Why does India breed so many traitors?

Why does India breed so many traitors?

(http://www.sify.com/news/why-does-india-breed-so-many-traitors-news-columns-qd3cvCeiadfdc.html)

Major General Mrinal Suman

While studying Indian history in school days, one was repeatedly told that the foreign invaders resorted to ‘divide and rule’ policy to gain control over India. They were painted as unscrupulous schemers who exploited the simple, trusting and gullible Indians.

It is only at a much later stage that one realised the hollowness of the above assertion. The truth is that we are adept at producing hordes of traitors who revel in India’s ruin. Every victory of the foreign invaders was facilitated by the local collaborators who betrayed their kings for some devious reward or to settle personal scores. No fort was ever conquered without the infidelity of a trusted minister/commander.

Unfortunately, centuries of slavery has taught us nothing. We carry on spawning throngs of people who can stoop down to any level (even imperil national security) for their petty gains. Our leaders, media and intellectuals appear to have a single point agenda: how to generate innovative issues to keep the nation divided and embroiled in petty bickering and internal dissentions; and thereby impede progress and bring a bad name to the country. They abhor India’s rise. Let me elucidate. 

First, the leaders: they are the fountainhead of all fissiparous tendencies. For them, vote bank politics take precedence over everything else. One does not have to be a visionary to predict the danger of abetting illegal migration from Bangladesh for garnering votes. But unscrupulous political leaders carry on unconcerned.

One hangs one’s head in shame when political leaders extend their support to a delinquent student leader who seeks destruction of India. Comparing him with martyr Bhagat Singh is by far the most perfidious act.  

Perhaps, India is the only country that has an ignominious track record of producing Home Ministers who revelled in shaming the country. One concocted theories of saffron terrorism to please his party bosses. In so doing, he presented a convenient propaganda tool to Pakistan. Another Home Minister did the unthinkable. He declared a terrorist to be innocent in an affidavit to the court. The aim was to ensnare the opposition leaders in a false case. Sadly, India’s intelligence gathering apparatus suffered immense damage in the process.

When a leader declares ‘it's safer to be a cow than to be a Muslim in India today’, he puts the whole country to shame. The world media flashes such headlines with sinister pleasure. India’s image takes a terrible beating. Just to score a brownie point against the government, he presents a convenient propaganda handle to the hostile forces. How low can a leader stoop!

Recently, a renowned advocate and a former law minister told a TV channel that shouting slogans for the destruction of the country is not debarred in the constitution. According to him, freedom of expression was of paramount importance. Even demand for secession (azadi) was justified. As the interview progressed, one was not only amazed by his perverted reasoning but also shocked to see the brazenness with which he was arguing. Survival of India appeared to be of no concern to him. One wondered if one was watching an Indian or a Pakistani channel.

Secondly, the media personnel: the less said the better. From their conduct, it appears that many of them are foreign plants and India means little to them. When a leading media house invited a vicious and remorseless enemy like General Pervez Musharraf and groveled before him, it marked the lowest depths of shamelessness to which journalism could sink. Instead of castigating him for the Kargil war, he was treated as a peace loving guest.

Both the electronic and the print media never report ‘positives’ about the country. Ugly India sells (a la ‘Slumdog Millionaire’); and not progressive India. Remember how a TV reporter failed to digest the popularity of Modi in the US and tried to incite the crowd with provocative remarks. But then they get paid to demean India, and not to extol it.

Immense damage is also being inflicted on the unity of the country by the media through its Machiavellian and skewed reporting. Every news item is deliberately reported with a religious, caste or creed slant – ‘a dalit girl molested in a Delhi bus’ (as if other women are not molested in Delhi buses) or ‘church guard killed’ (in reality an argument between two security guards had turned violent) or ‘Muslim driver runs over a boy’ (as if his being a Muslim is of any relevance). Recently, in a case of cattle stealing, a leading newspaper could not resist the temptation to add that ‘one of the five thieves is learnt to have had connections with a cow protection group in the past’. How cunningly, a simply case of robbery was given a communal taint.

