FURY WITHIN

FURY WITHIN

Shaktimaan died yesterday. (Iti ashwah - It was a horse). A police horse – from Uttarakhand Police who had served the nation for over a decade. It was a public asset. He was brutalised by protestors during a political protest march.

Commuters – all common men – went berserk in Diva, near Mumbai and started pelting local trains with rocks and stones, causing damage costing the public exchequer millions of rupees.

Parents of students of a school in Kolkata went on rampage after a girl died from bullying by seniors. Men and women of educated, cultured background ransacked the school, tore up documents, smashed computers and furniture and destroyed records.

Mumbai residents lose sanity and burn police vehicles.

Bangalore citizens protesting against EPF amendments run amok and torch public transport buses worth millions.

Lawyers burn public vehicles.

“Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.” Marcellus told Horatio in ‘Hamlet’. I understand that something is rotten in the state of India. There is poverty, famine, malnutrition, disasters, inequality, discrimination......to name just a few maladies of this democratic republic. It causes hurt and pain to people. We get upset, angry, distressed and negative. God knows, there are reasons enough.

God also knows that in every home, there are reasons enough for family members to get upset, angry, distressed and furious some time or the other. Do we go about smashing our own cars, maiming our pet dog, burning our books, tearing up the sofa or hammering to bits our TV sets? Does it make any sense?

But if we, as a people get angry, our first target is “public property” – essentially assets created or bought out of our own money. Is it because somehow we are still stuck in colonial mindset where we consider “government property” as something belonging to an alien, imperial despot? Do we not realise that every rupee in the purse of the ‘National Exchequer’ as the media loves to call the Treasury, comes out of our hard labour and enterprise? If we cripple a railway coach, who eventually suffers if not the public? If we burn down a school, whose children would be left without a place to study? Why beat the shit out of a poor police horse or a sniffer dog?

We like to call our country The Land of Universal Amity; The Birthplace of Non-violence, the Land of Buddha and Gandhi. Really?

Where does that mindless fury come from? Surely not from China or Pakistan. Surely not a result of "Western Influence". Certainly not from our ancient culture, traditions or heritage. Yet, that myopic callousness to public property pervades our psyche.

That’s a thorn in my side.

I'M A MAN (?)

I’M A MAN (?)

It happened last Sunday – 31stJanuary.

She was travelling in a car with friends. A mob stopped the car. She and her friends were dragged out and beaten. Her top was torn off and she was paraded topless. She sobbed and pleaded. Bystanders stood watching, doing nothing to stop the men. She tried to board a local bus. Passengers of the bus pushed her off. Finally, someone with a bit of humanity still left inside him took off his shirt and covered the girl up.

No – this did not happen in badlands of UP. No – the men who ripped off the girl’s top were not part of gangs of Wasseypur. And no – it wasn’t my daughter ... or yours. Thank God.

It happened in a city that boasts of its “cosmopolitan” culture and “obvious influence” of ex-pat community of highly educated IT professionals. This happened in a city which is far luckier than scores of other cities of India – a city on international travel lists. A progressive, modern city of India. A city where a woman should feel safe in public space.

I hope it makes us all reflect and shudder at what awaits a woman in those countless cities and towns and villages tucked away in the heart of darkness.

(Not a photo of the episode referred in this blog but equally disturbing image)

A mob is a violent, mindless creature. I understand that. It is born of conjugation of individual angry minds and that collective progeny is a monster that would be unrecognisable by the very individuals whose minds created it. I understand that. The girl’s shirt was ripped off in anger. I understand that.

Or do I?

When I feel angry at an incident, I may want to throw a stone at a passing bus which knocked down a local boy. But I won’t do that because I am alone. However, if there are 50 other men standing with me, feeling the same anger, I might be the first to pick up and throw the stone.

But if I knew that my father or mother or anyone dear to me was travelling in that bus, I would never throw that stone – no matter how angry I felt about the bus knocking down a pedestrian. I would also try to stop others from doing so.

So what happened in the incident we all read about?

Some man would have reached out for the girl. I am trying to think what I would have felt in her place as another man grabbed my waist, or hand or other body parts. Yet another inserted his fingers inside my top. His hands would have touched my skin, clawed my flesh. And then he would have pulled hard enough for the fabric to tear. I would be whimpering, trying to fight back but would have been overpowered. I would have called out for help – and seen inscrutable faces looking back at my humiliation.

