PERSPECTIVE

Greatness in apology
Neither faith nor reason on display
by A.J. Philip

Pope Benedict XVI

HOWEVER undesirable the recent controversy about a speech made by Pope Benedict XVI may be, its denouement is instructive in many respects. It shows the power of the media in selectively quoting a sentence from a 3755-word speech and creating needless furore and a climate of violence in which a poor nun lost her life and at least two churches were vandalised.

Let’s begin from the beginning. On a visit to his home country, Germany, the Pope addressed the faculty at the University of Regensburg on Faith, Reason and University: Memories and Reflections, on September 12. He was truly in a nostalgic mood.

The Pope recalled his days at the university “when professors from every faculty appeared before the students of the entire university, making possible a genuine experience of ‘universitas”.

The speech is not an easy read for anyone who is not well-versed in Christian theology and European history. Even after reading it carefully twice, I cannot claim to have fully understood it, let alone assimilated it. But that did not prevent hundreds of people coming out on the streets to protest against the Pope’s “blasphemous” speech.

Some of the outlandish among them even issued threats that put a chill in the spines of the devout who had dark visions of Samuel P. Huntington’s clash of civilisations.

Fortunately, the Vatican promptly issued a clarification. When it did not douse “passions”, the Pontiff himself took the initiative and said that he was “very sorry” that some passages of his speech might have sounded offensive to the sensibilities of the Muslim believers. The top doctrinal watchdog of the church during much of his predecessor’s Papacy, Benedict revealed his greatness in his apology. The public protests ended as suddenly as they began.

It can be debated endlessly whether the Pontiff did the right thing in quoting from the dialogue the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus had with a Persian “on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both”. Was it done with the purpose of provoking a controversy or a confrontation as some have effortlessly concluded? The Pope prefaces the questionable quote (I refrain from repeating the quotation in deference to the sensibilities of our Muslim readers) with these words: “I was reminded of this recently, when I read the edition by Professor Theodore Khoury (Muenster)”.

The dialogue happened “perhaps in 1391 in the winter barracks near Ankara” but he read it “recently”. Fourteenth century is a period in semitic religious history which is best forgotten than remembered but because of Prof Khoury’s book, it was fresh in the Pope’s mind and he used it to build his grand thesis that reason cannot be divorced from faith.

Even the most polemical purist will not find anything amiss either in his objective or in his conclusion — “not to act reasonably is contrary to the nature of God”.

Now, how did such a scholarly address receive so much flak? On September 14, one national daily carried a big photograph of the Pope on its front page with the provocative headline “Pope Ignites Furore”. The “furore” at that point was in the mind of the headline writer as nobody, other than the select gathering in that little-known German university, had heard about the speech.

A French news agency, too, played a role when its report began with, “Pope Benedict XVI hit out at Islam and its concept of Holy War …” though the report admitted that his attack came “during a complex theological lecture”.

Suddenly warriors of the religion came out of the woodworks with demonstrations reported from various cities and towns in the country. The Indian media can take credit for taking the initiative in creating the “furore”.

It reminded me of Syed Shahabuddin demanding a ban on Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses because he had learnt from Khushwant Singh, the only Indian who had read the book at that time, that it was blasphemous and the government succumbing to pressure. A book which would not be read even if it came with a cash incentive for reading it was banned in a secular country when much of the Arab Street remained unmindful.

Post-“furore” every commentator who blasted the Pope for quoting the Byzantine Emperor repeated the objectionable quote in his column in wanton disregard for the sensibilities of Muslim believers. One of them even used the occasion to call his predecessor John Paul II names because he held beliefs which he considers “reactionary” little realising that he was a titan who cut across his times in a way few Popes of any era ever had and who “allowed” the construction of a beautiful mosque not far away from the Vatican.

Another editor who wrote an eminently readable book on Jihad explaining to the reader that there are two kinds of Jihads, the greater being the one in which the believer purifies his own faith, found objection in the Pope calling the Byzantine emperor “erudite” while referring to the Muslim interlocutor just as “an educated Persian”. He asked such questions as who was that Persian, did he not have a name, was he not erudite etc?

