 |
| Wednesday, December 13, 2000, Chandigarh, India   
|
Problems
can wait, we are parliamentarians! Kashmir:
the Hurriyat factor Assam
killings |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DISASTERS
SINCE INDEPENDENCE How to
eliminate child labour
Training
agro-managers
From
reluctant to ambitious
|
|
Problems can wait, we are parliamentarians! PARLIAMENT is in danger of losing its relevance and as the prime place for taking collective decisions. The turmoil for the seventh consecutive working day on Tuesday has brought out two alarming factors. One, there is much cheap manoeuvring going on in the name of principled politics. A school boy can see through this game. And anybody who has a modicum of commonsense will not be fooled. Indian voters are anything but gullible. The second alarming development is that Parliament and parliamentarians are becoming insensitive to larger issues which warrant their immediate attention. Right now a severe drought has gripped Gujarat, Rajasthan and Orissa. Floods have devastated part of West Bengal. In Andhra Pradesh, rice growers are finding it difficult to sell their produce since the South is not covered by the procurement programme. Parliament has abandoned these people without showing the minimum courtesy of at least debating their distress. True, providing relief is a state responsibility, but prodding the states to rush timely and adequate assistance should be a major concern of parliamentarians. After all, they are elected by the same people and owe them a sense of gratitude. It is clear now that the remaining few days — just six days, including today — cannot provide time to tackle these and discuss more serious issues like the intelligence failure in Kargil last year. Many economic legislation lined up for this session, including the controversial Bill on reducing government share in banks, have to wait for parliamentary approval till the budget session, crowding the agenda and virtually blocking a serious debate. In a year Parliament meets for around six months — four months during the budget session with a three-week break and six weeks each during the monsoon and winter sessions. The founding fathers devised this format to enable members to constantly discuss and approve of periodic methods that are people-friendly. Of late, this has been converted into periodic verbal battles between the government and its allies and the opposition of varied hues. What is on display is frightening lung power and not a touching concern for the affairs of the nation or the common people. Jawaharlal Nehru once chided C. D. Deshmukh for claiming to represent the Colaba constituency in modern-day Mumbai. He said as a member of the Lok Sabha, which was in those days called the House of People, he represented the entire country. He was only elected by the voters of Colaba. Today's parliamentarians belong to the same tradition but, in practice, they represent only their political parties. It is a moot question as to what Nehru would have thought of them. |
|
India's
Ramzan initiative has led to at least one major development. A significant section of the All-Party Hurriyat Conference (APHC) has openly come out in favour of taking Prime Minister Vajpayee's idea beyond Ramzan to pave the way for peace to return to the Kashmir valley. This group includes senior APHC leader Abdul Ghani Lone, who has just come back from Pakistan after staying there for over three weeks following his son's much-publicised marriage with JKLF leader Amanullah Khan's daughter. Despite strong criticism of his stance at a recent seminar in Srinagar, he has asserted that "peace needs to be given a chance, and all militant outfits should come out with a united response to Mr Vajpayee's initiative for peace". He also stands for showing the door to all the mercenary militant elements once the current efforts reach the stage of formal dialogue. His views, which he first expressed during the course of an interview with The Washington Post, have got acceptance not only in a larger section of the APHC, a conglomerate of several pro-Pakistan organisations, but also, perhaps, on the other side of the border. Mr Lone has admitted that he had a discussion with General Pervez Musharraf, but preferred not to disclose what was the Pakistani leader's reaction to his line of thinking. One can, however, presume that it has been okayed. The presumption is based on two things. One, he appears to be quite pessimistic and hence ready to head a delegation of Hurriyat leaders to visit Pakistan and discuss the matter with the representatives of the militant outfits operating from there in Kashmir in the name of jehad. Two, his colleagues like Syed Ali Shah Geelani, a former APHC chief, are upset after Mr Lone made his views public and then succeeded in putting these across with the Pakistani establishment. JKLF chief in India Yaseen Malik and certain other senior APHC leaders also agree with the perception of Mr Lone. Mr Geelani is in the company of those who do not matter much. Thus it was natural for him to express his uneasiness which he did at