Posted by Aftab Khanna, who on the gentle goading of Tony Sebastian, has finally decided to try and foresee things before they have happened

“The trouble with free elections is, you never know who is going to win” – Leonid Brezhnev

Comrade Brezhnev might well have spoken for all us sitting at our homes in front of television screens and twiddling our thumbs as the great Indian tamasha gets underway once again. Opinion polls have been banned this time around – thus sparing the politicians many an anxiety and depriving our pollsters of their moments under the arc lights. The election process, one cant help but feeling, is poorer for the same. It was fun seeing spokespersons of major political parties denying all the poll findings if they were against them and then crucifying the pollsters on counting day when results went in their favor. Conversely the party projected to win would end up being cheated by the pollsters and suffer a reverse at the hustings. The spokespersons would go on to deride the very same polls that they were trumpeting a few weeks back.
India is a strange democracy and stranger still are its elections. It’s a country where the Intelligence Bureau instead of gathering evidence of upcoming terror strikes (I am sorry for making them sound like a music concert, but that’s the regularity and seriousness they acquired under the UPA) actually goes out and collects intelligence against the political rivals of the incumbent. The IB is the oldest pollster in the country and perhaps has a higher accuracy rate than even the likes of Prannoy Roy and Yogendra Yadav. You would have heard the old cliché – Indian elections are notoriously difficult to predict. It got a shot in the arm in 2004 when all the opinion polls (and surprisingly even the exit polls) got their results completely wrong. The electorate is so fragmented and so diverse that to reach the correct prediction is to play a game of snakes and ladders on a thousand square field. Yet there are some who carry the burden of psephology (would you believe it, MS Word 2007 does not even have this word in its dictionary; pollsters rival only investment bankers these days when it comes to earning discredits) and enlighten us as to the fate that awaits us ahead.

Yours truly is not a bearer of this burden – simply a patient of swivel chair (that’s the one I sit on) analysis. Hence, as Sir Tony would agree, in an extraordinarily courageous display of pre-emption, he now goes ahead and puts his neck on the line and attempts to gaze into a very hazy crystal ball.

The Congress: The grand old party of India is losing allies as its vehicle chugs along the bumpy electoral road. Lalu Yadav may have been temporarily estranged (both him and Mulayam would come back to the UPA to demand their pound of flesh in a post poll scenario) but it is the loss of the PMK in Tamil Nadu that would perhaps hurt the party the most. It would struggle to retain its tally of 10 seats in the state and its alliance partner DMK seems to have already thrown in the towel. The party seems set to gain in Punjab and Kerala and would lose in Haryana, Bihar, Jharkhand, Assam and Tamil Nadu. Key to the Congress’ fortune would lie in the states of Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh (with the last two being bellwether states in my estimate). The party would need to rout the BJP in Rajasthan, retain more or less the same seats in Maharashtra and minimize its losses in Andhra to even entertain hopes of government formation. Anything under 140 seats and the Congress would be at the mercy of Mamta, Mulayam and, in scenario nothing short of a nightmare for them, perhaps Jayalalitha and the Left.
Projection – 135 to 148 seats

The BJP: The Bhartiya Jalopy Party would be hoping for a repeat of the fortunes of 2004, not of their own but of the Congress! The Congress went into the polls then with no one giving it a fig leaf’s chance and trumped all the analysts and pollsters. Unlike the Congress in 2004 however, the BJP has failed to stitch together coherent alliances and seems set to pay the penalty. Its loss of Naveen Patnaik would cost it in Orissa (though like Lalu, the BJD too would come back to its erstwhile ally if push comes to shove) and the party would suffer reverses in Rajasthan. It seems set to more or less even out gains in J&K, HP, Gujarat and Jharkhand with marginal losses in MP, Chattisgarh and Maharashtra. Key to its fortunes would be to achieve damage limitation in Rajasthan and hope that Nitish Kumar swings Bihar their way with at least 20+ seats. But it’s still a tough shot for the BJP to emerge at the same levels as 1999. It would need to surprise us all a bit – sweep Gujurat, Karnataka and MP massively, raise its tally in Maharashtra and most of all, grab at least 20 seats in UP. That seems asking for a bit too much from Mr.Advani. The party’s only route to power is thus to cobble up around 140 seats on its own, hope that Jaya sweeps Tamil Nadu, the TDP alliance sweeps Andhra, Naveen Patnaik takes Orissa handsomely and all of them return to the NDA fold – if Mr.Advani and Mr.Jaitley pull that off, then I for one at least wont grudge them their 5 years of power.
Projection – 120 to 135 seats

Third Front: Can the reincarnated ‘Teesra Morcha’ grab power from under the noses of the UPA and NDA? Despite all their media blitz and ‘shor’ this cabal of regional players (accept it, the Left is a regional player) faces some quite steep hurdles. The Left is all set to slide from the high of 59 to around mid 30s in the new Lok Sabha. Naveen Patnaik, if he chooses to go with the Third Front, may not deliver the same seats as last time (11 of 20), since he fights alone and faces anti-incumbency both at state and parliamentary level. Third Front’s door to power rests on several shaky hinges – Mayawati has to outperform in UP and come close to a tally of 50, TDP must win around 30 and agree to stay with the Front and Jayalalitha should also reach a tally of 30. With these numbers and around 35 seats of the Left, the Front would hit 140+; that’s a range at which both Lalu and Mulayam (sure to underperform and return with lower numbers) may decide to grab a bite at power and change camps. If Naveen Patnaik too takes the third turn, then with numbers in excess of 150, the Third Front dream can hope to face the dawn of realization. The Congress may then be called upon to support the front from a position of weakness and we can all happily return back to the days of 1996.
But will it happen?? Will Mulayam join a front with Maya? More importantly will Mayawati reach near that figure of 50 in UP? Will both the TDP and Jaya outperform? And will the Congress agree to bide time and prepare for 2014 and extend outside support?
Projection – 110 to 125 seats

So what are we looking at after the polls? Make no mistake, India might well face a long summer with political parties slugging it out in the lack of a clear mandate. Deals would be struck, sides will be changed and there will be plenty of entertainment on offer. One won’t be surprised if there is a complete deadlock for a few days and the new Prime Minister gets sworn in only around late June. Here’s how the scenarios may pan out –

Probable– Congress reaches around 140; Lalu and Mulayam, both emerge weaker but rejoin the UPA and a Third Front constituent joins in while a couple of existing and dispensable allies are ditched. The alliance scrapes through to 272.

Somewhat Likely – Congress on its own is around 125 - 130 but the Third Front, let down by Mayawati’s inability to effect a decisive sweep, is also not strong enough to stake an independent claim. In a grand reconciliation the Left decides to bury its differences and carries along a couple of its Third Front partners to the UPA, once again supporting from outside. In such a case, Manmohan Singh might have to end up paying for his anti-Left tirade of the last 12 months.

Slightly less likely – Mayawati trumps everyone, sweeps UP and establishes presence through wins in Punjab and MP. She commands the Third Front along with Jayalalitha who also decimates the DMK in Tamil Nadu. The Congress, stranded at around 120 is left with no option but to cede momentum to the ladies.

Less likely – The NDA sweeps Gujarat, MP, Bihar; improves marginally in UP and Maharashtra and minimizes losses in Rajasthan and Orissa. It reaches a tally close to 200; the Third Front breaks up, the AIADMK and TDP with around 30 seats each finally propel Mr.Advani to Race Course Road.

Of course, I could be massively wrong. The least likely scenario may well turn out to be the most likely after the votes are counted. Predictions in Indian polls, more than astrology, can go horribly off the mark. Hence, you are advised to add a pinch of salt to your popcorn, as you read the same. And in case you feel badly let down by this author when the results finally come out, you are welcome to return to this post and smash some eggs on its face.

|

If you ever needed evidence that the institution of ragging needed strict regulation, then ladies and gents you have it right here before you. A young boy, a year out of school, with dreams and aspirations in his eyes, yet to come of age and discover the cynicisms of this world has paid the price with his life for upholding the grand legacy of this so called annual tradition in our colleges. This sadly is what ragging has come down to in our ‘professional’ institutions; what kind of members such institutions shall contribute to their professions is a question to ponder over. Doctors/ Engineers/ Lawyers who would not think twice before banging someone’s head mercilessly into a concrete wall. People who see nothing wrong in subjecting those junior to them (in age, perhaps not in mind) to the worst of psychological humiliations and physical abuse. People who are able to conjure up strange notions of power within their fiefdoms of college hostels and exercise that power brutally. People who get away every year with the tacit approval and lack of action by the institutions they supposedly claim to study in. Welcome to the grand tradition of college ragging, under the guise of which we have been passing off abuse and harassment – and now murder.