And when my top tore open did it make the men smile? Did I see the gleam of voyeuristic possibilities in their eyes? And then when the torn fabric was thrown away, and my breasts exposed to public view, I would have felt shame, rage, helplessness. I would have rued being a woman. I would have uncontrollable tears streaming down my cheeks. Maybe I would have heard a grunt...a snigger from the men. Maybe a paw would have scraped against my exposed skin. I would have tried to cover my breasts with my hands. Maybe someone kept pulling them away. I would have heard the deathly silence of the bystanders. I would have run to a passing bus hoping to find refuge there. I would’ve seen some women in the bus too.

But when I was pushed away and thrown out of the bus – what hopelessness would I have felt? In that moment, would I have felt pride in being a woman?

Which man does not understand that ripping away a woman’s top is not the same thing as ripping away a man’s shirt? That pushing around a topless woman in public view is not the same as doing that to a man? Which man would stand and watch his mother, sister, daughter, wife or female friend being subjected to that? And yet, the men in that mob did it to a woman.

As a man I feel ashamed. Has thousands of years of civilisation, “sanskriti” and “sanskara” left me with this?

What tortured minds of fathers and mothers would have raised those men who could strip a woman in public because they were angry at someone else? What relatives, neighbours and friends would have socialised with those men who could slap around and parade a half naked woman in public view? What teachers and mentors would have taught those men and women in the bus who looked at a hapless, denuded woman crying for help and brutally threw her off the bus – refusing to grant her shelter? What God of those men stood by and let them do what they did?

What did our National Poet mean when he wrote:

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high 

Where knowledge is free 

Where the world has not been broken up into fragments 

By narrow domestic walls 

Where words come out from the depth of truth 

Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection 

Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way 

Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit 

Where the mind is led forward by thee 

Into ever-widening thought and action 

Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake 

When will my daughter...my niece...your daughter, sister or niece feel safe in our country?

Even the much maligned Manusmriti says at one place:

यत्र नार्यस् तु पूज्यन्ते रमन्ते तत्र देवताः।
यत्र एतास् तु न पूज्यन्ते सर्वास् तत्र अफलाः क्रियाः ॥

Which when translated means:

"Wherever women are given their due respect, even the deities like to reside, and where they are not respected, all action remains unfruitful."

When will we be able to teach our sons that? When will men become men?

That’s a thorn in my side.

I ACCUSE MYSELF

I ACCUSE MYSELF

I am an Indian citizen. I am educated, can think and express my thoughts. For most people, I represent the “intelligentsia” – whether or not I actually am.

Look at the photo above of OROP PROTEST by ex servicemen.

My pulse races when I see our soldiers march to the tune of “Saare jahan se achcha” on crisp winter mornings of Delhi down the Raj Path with thousands of Tirangas fluttering all around. My breath comes faster when I follow news of some clinical counter strike by our armed forces along some international border or when insurgents or ultras are struck down in some village or town in Kashmir, Northeast or Punjab. My heart swells in pride when I see footage of our soldiers rushing to take aid to a neighbouring country reeling under a natural disaster or to our countrymen in various parts of India battling floods, earthquakes or other calamities.

Since independence, the pride over self governance has rapidly faded in our hearts. For us, every machinery of the nation state has failed. I consider political leadership corrupt and I have a four letter word – “Netas” – that expresses my disdain for our political representatives. The same is true for our public servants. We have another four letter word for them – “Babus” – a word that was used in utter disdain by our colonial rulers for their lowly Indian clerks. For us, our judiciary is slow, insensitive and the legal system tilted hugely in favour of the “haves”. So we revel in the famous line from the movie ‘Damini’ – “Tareekh pe tareekh…” For us Indians, the three pillars of state: legislature, executive and judiciary have failed us and bring us no satisfaction. We have also rejected the performance of the informal “Fourth State” – the media. We think that is now just a big tamasha.

If you ask an average citizen, they would deride “netas”, “babus”, courts and media but the ONE institution of the nation state everyone considers beyond reproach is – The Armed Forces. If we see true patriotism, it is in our armed forces; if we acknowledge efficiency, it is of our armed forces; if we consider any organ of the Indian government that actually works and deserves the financial contribution of the “honest taxpayers” it is our armed forces; if we think of an organisation that embodies the highest values of any organisation, we do not think of a MNC corporation – we think of our Army, Navy and Air Force. The ONLY organ of the Nation State that gets our undiluted gratitude and affection is our armed forces. Or so we like to say.

