who took over in 1985, following negotiated transition, fell sick even before taking oath of office and died soon. Democracy took some time to take off as the transitional era, from the term of Acting President and Neve’s Deputy - Jose Sarney- until the inauguration of new Constitution in 1990, continued to be governed by authoritarian Constitution of 1969.

The first President who got elected under the new Constitution in 1989 and took office on Jan 01, 1990– Fernando Collor de Mello – had to resign in 1992 following charges of Corruption. His Deputy Itamar Franco, who served remainder of the term until 1994, has probably been the only President in the history of Brazil who enjoyed reputation of a gentleman leader with unquestionable records of personal integrity besides delivering well on governance front. He stabilised economy and democracy both and accommodated various shades of political forces in the cabinet. He abdicated office after completion of the tenure as the new Constitution did not allow an incumbent President, even if he or she served part of the tenure, to run for re-election.

Franco’s successor Henrique Cordoso, a noted academic and politician with a left of the centre orientation, had come on reputation of his sound performance as Finance Minister under Franco. He had mixed results on governance and democracy with some of his pro-poor policies receiving popular endorsement but he struggled on many and few backfired. But before completion of his first tenure, he got the constitution amended in 1998 and got re-elected for another 4 yr term from Jan 1999 to 2002. This was first major tinkering with the new Constitution by an ambitious leader that came too soon in a nation that had barred an incumbent President to run for re-election, fearing return of dictatorship.

 Subsequent Presidents Luis Inacio Lula da Silva (2003-2010), who is again back at the helm, kindled great power aspirations for Brazil through faster growth rate during his tenure but with a tinge of rampant corruption. He was later himself indicted on corruption charges well after he demitted office and was sentenced and had to spend some time in prison.  He eventually succeeded in overturning the verdict by citing the bias of prosecutors and came clean on all charges. His successor Dilma Rousseff faced more ignominy, when she was impeached during second year of her second term on corruption charges only.

There is a strong possibility that even Bolsonaro too may face similar charges at some point of time in future. There are already few cases against him and Lula is likely to institute more. Bolsonaro's fall from grace is not likely to do any good to his future. 

Democracy, development and corruption have converged in Brazil. Judiciary has been selectively assertive but has not remained immune to influence. Further, local and global ecosystem have made it extremely difficult for Brazilian democracy to preserve integrity of its institutions, provide a robust governance and a strong mechanism of rule of law. A country that is so rich in natural resources and with its vast size and fairly large population, it is crying for efficient governance to translate its great-power potentials into reality. 

Manifestation of a Global Trend: Lessons For Democracies

Recent developments in Brazil are indicative of a larger global trend of erosion in integrity and credibility of democratic institutions, notwithstanding some exceptions and few variations. Elections have turned into high stake battles for warring elite not only in arena of politics but also corporate sector, sections of military and probably those in the grey world who probably need state support for their survival and clout. Hence, the phenomenon of populist leaders seeking to build their personality cult needs far closer examination and evaluation. Exploitation of nationalist or identity sentiments have potential to generate such levels of mass frenzy, at least among their supporters, that can knock out rule of law from list of key governance priorities. This can reduce democracy into arbitrary rule by elected dictators. Simultaneously, emotive strength of nationalism and identity provide a brilliant cover to deflect popular attention from governance failures and corruption.

The most striking feature of the Brazilian protests have been initial police reluctance to crack down on the rioters. Sections of Western media have suggested that Bolsonaro had been seeking to cultivate cartels within the security forces. While key figures in military or police who were part of the erstwhile military regime have faded out but progenies and proteges of those stalwarts continue to retain significant clout due to sheer inner dynamics of these institutions. Bolsonaro has been rather soft on military and security officers who have been found indulging in excesses or violating rule of law or what some would suggest a suspected nexus with regional crime cartels to run various shades of grey world operations. Eventually sanity prevailed and security forces could bring situation under control. But a lot of damage had already been done by that time. 

Political options that Brazilian democracy offers may not be ideal. Both Lula and Bolsonaro have been accused of corruption and knocking out their political opponents through ruthless manipulation of institutions. Rule of law and robust governance capacity automatically become a casualty under these conditions.  Besides, rising influence of China, through a set of local collaborators, and clandestine clout of organised crime syndicates further ensure continued decline of Brazilian democracy and sustained pilferage of its economy, especially the rich natural resources. 