The Supreme Court came out with its anti-ragging guidelines in 2001 – the very year that I entered college. At that time I remember it sparked of a debate in the college circuits. Delhi University students were bristling with self righteousness and proclaiming how ragging was an ice breaking institution that was high on the fun quotient and necessary to initiate their ‘fucchas’ and foster camaraderie between the freshmen and varsity. Of course, they had a point. On the very first day of college that year, Hindustan Times photographed five varsity students of Hindu College making three freshmen to go on haunches, put their hands to their ears and become what our schoolteachers used to say in an age long gone by, ‘murgaas’. That photograph, of five laughing seniors and three bended juniors made the front page of the newspaper the next day and all around my class there was one sentiment – how idiotic! Couldn’t those fools see that they were being photographed? (The seniors in the snap were temporarily suspended)

Every year our colleges put up notices ‘advising’ students against ragging. Every year stories come out. There are the first set of stories – the polite ones, the tellers of which will come up and claim what a wonderful tradition ragging is. Stories of vulgar songs being asked to be sung, stories of sexually driven young boys who have had limited interactions with the other sex asking their juniors to ‘go and propose to that girl’. These are stories whose veil you would never care to lift. You would smile, pass them on as signs of coming of age, ignore the signals and turn a blind eye.

And then there is the other set. The one that flows out of our medical and engineering colleges. Ask any student who has passed out of such an institution and you would know where I am coming from. I have heard tales of people being asked to strip, humiliated because they belonged to a particular caste, being told in the middle of the night to fetch liquor from outside for their seniors, people being slapped, caned, pulled by their hair and beaten up and girls being asked to dance nude. Now I know I sound a bit of an idealist on this blog at times, but please pray tell me in what civilized world does all the above count as steps of ‘initiation and building of espirit de corps’? And if indeed such acts are vital to break down walls of inhibitions that juniors possess when they enter college, then why don’t the same rules apply when our kids enter kindergarten or high school, when recruits enter the army or when we join a job after getting out of our colleges? My question is quite simple - would you accept your workplace tolerating your boss slapping and stripping you and pulling your hair? Would you laugh off lightly if tomorrow your kid’s head is smashed into the school wall when he enters kindergarten?

I can see where the strength and reasoning for ragging is derived. Colleges are places without codified rules of behavior. There are no codes of conduct, no uniforms and no class teacher to make you behave. It is a place for losing your innocence, for venturing into the big bad world after coming out of the protecting environs of your home. Young kids, specially in hostels, come across a diversity that they perhaps have not seen before in their lives. There is a sense of community and belongingness, driven by the feeling of everyone being far away from home. The hostel is your home. Your mates your brothers. A sense of authority prevails over those who enter the premises under you. A culture of patronage and protection – all under the garb of fostering ties and interaction. There is a sense of power hitherto unknown. Combine that power with regional and caste biases, a thrill at the ‘adventure’ on offer, a closeted sexuality demanding exploration and a knowledge that you are ‘one in a mob’, that ‘everyone does it, so why shouldn’t you?’ What do you get? Lifelong friendships – maybe. Camaraderie – maybe. Murder? Ah well, that’s just an unfortunate byproduct. So what if some people are abused and their heads smashed? We must have our dose of the cocktail of power.

The only explanation of ragging that anyone could offer me was – ‘Because I also got ragged’. Every batch claims it was more progressive than its seniors and that they ‘didn’t rag as much as they had suffered’.

The colleges, of course, can only shrug their shoulders every time an incident happens. In the recent case, the principal accused was a repeat offender – yet hadn’t been reprimanded even once. Institutions won’t act due to influence, fear of negative publicity and police scrutiny. The students won’t complain because they have to spend their academic life with those who harass them. They will simply bear the pain and insults and smile on gamely. And this ‘grand tradition’ of crass display of power derived from coercion will continue to roll along unabated.

Well, I am afraid but as the recent incident demonstrates this is a matter where we have exhausted all limits of self regulation. Unfortunately, Indian courts, police and the executive will now be called to enter into our colleges – not to frame educational policies and reform the functioning, not to demand an increase in budgetary allocations, not to call for improvement of infrastructure, but to police the students. And that, if you have passed out of a college in this country, along with the death of Aman Kachru, is a matter of utter collective shame.

 

|

Is it only me or are there other people also out there who think that there is something fishy about all these Bollywood movie awards? Times of India yesterday ran a full page story on this year’s Filmfare awards (Filmfare being a sister publication commanded natural space) and the list of awardees was well, how should I put it, a bit like reading a half well selected Indian team. It raises your eyebrows but only in a mild arc. Of course, you can always argue that all the awards doled out in India end up raising more than just arc – usually they raise a ruckus, mostly by those who have missed out and in the case of Milkha Singh a few years ago even by those who have received it. So why should yours truly raise his eyebrows only at poor Bollywood and at Filmfare? Perhaps because they came a week after the Oscars and howsoever illogical this may sound, I couldn’t help drawing a comparison. And perhaps because, Filmfare still claims to award India’s equivalent of the Oscars. It is rightly the oldest film awards function in Bollywood and can claim to command a certain degree of respect, perhaps by its sheer weight of history.

In the recent years of course, that respect, credibility and the comfort zone of Filmfare has been challenged by a slew of ‘me too’ clones. All you need these days of course is a publication that lends the media machine to your awards, a television channel that will ensure the sponsors and the entertainment factor and a lead sponsor to shell out all those mega bucks to the dancing stars. The trend was started by Screen (with Indian Express and Star), followed by Zee and now you have those hideous India International Film Awards that are a blatant way to rip off money from all those pravasi bhartiyas crazy about Hindi films (to the extent that they are held every year in an offshore destination; though I would like to see how many dollars the pravasis would shell out in this time of a downturn or perhaps it might well be yours and mine TV eyeballs that would bankroll the event). What all this does mean is that there is a competitive pressure amongst all these awards and since sponsors and revenues shall all be decided by the TV ratings, it becomes imperative to ensure that those don’t drop. And the safest way to guarantee TV ratings is to make sure that you get SRK to dance. But why should SRK dance at one function and not at another. So in this competition enters another element now. Give the star an award, give him a reason to attend and then make him dance. Everyone goes home happy – the star gets awarded, the commercial film gets lauded, sponsors make money and TV gets rating. And credibility? Ah pray what’s that again please??

Of course, the above is just a theory and conjecture (I want to qualify that, you never know when this blog might hurt the sensibilities of an idiot who might then drag me to court, as is happening with disturbing frequency recently) – but as I look down the list of the Filmfare awardees this year I can’t help but get that uncomfortable churn. Was Hrithik’s seriously a better performance than Nasser’s in ‘A Wednesday’? Was ‘Jodha Akbore (oops Akbar!) seriously a better film than say a ‘Mumbai Meri Jaan’ or an ‘A Wednesday’, a ‘Dev D’ or even ‘Rock On’ in terms of its narrative, tightness of script and communication of message? To satisfy any such concern, all these awards have found a convenient circumnavigation tool called ‘Critics Awards’. It’s a bit like handing out a return gift to the kids at a birthday party, a mere tool to acknowledge a presence and to keep the noise level down. So this year, Mumbai Meri Jaan has taken most of the Critics Awards. Movies like Oye Lucky have also found luck in the technical categories like Dialogue, categories about which the TV viewing public and the sponsors don’t give a fig about. But when it comes to the big draws, the Best Actors, Directors and Movie, big budget cinema (I won’t use the word successful since there always seems to be a debate about whether a movie was ‘hit’ or ‘miss’) called the shots.

Whatever we might think about the snobbishness and early morning shenanigans of the Oscars, you have to give them credit on two counts. One, they manage to achieve the right amount of slick quotient required for high quality TV coverage and second, agree or not with the final list of rewards, you would hardly find any controversies about the nominations. Most of them would deserve their place. In fact the Academy quite often supplants the big studios and doles out Uncle Oscar to the small budget ones. Surprisingly they manage to affect this snub and still put forward an effective TV show. A movie like the ‘The Dark Knight’ managed two Oscars out of eight nominations with one of them being the certainty of Heath Ledger’s win. Had it been India, the movie would have swept the awards circuit by the sheer weight of its collections. Not taking away anything from Chris Nolan who as a critic remarked ‘created Shakespeare out of a comic book’, there were perhaps other and deeper performances that pipped the caped crusader. Of course, the Oscars are not without their share of murmurs and some newspapers claimed that Slumdog was nominated and won a bundle of awards simply to ensure that TV revenues from the sub-continent were high. It was a bit like that old argument about Indians winning Miss Universe and Miss World titles so that Fair and Lovely could sell more (when was the last time an Indian girl won a beauty pageant by the way?? And is Fair and Lovely still selling despite all those national setbacks at Miss Universe and Miss World contests?)

