The Diversity of Indian Politics - Statewise

Random Musings - I

The Last Englishman to Rule India - I

In close to around 2 centuries of rule by the British, India has had its fair share of English rulers. Governors, Governor-Generals, Viceroys and figuratively, the Emperor / Empress of India were the different titles accorded to the British who wielded their power over Hindustan. But who exactly was that Last Englishman in power? Lord Louis Mountbatten?

Not quite. Pandit Nehru gave himself this moniker; the Harrow educated son of a wealthy barrister was not the archetypal 'son of the soil', as many of his contemporaries were. Nehru was more English than Indian in his customs and behavior, and was more at ease with his Western counterparts. His reputation of being a gentleman was indeed true and this often was shown in the political arena with his friends and foes.

17. Thats the number of years Nehru was India's Prime Minister. In hindsight, its easy to say that he was the best choice for the job, the only practical choice. But pre-independence, this was not true. His competitors had often got the better of him, and Nehru might not even have gotten close to being considered for the post he later held. The 1946 Congress Presidential election is an example of this. The person chosen for this would go on to lead Free India. Out of the 16 state votes, Nehru only won 3. The remaining 13 were won by Sardar Vallabhai Patel, who was considered by many to be a statesman superior to Nehru. As we all know, Patel did not go on to lead. And that is because Gandhi asked him to step aside in favor of Nehru; a tactic that had been used in the past, and a point often cited by Nehru's detractors. Patel would serve as the country's Home Minister and was credited with many achievements, with the Political integration of India standing out as his crowning glory.

But the uncertainity about Nehru's abilities faded rather quickly after coming into power. After Patel's death, he established himself as India's undoubted leader, and as the first Prime Minister, he made decisions (good or bad, to be discussed later) that would still have a great impact even fifty years after.

Nehru's tenure certainly was eventful, and probably because he was faced with issues only a newly freed democratic country could have. During his time, he oversaw the Kashmir situation, introduced Socialist Economic Planning through the Five Year Plans, set up institutions of higher learning for Science & Technnology, improved primary education country-wide and lost a war against China. Other less tangible achievements included giving Indians an Identity of India, successfully Integrating an eclectic mix of people belonging to all religions, castes, creeds and reagions and finally, and perhaps most importantly, ensuring that Indian democracy was not a distant dream, but a reality.

Kashmir is an Issue that has grown exponentially in political significance since Nehru's time. Wars with Pakistan were fought by his successors (Shastri & Indira) for this very reason, and in the modern millenium, the State has become focal point of dispute between India and Pakistan.
Nehru is often blamed for this problem, but is this blame justified?

Kashmir @ 1947 was ruled by Hari Singh. But having a Hindu ruler in a state with a 77% majority Muslim population was asking for trouble, at the time of the Partition. While Jinnah and his counterparts assumed that it would be a part of Pakistan, Hari Singh had other plans. He tried, in vain, for a while not to join either country, but that was no longer a realistic option. When Pakistani raiders invaded Kashmir to frighten him into submission, he contacted Governor General Mountbatten. Indian troops were offered to help him, but on the condition that Kashmir would acede to India. Vallabhai Patel's right hand man, V P Menon, was sent to get the Instrument of Accession signed. This document is of utmost importance, as it legitimizes India's claim over Kashmir - evidence that the independent sovereign ruler was in favor of his state becoming wholly a part of the Indian Union.

Many point a finger at Nehru for his next act - Approaching the United Nations, something that was recommended by Lord Mountbatten, possibily to get the International Community on the side of the country in this territorial dispute. The decision made by the UN was perhaps quite unanticipated - it has failed to recognize Pakistan as the aggressor. Its only recommendation for to hold a plebiscite (a referendum), but that was not feasible given the various objections that Jinnah, Nehru and others, brought up at various times. The plebiscite ultimately never took place, and most people never forgave Nehru for taking this dispute to an international arena. But in all fairness, Mountbatten and Nehru jointly believed that the UN would make a positive (for India) decision and that the Instrument of Accession was enough to keep Pakistan quiet forever. Is Kashmir a failing of Nehru's wrongdoing? Perhaps not, but the responsibility always falls on the throne.

(To be continued)

62

62 - Does this number have any relevance with Modern Indian Politics?

Well, we'll come back to that later. For now, I'd like to walk you through this blog - what it intends to be and what really prompted its coming into existence.

A portrait of the current US President - Barack Obama. A man who became popular not only in his own country, but the entire world. Of course, that probably had more to do by virtue of the post he was running for, and not his charisma, that images of the man were found everywhere. Newspapers, TV Channels, Web sites, Magazines and even Discussions on the Dining Table, Obama was truly everywhere. Indians were no exception to the rest of the world. We were there reading more about him, wondering what sort of attitude change would come in US-India relations, and just in general, getting to know more about the 2008 US Presidential Elections. Forgive me for camping all of us as Obama supporters, but the Global Electoral College of The Economist (http://www.economist.com/vote2008/) showed us as a strong Obama supporting state, with 87% of the votes going his way.

But with his election and barring a few incidents like naming Hilary Clinton as his Secretary of State, the election mania has died out. But should it really? Should it really go down, when India's General Elections of 2009 are just around the corner? An election, where its not just 2 people taking part, but in all aspects, anyone and everyone? An election whose result promises to be an absolute whammy - to even the best Indian political analysts.

To give you just a sample, India's history of anti-incumbency election results seems to cast a pessismistic outlook on the Congress' chances, the Left withdrawing its support hurts it even more. The BJP suffers from a lack of leadership (Mahajan and Vajpayee) and by making statements such as intending to build the Ram Temple in Ayodhya if elected,it simply alienates its own middle class urban supporters. The case for the Third Front has never been stronger - the dominance of Mayawati's BSP in UP leads this charge. Throw in your regional medley of political behemoths - the Akali Dal, CPI (M), DMK, AIDMK and you have enough coalition partners to make a million political combinations possible! Quite enough to whet your intellectual appetite.

But lets not get to ahead of ourselves. GE 2009 will undoubtedly covered in this blog, but so will other aspects of Indian politics; the history, the controversies, the growth, the paradigm shifts, the big pictures and even the little details. Not only will stalwarts like Nehru, Indira Gandhi and B R Ambedkar be mentioned, but even the now-slightly-forgotten ones like like VP Menon, Sardar Patel, Jayaprakash Narayan and Kanshi Ram. Its time to relook at history, and study the distance we have travelled as a nation.

Works of 'India Scholars' shall be reviewed - Shashi Tharoor, Pratap Mehta, Ashutosh Varshney, Amartya Sen, Sunil Khilnani and the like.

Watching Indians support Obama is a mixed bag. Positive as in the fact, that we do realize that front page news does indeed deserve to make it on the front page - decisions made impact us all. But negative when those same people refuse to have the desire to know more about their own political atmosphere, and realize how domestic elections are much, much more important to them, than who enters the White House.

I look forward to hearing your ideas and feedback. I will try and address a new and different topic, in each bit I write, and hope that by putting all these pieces together, we can all make sense of 21st Century Indian Politics.

Oh and before I forget, 62 is Independant India's current age. :)