Though surprisingly little might have changed in the remotest corners of the country, the strides India has taken as a collective whole belie belief. From being a British colony, to a divided nation, to a staunchly independent young nation, to finally being an American sympathiser (toady?) via being a Soviet sympathiser (again, toady?). Phew. Quite a journey.

However, this very journey has reaped rich rewards. Today, the world touts India as the next-to-next-big thing. Sadly, China stands between us and the next-big-thing tag. China notwithstanding, respect has been garnered. India is widely accepted as the chief proponent of soft power. The Mahatma would, in many respects, be proud to see the country he liberated, doing so well.

64 years ago, the very thought of India even entertaining thoughts of bidding for a permanent seat on that great table of power, the United Nations Security Council, would have sounded laughably ludicrous. True, that India was offered Taiwan’s seat in 1955, but much to his credit, our first Prime Minister refused. Maybe, he knew that India’s time was yet to come.

Today, nations are clamouring to endorse India’s bid for a permanent seat. “It represents the changing world order,” they say. Such a large consensus has little chance of being wrong, but what is interesting to see how our foreign policy might have affected this huge an opinion shift.

Indo-America bonding
The recent past has seen a great shift in India’s foreign policy. A shift largely towards the American camp. Observers are rather alarmed. Some have gone on to insinuate that India is losing its formerly independent stance.

The Hyde Act! That Hyde Act! How could they even entertain thoughts of agreeing to the postulates? HOW?! And whatever even happened to our close comradeship with the Soviets? Are we becoming America’s little lapdog? And is America even treating us fairly? After all, they are aiding Pakistan, and that very aid is in a way biting us through terrorism.

Valid questions and assertions, all. But then again, consider what we’ve gained in return. The respect of the Americans, and their endorsement (in principle at least), of our bid for a permanent Security Council seat. Come 2012, and our bid for the same should be that much easier because of this endorsement. Surely, that means a lot? Surely that means that other nations too can endorse the Indian candidature? After all, we now have the American seal of approval.

Yes. It means a lot, and India’s candidature has never looked stronger. When India bids for the permanent seat in 2012, it would have more support than it has ever had in its entire history.

Which brings us to:

Power and Responsibility
India’s growing clout has added a certain responsibility to its name. A responsibility that our leaders don’t quite feel.

As a dominant power in the world, and as a country which feels, and is able to convince others, that it is worthy of a Security Council seat, India does surprisingly little to not just assert its individuality, but also to fester more stability in its neighbourhood.

The Non-Aligned Movement, that great testament to India’s diplomacy and fierce individuality, seems to be a relic of the Cold War era. SAARC seems to be more of a formality than an actual convention which can make a difference. Indo-China relations are on the upswing, but it is China taking the initiative while India just plays along. Indo-Pak relations are nowhere close to being stress-free.

Let this new era of our independence be one where we, as a nation, show the world that we understand the responsibilities attached with our power. Let us show that the power we talk about isn’t merely through clever word-play, but also in deed. Our leaders might have convinced the world that we are worthy of the Security Council, but let them convince the largely cynical Indian populace. Let that be a test of worthiness.

This post first published as an Independence Day feature on SIMC Wire.

Visual Prompt

Birth

After the 26/11 terror strikes, almost all bilateral talks between India and Pakistan had stopped. Now, steps are underway to restart a composite dialogue that was derailed by the 2008 Mumbai attacks. A step towards the same is the on-going ministerial-level meet between the two nuclear-armed arch-rivals.

A meet between the two Foreign Ministers, India’s S M Krishna and Pakistan’s newly appointed Hina Rabbani Khar on Wednesday ended, like always, rather promisingly on paper. A number of issues were discussed. Promises were made. A future plan of action was charted. And reading the joint statement issued, one got the general feeling that both the Honourable Ministers were mighty pleases with the progress made.

Alas, progress on paper does not always result in action taken. There’s that funny period between successive rounds of talks where the complete lack of any sort of follow-up boggles the mind. Maybe, it is realized that the quagmire which is the diplomacy of the two countries is just too difficult to cross in a paper dinghy.

While the red tape and diplomatic hubris is no less on the Indian side, Pakistan’s side of things presents a fascinating story. In Pakistan, the almighty security establishment also needs to be taken into consideration. For decades, Pakistan’s foreign policy has been controlled by the security establishment and it reflects an obvious disconnect between national security considerations and diplomatic compulsions. Often, the security establishments have gone to war on the ground, with the Pakistani foreign office maintaining that the soldiers fighting were not Pakistani. Such is the disconnect that former Pakistani Prime Minister and current Opposition leader Nawaz Sharif has stated that the foreign policy ought to be shaped by the Parliament, and not by generals.

