Netaji-The hero we lost

This post is also published by me at Centre Right India:Netaji

I have said that today is the proudest day of my life. For an enslaved people, there can be no greater pride, no higher honour, than to be the first Soldier in the Army of Liberation. But this honour carries with it a corresponding responsibility and I am deeply conscious of it. I assure you that I shall be with you in darkness and in sunshine, in sorrow and in joy, in suffering and in victory. For the present, I can offer you nothing except hunger, thirst, privation, forced marches and death. -Singapore, 1943

Netaji  Subash Chandra Bosehad  been a born rebel, there  was the  anecdote  about  him attacking, the English  lecturer  at  his  college, who had  made  racist  and derogatory  comments  about  Indian natives.   As  he himself  stated  in a speech to the students  at  Amravati in 1929, " I still remember very clearly the day when my Principal summoned me to his presence and announced his order of suspension and his words still ring in my ears - "You are the most troublesome man in the College."   The  rebellious, independent  spirit  was present  in  him,  from quite  a long  time, and combined with  his own intelligence, made him one of  the  finest  thinkers  ever.  It  was  this  independent, rebellious  streak,  that  saw him,  give up a lucrative job  with  the  Indian Civil Services,  and  plunge  into  the freedom  struggle.  That  was the time he came across his  mentor   Deshbandhu  Chittaranjan  Das,  an  activist  and freedom fighter,  as  uncompromising  and  rebellious  as  Bose  was.  Deshbandhu  had earlier quit the Congress party, due to differences  with  Gandhiji over the No Council Entry policy,  and formed the Swaraj Party along with Motilal Nehru.

With regard to village self-government, it is not necessary to remind an Indian audience about the village Panchayats — democratic institutions handed down to us from days of yore. Not only democratic but other socio-political doctrines of an advanced character were not unknown to India in the past. Communism, for instance, is not a Western institution. Among the Khasis of Assam, to whom I have referred, private property as an institution does not exist in theory even today. The clan as a whole owns the entire land

C.R.Das, Motilal Nehru, N.C.Kelkar were among the Congress members, who opposed  Gandhiji's suspension of the Non Cooperation movement in 1923, over the Chauri Chaura  incident, creating a division between them and those who supported Gandhiji's  decision.   Subash Chandra Bose,  along with Vithalbai Patel  was becoming  increasingly  dissatisfied with the tactics of  the Congress Party, with  both  of  them  favoring an increasingly  militant  and aggresive approach.  Deshbandhu's  death in 1925, saw a weakening of  the Swaraj  Party, and  Netaji  losing  his  political mentor, which  however did not deter him from action.  Already elected  twice Mayor of  Kolkata,  Netaji  toured  extensively  in Europe  during the 30's  visiting  Mussolini among the other  leaders,  and  that had an influence  on  his  ideology too.  While  Netaji  was heavily  influenced by  European  nationalist  movements and thinkers,  especially  Garibaldi  and Mazinni,  he  sought  to  combine it  with  the best  of  Indian  political  and  spiritual  traditions,  a  fact resented by the more  left  wing  counterparts  of  his.   He believed  that  most  of  the  existing  political systems  in the West  already were  in  practice  in India for  long,  be  it  Communism, Republicanism  or  Democracy.    What  he looked forward to  was a  philosophy  that  sought  to  combine the best  of  Western political thought  with  institutions  that  were already  existing  in  India.

Indian nationalism is neither narrow, nor selfish, nor aggressive. It is inspired by the highest ideals of the human race, viz., Satyam (the true), Shivam (the good), Sundaram (the beautiful). Nationalism in India has instilled into us truthfulness, honesty, manliness and the spirit of service and sacrifice.

Again  Netaji  did  not  believe  in   one race, one culture  kind  of  unity  that  was propagated  by  most  of  European thinkers.  He  did  not  believe  in  imposing  a dull  uniformity  in the name of  unity,  that  tried  to  suppress  differences.   For  him  true unity  was achieved  only  in respecting  diversity,  accepting  differences,  the  mosaic  pattern  as  opposed  to the standard  melting pot  model.   It  was  precisely  the same  reason,  why  he  was  opposed to the Russian model  of  communism,  though  some  of  his  own  ideals  were  pretty much  on the left  side.   He  was  opposed to the  communists  idea  of  internationalism  and  use of  British  cloth,  I  guess one  reason, why  for  decades, the Communists  refused  to  accept  him.   The  communists  felt  that  the  labor movement  should not  be  linked with Nationalism, to Netaji  both  of  them were not  mutually  exclusive.

In the same province where uniform conditions prevail, Khadi does not make much headway in those tracts which are less poverty stricken. In other words, as long as economic condition of the masses is below a certain level, they gladly take to the spinning wheel; but when that level is reached they have a tendency to look out for a more lucrative employment, whether in agriculture or in industry.

Netaji  again  had  his  own  doubts  on  the  utility  of  the Khadi  movement.  As  he  had  stated  earlier, while  it  was helpful  for  masses,  existing  at  a subsistence  level,  once  they  cross  that  stage,  they  seek  more  gainful  employment.  I guess  a lesson here somewhere  for  the NREGA  scheme masters.   Netaji  believed  that  more  mass  participation  in the freedom movement  was  possible,  only  if  the  issues  that  directly  concerned  them were taken up  along  with  the cause  for freedom.  As  he  put it,  barring  stray  cases  as  in  Bengal, when they took up  the cause of  jute farmers  or  in Gujarat  on nonpayment  of  taxes, "we have seldom been able to make a direct appeal to the economic interests of the masses".    Netaji's  impatience  with  the  Congress  party  was  not  just  in  it's  approach  toward  fighting  for  independence,  he  felt  it  remained  a party  of  the  bourgeois  elite,  far  distanced  from  farmers,  workers  and the  youth.   Netaji  spoke  in a  language  that  reached  out  to the  youth  of  the times,  he  knew and  understood  their  feelings  much  more  than  some  of  the worthies  in  the party.

I mean the kisans, workers and youngmen. These sections have economic or social grievances against the Congress and hence they kept out because the Congress ought to remove the grievances, social and economical and be not content with the political ones only. We ought to bring them into our fold and harness their energies and resources. Unless the Congress is able to identify itself with the cause of the oppressed classes, I cannot see how the congress can push forward its political programme.

The  major  difference  that  caused  a split  between Netaji  and the Gandhi  faction in the Congress,  was  the approach towards  total boycott.  Netaji  felt  that  with the mood of  the nation, totally  for  a boycott,  it made  no  sense to enter the Councils,  it  was the best  time  to exert  pressure on the  British.   He  believed  it  made no  use,  for Indians  to  go to the  Round Table  conference  unless,  they were  given full powers.   He quoted  the example of  the pact  between Britain and  South Africa,  where  the  former  had to  agree  to accept  the  S.African  constitution in full, with  no  changes,  which  is  what  he  sought too.  He  wondered why  the  British had  to send in the  European  Chambers  of Commerce, Ruling  Chiefs  etc, when  this  was  clearly  a matter to be worked  out  between  the  British Govt  and  the  Indian  representatives.   The  differences between him  and  Gandhiji  were too deep,  and  when Netaji  won the  election to the post  of  President  at  the 1939  Tripura  Congress,  Gandhiji  took it  as  his  own defeat.   And  with some  deft manipulations  by  Gandhi's  clique,  Netaji  was forced  to  resign  from  the  Presidentship  post.  It  was a  poignant  moment,  when Netaji  suffering  from fever,  came on a stretcher  to submit  his  resignation at  the venue, and  to  replace  whom, a  man  called  Bhogaraju  Pattabhi  Sitaramaiah, pretty much  a mediocre  personality,  whose  only  qualification  was  being  Gandhiji's  yes man.  One  of  the  persons  who  strongly  supported Bose,  was  Pasumpon Muthuramalingam Thevar,   in fact  he  mobilized  the  entire  South  Indian votes  for  Netaj.  Pasumpon  was  also  disillusioned  with  the  Congress inability to  force  the British  to repeal  the  Criminal Tribes  Act,  became  one  of  the key  figures  in the Forward Bloc  founded  by  Netaji,  the  other  key   personalities being  Khurshed Nariman, Senapati Bapat  from Bombay,S.B.Yajee  from Bihar,  S.S.Cavasheer from Punjab.

