Thursday, August 23, 2007

Suman Bery: An inconvenient truth

http://www.businessstandard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=295232&leftnm=4&subLeft=0&chkFlg=

Suman Bery: An inconvenient truth

Suman Bery / New Delhi August 21, 2007



An appreciating exchange rate has been good for the economy.

In recent months Indian monetary management has received its share of knocks from several distinguished contributors to these pages. Capital surges towards emerging markets have become a regular feature of the international economy over the last fifteen years, tracking the cycle of monetary easing and tightening in the developed world. Handling them has accordingly become part of the toolkit of financial authorities in all major emerging markets.

While events over the last week suggest that the cycle might once again be turning, the distinct sense conveyed by the critics mentioned below is that the most recent surge has been handled with considerably less aplomb by the Finance Ministry and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) than in the past.

The sharpest criticism (particularly by Shankar Acharya: “Midsummer Madness?”, Business Standard, August 9, but also Surjit Bhalla and AV Rajwade in various columns) is that excessive (and excessively rapid) nominal exchange rate appreciation (particularly in March of this year) has been permitted by the RBI.

In addition Acharya, citing several articles by Rajiv Malik of J.P.Morgan, argues that progressive liberalisation of external commercial borrowing (ECBs) for Indian corporates was irresponsible, given the magnitude of other capital flows heading India’s way.

Acharya is forthright about the preferred response, which is to repeat the earlier drill:

• Reserve Bank purchases of foreign exchange (“intervention”) should keep the nominal exchange rate within a range loosely related to a real exchange rate target;
• The monetary impact of such purchases should be neutralised (“sterilised”) through sales of government securities [or increases in minimum required cash reserve ratios (CRRs)] to hit either liquidity or interest rate objectives;
• Although he personally believes that intervention can be continued indefinitely and is almost wholly successful for good measure he proposes sharp restrictions on the volume of ECBs, presumably to limit pure arbitrage operations.

Despite being a committed liberaliser in other spheres (notably trade and taxation), Acharya justifies this enormous exercise of discretionary power by the RBI on the grounds that not to do so is likely to impose “significant, rising and avoidable costs for exports, output and employment”.

Similar concerns have been expressed by Rajwade in his columns, drawing in part upon case studies of the impact of the rising rupee. These are reinforced in his article of August 20, where he strongly endorses the use of increases in the CRR as the preferred sterilisation instrument. Surjit Bhalla, in his BS column of August 18 (“How India is different from China”) provides specific orders of magnitude on the growth benefits of sterilised intervention.

Acharya, Bhalla and Rajwade (ABR) are all serious, responsible and experienced commentators, and a shared consensus among them cannot be taken lightly. In his August piece, Acharya attributes the recent deviation from past practice to arguments “peddled in recent months by some IMF staffers and a small group of younger domestic economists”. While no longer young, and never with the IMF, I was mildly surprised not have been bracketed in the same company. I would, however, admit to the same lack of “hands-on, policy-making experience” which Acharya considers essential for credibility in these matters.

Starting with a joint paper with Deepak Lal and D K Pant in 2003, and more recently in these columns, I have been among those who have been arguing for greater nominal exchange rate flexibility, including appreciation when the occasion demands it. Quite apart from the analytic points that I make below, I feel that such flexibility is to be welcomed because it reduces the risks associated with the necessary, desirable and inevitable integration of the Indian financial system into world markets.

There is clearly no disagreement between ABR and myself on the ultimate goals of economic policy. These are to provide high, efficient, sustainable non-inflationary growth. Where we apparently differ is on the importance of the tradables sector (both manufacturing and services) in generating such growth, and on the appropriateness of intervening heavily in financial markets to bring about an ever-increasing share of tradables in national output.

The polar case of such a strategy is China, and it is dubious that we either should, or can go down that path.

The view that Lal, Pant and I took in our 2003 work is that the fundamental driver of growth is efficient investment. This is most easily achieved by a judicious widening of the current account deficit (which allows foreign savings to enter the economy so as to supplement domestic savings) and by allowing the nominal exchange rate to track underlying movements in the “real” exchange rate (not the real effective exchange rate), which is the domestic relative price of tradables to non-tradables. The real exchange rate is basically responsive to the domestic imbalance between demand and supply.

On such a view, exchange market intervention leading to reserves accumulation frustrates the widening of the current account that would permit enhanced investment while sterilisation, through its impact on domestic interest rates, exacts a further toll on investment and growth. On this view, the recent growth acceleration is precisely because monetary and fiscal policy eased sufficiently to permit the current account deficit to record a modest deficit.

