ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Dilli Chalo!

A year ago I wrote about the persistence of memory, the need for Indians to be aware of their history . This Independence Day, I shall try my hand at peering into the crystal ball. I wish to talk about what I think each of us needs to do to make our dreams about India become a reality; I wish to also tell you why I, despite all the negatives all around, remain an optimist about India.

At the risk of being cliché-ridden, let me remind you of what a Frenchman -- maybe de Gaulle -- said (and John Kennedy repeated): "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country!" Every Indian reading my columns is, by definition, part of a small, well-educated, well-to-do class; in other words, the country has already done a lot for you. It is time for all of us to do our bit for the country.

But guilt-inducement is not the right way to present the case for India (although our good friends in Israel have made quite a cottage-industry out of it; and I mean no disrespect to them at all, I am impressed by them; if they can pull it off, more power to them!). As I have said in my personal neo-liberal manifesto, the bottom line is a realistic assessment of enlightened self-interest -- what will help both me and the country?

In this centenary year of the birth of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, I have been meaning to study the monumental Brothers Against the Raj: the biography of Subhas and Sarat Bose. Unfortunately, I have been intimidated by the sheer size of the book, and have had it sitting, unread, on my coffee table for several months. So I must admit, shamefacedly, that I am less informed about Netaji than I had hoped to be.

Nevertheless, it looks as though the nation is coming out of its collective amnesia about what Subhas Bose and that gallant but doomed force, the Indian National Army, did achieve. It appears as though Bose is being 'rehabilitated.' It is no longer taboo to speak about him. Jyoti Basu, the doyen of Indian Marxists, in a moment of fetching candor, admitted that the Communist Party had erred in denouncing Bose as some kind of fascist monster. Better late than never.

The dominant (JNU?) school of Indian historiography, or should I say hagiography, has crafted a revisionist modern Indian history where there is room only for one hero -- Jawaharlal Nehru. Or so we have been led to believe. Well, maybe Mahatma Gandhi had a bit of a supporting role, too. I agree that Nehru had charisma and leadership, but I fear that his vision, in hindsight, was severely flawed.

I am of the opinion that Bose galvanised the country as no one else did, with the single possible exception of the martyr Bhagat Singh. It is one of those impossible historical imponderables -- what if Gandhi had not had a fatal fondness for Nehru, and had not manoeuvred Bose out of the Congress Presidency? Who knows? We would certainly have a different India. Better or worse, it's hard to tell. Different, for sure.

But I like Bose's rallying cry -- Chalo Dilli! Let's march upon Delhi! As Jews have toasted each other for millenia, "Next year in Jerusalem!" I don't necessarily mean physically; but metaphorically, Indians need to march upon Delhi. For Delhi is the worst of India -- the parasitical Stalinist State, the self-serving, self-perpetuating, corrupting core of all that's wrong with India.

To those overseas, diasporic Indians, this is what Dilli Chalo! means -- return to India if you can. If you cannot, invest in India. If that too is not feasible, then get the company you're working for to invest in India. And none of this is for charity -- do it because it makes sense, because you can show a proper ROI, because you believe.

The exploits of overseas Chinese are too well-known to bear repeating: suffice to say that about 70% of all the massive investment in China has come from Chinese entrepreneurs all over Southeast Asia and North America. It is also oft-repeated that, alas, the Indian diaspora does not have the cash -- after all, there are hundreds of overseas Chinese millionaires; but there is only a handful of Laxmi Mittals and Srichand Hindujas and Harry Harilelas.

This is true -- the majority of Indians overseas are professionals, often medical or engineering types, who don't have the big bucks nor the managerial expertise to invest in trying environments. However, many of these professionals do have money, especially the wealthy doctors of Florida and the computer millionaires of the Silicon Valley. The others are mostly employees, working often for some large multinational corporation.

However, that fact is not really a disadvantage, in fact one could argue it is an advantage -- for these MNCs have money, and it should be possible to induce them to invest in India. In fact, quite a few Indians are now in senior positions in multinationals, including several at the CEO level. According to a recent story in Business Today, here are some Indian-origin CEOs in the Fortune 500:

Rajat Gupta -- McKinsey
Sanjay Kumar -- Computer Associates
Jim Wadia -- Arthur Andersen
Rana Talwar -- Standard and Chartered
Rakesh Gangwal -- USAir

The obvious implication is that there is a whole cadre of Indian-born managers and employees at various levels of major companies. Given the fact that many of these companies are currently looking to diversify their operations, either to take advantage of information technology, or as a portfolio risk-management strategy, it is not at all unreasonable to put together detailed business plans to start operations in India. I submit NRIs should do precisely that.

Just look at the list of recent announcements of software centres being set up in India, even in the gloomy sanctions climate since May -- Oracle's new development centre in Hyderabad, Ford's in Madras, and BaaN's global support centre, also in Hyderabad. These MNCs are investing in India because it is the most optimal use of their resources -- ask yourself, why not the company you work for?

To those Indians in India, Dilli Chalo! means -- recognise that the only ingredient missing is leadership. And each one of you should take a personal pledge to work towards creating and sustaining a vision that will make leaders of you. And you must work towards breaking the stranglehold of a faulty Stalinist system.

For it is clear that in addition to the ills of endemic corruption and lawlessness, the very democracy Indians are supposed to be so proud of is deeply flawed. It is pathetic to see a national government held to ransom by an imperious prima donna (J Jayalalitha) or a party consisting essentially of one man (Subramanian Swamy). Especially when the country is besieged by external threats, the moral equivalent of war.

There has been much talk of a constitutional amendment to bring in a Presidential form of government. That at least has the advantage of avoiding mid-term elections and no-confidence votes and so forth, but it brings its own host of problems. Better to try and improve the existing system.