Petty vandals are given the coverage befitting a mass leader. It was obnoxious to see two TV channels airing their interviews with a student leader charged with sedition. The worst was the indulgent demeanour of the TV anchors; as if a national hero was being eulogised. The interviews were repeatedly telecast at prime time. Did these channels think of interviewing war heroes or martyrs’ families? Forget it; that would have been a pro-India act and that is an act of sacrilege for them.

Thirdly, the self-proclaimed secular intelligentsia: it has done the maximum damage to India’s prestige and standing. Some of them appear to be fifth columnists masquerading as progressive intellectuals. In which country of the world would the intelligentsia write to the US government not to receive their Prime Minister? Honestly, it is simply loathsome: duly elected representative of 1.25 billion Indians being subjected to indignities by a shameless bunch of foreign-educated and foreign-paid anti-national elements. Unfortunately, their protests get huge publicity abroad, thereby undermining all efforts to raise India’s standing in the world forum.   

It can be said with certainty that the well-orchestrated campaign of intolerance was totally malicious in intent. The sole objective was to stall all progressive reforms by tarnishing the image of the government. How else can anti-nationalism be defined? As expected, having dented India’s reputation, sold-out media chose to ignore the true facts as they emerged. 

Hundreds of Christians, led by the church leaders, marched in protest on the roads of Delhi against the alleged vandalism of churches and a theft in a Christian school. Routine cases of petty crimes were cited to suggest an anti-minority conspiracy. They ensured extensive coverage of their protests by the foreign and Indian media, thereby damaging India’s secular image. Foreign channels are only too eager to shame India. Unwisely, even Obama got carried away with his uncalled for advice, losing considerable goodwill in India. Reportedly, he said so on the prodding of an Indian leader. 

   

Soldiers and the national symbols: the national flag, the national anthem and the national salutations are representative of a country’s national identity and pride. They symbolise ancient heritage, current challenges and future aspirations. For soldiers, their sanctity is incontestable.

Thousands of soldiers have sacrificed their lives to plant our tricolour on the enemy strongholds, thereby earning the ultimate honour of having their bodies draped in the national flag.

Notes of the national anthem make every soldier get goose pimples. The response is instantaneous and the effect is electrifying. Even in their homes, they stand up with their families when the national anthem is played on TV during Independence/Republic Day ceremonies.

Similarly, national salutations like ‘Hindustan Zindabad’, ‘Jai Hind’ and ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ make adrenalin surge through their bodies. The salutations act as a rallying call to inspire the soldiers for the ultimate sacrifice. All military functions conclude with full-throated renditions of ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’.

Therefore, the current controversy regarding national salutations is highly painful to the soldiers. They fail to understand as to how an Indian can have difficulty in hailing the country. How can ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ be assigned religious overtones.

Finally: History stands testimony to the fact that a nation infested with the virus of treachery, deceitfulness and perfidy has always been an easy prey for foreign subjugation. No one knows this bitter truth better than India. Yet, our leaders, media and intelligentsia keep discrediting and harming the country through their seditious utterances and activities. Under the garb of freedom of speech, they support those felonious speakers who vow not to rest till India is destroyed.

When Paris was hit by the terrorist attacks, the whole country gave a unified response. Compare it with our Batla House encounter against Indian Mujahdeen where two terrorists were killed and two arrested. A brave police officer lost his life. Yet, many seditious elements had the impudence to term the encounter to be ‘fake’.

Therefore, the mystery remains unsolved. Why does India continue to produce so many Jaichand and Mir Jafars? Is India a cursed nation or is treachery a part of our DNA? One wonders.*****

Induction of Women: Have the Indian Armed Forces Benefitted

Induction of Women: Have the Indian Armed Forces Benefitted

(Fauji Apr 2015)

Major General Mrinal Suman

Two events of the recent past have reignited the debate about the induction of women in the Indian armed forces. One, the Guard of Honour given to President Obama was commanded by a woman officer. Two, the Republic Day Parade included women contingents. Undoubtedly both are noteworthy occurrences – the nation is certainly proud of their smart turn-out and drill movements. As both were political decisions of symbolic value, no euphoric reaction is warranted.

