Book Release: Extreme Turbulence - India at the Crossroads

Yesterday my book, 'Extreme Turbulence - India at the Crossroads' was formally released by Shri Yashwant Sinha former Finance Minister in the NDA Government. He said, "I opened this book casually, and then I could not put it down till I had finished it". And he continued praising the book lavishly.

Mr. Kuldip Nayar, the noted journalist, who was supposed to discuss the book had obviously not read it. So he talked about independence and poverty in India. He also said "The rich are dishonest, cheats, blah! blah! blah!".

The function was great. The "blah! blah! blah!" created some sort of a stir in the forum and became the basis for a lively discussion. It continued for over half an hour. This is the first book opening I have been to in Delhi where the discussion session lasted over 30 minutes.

As soon as I got down from the dais, Jiji came up to me and embraced me with tears in her eyes. She was weeping with joy and pride. That is when sorely I missed my parents. I imagined how Papaji and Chandji would have reacted. Maybe they were watching from the other side.

As I walked out into the hall, Mr. Sukumar, the CEO of Harper Collins came up to me and said, "Congratulations, that was great". What a relief. I had been very aprehensive about my performance at the function - the book covers such a wide range of topics, and I was not sure of myself and my ability to field all the questions. Now, it was over. My family and friends told me I came out smelling like a rose in the discussion session!

The discussion session was followed by cocktails and snacks. I was swamped with requests to sign copies of my book. I must have signed at least 20 copies. The food was good. Usha thought that the Kababs were excellent. Purnima loved the mushrooms stuffed with cheese. I stuck to beer and fish fingers, both of which I love.

We left after 10 P.M. and the party shifted to C-47. Ajay, Shiro, Praful, Gaurav, Gautam, Sai, Vaibhav, and their friends were all there. The evening finally ended after 1 A.M.

Next morning Shubha called. She said she saw Vinod Dua leaving with a copy of the book. Lots of people who had come to the book release had to leave as the hall did not have enough seating capacity. Litika, the head of promotions in Harper Collins, also told me that they had not expected such a response but they were able to get all the right people to the book launch.

**************

Well, this is the formal address I made to the audience:

Hon’ble Shri Yashwant Sinha, Shri Kuldip Nayar, Mr. Sukumar and Friends,

I am meeting Mr. Sinha today after nearly 27 years. Mr. Sinha may not remember me, but I can not forget him. Maruti was registered as a company in February 1981. At that time, I was working for Maruti under the custodianship of Shri M.C. Gupta. Mr. Sinha was a member of the first board of Directors.

As Maruti’s Chief Executive, I personally took board resolutions to his office to have them signed. I went to see him right after he took over as a director of Maruti. I had expected to walk into a conventional office, but his office was not conventional. I walked into an impressive sitting room, with a sofa upholstered in white, some easy chairs and a centre table. In the corner of the room was a small table, perhaps 4’ x 2’, with just a few files on it and a chair was facing the wall. My interaction with Mr. Sinha made me certain that I was in front of someone special. I was right. At that time Mr. Sinha was a Joint secretary in the Ministry of Transport. His rise in politics to become the Finance Minister and the External Affairs Minister in the NDA Government is an extraordinary story.

Thank you, sir, for your graciousness in releasing my book and thank you again for your lavish praise of my book.

Shri Kuldip Nayar has kindly agreed to speak on my book for which I am extremely grateful. When I think of Mr. Nayar, many things come to my mind. I think of a person of distinction, long experience, great social commitment, and a well-respected doyen of journalists. I look forward to what he has to say on my book. Whatever Mr. Nayar says will certainly provide more insights to me.

My publishers, Harper Collins, have asked me to share with this distinguished audience a few words about my “turbulence”, that is, my book. I would prefer you read my book rather than listen to me. But my publishers are my boss and, therefore, you will have to bear with me. I promise I will try to make this introduction short. I will not talk on the contents of this book, but say a few words about the premises on which the book is based.

