Sunday, September 25, 2011

For once, this nation owes it to the Russians, owes it to the Gandhi's

For once, this nation owes it to the Russians, owes it to the Gandhi's.


I am not sure, but even as I try to unsolve the issue of how the Jan Lokapal Bill can become a threat to national security , who may be having the maximum of black money stashed away abroad, and where did the Gandhi family get all their money from, I chanced upon certain bigger facts of our history, about the days of the Cold War , about the international relations which existed in those days between India and the USSR, between Pakistan and America, and ofcourse, the India-West&East Pakistan.

It was only recently I stumbled upon another hard fact of diplomacy world--  Indians had not resisted the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the UN, back in 1979. From today’s relations it appears really appaling as to why us, who had once been subjugated by the British and many other people, did not oppose suppression of some other country by another. It is mysterious in some ways until we explore the history and the diplomacy game behind such abberations.

Back in 1962, during the Chinese incursion of Tibet, India was not so much self-dependant to be able to contest with China. Some recently released confidential letter reveal of how Nehru had desparetly attempted to seek help from the Americans who refused the help to us, perhaps because they are already engaged with the Pakistanis. Nehru had asked for fighter planes, asked for weaponry, but in vain.

It was from this experience perhaps that even after being so called Non-Aligned, we maintained quite a heavy inclination towards the Russians because it was them who came to our help later. During the Pakistani invasion in 1973 from both the frontiers, East and West, Indians could manage to have the East Pakistan liberated, maybe because of an indirect support of the Russians. US President, Richard Nixon, had already ordered their aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise, to enter the Bay of Bengal to help Pakistan, but it was never used by the Americans due to fear of retaliation from the Russians. India won the war and liberated a new nation, Bangladesh.

Another news of around (y.) 2007 told that the KGB chief has admitted to having paid some USD 200,000 every year to the family of Gandhis for getting India to help protect Russian interest far and at the UN.

These broken tales of the intel may perhaps reveal how the Gandhis became so rich, today with their black money stashed abroad and why political authorities are citing national security as the reason for not bringing the Prime Minister within the ambit of Jan Lokpal.

History,I believe, is read but not with the purpose of doing the judgment and pronouncing who was right and who was wrong. The ‘was’ contains certain sensibilities of its times which can perhaps never be properly understood the present day reviewer. History lessons are meant to give lessons of what happened, and what needs to be done to prevent its recurrance.

The 9/11 event brought a massive change in the global order. Diplomacy table turned over completely, and the old sensibilities have had to be forgotten to make the new ones. Anna Hazare and the Jan Lokpal are the post 9/11 events.

Will it be ethical and intelligent of us to attempt to punish or undo what the leaders of the Cold Wars did which was required of them to do in the interest of this country?

I surely don’t aim to dilute the agenda of Jan Lokpal(JLP), and still continue to demand that all governement offices be brought under the JLP, including the PM, but at the same time I don’t want to stand unethical and cruel and inhuman to do something which is self-humiliating. To punish the very mongoose who killed the snake which saved the child.

The JLP should contain provisions to address the corruptions of such nature, but it should not attempt to undo which was achieved by means of corruption in the interest of some larger group. I do not mean that such acts not be investigated and not be prosecuted, but the penalities must encompass waivers for what all was achieved by way of corruption. Corruption was (and is) our way of life, good or bad, truth or lie, whatever. And the new law must not attempt to judge the history by its own lenses.

At the same time, the JLP should also have safeguard to ensure that should the situation demand, then again the leading authorities be given freehand , without fear of trial away in future, to do what is best for the country.

We know what that implies.

Until the time I assembled these jigsaw pieces of history and diplomacy, I would think that everytime a political leader opposed JLP on the grounds of national security, perhaps what the ‘bloody politician’ was declaring was that the country had already been sold out and it was too late of us to demand an awakening, by means of the JLP bill.

But as the jigwas unsolved before me, if it really be as how I am solving the puzzle, I now have a heart change. Maybe it is true that they saved us by means of corrupt means somewhere sometime.

‘Us’ contains our full nation, and ‘they’ are the Gandhi family.