Thursday, November 19, 2009

A Year Later......He Lives Another Day !

A regular midweek afternoon turns a 180 for me when I heard the news of a gang war in Mumbai last year. Even the most popular english news channel in India paid little importance to the gun shots, till after an hour the sounds became louder. It was not gang war but an uncalled for attack from infiltrators from across the border on the nations entertainment and financial capital- what is now remembered as 26/11 (analogous to the famous 9/11 attack on the twin towers in NY). 60 odd hours of gun battle,at six different locations- in one of Mumbai's affluent regions captured the worlds attention that entire Thanksgiving long weekend. That date has now etched a mark in the history books for many years to come. It’s been exactly a year since the deadly and simpleton terrorists, on the instruction of their cowardly leaders, sitting across the border, scared this great city. Many have written and debated about this horrifying incident over the past year. Bureaucrats have met, Presidents and Prime Ministers have discussed, even cricketers have interacted to reduce the tension, resolve the issue and bring the culprits to justice. But here we are, one year later sending dossiers and dossiers, answering one question after another thrown at us by our neighbors in the hope of winning their support to end this ordeal. Unfortunately the wound still remains fresh!!! I am not here to talk about those things once again and reiterate what’s going around in the media.

Out of the 10 simpletons who opened fired in Mumbai, nine met their fatal end for their so called proclaimed 40 virgins, unfortunately one 22-year old young man was seduced into the hands of the Mumbai Police and not the 40 virgins he had dreamt of ! Mohammad Ajam Kasab, the lone gun man captured, now fights for his life which was priced for a meager sum of few 100,000 rupees by his leaders, as a reward for this sinister act. Look where he is now, in a secure and highly guarded penitentiary, for a year. A YEAR? Is he still alive? Something doesn’t sound right!

I am not a lawyer or a politician and have no judgment on the processes of law; I am well aware that my brother who is on his way to be a very competitive and successful lawyer will refute my every view and logic- the difference you get by looking at it legally and emotionally. I'm sure by now most of us have seen the HBO documentary which aired legally at least in US last week. It was the entire narrative and transcript of the conversation between the terrorist and their henchmen (those who haven’t ,here is a glimpse of it http://indiaatwar.com/?p=4638). I base my judgment and anger on what I have seen and heard, very well aware of the rules of the land.

It’s been one complete year and this murderer still lives to breathe the free air of the land he colored in red. Going back in time, remember 2001, when America was introduced to the worst form of terror- it took them two month to give a reply back to the perpetrators’ literally wiping a nation from the world map. Even America didn’t possess enough proof as much as India did to take a stern action to express its anger. The link which shows this documentary has not yet been aired in India primarily due to the legal proceedings in Kasab’s case. A few years back , a similar situation occured with regards to the magnum opus- BLACK FRIDAY- based on the Mumbai blast, the case was dragged for more than a decade to come to some conclusion. An analogous fear lingers in the minds of the people thinking about 26/11. My question is why, why such a delay in bringing the accused and guilty to justice? In Kasab's case there is proof from surveillance cameras, interrogation reports and eye witnesses which buttress this case and clearly spell one judgment –GUILTY AS CHARGED. But in spite of all this, after 365 days , Ajmal Kasab lives another day. Unless India does not shed away its soft stands on terrorism, many such Kasabs will grow in our neighbor’s poor cities and villages, eventually haunting us to death.

In my view, and my view only, I would support the establishment of a special court at par with the privileges of the Supreme Court to tackle with only terrorism related cases. Such a court will hopefully expedite the cases at a faster rate than presiding at state level or apex courts. A verdict from such a court should lawfully prevents it from a mercy plea which will not stall the execution of terrorists like Afzal Guru who used this judiciary loop hole in the system to halt the execution of his sentence. Another issue which slowed the proceedings of Kasabs case was the appointment of a lawyer. Why do we need a defense lawyer? Who is he going to defend? A terrorist and murderer who the world has seen committing a heinous crime like 26/11? We put the lawyer life and career on the line, who is either obligated or forced to defend a case which he knows from day one is a lost cause. Remember the attack on the female lawyer by political party workers in Mumbai for agreeing to defend Kasab- not because she wanted to, but because that was the only way the case would begin. Some may even try to twist the case for sensationalism- remember the defense lawyers statement on Kasab being a minor! Well that one point almost got him off the hook. We should appoint such defendants (ironically choice of word) lawyers only to narrate the charge-sheet, explain the proceeding of the case and finally the last judgment of his life! One might refute at this junction clinging to the point – ‘innocent until proven guilty’. Don’t we already know what and who Kasab and Afzal Guru are? Haven’t they already confessed and proved themselves to the world with their actions?

