Chow For Thought - Beware of Beijing bearing gifts
Posted by Ashok Chowgule (ashokvc@giasbm01.vsnl.net.in)
The Statesman
June 19, 1999
Title: Chow For Thought - Beware of Beijing bearing gifts
Author:
Publication: The Statesman
Date: June 19, 1999
THE worst conclusion that India can come to following Jaswant Singh's
all-smiles, two day visit to China is that the Asian behemoth is
gazing benignly at its neighbour. True, Pokhran wasn't mentioned, and
panchsheel was, when Singh met his counterpart Tang Jiaxuan. True,too,
Beijing seems ready to reopen dialogue on a wide range of issues, not
excluding, at some point, the vexed question of the Indo-Chinese
border. But none of this happened because Beijing has suddenly
realised the folly of its India policy. The most hardboiled of all
foreign policy mandarins, Beijing's diplomats have sussed out that
their traditionally hostile, and not a little contemptuous,
indifference towards New Delhi will be counter-productive now for two
reasons: Kargil and Kosovo. In the former, the absurd Pakistani
diplomacy and the real Pakistani threats have forced China to distance
itself from a country it has been not-so-covertly arming over the
years. When international, including US and UN, opinion has turned so
decisively against Islamabad, for China to appear pro-Pakistan would
have been damaging for its self-interests; Pakistan is expendable, at
least temporarily.
What is not expendable for Beijing at any point of time is the idea
that China is the first among equals in Asia. This, after Nato
intervention in Kosovo, is vulnerable, according to Chinese analysis.
Nato's bypassing the UN in dealing with Milosevic has alarmed the old
hardliners, who consider China's right to intervene in Asia as
sacrosanct. Matters have not been helped by the American proposal for
extending its security umbrella - diplomatic jargon for battle-ready
military muscle - in Asia with the cooperation of Japan and Taiwan.
Beijing has seen this as increasing the potential for
Kosovo-style,American-led intervention in Asia. That, in turn, has
made it look for regional allies. India is one of the obvious choices.
This is why New Delhi must tread carefully while renewing its
courtship with Beijing. Not having China on Pakistan's side during
Kargil is a huge advantage and all efforts must be made to keep things
that way. That such efforts should include keeping George Fernandes on
a firm leash goes without saying. But equally, New Delhi cannot lose
sight of the big picture. An alliance with China against "Western
hegemony" will make many in India misty-eyed, a throwback to the days
when Nehru and Chou En Lai were building a "new Asia". However,
matters are not so simple now - if they ever were - and India must
recognise that China will have little use for it as and when its
relations with America require improvement for material reasons. China
and America are bound by economic sinews of dimensions that India can
barely imagine, so latching on to Beijing too firmly now may not do
New Delhi much good later. In any case, even if China and the US enter
a long period of mutual dislike, being identified with Beijing will
make New Delhi a pariah of sorts in most Western capitals, which
cannot be in India's interests.
Balancing all these will require some skillful diplomacy on India's
part and one Jaswant Singh cannot cancel out the many dummies in the
Ministry of External Affairs. If MEA is nevertheless feeling quiet
good about itself these days, one needs to say that it took Pakistani
adventurism of the worst kind for the world to understand India's
position on Kashmir. MEA has been blabbering about it for years. No
one listened. And that included China.
================================================Letters to the Editor: Shivaji Was Not Communal
SIR, - Some of the observations made by RK DasGupta in his letter,
"Tagore's perception of Shivaji" (8-9 June) are hypothetical and
cannot be accepted without reservations. I wonder how Prof DasGupta
says, "He also feared that his readers would construe his ek
darmarajya pashe as Hindu Dharma rajyapashe. I would like to quote
another line from "Shivaji Utsav" to prove that Tagore surely had
Hinduism in mind when he wrote the poem. The line is Dhwaja kari
uraibi bairagir uttari basan. What religion are uttariya and bairagir
basan associated with? Is it not Hinduism?
There is no gainsaying the fact that Tagore was a great humanist. But
in some of his famous poems, I have observed Tagore's definite
leanings in favour of Hinduism. In "Kripon", he discusses the ways and
means of realising God. In "Dina Dan", Tagore shatters the myth that
God can be realised through a pompous display of affluence. And the
general ambience of the two poems speaks volumes for Tagore's leanings
in favour of Hinduism.
