January 31, 2024
Dear Readers,
This month, I journey through the historical ties of India and China, from the Silk Road to current tensions. It is a blend of cooperation and conflict, encouraging us to embrace dialogue and mutual respect.
Next, I discuss the challenges faced by democracies in a year with elections in over 70 countries. Authoritarian rule and electoral concerns in Bangladesh and Pakistan shed light on the delicate state of democracy in the region.
Finally, I look into the intersection of politics and religion as Prime Minister Modi inaugurates the Ram Mandir. The dissent among religious leaders adds complexity, revealing the delicate balance between religion and politics. Against this backdrop, Gandhi’s timeless call for religious tolerance and inclusivity serves as a poignant reminder that building an ideal society begins with embracing all faiths, going beyond the symbolism of the temple.
Wishing that the rest of the year is filled with discovery and thoughtful reflection!
Sincerely,
Hari Jaisingh
Centuries of Crossroads – India-China complexities through the ages
The Himalayas have been a long-standing divider and meeting point between India and China. Over time, these countries have had disagreements, relied on each other economically, and had cultural exchanges. Their history together is a mix of working together and competing. Knowing this past is essential in understanding the complexities of their current relationship.
In the past, lively trade on the Silk Road fostered cultural exchange and intellectual dialogue. Chinese Pilgrims Faxian, Xuanzang, and Yijing explored India, leaving behind invaluable accounts of its civilization. During this time, both India and China admired each other’s accomplishments. India influenced Chinese art and thinking, and China’s expertise in astronomy and medicine was embraced in India.
However, the 20th century ushered in a period of political discord. The unresolved border dispute, stemming from the McMahon Line and other contested territories, culminated in the 1962 war, leaving a deep scar on bilateral ties. The Tibetan issue further complicated matters, with India granting asylum to the Dalai Lama after China’s annexation of Tibet in 1950.
Despite these tensions, there were ongoing attempts to improve relations and reconcile differences. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s visit to China in 1988 marked a turning point, paving the way for increased dialogue and cooperation. The 1993 Border and Tranquillity Agreement [BPTA] – or formally, the Agreement on Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity along the Line of Actual Control [LAC] in the India-China Border Areas – aimed to prevent border skirmishes.
The post-Cold War era witnessed a significant growth in economic engagement. China’s economic boom translated into increased trade with India, making it India’s largest trading partner in 2008. Joint ventures flourished, and collaboration in infrastructure development and technology transfer intensified. However, the trade imbalance also became a point of contention, with India’s growing deficit raising concerns about economic vulnerability.
Beyond the economic sphere, both nations began to assert themselves as major regional and global players. India’s 1991 Look East Policy and China’s Belt and Road Initiative [BRI] highlighted their ambitions, sometimes leading to strategic competition, particularly in the Indian Ocean region.
In recent years, the historical fault lines have resurfaced. Border standoffs along the LAC, most notably the 2020 Galwan Valley clash, have reignited anxieties. China’s growing assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific and close ties to Pakistan pose new challenges for India’s security interests.
Dr. S. Jaishankar, India’s External Affairs Minister, has recently shed light on the complexities of this relationship. He has criticized Nehru’s “romanticism” towards China, advocating for a more “realist” strategy akin to Sardar Patel’s emphasis on safeguarding national interests. He has also highlighted the “abnormal state” of relations since the Galwan Valley clash, underscoring the need for a peaceful resolution through negotiations.
Despite these difficulties, the two countries share a fundamental interest in maintaining regional stability and promoting global economic growth. Regular high-level dialogues, cultural exchanges, and people-to-people interactions continue to build bridges. Addressing issues like climate change, terrorism, and pandemics necessitate collective action, where India and China’s cooperation is imperative.
Moving forward, the relationship needs to be navigated with utmost sensitivity and strategic foresight. Dr. Jaishankar has emphasized the importance of finding common ground on regional security and global challenges while acknowledging the need to balance China’s assertiveness. Both nations must prioritize dialogue and mutual respect, acknowledging their historic connections and recognizing the potential benefits of collaboration.
