After half a century

50 YEARS OF INDIAN REPUBLIC: M. K. Santhanam; Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, Patiala House, New Delhi-110001.

Rs. 580.

GOLDEN JUBILEE reminiscences are, as a rule, ``commemorative panegyrics'' according to Mr. L. M. Singhvi, one of the contributors to the volume under review. Completion of 50 years is an apt occasion for an assessment of the past and a call for the future by expert observers, experienced administrators and scholars. Happily, in this volume, there are critical articles too, alongside self-congratulatory ones.

In a no-holds barred review, former Foreign Secretary, Mr. Dixit, recalls a shift in foreign policy from the days of Lal Bahadur Shastri. Earlier, in Nehru's era, it was marked by ``romantic illusions and moral idealism''. Mr. Dixit highlights six major failures. They are: our taking the Kashmir issue to the U.N. even as our troops were neutralising the Pakistani invasion, a lukewarm, half-hearted protest against Pakistan's military pacts with the U.S., underestimating the possibility of a Sino- Pakistan nexus in Bandung in 1955; our acquiescence when China took over Tibet; our failure to develop nuclear weapons before China became a nuclear power in 1964; and failure to exercise the nuclear option in the late 1980s when Pakistan was going nuclear. In an interesting but intriguing revelation, he recalls that the U.S. had urged India to become a nuclear weapon power in the early 1960s and even assured assistance: but India was not interested in the offer. The seasoned diplomat is happy that our recent nuclear power status has balanced off the critical impact our hesitation and reticence made on our defence and foreign policies in the last 50 years. He cautions that it was Nehru's international and moral statures which got India a say in world affairs which was disproportionate to our economic, political and social strength and to continue to expect such global appeal and standing will be Narcissism.

Eminent jurist and M.P., Mr. Singhvi, feels that the task of the Supreme Court is unenviable in our overlegislated country where the laws are under-administered. He is objective enough to observe: ``Sometimes, the Supreme Court was wrong and sometimes the Executive and the Legislature had clearly overshot the mark. Neither of them had a monopoly of error or of wisdom.'' Thanks to the Supreme Court, the minority view in the 1950 A.K. Gopalan's case that ``law meant due process of law'' is now the axiomatic unanimity of all and natural justice has been duly entrenched, sanctified and canonised. While he acknowledges that public interest litigation has enriched and enlarged the observance of human rights, he also rightly hastens to caution that we should not allow it to be misused by persons and corporate entities to settle private scores, using pliable individuals or NGOs as a front.

The essay on poverty alleviation reveals that though over 50 million rural families have been assisted under the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), which covers almost the entire rural poor, only a small proportion of such families have crossed the poverty line on a sustainable basis. Among the many programmes, repeatedly restructured, only the Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (JRY) has yielded promising results thanks to elected panchayats and adequate transparency. Unless permanent assets accrue, such programmes will not have enduring impact. Social audit by Gram Sabhas, control of population, education and empowerment of rural people and less officious governments will ensure success.

Articles on Indian sports and arts and the electoral system are factual and informative, giving a record of work done so far. Dr. Gill cites a recent Supreme Court judgment by which, unless the political parties specifically account for the money spent on a candidate, such expenditure will be treated as part of the individual ceiling. Some views on state funding of elections would have been welcome.

Dr. Srinivasan laments the lack of scientific temper among Indians. Modern science and technology should be harnessed to improve our quality of life and standards of living and the paradox of capacity to build atomic power stations alongside the inability to provide safe drinking water or sanitation is a shame which should be erased.

Though a government publication, quite a few contributions are reasonably objective and critical.

A. S. PADMANABHAN

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Previous : 'Mata Hari of the tax world'
Next     : Media-driven marketing