As events have unfolded we have also seen that a strong rupee benefits some constituencies even as it may harm others, quite apart from the fact that it makes Indian assets more expensive to acquire and overseas assets cheaper. Finally, it is specious, arbitrary, and in the last instance impossible to draw fine distinctions between “good” and “undesirable” forms of capital inflow.

In brief in a fast-moving economy subject to myriad positive and negative shocks it is difficult to take a view on the equilibrium real exchange rate which will in any case vary across the economic cycle. Over the medium run it is clear that the real exchange rate will appreciate. The true concerns of macro managers are external and internal balance. As long as these are achieved, the composition of output is best left to the market to determine.

To conclude, I accept that there are pragmatic limits to the amount of nominal appreciation that is politically tolerable in a given space of time; also that the stability of capital flows is uncertain. My basic objection is to targeting a given effective exchange rate as an instrument of development policy. In this I do seem genuinely to differ from my esteemed fellow columnists in these pages.

The writer is Director-General NCAER. The views expressed here are personal. sbery@ncaer.org

The 'Mistress Syndrome' in business decision-making

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-2296364,prtpage-1.cms

When we were young, our elders cautioned us: “Remember, the grass on the other side always looks greener”. Yet, sometimes in taking business decisions we tend to ignore this advice. As I was watching (the movie) Life in a Metro some months ago, it began to make sense. What we exhibit in business decision-making is similar to a trait some people tend to exhibit in their lives — let’s call it the ‘Mistress Syndrome’.

Let me start with inorganic growth. For Indian companies to become global challengers, it is imperative that they acquire within India and abroad to get scale. However this cannot happen at the cost of defocusing on organic growth and the core business. One of the key reasons for the success of the Indian pioneers in globalisation other than IT has been strong and sustainable domestic business, which provide the resources and confidence to drive global acquisitions.

Yet I find a lot of companies which do not have sustainable domestic business models proclaiming three or four impending acquisitions. Both Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of GE and AG Lafley, CEO of P&G, are votaries of organic growth. They had used acquisitions to fuel some of their growth in the past, but they felt that just relying on deals could be dangerous. Immelt once commented “It’s so easy to overpay when buying growth, and experience shows that the bigger the deal, the bigger the risk”.

He is absolutely right. In most sectors, there is a lot of headroom for organic growth in India. One should not fall into the trap of buying growth at the expense of organic growth. It should be an add-on and not a substitute growth model. It brings an additional risk of complacency by targeting a lower organic growth post an acquisition. Remember it will not happen every year.

A similar ‘Mistress Syndrome’ is exhibited in new brand launches. A lot of marketers have the fetish to launch new initiatives in the name of innovation. The investments required are huge and if the innovation is not really incremental or radical it would be more sensible to direct the resources towards growing the existing power brands. The current trend is towards launching undifferentiated mass- premium niche brands.

In my opinion they are very much like the ‘Arm Candy’ one flaunts in some of the happening do’s in town. Leaders are far more tolerant towards these ‘Arm Candy’ brands or initiatives and they postpone a judicious stop-loss even in the absence of a long-term sustainable business model.



Unfortunately I have realised today’s boards are more tolerant towards leaders who promise light at the end of tunnel every meeting by conveniently shifting milestones as compared to someone who admits to a mistake and prevents further drainage of resources.

I have also concluded that marketers need to focus on a few ‘Big Bet’ new initiatives by committing investments instead of flirting with a large number of small initiatives while simultaneously working towards maximising the potential of their power brands.

Another instance of mistress syndrome is top-end focus. There is a lot of growth potential amongst the urban poor and in the emerging rural areas. Unfortunately they are not ‘Sexy’ enough and require much more hard work. So a new ‘Arm Candy’ in modern trade steps in. Some FMCG players have made a lot of disproportionate spends towards it without commensurate returns. However some smart players have managed to have win-win relationships with both modern and traditional retail since they believe that both will co-exist in the long term.

A lot of youngsters who do ‘Lateral Job Hopping’ demonstrate the syndrome. During the foundation years learning and professional value addition is more important than the employer label. After a few rounds of flirting with various organisations this realisation sinks in. But perhaps a trifle too late, just as in the movie Life in a Metro the protagonist realised this at the very end: was it worth the effort?