It will be seen at once that if the principle of freedom is to be applied to society and made the fundamental basis of the society of the future; it will mean nothing short of social revolution. Freedom for the whole of society will mean freedom for woman as well as for man; freedom for the depressed classes and not merely for the higher caste; freedom for the poor and not merely for the rich; freedom for the young and not merely for the old; in other words, freedom for all sections, for all minorities and for all individuals. Thus freedom implies equality and equality connotes fraternity

What Netaji  did not believe  was in a  false kind of  freedom, that  would  only  benefit  the bourgeois  upper  classes  and the elite,  he  like  Bhagat  Singh, sought a genuine freedom  that would  touch  every  section  of  society.  To him, mere  political freedom, without  emancipation  of  the poor, the  depressed classes  and women  was  meaningless. Netaji  was also  influenced by  the ideals of  Swami Vivekananda,  and  Bhagvad Geeta. He  quite often drew  on  India's  glorious  spiritual past, its  cultural heritage,  yet  he was not  one  to be living  there  forever.  While  influenced  by  European nationalist  thinkers  like  Garibaldi  and Mazinni, with  respect to waging  a political struggle, he  believed  in the spiritual  renaissance of  India.

India possesses all the resources - intellectual, moral and material, which go to make a people great. And India is still living, in spite of her hoary antiquity, because she has to become great once again; because she has a mission to perform.

What  Netaji  believed  in was the idea of  an India, that  would awake  itself  from it's slumber, and  begin to  be  true  to it's potential. He  wanted an  India where  citizens  are awake, in ceaseless activity,  or  what he called  our elan vital, a concept  derived  from French philosopher Bergan, which refers to the vital impetus  that  can drive  us to activity and progress. For Netaji  it  was the desire for freedom, for  expression, a  desire to revolt against bondage. Netaji  wanted the people to study the ancient  history,  observe  where the degradation took place. For  him all concepts like  deeksha  or initiation, led to the end goal-freedom.

The Youth Movement is an emblem of our dissatisfaction with the present order of things. It stands for the revolt of Youth against age-long bondage, tyranny and oppression. It seeks to create a new and better world for ourselves and for humanity by removing all shackles and giving the fullest scope to the creative activity of mankind. The Youth Movement is not, therefore, an additional or an exotic growth superimposed on the movements of today. It is a genuine independent movement, the main springs of which lie deeply embedded in human nature.

It  is  precisely  his desire for  complete  revolution and freedom, that  led to  his appeal among the youth, many  of  whom  saw the Congress  as a borgeuois old party, filled  with  old  fashioned  ideals. To Netaji, the youth  movement  was not  just  another  political movement, it  was a holistic  movement  designed to fulfil  the needs of the human soul. For him freedom  and self  fulfilment  were two goals,  that  had to exist together, one without the other  was meaningless.

Little do you know how much Bengali literature has drawn from the earlier history of the Punjab in order to enrich itself and edify its readers. Tales of your heroes have been composed and sung by our great poets including Rabindranath Tagore and some of them are today familiar in every Bengali home. Aphorisms of our saints have been translated into elegant Bengali and they afford solace and inspiration to millions in Bengal.

Netaji had a phenomenal  knowledge  of  Indian history  and culture,  an  aspect that made him  reach  out  to  every  region  in India.  Immensely  proud  of  his  Bengali  heritage  and culture, yet  at  the same  time, he  recognized the  unique  cultural  synthesis  of  India, where  each and every  region, drew  something  from another  region. To him though  India's  salvation did not lie in living on past  glories,  and  clinging on to  outmoded  theories.  He  felt  that if  India  and Asia,  were  to throw off the yoke  of  Western humiliation,  they had to look forward,  move  ahead.   He  sought  a revolution  of  ideas  in thought, he  desired  a complete  freedom,  where  individuals  could  express, think  and move. A freedom  that  could  unshackle the  mind and  spirit.

So  was the INA  a failure?

In strictly black and white terms, the Indian National Army , was a failure, and too often Bose’s authoritarian control was blamed for it. As the dictum goes History is written by the victors and not the vanquished. Leaving aside the merits of Bose’s strategies and his tactics, if we take it on a broader level, the INA, succeeded on many aspects. The INA was a shining example of how he managed to integrate the different communities of India into one. Bose went beyond the platitudes of Hindu-Muslim bhai, bhai, and Unity in Diversity. He walked the talk. Hindus, Muslim, Sikhs, Parsees all were melded together as one, and he actually created a pan Indian identity.

But more than military victories, the INA, succeeded in winning the hearts of people. Ordinary Indians responded in thousands to his call, people willingly gave money and their gold to him. While all other political leaders just paid mere lip service to cause of women, he raised a woman’s regiment in his army. The INA failed in it’s final assault on Imphal , because of their dependence on Japanese for logistics, and the heavy rain. As also the superior air power of the British.

But it was the later events that would show how successful the INA was. After the war, when 3 officers of the INA, Gen Shah Nawaz Khan, Col Prem Sehgal and Col Gurbux Singh Dhillon were put on trial in the Red Fort, the person defending them was none other than Jawaharlal Nehru, himself, in spite of the fact, that Nehru and Bose differed in their views. Both the Congress and Muslim League, made the defense of the 3 officers a major political issue. The British Government was so alarmed that it had to stop BBC from broadcasting this story.

But it could not prevent mutinies from breaking out in the British Army , especially the one by the Indian soldiers of the Royal Navy. Chennai, Pune, Jabalpur all saw the Indian soldiers rising in mutiny. The British often used the Indian soldiers as cannon fodder, they did all the dirty work, were the persons on front line in conflict and in many World Wars, many Indian soldiers died fighting for the British empire. Yet in grant for this, the British, treated the Indian soldiers as second class citizens, and exploited them. It was Bose’s Indian National Army which sparked the uprising. Years later Clement Atlee , cited the revolts of the Indian Army, as a major decision, to grant independence. Britian already economically and militarily weakened, after WW2, knew that it could no longer trust the Indian armed forces to prop up it’s Raj. So in a way, Bose, contributed significantly to the end of the Raj.

So  was  Netaji too Utopian  for  his  own good?  I  conclude  this  post  with a quote of  what  he  said  about  himself, and leave  it  to  the  readers  to  judge.