The India-China story is not about simple binaries of conflict or cooperation but rather a captivating blend of shared history, strategies, and fluctuating dynamics. It is a rich, ever-changing story with Nehru, Patel, Jaishankar, and others playing vital roles. Understanding this complexity and appreciating diverse perspectives is essential for shaping a peaceful and mutually beneficial future.
(January 5, 2024)
Challenges to democratic values in South Asia
In 2024, more than 70 countries will have elections involving about 2 billion voters. By the end of January 2024, 8 countries would have gone to the polls. In fact, this year stands out as one of the most significant for global democracy.
Alec Russell, the foreign editor at the Financial Times, has categorized electoral systems into four groups. The first includes countries like Belarus, Russia, and Rwanda, where leaders control elections, leading to overwhelming victories without real competition.
The second group consists of performative democracies like Iran, Tunisia, and Bangladesh, where the opposition might be allowed to participate but not win.
The third group, which has the most voters, democracy, faces subtler challenges. As seen in Hungary, leaders win power through fair elections but implement undemocratic policies. Countries like India, Indonesia, and Mexico have enthusiastic voters, but their democratic values and supporting institutions are often seen to be under pressure.
In the fourth group, older democracies face challenges as well. Centrist establishments are threatened by the rise of populist movements at the ballot box.
Let us analyze the goings-on in South Asia, where the political landscape stands at a critical juncture characterized by an erosion of democratic values and institutions across several nations in the region. Recent events in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India, to some extent, highlight the challenges plaguing the democratic fabric, raising questions about the state of governance and the plight of democratic processes in this part of the world.
Bangladesh, once heralded as a beacon of hope for democracy, has witnessed a distressing slide into authoritarianism under the rule of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.
Sheikh Hasina has had a tumultuous personal history, starting with the tragic assassination of her family members, including her father, Bangladesh’s founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in 1975. Hasina, like Aung San Suu Kyi in Myanmar, emerged as a strong opponent of dictatorship. Since 1996, Bangladeshi politics has been a battleground between Hasina and Khaleda Zia, head of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party [BNP]. However, Hasina has remained in power since 2008.
Recently, the country’s political climate has been marred by allegations of election rigging, suppression of opposition, and the erosion of fundamental democratic principles.
Hasina’s alleged authoritarianism includes rigging elections in 2014 and 2018, leading to widespread condemnation for irregularities and lack of fairness. Despite her autocratic methods, Hasina has presided over remarkable economic growth in Bangladesh, elevating the country’s status and improving social indicators. This has contributed to her popularity despite her dictatorial tendencies.
The January 7th elections in Bangladesh, despite their façade, were a predetermined outcome in the eyes of many observers. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina secured her fifth term in office, though the result was largely anticipated due to the main opposition’s boycott.
What surprised many was the emergence of independent candidates securing the second-highest number of seats. However, these independent winners were primarily individuals rejected by Hasina’s party, urged to run as “dummy candidates” to give the election a semblance of competitiveness.
The current opposition, the Jatiya Party, only managed to secure 11 of 300 parliamentary seats, leaving a significant challenge in forming a parliamentary opposition. The election and its outcome have been labeled bizarre, highlighting the lack of genuine contestation and a representative parliament.
Overall, the election lacked authenticity, characterized by the dominance of Sheikh Hasina’s party, the absence of a credible opposition, and skepticism regarding the reported voter turnout.
Turning to Pakistan, the country grapples with its own democratic crisis, as former Prime Minister Imran Khan recently voiced to The Economist. Imran Khan highlights the manipulation, suppression, and systemic hurdles his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf [PTI], faced, alleging interference from external forces and orchestrating efforts to curtail PTI’s political influence. He emphasizes the struggles faced by PTI in its bid to participate in a fair and free electoral process.
Khan asserts that the country is under caretaker governments both federally and provincially. He argues that these administrations are unconstitutional as elections weren’t held within the mandated 90-day period after parliamentary assemblies dissolved. Despite a Supreme Court order, there is skepticism about the upcoming national elections on February 8 due to past failures to conduct votes in two provinces, Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
These accounts of Bangladesh and Pakistan may signal broader trends across South Asia, reflecting a worrisome pattern of democratic regression. In Bangladesh, economic success coexists with authoritarian governance, presenting a paradox. Under Narendra Modi, India shares a similar trend, challenging the perceived trade-off between development and democratic values. That said, our democracy is more deeply rooted and stable.