the Srinagar seminar, asking his colleagues "not to differ" on the vital issues involved . As he is yet to realise the changing situation at the ground level — which means people's yearning for peace — he spoke strongly against Mr Lone's belief that religious extremism had emerged as a serious threat to the cause of restoring normalcy in Kashmir. As was obvious, he also disapproved of New Delhi's stand not to include Pakistan in a process of dialogue between APHC representatives and the Central government, which Mr Lone has not opposed. Over the years Mr Lone as also Mr Yaseen Malik have, as it seems, come to realise that only talks — and not a recourse to violence — can bring an end to the Kashmir crisis. They deserve encouragement in this regard. There is no harm in allowing them to play their desired role to begin a process of dialogue. The Central government should speed up the process of issuing them and their colleagues the necessary documents to facilitate their planned visit to Pakistan to convince the hotheads there to shun the path of violence, now that the Pakistan government too has announced the "maximum restraint " along the Line of Control. One can guess from the enthusiasm being shown by Mr Lone and Mr Malik that most Kashmiri militants are agreeable to their viewpoint and only the mercenaries are playing the spoilsport as is their wont. Here comes the role of the Pakistan government. Kashmir is bleeding the Pakistani economy white, which is often pointed out by right-thinking persons there through newspaper columns. The Musharraf regime should, in its own national interest, take a firm stand on cross-border militancy to help create an atmosphere conducive for the establishment of peace. |
|
Taking a cue from the Kashmiri militants, ULFA separatists in Assam have started targeting the Hindi-speaking people during the past three months. Daily-wage labourers and Bihari traders are the main victims of this dangerous trend. The worst massacre took place on December 7 when as many as 28 persons were killed in Kukurmara forest in Tinsukia district. Apparently the ULFA strategists are taking more than just a cue from their Kashmiri counterparts. Their links with the ISI of Pakistan have been growing and this paradigm policy shift has obviously been brought about on specific instructions from across the border. So far, most of the attacks were on government officials, politicians, businessmen and tea planters. ULFA was rather in disarray during the past three years, thanks to relentless raids by the unified command. It seems to have reactivated itself at the bidding of the ISI. What is noteworthy is that most of the attacks have been close to the Assam border. That fits in with the fact that a majority of ULFA camps are near or outside the border of Assam, particularly in Arunachal Pradesh. Among the neighbouring countries, Myanmar has started turning the heat on the killers. On the other hand, Bangladesh, despite several solemn promises, has not been too keen to close down the ULFA camps in its area. The state government has not been able to launch an effective counter-offensive. All it claims is that 1,800 pockets of Hindi-speaking people have been identified and they will be provided additional security. But it was found lacking in implementing the decision of a strategic group to impose a night curfew in the state’s border areas from December 3. Had this basic precaution been taken, the Kukurmara massacre could have been prevented. The change of tack may have taken place because killing Assamese was making ULFA unpopular among the local populace. Targeting Biharis and others does not pose this danger. Rather, it fuels the local — versus — outsider friction to the militants’
advantage. Violence has been cleverly stepped up in the run-up to the elections which are scheduled for early next year. Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta wants Assam elections to be segregated from the elections in other states. He has openly alleged that the Congress is helping and is being helped by ULFA. He has even demanded that the party should be banned from contesting the Assembly elections. It is this kind of mudslinging that gives a chance to ULFA to claim that the massacres are not its handiwork and that it is political parties which are trying to get President’s rule imposed in the state. An unusual development that has taken place in Assam is that the victims have started hitting back. Unarmed villagers have taken on the ultras, lynching 22 of them during the past one year and handing over 21 others to the police. The Governor, Lt-Gen S.K.Sinha (retd), has landed himself in the eye of a storm by advising Biharis to protect themselves with stones, sticks or whatever else they can muster to hit out at the assailants. He even repeated the advice recently. Later, he clarified that what he had suggested was village defence committees but not many people are convinced. To make matters worse, revenge killings have started. Seven persons were killed on Sunday last during attacks on the relatives of ULFA and Bodo militants. Such eye-for-an-eye exchanges may keep ULFA in leash to some extent but there is also a very real danger of the skirmishes degenerating into a civil war of sorts. |