Perhaps a way out could be to have an industry body conducting the awards. I remember seeing a Producers’ Guild Awards on NDTV last year and you could instantly see why such an idea will hit so many roadblocks in India. The audience present could not even fill a school auditorium and almost none of the major winners in the ‘popular’ categories of music and acting were present. Maybe in India we should stop fretting and simply accept that our awards are weighed towards commercial success and that it shall often be difficult to break that glass ceiling and bring an element of credibility. The only way out is to then treat them as those doling out these awards do – not recognition of cinematic excellence but simply as toffee handouts on the birthday party. The bigger fist shall get the lion’s share. The spectacled geeky boy shall be shoved around and then pitied and handed a token to assuage everyone’s conscience.

*****************************************************************************************************************

Can the Election Commission please announce the election dates and spare us all the agony of looking at full page government advertisements and blaring declarations of achievement on radio by various state ‘sarkars’. I am amazed to see that after so many years of inactivity, every day India is seeing a flurry of inaugurations and foundation stones. Of course, in our country, foundation stones remain just that - stones. The only ones benefiting from all this wasteful expenditure of your and my money are media companies designing these ads, the singers and actors finding employment in them and the print media that gets almost five to six pages of sarkari income every day. Perhaps the government can put a charitable spin on it and say that this is a thinly veiled bailout package for the Times of India and the Hindustan Times. Who cares about public money as long as the monkeys can scratch each other’s backs?

 

|

There is a strange kind of debate going on in the Indian media as Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire prepares to hit the screens this Friday. One of the disadvantages of round the clock media coverage, as we have all realized by now, is that a lot of inanity finds prime time viewership that is quite disproportionate to its significance to public debate. The arguments over whether Slumdog glorifies Indian poverty and thus consequently establishes that only Indian slums sell to the west is one such. The Hindi news channels, having by now long forsaken any pretense at news coverage and generating public opinion, have concentrated all their energies on blowing the trumpet for the movie and blaring its soundtrack even more diligently than MTV or the radio channels. Slumdog hardly needs any pre-release publicity; the mad frenzy that has gripped our news networks, who have by now done multiple interviews with anyone remotely associated with the movie, has ensured that enough people will be queuing up to buy tickets on day one even without posters, television campaigns or star appearances of its cast of actors. The English media, particularly the television one, has taken up the cudgels and run debates on whether the four Golden Globes amply prove that a romanticized picture of Indian poverty presented by an acceptable foreigner is enough to set the critics from New York, Hollywood and London running. Is Slumdog glorifying and selling Indian poverty?

Forgive me for being a bit thick, but there are far too many layers that I detect and am unable to unravel. At one level, there is the old fear. That of being identified still as the land of elephants and snake charmers and sadhus lying on bed of nails. This is the fear of the India of thirty years back – that realized too late that much of its spiritual charm for westerners lay in its image of being a place of hardship and renunciation. Placed alongside that, the snake charmers, the slums, the sewage and the grime seemed to complete an appropriate picture. India was a yogic land content in its dirt and at ease with its nakedness and flies. Of course, by the time India itself realized this image, a lot of time had passed and a lot of catching up to be done. This is an image that every Indian now seeks to suppress. Added to this is a new generation of monetarily empowered middle class Indians, the beneficiaries of the unlocking of gates achieved in 1991. And it is this semi-professional, confident and semi-nationalist Indian who now cringes at the mention of his country’s scars. For this Indian, the rise of an Infosys, economic growth, fancy office s and glitzy malls and rising consumer choice and consumption are enough to show that the tide has turned and the dirty, spiritual home of hippies is now a bright spanking Elevate. More than movie critics, it is this Indian who wonders why Jamal Malik’s and not his story makes the Western audiences sit up and award Golden Globes. This Indian begs the question as to why, when he has achieved skill based growth, must the world still look at Dharavi for inspiration. This Indian essentially contests the fact that Jamal Malik and not he is the true representative of his nation.

Alas, statistics, our urban landscape and daily realities of life are against him. For while he might have grown, a great of number of his countrymen are still slumdogs. More importantly, what he forgets is that the person sitting next to him on the high table of self achieved prosperity had some generation of his family that rose from those slums. He overlooks the wonderful stories of those who found inspiration to break out of those stinking drains and cramped houses and let their height grow to catch more the sun. He forgets that in India’s slums are born the dreams of desire. He forgets that he is the inspiration for those dreams. That those living cheek by jowls in India’s many Dharavis look to him and say to themselves – if he can, we can.

Essentially, this young Indian is insecure. Insecure of being pushed back to the land of renunciation and sadhu ashrams. Insecure that the world may fail to recognize him as it looks at India slums. He forgets that what he protests against is a story similar to his – a story of rising against adversity, of facing challenges and summoning grit to achieve a holy grail. Jamal Malik typifies India – yet to let go of it slums and scars, but not lacking in spirit to rise in this world and seeking a better life on his credentials alone. Slumdog is a tale of an India in transformation and howsoever much wealth the insecure Indian may amass, he cannot ignore the slums that dot his urban landscape. For in those slums lie the dreams of tomorrow and from there came the achievers of today.

I put this state of needless debate as my Facebook status and received some interesting responses. One friend was particularly galled by what he called Western hypocrisy in not showcasing their own poverty. That I believe is bit harsh. The West has been more self critical and inward looking that any other part of the current world. You only need to dive into the body of work of a Quentin Tarantino or a Martin Scorcese to explore the cinematic depiction of the underbelly of America. Another friend wondered whether all it takes to win a Booker these days is to get a degree from a foreign university, write about India and romanticize its poverty, corruption and caste system. He believes the west is excited about India’s plagues. I beg the question – Is India aware and excited about it plagues? The answer I leave for you to ponder. I could write another post defending Arvind Adiga’s book but I will mention only two points – read it and judge if you disagree with the picture of rural and urban life of India that he paints. And the second – all around me I see protagonists of Adiga’s book emerging. My grandparents’ young servant – son of a landless labourer from Bihar has taught himself to read English, owned and chucked a cell phone, bought a DVD player, likes to get his hair gelled and coloured, swears by the principle of ‘living within your monetary means’ and not taking debt and dreams one day to be an entrepreneur caretaking multiple residential dwellings. When I look at him, I realize that Adiga and Boyle do not speak to me in an alien language. These stories are resonating around India. These ambitions shall propel India. We must embrace them rather than shying away from accepting the place of their birth. We are, as a nation, surely self-confident enough to look at ourselves honestly in the mirror – to admire our beauty and understand our warts.

|

In this season of terrorist strikes and bomb blasts, Satyam chief Ramalinga Raju has left potentially the most damaging piece of explosive amidst the set up of corporate India. If Raju’s suicide note/ confession/ conscience call/ whatever you may choose to label it based upon whatever levels of credulity are still left in you after today, does not shake the susceptible foundations of corporate conduct in India then believe me, nothing will. For ladies and gentlemen, this is not a government controlled sick PSU that has been eating away public money for ages and now has come into the limelight. This is a success story (or an ex success story, again based on your remaining levels of optimism about the company) of the new Indian economy and its sunshine sector. This is the sector and the industry that we sell to the world, this is the service our nation is now synonymous with instead of bullock carts, elephants and snakes. In one stroke of his pen (literally!), Mr.Raju has done tremendous damage to this nation’s reputation and effectively signed away the one asset that any business can possess and lose only once – credibility.

For years we have been making jokes about Enron, WorldCom and Arthur Andersen; now we have our very own corporate fraud to humour ourselves with. Yours truly has gone ahead done the same with the title of this post. But this is no laughing matter after all. This is a heady cocktail of corporate fraud, auditor negligence, regulatory oversight and boardroom corruption all mixed together. Raju is nothing but the tip of this iceberg that might well leave more than a few cracks in different corporate Balance Sheets that now seem nothing less than floating Titanics.

Satyam’s fraud has taken the sheen off the Indian IT sector and smashed all concepts of corporate governance and Clause 49 to bits. You wonder what chance corporate governance can have in a country like ours where you can buy your way into anything and where CFOs, Managing Directors, Independent Directors and Auditors can sign off on Financial Statements misstated by crores. And the saddest truth is that all of this would have conveniently been undetected had the dominos not started falling post that abortive attempt to acquire family held companies by the Satyam chief. You and I would have gladly believed Satyam to be a blue chip stock on account of its high revenues, operating margins and huge cash reserves. We would have bought the stock at the markets and hoped it to stay steady as the market rides a recession. None of us would have ever known that revenues are overstated, margins are scanty (3%!!), cash reserves simply don’t exist and that the tone at the top is one set by crooks. In a sense Satyam has belied our faith in the accuracy of corporate announcements, results and financials – there seems little ‘satya’ in all the jargon spouted by the companies and the analysts. You and I will now look at every success story in India with a degree of scepticism; every corporate profit surge will now have to pass the ‘Satyam test’ and this loss of faith is one reason sufficient enough for Mr.Raju to be prosecuted criminally. If you can make fat bonuses and salaries by running your company and make gains through insider training, then you might as well face the flak when the chickens come home to roost.