Friends, I do not know if you will consider me to be Utopian in my theories or if you will dub me a visionary. But I shall plead guilty if I am accused of being a dreamer and I love my dreams. These dreams are to me as real as the workaday world is to the man in the street. From my dreams I derive inspiration and motive power. Without these dreams I can hardly live for life will lose its meaning and it's charm. The dream that I love is that of a free India; India resplendent in all her power and glory. I want India to be the mistress of her own household and the queen of her own destiny; I want her to be a free republic with her own army, navy, and airforce and her own ambassadors in the capitals of free countries.

Acknowledgement : This  article  on  Netaji   which  I have written,  was  primarily  based on various  sources  of  information,  and  it  would not  be  fair  on my  part  not  to  acknowledge  the  credit.  Some  of  the  material  here  is  from  two of  my  blog  posts on  Netaji at this   personal  blog,  which  I have  included here.

1)  Netaji's  Ideology  http://scorpiusmaximusindicus.blogspot.com/2007/05/was-bose-fascist.html.

2)  Was INA a Failure http://scorpiusmaximusindicus.blogspot.com/2007/05/was-ina-failure.html

3)  Netaji's  Speeches. http://www.subhaschandrabose.org/speeches/speeches.html

Netaji on Freedom and Youth

Disclaimer:  I just  could not have written this post   without the  wonderful  work  done at the  following site,  that  has  a compilation of  Netaji's  speeches. I gratefully  acknowledge  the material provided by  them. If  you are seeking  to  know  more  of  Netaji  and  his  ideology, check  it  out  here  at 
http://www.subhaschandrabose.org/speeches/speeches.html

Just for the fact that  Subash Chandra Bose sought the help  of Fascist Germany and Imperial Japan in the struggle  for  independence,  he has often been treated as a persona non grata.  The Leftists  called him a "quisling", a  traitor,  obviously to please their  Russian masters. They conveniently overlooked the fact, that  their  icon Stalin  was pretty much pally with Hitler  for  quite some time,  the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact that  effectively  ensured Poland  would  be looted from both  ends.  It  was only when Hitler  attacked  Russia,  that  the till then "Imperialist War"  became a  "People's War"  against  Fascism.  For  decades under  the Leftist rule, Netaji  was conveniently  ignored  by the Leftists, and only later on they accepted  him. The Congress  of  course never  was  comfortable  with  his  direct  action  policy,   and  were more  intent  being in the good books of  the British. So  that  begs  the fundamental question.


What  was Netaji's  Ideology?

To  actually  understand   Netaji's  belief  and value  system, it  is  imperative  to  look at some of  the speeches  he  made  addressing  students  in various  parts  of  India. Those speeches  were not  political in nature, there  were  more  intended  to  awake the youth, the students. 

It will be seen at once that if the principle of freedom is to be applied to society and made the fundamental basis of the society of the future; it will mean nothing short of social revolution. Freedom for the whole of society will mean freedom for woman as well as for man; freedom for the depressed classes and not merely for the higher caste; freedom for the poor and not merely for the rich; freedom for the young and not merely for the old; in other words, freedom for all sections, for all minorities and for all individuals. Thus freedom implies equality and equality connotes fraternity

What Netaji  did not believe  was in a  false kind of  freedom, that  would  only  benefit  the bourgeois  upper  classes  and the elite,  he  like  Bhagat  Singh, sought a genuine freedom  that would  touch  every  section  of  society.  To him, mere  political freedom, without  emancipation  of  the poor, the  depressed classes  and women  was  meaningless. Netaji  was also  influenced by  the ideals of  Swami Vivekananda,  and  Bhagvad Geeta. He  quite often drew  on  India's  glorious  spiritual past, its  cultural heritage,  yet  he was not  one  to be living  there  forever.  While  influenced  by  European nationalist  thinkers  like  Garibaldi  and Mazinni, with  respect to waging  a political struggle, he  believed  in the spiritual  renaissance of  India.

India possesses all the resources - intellectual, moral and material, which go to make a people great. And India is still living, in spite of her hoary antiquity, because she has to become great once again; because she has a mission to perform.

What  Netaji  believed  in was the idea of  an India, that  would awake  itself  from it's slumber, and  begin to  be  true  to it's potential. He  wanted an  India where  citizens  are awake, in ceaseless activity,  or  what he called  our elan vital, a concept  derived  from French philosopher Bergan, which refers to the vital impetus  that  can drive  us to activity and progress. For Netaji  it  was the desire for freedom, for  expression, a  desire to revolt against bondage. Netaji  wanted the people to study the ancient  history,  observe  where the degradation took place. For  him all concepts like  deeksha  or initiation, led to the end goal-freedom.

The Youth Movement is an emblem of our dissatisfaction with the present order of things. It stands for the revolt of Youth against age-long bondage, tyranny and oppression. It seeks to create a new and better world for ourselves and for humanity by removing all shackles and giving the fullest scope to the creative activity of mankind. The Youth Movement is not, therefore, an additional or an exotic growth superimposed on the movements of today. It is a genuine independent movement, the main springs of which lie deeply embedded in human nature.

It  is  precisely  his desire for  complete  revolution and freedom, that  led to  his appeal among the youth, many  of  whom  saw the Congress  as a borgeuois old party, filled  with  old  fashioned  ideals. To Netaji, the youth  movement  was not  just  another  political movement, it  was a holistic  movement  designed to fulfil  the needs of the human soul. For him freedom  and self  fulfilment  were two goals,  that  had to exist together, one without the other  was meaningless.

Little do you know how much Bengali literature has drawn from the earlier history of the Punjab in order to enrich itself and edify its readers. Tales of your heroes have been composed and sung by our great poets including Rabindranath Tagore and some of them are today familiar in every Bengali home. Aphorisms of our saints have been translated into elegant Bengali and they afford solace and inspiration to millions in Bengal.

Netaji had a phenomenal  knowledge  of  Indian history  and culture,  an  aspect that made him  reach  out  to  every  region  in India.  Immensely  proud  of  his  Bengali  heritage  and culture, yet  at  the same  time, he  recognized the  unique  cultural  synthesis  of  India, where  each and every  region, drew  something  from another  region. To him though  India's  salvation did not lie in living on past  glories,  and  clinging on to  outmoded  theories.  He  felt  that if  India  and Asia,  were  to throw off the yoke  of  Western humiliation,  they had to look forward,  move  ahead.   He  sought  a revolution  of  ideas  in thought, he  desired  a complete  freedom,  where  individuals  could  express, think  and move. A freedom  that  could  unshackle the  mind and  spirit.

Was  Netaji  too  Utopian for  his own good?

I end  this  post  with  what  he quoted, and I leave it  for you to judge.

Friends, I do not know if you will consider me to be Utopian in my theories or if you will dub me a visionary. But I shall plead guilty if I am accused of being a dreamer and I love my dreams. These dreams are to me as real as the workaday world is to the man in the street. From my dreams I derive inspiration and motive power. Without these dreams I can hardly live for life will lose its meaning and it's charm. The dream that I love is that of a free India; India resplendent in all her power and glory. I want India to be the mistress of her own household and the queen of her own destiny; I want her to be a free republic with her own army, navy, and airforce and her own ambassadors in the capitals of free countries.

Was the INA a failure?

In strictly black and white terms, the Indian National Army , was a failure, and too often Bose’s authoritarian control was blamed for it. As the dictum goes History is written by the victors and not the vanquished. Leaving aside the merits of Bose’s strategies and his tactics, if we take it on a broader level, the INA, succeeded on many aspects. The INA was a shining example of how he managed to integrate the different communities of India into one. Bose went beyond the platitudes of Hindu-Muslim bhai, bhai, and Unity in Diversity. He walked the talk. Hindus, Muslim, Sikhs, Parsees all were melded together as one, and he actually created a pan Indian identity. Not a very religious person himself, he gave equal importance to people of all communities, religions and regions.