|
DISASTERS SINCE INDEPENDENCE THE biggest disaster we have faced was at the outset of Independence when on both sides of the border inhuman cruelties were perpetrated in the name of religion and millions of people were driven out of their homes and fields to cross the border in long caravans. The extent of the disturbance was earth-shaking, and could have resulted in massive killings in India if we did not have men like Gandhiji and Nehru to prevent bloodshed. Our secular tradition was strengthened by the events of Partition. Who could be held responsible for this catastrophe — leaders of India and Pakistan who could not foresee the consequences of Partition, or the British, led by Lord Mountbatten, who guessed what was coming and chose to move out in time. Both sides are to blame specially those who had put out the two-nation theory and backed it with communal rioting. To this day the Muslims of India who remained behind, or those who migrated to Pakistan suffer from discrimination. From the first day of Partition the Pakistan army has not only dominated that country but has also given the impression to the people that India is a soft state and can easily be vanquished. They have paid heavily for this, but their mindset has not changed. The first Kashmir war was definitely due to the ambitions of Pakistan to conquer territory which it could not get in the partition settlement. It was a war in which the Indian Army and the Air Force performed extraordinary acts of valour, and saved the state. The people of Kashmir were rallied by Sheikh Abdullah and the National Conference to give full support. The Partition disturbances and the first Kashmir war were followed by a 20-year period of peace on our side when we tried our best to efface the wrongs of Partition. The refugees were quickly settled. A new generation of Muslims came up with education in English and sciences, and we thought that secularism was as well established in India as in France. After a peaceful beginning we again reverted to communal rioting. We had riots at Jabalpur, Bhiwandi, Jamshedpur, Biharsharif, Nellie in Assam, Rourkela and at many other places. Of them, probably the worst was the rioting that occurred all over India after the destruction of the Babri Masjid. The Chinese, or certainly a large section of their population, have deep respect bordering on affection for India. Buddhism and centuries of cultural contacts had created a Hindi-Chini Bhai-Bhai feeling long before Chou-en-Lai came to India. The Chinese incursion in 1962 in the North and the East was probably owing to Chairman Mao and his group wanting to prop up a regime which had been unable to show results. Yet again and again China has shown a moral stature which is similar to ours. It is also true that we made serious mistakes in assessing the Chinese strength and intentions in the sixties. We seem to have based our calculations on wrong inputs. All told, it was the second biggest mistake in our history for which our lack of preparation, poor intelligence and bad strategy were responsible. It was our Himalayan Blunder. Our dismal performance in the Chinese engagement perhaps gave an impression to General Ayub Khan and the military junta in Pakistan that India would not be able to resist the infiltration of 3000 or so commandos that were sent across the border. They were seen in various groups moving towards Srinagar. In a massive airlift Gen J.N. Chowdhury (COAS) and Mr L.P. Singh (Home Secretary) moved 14 police battalions from all over India to assist General Kahlan in Srinagar. Our Army units engaged the intruders and foiled their plan to surprise and take over the Government of Jammu & Kashmir. Special credit for this victory is due to the Chief Minister of J & K and D.P. Dhar, his Minister, whose knowledge of the area was so accurate that he could forecast all the moves of the infiltrators. All wars are a disaster. Even those in which we win a complete victory. In the 1971 war leading to the birth of Bangladesh it was an abject surrender by the Pakistan army — over 90,000 prisoners and a peace accord signed at Simla. It all came to nothing because the Pakistan army believed that the raison d’etre for its existence was enmity with India. For a time Pakistan got the help of the USA in funds and weapons to move the Russians out of Afghanistan. That has left Pakistan with a legacy of Talibanisation and refugees. Then they hit upon the idea of sending men to do “jehad” in Kashmir. For the time being all that we can hope for is that terrorism in J & K and the “jehad” pattern will be defeated by the security forces. After a few years when the Pakistan army realises the futility of its tactics, a union of South Asia may emerge with firm control on the army by a democratic government in Pakistan. In a country committed to religion, the two biggest disasters of a religious kind were the storming of the Golden Temple by the security forces