The question everyone will (or atleast should) ask is, how can Rs 5000crs of cash and bank balances be overstated? As someone who belongs to the profession and has audited cash and bank balances numerous times, I can safely state that such a fraud is simply not possible without connivance of either the auditors or the banks. Audit firms at end of every period compare bank balances in company books with bank statements and balance confirmations obtained on bank letterheads and signed and stamped by the banks. Clients, if they are really innovative, can circumvent this check by printing/ obtaining forged bank stationery and stamps to fool the auditors. This amounts to a scam of Telgi proportions! Auditors can guard against this risk by confirming bank balances independently of client intervention by writing directly to banks – this exercise is adopted at each year end for both debtor and bank balances. During my days as an auditor such letters sent directly to the banks were even posted by us by our very own hands and near our houses so that the client could not lay a hand on them! Now, do you realise why we should all be so interested in finding out the answers that the auditors have to offer? Satyam’s failure is a serious blot on Indian financial reporting and must be treated as such. It calls to question the emphasis that audit firms now place on dressing up audit evidence rather than on actual procedures (all Big 4 practitioners will have some tales to recall in this regard). It also questions the golf course and meeting room kind of corporate deals that occur between large investors, merchant bankers (Merill Lynch by selling shares a day before Raju’s confession might have some questions to answer on its own), CEOs and auditors whereby all financial problems of the company miraculously vanish.

As this story unfolds you would have people appearing on television screens stating how this is a one off case and will not have a long term impact. Well if you want to turn this nation into a banana republic where money can buy anything, then yes Satyam will not have an impact. But make no mistake, this is not an isolated case. Open more books and you will have more dirt tumbling out. We live in a world of Russian roulette – the one that gets caught is a thief, the rest are all saints…till another knife gets thrown and another target is struck. Sadly, I fear nothing much will turn out of our mad flapping. We need an accounting, financial reporting and corporate governance overhaul. We need to make financial frauds and fraudulent reporting into criminal rather than civil offences. We need an accounting regulator that realises that regulation is not about conducting exams and getting the government to issue notifications that guarantee bread earning certification for their vote bank of CAs and most importantly we need a SEBI with sharper teeth that possess a vicious bite. From what I have heard on television all this evening, I doubt any of this will happen. Business channels are worried whether Satyam’s fall will stop the short term rally in the markets. Can you believe it? The world is falling on the Indian IT sector and all that CNBC is concerned about is where the stock market will go! In fact, if anything is to be learnt from this episode, it is that market price of a share simply cannot be used as a barometer of company performance. Today no one cares for Cash reserves, profits accumulated or sound business models – all we care for are quick bucks on intra day trading and short selling. In a sense, the Satyam fall serves all of us desktop/ laptop stock market players right. We invest blindly and the Ramalinga Rajus of this world deservedly rob us of our money. Perhaps we can do better by realising that the BSE levels are not the end all and be all of corporate India’s performance. Perhaps its time to get back some qualitative aspects into businesses. Perhaps its time to get back some virtues that we teach to our kids day in and day out. I suggest we begin with the much abused virtue of honesty.

|

I have the latest issue of the ‘Outlook’ magazine lying next to my bed and it asks a pertinent question on its year end cover – Was 2008 India’s ‘annus horibilis’? It’s a question that occurred to yours truly sometime around Diwali, when in a moment of somber reflection, memories of the previous ten months came flitting by. A year that even till then, had been a blood soaked one. A year that had seen multiple bomb blasts (worryingly most of them caused by home grown terrorists), had seen reverse terrorism by a section of the Hindu right, had witnessed brazen vandalization of churches and attacks on its faithful across Orissa and Karnataka, had given enough perceived reasons for the majority to doubt the minority, had seen politics plumb to newer depths with wads of notes being placed on Parliament’s table and had brought with it the final nail in the coffin of the once glorious and golden national sport of hockey.

At that moment of reflection, I quickly dismissed the thought. We had seen worse and we had overcome it. During my own cognitive lifetime, 1992, the spring of 2002 and the summer of 2000 had been much more depressing times on account of different reasons. But as Mumbai singed, struggled and wept my heart sank with it. Those four helpless days of end November, while not shaking my faith in the structures bestowed upon us by the founding fathers, made me question to a great extent our honesty and sincerity in preserving and improving them. We might be a nation of young people, with a fast growing economy and skilled population, with a mostly tolerant and cordial multi-cultural society but, and this is a significant but, if we are not honest towards our nation and our ideals we will be like a beautifully dressed ship standing in the middle of the ocean with no fuel to propel us towards safer shores; sitting still and vulnerable to plunder of every passing pirate.

So was 2008 India’s year of horror and will 2009 with its promise of continuing economic downturn, a divided polity, unending terror, troublesome and failed neighbors be year of horror raised to the power two?

No, says the ever erudite and balanced Ramachandra Guha in the middle of the ‘Outlook’ issue. No, if you lived through 1948 (the year of Gandhi’s death, Kashmir war and continuing displacement of partition in a new, uncertain nation) or through 1984 (the real annus horibilis if you ask me – Sikh terror, Operation Bluestar, Punjab under martial law, Indira Gandhi’ death, massive riots in Delhi and the Bhopal gas tragedy – a black year of death). With not much to be optimistic about as we turn gingerly into 2009, here’s to the one hope we can all carry – maybe 2009 will not be a 1984, maybe it will not even be a 2008; perhaps this nation will once again summon reserves of resolve that it did after the gloomy winters of 1984 and 1992. Despite the pessimism that surrounds us, yours truly is glad to be coming to you at the end of 2008 and not 1984.

There is no point to a year end post if I don’t subject you to a year end list, and you are perfectly excused if you want to put on your parachute and jump out of this web page now. Still I shall continue with my list, biased towards a natural Indian perspective, but still containing some global names and achievements. If you are still reading, then you may agree or disagree – either way you are perfectly entitled to add/ delete to or modify this list.

Event and person of the year: On a slightly cold early winter morning, change came to America. As Barack Obama accepted his victory in front of a packed Chicago park, the world watched, many with hope, some with uncertainty and some with disillusionment. No one backed him when in January he pitted himself against the might of the Clinton machine. Obama’s achievement was not that he won or for that matter that he won as a black man, but in the fact that he won by remaining honest to his beliefs and ideology. It is a fact which you realize after reading his brilliant book ‘The Audacity of Hope’. Throughout his campaign, Obama never shied away from confronting the tricky, thorny issues that define the fault lines of America today. When faced with embarrassing comments made by his black pastor about 9/11, Obama gave perhaps the best speech of his entire campaign. In an honest appraisal of America’s doubts he talked of how blacks still faced subtle economic and political resistance, of how the nation had still not pulled them out of their ghettos; but was balanced enough to point out that if his elderly grandmother felt uncomfortable when walking across two young black men on the street, then there had to be something wrong with the way they conducted themselves. He did not back down from questioning the commitment of young black fathers who abandon their kids and called for more responsibility to be taken by the community (you almost wish someone would cajole the Indian Muslim community the same way). Often accused of talking down to the blacks, Obama won neither because or despite his racial color. He won because he represented a fresh, honest and balanced face to America. There is much he stands to lose. Cynicism can quickly replace hope; events can quickly overwhelm individuals and Obama faces a Mt.Everest of problems on hand. The world watches as Obama sizes up the peak – the price of disillusionment will be high.

Worst call of the year: Political analysts might debate if John McCain’s presidency bid would have turned out differently had he not picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. One thing though, seems sure, McCain would have commanded a lot more respect and maybe even votes had the bimbo from Alaksa stayed as far away from his campaign as Anchorage is from New York. As the pitbull turned hockey mom slipped from one embarrassment to another, America found a reason to laugh amidst the economic gloom. The much proclaimed ‘Palin Effect’ did come, but in a direction reverse than that in which it was supposed to go. Now she wants to run for President in 2012. I can’t wait for the jokes to begin. Palin confirmed that age old adism – style without substance never sells.

Political coup of the year: No, this isn’t a military coup – it’s a coup that Manmohan Singh managed to pull off (with some help from another Singh) despite all the odds against him. When it seemed that the nuclear deal’s death was a ‘done deal’, Singh cocked a snook at the outdated Marxists, gave Prakash Karat a convenient goodbye and showed remarkable political acumen to bail his government out with considerable ease. Akshay Kumar acted in the movie but this year clearly there was another Singh who was King.

Gaffe of the year: I am spoilt for choice for this category. Not to be biased towards anyone’s propensity towards idiocity, it is fair that it should be shared by all the deserving. Simi Garewal for making us realize that our slums are mini-Pakistan, Narendra Modi for standing outside the battlefield of Oberoi Trident in Mumbai and showering his state’s crores on slain policemen, Sarah Palin (again!) for all her utterances, Oscar Fernandes for justifying the lynching of a corporate CEO and Mukhtar Naqvi of the BJP for making us look at the powdered and lipstick bearing faces of the women protesting against terror on our streets.