Unfortunately, the Indian media (both print and electronic) is populated by the reporters who know little about national security imperatives and military matters. They thrive by blazoning hyperbolic and embellished headlines. Overwhelmed by the sight of women marching on the Rajpath, a well-known media personality proclaimed, “Women have proved that the defence of the nation is safe in their hands”. Can there be a more comical statement? One reporter declared that equality of sexes stood proved beyond doubt. Yet another columnist went to the absurd lengths of calling it ‘a grand display of Nari Shakti’. They did not care to explain as to how marching on Rajpath can be construed as a testimony of women’s prowess to fight on the borders.

Similarly, a few months back, media was agog with the news that a woman officer had been selected for the ‘coveted post’ of ADC to a General. It was hailed as a path-breaking recognition of the woman-power. Needless to say, the media did not know that the appointment of ADC is neither coveted nor based on any selection criteria. It is entirely dependent on the personal preferences of the concerned commander. 

Ignorance and unwillingness to learn render Indian media incapable of examining the issue of women’s entry in the services in an objective manner. For media, it is simply a case of ‘women empowerment’, ‘conquest of the last male bastion’, ‘gender equality’ and ‘women’s liberation’. It is least concerned about the fighting potential of the services.

Many people cite the bravery of Rani Jhansi, Razia Sultana and Chand Bibi to emphasise suitability of women for combat. How juvenile can one get! They forget that these brave ladies were exceptions. More importantly, even they did not recruit women in their armies.

It is often suggested that women can be easily accommodated in safe and softer posts in peace areas and not exposed to tough operational environment. Proponents of such ideas have to be reminded that there are only a handful of such posts and even male officers need a break from the grind of hard field postings to sort out their family affairs.

The hollowness of the arguments offered by the self proclaimed advocates of women power can be gauged from their claim that induction of women helps overcome the shortage of male officers. There cannot be a more senseless and foolish argument. It is a fallacy that male volunteers are insufficient. As per UPSC reports, more than 400 candidates apply for each seat in NDA. It is just that the services seek very exacting standards for males while women are accepted with abysmally laughable standards. For that matter, there are no standards for women. No woman cadet ever fails or gets relegated.

Raison d'être of the Armed Forces

The armed forces are created for the sole purpose of ensuring security of the nation, both against internal and external threats. That is the only justification for their existence. If that be so, every single policy decision must result in the enhancement of their fighting potential.  

Hence, before a major policy decision is taken, it should be studied thoroughly and its affects thought-through. Unfortunately, the decision to induct women was taken in the early 90s by a service Chief, in a cavalier, hasty and shoddy manner. It was simply a case of aping foreign militaries – ‘if other armies can have women, we should also have’. It was a patently flawed logic.

The militaries are designed, organised, equipped and trained to operate in the threat environment faced by the country. As no two countries face similar threats, no two militaries are alike. Every nation has to weigh its options against the backdrop of its operational imperatives and threat assessment. It is absurd to replicate models of foreign countries.

Unlike the Western countries, Indian military is facing hostile external and internal environment. Majority of the troops are deployed on active combat duties in remote, inhospitable and uncongenial areas. Only physically fit and tough troops with raw physical power can survive to deliver in such environment.

Additionally, whereas high-tech militaries of the West need a large number of technical personnel for which women can contribute effectively, the low-tech Indian military has very few such jobs. 

Howsoever righteous and morally upright the principle of equality of sexes may be; it should be applied to the armed forces in a conscientious manner without succumbing to populist pressures. The military exists to win wars, not to serve as an equal opportunity employer.

The Foreign Militaries

Foreign militaries are often cited by the self proclaimed champions to demand increased induction of women in the Indian armed forces. They forget that it is a matter of compulsion for them. As enough men are not volunteering for the services, women have to be inducted as they are ‘better than nothing’.

Although women have been serving in the militaries of developed countries for a long time, they are still grappling with various functional, social, behavioral and psychological issues. A few aspects have been clarified here.

No country has employed women in direct combat. Despite the much touted huge presence of women in the US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, there has not been a single woman casualty in direct action against the enemy. Some women have certainly lost lives ‘due to hostile activities’, like IED blasts, suicide bombers and rocket attacks.