As the title suggests, the primary focus of ‘turbulence’ is the challenges of change. This focus leads us to the first premise. If future were predetermined, change provides no challenge. The challenge exists because the future is not somewhere we are going; it is something we are creating. We have to decide on the type of future we want to create.

The second premise relates to the nature of the challenge. Never before in the history of humankind has the rate of change, the challenges to be faced, and the cost of failure been so high. The coming decades will see many major discontinuities in the economic, political, and social spheres. How will we, as a nation, face this ‘Extreme Turbulence’?

The third premise relates to solutions to these challenges. Never before has humankind acquired so much knowledge and proficiency to meet the challenges of change. Can we use this knowledge to create a brighter future, and a more inclusive and prosperous society?

The fourth and final premise recognizes the paradigm change in the power equation. Power that was vested wholly with the nation-state is now shared with the nation’s institutions and individuals.

This means recognizing that a nation can create prosperity only through institutions and civil society implementing new ideas and pursuing the country’s dreams. Will we dare find the means to integrate the resources of the government, institutions (both private and public), and civil society into a coherent force for social and economic development?

The final premise is also the motivation for writing this book. Developmental strategy, popularly called ‘perspective planning’, has been a monopoly of the government since independence. Unfortunately, we have not so far developed any institutions or alternative frameworks to bring ‘perspective planning’ to the civil society. If the civil society has to be involved in a push for development, these issues have to be brought to them in a manner that is simple so that they can understand the issues.

I have tried to take a small step in this direction. I do not know how far I have succeeded but I have described, with stories, the challenges and how the governance in India, Indian business and industry, chiefly the successful ventures, have tackled the upheavals and challenges of extreme turbulence.

It is my hope, Ladies and Gentlemen, that this book will initiate a discussion in our civil society of how we can contribute to our aspirations for a better future for India. If that happens, I will consider myself fully rewarded.

And, finally, I take this opportunity to thank my publishers, Harper Collins, for their cooperation in making this “turbulence” possible.

THANK YOU!

India, Pakistan and the Kashmiris

I was a student at the University of Illinois many years back. During those days, I developed a very close friendship with Khalid. He was studying for a Ph. D in nuclear physics. Khalid was a Kashmiri from Pakistan and I was a Kashmiri from India. We had many things in common, but surprisingly all the things we had in common were the things I have in common with my north Indian friends – not a single commonality related to our being Kashmiri.

Contrary to common perception, a ‘Kashmiri’ is basically a territorial identity. It means – a state subject of the former Princely State of Kashmir or a descendant of a male subject of the State. That is reality.

In 1950, Sir Owen Dixon, the UN representative for India and Pakistan, noted that Kashmir was “not really a unit geographically, demographically or economically” so much as “an agglomeration of territories brought under the political power of one Maharaja”.

There is no linguistic link between Kashmiris in Pakistan and in India. People speak Kashmiri in the valley, Dogri in Jammu and Ladakhi in Ladakh. But in Pakistan held Kashmir, the majority speak Punjabi, others Pashtu and Potohari (Mirpuri).

The ethnic background of the communities across the Line of Control (LOC) is also different. The Kashmiris in Pakistan held Kashmir are basically of Punjabi and Pathan stock. The Kashmiris in the valley are an old recorded civilization that can trace its identity much further back than other inhabitants of South Asia. Ladakhis and Dogras in Indian Kashmir also have no ethnic links with the people of Pakistan held Kashmir.

The LOC actually separates distinct linguistic, ethnic as well as cultural communities. The only commonality between the communities in the two countries is that a large part of the population is Muslim.

****************

The Kashmir problem is not about the separation of ethnic or linguistic groups between India and Pakistan. India has the second largest Muslim population in the world and the Muslim population of Kashmir is a very small part of it. That a large part of the population in Kashmir is Muslim – is important to the theocratic state of Pakistan. Is this argument reason enough to create or accept a division?

As long as Pakistan insists that Kashmir is the core issue between India and Pakistan and is an unfinished agenda of the partition and India takes the stand that the demographic character of the country is such that any settlement based on religion would threaten the very fabric of the country; we have to be mentally prepared that the conflict will not go away.