Worst business decision of the year: Granted that we are in difficult economic times, yet Jet Airways’ decision to sack around 1500 employees in one go secretly and without any notice period was nothing but an invitation to trouble. That the sacked employees, large enough in numbers to get organized and be noticed, went straight to the North Indian hating Raj Thackeray did not make matters any easy for Jet chairman Naresh Goyal. Overnight, he had a change of heart, realizing that the employees were like ‘family’ and he had responsibility towards them. This father won’t be shedding any extra kilos in the near future.

Villain of the year: But for Mumbai on 26/11, this award would have gone hands down to Raj Thackeray. The North Indian hater ‘marathi manoos’ caused much agony to his home city of Mumbai, made his goons bash up poor taxi drivers and railway exam students, tore away Mumbai’s remaining claims of cosmopolitanism and even managed to get the Marathi middle class to theoretically back his arguments. He was upstaged by his own city. Mumbai’s date with terror made Raj cower in fear in his home (his Sena all withdrew into their rat holes) and brought a new villain to our front pages – Ajmal Kasab might be a young gun toting brainwashed terrorist but he is symptomatic of our western neighbor that has no clue as to where it is going. Like Kasab, Pakistan is flailing its tentacles in all directions, firing mindlessly, hoping to catch anyone who comes in the line of fire. Yours truly has been calling it a failed state since the turn of the century. 2008 was the year when the world discovered this truth. As world opinion turned against it, Pakistan began the year with uncertainty (in the aftermath of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination), elected a civilian government, saw the exit of a discredited dictator and installation of a discredited politician as President, endured bomb blasts caused by its own monsters and ended the year short of being officially classified as a rogue state. Pakistan though lives in denial – it still believes that it can use its home grown militants to achieve ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan and bleed India with thousand cuts. The army remains unrepentant and unwilling to acknowledge its lack of control, the ISI is still a state within a state and Pakistan has now turned in to a whore state – throw some billions at them and you can make them agree to do what you want. Like a prostitute, Pakistan can give you fake pleasure but not sincerity of purpose.

Movie of the year: Without a second thought it has to be ‘The Dark Knight’. A movie that turned the concept of superhero comic flicks on its head. The beginnings of shades of reality began with the new Toby Maguire Spiderman movies, was carried on by Chris Nolan’s ‘Batman Begins’ and finally came full circle with ‘The Dark Knight’. It was bleak, pessimistic, deep, and subtle with many layers of meaning and with surely one of the finest performances in a negative role in Hollywood history. How much did Heath Ledger’s premature death contribute to the movie’s success is a matter of speculation but Ledger is well on his way to a posthumous Oscar. The Knight acquires deeper significance in the environment of violence that we live in. In one of my favorite scenes from the movie, Batman’s butler Alfred narrates the tale of a Burmese thief of jewels who would hide in the jungles and steal valuables for pleasure. Alfred’s point being that some people are not after anything – they are in it for the sheer pleasure of anarchy they cause. When Batman asks as to how the Burmese thief was caught, Alfred nonchalantly replies that he wasn’t; the forest had to be burnt down. It illustrated the dilemmas that the protagonist of the movie and the world today face – whether the rules of civilization can be preserved in the fight against evil. The Joker calls upon people to spread anarchy, chaos, expect the unexpected and leave everything to random chance- see any resemblance with the mindless anarchy spread on our streets by gun wielding terrorists who want no money and no hostages? Like the Joker, they delight in seeing our disorder. The Dark Knight is perhaps then, a lot more relevant that what we might have thought it initially to be.

Failure of the year: The Australian cricket team. Ricky Ponting promised us new age cricket when he landed in India but instead oversaw the rise of a new age that promises to usher in an element of vulnerability in Australian cricket. After the disgrace of Sydney, Australia lost the off the field battle with the BCCI over the racism row and Ponting lost it on the field against a young gangly fast bowler from Delhi. Two consecutive lost tests at Perth, loss of their home one day series and a drubbing by an inspired Indian team – is it any wonder that Kevin Pietersen and England cant wait for the summer of 2009 to arrive and the Ashes to begin. The golden age of Aussie domination seems well and truly ‘over’.

Sporting moment of the year: In a year in which Indian cricket had much to cheer about and Indian hockey much to cry over, it is perhaps fitting that the list should recognize that one man who literally shot his nation to glory. Abhinav Bindra finally fulfilled his potential, shot a perfect round and in the terribly competitive world of shooting brought India its first individual Olympic gold. Whether this feat inspires more to emulate Bindra will depend upon whether Indian sports is governed by those who harbor love and affection for it. Indian sport can do with scheming Pawars and Dalmiyas but not with arrogant KPS Gills. Individually, MS Dhoni, Vishy Anand and Jeev Milkha Singh shined; Vijay Mallaya bought a sub standard team that gave a sub standard performance, both in F1 and IPL, Sachin Tendulkar exorcised ghosts of fourth innings failures, Virendra Sehwag found redemption, Saina Nehwal gained in stature and boxing promised current and future glory. But for the sheer weight of his achievement, Bindra upstaged them all. His victory was truly well its weight in gold.

|

One of my favorite Calvin and Hobbes cartoons is the one in which a daydreaming Calvin is suddenly woken up in his Geography class by his teacher Miss Wormwood. Oblivious to her question, Calvin gets a shock when Wormwood screams at him, “Calvin! Pay Attention! Now what state do you live in?!” A puzzled Calvin immediately responds with glee “Denial”, much to the exasperation of the hapless Miss Wormwood. Viewing and hearing the events and happenings of the last few days, you would think everyone around is living in a state of denial. Everyone, except the man on the road. For long, it was the average Joe traveling on a local bus or a suburban train who bore the brunt of our violent urban upheavals. Then came the turn of the middle class salaried professional and employees, shaken out of their assured world of housing EMIs, car loans and daily grind of work emails. Now it’s the elite; the swish set who even take a coffee break in a five star hotel; people you would find making a beeline in their expensive luxury cars to grab a table at the latest gourmet sensation at the swankiest of five star hotels. Across the spectrum, all the three sets of people are angry. Angry at those all around them who live in a state of denial.

Our political establishment is the obvious target and this time they have taken it in the full, smack in the middle of the face. And of course, they haven’t done themselves any favors by completely refusing to recognize the magnitude of the events that has struck the nation. Perhaps it is a different world that they inhabit, insulated from the grime, dust and above all insecurities of life outside of security cordon. You only had to hear Narendra Modi, RR Patil, the Kerala CM and Mukhtar Naqvi to realize how trivial our concerns are for them and how condescending they think they are being when hear what we have to say. What Naqvi and the Kerala CM expressed was nothing short of ridicule against those demanding some answers from them. Of course, theirs is a state of denial which refuses to believe that not every family in India wants a political spectacle made out of the martyrdom of its son and that in a democracy people, irrespective of the cost of their lipstick brand, have a right to peaceful protests that raise questions.
Modi and Patil along with Vilasrao Deshmukh live in a world where the concept of ‘sensibility’ does not exist. For Modi, it is essential to prove that he is the martial answer for the effete Hindu religion against a marauding Islam that threatens to swamp India. Hence, there he was, with absolutely no business to be standing at an encounter site in another state, holding forth on how the treasury of his prosperous Gujarat will be opened for an officer whom he believed to be anti-national and anti-Hindu a few days ago. My suggestion at that point of time was that Modi should have been made some use of and ushered into the Oberoi Trident by the NSG. His self proclaimed ‘chhappan ki chaathi’ (chest with a size of 56) could have been utilized as a safety shield by the battling commandos and we would all have found out how martially gifted our latest prime ministerial aspirant actually is. Patil and Deshmukh have of course done an admirable job of shepherding Mumbai from one disaster to another – each time they have been Neros watching the spectacle of a burning Rome; be it the floods (an annual occurrence now), train blasts, Raj Thackeray’s violence or the latest terror strike. Not once, has either one of them made an effort to connect with those they govern and offered either an understanding of emotional upheaval or showed grace in their response to the situation in hand. Instead, we have witnessed statements dismissing the attack as any other and the conducting of guided tourist tours for the CM’s friends. Taking your actor son along to a terror site may not be improper, but in a city singing with anger and despair, it smacks of a complete inability to comprehend the nature of the event and its impact on those affected by it.

The Indian state lives in its own world of denials – a world whether words can substitute action, where loyalty commands a greater price in the market than competence, where it is believed by those running the reins of the establishment that setting up committees rather than acting on implementation of their recommendations is enough to take care of a charged public opinion. The State it seems in complete denial about any need for reform, blind to the deficiencies and inadequacies of its intelligence apparatus. Faced with an angered electorate, the State is extending a long rope for itself – it needs to act and let me repeat again ‘it needs to ACT’ before that rope turns into a noose around its neck.