To date most countries do not allow women tank crews because of the cramped conditions and lack of privacy. There are also concerns about cramped living conditions on board submarines and dangers posed by fumes inside the submarine to a foetus if a woman becomes pregnant. Even in Israel which has conscription for women (as well as men), women are not allotted active battle field duties. They serve in technical, administrative and training posts to release men for active duty.

A recent review conducted by the British army concluded that women have neither the upper-body strength nor the physical resilience to withstand intensive combat. Tests in 2000 respondents found that women were eight times more likely than men to sustain injuries other than wounds in action. The female skeletal system is less dense and more prone to breakages; in particular to stress fractures. With 25-30 percent less aerobic capacity, their endurance ability is far lesser than men.

Supporters of women’s induction never tire of citing the US as a shining example of women’s participation. They will be shocked to learn the truth. As per Gordon Duff, senior editor of Veterans Today, “The US military has become a culture of rape, prostitution and violence.”

As per the report released by the US Defence Department in May 2013, sexual abuse is a routine occurrence.  The report admitted that, on an average, three sexual assaults took place every hour or 500 every week in the US military during 2012. The Marine Corps had the worst record – on an average, four women were sexually abused each day in 2012. These figures refer only to the reported cases whereas a large number of cases remain unreported. Many women have been too traumatised to lead a normal life afterwards and need continuous counselling and medical attention.

Conditions in the British forces are better, but only marginally. A joint survey carried out by the Ministry of Defence and the Equal Opportunities Commission found that 67 percent of the respondents had experienced ‘sexualised’ behaviour directed at them personally in the previous 12 months. While 15 percent had a ‘particularly upsetting’ experience, sexual assault was cited by 12.7 percent of the respondents.

Women and the Indian Services

Nearly 25 years have passed since the decision to induct women was taken. It is time to find out whether the services have benefitted from the said decision? Have the women improved the fighting prowess of the services by their contribution? Their induction can be justified only if the answer to the above posers is in the affirmative.

Unfortunately, not a single officer, JCO or soldier considers women to be an asset. Their response varies between outright disapproval to nonchalant dismissal of the issue. Most consider their induction to be a political gimmick that merits no serious deliberation.

The women cannot be employed on all tasks and the flexibility available to the commander gets restricted. In a few cases, male officers have been seen to be resenting additional work load that they have to undertake as many tasks (like patrolling, night duty checks) cannot be assigned to women.

Grant of Short Service Commission (SSC) to women has been a totally short-sighted and wasteful policy. Women normally gain commission at the age of 23 to 25 years. Within two to three years of their commission, they get married. Every pregnancy means three years’ exemption from physical activities – one year pre-natal and two years post-delivery. With the standard two-child norm, a women officer remains physically inactive for close to six years. Thus the services gain little.

The services are mired in numerous court cases filed by women officers. They are demanding permanent commission. It is now for the courts to decide whether a woman should be given command of a unit or not. The services have abdicated their power to make personnel policies to the courts. How stupid can an organisation get! Can there be another example of shooting in the foot?

Worse, instead of earning kudos for inducting women, the services are getting flak from the judiciary, media and self-appointed experts.

Although most commanders are reluctant to have women officers in their units, they lack moral courage to admit it openly. Talk to them in private and they concede that the decision to induct women was hasty and not need-based. It is considered politically incorrect to oppose induction of women, more so after the flak received by a previous Vice Chief for his innocuous and honest remarks.

It is time to revisit the policy. Women should continue to serve in the Medical, Dental and Nursing Services as at present. They have been performing creditably. Grant of SSC to women should be stopped.

The current policy of granting permanent commission in Judge Advocate General and Army Education Corps of Army and their corresponding branches in Navy and Air Force; Naval Constructor in Navy; and Accounts, Technical, Administration and Meteorology Branches in Air Force should be continued. In addition, women could be considered for permanent commission in the Survey of India, Military Engineering Service Militarised Cadre, Director General Quality Assurance and such organisations.

Finally

Sharing his experience of multiple wars, Colonel Gordon D. Batcheller of the US Marine Corps put it brusquely, “There is no quality of life beyond staying alive: no comfort, no privacy, and no provisions for hygiene. Endurance — both physical and emotional — and raw strength are essential. The battlefield is a man’s world”. 

