Mahatma, Obama and India |
By
Asghar Ali Engineer
(Secular Perspective 16-30, November 2010).
Obama on
his recent trip to India paid glowing tribute to Mahatma
Gandhi and even said he belongs not only to India but to
whole world. Needless to say it is easier to pay tribute but
very difficult indeed to act in conformity with his
philosophy. Anyone who becomes Mahatma meets with the same
fate. We pay rich tributes to him and ignore his teachings
in practice. In fact more we ignore his teachings ri8cher
tends to be our tribute.
There is
very few exceptions to this rule. We Indians are guiltier of
ignoring Mahatma’s teachings than others. All our
politicians ritually pay tribute to Mahatma, we name roads
after him, install his statues and what is ironical print
his photograph on currency notes of all denominations.
Similarly all heads of states who visit India are
ritualistically taken to Gandhiji’s Samadhi to lay wreath of
flowers.
Obama’s
tributes to Gandhiji, I must say, was not merely
ritualistic, it was more than that. It seems it came from
his heart. Obama after all is follower of Martin King Jr.
who was greatly influenced by Gandhiji’s philosophy of
non-violence and what is distinguishing feature of King
Martin is that he practiced non-violence and won rights for
African-Americans through non-violent means.
King
Martin had to sacrifice his life for his ideals but he
liberated African Americans in sixties of last century and
Obama is also King Martin’s follower so what he said in
India was more than mere formality and had ring of truth.
But having said this some questions would be in place. King
Martin practiced what he believed and empowered the
African-Americans. Obama, though he too believes in
Gandhiji’s philosophy of non-violence but since he contested
election and won presidency of America he is far from
practicing his philosophy.
It is very
important to note in case of Gandhi is that he never
involved himself in any kind of power struggle. He never
entertained ambition to become President or prime minister
of India. The day India became independent and government
formation was taking place in Delhi Gandhiji was far away in
Noakhali putting out fire of communal violence. He did not
even celebrated Indian independence which came at a heavy
cost of partition, on one hand, and, mass killings, on the
other. And his priority was establishing communal harmony.
So he chose to be in Noakhali which was burning in communal
fire.
Secondly,
anyone who takes Gandhi seriously and claims to be his
follower must practice non-violence which is not possible
without practicing truth – ahimsa and satyagraha
(non-violence and truth) go together. Any country which is
armed to teeth and to the extent that it can destroy with
those arms this earth 10 times over cannot practice
non-violence. America wages wars in so many countries of
Asia and Africa in the name of security. In fact more arms
it possesses, more it feels insecure.
It
possesses several hundred most disastrous nuclear arms and
Gandhiji was totally against nuclear arms. Thus first thing
Obama can do is to prepare an authentic programme to
eliminate nuclear arms and then acquire moral right to ask
other nuclear powers to destroy all nuclear arms. Today even
under Obama USA is following double standards. While it
pressurizes Iran not to manufacture nuclear weapons, it
directly or indirectly justifies Israel possessing more than
100 nuclear heads. How can it exercise any moral authority
to ask Iran not to go for nuclear arms. Such double
standards are totally against Gandhji’s philosophy of truth
and non-violence.
Thirdly.
under Obama as a true follower of Gandhiji America must
bring about genuine peace in Palestine and get Palestinians
their rights. Gandhiji had said that Palestine belongs to
Palestini8aqns as much as India belongs to Indians or
England belongs to Englishmen. I hope Obama has read these
words of Gandhiji and as his follower should do everything
possible, resisting all pressures, to restore Palestine to
Palestinians as per UN resolution of 1948 and 1967.
Yet
another question is of liberalization and globalization.
Gandhji had said that real progress and development is one
which benefits the last person in the society or the poorest
of the poor. What we see in the world in general and in
India in particular, is just opposite of that. The poor are
getting horribly poor and rich are getting vulgarly rich. It
is well known fact that more than 75 per cent people in
India are living on Rs. 25 a day which cannot buy even one
single meal.