But more than military victories, the INA, succeeded in winning the hearts of people. Ordinary Indians responded in thousands to his call, people willingly gave money and their gold to him. While all other political leaders just paid mere lip service to cause of women, he raised a woman’s regiment in his army. The INA failed in it’s final assault on Imphal , because of their dependence on Japanese for logistics, and the heavy rain. As also the superior air power of the British.

But it was the later events that would show how successful the INA was. After the war, when 3 officers of the INA, Gen Shah Nawaz Khan, Col Prem Sehgal and Col Gurbux Singh Dhillon were put on trial in the Red Fort, the person defending them was none other than Jawaharlal Nehru, himself, in spite of the fact, that Nehru and Bose differed in their views. Both the Congress and Muslim League, made the defense of the 3 officers a major political issue. The British Government was so alarmed that it had to stop BBC from broadcasting this story.

But it could not prevent mutinies from breaking out in the British Army , especially the one by the Indian soldiers of the Royal Navy. Chennai, Pune, Jabalpur all saw the Indian soldiers rising in mutiny. The British often used the Indian soldiers as cannon fodder, they did all the dirty work, were the persons on front line in conflict and in many World Wars, many Indian soldiers died fighting for the British empire. Yet in grant for this, the British, treated the Indian soldiers as second class citizens, and exploited them. It was Bose’s Indian National Army which sparked the uprising. Years later Clement Atlee , cited the revolts of the Indian Army, as a major decision, to grant independence. Britian already economically and militarily weakened, after WW2, knew that it could no longer trust the Indian armed forces to prop up it’s Raj. So in a way, Bose, contributed significantly to the end of the Raj.

Vizag-My sweet little hometown

Bay of Bengal from Kailashgiri

  

Over the past decade, have been to a lot of places in India and abroad, worked there, stayed there, visited them. And then there is my own hometown, Vishakapatnam or it’s more popular name Vizag . It’s a city in which i spent a good 30 years of my life, to which i still keep going, whenever i have a break. Its the city, where i grew up, studied, got married, and where my kids were born too. For me Vizag is not just a city, its a part of my life, a city where i have memories of my childhood, my college going days, my younger days. It was the city where i made a transition from a kid to a teen to an adult. Every time i visit Vizag, its like stepping into a time machine, every place having some memories. Some of the memories are of course being erased in the name of "Development" , but that is another story for now.

As a city, Vizag certainly does not have much history to speak of. In ancient times it was believed to have been called Kulotthunga Chola Patnam , and then there is the famous temple of Simhachalam , built by the Ganga kings of Kalinga and later it had grants from the emperor Sri Krishna Deva Raya. But for most part, Vizag was a sleepy fishing hamlet, the neighboring kingdoms of Vijayanagaram and Bobilli, were the thriving centers around that period. During the colonial rule, it was initially under the French control, and then later passed into British hands after the Battle of Vizagapatam in 1804. The city thrived under the British rule, due to it’s location on the sea coast. It had hills on one side, the sea on another side, making it a natural harbor. 

Submarine Museum on Beach Road

The city’s location sandwiched between the hills on one side, and the Bay of Bengal on another side, makes it one of the most beautiful cities. Also the Ramakrishna Beach , is quite long, and the city’s main hang out point. Weekends sees the beach crowded with people, just hanging around, and it can be hard to find a space to park your vehicle. The Beach gives me some of my best memories of Vizag, hanging around with friends there, partaking the delicious chat , or chilling out with fruit juices at the numerous stalls. Most of the times, would just pass the time, chatting with friends late into the night. The beach has been developed to make it more tourist friendly, with statues of famous personalities, parks, restaurants, outdoor cafes, food stalls. Inspite of the crowds, and the stalls, thankfully the beach has not become as dirty and overcrowded like Chowpatty, the waters are good enough to go for a swim. Actually the beach is the best thing in Vizag, you don’t really have to plan, or look at the newspaper to decide what to do for the weekend, just drive down, hang out for some time. 

Ramakrishna Beach

Apart from just hanging out, the Beach has a plethora of other attractions too, the Submarine Museum , with it’s life like models inside it. An Aquarium which does have a good collection of marine life, and the Ramakrishna Mission Ashram , with its beautiful building, and serene atmosphere inside. There is also a Kali Temple , modelled on the lines of the famous temple in Dakshineshwar . Vizag also has some beautiful parks where you can go and relax, the VUDA Park, famous for it’s boating and skating rink, the Tenneti Park , located on a cliff side, overlooking the Bay of Bengal, and also it’s giant TV screen. One of the must see places in Vizag is the Kailashgiri Hill , that divides the city into two halves. On top of the hill, is a lovely park developed by VUDA, the local city body, with huge statues of Shiva, Parvati, and the Tirumala Temple Logo, it also has a mini train, that takes people around the hill. You get a lovely view of Vizag from here, the city on one side, and another side, the green hills, and the Bay of the Bengal . 

Vizag is also famous for the 3 Hillocks, near the Harbor, one containing a Sri Venkateshwara Temple, another having a St. Mary’s Church, and another one containing a Mosque, in effect they speak about the communal harmony in the city. And it’s not just symbolic, having grown up in Vizag, i can say for sure, that the city is tolerant, and you have Hindus, Muslims, Christians co existing peacefully, without the ugly conflicts that have plagued other cities. And being the site for many PSU’s like Hindustan Zinc, BHPV, Vizag Steel Plant, as well as pvt sector giants like Coromandel Fertilizers, and MNC’s like LG Polymers, Vizag has a cosmopolitan atmosphere. The Vizag Port Trust, as well as Eastern Naval Command having it’s HQ here, have seen a large number of people from other states settle here. So apart from Telugus, the city has a large population of Marwaris, Punjabis, Gujjus, Tamilians, Mallus, Oriyas, Bongs all co exisiting. Durga Puja is celebrated with as much fervor as Ganesh Puja, Xmas and Id are celebrated with joy, making it a true melting pot. In a sense, Vizag is like a mini India, and thankfully there is no "anti outsider" sentiment here.

Vizag is also an educational center, with the Andhra University , being one of the oldest ones, in India, and also good colleges like GITAM( Engg), IIAM( Mgt), AMC( Medicine). The city is a foodie’s delight, with restaurants offering all kind of cuisine from fast food to Traditional Southern to Punjabi to North Indian, you have all choices. And for entertainment, the city has around 20 odd theaters, most of them AC, comfortable, and where you don’t need to shell out 500 bucks to watch a movie. The city also has a thriving theater scene, and auditoriums like Kala bharati stage the best of plays. And you have music concerts of all kinds taking place regularly in the city. 