In his speech, the Pope himself admits that it was not a dialogue of equals. “It was probably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402; and this would explain why his arguments are given in greater detail than the responses of the learned Persian”. The Pope calls the Persian not only “educated” but also “learned”. Both “erudite” and “learned” are synonymous with “scholarly”. Yet, the Pope was not spared for what the learned editor-publisher thought was lexical in-exactitude.

While all is well that ends well, is it not time to lament over the death of tolerance and reason without which no dialogue of cultures is possible? And who will tell the adherents of a faith, who feel threatened by a quote, that Islam is built on the solid foundations of faith and it does not need slogan-shouting and gun-wielding defenders, particularly when it is the fastest growing religion in the world?

On Record
Cultural diplomacy needs a big thrust,
says Karan Singh
by Satish Misra

Dr Karan Singh

Culture is the third instrument of foreign policy and it must be effectively used as a tool for projecting India’s image globally, says Indian Council for Cultural Relations President Dr Karan Singh. India is rich in arts, culture, music and dance. Yet, this instrument has not yet been put into action, laments Dr Singh, who became the Sadr-e-Riyasat of Jammu and Kashmir at the age of 18. He became a Union Minister at the age of 36.

An authority on Indian culture, religion and ethos, Dr Singh advocates a major thrust in India’s cultural diplomacy in an exclusive interview to The Sunday Tribune.

Excerpts:

Q: What is the role of cultural diplomacy in furthering national interest?

A: There are three streams of diplomacy. There is the traditional diplomacy or the classical diplomacy which has been practised for thousands of years. It is akin to the Ganga. There is a growing stream which has become dominant in the last 10 to 15 years. That is economic diplomacy. I call it the Yamuna. The third is the invisible stream like the Saraswati of the Triveni. That is cultural diplomacy. It is very different from the other two.

Cultural diplomacy speaks through the languages of art, craft, literature, dance, music, philosophy, ideas and yoga. This is an area which we have not highlighted at all, all these years. India is one of the very few nations in the world, I am not being chauvinistic, that has been the great originator of culture. Apart from receiving impressions from where ever they came, we have generated ideas and languages. The Vedas said that let noble ideas and thoughts come to us from all sides. We have generated 25 languages from ancient Sanskrit — a great treasure of wisdom and knowledge — to Dogri, my mother tongue. We have generated wonderful forms of dance from Bharat Natyam to Kathak. We have generated brilliant manifestations of architecture. We have got such rich cultural material.

Q: Why have we not been able to use our treasures of culture to our advantage?

A: Unfortunately, what we find cultural attaches, junior level officers, posted in our foreign missions trying to propagate culture. The ICCR, founded half a century ago by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and which is mandated for this purpose, has an annual budget of Rs 63 crore. One-third of this budget goes towards paying the salaries. If that is the sort of priority we give to culture, then are we not messing up a lot? China, over the period of next 10 years, is going to spend US $ 10 billion on setting up 100 cultural centres around the world. It is going to name these centres after Confucius, a philosopher who was outlawed during the cultural revolution. In this background, we have to reorient ourselves.

Q: What can the ICCR do? You have been here almost a year.

A: There has been a turn around. I have written to the Prime Minister last month. After one year as the ICCR President, I will submit that unless you substantially increase the budget of ICCR, what will we be able to achieve? As it is, out of the Rs 63 crore, one-third goes to payment of salaries and another third goes for scholarships. So we hardly have 20 to 21 crore left for our activities. Apart from Saudi Arabia, India has one of the largest Muslim shrine of Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti at Ajmer and all the Buddhist shrines barring Lumbini which is in Nepal are here. All the Sikh shrines barring Nankana Sahib are here. Grand Jain temples and other architectural wonders attract people.

India is a highly talented country for culture. For a country like India, which has given four religions to the world and where many world religions have settled and prospered, the resource constraint is a serious handicap.

Q: If the desired budget was given to you, what would the ICCR do?

A: First, we would like to open more cultural centres. In the whole of Europe, we have one in Moscow, one in Germany and the other in London. Three for the whole of Europe are grossly inadequate. In the whole of North American continent, we have no centre. In Canada and the US, there is no cultural centre.

