India~ through my eyes.

Today, I read an article on India's Foreign Policy written by Maj Gen Sheru Thapliyal. The article gives a brief criticism of India's Foreign Policy and India's relations with the immediate neighbours such as Pakistan, China, Nepal and Bhutan. Personally, I did not approve of the article as I found the author was too biased to write objectively about the India and its political affairs. When I say biased, I do not mean it in a good way. As you all are aware, today, in India, there are people who criticize India on its each and every factor and aspect. They are determined to find fault in every move of the government. Its as if, they have affiliated themselves with the opposition.The Author falls into that category. He not only criticizes India's policy and the system but also insults the Constitution as well as top members who are highly respected through out the world. So I thought, why not clarify once and for all what India actually is for all those who criticize it and think foreign countries are the best.

As we all are aware, India got its independence in August 1947 and just 2 years prior to this event Japan had suffered from the terrible defeat of 2nd World War. These 2 events are very important because today, almost every person compares the progress of Japan to that of India. Japan has made tremendous development when it comes to its economy and social growth. There is no doubt about it that their growth is praiseworthy but what I fail to see is- Why the growth of Japan is always compared to that of India? It is always said that "If Japan could develop after the atomic bombings then why couldn't India do it? Because Indians are lazy people and rather than developing the country, the leaders of our nation concentrated on self gain and trivial matters." I am saying this sentence as a general opinion and not word-to-word statement. I refuse to believe this sentiment. Who says India did not go through hell after the independence? Those who believe it was a piece of cake for India to develop are ignorant and delusional. The partition which followed Independence not only cost many lives but also time and money. After the partition, there was onslaught of refugees in India from both the sides (Pakistan as well as Bangladesh). I agree, people migrated out of India as well but the number of incomers was more than outgoers. Those people who had come had left their land, property and everything behind. It was in the hands of government to provide them with land, employment, ration, house, money, electricity, capital and so on. It took sometime for India to stabilize this situation but it managed to do that within a year or so is a great achievement in my eyes. After the problem of partition, there was a problem of Framing of Constitution. It is wrong to give the full credit of it to only one person because there were many different people working on it. Debate after debate continued for 2years and after which the Constitution came into being. Till that time, the position of the country as sovereign was not strong and it was still under the influence of Governor General Mountbatten. The true control came over after 26th January 1950. The framing of the Constitution was not end of the problems but just the beginning as the whole responsibility of the running of the state directly fell onto the cabinet and its ministers, specially Jawaharlal Nehru who people believed to be messiah. The next problem which followed was Linguistic Organization of the States and deciding National Language. For the former issue, not only Nehru but many of the cabinet ministers were reluctant and who could blame them after the Partition which was based solely on religion. They feared that country would be divided on the basis of language and it will become chaotic. But eventually, after the death of Sriramulu (who was supporter of Samyukta Andhra and had started fast unto death for the separate Andhra Pradesh), the Cabinet and the Nehru had to cave in. More or less same thing occurred regarding National Language decision. It escalated to such a proportion that till now Hindi has not been put into the Constitution as National Language, regardless of what every North Indian might think.

These were some of the political problems which faces the nation but what about economical and social problems? There was shortage of food products so much so that milk was distributed only once a day and that too selected amount, regardless of the number of people in the household and presence of a small baby. If it is hard to believe then it is better to ask our parents what I mean. This situation was changed by 5yr plans, Green Revolution, White Revolution. The credit of which goes to Nehru again. Getting back to Nehru, he is always considered as next to Gandhi and thought he could not do any mistakes. NAM policy undertaken by him was one of the best at that point of time and gave a direction to the countries which were still under colonialism and did not want to take part in BLOCS of Cold War. Later on he became biased towards Soviet Camp because Soviet Union was the only country helping India when America was busy giving aid to Pakistan which Pakistan used in fight against India. So I guess its understandable that his liking was more towards Soviet Union. One of the biggest mistake of Nehru was believing and trusting China. He was a follower of Gandhi and hence acted on the principals of Gandhi. When China attacked India, it was not only a physical blow to the country but also an emotional one. People never forgave him for the mistakes he did but people of India also forgot that he was merely a human.

Coming to now, yes, parties in India are full of corruption and Congress is still baiting onto that 1947 sentiment of the people but to call our PM as Moron is not acceptable in my view. We blame whatever is in front of us and the mistakes the government is making but in the process we forget that these are the same people who have balanced and managed this country since very long. Take example of our PM, due to his LPG policy of 1991, India has managed such an advancement and development in the economy. Even when the whole world was going through massive depression in 2007, India was stable as a rock. The credit of it goes to economists such as Manmohan Singh. India's development is not only in the one direction but in all the directions. It is a very slow process, I agree, but considering the population and the diversity of India, I think, our country has to be given a chance. And those who are blaming in continuously 24/7, why don't you do something about it? I am not asking you to go and stand for the elections but do you even go and vote during the time of elections? Every citizen of the country feels very happy in blaming the politics and politician saying its a gutter, every one enjoys all the rights but when it comes to one fundamental duty of Voting, not even one educated citizen follows it. One of my close friend said "Criticism leads to finding faults and loopholes in our system and makes us correct them and move ahead with better ideas." In this sentence, he has used US and not them which is what we all need to do. Instead of just finding faults, its high time that youth and educated people of this country take a step ahead and perform their duty. A.P.J Abdul Kalam has put rightly in words what I  feel---

Tell me, why is the media here so negative? Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognise our own strengths, our achievements? We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse to acknowledge them. Why?