With  it’s  relatively  less  hectic  lifestyle,  lower  cost of  living,  peaceful  atmosphere  and  cosmopolitanism,  Vizag  is  indeed  an   excellent  place  to  be  in.  In  fact  it  combines  the advantages  of   a  city  life  while  at  the  same  time,  ensuring  a relatively  laid  back  lifestyle, not too fast  or  hectic.   However  like  any  other  city,  Vizag  itself  is  facing  the  issue  of "development".   Traffic  jams  are  commonplace  in  the  city,  and  like  any  other  city, the  builder’s  lobby  is  ensuring  it’s  destruction.  The  green cover  in  the  center  of  the  city,  and  many  trees have been  cut  down,  with the  result,  that  temperatures  which  rarely  used  to cross 35,  now  regularly  touch  the 40+  mark.  The  road  to my college, used  to be  covered  with  lovely  causarina  forests,  and  all  that  has  been  chopped  down.   I  just  wish  that  unplanned  development,  does  not  ruin  Vizag,  the  way  it  has  numerous  other  cities  in India. 

How to Reach Vizag: The city is well connected by road, rail and air. There are regular flights from Mumbai, Delhi, Bangalore and Kolkata. Lying on the Howrah-Chennai rail route, people from both cities, have a large number of trains to reach there. With the airport being made international, flights have started to operate to Singapore. The city also has a large number of decent, medium budget hotels to stay in, however you could try, Punnami, the tourist guest home run by the AP Tourism Department. If you are looking for a more luxurious stay, you could opt for Taj Residency or Grand Bay.

2011- A year gone by

So another year will be soon passing into history,  for scholars, academicians, historians to ponder over.  They sure have a lot to think about this year though, a whole lot  of  stuff  has happened, that has just left them struck dumbfounded not  knowing what exactly to make of it. Governments were toppled, invincible dictators met  their ends, and in the case of one, it  was a rather  messy end,  people came out on the streets to protest.  The over riding theme of the year seemed to be "No govt is good, no ideology works".  No  single ism or  ideology  really seemed to work,  the US  sank into a debt crisis,  the Mecca of  welfarism Europe  went bust up, and the future of the Euro  seems bleak,  the Middle East and the Arab world exploded with a fury  against  their Govts and for a change the anger there  was not against  US or Israel.  Anna Hazare bought the Govt to it's knees,  with  his  agitation for the Lokpal, while Putin faced  unprecedented protests at the end of the year in 2011. In short it was not really a good year, if you happened to be one of the rich and powerful, and the Forbes  list, seems  rather ironical now.  Anyway I am not going to get into the Top 10 or 100 , Best of, Worst of  Lists  which the media usually does at the end of the year, not my cup of tea.  Rather  this article  is an attempt to  take a look at  what  I feel could be the defining moments of  the year.  Again  these are just my own observations  and it may or not necessarily come true.

A Libyan Woman, holds an AK 47 in the fight against Gadaffi

Women Protesters in Egypt

The Arab spring and women

One of  the noticeable aspects  of the Arab Spring  that rocked the  thrones of the leaders for life,  was not the resignation of  Mubarak  or the rather gory end of  Gadaffi.  There  was another  unforgettable image,  it  was the women on the street out there,  shoulder to shoulder  with the men, raising slogans against  the rulers.  The sight  of  the women in headscarves,  their long flying robes, defiantly raising fists against the Govt,  was  something that could not be ignored. In a region where women had traditionally been relegated to the home and kitchen, where they were always  expected to play a subordinate role,  this  was a significant shift.  Be it  Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Tunisia  the women in the Arab world came out  in large numbers leaving the comfort of their homes, fists raised, and shouting slogans. And no it  was not  armchair activism. These women were there out  in the streets,  facing  the riot police, the tear gas, the batons, the firings.  Some of  them were  jailed, some of them were tortured brutally, some of them were sexually assaulted, but that  did not really stop them. Rather the Arab Spring seemed to give  them  the opportunity to break free, which they had been waiting for all these decades.  In a way Arab women had to bear suppression from both the Govt, as well as the society, but they seemed to be speaking out in one voice, enough is enough. Yes the Islamists  have won in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya, and  seem to gain in Syria.  But  they can't  rest  easily, the women in the Arab world, have found their voice and tasted the fruit of freedom, they are not going to let it go. More important, these women are tough, determined, and can fight till the end.  It is important to note that the feminism espoused by these women has little to do with the bra burning, slut walk feminism of the West,  rather they seek  an independent  role for women, well within the context of their  religion and culture. The  Arab Spring is not yet over,  the Islamists will have to contend with an awakened women, willing to fight for their right till the end, and that could define 2012.

The Dragon in Africa

Sometime back,  Paul Kagame, the President of Rwanda,  had remarked in an interview "  The West  gives us only Aid and promises, China  gives us what we need, infrastructure and jobs".   In  a way,  it  sums up how China has been able to expand it's  dominance in Africa. First things first, many  Africans are not really comfortable with Chinese presence. China  sees Africa more as a market, to flood it's  cheap goods with, while not buying back any products made there. Chinese  factory made textiles  at lower rates, have devastated the native African textile industry. The working conditions in most of the Chinese companies in Africa, would  certainly do the Third Reich proud. Add to it, China's  record of  hobnobbing with  dubious  Govts in Angola, Zimbabwe, Sudan as these nations offer them the energy resources they need.  So  what has made China  a dominant player in Africa?  The Chinese have a  simple policy with Africa "If your nation has something to offer us, we do business with you".  In essence, this means  China does not really care for  stuff like human rights,  rule of law, and can often end  up  supporting  Govts like those in Angola and Sudan, on the other side,it  means your Govt  is less likely to be toppled.  The  fact is China does not really care if  your Govt is communist, fascist, dictatorial, democratic as long  as it benefits from you. And tomorrow should the Govt  change, it does not really bother the Chinese much either. The fact is most  ordinary Africans  are tired of  being seen as that  lovely exotic place where you go to watch wildlife,  those poor, sodden souls, who have to be showered with Aid  by the benevolent Westerners doing all those rock concerts.  To put it in Chinese terminology, Africans had enough of  being fed  fish all their life, they want the fishing rods, and China does just that.  They have a lot of issues with the Chinese,  but they are willing to put up  with them, because China has been investing heavily  in infrastructure and industrial projects in Africa. The kind of projects  that  bring in the jobs, the money  which most  ordinary Africans seek. The West  needs to get out of it's  lets shower  Aid  on these poor natives mentality, China is taking over large  parts of the continent.

Lula of Brazil, Erdogan of Turkey, signing the Treaty for Iran's Nuclear Program

Al Jazeera's  TV Studios

A more  multipolar World

The King is dead,long live the king. Ok  maybe the US is not exactly finished, it could still come back.  What is clear however  is  that the days  of a unipolar world, with one single nation dominating the world, seem to be  gone by. 20 years back, the US  seemed to have clearly  won the Cold War, with Russia  gone, disintegrated, and the  Eastern bloc turning capitalist.  Things have changed rapidly, Wall Street's collapse, the fiasco in Iraq and Afghanistan, mean  that  the US is no longer the lord  of all it  surveys.  Lula, the former President of  Brazil, summed it up perfectly "Earlier  when the US sneezed  we caught pneumonia, now when the US sneezes, we too sneeze". He should be knowing  better,  like Erdogan in Turkey,  Lula has transformed Brazil  from a perennial underachiever nation into  realizing  it's  true potential.  The 8th largest economy in the world  tag for Brazil  was long over due. Samba, Soccer  are still popular in Brazil, but beyond  that  is  a nation, that has shaken off  it's  under performer  tag, and is on the way to make use of it. What is  clear though is there is no one single, major  power  in the world, rather  you have countries  that  are dominating  a specific region. Brazil  in Latin America,  Iran and Turkey  in the Middle East /Central Asia , China in Asia-Pacific, Russia and to an extent  Germany in Europe. It bears an eerie resemblance to the Mughal Empire after Aurangzeb's rule, when  the Marathas, Sikhs, Jats, Rajputs   all broke away to form strong empires within themselves.  What it  means is that the power equations are shifting in a rather  significant empire,  Uncle Sam's  favored nephew, Saudi Arabia, finds  it's  influence under threat not just  from Iran and Turkey, but from the tiny nation of Qatar  which is using  Al Jazeera  as a tool to expand it's influence,  broker peace deals, support  and finance  rebel movements in Syria and Libya.

