(Thanks to Ruchira for the idea and link)
Ammu Joseph comments on the international media extolling the election of Pratibha Patil as the 13th President of India, and the first female to occupy that illustrious post.
Is her election “a victory for women in a country where gender discrimination is deep-rooted and widespread,” as the Associated Press report
suggested? Does her elevation to the largely ceremonial post represent
“a step forward for hundreds of millions of Indian women and girls who
face bitter discrimination in everyday life,” as The Washington Post said? Will her investiture tomorrow signify “a boost for the rights of millions of downtrodden women,” as Reuters put it?More at link
I didn’t really have an opinion about Ms.Patil, but am now torn between a mixture of being appalled at the elevation of a two-bit politico to the highest (even if only ceremonial) post in India, and resignation at the political maneuvering as usual in the highest echelons.
Sifting through a series of hard-hitting exposes written by
journalist-turned-BJP-politician Arun Shourie about the nefarious
doings of her and her family members, this article,
first of a three part series, accuses Pratibha Patil of enriching her
family at the cost of small vendors and depositors, siphoning off
money in the forms of ‘loans’ to her near and dear.
"We opened accounts in your bank trusting
that it had been established to help poor women and to come to their
aid in times of need. You know that the bank is now on the brink of
bankruptcy…Once the bank is liquidated, those who took
the loans do not have to worry, just as when a sahukar dies, the
persons to whom he had lent money heave a sigh of relief. But what
about poor women depositors like us who are vegetable vendors,
fruit-sellers, rag-pickers, etc, who saved our meagre earnings in your
bank, hoping that the money would be useful to us in our old age or for
the marriage of our daughters? Pratibhatai, we tried a lot to meet you
personally. We were unsuccessful. But you know everything. Therefore,
we urge you to disclose the names of all those culprits who are
responsible for the bankruptcy of our bank.’"
So says a well-written appeal from a group of aggrieved citizens.
This definitely doesn’t sound like an uplifting moment for ‘downtrodden
women’, no matter what Reuters may say about Pratibha Patil’s election.
It would seem that her main qualification for the post is an
unwavering loyalty to the Gandhi dynasty (She organized the Gandhi
family’s kitchen when Indira’s son Sanjay died in an aircraft accident,
and even went to jail for 10 days for protesting the arrest of Indira,
transferred her allegiance next to Rajiv and later Sonia.) She has been
well-served by this loyalty, getting plum posts in various states,
becoming the first woman governor of Rajasthan.
Ms.Patil garnered international headlines of a favorable kind in late 2006,for refusing to sign the
Rajasthan Religious Freedom Bill 2006 passed by the state legislature
prohibiting proselytisation, on the grounds that it infringed on the
right to free speech and religion guaranteed by the Indian
constitution. She kept sitting on it till her last day in office as
governor before sending it on to previous President Abdul Kalam’s
office. Now that it is now her office,it will undoubtedly continue to gather dust.
That would definitely account for some of the vitriol spewed during
the election cycle, as the BJP/VHP/RSS Hindu rightwingers combine would
have done their level best to discredit her and take away votes through
highlighting the personal and financial shenanigans. Not that it helped
much, she was still found to be a more acceptable candidate than her
opponent Bhairon Singh Shekhawat and won over him with a 300,000 vote
margin in the electoral college (composed primarily of legislators all
over India).
Interestingly, the election of the previous president A.P.J.Abdul Kalam was not without its share of political maneuvering.
The only advantage that he had over the other candidates at the time
was that, being a scientist-administrator (which definitely presupposes
some degree of political skill and shrewdness), he was a relatively
unknown quantity in the field of politics and legislation.
HOW
did the dark horse, Kalam, manage to become the favourite of everyone
except the Left parties? Kalam’s modesty apart, the support he drew
from political parties was based on how the parties and the groups
perceived the after-effects of his elevation to the Presidency.
