Regional leaders need to prioritise loyalties
between May 21 and May 31, 1991, India had to send 67 tonnes of gold to two international banks — 47 tonnes was pledged with the Bank of England and the remaining 20, with Union Bank of Switzerland. India had to raise $2.20 billion to escape the ultimate humiliation — a nation that had failed to meet its international commitments.
That was in 1991. Today, in 2013, the country has given $5 billion in aid to African countries. It has contributed $10 billion to the International Monetary Fund to help tackle the Euro crisis. Sure enough, the country is now seen as a nation on the rise and, therefore, demands respect. From a dollar seeker, India has turned into a dollar giver. From a foodgrains seeker, it is now a food giving nation.
Dalits, too, appear to be doing better today as compared to what their forefathers had to endure. There are instances where Dalit youth are acceptable as grooms by non-Dalit women. Food hierarchies are breaking down as food sources are increasingly becoming common. Machines have replaced manual work. Mechanisation of agriculuture is sowing seeds of modernity in villages. Jeans and T-shirts have come to replace the traditional dhoti-kurta.
But while things are looking bright for a nation on the rise, there are some problems that the nation is facing. These problems are unfortunately, State and region-centric. For the first time in India’s written history, loyalty to the country has become secondary. In other words, should a person from Tamil Nadu have his loyalties for his State first or IndiaIJ
Can there be a more cruel group than the lTTE which plotted to assassinate a nation’s Prime Minister and get away with itIJ What can be a bigger joke than lTTE supporters talking of human rights! Is there any terrorist outfit as cruel as the lTTEIJ Sure, Taliban comes to mind.
But coming back to loyalties. Why are Tamil parties giving priority to the plight of Tamils in Sri lanka instead of supporting the country. It is the people from Tamil Nadu who have to think why they are electing leaders for whom Tamil Nadu comes first and India only next.
Moving towards the north. What is so special about BiharIJ Many people left their State for a better life elsewhere. I was in Kohima recently and saw many workers from Bihar. The State doesn’t exist today as a viable State without India. What is the future of Bihar if States like Maharashtra, Punjab, Haryana and Gujarat ban the entry of workers from BiharIJ
For Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, her State West Bengal is India. Bengal has no neighboring State because there is no other State in the country other than her own. The same holds true for Uttar Pradesh. The Chief Minister of this State comes to Delhi to seek grants. But the UP Government is against Foreign Direct Investment in retail. Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav has threatened to burn down Wal Mart if the American retail giant enters UP. This is because the State is against the mall culture, against industrialisation and against acquisition of farmland for SEZs. The State, in a nutshell, is against wealth building and generating revenues. Ironically, the State wants a special package of Rs94000 crore from the Centre. For the UP Chief Minister, the State comes first and India second.
There are other leaders like former UP Chief Minister Mayawati and Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar who prefer Hindi over English. Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi prefers Gujarati over English. Has anyone heard DMK chief Karunanidhi speak in any language other than TamilIJ Popular with voters, Modi compares India with Gujarat, as does Nitish with Bihar.
let us examine India and its foreign policy. Does India have any standing in the DMK or the AIADMKIJ Should these parties have any say when it comes to India’s stand on Sri lankaIJ Should the political parties in J&K decide what stand should India take PakistanIJ Regional parties and States are ruled by caste and are necessary in a democratic set-up like ours. The only reason why these parties come into existence is because the main political parties fail to live up to the aspirations of many.
But this doesn’t mean that these parties have the right to have a say in the nation’s foreign policy without ensuring that India is their priority and not their own State. State-based parties are region-centric and have no national perspective. These parties can’t see beyond their boundaries. leaders of these parties rarely visit other States.
So, the onus of electing the right kind of people rests with the public. Should they elect a representative for whom India comes second or do they want a leader who takes pride in being an Indian firstIJ