When I was Ambassador in the US for a brief period, I had moved a proposal to set up a cultural centre in Washington. In the last 17 years, we have not been able to open a centre in Washington. Everytime, a property comes up in the market and by the time we can get our act together, it has been sold. They wouldn’t wait for us. Property in Washington goes like hot cake. Just today we have identified a property. The ICCR is not empowered to buy it as many clearances are required.

We need more cultural centres including in the SAARC region. Apart from holding exhibitions on Indian themes, these centres run classes for dance, music, yoga etc. They are extremely popular with not only local population but also become links for the NRI children. We would also like to start Indian Chairs at the universities so that more and more younger generation get exposed to the Indian ethos and culture.

In Mumbai, we are going to start a South Asian Centre for Arts and Culture at Jinnah House. We would like to give more scholarships to study in India. When Prime Minister Manmohan Singh went to Kabul last year, he announced 500 scholarships and 20,000 applied for these scholarships. This is the kind of demand that exists.

Turmoil in West Asia
by Shelley Walia

THE recent ceasefire followed by a missile attack on Lebanon by the Israeli air force unmistakably indicates a posturing that the western interests lie in finding no immediate solution for bringing the Israeli blitz to an end, but rather in ensuring the dismantling of Hezbollah.

The media too has deftly remained silent on the Ceyhan-Tblisi-Baku (BTC) oil pipeline, that was launched on July 13, the time of the beginning of the invasion of Lebanon. Britain, the US and Israel are partners in this venture that aims to ensure that Israel remains the custodian of much of the oil flowing out of the Caspian sea and safeguards the Eastern Mediterranean transport and pipeline corridors out of Ceyhan.

This visibly is of enormous interest to oil companies operating from the west, most of all British Petroleum. Oil will be pumped not into the oil wells of the west, but will also find a secure route into Israel. Since the underwater pipelines detour Syria and Lebanon, the present onslaught on the latter is inextricably tied to obtaining control over the oil economy. These safeguards will presumably be extended to Syria and then to Iran with the comprehensive plan of securing complete control over the Caspian oil.

The UN humanitarian efforts have been insignificant in the face of non-stop pounding of Southern Lebanon where more than a thousand civilians have died with a third being children and a million people displaced. The ceasefire is a mere façade of concern. If the US vetoed 40 UN resolutions condemning Israeli actions, there is no tangible function of the peacemaking body or its decisions.

The last few weeks have shown that the intimidation of Iran and Syria has brought no results; Iran is still unyielding and has not responded to the August deadline that calls for a suspension of uranium enrichment to avoid facing international sanctions. The Hezbollah still remains a tough military force difficult to suppress even with the American-backed Israeli military. Undeniably, it has been a victory for the Hezbollah, which through its ground forces has put up a strong challenge to Israeli air force and has proved that without foot soldiers it is difficult to win a war.

Israel’s agenda of ‘cleaning up’ Hezbollah within the 20 km zone from the border to the Litani River had the purpose of stationing the International Stabilisation Force, but has left behind a complete pulverisation of the basic amenities of power, food and medicine, schools and bridges in both Lebanon and Gaza. UN security resolutions 242 and 338 insist on an immediate withdrawal from Golan Heights, West Bank and Gaza. World leaders need to make all efforts to implement the ceasefire, failing which there would be a further doubt cast on the already low credibility of the western allies.

The world has to stir out of its slumber and denounce Israel and its allies without fear of being labeled anti-Semitic, being fully aware that the West Asian animosity will result in manifold killings which would give birth to further terrorist attacks, sponsored either by the state or by private agencies.

OPED

Profile
In quest of improving the quality of life
by Harihar Swarup

ONE wonders why Indians rise like meteor, outshine others, when they go abroad; some of them emerge as prodigy in any sphere they choose. Born in Balasore, 67-year-old Prof Asit K Biswas is one of them. He was awarded this year’s Stockholm Water Prize, considered equivalent to Nobel Prize for water. He was honoured by the Stockholm Water Foundation for his outstanding contribution to global water resource issues, including research, education and awareness, water management, human and international relations in both developed and developing countries. He has applied his skills internationally to open up new dimensions to the wise use and management of global water resources.