If the people of Kashmir had to decide their future, how is this to be ascertained? If it is an unfinished part of partition, I believe that it is the people who were part of the partition process who were provided the choice. This right of choice is not a right that passes from generation to generation. The demography and the conditions in the region have changed.

The solution has to be based on trying to reconstruct what the will of the people was at the time of the United Nations resolution. There has been significant progress in the social sciences and in techniques of analysis. Is it possible to reconstruct the wishes of the people from the facts and statistics available?

As this may not be possible, talks can provide a solution if there is goodwill and a serious determination to find solutions. India and Pakistan have yet to show that they have a will to work and live together.

One has to remember the regularity of bilateral talks since 1972, at the Foreign Secretary level every one or two years and at the President or Prime Minister level more than 9 times between 1972 and 2001.

The perceptions of religion, ethnicity and plebiscite hide the reality of the escalation of the conflict with India. The problem relates to Pakistan’s ruling dispensation. That is why the solution so difficult to find.

The Pakistan Army came into birth with a war on Kashmir. The Kashmir conflict is the structural element that helps it to remain in a constant situation of mobilizing society and imposing its control upon it. An Army can only rule when there is a threat perception.

As a theocratic nation, the Army finds it difficult to identify its Muslim neighbors as threats. Therefore, India has been projected as a real threat to Pakistan and this projection has been carried out effectively for the last 50 years. The fragile cohesion of Pakistan and the trauma of the 1971 division of Pakistan strengthen this image of India. It not surprising then that the Kashmir issue has been kept alive.

The escalation of the Kashmir problem by Pakistan is the effect of the strategy for control, and is not the cause of the Indo-Pakistan imbroglio.

*********

Though India may believe that Kashmir is an integral part of this country and Kashmir's accession to India is final and non-negotiable, we have to keep talking. It is more important now, especially keeping in mind the new developments in Pakistan. Dialogue helps in lowering hostility.

Perhaps the talks should start by India convincing Pakistanis, the world and Indians that India is a secular nation and not a Hindu nation in spite of its demography; India is not a threat to Pakistan in spite of its size and military power; that the existing power structure in Pakistan can be sustained even if India and Pakistan maintain neighborly and friendly relations.

Pakistan on the other hand can convince India that it is willing to build bridges between and peoples and ensure that its territories are not used to attack or destabilize the balance between the countries. It will use its media to further India-Pakistan relations.

The process of talks has to start by finding ways to encourage people to people contact to induce a fresh air of conciliation and prove the credentials of both India and Pakistan, bettering their sports and cultural relations, and ensuring good media. If this shows results they can look at trade as the area to exploit.

Both the countries need to recognize that regional co-operation can be mutually beneficial. They can work together to expand their regional markets and improve their competitive position internationally.

A sustainable and coherent policy, based on mutual respect to each other, has to be created for talks on Kashmir to be fruitful. The first step in this exercise would be to improve the relations between the two countries and at the same time work to bring peace to the state. A step-by-step approach then needs to be decided upon. This will require the countries to formulate a coherent approach of how the Kashmir dispute can be resolved.

India and Pakistan are both mature nations. They should understand that they are weaker if they work against each other and stronger if they work together. As nuclear powers they cannot afford war. Therefore, they need to talk – they need to shed their suspicions of each other and talk peace, understanding and co-existence. Perhaps the solution will have to be built around making the LOC a more permanent line of separation, as both nations have lived with it for over sixty years.


Upendra Kachru

Ruminations on Kashmiriyat

I had written this piece and another, sometime in 2003, on my native land - Kashmir. I did not do anything with this piece of writing then, but now I want to share my thoughts with you. The piece may be dated in terms of chronology, but the facts and sentiments still remain unchanged.