in 1984 and the destruction of the Babri Masjid in 1992. Looking back, I find insufficient reason for the hurry and lack of preparation that preceded the Army action in Amritsar. It was known that fortifications had been built by Bhindranwale, Major-Gen Shehbag and the militants holed up in the temple. It was probably a feeling in the minds of Indira Gandhi that the mere appearance of the Army outside the Golden Temple would lead to surrender. Both the IB and the Army were not aware of the number of weapons that were available inside, certainly not the 400 Brens that were found after the assault. The first thrust of the Army was grounded by murderous fire. Tanks were then used to finish the resistance, and the damages that resulted was serious. The second time an entry in the Golden Temple was required it was a police operation conducted by Mr K.P.S.
Gill, a far less policeman, Chaman Lal, his daring Deputy, assisted by the CRPF, the NSG and Mr Sarabjit Singh, the DC. The whole operation was conducted in the full glare of publicity. Power and water supplies were cut off. Repeated appeals were made and assurances of safety were given if they surrendered. Nearly 150 militants were flushed out, two committed suicide and three died in firing. All the devotees trapped inside were saved. Indira Gandhi had taken the generous view that Sikh guards should not be moved out from her security. No prolonged attempt was made to question them about their feelings. If that had been done, it may have been noticed that the guards were emotionally disturbed. The assassination of the former Prime Minister was a failure both of the security and intelligence network, but most of all of our understanding of a people’s rage. A similar failure occurred at the time of the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi who had felt that security was being overdone and was the cause of unpopularity for him. The method used of a human bomber waiting to welcome the VVIP ought to ring alarm bells in our security arrangements. The career of a young leader, who had impressed the world with his personality, his principles and his capacity to lead a large nation, was suddenly cut off in his prime. December 6, 1992, was in the words of Vijay Karan (“War by Stealth”) a day that went against the time-honoured Indian ethos of tolerance. A mob brought down an old and harmless structure called the Babri Masjid. Over 2,000 persons were killed in the rioting that followed. In Pakistan and Bangladesh, Hindus and their temples were targeted by angry Muslim mobs. Then followed a series of bomb explosions in Bombay killing 323 persons. A study of the disasters that we have faced since Independence leads to the conclusion that the majority of them were concerned in one way or the other with religion. It is a strange confusion that we flounder in the Indian subcontinent. We hate bigotry in our neighbour. But we placate it as harmless in our own land. The writer is a former member of the Police Commission. |
|
How to eliminate child labour TODAY’s world gives great importance to equality, liberty and fraternity. Concerted efforts at the global level have been made for evolving measures not only to safeguard these ideals but also to promote universalisation of primary education and development mechanisms to eradicate child labour. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, dealt with the rights of the child per
se. The convention reiterated the principle of equality and non-discrimination, promised the survival, protection and development of children and made it obligatory on the part of the State to ensure the protection of all the rights in the best interest of the child. The Government of India adopted the UN convention on the rights of the child in December, 1992, and enacted various related laws and regulations. Growing global concern discourages the purchase of the products made with the use of child labour. In fact, one can see a strong movement in the near future, particularly in the West, on this issue. The message is that India should do something quickly to eradicate child labour or face the consequences. That apart, India today is faced with the problem of a continuously growing number of child workers on the one hand and unemployment on the other. Though several laws have been passed to prohibit the employment of children below a certain age in the organised sector, the Child-Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986 has less to do with prohibition and more with regulation. Further, Article 24 provides that no child, below the age of 14, shall be employed in any hazardous occupation, but there is permission to work in house-hold industries. Mostly children are engaged in traditional occupations in the unorganised sector. Many traditional occupations have hazardous processes (like beedi making, polishing, weaving, match box and fireworks making, spray painting, electroplating, beads and bangle making, etc) where child labour is employed with poor working conditions. Working children are denied entry into the organised sector where the situation is better. India gives great importance to the universalisation of primary education with a view to eradicating child labour. Therefore, most of the state governments have passed laws for compulsory education. Not only has education been made free of cost but also some additional incentives such as free mid-day meals and textbooks for school-going children are offered. However, the formal education system suffers from various deficiencies. One is that the curriculum is so irrelevant that it does not motivate parents to send their children to school. Secondly, formal education renders a child totally unfit in a competitive