With such a blatant disconnect between the promised and the delivered, it is easy to be cynical about what might actually be achieved after the present round of talks. But then, it should not be forgotten that some issues do get resolved through these talks. The Samjhauta Express being re-started, the cross-border bus service, greater trade opportunities between the two countries, all came about after diplomatic talks. In the same vein, the present round, with its promises of increased truck movement and cross-LoC travel, might not be a complete failure. But it is the failure to address the hard issues like border security and counter-insurgencies measures which really tinkers. Whether they will be addressed satisfactorily henceforth will have to be seen.

First published as a lead story on SIMC Wire.

What this bumper crop has meant is that the Government does not really know what to do with it. The storage facilities it has aren’t quite adequate. Government godowns have a bulging wheat stock of 37.8 MT in view of the bumper output. Such is the situation that even Union Agriculture Minister, Mr Sharad Pawar expresses some amount of concern. Talking to the media on the sidelines of an Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) function, he expressed concern over storage issues that could arise for the new crop to be harvested in 2011-2012. He went on to say that his real worry was for when paddy procurement starts in Andhra Pradesh and Punjab as the current stocks were much more than the country’s requirements.

Perhaps keeping all this in mind, the Government on Saturday decided to lift the four-year old ban on wheat export. During the same interaction with the media, Pawar made as much clear when he said that there was no ban and that wheat exports were allowed. Though the exact amount of grain sanctioned for export has not yet been revealed, or a formal announcement has not yet been made by the Government, this might seem like a prudent move one would say.

Alas, the Russians beat the Indians to it. Although evidence of a global wheat shortage did exist earlier in the year, the Indian Government’s move came only after Russian wheat started flooding the global market. The Russians, also seeing an upward swing in their wheat production, entered the global market after almost one year. Russian Black Sea wheat, which tastes similar to Indian wheat and is of a similar quality, currently trades at $244 per tonne. Traders say Indian wheat would be priced at around $300 per tonne. Clearly, industry insiders aren’t wrong when they say that there is very little possibility that Indian wheat would find takers.

According to those in the know, the best time for India to have entered the market would have been around March-April when there was a real shortage of wheat in the global markets and Russian wheat was yet to arrive. India, however, missed that opportunity. Some believe this delay was because of the pendency of the Food Security Act, which is a favourite of Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council.

So even though the Supreme Court has frequently hauled up the Government for its wasteful practice in a country of hungry people, it looks like grain would again be wasted this year. Sad, don’t you think?

This post first published on SIMC Wire.

Well that could be one way to go about things. How about a different route, however? How about a more introspective route? The very same route the collective nation takes in the immediate after math of a terror attack, but chooses to abandon less than hour later. Something about inconvenient truths, or maybe the collective memory really is 140 characters long.

Why exactly did this attack take place? Why exactly do any of the attacks take place? Post 26/11, the Indian public had been promised tighter checks and a more secure India. The National Investigative Agency Bill and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Bill became a law and the National Investigative Agency (NIA) was set up. Never again seemed to be the tone used by the Government. And yet, 13/7 happened. Three blasts. Fifty-six killed, over 200 injured. Mumbai the target again. Intelligence failure? Or merely a failure of collective intelligence?

The very fact that each attack catches the Indian public and Government by surprise hints at bumbling ineptitude on the part of the various intelligence agencies. It’s not like the best intelligence agencies don’t fail. In fact, the FBI and CIA failed to prevent 9/11 even though Mossad had tipped them off about it one full month in advance. No intelligence agency can be 100% accurate. And yet we see this vast difference in the times the two nations (India and USA) are targeted. That even though many terror outfits recognize USA as enemy #1. Maybe it has something to do with stringent security measures? Or maybe it has something to do with the policies adopted by the two with respect to terrorism.

While talking to the media in the aftermath of the 13/7 attacks, Bharatiya Janata Party leader L K Advani claimed that the attacks were caused because of a policy failure, and not an intelligence failure. While condemning the attacks, he urged the Government to also adopt a zero-tolerance approach towards terrorism. While one can’t really be certain whether such an approach would work in the Indian context, it should be noted that USA and Israel both follow a zero-tolerance approach, and are generally considered to be the toughest countries to launch an attack against.

While talking about the various ‘security’ measures which are meant to act as ‘deterrents’ against attacks like these, one must keep in mind the numerous ineffective pat-downs, the non-functioning metal detectors and the generally lazy security guards. While timely intelligence reports would help tremendously in the fight against terror, displaying an iota of collective intelligence would work wonders too.