KASHMIR – KASHMIRIYAT

"Gar Jannat Bar-ru-e-Zamin Ast ; Hamin Ast , Hamin Ast, Hamin Asto”

If there is paradise on this earth; this is it, this is it, and this is it. These words are believed to be the expressions of the Mughal Emperor Jahangir. Bernier, who was the first European to enter the territory as early as 1665 AD, called it "a kingdom of unsurpassing beauty". Francis Younghusband, another great admirer, has said in his charming book on Kashmir that when "the clouds roll by, the haze lifts and a real Kashmir spring or autumn discloses itself, the heart of even the hardest visitor melts and he becomes a Bernier himself !"

The chronology of the Kashmir Kings written by Kalhana in his Raj Tarangini eulogises the beauty of Kashmir and says “ Kashmir is manifest with the beauty of Goddess Parvati; and its owner is Lord Shiva himself.”

Legend states that the Kashmir valley was once a large lake and in it lived an abominable demon. The demon was killed after the lake was drained with the collective help of Brahma's grandson, Kashyap and the goddess Parvati. Parvati killed the demon by dropping a mountain upon him and thereby crushing him to death. This legendary mountain is believed to be 'Takht-i- Sulaiman' or Shankracharya that forms the famous backdrop to the city of Srinagar.

Beauty and Kashmir are synonymous. Kashmir has been the poet’s paradise, the dreamer’s “heaven”, and its beauty has made it the envy of the region. Surrounded by three Himalayan ranges, Karakoram, Zanaskar and Pir Panjal - majestic with snow covered peaks, the valley is a tourist’s delight. These mountains are the birthplace of the great rivers that flow through the valley.

Every season offers new vistas - spring, when the air is heady and the valley is filled with the fragrance of a million flowers that blossom on trees, shrubs and creepers; summer and autumn, when these effects are heightened with the colors of warm introspection; winter, when the snow paints the landscape with a brush of white.

However, the most beautiful of all, the gem that made Kashmir a real paradise, was its multifaceted and unique cultural blend. Its different cultural forms like art and architecture, fair and festivals, rites and rituals, seer and sagas, cuisine and language, embedded in ageless period of history, created an unparalleled cultural cohesion – called ‘Kashmiriyat’.

******

Myths and history, language and literature, art and architecture, culture and tradition, in Kashmir all worked towards strengthening the concept of 'kashmiriyat'. In Kashmir, Buddhism reached the zenith of its glory, Hinduism extended its philosophical frontiers into Shaivism and Shaktism, and Islam achieved a new meaning and practice in its tradition of Sufism.

'Kashmiriyat’ was an evolution of a people isolated by geography and interdependent on each other. This interdependence grew into a common culture, a native pride, a togetherness and mutuality amongst the peoples – something local and ingenious to the valley.

The concept of togetherness and mutuality was passed on by wandering mendicants, male and female, Hindu and Muslim. Their songs and utterances penetrated into the imagination of the people. Their hymns were in their language, Kashmiri. It was the memory and compositions of Lal Ded and Noor-ud-Din and Habba Khatoon that continued to inspire the Kashmiri Muslims and Hindus alike, irrespective of class or religion and promote ‘Kashmiriyat’.

The 1990’s saw an attack on ‘Kashmiriyat’. It started with threats, abduction, torture and killings. It resulted in the flight of nearly a quarter of a million of Kashmiri Pandits of the Kashmir valley into neighboring Jammu and the plains of India. Death and destruction came to the valley, with armed bands burning down educational institutions bridges and vital communications, looting, vandalizing and burning the leftover properties of Pandits. They also started enforcing Islamic diktat on the masses and holding civil servants to ransom in order to run the administration by proxy.

The story of the exodus of the Kashmiri Pandit from the valley and the aftermath is the story of our family and many like us. We lived in Habakadal in Srinagar. Though our family branch of the family left the valley in 1948, my uncles used to live in the ancestral home. One night in early 1991, the neighbors told them that they should leave. It was not safe for the family to continue living in the mohalla. My uncles hired an auto rickshaw. The family packed some of their most precious belongings and went to the bus terminus in the dead of the night. When they tried to board the bus to Jammu, they were told to leave their belongings behind as there was no space in the bus for their luggage. They left the valley with a suitcase, which was all they could carry. Our ancestral house was burnt down a few years later.