In the past few years, we have seen the common citizen backed by civil society come forth into public space and make itself heard to the much hated “netas” and “babus”. The Anna Hazare movement, Nirbhaya march to the Parliament, we have ranted and raved on TV, in newspapers, blogs about the “culture of bans” – against beef ban there, porn ban here, about net neutrality, IPL scam and so many others. We are an active and agitational nation. A land of thousand mutinies! We love to put miniature Tricolours on our car dashboards, do wheelies on mobikes with the Tiranga, put tricolour face-paint. We love to wear our Indianness on our sleeves.

So, on the one hand we profess love, respect and unqualified appreciation towards our armed forces, yet when it comes to giving emotional and representational support to our soldiers, we practice silence of the lambs. When our ex servicemen sit on relay hunger strike asking for better pension, not one of us starts a candle march or night vigils at India Gate or rallies waving flags in support of whatever it is our soldiers are demanding.

Coming to the specific demand for One Rank One Pension (OROP) most of us who shout “Jai Hind – Jai Hind ki Sena” even make the effort to understand the actual issue – leave alone try to understand the mammoth legal, administrative and financial complexities of implementing OROP. I do not see any real engagement in the cause of our soldiers – about whom we all mouth empty praises. Either we go by half baked information dished out on media or are simply not bothered. I was appalled to find several well placed and educated citizens who were not even aware of the OROP agitation or what the term means.

For those still interested in understanding the issue in a nutshell they can read the 2011 Bhagat Singh Koshyari report on OROP submitted to the Rajya Sabha. This is the 142^nd report on the matter. Read it on http://www.rajeev.in/One_Rank_One_Pension/Report_Dec192011.pdf

The OROP implementation has only 3 problems:

1.     Administrative difficulty: to roll out the benefits for millions of pensioners and calculate exact amounts of arrears for those who have retired more than 30 years ago is a gargantuan exercise for which we do not have the manpower or administrative capacity.

2.     Legal implication: the equality tenet enshrined in the Constitution would immediately result in similar demand from paramilitary forces who fight the same battles and die in larger numbers but are less revered since they are categorised as “civil organisations”.

3.     Financial constraints: OROP will cost at least about Rs. 8000 crores extra per annum. Some estimate the amount at Rs. 20000 crores for the first year. (1 crore = 10 million)

I don’t see why any of these should be a problem. Capacity to handle pension calculation and disbursement can be built by strengthening Indian Defence Accounts Service / DP&PW.

Our courts are full of really knowledgeable and good judges who can resolve any legal issues that emerge from OROP.

If we can allot Rs 2100 crores for Clean Ganga and Rs 4200 crores for Swachcha Bharat, surely we can allocate Rs 8000 crores for OROP. Of course, we will have to reduce expenditure on several other schemes like Digital India, schemes for girls, toilets etc. We will HAVE to put the requirement of our soldiers above all. It might mean some “sacrifices” in terms of a small 2-3% surcharge on various taxes. But then, don’t we all profess complete respect and admiration for the “supreme sacrifice” that a soldier is prepared to do for us?

But no – we won’t hear our columnist writing emotional articles in support of OROP, we won’t see our civil society activists joining the ex servicemen in their agitation at Jantar Mantar, no candle marches, we won’t see rallies waving the Tiranga. We won’t even be willing to come forward and offer 2% extra surcharge on taxes.

In any home, parents would be most concerned about the demands of their most beloved and best child. If that child is crying in pain or suffering, parents would do everything in their power to assuage the suffering. At the cost of greater hardship for themselves or other not-so-ideal or good children. They certainly won’t start slapping the crying ideal child.

Isn’t that what happened in Jantar Mantar last Friday?

Even for adoption of “Jan Lokpal Bill” there were stories of Indians, NRIS and IIT/IIM graduates, entrepreneurs dashing to Jantar Mantar offering support. Why no such effort is evident in support of our fasting ex servicemen?

There are only 2 possible conclusions:

1.     We don’t really believe that our armed forces are the single most important, most efficient and most deserving organisation that deserves whatever they demand in terms of pecuniary benefits on retirement or as pay and allowances. In that case, we are guilty of lying – in public and to ourselves.

or

2.     We do believe our soldiers deserve what they are demanding but we don’t think that is the most important issue to tackle as a civil society. In that case, we are again guilty of lying.

We are certainly guilty of intellectual neglect. I have seen far more active debates in private parties and on social media about things like beef ban, porn website bans, Radhe Ma and countless other matters.

More than a year back, I wrote the article http://sidethorn.blogspot.in/2014/05/why-do-we-put-tears-in-our-soldiers-eyes_3.html on this blog. That was in the era of another political regime. How much has changed today? Can we really blame any political leadership for the delays? When we ourselves can’t be bothered?