“No military in the world has ever sought more women to better the combat force or claimed that the mixed force is more effective than an all male force”, he proclaimed.

Finally, he averred, “Some advocates insist it is a woman’s right to serve in the military if she wants. That, of course, is nonsense. The military is created and structured to win wars, and its personnel policies are crafted to serve that end, not satisfy vocational whims”. 

The issue is certainly too serious to be reduced to a publicity gimmick to flaunt sexual equality. National security cannot be compromised just to humour some ill-informed champions of Nari Shakti. To date, no one has been able to justify the decision to induct women in the Indian armed forces. The disconcerting question ‘in what way have the services gained’ remains unanswered.*****

OROP and Other Issues: Time for Course Correction

OROP and Other Issues: Time for Course Correction

Major General Mrinal Suman

The social media is getting increasingly flooded with veterans’ grievances these days. They appear to be the most unhappy and discontented segment of the society. Their outpouring borders on despondency. Not only are they unhappy with the environment but with each other as well. They seem convinced that the country (read government) has not been fair to them and feel highly aggrieved.

Are things as dismal as being made out? Are the veterans being singled out for unfair treatment? Is such a state of dissatisfaction justified? These posers are of immense importance. Veterans need to do some serious introspection rather than get carried away with the prevailing wave of gloom. Self-pity and persecution complex are not the traits soldiers are known for.

There are three reasons why the current state of despair cannot be allowed to continue. One, veterans are a highly esteemed segment of the society. They represent confidence and sanguinity. The country looks up to them as beacons of national pride. Unhappy veterans infect the national psyche adversely. Two, veterans have an umbilical bond with the serving fraternity. Unhappy veterans demoralise them as they see themselves as veterans of the future. Finally, sense of discontentment and desolation plays havoc with the health of individual veterans.

A look at the veterans’ major grievances (both real and perceived) will be in order here. Veterans are primarily dissatisfied with the current government on account of three promises it made prior to getting elected to power – Veterans’ Commission, War Memorial and OROP. Here is an appraisal of the progress made so far.

·         Veterans’ Commission

In his reply to a question in the Lok Sabha on 11 March 2016, Minister of State for Defence informed the house that pursuant to government’s decision to appoint a Veterans Commission, the National Commission for Ex-Servicemen Bill, 2015 had already been drafted. It was further stated that the comments of Department of Legislative Affairs and Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances have also been obtained. According to the Minister, the matter is under consideration of the government.

As is well-known, drafting a bill and having it legislated is a deliberate and painstaking process. It is highly encouraging that rather than creating a toothless Veterans Commission through an executive order, the government has decided to make it a statutory body through due legislation. It will enjoy considerable powers like the Minorities Commission and the Women’s Commission.

·         War Memorial

On 07 October 2015, the government approved construction of a National War Memorial and a National War Museum near India Gate, taking a major step towards fulfilling its election promise. At last the country will be able to pay homage to the memory of nearly 23,000 soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice in defence of the country.

The National War Memorial will be made around the existing canopy near India Gate with the memorial wall, containing the names of martyrs, flushed with the ground.  The War Museum will be constructed in the adjoining 14-acre Princess Park area. Both will be connected by a subway. Global tenders are being issued. Foreign architects are being contacted for assistance. The whole project is estimated to cost Rs 500 crore and is likely to take 5 years.

It may be recalled that Delhi’s Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit had shot down a similar proposal in 2012. She is reported to have commented, “It is a people’s place. It is just like Marina beach and Chowpatty. My point is that you can make a memorial anywhere else. Why spoil this beautiful place? Why become a hindrance to the people’s enjoyment?” The proposal had to be shelved.

·         OROP

OROP has been by far the most contentious issue. Modi had publically promised OROP and the veterans expected him to announce its sanction soon after taking oath. A few comments by some leaders of the ruling party vitiated the environment, forcing the veterans to harden their stand. Despite Modi’s repeated assertions that he stood by his commitment but needed time to sort out details, the delay made veterans sceptical about the government’s intentions. They became restless and adopted agitational approach. Most unfortunately, relations between the government and the agitating veterans became inimical.