Such phenomenon reinforces my belief that democracies need to re-discover themselves to optimise their latent and real potentials. Legitimate political, economic and social stakeholders in democracies need to work out a mechanism to address their differences, if they genuinely care for comprehensive and sustained defence of universal access to freedom, equality and opportunities. Otherwise, despite an outward façade of democracy, even larger states, with not so robust institutions, run the risk of being controlled by a combination of local and global cartels to the detriment of collective interests of their communities and even the entire nation. There may not be easy answers in this direction.  Brazil appears too fractured and divided at this juncture, where robust institutions do not appear sustainable. It needs to heal internally for which both incumbents of state and society need to contribute. It shall also require exceptional statesmanship from incoming President Lula to negotiate a combination of highly complex internal and external challenges threatening his nation at this juncture. 

LOOKING AT UKRAINE WAR FROM INDIAN PRISM

INDIAN EXPERTS ON THE WAR    

Discussions in India's intellectual spaces on Russia-Ukraine war were initially focused on humanitarian evacuations. Subsequently, most Indian experts appeared more anxious to express solidarity with President Putin led Russia, rather than evaluating the entire issue objectively, even from the perspective of strategic interests of Russian state and its people. 

     Looking at the entire issue from New Delhi, closer ties with Russia and Israel appear critical for India's own security as well as long-term security and stability of this region and beyond. Simultaneously, India's friendship with the West, and especially the United States, is equally important for India's existential interests as well as strategic security of the United States. However, there has been an apprehension that China's burgeoning economic, military and technological prowess may compel the United States at some point of time to abandon Asia and Indo-Pacific, especially if the costs of defending this region, or even maintaining presence here, could become unsustainable.

 China's military and technological surge appears unstoppable at this juncture. Simultaneously, internal fissures in US democracy, including its position even on critical foreign policy and security issues, appears more than glaring. In long run, China definitely threatens the United States and its allies. But in the interim, it is possible that the United States can work out a tactical understanding with China to avert a direct conflict.  

    On the other hand, India is uniquely positioned to consolidate ties with West Asia and Africa as well, including Islamic nations. It continues to enjoy immense goodwill in the region. The entire equilibrium places India in an unparalleled position to pursue its great power aspirations, if it can optimise its internal governance institutions. 

The dividend of better understanding between the West and Russia at one level and Israel and Arab world on the other may harm military industrial complexes of the West but provide an unparalleled impetus to technological and economic upsurge for the entire mankind. India's rise will not only provide the biggest antidote to both Islamist radicalism and Chinese authoritarianism but also act as the biggest catalysts to peace, stability and innovation, benefitting the entire mankind. 

    I believe that the Russia-Ukraine war is not of mere academic interest to India. A depleted and weakened Russia, dependent upon China, shall be disaster for India. It can multiply military-security threats from China. However, the dynamics of Chinese political system is such that it is bound to breed conflict with both Russia and India. With 10 times more population than Russia and similar advantage in economic sphere, China possesses the capacity to virtually gobble up Russian land and natural resources, at least substantially if not entirely. Though internal systems of China are likely to crumble once the bottled-up pressure of mass oppression explodes. This is inevitable at some point of time. 

    Such an outcome has potential to generate exceptional instability and volatility in the region. This would dwarf the instability and volatility that we witnessed on fall of Soviet Russia in early 1990s.   Though the world has recovered from the same due to stability provided by leadership of strongman Putin. But his de-institutionalization of Russia and decimation of all opponents, besides creation of an army of loyalists through a caucus of oligarchs - at the cost of sustainable progress of his own country-  doesn't augur well for future of this great civilisation. 

    Most discourses on Ukraine war in the intellectual space of the West appear driven by an urge to humiliate and vanquish President Putin and Russia. West has done huge disservice to both democracy and Russia by giving an impression that it was consistently trying to undermine and destabilise Russia. It has also been suspected of engineering colured revolutions in Russian backyard to change regimes. These moves appear more focused on weakening Putin and Russia rather than ushering democracy in these parts of the world. These have backfired and further strengthened Putin and impeded Russia's transition to genuine democracy. In retrospect, the entire approach also appears flawed and tactical. It plays into hand of China. Russia could have been a much lesser danger even to the West than Xi led China.  

    India has to impress upon the West that an isolated and weakened Russia, dependent upon China, is as much threat to the West as India. Russia has to be weaned away from the Chinese influence and it should be nudged on the path of democracy. This will definitely help stability and security of the existing global order. However, this is not going to be easy. India has ignored provocations and taunts by the Western media that has been least respectful, or even receptive, to Indian sensitivities. But Indian state must harness its goodwill to break the impasse in US-Russia ties. 

    During yet another discussion on a Hindi channel named APN, I was shocked by observations of a retired Indian diplomat. He insisted that India must stay away from Russia-Ukraine dispute. His words were: "doosre ke jhagde mein hamein kyon padna hai?" (Why should we get into quarrel of others). This is the precise psyche from which India must extricate itself, We are in a different era where any development anywhere in the world impacts us in one or the other form to some degree. The war of attrition between Russia and Ukraine, despite helping us in the interim on oil bills, threatens to shift an already disadvantageous geopolitical equilibrium further against us. 