The government of India can continue its diplomatic effort with its neighbors and international society to win support, but terrorism in a problem in our neighborhood which is spreading into our house if not dealt with aggression. India cannot fight the terror in the world alone, but it can show its determination and robustness by asserting its stand firmly on how it intends to deal with this problem and the creators of this problem.

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Linguistic Supremacy

After years of struggle from the British Raj which united a nation of diverse individuals, today this very diversity seems to be slowly poisoning the spirit of unity among Indians. India has seen internal conflicts on the bases on religion, culture, poverty etc. but overlooked the silent propaganda of linguistic prominence. After more than 60 years since Independence, in an era of technological and economic supremacy, we are being distracted by linguistic supremacy. One may ask, what is linguistic supremacy? And I would define it in view of the contemporary scenario as “An attempt to revive and preserve regionalism and cultural nexus in 21st century INDIA”.

Unfortunately this so called revolution is not similar to the freedom struggle carried out by scholars and patriots, but by power hungry and electoral vultures, who are singing the songs of linguistic patriotism to fulfill their personal and political ambition. Rise of regional politicians in Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh etc, are currently driving this issue all the way to their warm seats either in the national parliament or state assembly.

India is a land of more than thousand languages with the Indian constitution recognizing HINDI as the official language ( acc to Official Language Act of 1965- corrected by my brother from my previous statement of calling HINDI as the national language) and 18 other regional state languages. The issue of what should be its national language was under debate post independence, which the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru settled the quandary between English and Hindi in a very contentious manner. This insulted many Dravidian leaders, provoking and instigating an Anti-Hindi agitation by the Tamils. Today many, like the Tamil DMK party, have grown with a sole agenda to propagate their regional language and culture- The MNS and Shiv Sena in Maharashtra, the SP in Uttar Pradesh, the Kannada Chalavali Vatal Paksha in Karnataka, to name a few.

The 2004 movement by the Karnataka Film Industry to delay release of Hindi Cinemas by 4 weeks to promote regional Kannada films, last year’s anti-North Indian movement by the nascent MNS in a multi-cultural metro like Mumbai against non-marati speaking migrants from UP and Bihar, the failed legislation of only licensing educational institutions which make Kannada the language of education, the conversion sign boards to regional scripts, forceful conversion of all official documents to only regional languages etc are just few of the most absurd actions taken to promote the spirit of linguistic patriotism. The most recent incident which caught my attention was the assault of a prominent regional leader taking oath to office in the national language by other political leaders who narrated the oath in the regional language. Have we stooped so low that we are forcefully trying to instill in people this so called regionalist / linguistic feeling?

I personally respect one’s personal preference of their own regional language. I am proud to be a Kannadiga and also take pride in speaking my language but do I have the right to force that pride into someone? The legislator who was assaulted hails from a state which has Hindi as its regional language. Was he wrong in speaking in a language he is comfortable in? Many of India’s national leaders from the south do not even speak Hindi, is that considered offensive towards national pride? For five years the nation’s first citizen, the President of India did not utter a word of Hindi in all his national addresses, why didn’t anyone create a ruckus then? But there are extremes also to this cause, such the Anti-Hindi MNS chief, who doesn’t talk any other language in ‘public’ except his mother tongue, in an attempt to show solidarity towards the language, when his children are studying in English medium schools learning French and German. How about the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, who holds the tag of being a true proponent of the Tamil cause; he has educated his children in reputed English medium universities. To add to this list are also Pro-Hindi and Anti English politicians from the northern state of India, Uttar Pradesh, who educated his children in international universities. Why such a hypocrisy when it comes to one's own kin?

In a country where inter-national migration is highest, how can linguistic dominance find any takers? When an aspiring software engineer from north moves to Bangalore or Hyderabad to fulfill his ambition, how will he or she feel welcomed when they are shoved with documents in either Kannada or Telugu? How will they commute when the number and destinations on intercity buses is in regional script? How will they read commercial boards when they are in a medium alien to them? If this continues to happens, migration will comes to a standstill, dramatically constraining not only India's but also the state's economical and social growth. Why is it that these linguistic politicians do not recognize this issues? Yes, I must assert myself here saying that “when in Rome be like a Roman”- one should learn the medium of language they are surrounded by in due course fo time but should have the freedom to communicate in the language they are comfortable in. I believe the acceptance of bilingual or even trilingual schemes which facilitates communication in regional, national and English should satisfy these linguistic patriots- or will it ?

In an age when India is competing with countries like China, Russia and Brazil for technological and economic significance, one factor which makes us stand out among the crowd is our linguistic abilities. Fluency in national and regional language along with English has enabled young India to migrate to various parts of the country and the world conquering new horizons. In such a rat race, we cannot afford to indulge ourselves in linguistic dominance ignoring nationalistic spirit of progress. Every Indian should be aware and proud of his culture and language; and also have the freedom to express himself by means comfortable and satisfactory to oneself without being radically forced by hypocritical and unconvincing principles.