As an Indian citizen, I accuse myself of lying and criminal neglect of needs of my soldiers. And I plead guilty. I have nothing to rely upon in my defence.

Individually, all I can do is accuse myself and admit my guilt. I am also going to tie a black ribbon to the mast of the Tricolour I have on my desk in office. I will untie it the day OROP is implemented. I was never into candle marches or vigils but those millions who are, why don’t you start assembling at Jantar Mantar and across the nation in support of OROP.

Or stop mouthing meaningless platitudes for armed forces. Have the guts to tell them what you perhaps actually believe: that the armed forces are just another arm of the nation state who consume the biggest “unproductive” chunk of the exchequers’ kitty. That "we honest taxpayers" pay for their salary and free ration, booze, personal attendants, housing and many other "perks". That it is not just them who matters for the nation – there is the industry, commerce, agriculturists and countless other classes or professions that make India what it is. Say that in public space.

Or do something....anything to support their cause. They matter to us because we matter to our soldiers.

Let's not lie to our soldiers.

Or to each other.

That is a big thorn in my side.

MOTHERS, SISTERS AND DAUGHTERS-IN-LAW OF INDIA

MOTHERS, SISTERS AND DAUGHTERS-IN-LAW OF INDIA

AHMEDABAD: A six-year-old girl was allegedly sexually attacked with the perpetrator inserting an iron rod into her private parts on Friday afternoon. Sola police registered a complaint for rape andarrested the 25-year-old accused Kaushal Chauhan from the spot.

Women's rights in Rwanda – where, 20 years ago, between 250,000 and 500,000 women were rapedduring the genocide that left more than 800,000 Tutsis dead – have progressedhugely. An impressive 64% of parliamentarians are women – the highestproportion of any parliament in the world – gender rights are enshrined in itsconstitution, and a swath of laws have given women the right to inherit land,share the assets of a marriage and obtain credit.

Germany on Friday approved a new quota that will force some of Europe’s largest companies to increase the number of women in their boardrooms to 30 percent by next year.

Women claim just 15.5 percent of boardroomseats on companies listed on the S&P 1500 -- an index of U.S. stocks --fewer than the combined number of positions held by men named John, Robert,William or James, according to a report from Ernst & Young.

I read the three news items today – the International Women’s Day. For the last few days, people around me have been discussing a documentary named “India’s Daughter”. The plight of women in India, their safety, security and well being is the common topic of discussion on social media over the past week or so. Everyone agrees that women in India don’t have a good life. They are discriminated against at home, at work, in public life and in economic arena. They are physically, mentally and socially abused – in metro cities and in villages. Female foetuses are killed. Women are victims of acid attacks, honour killings and paraded naked in streets with abandon.

This makes everyone angry. This makes people DEMAND a change. NO MORE…ENOUGH! Reactions range from immediate castration of perpetrators and death penalty to attacking mindsets. We have to change attitude of men…of families. We have to ensure better education. Create more employment opportunities for women. Improve law and order. Sensitize police towards women. Tighten the judicial system for delivering speedy justice in cases of rape and molestation. Make laws more stringent. We all agree. Perhaps, in a few decades, things might start changing.

In the meantime, I would worry about my daughter going out alone. Going out at night. Travelling un-escorted. Going to college, going shopping, wearing shorts, or jeans…or shalwar or saree or burqua. I would worry for her during daytime and at night. Inside home or hotel and in a city street or in public transport. I will keep worrying because India is an ancient civilisation but that 5000 years plus civilisation has still resulted in women feeling unsafe in India. Or men thinking they have absolute power over women and can express this power by inserting whatever they want into women, whenever they want. That the provocation always comes from women. If 5000 years hasn’t changed that, I worry what will change in the next 5 years?

Many women I respect as colleagues or friends shared their hurt and anger about the “Women’s Question” and the way things are in India. But I could not get a sense of any agenda. There is a wish-list, of course….that things SHOULD be this way. But no agenda. Perhaps, that is why things are not changing – at least not at the speed with which they should in India. If Rawanda can have 67% women legislators and Germany can reserve 30% seats in corporate boardroom, why can we not think in that direction?

Let me explain using an example. We know that rapes in police custody is a fact. Will it happen in an all women police station? Yes, I am also considering existence of lesbians. I personally feel an all woman police station will probably have no custodial rapes. So can we extend that thought? What if the entire police force is made up of only women? If we bring 100% reservation in police, what could go wrong? Will women be less efficient? Will they not be able to handle police work? Are they less capable physically and mentally to do police work? If not, why don’t we look at this as a solution?