Besides, I cannot accept Prof DasGupta's contention that neither
Shivaji nor Guru Nanak has advanced the cause of Indian unity.
Directly, they might not have advanced the cause of our unity.
But indirectly the two great men posed the greatest threat to the
invincible Mughals and shook the very foundations of the Mughal
Empire. Without the destruction of the Mughal Empire, India could
never have been united under British rule.
Again, it is nothing but a travesty of justice to dismiss Shivaji as
communal. In spite of being a devout Hindu, Shivaji had a deep respect
for the other religions, including Islam. He employed Muslims in his
army. Besides, he made it obligatory on the part of his followers not
to destroy mosques and to desecrate the Quran.
Now that the Shiv Sainiks are behaving fanatically is hardly
surprising. After all they are the direct descendants of the notorious
Bargis who made occasional forays into the Bengal countryside causing
anxiety to peace-loving people. Even mothers in our childhood composed
lullabyes about the Bargis to frighten us into sleep.
Yours,
DIPANKAR PATTANAYAK.
Langalberia
===============================================Sir, - Quite predictably, KR Malkani's letter (28-29 May) has
generated fruitful correspondence. In his rejoinder (Tagore's
Perception of Shivaji), RK DasGupta has raised the issue of Shivaji's
communal approach to the question of Indian unity. His letter is
one-sided and does not have a word of criticism of later Moghuls who,
reversing the policy of their predecessors, adopted an intolerant
line. Resistance movements were organised by Guru Gobinda Singh in the
Punjab and by Shivaji in Maharashtra at a time, to quote the opening
line of a Tagore poem from his collection Katha, "when Aurangzeb was
smashing India into smithereens". They were inspired by the spiritual
and human ideals they imbibed from their Sikh and Hindu teachers, Guru
Nanak and Samarthi Ramadas.
DasGupta writes that "Were the poet alive today, he would have said
that Shiv Sena founded on the birthday of Shivaji, descends from the
religious mentality of the adversary of Aurangzeb and is therefore, a
factor of disunity". Kafi Khan, the Court historian of Aurangzeb seems
to differ. In his History of India (written in Persian) we read as
follows:
"He (Shivaji) made it a rule that, whenever his followers went
plundering, they should do no harm to mosques, to the Book of God, or
to anyone's women. Whenever a copy of the Holy Quran came into his
hands, he treated it with respect, and gave it to some of his Muslim
followers".
As for the charge, based solely on external rather than internal
evidence, that Shivaji Utsav is not a spontaneous outburst of the
poet's appreciation of the hero, we may point out that happily this
poem is not the solitary Tagore poem glorifying Shivaji. Seven years
earlier in a poem to be found in Katha, mentioned above, he narrates
the story of his initiation in saffron. This poem is also relevant to
an understanding of Tagore's idea of dharma in the specific context of
Shivaji's aspirations, and not what he philosophically meant by it in
his later years.
As goes the poem Pratinidhi, one morning Shivaji sees his guru Ramadas
begging from door to door. So shocked is he at the contrast of his
lifestyle and that of his guru that he sends a message to him gifting
away his kingdom to him. Guru and disciple meet and they mutually
agree to exchange their respective roles of beggar and king. At the
end of the day Ramadas tells his disciple "now that you are my
servant, do my bidding. Take back your kingdom. But rule it on my
behalf as the representative of a beggar. Exercise Raj-dharma but know
it to be my job that you are doing. Possess kingdom but let it not
possess you. Here are my yellow robes and my blessings for you. Let
the yellow robe of the detached beggar be your banner".
The point in summarising the poem is that here Tagore in verse after
verse builds up Shivaji's image of a self-defacing Yogi -- the common
threat linking his earlier and the later poem on the Maratha hero;
while Shivaji Utsav lays emphasis on the political ideal of freedom
and social responsibility, Pratinidhi focuses on the ethical value of
service and sacrifice. Together they complete the image of the Indian
concept of Rajarshi.
Yours,
ATANU SARBADHIKARI.
Narayanpur (North 24 Parganas).
Back
Top
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2011, Dharma Universe.
|
|