Let me conclude by emphasising that I am all for inorganic growth, new initiatives etc. as long as they make long term business sense and they are not funded by milking and weakening one’s primary resource engines. It is foolish to assume low organic growth potential in any category in India unless there is a strong environmental trend against it.

And it takes much less effort, risk and resources to drive organic growth instead of just trying to only chase inorganic growth. The same goes for betting on a few big initiatives as compared to flirting with countless incremental ones. Just as it takes much less effort to mend relationships at home as compared finding something outside.

The author is CEO, Consumer Products Division, Marico

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Life lessons from Narayana Murthy

http://www.rediff.com/money/2007/may/28bspec.htm

N R Narayana Murthy, chief mentor and chairman of the board, Infosys Technologies, delivered a pre-commencement lecture at the New York University (Stern School of Business) on May 9. It is a scintillating speech, Murthy speaks about the lessons he learnt from his life and career. We present it for our readers:


Dean Cooley, faculty, staff, distinguished guests, and, most importantly, the graduating class of 2007, it is a great privilege to speak at your commencement ceremonies.

I thank Dean Cooley and Prof Marti Subrahmanyam for their kind invitation. I am exhilarated to be part of such a joyous occasion. Congratulations to you, the class of 2007, on completing an important milestone in your life journey.

After some thought, I have decided to share with you some of my life lessons. I learned these lessons in the context of my early career struggles, a life lived under the influence of sometimes unplanned events which were the crucibles that tempered my character and reshaped my future.

I would like first to share some of these key life events with you, in the hope that these may help you understand my struggles and how chance events and unplanned encounters with influential persons shaped my life and career.

Later, I will share the deeper life lessons that I have learned. My sincere hope is that this sharing will help you see your own trials and tribulations for the hidden blessings they can be.

The first event occurred when I was a graduate student in Control Theory at IIT, Kanpur, in India. At breakfast on a bright Sunday morning in 1968, I had a chance encounter with a famous computer scientist on sabbatical from a well-known US university.

He was discussing exciting new developments in the field of computer science with a large group of students and how such developments would alter our future. He was articulate, passionate and quite convincing. I was hooked. I went straight from breakfast to the library, read four or five papers he had suggested, and left the library determined to study computer science.

Friends, when I look back today at that pivotal meeting, I marvel at how one role model can alter for the better the future of a young student. This experience taught me that valuable advice can sometimes come from an unexpected source, and chance events can sometimes open new doors.

The next event that left an indelible mark on me occurred in 1974. The location: Nis, a border town between former Yugoslavia, now Serbia, and Bulgaria. I was hitchhiking from Paris back to Mysore, India, my home town.

By the time a kind driver dropped me at Nis railway station at 9 p.m. on a Saturday night, the restaurant was closed. So was the bank the next morning, and I could not eat because I had no local money. I slept on the railway platform until 8.30 pm in the night when the Sofia Express pulled in.

The only passengers in my compartment were a girl and a boy. I struck a conversation in French with the young girl. She talked about the travails of living in an iron curtain country, until we were roughly interrupted by some policemen who, I later gathered, were summoned by the young man who thought we were criticising the communist government of Bulgaria.

The girl was led away; my backpack and sleeping bag were confiscated. I was dragged along the platform into a small 8x8 foot room with a cold stone floor and a hole in one corner by way of toilet facilities. I was held in that bitterly cold room without food or water for over 72 hours.

I had lost all hope of ever seeing the outside world again, when the door opened. I was again dragged out unceremoniously, locked up in the guard's compartment on a departing freight train and told that I would be released 20 hours later upon reaching Istanbul. The guard's final words still ring in my ears -- "You are from a friendly country called India and that is why we are letting you go!"

The journey to Istanbul was lonely, and I was starving. This long, lonely, cold journey forced me to deeply rethink my convictions about Communism. Early on a dark Thursday morning, after being hungry for 108 hours, I was purged of any last vestiges of affinity for the Left.

I concluded that entrepreneurship, resulting in large-scale job creation, was the only viable mechanism for eradicating poverty in societies.

Deep in my heart, I always thank the Bulgarian guards for transforming me from a confused Leftist into a determined, compassionate capitalist! Inevitably, this sequence of events led to the eventual founding of Infosys in 1981.

While these first two events were rather fortuitous, the next two, both concerning the Infosys journey, were more planned and profoundly influenced my career trajectory.