society. The need is to make the education system fit to cater to the needs of vocational training so that children and their parents do not feel redundant in a competitive society. Realising that mere legislation will not eradicate the menace of child labour, the Government of India has prepared a National Policy on Child Labour which concerns education, health, nutrition, integrated child development and employment. Unfortunately, the efforts of the government have made a limited impact both on eradicating child labour and the universalisation of primary education. No doubt, India has the world’s largest population of child workers with a 5.5 per cent share of the world’s total. According to UN estimates, out of every five working children, one is from India. The government reported that in 1993 17.4 million Indian children below the age of 15 were part of the labour force, constituting 68 per cent of the rural and 24 per cent of the urban work-force. About 10 crore children are working in the unorganised sector. Of them, more than 20 lakh are working in hazardous industries. The immediate need is to find out the reasons why the policies and programmes of the government and the efforts of the NGOs have failed to improve the situation. One reason for the failure is that there are families where children work for their “survival needs”. Thus child labour is an inevitable consequence of economic factors. Any effort to withdraw a child from work without providing him with an alternative source of income is bound to fail. Therefore, it is necessary to evolve an alternative package to help the acquisition of skills to earn one’s livelihood and improve the quality of life. A field survey recently done by this writer in Aligarh district of Uttar Pradesh — where about 15,000 children work in the lock-making industry alone, with an overwhelming majority in the hazardous process of polishing, electroplating painting, etc — showed that most of them were suffering from asthma, TB and other respiratory problems. It is interesting to note that a majority (78 per cent) of child workers, both male and female, are engaged in occupations not preferred by them. But their dislike is subordinated to their family conditions. Even the children engaged in a work of their choice pointed out that poverty had compelled them to accept this occupation. This shows that child workers do not have any scale of choice because all of them suffer from poor socio-economic conditions. A few of them are engaged in their family’s traditional occupation. Why do parents send their children to work at a very young age? The reasons they give are: * Schools have no provision to prepare children for any kind of skill development. * The education system does not fulfil their needs. It does not impart skill-oriented education. It does not help in gratifying their survival needs. * School education is a waste of time and has no direct link with the real life situation where one has to earn for one’s survival. * The lack of facilities like drinking water, toilets, electricity supply and proper seating arrangements at schools does not motivate students to learn. But employers have their own reasons to offer for engaging child workers: (1) Many children work for several months without wages, in the hope of learning a skill. (2) Child labour is cheap and it enhances the employers’ profit. (3) Child labour is easily manageable. They do not understand the concept of unionism. (4) Child labourers belong to poor families. They are fatalistic and can be exploited easily. It is strongly felt that the government should have a watch committee at the district level in which representatives of the community, the District Industries Centre, members of non-governmental organisations, et al, should be included. The committee should ensure strict implementation of all the Acts and regulations concerning working children. The writer is a Chandigarh-based social scientist. |
|
Wolf
Prize awardee, Dr Gurdev Singh Khush, was in Chandigarh for the Agro-tech—2000 that concluded last week. He heads the division of plant breeding, genetics and biochemistry at the International Rice Research Institute, Philippines. His work on evolving rice varieties is acknowledged world-wide. A lot of global interest has been revived in agriculture. Where does India take-off? What should be its priorities? What policy changes are required to qualify India to compete in the world market?
