The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

ARTICLE

Towards India-EU FTA
Important for bilateral ties
by Harsh V. Pant

India and the European Union (EU) continue to struggle to conclude a bilateral Free Trade Agreement (FTA) six years after the negotiations were first launched in 2007. There’s a new momentum in the talks after the visit of Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh to Germany a few days back where he along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel emphasised the importance of concluding the on-going India-European Union Broad-Based Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) talks expeditiously. Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma was in Brussels the other day for high-level negotiations with the EU Trade Commissioner, Karl De Gucht, but the two could not iron out all the differences.

India has an interest in getting a favourable package on services, including declared interests in IT and the movement of Indian professionals. Market access for agricultural products, pharmaceuticals and textiles is also a priority for India. For the EU, concessions in the financial services are the key. This includes opening up of the insurance sector for FDI from the present 29 per cent to 49 per cent. The EU is also keen on the automobile sector where it is seeking a reduction in tariffs, much to the consternation of the Indian automobile industry, as well as a strong intellectual property regime.

The BTIA will be very significant for India-EU ties as this will be the first FTA for India not merely focused on the liberalisation of trade but also of investment. The conclusion of BTIA will be important not only for India’s further integration into the global economy but also to a give a boost to India-EU ties which have failed to achieve their full potential.

Despite the well-intentioned attempts by the EU to engage India more productively in recent years, there are significant constraints that continue to limit these ties from reaching their full potential. It took the EU very long to recognise that India also matters over the long-term and should be taken seriously. For long, the EU had single-mindedly focused on China, ignoring the rise of India in Asia-Pacific. India’s rising economic profile, the US overtures to India, its growing role on the global stage from the United Nations to the WTO, all have forced the EU to make it one of its strategic partners. The EU-India relationship is getting a long-term focus with the recognition that there are enough mutual benefits to ensure that small areas of friction are smoothed over.

The EU has been lukewarm at best to support India’s bid for a permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council. This is partly because different member-states have different views on this issue and partly because the EU is still testing the waters to see which way the wind will blow ultimately. This is despite the fact that the EU has been supportive of the UN attempts to reform its functioning and organisational structure so that it reflects the
changing global realities.

Though the EU is India’s largest trading partner accounting for around 19 per cent of trade, FDI from the EU into India has also grown considerably in recent years. India’s trade with the EU reached $91.3 billion in 2010-11. Yet the EU’s economic ties with India are yet to achieve their full potential with total FDI into India still amounting to only 1 per cent of EU outflows and being less than a tenth of that into China.

Finally, and perhaps most important, there is the issue of the EU mindset which still views India as a regional South Asian power and continues to equate India with Pakistan. The tendency to equate India and Pakistan, which until recently affected Washington and marred all policy initiatives in the past, seems to be alive and kicking in Europe. Despite some belated efforts, the EU continues to see security issues through the old lens, trying to find a fine balance between New Delhi and Islamabad.

With the exception of France and Britain, member-states of the EU have not been entirely supportive of the recently concluded US-India nuclear deal as was clear from the initial deadlock at the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). This granting of an extraordinary exception to India by the US has not gone down very well with the non-proliferation constituencies in various EU countries.

As the centre of gravity shifts to Asia-Pacific and the international system undergoes a profound re-ordering, the EU is trying hard to accommodate to these new global realities. The rise of China and India has presented the EU with several opportunities that it’s trying its best to harness. But while trade and economics seems to have given the EU a reference point vis-à-vis the two Asian giants, politically it seems adrift as it is finding it difficult to speak with one voice on the political issues that confront the world today. Europe is finding it difficult to formulate a coherent foreign policy across the EU nations and this has made it difficult for the EU to respond as effectively to the rise of China and India as it would like to. The US has taken the lead in defining its relations with China and India and the EU now seems to be reluctantly following its lead as opposed to acting as an autonomous political unit keeping in mind its own strategic priorities.