On a chilly Saturday morning in winter 1990, five of the seven founders of Infosys met in our small office in a leafy Bangalore suburb. The decision at hand was the possible sale of Infosys for the enticing sum of $1 million. After nine years of toil in the then business-unfriendly India, we were quite happy at the prospect of seeing at least some money.

ALSO READ: The amazing success story of Infosys
I let my younger colleagues talk about their future plans. Discussions about the travails of our journey thus far and our future challenges went on for about four hours. I had not yet spoken a word.

Finally, it was my turn. I spoke about our journey from a small Mumbai apartment in 1981 that had been beset with many challenges, but also of how I believed we were at the darkest hour before the dawn. I then took an audacious step. If they were all bent upon selling the company, I said, I would buy out all my colleagues, though I did not have a cent in my pocket.

There was a stunned silence in the room. My colleagues wondered aloud about my foolhardiness. But I remained silent. However, after an hour of my arguments, my colleagues changed their minds to my way of thinking. I urged them that if we wanted to create a great company, we should be optimistic and confident. They have more than lived up to their promise of that day.

In the seventeen years since that day, Infosys has grown to revenues in excess of $3.0 billion, a net income of more than $800 million and a market capitalisation of more than $28 billion, 28,000 times richer than the offer of $1 million on that day.

In the process, Infosys has created more than 70,000 well-paying jobs, 2,000-plus dollar-millionaires and 20,000-plus rupee millionaires.

A final story: On a hot summer morning in 1995, a Fortune-10 corporation had sequestered all their Indian software vendors, including Infosys, in different rooms at the Taj Residency hotel in Bangalore so that the vendors could not communicate with one another. This customer's propensity for tough negotiations was well-known. Our team was very nervous.

First of all, with revenues of only around $5 million, we were minnows compared to the customer.

Second, this customer contributed fully 25% of our revenues. The loss of this business would potentially devastate our recently-listed company.

Third, the customer's negotiation style was very aggressive. The customer team would go from room to room, get the best terms out of each vendor and then pit one vendor against the other. This went on for several rounds. Our various arguments why a fair price -- one that allowed us to invest in good people, R&D, infrastructure, technology and training -- was actually in their interest failed to cut any ice with the customer.

By 5 p.m. on the last day, we had to make a decision right on the spot whether to accept the customer's terms or to walk out.

All eyes were on me as I mulled over the decision. I closed my eyes, and reflected upon our journey until then. Through many a tough call, we had always thought about the long-term interests of Infosys. I communicated clearly to the customer team that we could not accept their terms, since it could well lead us to letting them down later. But I promised a smooth, professional transition to a vendor of customer's choice.

This was a turning point for Infosys.

Subsequently, we created a Risk Mitigation Council which ensured that we would never again depend too much on any one client, technology, country, application area or key employee. The crisis was a blessing in disguise. Today, Infosys has a sound de-risking strategy that has stabilised its revenues and profits.

I want to share with you, next, the life lessons these events have taught me.

1. I will begin with the importance of learning from experience. It is less important, I believe, where you start. It is more important how and what you learn. If the quality of the learning is high, the development gradient is steep, and, given time, you can find yourself in a previously unattainable place. I believe the Infosys story is living proof of this.

Learning from experience, however, can be complicated. It can be much more difficult to learn from success than from failure. If we fail, we think carefully about the precise cause. Success can indiscriminately reinforce all our prior actions.

2. A second theme concerns the power of chance events. As I think across a wide variety of settings in my life, I am struck by the incredible role played by the interplay of chance events with intentional choices. While the turning points themselves are indeed often fortuitous, how we respond to them is anything but so. It is this very quality of how we respond systematically to chance events that is crucial.

3. Of course, the mindset one works with is also quite critical. As recent work by the psychologist, Carol Dweck, has shown, it matters greatly whether one believes in ability as inherent or that it can be developed. Put simply, the former view, a fixed mindset, creates a tendency to avoid challenges, to ignore useful negative feedback and leads such people to plateau early and not achieve their full potential.

The latter view, a growth mindset, leads to a tendency to embrace challenges, to learn from criticism and such people reach ever higher levels of achievement (Krakovsky, 2007: page 48).

4. The fourth theme is a cornerstone of the Indian spiritual tradition: self-knowledge. Indeed, the highest form of knowledge, it is said, is self-knowledge. I believe this greater awareness and knowledge of oneself is what ultimately helps develop a more grounded belief in oneself, courage, determination, and, above all, humility, all qualities which enable one to wear one's success with dignity and grace.