The end of  -isms.

When Mubarak fell,  most of the Liberal fraternity rejoiced, they called it a triumph for freedom, democracy and human rights.  No issues with that, but the test came when revolts against  Gadaffi  began  in February,  and  took on a violent tone.  It  was easy to hate  Mubarak, he  was pro American, pro Israeli, a dictator, enough  for the Liberals to hate,  but  Gadaffi  was  a different case, he  was anti American, anti Israel. And  precisely, many  were confused,  do we support Gadaffi  for his  anti American stance,  or do we support the rebels.  Some of the Liberals took the easy way out, they blamed  the West  and imperialist forces  for  stirring trouble, forgetting the fact  that the dissent  against  Gadaffi  was waiting to explode at some point or other. During the Cold War days,  when the CIA  was  accused of  propping up tin pot dictators and  warlords, they had  a simple explanation  for it " He is a bastard, but he is our bastard".  Left-Liberals  actually for  quite  some time, went to the other end with "He may be a Bastard, but  he is anti American and anti Israel, this is all a Zionist-American conspiracy to discredit him" .  The CIA theory had long ago gone for a toss, and  I suspect 2011, could see the end of  that liberal thought too. What is  clear is  the Arab Spring  exposed the opportunism and shallowness in the intellectual world, for whom concepts like  humanism, freedom, human rights just seemed a matter of convenience.  So  Mubarak  had to go, because he was a crook, but when it  came to Gadaffi and Assad, they were mere victims of  imperialism and Zionism, oh so sad.  

What is  clear  that  the traditional divisions between Right, Left, Liberal and Conservatives are slowly disappearing. What else can account for the bizarre spectacle  of  Republicans  in the US  supporting Gadaffi, a man whom their icon Ronald  Reagan had once described as the "Mad dog of the Middle East".  Honestly  speaking, I think the concept of  a  particular ism or ideology  no longer holds valid. People and even nations are refusing to be straight jacketed into an ideology,  what matters more is  the utility and convenience.Dogmatic  adherence to  ideology  be it  Right or Left is passe,  what is needed is an approach, that takes into account  the  prevailing ground realities.  Traditionally Leftist leaders in Latin America like Lula in Brazil  have used  a mix  of  populism and  more pragmatic  economic policies to fuel the growth of their nations, Erdogan in Turkey  seeks to introduce a system that is secular in nature yet within the parameters  of  Islamic faith.  Imported concepts  don't  work, we have to devise systems and methods best suited for  our  nation's  circumstances.

What is going to happen in 2012, I have no idea, I can't even predict  what is going to happen in the next one hour or so, forget the future.  But i firmly  believe that some of the  issues I have mentioned above, are going to significantly impact  the way we talk and live  in the years to come. We can't afford to be stuck in nostalgia  and  a specific ideology. There is a lot of change going on in the world, in India, fossilized  leaderships  clinging on to outdated concepts will be tossed aside be it in politics or business or  trade, they may win the battle but they will be losing the war in the longer run. The traditional  ideologies of  capitalism, communism, socialism or any form of ism, are not working,  they need a relook  in a world  that is changing rapidly.  What i foresee in the future is a new ideology  bound by  self interest,  the national interest  that  would be driving  countries ahead. 

Erdogan and the rise of Turkey

This  was published earlier at  CRI:Turkey

Growing up as a kid, the word Turkey, meant 2 things to me, one was that fat, weird looking bird, that often ended up as a Thanksgiving delicacy, and the other one was a country, whose sobriquet was The Sick Man of Europe. Growing up later my knowledge of Turkey was restricted to Istanbul, the place made famous by some of those 007 movies and Hollywood heist flicks like Topkapi.

It was much later I had a slightly basic idea of Turkey’s history, primarily the Ottoman Empire, its fall, Turkey’s defeat in WW1 and Kemal Attaturk, transforming Turkey into a modern, secular nation. The Sick man of Europe epithet, was believed to have been originated by Tsar Nicolas I in Russia, the Ottoman Empire was on the verge of collapse, Turkey was one of the more poorer nations. While Turkey, did cover itself with glory in the Battle of Gallipolli during WW1, it ended up as an overall loser. And T.E.Lawrence’s campaign, uniting the Arab tribes, against the Turks, accelerated the downfall, as the Arab nations broke away from the Ottoman Empire, emerging as independent nations of their own. For a major part of the 20th Century, Turkey was an economic laggard, one of the poorer nations in Europe. Faced with grinding poverty back home, most of the Turks, choose to migrate, primarily to West Germany, where they settled in large numbers, quite often leading to race conflicts too.

But foremost, I do not subscribe to the view that Islamic culture and democracy cannot be reconciled.

It was in one such poor neighborhood in Istanbul, Kasimpasa, that Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the present Prime Minister of Turkey was born in 1954. Kasimpasa was primarily used a naval yard during the Ottoman Empire era, and after the fall of the empire, the area also fell into neglect, turning into one of Istanbul’s more poorer areas. Erdogan’s story seems pretty much the kind of inspirational man with a dream movies, that Hollywood quite often keeps churning out.

Coming from a humble background, Erdogan sold lemonade and simit( a Turkish snack), on the streets to make some extra money. It was the rather humble background of his childhood, plus the more conservative outlook of his family, that would in a way, shape Erdogan’s own ideology. Erdogan’s first brush with politics was in 1974, when he wrote the play Maskomya, primarily a strong statement against the 3 ideologies, often considered evil in Turkish society, Freemasonry, Communism and Judaism.

Erdogan started his political career with the Islamist National Salvation Party during the late 70′s, a counterpoint to the more secular culture. In fact when he later was elected as the Mayor of Istanbul in 1994, it was a news that concerned more secular citizens, fearing an imposition of Sharia. Erodgan however, proved to be a more pragmatic Mayor, focusing on the more vital issues like traffic and pollution.

The Western man has freedom of belief; in Europe, there is respect for worship, for the headscarf. Why is there not in Turkey?

Two major developments would shape Erdogan’s way of thinking. One was in 1997, when the military ousted the Islamist regime of Necbettin Erbakan, who had come to power in 1996, forming a coalition with the centrist right True Path Party. Erbakan who had been Erdogan’s mentor in politics, was arrested, the party was banned, and Erdogan was one of those caught in the crackdown on the party. Erdogan was arrested for quoting the following line from a Turkish poem “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers.” and sentenced to 10 months. It was considered to be the end of his political career, with many writing him off.

The coup and the crackdown, would however also influence Erdogan’s way of thinking. He came to believe that Erbakan’s stridently conservative, anti Western line of thought, was not what Turkey needed. That in a way, helped in a major realignment, with Erdogan and his other colleagues like Abdullah Gul, who shared his views, to lead a breakaway movement.

