Home Columns Books Profile Contact
   
 
Between the line
 

Who is celebrating?
August 10, 2011

 

WHEN India and Pakistan are celebrating their 64th independence anniversaries, the scions of the two dominating families are also happily entering their adulthood in political arena. Rahul Gandhi in India and Bilawal Bhutto Zardari in Pakistan are equally conscious of their dynastic clout that gives them the power and privileges they have come to enjoy without holding any government office.

They dress up simply – Rahul in kurta and pajama and Asif Bilal will soon be returning to Pakistan and wearing salwar and kameez (the dress that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto prescribed). But both dynasties have tons of money, most of which they have reportedly stashed away abroad. Every one remembers the luxurious country estate priced at crores (more than four million pounds) that Asif Ali Zardari purchased in the English county of Surrey. In Rajiv Gandhi’s regime, the Bofors gun scandal was a byword for corruption.

Both dynasties of Nehru-Gandhi on the one hand, and Zulfikar-Benazir Bhutto on the other, are conscious of their support among the gullible whom each have fed on slogans: Mrs Gandhi promising the electorate to oust poverty (garibi hatao) and Bhutto’s vowing to give the common man access to food, clothes and housing (roti, kapda aur makaan).

Without doubt they have each let their respective nations down because people on both sides still wallow in poverty and helplessness. But the past sacrifices of Jawaharlal Nehru in one country and those of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Benazir in the other have still sustained the hope that the two dynasties would one day deliver the dream which they had sold.

Indeed, the two families have the halo of martyrdom around them which the Congress in India and the Pakistan People’s Party are able to cash in on during the polls. One may criticise Mrs Gandhi for driving morality from politics during the Emergency from 1975-1977, but at the same time, who can forget that she was assassinated by her own security men whom the intelligence agencies correctly identified as doubtful. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto may have rubbed his opponents the wrong way, or suppressed free speech, but people recall him as their saviour who gave his life because he wanted democracy to live.

When will the peoples of the two nations remove the blinkers from their eyes is difficult to say because Pakistan remains a feudal society and India a middle class-led democracy, with a wobbling parliament. Yet one thing is certain: the common man will some day assert himself and undo the spell of the dynasties and their misgovernance.

Stirrings are already visible. The Anna Hazare phenomenon in India, underlining the appointment of a Lokpal (Ombudsman), is bringing out people’s resentment in the open. Strangely, in Pakistan more and more people are finding solace in fundamentalism as if religion will find a solution to their problems or dismal poverty. Unfortunately, terrorism is the harvest of seeds of fundamentalism sown at one time.

Both India and Pakistan are victims, although the latter is more to blame because it had made terrorism part of its policy. Beheading of two security men by terrorists who then returned to the heaven of Pakistan has remained un-condemned by Islamabad. In India, chief minister Narendra Modi has suspended an IPS officer because he alleged Modi’s complicity in Godhara-Gujarat riots.

Since India is an open society, the corruption of politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen is discussed even in parliament. The two major parties, the Congress and the BJP, are vying with each other in hurling charges of corruption. The fact remains that both the parties have indulged in corruption and nepotism wherever they are in power in the states and whenever they assumed office at the centre. In Pakistan corruption in high places is an open secret, but it is seldom discussed because the government is harsh in dealing with the whistle-blowers. Many journalists have died in exposing even a minor scam.

Sadly, none of the political parties in either country ever thought of providing free education. This should have been a priority with the enlightened Nehru, or with the first martial law dictator in Pakistan, General Mohammed Ayub Khan. Had the two nations been educated, they would have been resourceful enough to start enterprises and oust social ills from their lives. Today – after more than six decades – India’s literacy is around 70 per cent while Pakistan remains way down. Instead the rulers on both sides have cultivated prejudices in the hearts of the people. The hatred between India and Pakistan is one of the fallouts.

Another fallout has been the lack of character in the upper class. It has no sense of social obligation. The dazzling malls that have come up are full of women who flaunt their Rs 16 lakh purses and of men who think that the clothes with foreign brand names give them distinction and the intellectual air which they otherwise lack. They have no pride in the indigenous goods. Even otherwise one cannot buy eatables which are not adulterated. The worst is that even medicines are not without impurity. Children are the real sufferers because the best of hospitals do not provide a clean environment and many patients pick up infection from there.

Perhaps it is time for the two countries to introspect about where they are heading and what are their goals. A little soul searching cannot do any harm. It is no use picking one party or one person as a scapegoat. In this bath we are all naked. The problem with us is that we have lost sensitivity.

We may talk about poverty, but we, the privileged class, really do not know what the poor go through, or how they live. Mahatma Gandhi, who led us to freedom, said that the country would now usher in an era where everybody would have food to eat, a house to live and an opportunity for gainful employment. Nehru talked about a tryst with destiny and promised to fulfill the dreams with which the people had lived during their bondage.

The founder of Pakistan, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, promised equality to all in religion and opportunities. His dream of a pluralist society has been belied by the modern Pakistan. India can at least say with pride that it has established a secular society. Yet what the rulers and dynasties in both countries have to realise is that they are far from what the founding fathers had promised. At least they should have met the minimum needs of the common man and above all they should have established democratic, secular polities.

On the 64th birth anniversaries of India and Pakistan, people should make it clear that each country is not a playground for any dynasty. Democracy means rule of the people, by the people and for the people.


 
 
 
© Copyright 2008, All rights reserved.