Based on my life experiences, I can assert that it is this belief in learning from experience, a growth mindset, the power of chance events, and self-reflection that have helped me grow to the present.

Back in the 1960s, the odds of my being in front of you today would have been zero. Yet here I stand before you! With every successive step, the odds kept changing in my favour, and it is these life lessons that made all the difference.

My young friends, I would like to end with some words of advice. Do you believe that your future is pre-ordained, and is already set? Or, do you believe that your future is yet to be written and that it will depend upon the sometimes fortuitous events?

Do you believe that these events can provide turning points to which you will respond with your energy and enthusiasm? Do you believe that you will learn from these events and that you will reflect on your setbacks? Do you believe that you will examine your successes with even greater care?

I hope you believe that the future will be shaped by several turning points with great learning opportunities. In fact, this is the path I have walked to much advantage.

A final word: When, one day, you have made your mark on the world, remember that, in the ultimate analysis, we are all mere temporary custodians of the wealth we generate, whether it be financial, intellectual, or emotional. The best use of all your wealth is to share it with those less fortunate.

I believe that we have all at some time eaten the fruit from trees that we did not plant. In the fullness of time, when it is our turn to give, it behooves us in turn to plant gardens that we may never eat the fruit of, which will largely benefit generations to come. I believe this is our sacred responsibility, one that I hope you will shoulder in time.

Thank you for your patience. Go forth and embrace your future with open arms, and pursue enthusiastically your own life journey of discovery!

Mumbai, Safe City? ??l*#$!*@!

Mumbai, Safe City? ??l*#$!*@!

Baby Helmet
Baby helmet, infant headgear Head protection $21.95 per itemMaternity Belly Barbell
Pregnancy Piercings Navel Rings Unique New MaternityAds by Google
In Mumbai, you can stroll anywhere, at any time. In Mumbai, women are safe. In Mumbai, people are civilised, cultured - meaning really not like North India!


Really? Is all this really true? Why don't you ask that to the bruised and battered 10-year-old (10 year-old , for god's sake) girl lying in a hospital in Chembur? Asma Sheikh is a stinging slap on the face of all of us idiots who believe that Mumbai is this great safe land. The land of the erudite. The land of the sane.


It isn't. It is as safe or unsafe as any other major city in this sexually repressed country.


Here's what happened to poor Asma - she was returning home when a bunch of goons in a jeep, apparently rich brats, zoomed in and began to pass lewd comments on her and tried to molest her. Scared out of her wits (how else does a 10-year-old girl react?), she ran and her skirt caught the jeep. The boys, by now trying to flee the scene, just roared ahead dragging the poor girl along with them. One of the wheels even went over her arm breaking it in two places.


Her mother has said that her the underside of her legs have been bruised so badly that the skin has almost come off entirely and will, in all probability, need plastic surgery. See the story carefully, very carefully. Hear the girl wail in pain, listen to her mother saying - I saw the boys in front of me, but what could I do?


That's what all decent people like you and me feel these days? What can we do? Who is on our side? We never have the money, nor the contacts to really fight back and we are molested, abused day after day. Either its the rich, brats like these who have no business getting behind a jeep anyway (the driver didn't even have a licence), or its criminal goons who get away with anything because they are just so brazen.


In a country of ever rising incidents of rape and molestation, of countless sex crimes, our politicians are still saying - don't talk about sex education! How repressed and insane are we?


Someone said to me today - this is just a stray incident.


That's just such a typical, educated, middle class response - balanced, moderate, always objective. I'm sorry, today I am saying that I WILL NOT BE MODERATE WHEN A 10-YEAR-OLD IS MOLESTED. I DON'T CARE IF THAT'S EXPECTED OF ME BECAUSE I AM A JOURNALIST. PEOPLE WHO EXPECT THAT OF ME CAN TAKE A HIKE. I AM A CITIZEN FIRST, BEFORE A JOURNALIST, AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO RESPOND AS A CITIZEN. AND IF THAT MAKES ME A BAD JOURNALIST, SO BE IT. I WOULD MUCH RATHER BE A BETTER HUMAN BEING.


AND THE CITIZEN IN ME SAYS - THRASH THE CULPRITS, THRASH THEM PUBLICLY, LET THE WORLD KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DID AND WHICH FAMILY THEY COME FROM. LET THEIR PARENTS TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE MONSTERS THEY CREATED.