These refugees also carried away with them the centuries old tradition of ‘Kashmiriyat’. It was there in 1947. It enabled the Kashmiris to counter- attack the Kabalis. The Kashmiris could have thrown their own lot with the invaders and thus could have opted for Pakistan. But they didn’t. They threw their weight with secular and democratic India rather than with theocratic and authoritative Pakistan. They showed more concern with Kashmiriyat i.e. their Kashmiri identity than with their Muslim identity. Is it still there?

A change is taking place – the Kashmiri Pandits have left the valley. People who visit the valley notice a difference in the social and economic fabric of the valley. Much of the political and economic power in Kashmir is now in the hands of many who would normally not have such power. In a major thrust to expand literacy, ‘Madrasas’ have gained importance amongst the population. Many of these institutions are believed to focus on the Islamic identity of the students – weakening the concept of ‘Kashmiriyat’.

Is it an accident that Sheikh Abdullah, who was considered a pillar of ‘Kashmiriyat’, made all his major political announcements out of Hazratbal, a mosque? His son, Farooq Abdullah, and his grandson follow this tradition. Interestingly, the expansion of the ‘Madrasas’ started during the Sheikh regime. Considering politics of the country where religion, language and caste have become the vehicles to create vote banks – it is not surprising. To an extent this is a legitimate strategy in a democracy – but when focusing on votebanks based on religious beliefs can result in fundamentalism, there is need to re- examine this issue.

There may be vast differences between perception and reality. A study conducted by Dr. Mir Zafar Iqbal in his book, 'Unrest In The State Of Jammu And Kashmir - A Quest Of Some Psycho-social Correlates', (Mohit Publications, 2003) showed similarity in attitudes towards Kashmiri nationalism (that envisages ‘Kashmiriyat’) being cherished by Muslims, Hindus and militants equally. In groups, he studied from Kashmir, he found no Hindu –Muslim prejudice. He concludes that the Kashmir issue is not an ethnic problem between Hindus and Muslims but is a problem about Kashmiri nationalism.

A combination of Kashmiri nationalism and the temptation of a plebiscite make up a deadly cocktail. It is, therefore, no wonder that Pakistan and many of the political parties in the valley keep the issue of plebiscite open. As long as plebiscite is a possibility and this concept is kept alive in the minds of the people, there is the incentive to change the demography of the region and the mindset of the people.

**********

As an optimist, I hope Dr. Mir Zafar Iqbal is right and ‘Kashmiriyat’ has temporarily gone underground. If this is the problem, the solution lies in restoring law and order and taking back control of the civil governance. This is a difficult task, and requires external influences to be minimized and internal influences maximized.

External influences can be restricted using diplomatic processes, improved security arrangements and technological options to halt cross-border movement and publicity. Internal processes can be strengthened only if the people have the will to do so.

The average Kashmiri has to start fighting the threats of the armed groups - who have no accountability and play by rules of their own making. Tradition and morality has once again to take precedence over other issues. This will be possible by reawakening ‘Kashmiriyat’ and using it as the resource to provide a healing touch. This task is difficult and requires patience, but reawakening the conscience of the people is the way to bring back peace in Kashmir.

I remember the pride my father and my grandfather took in the fact that we were Kashmiris and of the spirit of ‘Kashmiriyat’, amongst us. It took just a few months of violence to tarnish a tradition that had a genesis of over a thousand years. Secularism, that has become the essence of Indian pluralism, is based on the concept of ‘Kashmiriyat’ – the tradition of respecting the identity of diverse ethnic groups, enriching their cultures and contributing towards their social mores. It was Nehru’s background and what he saw of ‘Kashmiriyat’ in the valley that made him believe that secular India could be a reality. Kashmir exported the unique concept of ‘Kashmiriyat’ to India and now it needs to be brought back into Kashmir.


Upendra Kachru