When
Vajpayee was looking for a third option, choosing Kalam helped him to
clip the wings of the hardliners within the NDA, who were pushing for
Alexander, and also neutralise the Opposition’s attack on him for not
following the canons of consensus-building.
After
elevation to the presidency, he went on to become a very effective
spokesman for the modernization brigade, and by virtue of his office
and exposure, served as inspiration to the youth of India, partly
inclined by his own sense of the requirements of the office, and part
media-hype.
Presidential office in the Indian constitution is purely ceremonial. The Indian Constitution envisions the president as being a de jure head of state, while the de
facto power resides in the Parliament, which elects the leader of the
majority party/coalition as the executive head- the Prime Minister and
his/her Cabinet. Yet, this largely ceremonial post has some small measure of power such as declining to sign legislation which they can
return for reconsideration,though it could in theory be overridden by the
Parliament on a second passage for the bill. Serving as a goodwill ambassador and
one of the main faces of India to the world is another important
function.
Given her penchant for the occasional foot-in-the-mouth comment,
which has raised hackles in different interest groups at various
times, I’m not quite sure how Ms.Patil’s utterances will be toned down to match the gravitas required by a President. Earlier this year,speaking to a congregation of Rajputs in the state where she was governor:
Women have always been respected in the Indian culture. The purdah system was introduced to protect them from the Muslim
invaders. However, times have changed. India is now independent and
hence, the systems should also change. Now that women are progressing
in every field, we should morally support and encourage them by leaving
such practices behind.
This
led to criticism of her candidacy by Muslim groups enraged by the
aspersions she cast on Muslim culture, no doubt ironic in the light of
her celebrated refusal to sign the Rajasthan Religious Freedom bill.
Another statement, this time an advance intimation of a ghostly nature, with claims that the spirit of a deceased guru told her of her great responsibility:
Patil was at the
Brahmakumari ashram at Mt Abu when Congress president Sonia Gandhi called her to
seek her consent for her being nominated as the UPA-Left candidate. Patil
claimed that the late Baba (Lekhraj) spoke to her indicating that she should be
prepared to shoulder greater responsibility. "He also made me very lucky," she
said.
In
Indian politics, as in U.S. politics(or for that matter Iranian
politics), it always helps to have a direct line to the deity of choice.
The best that India can hope for at this point is that ceremonial though the President might be, and contradictory indications in her persona
nothwithstanding, Pratibha Patil will live up to the expectations of
the office, rather than the opposite.
Accidental Blogger 
11 responses to “Namaste, Madam President (Sujatha)”
Pratibha Patil’s presidency will do zilch for women’s issues in India. India is no stranger to women in positions of power. But that hardly ever translates to substantial improvement in the general mentality towards the sexes. Most of the gains for women over the years have happened because of grass roots efforts by activists, both male and female.
The presidency of India is indeed for the most part a ceremonial position. But that doesn’t mean that it is not an important one as far as the image it projects of a nation’s aspirations. The Indian president has always been handpicked by the party in power (though many Indian presidents did not officially belong to any political party) and it has much to do with having the right connections. But at least in the first few decades after India’s independence, presidents also had impressive records of scholarship and activism. Patil seems to have enjoyed her string of good luck mostly due to her “loyalty” to one powerful Indian political family, not due to any independently laudable achievements. As for two bit politicians without gravitas, what else to expect when one’s patron is Sonia Gandhi, a woman of conspicuous lightness of intellect? But Sonia G. is at the helm of Indian politics now and is busy at work to ensure the political future of her son which if successful, will mean that four of India’s prime ministers after 1947 would have come from the Nehru-Gandhi family, presumably with more to follow down the road!
As for Patil’s thin resume, that did not bother me as much as her “conversations” with the dead guru. Scary, laughable and very embarrassing. But how does it matter when Sonia Gandhi holds your hand?