Our Special Correspondent P.P.S. Gill spoke to Dr Khush. Excerpts from the interview How do you perceive the future of Indian agriculture? Agriculture has become a world issue. Irrespective of the World Trade Organisation, it is time to increase efficiency of inputs, opt for better high-yielding varieties, reduce cost of cultivation, adopt precision and mechanised farming, protect soil health, practice water management, provide for nutritional needs of crops, cut dependence on cereals and take on oilseed and cotton. Agriculture has become problematic. Production has plateaued. Farmers are committing suicide. Rural youth do not get admission into agricultural universities. What is the way out? There is need for a de-centralised approach to agriculture, which is not a problem. The problem is rural development that needs attention. There cannot be blanket recommendations in
farming. Scientific mapping of regions has to be done and area specific recommendations made for different crops depending upon soil-type, agro-climatic conditions and water availability. The basic requirement is to change academic courses in the universities. Prepare and train agro-managers, who can take up extension work and explain new techniques to farmers in their language. These agro-managers must be good communicators, work like China’s barefoot doctors and revolutionise agriculture. What is future of Punjab agriculture? Punjab must reduce area under rice. Given its climate, Basmati rice has a bright future in the global market. With Assam, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh out to exploit the untapped potential these states will pose a major challenge to Punjab which will find it very difficult to sell its produce outside its boundaries. Punjab has to preserve its scarce water resources, use scientific techniques like sprinkler and drip irrigation instead of flood irrigation. Soil nutrition and fertility is endangered. Give farmers training and education. Farm technocrats must be trained and farmers given incentives like assured price and market. Till then diversification will remain a dream. Punjab must change its cropping pattern. Instead of chapati wheat it should shift to bread wheat to sell in the world market. Instead of ordinary rice it should sow Basmati varieties. How do you view your achievements as a rice-breeder? What is next in the pipe-line? (He blushes, smiles and whispers modestly.) At present, the varieties evolved at the IRRI occupy 50 per cent of the total world area. I have developed nearly 320 varieties. The endevour is to evolve nutritionally better and high-yielding varieties. There are some varieties ready for trial next year. These have at least 20 per cent higher yield potential than the existing ones. Their grain quality is also much better. How do you view government action in suspending the Director-General of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Dr R.S. Paroda? This is not the done thing. Every key world figure in agriculture, including Director of IRRI and Nobel Prize winner, Dr Norman E Borlough, have written to the government and spoken for Dr Paroda’s reinstatement. Such a step has sent wrong signals world over. This is a disturbing development now when the ICAR is engaged in re-inventing the agricultural education, research and extension programmes in the universities. What is your experience of the Agro-tech—2000? The idea is good. Important thing is will it stop here or percolate down to the masses? Take technology down to the acceptable levels to help increase production and quality and make farming cost-effective. Agriculturally progressive states should explore possibilities of introducing Information Technology into agricultural operations and promote agro-industry for value addition. The wastage percentage of 30 in the post-harvest period is pretty high to be ignored. Punjab must draw lessons from the success stories from Israel experience in agriculture. Moreover, government involvement and investment in agriculture is imperative. Assumption-based farming approach must change, otherwise agriculture will be in serious trouble in the next couple of years. |
|