Like India, Pakistan too has put on the blinds. We may deny our need to reform but our neighbor denies the dilemmas of its existence. And now its military ‘establishment’ refuses to accept the presence of the monsters crawling under its bed, monsters that may lash out at a passer by with their extended claws but which would not hesitate a moment to turn inward and search for prey. Pakistan is a nation that faces a deep internal catharsis, it has a frontier that it cannot govern, it has a government that cannot take any hard decisions and it has an army that is adamant on the fact that it can sleep with the tiger at home and let it hunt abroad. Simply put, the army refuses to acknowledge the extent of the threat, stressing that it still has control, that it can talk and temper its terror machine. It’s an army that is yet to lose faith in its Frankenstein. By the time it does, there may not be a nation left for the soldiers to defend. And the price will be paid by the larger neighborhood where the brimming cup of instability will overflow.

But while nations on our eastern and western frontiers sink into a quagmire we must not fail on two counts. The country is disturbed and impatient and demanding action. And the state, to ensure its legitimacy must give them the same. While it’s essential to handle both Pakistan and Bangladesh with deft diplomacy, we must urgently raise the heights of our walls even if our options are limited with respect to use of force beyond them. Internal security has been crying for reform for decades and we have paid a heavy price for our bureaucratic ignorance. We must not, any longer. This author does not need to draft a ‘to do’ list for the incumbents in power. Numerous committees, appointed by different governments, have submitted relevant recommendations. Those measures deserve a better place than a babu’s dust filled closet. They must, literally, see the light of the day.

Let this be a warning to the Indian state. The citizens may not want a military invasion of Pakistan, but they do crave for a sense of security, and even more than that for a sense of action and a certain degree of sensitivity towards their losses. Any State that fails to meet these expectations stands to lose its citizens’ loyalty and faith – the first step in turning a man into an anarchist is to make him believe that he has no stake in the system and that the system does not exist for him. We must not allow such a path to appear.

|

Hope and dreams are two much abused words. Overused, oversold and perhaps exaggerated on occasions. They have this intangible quality to them that makes the hard nosed realists amongst us to treat them with their opposite feeling – cynicism. Both hope and dreams carry with them a cruel companion named reality that does not always allow them to reach their intended junctions. But hope is a foundation for action and dreams a foundation for ambitions. They are the first tentative, hazy steps in a journey called realization.

Barack Obama reached one stage of that journey today as he became the first African American to claim the Presidency, an attainment that this author had certainly not thought possible for another two decades and many of his slightly more cynical friends, during their entire lifetimes. But Obama is now at the summit of political power – and he has been propelled there by the intangibles of hope, change and dreams that we often dismiss as being out of place characters in the political drama. Across the United States, Obama, a political greenhorn in terms of his Washington experience, has performed two actions that few politicians are able to achieve – transcend barriers of identity and make people believe that they have a stake. He is not a black President, for blacks could simply have not voted him into power. He has projected himself as the American president, consistently called for an end to the bitter divides between liberal and conservatives, white and black, Democrat and Republican. By acknowledging concerns on both sides of the debate he has brought a tone of moderation into his political language. He risked his credibility amongst blacks by calling for them for being more responsible as a community and as individuals, and also staked his white votes by reminding them that the animosity of racial discrimination still haunted the poorest of America’s communities. He has won by talking to the people and not at them. Credit it to his rhetoric, ideas or just youthful energy but he has made young Americans believe that they can change the way the nation is governed by casting their ballots. It’s no surprise that his win has come on the back of large voter turnout and that many first time voters went with him. Young men and women are more perceptive to the happenings around them, more aware of their surroundings and across the world more and more cynical about their political systems and the vested interests that govern them. Obama has made them believe in the political process and that is an achievement in itself.

But make no mistakes; this is not a rout as the Electoral College vote will tell you. Obama has won a 52-47 popular vote mandate, which still reflects a nation with two halfs at odds with each other. In his book ‘The Audacity of Hope’, Obama talks of how President Bush was emboldened and gung ho after a 51-49 victory over John Kerry in 2004 and how the White House had forgotten that there was a section of America that hadn’t voted for it. In his acceptance speech, Obama talked of being a President also for those whose support he had not won; of listening to his people, particularly when they disagreed with him. He would need to live up to his word, for in a Washington now set to be ruled by Democrats, a humble and gracious President would need to engage in dialogue to overcome the bipartisanship that he mentions as disturbing in his experiences. Obama, the author, critiques how ‘we paint our faces blue and red and cheer our side and boo the other; and if takes a cheap shot or a late hit to win the game then so be it, for it seems that winning is all that matters.’ An Obama presidency will need to avoid the same pitfalls.

It would not be wrong to say that in this moment America needed an Obama as president more than he needed the seat himself; simply because of the message it sends to the world. I am not a romantic and don’t think that America’s problems will be solved in his tenure but Obama’s election signals a shift of view point in America. It signals a break from old prejudices, from hidden biases of the ‘Bradley Effect’, from the Guns, God and Gays rhetoric of the neo-right. But more importantly it symbolizes an electorate willing to choose ability over identity – the very principle of foundation of the American nation. And as the demography of the United States increasingly yields more space to the non-whites, a new generation will hopefully not be entrapped by their limited visions and dare to look beyond.

But is Obama a socialist and an uncomfortable President for India? If he succumbs to the protectionist and non-proliferation lobbies of the Democrats, then maybe but so far he has demonstrated to be his own man. In his book Obama devotes a chapter to ‘Opportunity’ and opines on big government and globalization. He mentions how ‘the conservative revolution that Ronald Reagan helped usher in gained traction because Reagan’s central insight – that the liberal welfare state had grown complacent and overly bureaucratic with Democrats more concerned with slicing the economic pie than enlarging it – contained a good deal of truth.’
He further states that ‘America can’t compete with China and India simply by cutting costs and shrinking government - unless we are willing to tolerate a drastic decline in our living standards. Nor can America compete by simply erecting trade barriers and raising minimum wage - unless we are willing to confiscate all the computers of the world. We don’t have to choose between an oppressive, government run economy and a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism. Like those who came before us, we should be asking what mix of policies will lead to dynamic free market, widespread economic security, entrepreneurial innovation and upward mobility…. Let us begin with those investments that can make America more competitive in the global economy – in education, science, technology and energy independence.’

These to me are hardly the words of a socialist, much less a protectionist. Obama has displayed an understanding of Pakistan and its equation with India and Afghanistan. It will be up to South Block to appraise the latest US President of Indian concerns and apprehensions. The world’s largest democracy should be able to hold its own irrespective of any White House occupant. Will he be a friend of India? Given Obama’s respect for democracy, dialogue, tolerance and natural justice, I can stick my neck out and say a confident yes.

Barack Obama has talked about the need for a ‘deliberative democracy’, to understand ‘that we must talk and reach common understandings precisely because all of us are imperfect and can never act with the certainty that God is on our side; and yet at time we must act nonetheless, as if we are certain, protected from error only by providence.’

The world awaits Barack Obama…..Hope and Dreams wait in the shadows, packing their bags for a journey ahead.

|

I was at the Ferozshah Kotla last Saturday as India tried their mighty best to let Michael Clarke and Australia to escape with a draw in the third test. The crowd, frustrated after the string of dropped catches, was pleading for a quick end to the Aussie innings and the only bowler on the field who seemed capable to them of doing that was Virendra Sehwag. But Anil Kumble was his usual stubborn self and in another display of perseverance kept bowling continuously from one end after tea. Amit Mishra was at the other end and seeing no sign of their beloved Sehwag the chanting for a change started in the stands. But it was a strange kind of chanting. It was more an entreaty, a pleading request to an elder brother to kindly pass the ball to his younger one. ‘Kumble bhai’, went the leader of the chant, ‘please yaar…samajh yaar, Viru ko de yaar please’. In my almost two decades of watching cricket, I have heard people comment in varied hues on different Indian cricketers. Most of them have been lauded on their successes and mercilessly beaten down on their failures. Even the great Sachin Tendulkar, while growing above the game for most Indian fans, has not been spared of accusations of batting selfishly for his hundreds and failing to perform in fourth innings of test matches. One man who has been spared of all accusations and critiques by the general public has been the quiet and hardworking Anil Kumble. Cricket journalists and ex players may have questioned his ability to spin the ball (stupidly in my opinion, when there was already a precedent of a fast and zipping leg spinner taking more than 200 test wickets in Chandrasekhar) but for the average Indian cricket fan on the street Anil Kumble has been a synonym for trust and reliance. Dravid may have lost his form, Ganguly may have been erratic, Sachin may have compromised belligerence for quiet run gathering but Kumble was still the same as he started out – economical, at the batsman and accurate. To understand the importance of Kumble you have to turn the clock back to mid and late 90s. Before Harbhajan burst on the scene and Indian cricket enjoyed a diversity of pace bowling riches, Kumble was both a stock and strike bowler for his captain. After the opposition’s opening batsmen had laid into Srinath and Prasad, both Azhar and Tendulkar would invariably turn to Kumble. On innumerable occasions, Kumble was the man Indian captains looked towards for blunting the impact of the likes of Jayasuriya, Aravinda De Silva, Saeed Anwar, Aamir Sohail and Adam Gilchrist. Coming on within the first 15 overs with field restrictions, Kumble relished the challenge and would immediately plug the flow of runs. While the other Indian bowlers would have economy rates of tending towards or in excess of 5 an over, Jumbo would walk away with a dignified number of 3 an over against his name. In many games his spell was the difference between a total of 280-290 and a chaseable 250 (remember this was mid to late 90s, before the 300 + chase became an achievable rather than an unlikely possibility).