The EU’s lack of a strategic direction in foreign policy makes it difficult for it to respond effectively to new challenges such as the rise of India. New Delhi should leverage its growing economic and political profile in the international system to impress upon the EU that it’s time for the EU to act seriously on its promise to make India a strategic partner. An expeditious conclusion of the India-EU FTA would be an important first step.

MIDDLE

The aroma of patriotic fervour
by N.S. Tasneem

Love for one’s motherland is an ingrained sentiment. It is, in fact, sucked in with the mother’s milk. Thereafter a little bit of intrusion in the land by a foreign country evokes resentment. This is tantamount to a blow to self-respect and a challenge to national pride. To reclaim the territory, at any cost, becomes an issue that can assume terrible proportions. But the best course is to sort out differences in an amicable manner. Still it should always be borne in mind that— ‘If you want peace, be prepared for war.’

At this time, two personages of history loom large in my mind who were denied access, after their deportation, to their motherland. Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal emperor, and Maharaja Duleep Singh, the last ruler of the Land of Fiver Rivers, could not find eternal abodes for their mortal frames in the land of their birth. Both of them had become the victims of the nefarious designs of the foreign rulers.

Interestingly, Bahadur Shah Zafar had lived full circle when he was deported to Rangoon, whereas Maharaja Duleep Singh was hardly 11 when the Punjab was annexed to the British territory. But their end was quite similar, as they died with the flame of patriotic fervour flickering in their hearts. Zafar, prophetically, had said earlier— Kitna hai bad-naseeb ‘Zafar’ dafn ke liye/ Do ghaz zameen bhi na mili ku’ay yaar mein (How unfortunate is Zafar that he has not been able to get even two yards of land in his beloved’s street for his burial!) What endears them to their compatriots, after such a long time, is the warmth that they exuded in their personal relationships. During his lifetime, Bahadur Shah Zafar was the patron to poets like Ustad Zauq and Mirza Ghalib. But, at the same time, he acknowledged them as his mentors.

Once Ustad Zauq and some other poets had to wait for a long time to get an audience with the emperor. He was ushered in, after an interminable period, so that his admirers at once entered into conversation with him. Hardly had the tete-a-tete begun, when the emperor received summons from his consort. He got up at once to the astonishment of the persons present there. Someone among the poets, however, could not resist the temptation of remarking, “So soon, my lord?” The emperor, with a gesture of helplessness, replied: “Apni khushi se aaye, na apni khushi chale.”

Maharaja Duleep Singh too had tender feelings tucked away in the inner recesses of his heart. Once he developed some trouble in his feet but this did not deter him from dancing when someone played his favourite tune. He injured his feet in the process but he did not mind it.

Lady Login, the wife of the tutor of Maharaja Duleep Singh, has recalled an interesting episode in her memoirs. Once Lady Login went to see Ranee Duknoo (Duleep Singh’s sister-in-law) in the company of Maharaja Duleep Singh who was just about 13 then. The Ranee took it into her head to insult her in a subtle manner. She filled the only one glass in the tray with sherbet and offered it to the Maharaja. But he courteously handed it to the Lady. She drank a part of it and placed it on the tray. The Ranee filled it again and presented the same to the Maharaja. He took the glass in his hand, drank off its contents and abruptly walked off. He later told Lady Login that he could not let the Ranee insult her.

Indeed the other sides of the portraits of these great personalities of history are all the more attractive. Both of them longed for a glimpse of their motherland before closing their eyes, but the rulers of the time blocked their paths. They died forlorn on the alien soils but the aroma of their patriotic fervour still wafts along the corridors of the minds of their countrymen.

OPED WOMEN

Is market directing bold feminist writing?
Is women’s writing catalytic enough to bring something new out of the prevailing chaos? Or, by offering titillation in the name of being bold, feminists are catering to the demands of the publishing industry?
Mridula Garg

I think it is important to remember grassroots feminists like Mahadevi Verma and Simone de Beauvoir in the time of ideological confusion today. Powerful men in publishing and editing, posing as liberal feminists have, alarmingly taken over the supervision of writing by women. They offer to publish their books with heavy publicity if they agree to write soft pornography: in the name of feminism of course.