His research helped significantly improve the lives of millions of people in the developing world. In his many roles as scientist and educator, Prof Biswas had acted as advisor to policymakers in water and environmental management in 17 countries, six heads of UN agencies and several inter-governmental and international organisations.

Though born and brought up in India, Prof Biswas did his research work mostly in Canada whose citizenship he has now acquired. He is President of the Third World Centre for Water Management, Mexico City. He spoke to Stockholm Water Front on the eve of this year’s Water Week and some of his observations are so educative and revealing. He says the prestigious award is confirmation of the quality work done by the Centre and its overall impact on the world.

He describes himself primarily as a scientist who “does not care much for political correctness, international bandwagons, dogmatic views and hidden agendas”. His objective is to ensure that best water policies are formulated and implemented in specific countries, based on countries’ aspirations and conditions to improve the quality of life of their people.

Prof Biswas dismisses talk of “water wars” as “pure rubbish” and says if there is a war between two countries, the tenth reason could be water but not the first nine. Water projects, when planned and managed properly, act as engines for regional development. Their benefits could revolutionise the quality of life of the poor people. Yet, the water profession has consistently neglected to assess scientifically how water development can act as an engine for growth of an entire region.

He has analysed the benefits and costs of three large water projects — Bhakra Nangal in India, Aswan Dam in Egypt and Ataturk Dam in Turkey and reached the conclusion that the benefits these dams have brought to the region are simply “fantastic”. By bringing prosperity to the region, they have advanced the cause of peace and security.

Prof Biswas feels that during the next 20 years the world of water will change more, compared to past 2000 years and this is the biggest challenge of the 21st century. “We can no longer anticipate, let alone solve, tomorrow’s water problems with yesterday’s knowledge and the day before yesterday’s experience. Forces like globalisation, free trade, information and communication revolution, accelerated the quest for energy security, technological and rural development. New dynamics in areas like population and urbanisation are changing the boundary conditions of water management. Yet, these issues are being consistently ignored by the water profession”.

Even though Prof Biswas mostly lives abroad, he has not forgotten his links with India. Nor has he forgotten Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, from where he obtained his Bachelor’s degree. He visits the country of his birth twice or thrice a year and readily lends his service to the Government of India to solve any water problem.

He helped the UNDP and the UNIDO to establish the Pollution Control Research Institute at Hardwar and acted as the Chief Technical Advisor of this establishment. He has also been an advisor to the Central Water Commission, the Union Ministry of Environment and the Government of Gujarat. In addition, he has evaluated the Indira Gandhi Nahar (Canal) Project, the Bhima Command Development Project in Madhya Pradesh and the Groundwater Development Project in UP.

Whenever in India, Prof Biswas makes it a point to visit his home town in Balasore. He can never forget his mother who, he says, “taught me to fight, even when I am in the minority of one, as long as the cause is right”. He often quotes his mother as telling him: “there is nothing wrong in living in an ivory tower, as long as it is not the only place of residence”.

Another source of Prof Biswas’ inspiration is his wife, Ceilia. “I have not done anything during the last 10 years where she has not had major intellectual and technical inputs”, he says.

Reflections
Police reforms
Supreme Court cracks the whip
by Kiran Bedi

HERE is some telling feedback from a recent discussion I was witness to:

• Quote (a): “If you go by the law book then what are we for”? Asked a local leader of a new entrant in police service, who was strictly going by the law book. This young entrant was determined to do what his teachers had taught him in the academy.
• Quote (b): “Some of the local representatives think that taking up popular issues alone is the primary responsibility and not legislating by them”.
• Quote (c): “The police force suffers from a schizophrenic syndrome. It has a split culture. For survival it depends on politicians and for accountability to law. We need a clear chain of command”.

Truly, September 22 will be remembered in the annals of Indian Policing as National Day of Rule of Law. Jai Hind.

Diversities — Delhi Letter
No concern for the displaced people
by Humra Quraishi

EACH time I receive a copy of the Refugees, published by UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, I feel almost depressed. For, invariably there are stories of how the human being is either sitting uprooted, fleeing or living in refuge. Though we make those hollow claims that developed we are as we go marching onwards, ironically the past few decades have seen more “forced migrations” the world over than ever before.