Disclaimer-I would like to make one thing clear is what I am saying is not something made up and is based on books and facts . I have merely expressed my views on the events and try to understand it through the context of time and space. The books I refereed are by Ramchandra Guha, Dominique Lapierre, V K Agnihotri and articles in newspapers. The link of article mentioned in the 1st para is~ http://www.indiandefencereview.com/geopolitics/Indias-Foreign-Policy--A-Muddle-for-Sixty-Two-Years.html

Historians!!!!!!!?????!!!!!!!!

There are times when we look forward to some special occassions or events and feel we can learn so much from this! This is such an awesome opportunity! But at the end of the event, you feel disappointed at how lousy it turned out to be and how disappointing it was. One such event for me was the National Seminar organized by Dept of History, Pune University. There was such an enthusiasm and zest regarding this seminar. The co-ordinator Sir had asked each and every student for volunteering, the whole department had been cleaned and made posh. Even the fans were cleaned from inside out, huge banners were put up at the entrance and in the lecture halls, students were asked to dress appropriately because "Historians" from all over India were to come to present their paper in the Seminar. So all in all, every one was waiting for the Seminar to commence. 


Finally the mighty day of 23rd February arrived. On the 1st day, there were almost 6 Ph.D. holders who presented their paper to the audience. I would not call them "Historians" as they did not fit my definition of "Historians". I will dwell on that concept later, after I have done describing about the Seminar. Coming back to the topic, Ph.D. holders had come from Orissa, Mumbai, Nagpur, Rajasthan, New Delhi, Pune and Belgaum (Karnataka). All in all, there were almost two dozen Ph.D. holders who presented their papers in the span of 3 days. According to me, the first day was not so bad. They presented their paper and yes, my mind did drift away many a times but I thought it was my fault as many a times I have been called Impatient and Fickle minded. On the second day, I did a resolution with myself that I will concentrate completely and try to listen to every word they read as the information can be useful for me in near future and after all, it is good to know new stuff. ALAS! My resolution remained just that, Resolution. I could not put it into action how much ever I tried. My mind just did not want to listen to those papers. At one point of time, it even told me, these papers are so boring. I am getting so bored of History. My mind was having mind of its own. It refused to listen to my brain. Finally, I got horified of my own thoughts and decided by lunch break that I have had enough. If I want to get back to loving my own subject, I had to get out of this Seminar, which is exactly what I did. After coming back home, I learnt more in half an hour than I had learnt sitting there for 4hrs, though I did nothing more than working on my project. On the 3rd day, I merely went as it was last day and I had given my word to Sir about volunteering and I did not want to break that. (Techincally I breached the so called word when I decided to leave the half of the second session, but thats inconsequential.) Thankfuly, 3rd day did not have 10 or so papers but just 4 which I again tried to listen with great concentration. The day ended with Valedictory function and that was the end of the National Seminar.


Now comes the big question, why did I get bored of the Seminar when it was about History and What was the topic of the Seminar? The topic of the Seminar was "History of Marathas- New perspective." There are many reasons on why I did not like the seminar. First and foremost, I did not find any "New Perspective" in the papers presented. Yes, there were few, who tried to look at Maratha History through a different angle such as Art and tried to define it but other than that, rest were just trying to throw the light on the subject which were neglected. Every Ph.D. holder called themselves Historians but they did not have the necessary qualities required of Historian. Formost of it, they brought religion and regionalism in their studies and when the audience objected to it, they did not take criticism in healthy attitude. They acted defensive against the caste or region. This showed they lacked objectivity and the foresight required for any Historian. Second, they were not aware of the conditions and the situations of the world. I can remember atleast 2 Ph.D. holders calling Africans as Negro, which as we all know, is as horrifyingly derogatory term. This fact is known by even 16yr old kid living in the age of computers. Ignorance of this fact by Historians showcase their limited vision. Thirdly, all the papers presented were too factual. They were just facts, uncovered from unpublished documents. There was no different interpretation of it and no theories put forward through those facts. Historian's main job is to interpret the events that took place and understand the reason behind it, which was never accomplished by these Ph.D. holders. Now my questions is- How can they call themselves as Historians? 


The so called Historians, who had come in this Seminar, had a narrow minded approach and did not bother to look outside their realm and comfort zone. In my words, they assassinated History. I am even inclined to think that, because of these kind of "Historians" the subject seems so boring and lengthy to the masses. I am not blaming all the Historians out there. But from what I have seen so far, Indian Historians need to think about their mindset and about their work ethic. Ph.D. is not just some degree, it is a doctorate and it should not be taken lightly. Being an Historian, is not an easy accomplishment. It requires tremendous knowledge and effort on the part of a person. He should not only know his own subject but also possess the knowledge of the whole wide world because Whatever Significant Happens Today is the History of Tomorrow. 


"For Historians ought to be precise, truthful, and quite unprejudiced, and neither interest nor fear, hatred nor affection, should cause them to swerve from the path of truth, whose mother is history, the rival of time, the depository of great actions, the witness of what is past, the example and instruction of the present, the monitor of the future." --Cervantes