This post was first published in SIMC Wire.

Director: Milos Forman.
Starring: F. Murray Abraham, Tom Hulce.

Adapted from Peter Schaffer’s Broadway hit of the same name, Amadeus is a partially fictionalized account of the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Told from the perspective of his rival, Salieri, the film has the rivalry between the two as its central conflict. The film chronicles (in flashback) how Salieri came in contact with, got jealous of, and then tried to destroy Mozart.

Director Milos Forman stages much of the drama in a very simplistic fashion, without much overt flair, employing classical and subtle camera movements to convey meaning. One stand-out sequence shows the streets of Prague (doubling for Vienna) with snow gently falling, as Salieri (dressed in a pitch black Death’s Mask costume), hurries to Mozart’s house. Expertly edited, the juxtaposition and beauty of images in this sequence manages to evoke dread and acts as a good foreshadowing device. This imagery is repeated later in the film, with one tragic twist.

A big issue I had with the film was its run time and how it felt rather weirdly boxed in, as though it were taking place in matchbox-land. With a 3 hour plus run time, Amadeus tends to drag, especially in the umpteen opera sequences. Though the music is superb (how dare it not be, after all it is Mozart’s music), the opera sequences tend to get repetitive.

Also, the movie feels very obviously adapted from a stage play. Stage plays, by their very nature, have to cut down on locations, and try and cram everything into the boundaries of the stage. Movies, on the other hand, can get as expansive as they like with their locations and staging. Amadeus, however, feels like a filmed stage play. It’s almost as though if the camera were to pan too much to either side, one would get to see the wings. Again, this is not a problem limited to Amadeus, but one shared by all movies adapted from stage plays.

This feeling of a filmed stage play extends into the performances of the actors too. Gone is the restraint one expects in film, and in comes the over-the-top performances which are a necessity on stage. Tom Hulce is particularly over-the-top in the beginning.

Shaffer’s screenplay is pretty effective. The way he manages to fuse music, lust and religion and eke out the characters of Mozart and Salieri is pretty ingenious. The dialogue drips with a self-seriousness, something which is not quite complemented by the general tone of much of the movie (which is rather jokey and frivolous). Only towards the end does the tone of the dialogue and the movie match, and only then does the movie take on a deeper significance.

As mentioned earlier, most of the performances are rather over-the-top. Mozart is drawn too crudely and acted out too brashly in the beginning. Surely some restraint would have resulted in a much more tolerable character. However, as the drama progresses, Hulce eases in to the role, and the rough edges in his performance are polished. Abraham, playing Salieri, is much more layered and nuanced. As the protagonist, he naturally has a much better written role. The conniving (yet slightly unintentionally comic) nature of Salieri and Abraham’s countenance and body language seem to be a perfect match for each other.

The period setting of the film is not quite brought out by the costume and props department. Most of the sets (particularly the palace sets) look shoddy, as though hit by a serious budget crunch. The king’s costumes lack the splendour and polish one expects from them.

The music, comprising solely of Mozart’s music, lends a scale rarely matched by the images on screen. Yes, I am biased towards Mozart’s music, but the sheer power of it is actually unmatched by much of the movie. Again, as is the case with many other elements, the true power of the music is tapped only towards the end. The juxtaposition of images at the very end, with Mozart’s Requiem sound tracking them, is very symbolic and powerful.

Amadeus begs the question, “what exactly is a genius?” While one might immediately think of a subservient being, totally dedicated (to the point of ignoring everything else) to his/her craft, Amadeus paints Mozart as a very different sort of genius. Mozart knows he’s a prodigy and is not afraid of flaunting it or taking it for granted. He is a philanderer, and he is a genius. He loves his wine and women as much as he loves his music. These rather contrasting definitions of genius are the point of tussle between Salieri (who subscribes to the former definition) and Mozart. Amadeus repeatedly makes a case for genius being a person “touched by God”.

In conclusion, while the movie has many nice touches (like when Salieri is shown almost hitting orgasm when he reads Mozart’s music for the first time), it has it problems (chief amongst them being the rather stagey feel). The end result, while not pathetic, is also not what could have been. The story is brilliant, and the dramatic arc picks up towards the end, but Forman’s simplistic direction fails to sufficiently draw the juice out from the material.

If that other master con man, CWG OC chief Suresh Kalmadi, were to write his autobiography any time soon, he might recount his days in Tihar in much the same light. Not that the Indian judicial system (in general) or the Tihar jail authorities (in particular) have suddenly decided to treat prisoners with any humanity and leniency, but then VIP prisoners were never really actual prisoners, were they?