I am tired of these escapist statements that these are stray incidents. They are not. They happen every other day. Some are reported, some are not. Let one woman who has travelled in a Mumbai train tell you that Mumbai is safe. No one will. Because they face abuse every, single day and still the myth persists that Mumbai is safe. It isn't. Deal with it.


Maybe it was once upon a time. Not now. Yes, it is better than Delhi and north India - but then even the jungle is much better than Delhi and north India. That is no comparison. Delhi and north India have animals roaming the streets. Nothing is worse than living in those cities. But Mumbai is certainly not safe.


It's like that other myth - Mumbai is cosmopolitan. Yeah, really? A city where is most parts the minorities cannot find a home. A city where entire chunks are only for vegetarians, rich Gujjus and Jains? A city where a Muslim friend of mine could not find a home for more than six months because he was a single man? Cosmopolitan? You must be kidding!


The only justice Asma can get is efficient, immediate punishment for the boys. Give them the harshest punishment possible, make an example of them, so that no brat ever dares to do something like this.


And let your girls carry pepper spray (my sister used to carry a blade and then a pocket knife all the years she travelled in a train and bus in Mumbai, a good eight years), arm your girls, let them fight back and fight to kill. I would love to see a few dead molestors on the street. Really, I really would. It would really set an example.


Mumbai is not safe. Repeat: Mumbai is not safe.


And if the Mumbaikar does not accept that now and does not do something about it now, if the protest doesn't happen now, then remember - we will become a Delhi and then see how you like it!

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

The Curse of Being a Hindu in Modern India

Every individual has the right to self respect and dignity, especially from its fellow countrymen. Irrespective of the religion, caste, creed and all other secular lingo, we all should be treated fairly. However, somewhere down the line I feel in the present modern setup of India, self respect of the Hindus has been taken for a ride by media and politicians alike. We have been considered harmless and so nobody cares if there is any sort of infliction on us. For them, it is more important to concentrate on issues which aim at pleasing the minorities. And make no mistake, minorities not only include Muslims, but also Christians and other non-Hindu religions. I have nothing against my fellow "minority" countrymen, for in all fairness I have never even thought of them as "minorities". For me they are as Indian as I am. They definitely need a change in their socio-economic conditions and we all should support the cause. Infact, we have mutual respect for each other and if not for petty politics, there wouldn't be an iota of doubt on our camaraderie.


The recent coverage of "Gujarat revisited" did make me think that Hindus have been sidelined into oblivion. Agreed, there were lots of Muslim casualties and it is a despicable act of barbarism to kill innocent children, women, and others. Rightly so they have been given coverage to show the ghastardly side of the politicians. However, was there not even a single Hindu who lost his life in the riots? Leave that, even the media coverage of "Gujarat revisited" did not for once make an attempt to sympathize with the karsewaks who lost their lives. That was equally shameful on the part of the murderers and those karsewaks were innocent too. All these days, media termed the Godhra train carnage only as "the aftermath of Godhra" and in a split second the news turned to the innocent Muslims who were killed in the riots. Even a common Muslim felt the pain of the massacre of the karsewaks so why couldn't the media capture the trauma their families went through? Why couldn't the likes of Barkha Dutt who were capturing possibly each and every house of the Muslim victims for the primetime news did not for once go to the karsewak's family? Why were all the cameras turned to the Muslim rehabilitation camps and none to the Hindu camps? I have also felt the pain seeing media bits of the way riots shaped into a deadly massacre. Infact, majority of the common Hindus condemned the shameful act of genocide and attacked the Gujarat government for poor handling of the situation. We all felt the pain of our fellow Muslim brothers and I am definitely sure they had also felt the pain when the karsewaks were burnt alive and helpless.


Then why did the media not capture that part of the riots? And to top it all, how derogatory it felt when the deaths of the innocent Karsewaks in the burning train were termed as sabotage by few men to induce polarization, to gain prominence. How shocking it was to see the politicians leaving no stone unturned to prove that the train carnage was accidental and not preplanned just for the sake of their insatiated urge for more votes. In just one action, they jolted the self respect of the Hindus. And it is not only Gujarat, the Kashmiri Hindus have also not got significant media coverage for reasons well known to the media. They and politicians awake on this issue only when assembly elections in Kashmir are about to happen. And in all honestly, why will they cover such stories? They shall not gain anything by inciting the Hindus for it has been historically proven that we don't really feel loss of self respect for anything and everything. We believe in the "sab chalta hain" ("everything goes") attitude. Why will the politicians talk about issues pertaining to Hindus? We do not form the chunk of their vote banks. And even if we do, we celebrate the voting day as a national holiday staying at homes.