Last week, the Calcutta Research Group in collaboration with the Academy of Third World Studies organised a five-day international workshop here in New Delhi to focus on this grim reality and the patterns that follow in the context of forced migration. Those issues of gender dimensions of forced migration, refugee protection laws, politics of displacement and then, of course, the important issue of internal displacement.

In her keynote address, Carol Batchelor, Chief of Mission, UNHCR, New Delhi, focused on the 1951 UN Convention that defined a refugee as someone who had crossed an international border due to a well-founded fear of persecution. Reasons such as migration due to environmental disasters were not included in this definition. Dr Batchelor outlined in detail the distinction in the status of refugees (who have crossed national borders and hence have no national protection), internally displaced people (IDPs), conflict-generated IDPs and non-conflict-generated IDPs (such as those displaced due to natural disasters) and voluntary migrants.

According to UN statistics, there were currently 8.4 million refugees (more than half of whom had been in exile for more than five years), over 20 million IDPs out of whom over 6.6 million were conflict-generated IDPs. She also referred to the 4.3 million Palestinian refugees, many of whom had been in exile for over five decades…And also the fact that 80 per cent of refugee populations were comprised women, children and the elderly.

She also referred to the high power dialogue by the UN on Migration held at New York last week to explore the possibilities to have legal migration systems and developmental projects that would stem the flow of migrations.

Several others also spoke. Ranabir Samadar of the Calcutta Research Group pointed out that there was a need, given the enormity of the problem of migration, to move beyond “assembly-line humanitarianism” and “calculated hospitality’ and to address the “state of rightlessness” that refugees and migrants often lived in.

There seems much turmoil in the world. As though almost under the façade of development and distractions, the human being is being pushed around, even in India. Don’t we have our own internally displaced and what has the establishment done for their upkeep? Nothing really!

This brings me to write about what another speaker had to say. Professor Smitu Kothari came up with a potently hard-hitting speech. He said that in India alone there are 60 million displaced men and women. They are all victims of planned development with no compensation from the government.

He rightly said that we may have ousted the British, but we not only follow outdated laws and Acts, but use the same ways to settle the helpless. He pointed out in the last 30 years, the gap between India’s rich and poor has widened and there has been an uneven development.

He said, “the Tehri valley looks ravaged because power has to be brought to New Delhi...those dozens of villages in the Tehri valley don’t get power, yet power has to be brought from there for the Capital. Dams are coming up in the name of development, but who is bothered that some millions are going to be displaced because of their constructions.”

He said the country has no national policy on development. He called it “limited democracy” because the state seemed the sole political authority to do what it claims is right”.

State violence must stop

If the establishment is even a little serious about curbing violence, it should start with its own machinery. What can be a more appropriate day than October 2, Gandhi Jayanthi. Instead of all those hollow speeches, it is best to see and perceive what damage is being done by the lathis, firings and the boot. This week has witnessed all this and more. So there is little sense in my going into details of what havoc has been unleashed on the citizen by the very force which is supposedly there to protect it.

Let us not overlook another important aspect. The issue of communal riots. I would like to refer to the book, Communal Riots: The State and Law in India, edited by Iqbal A. Ansari and published by the Institute of Objective Studies. If you were to read this volume, you will be shocked to note the biased attitude of the government machinery during violence.

Take care of your heart

Today is World Heart Day. With the rising reasons for stress and not-so-favourable living conditions, all is not well for the upkeep of the heart. Medical shops have mushroomed as ever before, but at what cost? I think the nature has not really equipped the heart to live in such harsh times.

REFLECTIONS

Only when man has his fall of material objects, does he care to raise his eyes upwards.

— The Upanishads

None should boast of what they cannot achieve. Called to the challenge, they are forced to seek wild excuses which convince none and make them a laughing stock.

— The Mahabharata

Worship nothing but God; be good to your parents and relatives, and to the orphan and the poor. Speak nicely to people, be constant in prayer, and give charity.

— The Koran

God has explained to me, and I stand convinced, that there is only one creator of the wide world. We should always remember Him.

— Guru Nanak