If he lived with one albatross around his neck, it was that of not being able to take wickets on foreign shores. He responded in the only way he knew best – through hard work and perseverance of effort. Over the years he shortened his run up, raised his jump to exploit his height for bounce and added a crafty googly and a turning leg spinner to his repertoire. He buried the ‘non-performer at overseas tag’ with two sterling displays – the first in Australia in the winter of 2003 where he was the most successful Indian bowler (24 wickets from 3 tests at 29 runs apiece) and in Pakistan in the historic tour of 2004 (15 wickets from 3 tests at 25 apiece). And yet, despite his limitations, Kumble perhaps like his spinning counterpart Muralitharan remained a solo match winner for India for a long duration. His impeccable record at home underscores his importance again in a period when pace bowling had not yet started winning games for the country. He needed no certificates from the media boxes – there were ample batsmen to vouch for his trouble making abilities. None more so than Stephen Waugh, no less a persevering batsman himself. He credited Kumble with being at the bat all the time with each and every delivery. And every word of that appreciation was true. You only had to watch him bowl that first delivery to Hayden at the Kotla in the second innings to realize that Waugh wasn’t exaggerating. A fizzing leg spinner that was in line with the stumps and almost sneaked through to trap the batsman in front.

Anil Kumble retires like few Indian cricketers have in recent memory – with hardly any qualifications in his record and mutual respect and admiration from everyone around him. He retires an achiever all right but without any pretensions. He retires a team man to the core, his place safely reserved in history as the best to ever hold that red cherry in his hand with an India cap on.

I had planned on writing a farewell for Sourav Ganguly at the end of series after he had played his last test innings. Anil Kumble’s retirement now demands a packaged farewell for both. Not that Ganguly’s achievements are any less diminishing in Indian cricket. Statistics will tell you that he has been the most successful Indian captain. India’s results and style of cricket in the 21st century will tell you that he has undisputedly been the best Indian captain. You cannot even give Ganguly the gift of being ‘at the right place at the right time.’ If anything, he took over Indian cricket when it was at its lowest trough, post the match fixing saga. Sourav not only had to deliver results but also restore credibility, and the second task, as any incumbent politician will tell you can be quite a daunting one. Ganguly’s contribution lies not just in bringing a sense of ‘in your face’ confidence in the way India conducted themselves in the field (he staked his personal reputation on this by frequently getting into arguments with opposition captains and match referees) but also in the way he nurtured a talented crop of youngsters who shall take over the torch from his generation. Harbhajan would surely have been a Sikh migrant sitting in the US today had Sourav not insisted on his inclusion in 2001 and Yuvraj, Zaheer and Dhoni all made their debuts under him.

In the midst of all this appreciation of his captaincy, one almost forgets that Sourav was a tremendously talented one day batsmen. He formed the most successful opening pair with Tendulkar and brought the similar aggression to his batting by frequently hitting bowlers over infield to get India going. His test innings of Lord’s and Brisbane are frequently cited but he also dug deep and bailed India out of trouble during the series in South Africa in 2006 and England in the following year. To say that Sourav Ganguly reflected the ‘New India’ is to overstate a cliché, but he definitely changed the way India shaped up towards other teams in the cricketing world. His tenure marked Indian cricket matching its performance on the field with its clout in the money stakes. He took an India languishing near the bottom and left it sniffing the soil of the top. As he retires, Sourav may well thank Dravid and Laxman for that incredible day at the Eden Gardens in 2001 which changed the fortunes of his captaincy. Had India lost that game and the series with it, Sourav whose off field activities liaisons were being reported daily by the media would not have carried on at the helm much longer and Indian cricket would perhaps have not seen the rise which that ‘come from the dead’ victory over Australia propelled.

Shakespeare depicts King Henry V of England exhorting his soldiers at the Battle of Agincourt by stating that whosoever shed his blood in battle would be his brother that day and together their army would constitute a ‘Band of Brothers’. Sourav Ganguly created a merry band of his own, one that effectively changed the standing of his Indian team in the cricketing battlefields that they took to.

|

The Pauper poetry below is in response to Tony Sebastian’s ‘Nash –ty poetry’ a couple of days back. I started by writing out a comment on his blog but then could not control my instincts and decided to put this stuff here. Sir Tony would not mind – free publicity never hurts :)

Young lad Tony wanted to explore
Perform some sin and make a roar
Sadly for him the times weren’t right
And his stock crashed before its flight

The lad decided to give up the carnal
And take to singing with the nasal
But alas that space was taken too
And young Tony could only sing in the loo

He then ventured to emulate Nash
Write some poetry and earn some cash
So he took on the veggie food
And left the conservatives in a fowl mood
Corrupting our religion and our kids, now they say
Throw him into the sambhar sea and show others the way!

Tony knew he may have bitten too much
And now pleaded as such
‘I only wanted to see some action
Alas my drivers suffer from too much traction
I thought I would indulge
And give myself a little bulge
Now I am swimming in spicy seas
Surrounded by potatoes and peas
I am now ready to wear a halter
But do not sacrifice me on this alter
Spare me the misery and get me out
And I promise never to raise a shout
Only allow me a little bite
Chicken during the day and sen-sex at night!’

|

There is something about the vanishing of a large global corporation that makes everyone sit up and take notice. It’s akin to the sinking of the Titanic – something that is considered huge, grand, unassailable and unsinkable. Not just because of its own size but more so because of the quality of minds powering it. But Titanics are mostly victims of their own inflated self, and in their high, long term, grand vision of their crownests often ignore that creeping iceberg that lies beneath the surface and inflicts unmitigated damage to their shells. Step into New York today and you will see a Titanic at every corner, some already confined to the waves of history, some struggling to stay afloat and hunting desperately for lifeboats. And sadly, these behemoths are not just confined to the Wall Street alone. Bigger, larger and grander Titanics across the globe are hearing that creaking sound in their hulls – a sound of metal breaking and a potential flood waiting to crash in.

The crisis, as everyone from Delhi to Dallas, tells you is one of liquidity and confidence. Or well a lack of them. In very crude layman terms, its about people borrowing huge sums of money and being not able to repay them. In a bid to stave off their hungry lenders, as they run around to borrow more, they are summarily dismissed by other lenders who now have no confidence in their ability to generate earnings from the money sought. I would add one more word to the description in the line above. In effect, this is a crisis of credibility. Credibility of banks, brokers, traders, speculators, merchant bankers and their ilk. And this sadly is a strong indictment on those running these institutions. Those ‘quality minds’ who exit the hallowed lawns of the brightest B-schools and then enter the bull ring of our financial markets. The knife twists further into the flesh when one realizes that the Balance Sheets that went broke were of those for which the ‘best and the brightest’ from these schools chose to work for. (TT Ram Mohan has provided an insight into how the hollowness of the so called intellect of these firms and the people who inhabit them in the Economic times a couple of days ago)

Not that there haven’t been crises in the economies before. But this one has a marked difference on two principal counts. Earlier crises have been closely driven by the real economy; the brick and mortar or the tangible elements – due to sectors, companies & currencies with weak fundamentals which you could see and their inability to drive promised earnings leading to a crash of over invested money put in them. ‘Fundamentals’ is a much used word in all that we read today. Simply put, it effectively means that if you take a housing loan of Rs 60 lacs and if you possess a full time job paying you even Rs 6-7 lacs minimum in a year, your fundamentals are strong at the time of borrowing; simply because you possess the means to repay the money, albeit slowly. The current crisis though is that of the unseen or more so that of the un-understood and difficult to comprehend instruments. Even those well versed with the financial markets are finding it hard to pin point where the trouble lies in the opaque Balance Sheets of the collapsing institutions. And the final defaulting debt lying on such Balance Sheets is distanced from the real economy (in this case the house sold on the mortgage) by a significant web of complex, inter woven and hard to unravel securitized assets.