We are not asking for favors. We also do not mind our dear PM to suddenly wake up and announce reservations for "dalit Muslims" as if dalit Muslims are not a subset of the larger dalit community. We have been seeing this for quite a long time and now we have become thick skinned. What we request is to feel for our sufferings in the same vein as others. We also have a sense of self respect and dignity and expect fair treatment meted out to us. It is high time that media acts responsibly and in an unbiased way. We have already lost hope in our politicians. Hence, media becomes all the more potent. I am not undermining the goods media has delivered. However, there is always some scope for improvement and this is definitely one grey area where the media needs to pull up its socks.


Hopefully, there will be an all out attempt on the part of the media to rehabilitate our Kashmiri Hindus just as they are doing for the Gujarati Muslims. At the end of the day, it is an Indian that will benefit and not a Hindu or a Muslim.

http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/saurabhsaksena/559/42312/the-curse-of-being-a-hindu-in-modern-india.html

Vande Mataram

The Curse of Being a Hindu in Modern India

Every individual has the right to self respect and dignity, especially from its fellow countrymen. Irrespective of the religion, caste, creed and all other secular lingo, we all should be treated fairly. However, somewhere down the line I feel in the present modern setup of India, self respect of the Hindus has been taken for a ride by media and politicians alike. We have been considered harmless and so nobody cares if there is any sort of infliction on us. For them, it is more important to concentrate on issues which aim at pleasing the minorities. And make no mistake, minorities not only include Muslims, but also Christians and other non-Hindu religions. I have nothing against my fellow "minority" countrymen, for in all fairness I have never even thought of them as "minorities". For me they are as Indian as I am. They definitely need a change in their socio-economic conditions and we all should support the cause. Infact, we have mutual respect for each other and if not for petty politics, there wouldn't be an iota of doubt on our camaraderie.


The recent coverage of "Gujarat revisited" did make me think that Hindus have been sidelined into oblivion. Agreed, there were lots of Muslim casualties and it is a despicable act of barbarism to kill innocent children, women, and others. Rightly so they have been given coverage to show the ghastardly side of the politicians. However, was there not even a single Hindu who lost his life in the riots? Leave that, even the media coverage of "Gujarat revisited" did not for once make an attempt to sympathize with the karsewaks who lost their lives. That was equally shameful on the part of the murderers and those karsewaks were innocent too. All these days, media termed the Godhra train carnage only as "the aftermath of Godhra" and in a split second the news turned to the innocent Muslims who were killed in the riots. Even a common Muslim felt the pain of the massacre of the karsewaks so why couldn't the media capture the trauma their families went through? Why couldn't the likes of Barkha Dutt who were capturing possibly each and every house of the Muslim victims for the primetime news did not for once go to the karsewak's family? Why were all the cameras turned to the Muslim rehabilitation camps and none to the Hindu camps? I have also felt the pain seeing media bits of the way riots shaped into a deadly massacre. Infact, majority of the common Hindus condemned the shameful act of genocide and attacked the Gujarat government for poor handling of the situation. We all felt the pain of our fellow Muslim brothers and I am definitely sure they had also felt the pain when the karsewaks were burnt alive and helpless.


Then why did the media not capture that part of the riots? And to top it all, how derogatory it felt when the deaths of the innocent Karsewaks in the burning train were termed as sabotage by few men to induce polarization, to gain prominence. How shocking it was to see the politicians leaving no stone unturned to prove that the train carnage was accidental and not preplanned just for the sake of their insatiated urge for more votes. In just one action, they jolted the self respect of the Hindus. And it is not only Gujarat, the Kashmiri Hindus have also not got significant media coverage for reasons well known to the media. They and politicians awake on this issue only when assembly elections in Kashmir are about to happen. And in all honestly, why will they cover such stories? They shall not gain anything by inciting the Hindus for it has been historically proven that we don't really feel loss of self respect for anything and everything. We believe in the "sab chalta hain" ("everything goes") attitude. Why will the politicians talk about issues pertaining to Hindus? We do not form the chunk of their vote banks. And even if we do, we celebrate the voting day as a national holiday staying at homes.