For instance, one of the biggest problems is all these fragmented, venal parties that are merely the expression of one person's ego. I propose that the proliferation of parties must be prevented -- as in the US, if you wish to create a party, you must get the signatures of some 20 pc of the voters in each state on a petition for the creation of the party. And these signatures must be audited at the expense of the party. This will put paid to the Subramanian Swamy parties.

In fact, I'd go one step further and limit the number of parties in the country to just three: a leftist, a rightist, and a centrist party. Furthermore, there will be no such thing as 'defection,' because any legislator who wishes to change parties will have to resign; a fresh election will be held, the costs for which will be borne by the resigning MLA or MP. The only exception will be the death of the sitting legislator, or a general election, in which case the government will bear the costs.

Yes, the rules of the game have to be changed. The great Malayalam poet Kumaran Asan said, Mattuvin chattangale! Allengil
Mattumathukali ningalethan.

Change the rules! Lest they
Change thee thyselves.

I think it is up to every one of the resident Indians to ensure that the rules are changed, so that politics is no longer the last resort of the scoundrel. It is not enough to sit back and criticise. It is time for action, for a technology-savvy, Internet-friendly, globally-aware generation to take over.

Is there any point, though? Is there any possibility that the nation will be able to overcome the weight of centuries of apathy, decay and deprivation? I believe there is, and I base this on two examples, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh.

One hundred years ago, Kerala was an extraordinarily brutal society. It reached levels of depravity that are almost unimaginable -- for caste determined everything. 'Lower caste' people were supposed to stand a certain distance away from 'upper caste' people -- for not only their touch, but even their shadows would pollute. And the punishment for pollution was death.

Furthermore, there was at least one caste that was not only untouchable, but even 'unseeable' -- seeing them was considered polluting; so they had to shout, "I am coming, please avert your eyes," if they walked down a village street. The 'lower castes' essentially had no rights greater than domestic animals; 'lower caste' women were fair game for the 'upper castes.'

It was against all this that the poet Asan raised his clarion call about changing the rules. And Swami Vivekananda was moved to call Kerala a lunatic asylum. One can imagine the self-image of the 'lower castes' -- it could hardly have been worse. I see this syndrome today in much of India, especially the BIMARU (Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh -- the "cow belt") states, where obsequiousness betrays a sense of worthlessness.

But a century later, as a result of thoroughgoing political and social reform, I don't think there's anyone in Kerala who feels worthless. If anything, Kerala residents suffer from a surfeit of self-image, as can be seen in the frequent strikes and political marches. Nobody believes he/she is, as a human being, inferior to anyone else -- okay, maybe they have less money, or less education or whatever, but they are still somebody. So if it can happen in Kerala, why not in the BIMARU states, maybe in another fifty years?

Andhra Pradesh is another surprising success story. My image of the state -- horrible feudal exploitation -- comes from films like Ankur and Oka Oorie Katha. The violent People's War Group's activities, the periodic suicides of impoverished farmers, the extreme heat and aridness of the interior districts -- all of this does not add to my sense of confidence.

But a quiet revolution is taking place in Andhra, and it can be attributed to just one small thing -- leadership. And it is not as though there aren't Indians who have that trait: just look at the list of CEOs above. Andhra has a man who acts like a CEO although he is a politician -- N Chandrababu Naidu, the chief minister of the state.

This one man has transformed sleepy Andhra Pradesh and its capital Hyderabad. I was fortunate enough to get an audience with him; in an electrifying forty-five minutes, he showed me the face of a new India -- one that gives me considerable optimism. Maybe the mantra for the future should be Hyderabad Chalo! For Naidu is determined to compete with the world's best -- in IT, for example, he has the Silicon Valley in his gunsights.

Naidu reels off facts and figures; a trained economist, he speaks of stakeholders -- his investment in information technology is not for vanity, but it is making a difference to the lives of his people in far-flung villages. He is decentralising governance, involving hundreds of citizen groups in villages in running their own projects, for which they have to raise 30 pc of the funds locally.

To begin with, Naidu's government had to sell off prime real estate to finance road-works; but now investors are taking note -- a $25 million bond issued by the state was oversubscribed by 500 pc; and the World Bank, despite the sanctions brouhaha, recently released a $500 million dollar loan. He has built irrigation facilities for 2.2 million acres of land in the last three years, as compared to a total of 4 million acres in the previous fifty years.

Naidu speaks on into the afternoon, painting a picture at once seductive and practical. He talks of 4 million acres of degraded land that he intends to regenerate; of rainwater harvesting in his perennially thirsty districts. He speaks of involvement -- he himself works 18 hours a day; and asks, why can't everybody else work ten? He suggests that it is a mind-set change that he is after: motivation. He has now prodded his bureaucrats into mandatory three-week stints in villages every three months so they can see first-hand what the problems are.

In short, Naidu has done enough to be India's unofficial economic ambassador -- this 47-year-old man was in Business Week's list of Asia's most important leaders; and he said, laughing, that when the S&P team came to India to review the country's ratings, they were bundled off to Andhra to meet him, and to presumably be impressed. He is also becoming a role model -- his next visitor after us was a finance minister from one of the BIMARU states.

India's leaders have consistently failed the nation ever since Independence; any progress has been made in spite of them and their stultifying policies, not because of them: as Professor Jagdish Bhagwati said, "India has had the great misfortune to have brilliant economists" who over-planned. But here is an economist-leader who may break the stereotype.

In sum, then, I claim that there is definitely hope for India, hope for her teeming masses. But for miracles to happen, there needs to be commitment and action on the part of each one of you. I hope you will rise to the occasion. And if you ask me what I am personally doing for India, I will tell you that I am practising pretty much everything I am preaching.

Rajeev Srinivasan