Same applies to public service. Public servants are the arms of the state. What’s wrong with 100% reservation for women in all government jobs? What about legislatures and judiciary? And what about the Fourth State – press? Finally, as this world is moving rapidly towards corporatisation, where more and more power will vest in corporations – what about the German solution? At least 50% if not 100% reservation for women in bigger corporations – say those which fall in the mandatory CSR category? Why not come together as a society and agree for 50 years of this real CHANGE?

There are two “weaknesses” that women in general suffer with. One is their physical size, musculature etc and the other is their economic capability. The former is natural while the latter is a result of social process.

Having practiced martial arts for years now, I know that physical strength can be countered through training. Similarly, having been a student of economics, I also know that normally, wealth begets wealth.

Obviously, then, the solution in the short run is reduce (or remove) the physical handicap of women. At the same time, remove (or reduce) their economic handicap. Unfortunately, we cannot simply “wish” that men would stop misusing their physical superiority against women. In the short run, this has to be effectively countered through appropriate training. Just as educated parents today are giving their daughters good nutrition, education and encouraging them to have a career, so also they must start ensuring their daughters get some training to deal with physical assault. This also gives extreme inner sense of confidence.

As regards the economic handicap, let us try 50 years of suspension of wealth ownership by men. They can work earn a living but the amassed wealth cannot be in their name. Initially, this will not change much as men would still control the real purse strings. But as judiciary, executive, executive, media and corporations become women oriented, the change will be real and rapid.

I know, this sounds too Utopian. Most women friends / colleagues I spoke of were extremely reluctant to even look at these solutions. They agree this would work but are too skeptical and in-confident to even think of demanding this. When Emmeline Pankhurst started demanding right to vote and get elected for women, towards the end of 19^th century, no one would have believed the Suffragists could achieve it. But it happened. It was only because the movement became a political plank.

Perhaps now is the time to take the women’s question to a political plank. Make 100% reservation in all important spheres of public life a demand. Maybe 30% will happen. Maybe 50%. That would be a vast improvement.

Will majority of men be happy with that? Obviously not. Will they GIVE it to women? No. That change will have to be extracted. For millennia of dominance, some enlightened men might even start supporting that political movement. There is need for a political intervention and women require to create a political plank of their own to press their demands. If a 10 year horizon is what we want, then that is the only solution. Otherwise, we can pray for judicial reforms, more legislation, more sensitive policing…but our women will continue getting abused and discriminated against.

So the question is, what do the mothers, sisters and daughter-in-laws of India want? Should they wait for society to change through education, awareness and sensitization? How long will it take? In the meantime, should a political plank be created? I hope some politically active women start reflecting on these solutions and looking at Rawanda and Germany. Or come up with an alternative that will work in 5 - 10 years.

It’s International Women’s Day today.

Why do we put tears in our soldiers' eyes?

Why do we put tears in our soldiers' eyes?

A close friend of three decades is a Brigadier and a true officer and a gentleman. He sent me a link of a write-up published in ‘THE CITIZEN IS YOU’ online daily, titled ‘A Requiem For the Martyrs’ by Lt. Gen. Syed Ata Hasnain, a much decorated retired officer who was known for his “Hearts is my weapon” campaign in J&K as a healing touch initiative for the troubled state.

Very briefly, the article talks about the general apathy in India towards our soldiers. It also refers to an oft-heard refrain by many that soldiers have chosen their profession and are paid for the risk. Lt. Gen. Hasnain says, “No one expects the nation to come to a grinding halt every other day when a braveheart loses his life in a conflict situation battling the nation’s enemies, nor does one need banners to announce such news; all that is asked for is an acknowledgement of the sacrifice, a few words of remorse and empathy towards the families who have lost their all.”

While the write-up made me think deeply, my own friend’s remark made me feel ashamed as a citizen of India. While forwarding the article, he asked, why are we (soldiers) pleading if it (recognition) is not there?

What makes a fine officer of the Indian Army say that - or even think that? Someone who has been bestowed with one of the highest military honours for bravery in combat? That emotion could only come from receiving apathy, neglect and disconnect from us – the People of India. We, the People of India have failed him and ourselves - for India is defended by Indian soldiers and not soldiers from any other nation. They are us. Soldiers exist because a nation exists. Take away the idea of a nation and you take away the need for national defence and national armies and the need for men and women to lay down their lives to defend a nation. Therefore, shouldn't a nation feel some obligations towards its soldiers? Does my friend (or one of our countless other soldiers) deserves to feel like that? If any soldier feels neglected, unrecognised or forgotten, it is we, the People of India who must reflect on what has become of us.