The decline of democracy in South Asia is concerning and needs urgent attention. Regional dynamics should be reviewed, highlighting the importance of preserving democratic values despite economic growth and strategic partnerships. The erosion of democratic norms in Bangladesh and Pakistan serves as a stark reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions in the region, emphasizing the imperative to uphold and safeguard these principles for a more stable and equitable future.
(January 12, 2024)
Intersection of Politics and Religion: Modi’s Ambitious Ram Mandir Inauguration
India is a multi-dimensional social and religious polity with spiritual overtones and a constant craving for materialism. Politics and religious zeal have gotten intermixed, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi playing his political games to install himself as a politico-religious Jagat guru. Whether he will succeed in achieving his goals is difficult to predict, but his ambition is evident as he is all set to inaugurate the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya on January 22, 2024. He is also expected to perform the Pran Pratishtha ceremony at Ayodhya.
The BJP is vigorously promoting the inauguration as a national and international event. More than 200,000 people are expected to gather at Ayodhya on the day. The event is expected to be screened nationwide, at Indian embassies globally, and on a sponsored screed in Times Square in New York. This is understandable since Hindus are a globally visible community. Donations for the temple are projected to become the world’s largest. It is expected to surpass INR 4 trillion (USD 48 billion), as reported by the trust overseeing construction.
Numerous gifts, including fruit baskets from Nepal and the world’s most enormous incense stick, measuring 108 feet and composed of 1,470 kg of cow dung, 190 kg of ghee, and 420 kg of herbs, are pouring in. The colossal incense stick is expected to burn for a month and a half once ignited.
The Shankaracharyas of the four Hindu maths located in Dwarka (Gujarat), Joshirmath (Uttarakhand), Puri (Odisha), and Sringeri (Karnataka) will not attend the inauguration of the Ram temple. These maths, believed to have been established by the eighth-century religious scholar and philosopher Adi Shankara, play a significant role in Hinduism’s spiritual and religious leadership.
Although the Shankaracharyas from Dwarka and Sringeri have not provided explanations, the Shankaracharya of Puri math has been outspoken about his decision. Shankaracharya Nischalananda Saraswati – the 145th Shankaracharya of the Purvaamnaya Govardhanmath Peeth at Jagannath Puri, Odisha – has recently declined to participate in the Pran Pratishtha ceremony. The reason for his objection to the inauguration ceremony of the Ram Mandir lies in his view that the event has become political. Upon receiving the Ram Mandir inauguration invitation, Nischalananda Saraswati expressed concern that the ceremony had transformed into a political spectacle.
He said:
“The country’s Prime Minister will reside in the sanctum sanctorum, touch the idol, and perform the Pran Pratishtha ceremony. This has been given a political hue, if there is to be the Pran Pratishta of Lord Rama, it should be according to scriptural guidelines. I won’t oppose it, nor will I attend. I have taken my stance. Let’s not mix half-truths and half-lies; everything should align with scriptural knowledge.”
Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranand, who presides over JyotirmathPeeth in Uttarakhand, has chosen not to participate in the Ram Mandir ceremony. He explains that the temple’s construction does not represent a victory for Sanatam Dharma. According to him, Ayodhya already had a Ram Mandir in the past, and the temple’s construction is not a gift or triumph for the religion.
The temple construction has been a contentious issue for decades, carrying significant social and political weight. While many Hindus see it as a symbol of cultural and religious resurgence, others raise concerns about the potential for exclusion and division.
The construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya represents a significant political promise for the BJP, with Prime Minister Modi ready to claim credit for its fulfillment. However, the temple as such is not projected to transcend into the realization of Ramrajya nationwide. Instead, its primary consequence is expected to be a political victory for the BJP in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections.
A 2022 poll of voters in Uttar Pradesh, cited by The Economist, revealed that 74% regarded inflation and development as highly important issues, while only 40% accorded similar importance to the Ram temple. If Modi were to decisively address these economic issues, he has the potential for significant success. Regrettably, for Prime Minister Modi, building a temple seems more attainable than tackling the broader economic challenges.