This is nothing new. But it has spread its tentacles far and wide now, particularly in the Hindi literary world. In fact, ever since the first International Women’s Day was celebrated in 1975, Indian male writers and editors have been in thrall of soft pornography written by women. They hide their titillation behind the pretence of mouth smacking feminism. All that feminism implies for them is that they are in favour of women baring it all for them to enjoy the view and frank talk. I remember when I wrote my first novel, coincidentally in 1975, I was asked by the famous male Hindi editor/ publisher, at present the foremost patron of writing by women, “Can you write something like Erica Jong’s Fear of Flying in Hindi.” My answer was “I can but I won’t.” I remember a kind of sex manual called “Any Woman Can” used to be on the best -seller list those days. That too kept getting thrown at the heads of hapless women writers by the male literati; the innuendo being, surely you can. Naipaul said it openly and brutally; Hindi writers, slyly. My riposte was always the same,” Sure any women can but does she want to?”

Both women — Mahadevi Verma and Simon de Beauvoir — were characterised by the peculiar brand of turmoil and resurgence that prevailed in their motherland, both responded to it in more than 50 shades

Why only fifty shades of grey?

Four decades have passed since and the latest to grab the fancy of male pro-feminists is the book, “Fifty Shades of Grey.” Again they are smacking their lips and asking young female writers, “Can you write a book like Fifty Shades of Grey?” The poor dears are vying with each other to produce pale copies, forgetting they are writing in a language where Vice Chancellors of Universities can call female writers sluts, with impunity (or the unprintable word as was originally used in Hindi), if they strayed from the beaten track. The point discussed with lip smacking interest then was; are female writers, sluts or are they pretending to be? The incident died without any loss of face by the V.C while the question continued to do the rounds.

Under these bleak circumstances, I think it is imperative that we remember a stalwart and veteran feminist like Mahadevi Verma, who fought for women’s rights through her works without once invoking pornographic titillation.

Simone de Beauvoir of France and Mahadevi Verma of India were two literary giants as unlike each other as their countries. But each was true to the special genius of her particular country in a manner that went beyond psyche or tradition. Their work embraced a whole gamut of emotions which reflected their countries over the catalytic period, which created a new society out of the prevailing chaos.

Simone de Beauvoir was born in 1908 in France. In her youth, she saw her country subdued and occupied during the Second World War and soon after, re-emerge as a proud and vibrant nation. Mahadevi Verma was born in 1907 in India, a country already subdued and occupied but one, whose proud and rebellious spirit was soon to assert itself in a freedom struggle, which coincided with her youth.

Unlike the short and valiant French resistance, the Indian movement was more protracted, so it required more patience, hope and above all, faith. Characteristically, it was faith rather than fiery rebellion which gave its special touch to Mahadevi’s work. Both women were characterised by the peculiar brand of turmoil and resurgence which prevailed in their motherland.

Rebellion of the soul or body?

Simone rebelled against the religiosity of her time and took refuge in the companionship of another rebel, a flesh and blood lover, friend, philosopher and guide. Mahadevi rebelled against the constraints of her social milieu, pursued an education against the dictates of the elders. She refused to go to her husband’s house and insisted on the annulment of a marriage promulgated by others. But she did not rebel against religiosity. She metamorphosed it into poetry of an intensely personal nature. She did not choose a flesh and blood companion but a mystic lover, with whom there could be no union; only eternal yearning. And that, according to our mystic poets and thinkers, is the true state of perfect love; a yearning that knows no end.

The mystic love she sang of in her poems, full of wistful, tender longing and deep anguish, made people compare her to Mirabai, the most lyrical and rebellious of the Bhakti poets. Mahadevi was born in a later era so she did not have to leave the household and wander as a vagabond in a world, not willing to accept an unattached woman. She eschewed the home before it was thrust upon her. Not that it required less courage but it showed her to be a truly pragmatic woman along with being a deeply metaphysical one.