The government announced grant of OROP on 06 September 2015, effective from 01 July 2014. The notification was issued on 07 November 2015. It was announced that the pension would be re-fixed every five years. Anticipating that certain provisions of the policy would be contested by the veterans, it appointed a Judicial Committee to look into the anomalies and submit its report in six months.

A section of the veterans remains unconvinced and has decided to continue the agitation till all their demands are met in totality, the core issue being periodicity of re-fixation of pension. They want it to be done annually, as had been recommended by the Koshiyari Committee (Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence). On 14 March 2016, Defence Minister Parrikar stated unambiguously that after the appointment of the Judicial Committee, the government cannot consider any demand of the veterans directly. They must approach the Judicial Committee. Some veterans do not trust the government and the stalemate continues.

Need for Course Correction

The current impasse is proving highly detrimental to the establishment of convivial relations between the government and the veterans. Veterans should never allow its equation with the government to become adversarial. That shall be a very unfortunate development.

What should the veterans do now? Is there a need for course correction? Before carrying out an appreciation of the courses open, the veterans must keep some factors in mind:-

   

One, recommendations of Parliamentary Standing Committees are advisory in nature. They are not debated and passed by the parliament. The recommendations are not binding on the government. As a matter of fact, governments rarely accept them. Therefore, obsession with the views of the Koshiyari Committee may be misplaced.

Two, whenever negotiations take place, both sides have to give and take. There cannot be a unilateral diktat. Even the most stubborn trade union leaders also understand this fact and make compromises during negotiations. As Parrikar stated, no government can be coerced to concede demands at gun-point.

Three, the government has already shown a way out to the veterans: put up your grievances to the Judicial Committee, convince it and the government shall consider them.

Four, it will be incorrect to cite Patil/Gujjar/Jat agitations. They belong to an entirely different genre.

Five, both Modi and Parrikar are trying to fulfill all the election promises made to the services. India will have a magnificent war memorial and an impressive museum in the near future. Commission for the veterans will be a huge step forward. OROP arrears have started flowing to the veterans. All this in less than two years.

All veterans associations have reasons to be happy with the result of their struggle. For the first time, the government has officially accepted the concept of OROP, frequency of re-fixation notwithstanding. It is a huge achievement and they deserve credit. For future crusade, veterans have three courses open to them:-

a)  Continue with the agitation as hitherto fore. As the government is unlikely to even discuss any demand, veterans will achieve nothing except developing an antagonistic relationship with the ruling dispensation.

b)  Call off the agitation and approach the courts for justice. Again, it may not be a viable approach. The courts may well ask the veterans to first explore the avenue of the Judicial Committee. Additionally, veterans should not fall in the trap of some renowned advocates who are always ready to fish in the troubled waters. In any case, litigation is a long-drawn process.  

c)  Call off the agitation and seek remedy of all anomalies from the Judicial Committee. It will be unfair to suspect the fair-mindedness of the Judicial Committee. This approach may produce quickest and most-favorable results.

To start with, all veterans associations must unite, sit down together and debate all courses open to them. An estranged veteran community does not bode well for the country. Prudence demands that the stances be softened. Both the government and the veterans will do well to adopt mutually accommodative and reasonable postures. For the first time we have a ruling dispensation that is pro-services. The veterans should not miss this opportunity. Amicable negotiations should be the ruling mantra.*****

Freedom in India: Three questions for Kanhaiya Kumar

Freedom in India: Three questions for Kanhaiya Kumar 

(http://www.sify.com/news/freedom-in-india-three-questions-for-kanhaiya-kumar-news-columns-qdeqO7aijhjbd.html)

Aditi Kumaria Hingu

Kanhaiya Kumar got bail and came back to JNU to a hero's welcome. This in itself is a valediction of the atmosphere of 'tolerance' that India is known for. Try to badmouth the government of the day in any of our neighbouring countries and more often than not, the voice will be silenced forever.

It is only in India that a Kanhaiya Kumar (with his powerful oratory) will get more footage than a Lance Naik Hanumanthappa buried in a crevasse at Siachen (after all, he only knew how to guard the borders at 20,000 feet; he never did learn how to give fiery speeches).