LikeLike
Claims of talk from Godmen, incidentally, isn’t exclusive to the new president. Abdul Kalam had received his share of, in his case, very practical advice from a swamiji when he was young. From his autobiography “Wings of Fire” :
“I could only finish ninth in 25 people examined to select 8 officers for commissioning in the Air Force.I was deeply disappointed.It took some time to comprehend that the opportunity to join Air Force had just slipped through my fingers.I dragged myself out of the selection board and stood at the edge of a cliff. There was a lake far below.I knew days ahead would be difficult. There were questions to which I sought answers when I met Swami Sivananda.
He smiled and said ” Accept your destiny and go ahead with your life. You are not destined to be a pilot.what is destined is not revealed to you. Search instead for your true purpose of your existence. Become one with yourself!” And all my anxiety was washed away almost instantly.”
The difference is that this autobiography was published after Abdul Kalam became the president, rather than within a few days of announcing candidacy.It was a live guru who was proffering the advice, which was fairly generic and encouraging to a depressed young man. Definitely much less objectionable than claims of having been addressed by the spirit of a dead guru in the body of another (Dadiji or Hirdaya Mohini,in this case).
You’re right about Sonia trying to protect the future of her son, perhaps even her daughter’s political ambitions ( A very illuminating look into their mindsets in this 2004 Time interview with Rahul and Priyanka- note that Priyanka is the more savvy of the two).
LikeLike
The BBC seems to have got it right, probably because of the writer.
-Amit
LikeLike
Amit,
The BBC commentary is fairly straight-forward reporting of the actual perception of the presidential election in India, as opposed to the usual platitudes trotted out by the majority of the western media (uplifting women since a woman has been elevated to the highest post, etc.)
Read on for another blogger’s misinterpretation of my post (and don’t forget to read the battle of the comments below the post as well.)
LikeLike
Sujatha,
Seems like Sanjay Garg didn’t understand your point at all. As they say, you can lead a horse to water but can’t make it drink. Arguing with fools is pointless. That’s one of the reasons I’m not convinced to start writing about political and social issues on my blog.
LikeLike
Sujatha, first of all, thanks for a very good and informative post. That Sanjay Garg would find your article offensive (he even found the word “ceremonial” objectionable although both you and I pointed out that despite the ceremonial nature of the office, the president of India holds an important position for which a degree of exceptional achievement is desirable) is not a surprise at all. Sanjay is no stranger to this blog. We have butted heads before – for example, here and here.
Amit, on A.B. we do not particularly flinch from making political commentary. This blog was launched as a protest against the Bush administration’s misdeeds. The overwhelming majority of political posts here are critical of the US right wing. Many of the posts directed against Bush-Cheney have also been linked by bigger blogs, resulting in wide exposure. Very few have resulted in slime attacks and Sanjay too has never accused us of being “unpatriotic” on account of the articles voicing our opposition to US policies.
Sujatha and I are the two Indian born authors here. Keeping in mind that our readership includes many non-Indians, our posts about India tend to be of the “cultural” variety – book reviews and some social commentary. Very few articles deal with the minutiae of Indian politics – frankly, I at least am no longer very well attuned to the Indian political scene. But every time there has been any commentary even slightly critical of India, we have incurred the wrath of Sanjay Garg.
If Sanjay had his way, we will all refrain from ever mentioning that India has any evidence of corruption, poverty or even dirt on the street – especially if there is any chance that a western (gasp!) audience might come across it. To do otherwise is to become a “Sepoy or a Bechari.” (See The U-Turn Theory in part 2.2 of the Wisdom Initiative and the list of contributors at the bottom) Instead, by virtue of our ethnicity, we must forever remain “loyal soldiers” for Mother India.
Note: translation – Sepoy = Foot Soldier. Bechari = Poor hapless soul (female).
LikeLike
Ruchira, I’m glad that you and Sujatha and others are writing about political and social issues, and I enjoy reading what you write. I didn’t say that people shouldn’t write about them, simply that this is something that I’ve decided not to write about because of the time and energy investment. So, more power to you and Sujatha!!! :)
I myself have faced this criticism when discussing issues, that as an Indian living in the US, I am somehow less qualified to comment on Indian issues (true in some cases), but I don’t agree with that thesis, and it hasn’t stopped me from commenting and/or trying to understand the issues better.