 Even as we ought to accept that each country would progress with a different method and speed toward that goal, the standard for the expected end-state should not be lowered

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

To Erdogan and Gul, the West was not an enemy, rather their vision was using the best of Western thought process into Turkey’s development, while at the same time retaining the essential Turkish identity. Their focus was on integration with EU, and political reforms initiated by the EU. While Erdogan rejected the religious conservative thought, at the same time he was not in favor of the militant secularism that had been a hallmark of Turkey, inspired by European nations. And it was in 2001, that Erdogan and Abdullah Gul established the AKP, or the Justice and Development Party in Turkey, Gul who was Erdogan’s close confidant, would later play a key role as a Foreign Minister, and later become the President too. Erdogan assured voters, that his was not an Islamist party, but more of a mainstream conservative party, that focused on political and economic liberalization.

AKP won the general elections in 2002, hands down, with Erdogan’s slogans of economic reforms, attracting a Turkey, that was crippled by a major economic crisis. In spite of the handsome victory, Erdogan still could not become the Prime Minister due to the ban on his political activities. However due to a change in the constitution, Erdogan finally managed to become the Prime Minister in 2003. As the PM, Erdogan began a series of measures, aimed at political reforms. The European Court of Human Rights was given more primacy, and many restrictions on freedom of speech and press. Notwithstanding the attacks against journalists and media, Turkey, still remains one of the few nations in the Muslim world, that has a better freedom of the press.

I regard the endorsement of both the objective and a method – which can differ from one country to another- of democratization by the parties in the region as a basic requisite of democratization in the Middle East.

It was however his engagement with Turkey’s Kurdish community that was however vital. For long there was no love lost between the Kurdish community and the Turks, and an insurgency sparked by them in 1984, has still been continuing. It was a long and bitter conflict, of which I really can’t go into much detail here , which had casualties and human rights abuses from both sides. Erdogan took a step forward, negotiating a truce with the PKK, the main Kurdish party, and also took steps that included using the Kurdish language in the media, restoring the original Kurdish names of towns that had been replaced with the Turkish sounding names and granting amnesty to convicted members of the PKK. The conflict however not yet died down, and a renewed bout of fresh fighting has again started in 2011, it still remains a major challenge.

When Erdogan took over the Govt, the Turkish economy was in a major crisis, caused by stifling Govt restrictions, and low foreign investment, hard decisions had to be taken. Erdogan, backed Ali Babacan, a Kellog school graduate and technocrat, as the Finance Minister, and wisely kept him away from politics.

If you are wondering where you heard this before, yes Turkey in 2002, was pretty much like India in 1991, and Erdogan-Babacan duo, was the Turkish version of the Narasimha Rao-Manmohan Singh tango. The average GDP growth has been 7.3% from the time Erdogan took over in 2003 to date. The debt amount of 23.5 billion USD which Erdogan had inherited, has been reduced down to 6.1 billion USD, and Turkey expects to clear all its debts by 2013. The public debt as a % of the annual GDP fell from 74% in 2002 to just around 39% in 2009, as shown by the above picture. Unemployment fell to around 9.7%, though during the 2008 global economic crisis in 2008, Turkey was not spared from the fall out. And from around 26.5 billion USD in reserves, it is at a much more healthier 92.2 billion USD in 2011.

Another radical move by Erdogan, was in healtthcare, where he bought Turkey’s 3 social security services into one single body, giving equal health benefits to all. He also came up with the move to provide universal free health care to any one under the age of 18, irrespective of whether they had paid premiums or not. In a way, it was an attempt to do away with the complex set of rules and regulations that had earlier characterized Turkey’s healthcare system.

The Muslim world and its subset the countries of the Middle East have been left behind in the marathon of political, economic and human development. For that, there is a tendency to blame others as the primary cause.

The major architect of Turkey’s foreign policy has been Ahmet Davutoglu, an academic and expert in international relations. His policy, was the keystone for Erdogan’s Govt, that sought to see Turkey as a major role player, having strategic depth, and more importantly as the bridge nation between the Muslim and Western world, the Balkans and the Middle East. The view being that Turkey can play a major role in the entire belt stretching from the Persian Gulf to the Black Sea to Central Asia to the Mediterranean.

The realization was that Turkey had been wasting too much time on conflicts with it’s neighbors and engagement was the need of the hour. It was this ideology that was articulated in Vision 2023, one which saw Turkey, being an economic giant,and a conflict resolver, as well as taking the leadership politically of the regions. In 2011, Erdogan made the visit to drought affected Somalia, and right now Turkey has been one of the major aid givers to that nation, as well as building the infrastructure.

Erdogoan has been the first Turkish PM to visit Brazil in 2010, another nation that was seeking to slowly shrug off it’s underperformer tag, and sign a FTA with it. While Turkey had been the first to recognize Armenia in 1991, relations still remain strained, mainly ue to Turkey backing Azerbaijan, during the Nogorno Karabakh conflict, as well as the earlier genocide of Armenians, still a thorny issue.

There exists an unmistakable demand in the Middle East and in the wider Muslim world for democratization.

During the recent Arab Spring events, Erdogan was the first to call Hosni Mubarak to step down, amidst the protests. Erdogan still remains a major influence for the Egyptians, who see in his AKP, a role model for most of the Muslim nations aspiring for democracy. Turkey has made major effort to build fences with Iraq, with Erdogan making a historic first visit to the Kurdistan region, as well as investing heavily in the infrastructure.

The major role though has been with the Iranian nuclear program, where Erdogan, let Iran outsource it’s uranium enrichment program to them, to beat the effect of the sanctions, in tandem with Brazil. In recent times, both Iran and Turkey have been moving closer in all ways, and a massive pipeline connecting both the nations, which could just be bad news for Saudi, already having to deal with Iran. Turkey in fact has been playing a major mediator role in the conflicts plaguing the region, be it the Syria-Israel conflict over the Golan Heights or the Iranian nuclear program. The relations with Israel have been more complicated, while Turkey has been the first Muslim nation to recognize Israel, and the latter has been one of Turkey’s main suppliers, relations have become strained. Turkey had been playing a role in trying to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian issue, as well as the Israel-Syrian conflict. However the Gaza flotilla raid in 2010, has strained the relations, when 8 Turkish citizens were among those killed, add to it Turkey’s open support for Iran’s nuclear program, while accusing the West of double standards and aiding Israel’s.

Therefore, the question is not whether such democratization is possible, but instead how to meet the yearning of the masses in the Middle East for democracy; in other words, how to achieve democratization in the Middle East.

Turkey still has it’s own share of challenges, the Kurdish conflict and insurgency still continues inspite of the truce called in 2009. Erdogan faces strong opposition from the judiciary, over what they see as his dictatorial tendencies and interference. There is a huge domestic opposition to Erdogan, with massive protests in 2007, over his re election. And while Turkey, has generally had a better record of press freedom compared to other Muslim nations, journalists still carry the risk of being harassed and intimidated. What is however clear, that Turkey’s Sick Man of Europe days, are past well behind.

For long a perennial under performer on the world stage, Turkey is shaking off that tag, and is slowly emerging as a force to reckon with. What Erdogan has showed, is that it is possible for a Muslim nation to democratize, and still not lose it’s Muslim identity. In a way the Turkish model has emerged as the benchmark for most of these nascent pro democracy movements in the Middle East. Also considering Turkey’s location, it stands perfectly poised to become the bridge between the West and the East, the Muslim and Western world, and a key player in the Caucasus, the Balkans, the Mediterranean as well the Persian Gulf.