(January 19, 2024)
Faith and the pursuit of Ramrajya
The inauguration ceremony of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya marked a significant event in India’s history, intertwining politics, religion, and identity. Over 5,00,000 people paid obeisance to the Ram idol a day after the consecration ceremony, and nearly 8,000 security personnel were deployed to manage the crowd. For the devotees, it was a dream come true.
The grand inauguration ceremony of the Ram Mandir unfolded on a vast three-hectare expanse, costing an estimated USD 217 million. The temple, designed in the Nagara style, features 46 doors, 42 adorned in gold. The 1.3-meter Ram Lalla idol, carved from dark stone, received the Pran Pratishtha ceremony, symbolizing the giving of life to the statue.
The ceremony was not just a religious event; it had profound political implications. With a star-studded guest list, including business magnates and Bollywood celebrities, the BJP aimed to solidify its base. The strategic timing before the election season indicates an intent to leverage the event for electoral gains.
Amidst all this, the idea of Ramrajya has once again surfaced in discourses – an envisioned ideal state believed to have been established after Lord Ram’s return to Ayodhya and the establishment of his rule.
For Mahatma Gandhi, Ramrajya wasn’t a literal kingdom but symbolized an ideal society based on justice, equality, and truth. He imagined a world where everyone, regardless of background, had equal rights and opportunities, with non-violence as the guiding principle. Gandhi believed this utopia wouldn’t come through external force but through moral awakening and self-discipline within each individual.
The history of the Ram Mandir is, no doubt, steeped in controversy, dating back to the 19th century. Legal battles ensued, culminating in the Supreme Court ruling in 2019, awarding the disputed land to a trust administered by the government.
The question of whether the site is the birthplace of Lord Ram is a matter of contention. Historical writings, archaeological evidence, and references in sacred texts form the basis for the pro-Janmabhoomi argument. However, liberal historians dismiss the quality of evidence, accusing archaeologists of fabricating data for political agendas. The Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling acknowledged evidence of a 12th-century temple but left the question of its destruction open-ended.
Beyond electoral considerations, the Ram Mandir is pivotal in the BJP’s long-term cultural project. Prime Minister Modi’s assertion that “Ram is the faith of India, Ram is the idea of India”
underscores the temple’s role in shaping a new cultural narrative. The BJP aims to redefine political norms, projecting the temple as the symbol of New India.
The Ram Mandir stands as a symbol of religious fervor and political strategy, embodying a complex story transcending the boundaries of history and politics. Its impact on elections, cultural identity, and the idea of India remains a subject of ongoing debate. As the temple becomes a focal point in India’s cultural landscape, its legacy and influence will shape the nation’s trajectory in the years to come.
Pervez Hoodbhoy, an Islamabad-based physicist and writer, states in The Dawn:
“Still, to me, an infrequent visitor to India, secularism’s rapid retreat comes as a surprise. Twenty years ago, while visiting the Jawaharlal Nehru Institute for Advanced Research in Bangalore, I was intrigued by Nehru’s words inscribed on the foundation stone: “I too have worshipped at the shrine of science.” But I don’t see ‘worship’ and ‘shrine’ tallying well with modern science or the scientific temper associated with Nehru. My hosts rushed to explain. Shrine of science, they said, was actually a metaphorical allusion to labs and research centres. Nehru, they proudly asserted, was an atheist and never went to temples. Later, I found he actually did visit temples as well as mosques. Further, as in his prison diary The Discovery of India, his view of religion is fairly nuanced.”
Hoodbhoy’s observation of a decline in secularism aligns with ongoing debates surrounding the construction of the Ram Mandir and the idea of Ramrajya. It prompts reflection on how religion, science, and politics contribute to or challenge the principles of secularism that have been a foundational aspect of the Indian ethos. As Gandhi once famously articulated, “My Hinduism teaches me to respect all religions. In this lies the secret of Ramarajya,”
highlighting the crucial role of religious tolerance and inclusivity.
Building this ideal society starts not with a temple but within our hearts and with openness to all faiths. It is a call for collective transformation, where the journey to Ramrajya begins with embracing all religions.
(January 26, 2024)