|
Ram Puniyani |
Ram Puniyani
The withdrawal of
invitation for Narendra Modi to speak at Wharton Business School of
Pennsylvania (March 2013) has been looked at in different ways by different
commentators. Those who are opposing the invitation withdrawal, point out
that it is a violation of the norms of freedom of speech. They say that Modi
is an elected person in Indian system and his views on development of Gujarat
under his leadership need to be heard by the people from business
circles. Those opposing his invitation argue that inviting him is like
giving legitimacy to his total record. His role in Gujarat violence, his
failure to prevent the carnage and give justice to the violence victims
cannot be delinked from his so called development. They point out that as far
as debating and engaging with Modi is concerned it cannot be achieved by
inviting him as a key note speaker; this invitation already gives a high
pedestal and recognition to him. He should be interrogated, engaged and
debated with on different forums which give equal ground to those wanting to
debate with him.
They also point that
Gujarat’s development is a lopsided one, it is projected more than what the
reality is. In Gujarat the levels of malnutrition, child and maternal
mortality is higher, Gujarat is comparatively low on human growth index. The
anti SC/ST atrocity cases are one index of human rights record of the state.
In taking these cases of atrocities against SC/ST Gujarat is lowest on the rung,
with only 25% convictions. According to analysts the growth of Gujarat is
more of propaganda as many other states have done much better during this
period. The lowest in the scale of development in Gujarat are minorities and
SC/STs.
Modi was invited by the
students of Wharton to speak on Gujarat’ development. After this a few
Professors circulated a petition asking for withdrawal of the invitation.
Within just few hours the petition got a massive response and was signed not
only by the professors, many others: alumni, the students, doctor’s lawyers
and other stake holders also supported the petition. The large number of
signatures and the logic which the petition put forward clinched the issue
and students, who are the ones to decide, withdrew the invitation.
The United States has
denied VISA to Narendra Modi since 2005, despite his being an elected Chief
Minister of the state. The Commonwealth countries so far have been keeping
him at arm’s length, but after his third victory, these countries want to mend
the relationship with him, as his projection as the Prime Ministerial
candidate are floating around in a strong manner. US had denied him VISA for
his role in the carnage of 2002, and the denial continues. Similarly
due to popular pressure after sustained campaigns; the activists groups
succeeded in stopping the huge dollar funding from US to the RSS affiliate
‘India Development Relief Fund’ was collecting huge amounts and supporting
the political work of RSS combine in the garb of cultural work. This RSS
combine’s work is essentially to build up Hatred against minorities, through
its various organizations.
While one is aware about
the role of America in the promotion of politics of terror, in the formation
of Al Qaeda in particular, while it is also known that US is out to attack
other countries to promote its political-economic interests, at the same time
there are various norms which different wings of American state follow. There
are various civic norms which are stringent and are aimed to sustain and
promote democratic values. The Civil society has also been campaigning to use
this space, democratic-liberal one provided by these provisions of US system
and try to stop the violation of human rights and retrograde activities in
different places. This is a contradictory situation. The state by and large
in its foreign affairs is like a Big Brother, violating all the laws of
international behavior and laws and intimidating the smaller powers. There is
no doubt about its role in international affairs, as a super power; it is
undermining the global democracy; it has mauled the emerging global democracy
amongst nations, which was getting expressed through rising clout of United
Nations, has been sabotaged by US in particular. As a state it has promoted dictators
and has been thick as thief with different dictators and autocrats.
At another level, the
civic society has come up steeped in civility with respect for the norms of
modern democracies, to some extent. So we see the dichotomous processes going
on here. It is due to this pressure of prevailing norms and civil society
campaigns that US is denying Visa to Modi. Is this denial of Visa to Modi an
insult to our country? No way. It just shows us the mirror of the state of
affairs in our country. Many a US bodies do keep monitoring phenomenon like,
Religious freedom in other countries. Many of them keep making a list of
terrorist organizations. All this monitoring is showing the diversities of
our societies. In the same set up we are seeing two contradictory
phenomenons.
Coming back to Modi,
Wharton student’s body has gone more by the norms of civil society; has
recognized that Modi may be claiming and many others may be buying his story
of development, but the truth lies somewhere else. The petitioners opposing
the Modi invite correctly point out that Human rights issues and development
cannot be separated. As far as Modi being a democratically elected
person is concerned, the analysts can point out that his victory has been
based on his politics of polarization, not on the inclusive politics. He has
successfully scared the majority community about the threat of minority
community. This goes on and on to make the foundations of his victory and
there by his followers claiming that he has been elected, so all is well.
Only thing they ignore at this point is that even Hitler had come to power
through democratic means.
As far as his development
is concerned it is de facto the development of industrial houses. One such
industrialist, Adani, was the sponsor of Wharton meet. He withdrew his
sponsorship the moment invitation to Modi was withdrawn. Modi’s mode of
‘development’ means giving all freebees to Tata, Adanai, Ambani and company
while the poor one’s are getting more marginalized. This invitation being taken
back just reflects that Modi’s propaganda has been punctured and a reminder
that the violation of human rights violation of the weak cannot be exonerated
at any cost.
The contents of the article rest on the author.
|