From reluctant to ambitious As a new First Lady prepares to enter the White House, we look back at the long line of presidential wives that began with the reluctant Martha Washington more than 200 years ago. By the end of the year 2000, the USA will not only have a new President but a new woman in the White House. Whether it's Tipper Gore or Laura Bush, she will have a lot to live up to. After all, she will be following in a long line of First Ladies who have made the job distinctly their own ever since Martha Washington became the nation's very first presidential wife in 1789. Reflecting and sometimes rebelling against the times in which they lived, America's First Ladies have ranged from reluctant to ambitious, and from behind-the-scenes managers of domestic and social affairs to politically active individuals in their own right. For Martha Washington, the role of America's First Lady was one to be endured rather than enjoyed. ‘‘I think I am more like a state prisoner than anything else,’’ she confided in a letter to a niece, ‘‘there are certain bounds set for me which I must not depart from.’’ Although she was referring to her role as First Lady, she could just as easily have been discussing the harsh limits imposed on all women at the time. Typically, this daughter of a privileged 18th century, Williamsburg plantation family, received a negligible education. Instead, she learned that her most important role was to support her husband and family. Like Martha Washington and many of her successors since, Letitia Tyler was a southern belle who grew up in a Virginia plantation home with very little formal education and the notion that her function was to manage domestic duties and make a home for her husband, John Tyler. She was already 51 when he was elected President in 1841, and so frail from the eight children she had borne him that she had been confined to a wheelchair. She joined him for just one winter social season in Washington before her death in the White House on September 10, 1842, leaving her daughter-in-law Priscilla Cooper Tyler to step in and give politics its first taste of show business. The daughter of a well-known tragic actor, Priscilla had gone on stage herself at 17, playing Desdemona to her father's Othello, and catching the eye of young Robert Tyler, whom she married in 1839. ‘‘Intelligent and beautiful, with dark brown hair, she charmed the President's guests— from visiting celebrities like Charles Dickens to enthusiastic countrymen,’’ says Margaret Klaphthor, a curator at the Smithsonian Institution who has spent 50 years studying women in the White House. According to Klaphthor, Priscilla Tyler went to her mother-in-law's immediate predecessor Dolley Madison for advice. For almost half a century, Madison had been the most important women in the social circles of America. She had married Virginia representative James Madison in 1794, when she threw off her sombre Quaker upbringing for the finest of fashions and became Washington's first social butterfly. ‘‘She looked a Queen,’’ wrote Margaret Bayard Smith, a chronicler of early Washington. ‘‘It would be absolutely impossible for anyone to behave with more perfect propriety than she did.’’ When her husband became Secretary of State to President Thomas Jefferson in 1801, Dolley made their home the centre of society and even helped at the White House when the widowed Jefferson asked her assistance in receiving ladies and overseas dignitaries. Indeed, she presided at the first inaugural ball in Washington in 1809 when her husband became chief executive. ‘‘Dolley's social graces made her famous,’’ says Klaphthor. ‘‘Her political acumen, prized by her husband, is less renowned, though her gracious tact smoothed many a quarrel. Hostile statesmen, difficult envoys from Spain or Tunisia, warrior chiefs from the west, flustered youngsters — she always welcomed everyone.’’ If Dolley Madison introduced the White House to the glamour and society associations for which it is now famous, she was also the first to realise that nurturing contacts and friendships was an essential part of directing her husband's political career. But it was Eleanor Roosevelt who became the first First Lady to wield her political tools openly and publicly. The 20th century had heralded a shift in the role of women that gradually made itself felt in the White House. For the first time, first ladies had their own careers — Ellen Wilson was an accomplished artist, Grace Coolidge taught the deaf, and Lou Henry Hoover was a geologist. Roosevelt herself was not only a northerner (she was born in New York), but she was educated and unwilling to become what she called a ‘‘fairly conventional, quiet, young society matron.’’ After marrying her distant cousin, Franklin, in 1905, she began her long career as his political helpmate. While he served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, she learned everything she could about Washington. She was active in the women's division of the State Democratic Committee, kept his interest in politics alive when he was stricken with polio in 1921, and made it her business to research issues and opinions when he ran for President. ‘‘When Mrs Roosevelt came to the White House in 1933, she understood social conditions better than any of her predecessors and she transformed the role of First Lady accordingly,’’ says Klaphthor. While she continued the First Lady tradition of official entertaining, ‘‘she also broke precedent to hold press conferences, travel to all parts of the country, give lectures and radio broadcasts, and express her opinions candidly in a daily syndicated newspaper column, My Day.’’ Nor did she abandon politics after her husband's death in 1945. During the cold war witch hunts, she criticised John F. Kennedy for his failure to take a stand against McCarthyism and voiced the feelings of many people around the world when she asked the American Government why it was freeing so many Nazi war criminals. She was such a powerful public figure, that the FBI even reported on her activities to President Dwight Eisenhower. Later she played a key role in the fight for equal employment opportunities for women and went on to chair the National Organisation for Women. When Kennedy was inaugurated in 1961, his First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy seemed more like Dolley Madison than Eleanor Roosevelt. Although she was a highly educated Vassar student, she was also a member of the wealthy establishment who had been groomed for marriage. At the White House, she defined her major role as ‘‘to take care of the President’’. However, she was canny enough to turn herself into her husband's unofficial cultural ambassador, developing and publicising her interest in the arts in a way that appealed to both young and establishment voters alike. Like Madison and Priscilla Tyler before her, Jackie Kennedy brought glamour to the White House, a useful tactic that Nancy Reagan emulated right down to the Chanel suits and the remodelling of the presidential decor during her tenure there in the 1980s. However, Reagan added a watered down version of Eleanor Roosevelt's political identity, supporting the ‘‘just say no’’ anti-drugs campaign (while her husband was embroiled in the Iran-Contra affair). Barbara Bush, too, became a kind of alter ego for her husband, fronting a literacy programme while the President made welfare cuts. It is Hillary Rodham Clinton who has come closest to the model set by Roosevelt. Politically ambitious herself, she is a qualified lawyer with a razor-sharp mind who has achieved as much individually as she has with her husband. Indeed, before she arrived at the White House from Arkansas, she introduced a pioneer education programme that sent teachers into homes to train parents how to teach their pre-school children basic literacy skills. It was so successful it has become a model for other states. She founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and served on the board of the Arkansas Children's Hospital. Who will the new First Lady emulate? Dolley Madison, Martha Washington, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jackie Kennedy or Hillary Clinton? Or perhaps the 21st century will herald an entirely new way of being the First Lady. —By arrangement with The Guardian |
|
The present now is the sum of all prior thens. *** Those living in the heart chakra, anahata, are able to cognise and know deeply the governing mechanism of rebirth from their own awakening. *** Reincarnation is a refining process, attributing to the evolution of consciousness. *** Man can either incarnate soon after his death, with little or no interlude, or he may remain for thousands of years on the astral plane, evolving in those force-fields, just as on earth he evolved from experience to experience. *** The entire process of reincarnation is the inner play of magnetic force-fields. —Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, Merging with Shiva; Hinduism's Contemporary Metaphysics, chapter 50. *** In the sinning heart reigns Kama and the fickle mind breaks
out of control. Kama casts its noose even upon yogis, jangams, and sannyasis. Only those imbued with God's name (fall not a prey to it) and are able to go across the ocean of existence. —
Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur, Sri Guru Granth Sahib, page 1186. *** The lustful ruin their devotion By indulging in sensual pleasures, The rare diamond of divine love They let slip from their hand And ruin the precious chance of the human birth. *** The lustful will not relish Nectar The poison of pleasures he craves; Over him sensualness prevails — He does not listen, Though warned again and again. —Kabir, Sakhi
Sangraha, p. 130:5; p.131:17 *** Avoid the life of sensual pleasures and turn out desire for lust from your heart... To indulge in sex pleasures and to expect to enter the Kingdom of heaven is sheer mockery. —Maharaj Jagat Singh,
the Science of the Soul, Part IV, 25 |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 120 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