We are not asking for favors. We also do not mind our dear PM to suddenly wake up and announce reservations for "dalit Muslims" as if dalit Muslims are not a subset of the larger dalit community. We have been seeing this for quite a long time and now we have become thick skinned. What we request is to feel for our sufferings in the same vein as others. We also have a sense of self respect and dignity and expect fair treatment meted out to us. It is high time that media acts responsibly and in an unbiased way. We have already lost hope in our politicians. Hence, media becomes all the more potent. I am not undermining the goods media has delivered. However, there is always some scope for improvement and this is definitely one grey area where the media needs to pull up its socks.


Hopefully, there will be an all out attempt on the part of the media to rehabilitate our Kashmiri Hindus just as they are doing for the Gujarati Muslims. At the end of the day, it is an Indian that will benefit and not a Hindu or a Muslim.

http://www.ibnlive.com/blogs/saurabhsaksena/559/42312/the-curse-of-being-a-hindu-in-modern-india.html

Vande Mataram

Monday, June 4, 2007

A V Rajwade: The Prime Minister`s right

I gave my first (and last) job interview in SBI more than 50 years back. During those days, the interview used to be with a committee of the bank’s directors. And one of them bowled a googly: “What would be your reaction if I say that our Prime Minister (Jawaharlal Nehru at that time) talks too much?” (Note the “if”). I somehow managed to deflect the ball, saying “Sir, if our Prime Minister does talk too much, it is his privilege.”

I was reminded of this incident in the context of the Prime Minister’s now famous speech at the CII conference and the, mostly critical, press comment it has elicited. While our present Prime Minister can hardly be accused of talking too much, it was certainly his privilege to say whatever he did at the conference, particularly when he had been invited to comment on the social responsibility of business. I would also not quarrel with his preaching the virtues of austerity and hard work: economic historians attribute the greater advancement of northern Europe as compared to southern Europe to protestant (Calvinist) virtues like thrift and education. In any case, he had the right credentials, being a man of impeccable integrity and humility (old timers in RBI have told me how he would stand in the queue to see the doctor in the RBI central office, even when he was governor).

But this apart, somebody like the Prime Minister does need to raise the issue of what the major stakeholders in the economy can do for the country, instead of merely asking what the government can do for them. (John Kennedy made the point in his inaugural address — think of what you can do for the United States, not merely what the United States can do for you.) How one hopes that the Prime Minister publicly raises similar issues with other stakeholders in the economy like the politicians in general and his cabinet colleagues in particular; the civil service and the middle class in general; and even the poor in this country. As for the politicians, for example, would he call upon all those who stand for elections and declare assets in crores of rupees, to at least have a PAN card? (Many crorepati candidates in the UP election did not have them.) Would he tell his Supreme Leader that education and employment reservations based on caste and religion would merely perpetuate the divisions in the society, and that it is more equitable to make these on the basis of economic criteria? That the present system has created a vested interest in having one’s own caste declared as backward or scheduled, sometimes leading to tragic loss of life as happened in Rajasthan last week? That fostering a culture of dependency on the state for everything is not the best way forward for the country? That every subsidy to other than BPL is at the cost of rural roads, water supplies and schools?

The civil service also needs to be told clearly that they are here to serve the citizens of this country and that they should not be producing shoddily drafted, less-than-clear laws, rules and regulations leading to endless delays, corruption and the harassment of citizens; that the secretary’s job is not merely to frame policy, but to also pay attention to how it can be implemented in the most citizen-friendly fashion; that even top civil servants need to give up their Brahminic indifference to mundane matters like form and system design, procedures, and so on. The endless and sometimes conflicting tax circulars regarding service tax, for instance, are only one example. The middle class in general also needs to be made aware that it has probably been the biggest beneficiary of fast growth in the economy over the last couple of decades, and is still the beneficiary of the maximum share of subsidies; and that these subsidies will have to be withdrawn as resources are needed elsewhere.

As for the broader constituency of the people of India, including the poor, it is the responsibility of those who believe in economic reforms, including the Prime Minister, to “market” them. Take the current issue of agricultural land for industry. The fact is that God stopped manufacturing land a long time back; industry can produce far more jobs on one acre of land than agriculture can; that unless there is a huge movement of workers from agriculture to industry and services, rural standards of living cannot improve. This does need to be emphasised, lest only those who see every change as a crime will gain populist support.

Tailpiece: When the home minister visited the recently bombed mosque in Hyderabad, he did so in a convoy of 24 cars. Is this any less ostentatious than a businessman riding in a Mercedes? Unfortunately, in our democracy, the politician’s worth depends on the number of armed guards, hangers on, and assorted officials in vehicles following him.