Kanhaiya Kumar has clarified that 'he does not want freedom from India because India never colonized anyone' (surely that speaks something good about our nation and the majority religion Hinduism...at last an intellectual at one of our most esteemed universities JNU does recognize that not all Hindus are right wing fanatics who are insistent on oppressing the minorities/ poor/ downtrodden).

As an Indian who loves her country (since I cannot use the term nationalism – its bad to be a nationalist now), I am happy that Kanhaiya Kumar has clarified that he wants "freedom not from India, but within India”. This is wonderful.  And since both Kanhaiya Kumar and I love our country and worry about similar issues, I would like to ask him only three questions.

1. Kanhaiya Kumar said "We want azadi from capitalism, from brahminism, from casteism, this is the kind of azadi that we want."

This is such a laudable aim. We all want it but how do you achieve it? I have listened to all of the speeches made by intellectuals in the recent past and I am still to hear even one voice explain how would this be achieved?

From my point of view, economic equality is a big leveller. But achieving economic equality would mean bringing in investment in the country, building relevant capabilities and skill sets among the youth, creating opportunities for the unemployed youth, and ensuring that a sustainable economic environment is created.  The current government has its flaws but it is trying to foster an environment of sustained and inclusive economic empowerment.

But of course, for a left leaning aspiring politician like Kanhaiya Kumar, maybe it is too degrading to simply finish his PhD soon, get a job, start earning a livelihood so that his family can get more than Rs. 3000 per month. Maybe as per him, he does not owe his family anything. It is the nation that owes him and his family and it is up to the nation to ensure that they are equal in all aspects to someone whose son/daughter slogs for 10 hours a day in a call centre and earns Rs. 20,000 per month. 

My question to him is – what is his plan to ensure his family is free from poverty? After all, change and charity, both begin at home. And then, what is his plan to ensure azadi from brahminism, casteism and all the other ills which so pain him?

2. Kanhaiya Kumar said, "We want freedom not from India but from those who loot India.”

Again such a praiseworthy aim. It is indeed inspiring to see this heightened sense of probity and ethics in him.  But hasn't he heard of Robert Vadra, Suresh Kalmadi, A Raja and many others like them?  As Kanhaiya's speech shows, he is a fairly intelligent adult who is well versed in current affairs.  He is currently 28 years old, which means that when the Sarada Scam (2013), Coal allocation, Tatra Truck, Chopper Scams (2012), Commonwealth games (2010), Satyam Scam (2009) and 2G Spectrum Scam (2008) etc. broke out, he was in his early to mid 20s...old enough to understand that his nation is being looted.

Whatever be the faults of the current government, there has not been a single scam of similar proportions in the last two years. Ask the people on the street – they will routinely tell about their 'pleasant' experiences at government offices where work is now getting done without the traditional 'chai – pani'.

So my question to him is – why did he not demand azadi from those who looted India in 2008? Or in 2009? 2010? 2012? 2013? Why wait till 2016 when the all pervasive atmosphere of corruption is actually reducing?  As a patriotic Indian, did the scams in 2008-2014 not make his heart bleed for his motherland? The nation needed him then to launch the fight against corruption...why did he let the nation down?

Every nation has problems. The problem gets compounded when the nation in question is  physically as large as India, as culturally diverse as India, has been under 200 years of slavery and then ruled with an iron fist by a decadent, corrupt party where the only will that matters is that of the 'first family'.

Nation building cannot be done overnight and neither can decades of mismanagement be sorted out in a year or two. Nation building is a slow, tedious job often done away from the arc lights.  The nation needs people who work hard to earn an honest living, who respect it enough to pay their taxes and who create tangible change in their areas of influence.

If Kanhaiya Kumar truly wants to build a utopian nation, giving fiery speeches won't help. His speeches may earn him followers, his own Wikipedia page, a ticket to fight elections, maybe even a seat in the Parliament. But it won't help the nation.

3. The last question for Kanhaiya Kumar – what does he actually want? A thriving political career for himself? Or an India that is healthy, secure, and confident and provides equal opportunity for all its citizens to grow? And contrary to what some may believe, these two goals are mutually exclusive.

(Aditi Kumaria Hingu is a marketing graduate from IIM Calcutta, currently she works in the corporate sector. She comes from an army background.)