So whether it be Kalmadi playing dollhouse and sipping tea with the Jail Superintendent, or Vikas and Vishal Yadav (who are serving a life sentence for the murder of Nitish Katara) treating the jail garden like their very own back lawn, examples of sycophancy on the part of jail authorities have suddenly burst on to national consciousness. Newspapers have given sufficient space to these cases, and then some more to inform us about the aftermath.

Actions have been taken against those involved, we are told. The Jail Superintendent from the Kalmadi incident has been shipped away to Port Blair. Kalaa paani. Three jail officials including two assistant superintendents and a head warden have been suspended. Jitters, anyone?

It is assumed that we should be thankful for the actions taken. We as a public are supposed to feel satisfied that the justice system does work and is in good health. After all, the guilty have been punished, haven’t they?

While on one level that might be true, if we stop to question what just happened here, we might be able to observe a rather disturbing trend of toadying and passiveness within the judicial system.

Take the example of the formerly-Honourable OC chief. His crime? Abuse of power for personal gains. Action against him? Chuck him into a high security prison, the Tihar jail. And then what does he end up doing inside the jail? Oh no, answer is not ‘repent’. He abuses his former power for personal gains. Sure, a cup of tea has nothing on the crores he reportedly embezzled, but where is the sense in convicting someone for a particular wrong-doing, and then letting him brazenly continue with that very same act? Apparently some khakhi’s urge to have tea with the high and the mighty is more important than the nation’s need for a sense of justice.

What is needed is an active crackdown on such toadying inside jails. Maybe a vigilance cell which is actually vigil should police the ones policing the jail. Every inmate is equal, and every inmate should be treated thus. Why exceptions?

This post first appeared as a Feature on the SIMC Wire.

She always used to say you’d be late for your own funeral. Remember that? Her little joke because you were such a slob—always late, always forgetting stuff, even before the incident.

The metro lumbers in. You catch sight of your haggard self in one of the windows. Untrimmed beard, hair ravaged by winter’s keen prick. You step in. You know where you’re headed, but you don’t care about how you get there. You have no interest in the nitty-gritties, you just want to see the end. Maybe you were always like that. No you weren’t. Maybe you’re just in too much of a rush.

“Life’s a race, but mommy, I broke my toe!”
“You should have told me before the race began. Can’t help it now. Suck it, loser.”

You stare at that girl. She’s dressed in the style du jour, which means you’ll hate her. But you stare at her. Look at that face! Clothes, you used to believe, showed a person’s true self. Her clothes say she’s uptight and too bothered about what people think about her. Now you know you’ll dread the moment she opens her mouth. But you stare on, hoping to catch her eye. Look at that face!

Were you always this shallow?

You catch sight of a familiar face. You used to be best friends in grade II. Sure the whole world was best friends back then, but you used to be the bestest of friends. You look away and down, hoping he hasn’t seen you. Out of the corner of your eye, you see that he’s done much the same thing.

You have number of close friends, all of them a message or phone call away. None of them seem to want to meet you, though.

The metro stops at the next station. The doors slowly begin to open. Nobody at the station takes a step forward. Nobody seems to want to board. The doors close shut even before they’d opened completely. The metro lumbers on.

Everything’s a business transaction; nothing’s fair; everything’s driven by a free market force; everything’s opportunity dependent.

You hop off at your station. You see a man tying his muffler in the way that is today’s fashion. You catch yourself wishing you had a muffler like that. You are warm enough. You only want it so that you could see what it feels like to tie that muffler like the noose-inspired fashion. Again the shell, again the shell.

Maybe you were always this shallow.

You step onto the crowded escalator. You start moving up. You look at the time. You realize you’re hopelessly late. You look for a way up the escalator. All you see are people. You notice a woman calmly climbing the stairs to your right. She passes by you; the stairs are empty.

For all your claims about being different, you’re the same as everyone. You aren’t the scientist, you’re just the rat. You’re just another rat.

You move onward and upward, finally emerging from the underground station. You hold your head at an angle, and it seems like you’re climbing up the stairway to heaven. You hop off the escalator. The sun’s shining today for a change. You don’t rejoice. You know that in eight hours, you’ll be back again. That in eight hours you’ll hop on to the metro again. That in ten hours, you’ll be back home again. That in ten and a half hours, you’ll be mad at your mum again. You know.

You know that the only people you’ll ever have time for from now on are the random strangers you meet on the metro.

Welcome to Life.

Kwo-oh-fee!

The title of the movie (Kwo-oh-fee!) is an in-joke between Ankur and me. Roughly, it is how you would phonetically spell the pronunciation of ‘coffee’ as spoken by a British mafia lord.

Headless Chicken