I guess Sanjay and others like him will just have to live with thoughtful writers like you and Sujatha, whether he likes it or not. I just hope he actually reads and understand what you and Sujatha write, before commenting on it.
LikeLike
Ruchira, thanks for the link you provided (Sepoy or the Bechari). I’ve only recently plugged into this debate going on about India, Hinduism, its representation in the US etc., so my knowledge is incomplete. But, from what I’ve read so far, I think that some of the points raised by Rajiv Malhotra are valid (I’ve also read his other essays and by Aditi Bannerjee), and I agree with them. Of course, to fully evaluate the truth, I’d have to read books by Wendy Doniger and also have a thorough knowledge of Hindu religious texts.
This is speaking from my experience (and what I’ve seen in India and the US) of course – as I haven’t studied Vedas or other Hindu scriptures in any detail. I personally do not fall into the group of either rejecting everything about India and Hinduism in favor of Western perspective, or of embracing everything about India and Hinduism, and brush the negatives under the carpet – both of which come from looking at issues only through an ideology or from one perspective. I do think that when it comes to Hindu religious texts and Ayurveda, an honest study is required, and hope that IF manages to contribute to that. This is somewhat similar to the position you take by criticizing Bush for Iraq war and criticizing Islamic fundamentalism simultaneously (which is also my position) that brings flak from people who view things strictly from left/right perspective. And reading some Indian blogs, seems to me that many people get confused by this position.
Sorry for this long OT message, but I don’t think you or or any other Indian woman in the US who criticizes issues in India is a bechari, nor does it make me a blind sepoy – though I have no issues with criticizing the Western policies when it comes to issues like bio-piracy, and Indian society for female infanticide. Those two positions, for me, are not mutually exclusive.
LikeLike
Great post and sound analysis. If elevating a woman to the Presidential office was the primary goal, was Patil the best woman they could find in a country that abounds with smart women?! As for the debate on desicritics, that was a textbook example of cultural insecurity, defensiveness, and virulent patriotism from Mr. Sanjay Garg. Oh, well.
LikeLike
Amit:
You are right of course. Very few things in life are black or white, left or right. Some people however are afraid of nuances or layered thinking. George W. Bush is a great example and Sanjay Garg has exposed himself as another.
I (as I am sure also Sujatha) am perfectly capable of recognizing India bashing – by Indians as well as the west. That the image of India and the non-western world is often colored by imperious and unfair western perceptions, is not news to me – a relatively trivial example here on the blog. I grew up in a very young India when the scars of its colonial past were still fresh in the minds of my parents and teachers. In fact my generation was a politically savvy one. The Naxalite movement, the Vietnam war, the war with China, two wars with Pakistan, the liberation of Bangladesh, Mrs. Gandhi’s Emergency, the tumultous age of rock “n” roll – we witnessed it all first hand. Campus politics and even national politics drew their boundaries mostly along ideologies and not religious and sectarian lines. I have also read Edward Said, Amartya Sen and a whole host of anti-colonial literature in Bengali. So it is stupid of someone like Sanjay to suspect me of being a Bechari as he has done on several occasions. This time he has turned his venom towards Sujatha and because he has done it at his own site rather than engage her here, he was emboldened to become more vitriolic. The irony is that Sujatha and I would have held the same opinion of Pratibha Patil (and of Sonia Gandhi) even if we were currently living in India – without the benefit of a “western” audience.
The man has a silly and paranoid attitude but he is not alone in his chauvinism.
LikeLike
Ruchira, I’m with you on your last message. Reminds me of a quote from the movie “The Quiet American,” said by the Vietnamese servant to the character played by Michael Caine: “Sooner or later, Mr. Fowler, one has to take sides, if one is to remain human.”
I still remember that line, and have often wondered about it.
LikeLike