Indeed, the argument that soldiers are paid for their sacrifices is revolting. A doctor is generally considered next to God even though, in most cases, we pay through our noses to get treatment. Yet, a doctor is respected - we encourage our children to become doctors - precisely because there is a possibility of earning much more than an average soldier would earn (and no threat of death in action). A banker is also paid (and rather well) and retains a place in our modern pantheon of "achievers". A VP of a bank would be holding equivalent organisational stature and responsibilities as a CO in armed forces but as a society, the VP is more "valuable". We as a society even pay him several times more. Should this not be a matter of some concern?

Are we, as a society becoming too commercialised? We have a tradition of “Gurur-Brahmaa Gurur-Vissnnur-Gururdevo Maheshvarah |Gurureva Param Brahma Tasmai Shrii-Gurave Namah ||” (The Guru is Brahma, the Guru is Vishnu, the Guru Deva is Maheshwara, The Guru is truly the Para-Bramha; Salutations to that Guru). But today, are we pushing our kids to become teachers? It just doesn't pay and hence it is no longer a "respected" or cared for profession. Is a soldier's profession another victim of our increasingly crassly commercial attitude?

One of the attributes of a nation-state is sovereignty and its ability to defend its boundaries against external threats. Not every citizen is required to do so because a few choose to do that job. But their choice is not the same as the act of choosing any another profession like law, or films, or brokering or any other. By making that choice, it renders a soldier special for the nation because this choice enables others to be free to choose other jobs or professions. It's not that any profession is anything less, it's just that some professions deserve being treated as something more.

No one in today’s world is born a doctor or lawyer or actor or soldier. Personal inclinations, capabilities, circumstances and opportunities place people in different professions. But the profession of a soldier requires him to kill or die for his nation – a requirement that doesn’t exist for any other profession barring the paramilitary/CPOs. Perhaps the only other even more difficult profession is espionage/intelligence. They are supposed to be soldiers but without a face – not even known or acknowledged. So why is it difficult for us to accept this difference and add respect and recognition over and above the "CTC" or monetary compensation we pay them as a society or a nation? What makes us “respect” and “recognise” someone who entertains us more than someone who is willing to kill for us – so that our own hands remain clean or die so that we may live in peace?

Is it because in India we are blasé about people dying? It is interesting to read the National Crime Record Bureau Report (NCRB) 2012. Pg. 531 of the Report gives figures for 2012 alone as: 68676 recorded murders, death due to negligence 87334, 78 killed in police firing, 821 police personnel killed of which 83 by terrorists/militants and 61 by other criminals. At the same time, reports in public domain indicate 11 military casualties during 2011. So have we become benumbed? Because thousands are getting killed or are killing, where roads in the Red Corridor are strewn with corpses of policemen and civilians killed by Maoists each year, we have no value for the soldier who does so for a higher cause? Are we treating death in line of duty by a soldier in the same category as a murder?

Are these commercial reasons and societal disdain the cause of massive shortage of officers in our armed forces? A shortage of 20-25% at officer level is a serious problem. Quite clearly, kids today are no longer interested in that career. Is it because they see the disdain in their parents' eyes? Is it because the lure of money has been perpetrated and encouraged? Is it because our society portrays our soldiers as bumbling fools who dash off to play war games and die whenever signalled while the rest of us "smarter lot" get on with improving our standard of living, acquiring wealth, giving foreign education to our children so that they can earn even better than us?

Does that soldier not contribute to providing secure environment to enable our betterment? How much should that convert to in commercial terms? If the society doesn't want to pay that much, is it possible to compensate a bit by giving some respect, recognition and love? Those things don't cost. Or have we become a people who want to give nothing - even if it costs us nothing? Or do we begrudge them something? What?

There's no point convincing ourselves that actually the soldier is given enough till the time the soldier looks downcast. Do we think giving medals, uniform, his ration of few eggs and butter, the facilities of defence canteen, orderlies, dancing of film stars amongst jawans, sonorous debates on the TV when a soldier dies, giving a gun-salute and such other things enough "payment"? How many of us would trade all that with our lives when the occasion demands? If a soldier feels bad, feels unwanted, neglected - there's something wrong.