RIP Vaclav Havel

The tragedy of modern man is not that he knows less and less about the meaning of his own life, but that it bothers him less and less.

It  was December 1989, in the days  when the Net  was something which only existed in science fiction, and TV meant Doordarshan only, and we were still using the good old  STD(Subscribers trunk dialing not the other STD, please!).

The only way we could get the news of the world around us on TV,  was Prannoy Roy’s  program, The World this Week  and of course good ole DD News.  And yes the newspapers, which then still printed News mostly. I was just entering into my 20s, into my adulthood, but the momentous images flashing on TV, in the World this Week and DD News, could not be missed out.

The unthinkable was happening, the Iron Curtain that had descended on the European continent was breaking down, slowly. One by one, the Soviet backed communist regimes, hitherto considered invincible, were toppling like dominoes, Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia,  and  this time there were no Russian tanks, rumbling into Prague or Budapest  as in 1956 and 1968.

While I had some inkling of  Lech Walesa, Solidarity, thanks to an article I had read some time back in a copy of Time magazine, most of the other names, seemed  quite unfamiliar to me.  I did catch note of one name,  Vaclav Havel,and  4 years later, the name cropped up when the erstwhile republic of  Czechoslovakia  split into the Czech Republic and  Slovakia, Havel was the president then.

You do not become a “dissident” just because you decide one day to take up this most unusual career. You are thrown into it by your personal sense of responsibility, combined with a complex set of external circumstances.

With his  unruly mop of hair, a wispy moustache, and a rather avuncular persona,  Vaclav Havel,  would be the most  unlikely person you would ever associate with the term  revolutionary.

In fact  at first glance, he would seem the typical kind of academic, writer, more at home in the cozy environs of  academia,  rather than leading a nation against their tyrannical rulers, and later on becoming the president of the Nation, and guiding it through one of their most turbulent phases. Vaclav Havel born Oct 5,1936 in the city of  Prague, hailed  from a family that  was wealthy and intellectually eminent. His father owned the Barrandov studios, his mother’s  father  was an ambassador and journalist himself.

At first glance, he would seem the typical kind of academic, writer, more at home in the cozy environs of academia..

His bourgeois  background though would be a disadvantage for him, growing up in the Communist era  Czechoslovakia. Forbidden to have formal education, he  worked part time as an apprentice at a chemical lab, while doing night school to complete his studies. Later on he taught at the Faculty of Economics at Prague Tech University for some time, before dropping out, and in the meantime, married his long time love Olga, who came from a working class background diametrically opposite to his.

It was the discrimination he faced, both at getting an education,  as well as a job later, due to his bourgeois  background,  that  helped  in shaping Havel’s strong  ideological opposition to the Soviet backed regime.

We had all become used to the totalitarian system and accepted it as an unchangeable fact and thus helped to perpetuate it.

From Franz Kafka to Milan Kundera to Milos Forman, Czechoslovakia always had  a  strong intellectual, culture, where writers, artistes, directors  used their works as a tool for activism,  taking on the system.  Havel, started his career as a playwright with The Garden Party, where the protagonist while adapting to the whims and fancies of the bureaucracy, ultimately ends up becoming one of them.

His next play The Memorandum, would however be one of his most memorable ones, where he came up with an imaginary artificial language Ptedype, basically a satire against the excessive bureaucratic jargon used by the Govt.

Both the Memorandum  and Garden Party,  used satire effectively, to mock at the Soviet  style bureaucracy  that  was stifling the citizens. It was The Memorandum that made him well known in the US, where his plays regularly continued to be exhibited, even after they were banned in his country, post 1968. After the suppression of the Prague Spring in 1968, Havel, again was forced to take a job at a brewery to survive, after he was banned from theater.

That was the time, Havel  became even more politically  active, interacting with other dissidents across the Soviet bloc.

It  was the time when his Vanek trilogy of plays, so called because of the central character, often believed to be his alter ego, were circulated  by the Samizdat,  a form of communication, in which banned literature  was transferred in the form of hand printed copies  from one person to another.

Havel’s  political activities, earned him the ire of the authorities, and he spent 7 years in and out of prisons, constant surveillance by the Govt. It was during one of his  long stays  in the prison, that he wrote  Letters to Olga, his wife, documenting his prison experiences.

It  was a deep love between them, which lasted until her death from cancer in 1996. His long stays in prison, also impacted his health,  making him prone to breakdowns. But at no stage did he give up on his opposition to the Govt. Havel’s  reputation as a leading revolutionary,  was further enhanced with the publication of  Charter 77, a manifesto that was jointly signed by him and other dissidents, primarily in protest against the detainment of the Czech band, Plastic People of Universe.

The salvation of this human world lies nowhere else than in the human heart, in the human power to reflect, in human meekness and human responsibility.

A firm believer in non violence, it  was his leadership, during the 1989 revolts in Eastern Europe, that ensured the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia,  went off without a shot being fired. The demonstrations  in the neighboring countries were having their impact,  and the poor economic conditions, rising unemployment bought many Czechs and Slovaks on to the streets.  Considering that the mass media  was controlled by the Govt, and there was no social media around that time,  the dissidents and protesters began to use home made posters denouncing the Communist regime.

Mass demonstrations had broken out all over Prague and other cities in Czechoslovakia. While the strike  was first led by the students, soon other sections of the society  started to pitch in more and more. By Dec 10,1989,  the Communist Government resigned, and Vaclav Havel  was sworn in as President. The most  inspiring sight was Havel, appearing on stage with Alexander Dubcek, the hero of the 1968 Prague Spring, the crowds  erupted into applause seeing them.

I dream of a republic independent, free, and democratic, of a republic economically prosperous and yet socially just; in short, of a humane republic that serves the individual and that therefore holds the hope that the individual will serve it in turn

Winning the Revolution was the easier task though  for  Havel,  the challenges ahead were enormous. What he had was a nation, scarred from years of occupation first by the Nazis  and later on the Communists.  Economically, the nation had to pay a heavy price, with shortages, low growth, unemployment. One of the first acts by Havel  as President,  was the release of political prisoners, though many critics claimed it  would  just increase the crime rate. Havel’s  biggest challenge  however was the very existence of  Czechoslovakia itself.

A firm believer in a united nation, he resigned in July 1992,  after the Slovak MPs turned against him, stating he would not preside over the breakup. The sentiment against  break up though  was overwhelmingly high in both places, the Czechs  felt that breaking away from the Slovaks  would free them from subsidizing the economically weaker Slovak region,and bring a higher rate of growth, while the Slovaks felt  that  having their own nation, would be more beneficial economically for them.

The Velvet Divorce  occurred, and by Jan 1993, the nation of Czechoslovakia ceased to exist.  Havel, who had earlier resigned  over the  breakup of the nation, was again voted to power in the 1993 elections, and once again was sworn in as President. After his re election once again in 1998, he finally resigned from office in 2003.

A humanist, writer, dissident, president, playwright, Vaclav Havel  was all of these. But more than history would remember him as the man who refused to bow to tyranny, who stood unflinchingly against the dictatorship, and waged an uncompromising struggle for freedom, without a single shot being fired. Along with Lech  Walesa,  Vaclav Havel, would be one of the most visible icons of the East European revolution in 1989. In a world increasingly filled with leaders, who seem bereft of any leadership or character,  Vaclav  Havel will be sorely missed. RIP.