I call an approach of isolation from Russia and the West as strategic myopia. At one hand, we aspire to become global leaders, and at another we are reluctant to engage others or reform ourselves internally, to secure our own existential interests. Our great power aspirations must not rest on goodwill or mercy of the world or discretion of fortunes. We have to pursue it ourselves as a state and society        

LOOKING AT THE LARGER PICTURE

    Ukraine has suffered enormously in the ongoing war.  But Russia too has not been able to escape the devastating consequences. Military losses and setbacks have embarrassed Russia and generated a lot of resentment internally. People have been quiet on economic hardships but loss of youthful population and wasted economic opportunities is going to haunt Russia for a long time. 

    President Putin has been outsmarted by the NATO strategists this time. Probably, it is complacence that bred overconfidence this time. NATO or the United States seem to be winning the battle for the time being. But a victory here is likely to push them to an imminent loss in a larger geopolitical war. 

    Ever since pro-Russian Ukrainian President Ynaukovich was ousted through a mass uprising in 2014, the NATO-Russia confrontation had been on the rise. Russian victory over Crimea and its annexation, in a genuinely short, swift and decisive battle bolstered the image of invincibility of Putin. He had successfully avenged humiliation over ouster of a pro-Mocow regime. But his failure to win the current war, despite having initiated the same, appears a self-goal. Many believe that he was provoked into this trap by the NATO strategists.  

    There are far too many indicators to suggest that President Putin went into the war without adequate preparation. None of his advisors and associates could probably muster enough courage to point this out. Early this year, there was a video that went viral on social media in which the President Putin was seen rebuking his intelligence Chief. The latter had mildly tried to suggest that Russia needed more preparation to win the war.

     Inbuilt constraints of the authoritarian governance model of Russia have also been exposed during this war.  Russia had also failed to factor in the tough resistance from Ukrainians and alleged covert support that they have received from the West. 

    NATO's eastward expansion is also something that the West is not able to discuss with candour amongst itself. The West should have tried to push democracy in Russia more through persuasion rather than coercion, deception and clandestine regime changes. A genuine democratization of Russia could have provided bigger safety net for security of the West. 

    But that appears improbable at this point of time. For persuading Russia or others to democratize, the United States has to fix its own internal democracy, which it appears shy of addressing. Simultaneously, expanding asymmetry of power between China and India is another factor that has been denting desirability of democracy and open societies, notwithstanding appreciation for the same. 

    It is widely believed that capitalist greed of United States has created a monster in form of authoritarian China.  A small cartel of people led by an insane narcissist, domestically accountable to none, but with access to exceptional financial, technological and military prowess, threaten the entire world. They appear capable of marginalising even the United States in few years at least in Asia, Eurasia, Africa and Far East. 

    TEST OF GLOBAL DIPLOMACY AND LEADERSHIP    

    An early conclusion of war, at this juncture, appears too distant given the level of distrust between the two sides. Any mediation by any power appears fraught with serious possibilities of failure. Mediation and facilitation more often require complex technical skills, besides trust of contending parties. While India enjoys high degree of trust of both Russia and Ukraine, but it is possible that neither United States nor China could be interested in putting their weight behind India or a bonafide peace deal. Besides, Indian diplomacy's technical expertise and experience of mediation in such complex conflicts is quite suspect. Hence, a progress in this direction is possible but it is not going to be easy.  

    Many Western analysts have contended that the Russian failures have severely dented the aura of invincibility of President Putin. Some assess that he may have to explore a smooth exit from political space of Russia. Alternatively, there could also be an abrupt end of his regime, which appears difficult the way he has decimated all opponents and even alternatives to himself. 

Surreptitious regime changes forcing transition to election process has failed in far too many contexts. Political stability in Russia appears not worth the risk of instability that the West supported coloured revolutions had brought in. Of course, at some point of time Putin has to retire. Someone acceptable to the west and Russia has to assure Putin of a safe retirement and stop comedian turned hero Zelensky to restrain his bravado. But this is not going to be that easy. President Putin has established himself as custodian of Russian pride. West has to act with immense generosity whereas India has to stretch all its potentials and capacities to push peace, not as an act of altruism or charity but a critical necessity for creation of a geopolitical equilibrium that ensures its security.   

But as long as Putin remains at the helm, the threat of a nuclear attack, howsoever minor, remains a reality. The world has already paid a high price over Russia-Ukraine war. It will test resilience of global diplomacy and leadership to extricate the mankind from potential threats of a further escalation of this war that has already taken a heavy toll.