I have interacted with many people in the armed forces but none who feels the nation is giving them their due. Can all of them be wrong? If so, they can only be extremely self-centred and greedy people for whom the phrase, 'Ye dil maangey more' means nothing more than a soft drink salesman's desire to earn more by way of bonus by selling more and perhaps also being given the 'Salesman of the Year Award'. Then our soldiers must all be Gordon Geckos for whom "greed is good".

But why would such "greedy" souls lay down their lives for the nation?

Or do we need to look into our own benumbed, commercial souls and answer the question, "Why do our soldiers feel unhappy and neglected?"

I don't know how will our attitude change. I don't know how to bring that happy smile on my soldier's face. And that's a thorn in my side.

I must end with these lines from Makhanlal Chaturvedi to help us reflect:

चाह नहीं मैं सुरबाला के गहनों में गूँथा जाऊँ

चाह नहीं, प्रेमी-माला में बिंध प्यारी को ललचाऊँ

चाह नहीं, सम्राटों के शव पर हे हरि, डाला जाऊँ

चाह नहीं, देवों के सिर पर चढ़ूँ भाग्य पर इठलाऊँ

मुझे तोड़ लेना वनमाली उस पथ पर देना तुम फेंक

मातृभूमि पर शीश चढ़ाने जिस पर जावें वीर अनेक ।।
.................
TRANSLATION:

"The Yearning of a Flower Desireth not to be on the young lass’ Tresses…living twice all over,

Desireth not to be in a garland Binding, enticing young lovers,

Desireth not to rest on the mortals Of Emperors – aren’t we equally God’s own?

Desireth not to be on the heads of Gods To take pride in mere fortune,

Pick me out, O Gardener!

Strew me on the path that the Brave tread To sacrifice for Motherland!

Let me, in obeisance, bow my head!"

...............................................................................................    Sorry - I simply couldn't resist.

Where will the Samurais come from?

                                                   Where will the Samurais come from?

Many years back, in a moment of candor, one of the professors of my MBA course in UK expressed wistful regret that Great Britain never tried to replicate their experiment with a national civil service like the one they conducted in India - neither anywhere else in their vast colonies, nor back home. Years later, an officer of the US government familiar with India expressed almost similar sentiments. In this world where “professionalism” and “management” are revered words, those views of objective foreigners were rather thought provoking.

The Government of India Act of 1858 created the Indian Civil Service. By 1934 the British were administering India through seven All India Services and five Central Services, together designated as Central Superior Services. The term “civil service” in India today loosely refers to the handful of services that provide senior managers for a wide array of the most critical government businesses ranging from general areas like administration to specialized fields like international relations, tax administration, law & order, audit and accounting, railways, posts etc.

The rich history, the important role in managing affairs of the state and the prestige civil services carried made them the topmost career option for several decades after the independence. Working for the Government was working for the People of India. It gave tremendous satisfaction. Being a second generation civil servant, I grew up with the impression that general public respected government servants - from the postman and Railway Ticket Collector to officers of the elite civil services - perhaps because these people were considered as symbols of selfless public service.

But things had started changing by the ‘80s. In 1989, when I informed some of my college teachers in Mumbai that I had cleared the civil service examination, one professor asked me coldly, “What’s so civil about the civil service?” I felt disappointment, disdain and derision in her tone. Most of my brighter classmates were taking their GRE or CAT and wanted to get away from India. At least in Mumbai, by that time, civil services were no longer a preferred option.

With liberalization in the ‘90s the picture became worse. As private companies vied to attract better talent, the pay packages and perks became more and more lucrative. In metros, the lifestyle of my contemporaries in equivalent managerial positions in the corporate sector had become unachievable by civil servants. Having a father and an older sibling in civil service I was less naïve, but the visions that many batch-mates had of zipping across in government Ambassadors and living in sprawling bungalows were quickly shattered in the bigger cities. Only those posted in B or C class towns still enjoyed the “charm” of yellow PWD accommodation, a rundown office Gypsy and residential telephone.

In my second year of posting in Delhi, a college friend who had taken the B-school route visited from Mumbai. He invited me over for lunch to his room in Le Meridian. He happily said the bill would be “adjusted” in his business account. He spoke enthusiastically of his company’s corporate values and clout. He proudly talked about how his company influenced government policies and decisions and how their MD aspired to build a new India. He also had a taxi waiting that dropped me back to my office. I didn’t have to hunt for an auto.

I married a college mate who had become a journalist. Before marriage, a mutual friend advised her, “Ask him to change his job. It doesn't suit him. Government babus are horrible, paan-chewing creatures. Besides, how would you live in those filthy small towns?” It was a big shift from the times when civil servants were supposed to possess sophistication and intellectualism. OLQ – or Officer Like Quality was no longer at premium. Corporate Culture was the new  benchmark of social grace. Already, a civil servant was not the best match for urban girls.