The second major difference is that of risk appetite and its assessment. Economies pass through routine cycles of booms and recessions on account of heavy investments driven by a hunger to risk big for bigger returns. What is unraveling now is a risk appetite among major investment banks and other institutions that had gone beyond the roof. Continuing with our previous example, it’s a bit like you possessing an uncertain job (or no job) and your bank stilling willing to lend those 60 lacs to you. In what economists call the ‘rational human mind’, such business with no assurance of repayment and no collateral (another asset that will cover your risk of default) or bad collaterals will simply be labeled with one word – preposterous. And yes, this is pretty much the kind of thing that was going on in the US. The ‘best of the best’ rode this bandwagon and put more money in the hands of those who did not have the means to repay it, in the hope that if the borrower defaulted the underlying house for which the loan was given would be sold at a premium and money would be recovered.

But of course, you can realize premium on the sale of one house but not when all the houses are out for sale because everyone lent money in the same reckless way as you did. The prices crash (supply exceeds demand) and you simply have nothing to cover your backside. This kind of dealing is not an illegal act but bad and greedy investment. And bad investments, as we all know, yield no returns.

Some major home truths have emerged from this crisis which should guide the response of those in the thick of the action now. First, no matter how free and competitive a market may be, you still need a strong statutory/ government regulator to bail out collapsing institutions that can have a domino effect and derail a lot more than just their immediate neighborhood. Second, bad assets WILL NOT create good earnings no matter how much ‘smart analyses’ may justify it. Third, no corporation is above board or unsinkable. The moment the fountain of money runs dry even the largest giant will find it difficult to stand tall. And fourth, its time for all the regulators to pull up their socks. One cannot prevent an investment from taking place in a bad market but tighter solvency norms and higher provisioning requirements (effectively asking institutions to park enough money for the ‘rainy days’) need to be looked at anew to barricade future such spectacular implosions.

And all the players need to ask some serious questions. The ‘smart guys’ in the banks need to reflect how such bad investments were allowed a free run. The regulators need to question their norms and whether corporate governance fulfilled its role in preventing such a rush towards manic opportunities that have resulted in a zero gum game. The auditors need to ask themselves how they missed seeing that the assets reflecting against the loans taken were nothing but pieces of papers. And investors like you and me can do well to pay attention to the dissenters like Nassim Nicholas Taleb who argue that all those experts hypothesing over the market movements daily on our televisions, perhaps simply don’t know what they are talking about.

|

Since my school days, when I started to develop an opinion on the happenings around me, I have always been critical of any attempts made to insult the intelligence of young children. I guess being adults, the distance that age puts between us and the children, makes us adopt this know-all, condescending attitude. The sophisticated name of course is ‘generation gap’. But my argument is not so much against this inevitable differing of viewpoints between two sets of people who stand at different co-ordinates of the time graph. My problem is with ignoring how the world has changed since the time we were in childhood and thinking that our kids are not smart enough. Two recent incidents reminded me of this belief and prompt these words.

My 12 year old cousin Karan lives and studies in Canada. An ice hockey and baseball freak, he isn’t too far away from his Indian roots as well. With relatives around, he takes sadistic pleasure in subjecting us all to his smattering of Hindi and Punjabi, often mixing up his tenses, phrases and expressions (‘I touch your feet’ becomes for him ‘Mein aapke pair khaata hoon’). Of course, all his Hindi is purely picked up from the television serials that his grandmother watches and which he is forced to watch as well as he waits for the commercials to catch his sports action. You might pass him off as any other North American Indian kid with his brown skin, accent and possessing knowledge of Indian customs that marriages, gurudwara trips or diwali gatherings have afforded him. But he possesses two qualities that would mark any kid out - inquisitiveness and observance. Out on a drive in the city with his parents, me and my mother, he started off on his usual trip of speaking broken, illogical Hindi. It was all fine before he suddenly turned towards my mother and asked her, ‘Aap Hindu ho yaan Punjabi?’

His mother wasn’t exactly enthused with the question and quickly responded with a ‘Karan, you don’t ask such questions.’ She turned to me and explained how schools in Canada discourage students from asking about the religious identities of those around them. At first glance, you would perfectly understand this dilemma of a newly multicultural and multi religious society. A society in which public display of religion is not common and not stressed. A secular state that would want religion to be confined only in the homes and places of worship of those who follow it. A state which perhaps believes that asking a person’s religion and acknowledging its difference from your own in the first step in societal segregation.

I must admit that at first I felt a degree of understanding towards this approach; till of course Karan came up with his response,

‘No! I am asking because agar aap Hindu ho to why don’t you have a bindi here (pointing to my mother’s forehead) and red colour (now pointing at her hair above the forehead) like all other Hindu women’

For a moment, we were all silent in the car. Karan’s dad, not exactly sympathizing earlier with his mother’s admonishment, announced triumphantly
‘See! He has a logic for his question’ And indeed he did. None of us knew where this kid had picked up concepts of vermillion and bindis. And how he had come to know its significance for a Hindu woman. His probing of religious identity was not to place a mark of segregation or assert affirmation with those around him, but simply an attempt to obtain cultural understanding. And in that sense we were all wrong to assume that his mind, even in today’s religiously charged and to an extent divided world, would function only on one dimension – a dimension of creating and not breaking walls.
I wondered later whether that tiny episode had a lesson for all us. Is denial of identity and closing of mouths to discuss it another form of segregation? Are we creating walls or breaking them when we seek to create a society where school kids are ignorant of the diversity of the cultures that they inhabit? And as liberals are we correct in being so squeamish about discussing religion with our children? Is it so hard for us to educate them and then set them on the path of moderation and tolerance? Why are we allowing Osama bin Laden and not our school teachers to introduce our children to their religion?

***********************************

The second episode relates to a 14 year old boy Siddharth, the son of one of my mother’s old friends from office. I recently visited him and by chance my curiosity forced me to have a look at his school textbooks. I was sort of making impromptu comparisons on the extent of change in the NCERT textbooks from 11 years ago when I was in the same class in which Siddharth studies today. In the middle of my exploration I chanced to lay my hands on a colorful and deftly prepared paper folder which had his details written on the face of it with some skillful crayon work.
‘My holiday homework’, informed Siddharth. ‘I had to do two book reports’. Inside were two pages of a A4 size containing his ‘book report’. I read the first one. It was on ‘Life of Pi’ by Yann Martel. As I read those five hundred odd words that he had written. I was a little amazed at the quality of the language as well at the abrupt nature of the presentation of the report. Siddharth probably sensed it,
‘I copied it from the internet’. That explained it. Schoolboy level detailing mixed with book review level kind of passages. When I asked why, he responded laconically that ‘who had the time to write so much’ and that he had done his report in the last week of his vacations. Now I am someone who really isn’t enthused about people substituting originality with Google, but I carried on as Siddharth next placed in my hands his holiday homework list. It was a bunch of 4 pages photocopied and stapled together (just the way it used to happen in my time – it seems the idea of mass computer prints is yet to strike any one in our schools). The contents of that homework did not carry any surprises for me. The only addition in the quality of the work required from the students, in the space of a decade, has come in the form of a Disaster Management project mandated by the CBSE. The holiday homework had a section for each subject. The sciences & mathematics required students to answer a set of questions which were nothing but a revision of either what they had studied before leave or would study out after leave. The social sciences and grammar subjects too could not think beyond the realms of the textbooks. In fact I was shocked to see that the Hindi homework required students to write a letter inviting their friend over to their birthday party! I remember writing such a letter when I was in class 3 and that was a good 17 years ago! Of course, in the world of CBSE, our schools and Indian education they still believe that a kid writes and posts letters to all his friends asking them to attend his birthday celebrations. The concepts of telephone and emails are as far away as the third millennium.

In short there was nothing in that bunch of papers that could have challenged Siddharth’s imagination and creativity. Perhaps the only thing that he would have enjoyed doing was preparing the cover of his book review.

What is wrong with our teachers and our schools? Why can’t we leave textbooks and courses aside for a month and a half in the year and let our kids THINK? Is it so hard to ask them to chuck their books and prepare a 5-6 page project on something that they have interest in? (Siddharth has an active liking for cars. In a brief span of twenty minutes he had given me all the gyaan about the new models hitting the Indian market). Why can’t we allow our children to be creative for once and escape the drudgery of ‘Answer the following in your own words’? I am not proposing that every kid has a fountain of creativity bubbling inside him but then is it so hard to assume that when faced with acting around a topical interest not just kids but even elder men find hidden reserves of imagination and creativity? And is it so difficult for schools to see that a diversified range of interests in their students will automatically lead to an enhancement of knowledge sharing between the kids themselves? Why are we allowing the unimaginative to recklessly suppress the imagination of our kids?

But of course these are vain questions; because from what I saw with Siddharth I was certain of one fact. Dinosaurs can reappear on our planet but to expect changes in the manner in which we teach our kids is asking for a little too much. On this teacher’s day, sample this thought.

|