It is
obvious that Obama too is promoting this kind of skewed
development which results in extreme polarization between
rich and poor and grinds down the poor. Gandhiji would never
approve of such ‘development’. It is this kind of unjust
development which results in more and more violence. America
also invades other countries not only for its security but
for its economic ‘prosperity’. Only a just society can be a
truly non-violent society.
Today
India is also witnessing so much violence – be it Naxal
violence or communal violence or ethnic violence or caste
violence only because there is no justice. Tribal areas are
being plundered by multinationals for minerals for so called
development earning billions of rupees whereas tribals go
hungry. Can Mahatma Gandhi approve of such loot resulting in
gross injustice?
Gandhiji
laid down his life for protection and justice for
minorities. A Hindu fanatic shot him dead accusing him of
favouring Muslims. Today political parties directly or
indirectly organize communal riots to win elections. Can
this be a just democracy? Agreed no blame can go to Obama
for this state of affairs but often communal violence also
takes place to hide the ugly reality from gross injustices.
Communal solidarity is promoted to break class solidarity.
Poor of one community are made to kill poor of another
community.
Poverty
and development favouring rich becomes cause of violence
which then takes different forms including communal
violence. Even in western societies racial feelings go up
during economic downturn. Just imagine the extent of
violence in India where almost 75 per cent people live
either on poverty line or below poverty line. Such
developmental model simply cannot be acceptable by any
admirer of Gandhi.
Gandhi
stressed simple living with stress on spirituality and
truth. A non-violent society is not possible without
simplicity, truth and spirituality. Any high standard of
living as Americans and Indian elite have will inevitably
lead to violence as such high standards are based on
exploitation and injustice which inevitably result in
genesis of violence. Modern economies are based on
generating artificial needs and high levels of consumerism.
President
Obama was, on one hand, admiring Gandhi and, on the other,
was all praise for high rate of growth of India which is, as
pointed out above, beneficial only for the upper class
elite. Both, i.e. admiration for Gandhi and his philosophy
of truth and non-violence cannot simply go together.
President Obama had come to India mainly for creating jobs
for Americans through collaboration with economic growth of
India, not so much to express his admiration for Gandhian
philosophy.
We are
aware that it is not easy for Obama, or for any American
President, to bring about change in economic model and bring
down level of consumerism. It is easier said than done. No
American President can survive such change. American
president cannot even reduce conventional armament, let
alone nuclear armament as there are strong linkages between
military and industry.
But it is
also true that as long as America follows such pattern of
economic growth and high standards of living at the cost of
poorer countries, there will be no peace in the world. Also,
i8t is compulsion of American military-industrial complex to
sell armaments and provoke violence in some or the other
part of Afro-Asian countries. Bush had said with all
conviction that there are weapons of mass destruction in
Iraq and destroyed Iraq with weapons of their own mass
destruction and now he admits in his own book Decision
Points that there were no weapons of mass destruction.
This lie
was spoken deliberately and entire media controlled by the
elite who benefit from such lies readily obliged and
propagated theory of weapons of mass destruction. All this
is necessary for sustaining unjust patterns of economic
growth. A Gandhian with any measure of sincerity cannot be
part of such unjust economic growth. A true Gandhian has to
be spiritually-oriented and has to equally concentrate on
ones spiritual richness as much as material one.
The modern
economy is such that more one consumes, more one needs and
more one becomes hollow spiritually. No growth deprived of
morality and spirituality can bring any joy to the people.
It can bring only stress and tension. Many of Gandhiji’s
economic theories also need to be critiqued as he was
writing and theorizing during colonial times. Charkha
(spinning wheel) economy also cannot work today but some of
Gandhiji’s insights are valid even today as much as they
were during those days. There are eternal truths and
contextual ones. We need not stick to contextual ones.
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, Mumbai |