By the new millennium, India was shining brightly and India Inc was the new Sun. A call center executive was earning almost as much as a civil servant. The B-school wallas had moved far ahead. They justified their astronomical packages by swearing they worked 18 to 20 hours a day. Yet, despite returning home past midnight during Parliament sessions or working for days at a stretch on enforcement duties, I couldn't claim doing any work because it only earned sniggers and comments like, “The country would be better off if you babus did even less work.”

Understandably therefore, I haven’t met a single boy or girl from any metro or even second tier towns in years who wanted to join the civil service. Neither the image, nor the salaries nor the prospects of constant transfers attracts them. The lure of cheap government guest houses on vacations or “tenure membership” of district sports clubs is no longer enough. Governance, like politics is considered a dirty job.

Sometimes, the existing reality reminds me of the movie, The Last Samurai where a fast-westernising Japan has no place for the age old system of Samurais. Arrested for carrying arms into a meeting (a Samurai never left his sword behind), the leader of the Samurais, Katsumoto Moritsugu is ready to commit Seppuku (or hara-kiri). “The way of the Samurai is not necessary anymore”, he says.

In India today, there is still – and I dare say even more - need for dynamic DMs, humane SPs, judicious DCs of taxation or polished First Secretaries in our embassies abroad. But the best are no longer looking at entering public service. Yet, as a nation we want the best, most professional, bright and sensitive civil servants. We want high class Samurais who will serve the nation with dedication, integrity and intelligence – sacrificing personal interests. At the least possible social remuneration.

So it makes me wonder: Where will the Samurais come from? And more importantly – does India, as a nation even need those Samurai anymore?

Or is it time to disband the old style bureaucracy and shift to a system where practically all functions of the state are privatized. Can’t this be done? Let’s examine four of the fundamental role of a state: defence, foreign relations, taxation and law & order.

A famous and extremely popular author, in his book analysing the needs of present India makes a point of outsourcing LoC border defence to the US army. He reasons, this will be far cheaper than maintaining our own border security with, say, Pakistan because the US army already has bases in Pakistan and it would be in their interest to maintain safe borders between India and Pakistan. If I look at it like a rational, economic individual, it makes sense. At a fraction of the cost, our borders can be outsourced. Several small nations in Africa have already tried this successfully. Border security can be contracted out to another nation or mercenaries at a fraction of the cost (monetary or human) it takes to maintain a national army.

Today, most public spaces – malls, cinemas, residential colonies, parks etc. have private security. Should not this model be extended to policing? Local communities can appoint their own policemen, private detective firms can be contracted to replace crime branch, mercenaries can be hired to conduct raids or replace armed constabulary.

Instead of a dedicated, career diplomatic service, why can’t the job be done by hiring lobbyists, PR firms or contracting professionals on a tenure basis? Processing of visas or passport applications is already outsourced. Why can’t this philosophy be extended to other functions of our Ministry of External Affairs?

Similarly, why can’t assessment and collection of federal taxes be given to firms of chartered accountants and auditors? Banks can be made responsible for collection – after all, we have all seen how active collection agents of banks are. Existing laws permit hiring of private auditors for very complex matters. Why not extend it to all tax cases?

Such measures would practically eradicate the much-resented and redundant “government servants” from the structure of governance. This should come as a big relief and satisfaction to our citizens. And all this will substantially bring down the administrative costs that are the biggest portion of government spending. Service Level Agreements can be entered into so that the hired contractors simply deduct operational costs, charge a pre-decided contract fee and pay the balance to the government. They may even be allowed to raise public money through IPOs. So, if people do not want to continue with Arunachal border security – or it is a loss making enterprise, the share value of that company would fall and eventually it will cease to exist or amalgamate with some more efficient (profitable) company rendering defence services. If Indo-Pak relationship is becoming worse, the PR firm can be fired and a new one hired. If tax collections do not meet targets, the collection agency can be penalised and the contract withdrawn. The same for police service contractors. Why can’t all this be done?

Such a course of action might make “government” itself redundant. If all its functions can be privatised/marketised and therefore outsourced, what will be the need for any “government”?

 Or this is all impractical and undesirable? If so, we come back to the need for having a dedicated band of Samurais – professional, ethical, intelligent, self-sacrificing, faceless and incorruptible. But how do we get them? That’s a thorn in my side.