She declared, like Mirabai that she yearned for an identity, different from what most others wanted and for that, she had to reject being a householder and mother. She could express her yearning for a deathless lover without taking a stand against men of flesh and blood or proclaiming herself to be of the second sex, as her contemporary Simone de Beauvoir did.

She was lucky to have stalwarts like Suryakant Tripathi Nirala and Sumitra Nandan Pant as her contemporaries, of whom she always spoke with affection and adulation. They died but she survived in a more materialistic and strife torn world. She was not ready to succumb to its dictates; perhaps that’s why she did not publish a work of poetry after 1940.

The unattached woman

All the acclaim she got came from five collections of poetry written before 1940; Neehar, Rashmi, Neerja, Sandhyageet and Yamaa. The last won her the Bhartiya Jnanpeeth Award in 1982, though it had been published as far back as 1939. Recognition came early to her with the first book she published, when she was barely 21 years. But Jnanpeeth Award came rather late, considering she had bestowed the same award to another writer seven years earlier. That indeed had been her finest hour. She mounted the dais at the Award ceremony in Delhi during the Emergency of 1975. With a singular display of courage of conviction and belief in freedom, she lashed out at a government that dared put curbs on the freedom of people, artists and writers, including those, who had sacrificed all that they had to win it barely 30 years ago. Seven years later when she was awarded the honour, she had already bestowed on another; many hoped she would refuse it, the way Sartre had refused the Nobel Prize. Disappointingly she did not. But it did not tarnish the memory of her finest hour.

Mahadevi was not only a poet of rare sensibility and mystic insight but also a prose writer of vibrant earthiness and tender humour. Reading her pen portraits or Rekhachitra is like being present at the village well-gathering of chatty, earthy women, who bare their souls as they recount their day to day anguish, without losing their sense of humour or zest for life. The affinity one felt with the living characters made one surmise, that had their experiences been turned into stories, something vibrant and vital would have been lost.

She used her inimitable genius to internalize the emotions and feelings of others to write in yet another genre, equally inimitably. She turned into a letter writer for the illiterate poor men and women around her. More women came to her to have letters written than men. The most touching was the story of a dumb destitute woman called Gungia, who wanted her to write to her long lost son, Hulasi, whose whereabouts she did not know but was sure, Mahadevi would somehow trace him. To interpret her gestures and reproduce them in words, as she herself said, was not an easy task. In her own words, “When asked if I should write that it was very wrong of Hulasi to have run away, Gungia waggled her index finger to say, no. Then should I write whatever he did was right, I asked and Gungia’s head moved in an emphatic no. Finally, your Gungia Amma has been waiting for you for twelve years met with her mute approval. In this way, I managed to write the letter sentence by sentence like a novice poet.” The fact that a poet acclaimed as a prodigy and a genius undertook this task of her own choice, showed the true strength of her sisterhood. A sisterhood, others have to either pretend to or at best aspire to.

Empathy, sisterhood or titillation?

Male critics often separate the two Mahadevis; one bound to the earth, translating everyday reality into vibrant prose; the other, taking flight in the world of the spirit, seeking a mystic lover in various aspects of nature and in the vision of the Absolute. But, as a woman I feel that the superficial dichotomy between the pull of the womb and the mind or the spirit is, in fact, a synchronized reality, which constitutes the essence of a woman’s nature. The womb helps to keep us rooted firmly to the ground, while the mind goads us to surge upwards and roam the beyond. But very few women have the courage to touch the beyond as Mahadevi did. She was being quintessentially a woman and an Indian when she dared to roam the earth and soar into the unknown with equal grace. The mystic poet and the earthy prose writer were in fact complimentary to each other, not contradictory.

But she did something more. She gave up the womb altogether by choice. She felt that it was the only way she could seek and preserve her identity. She then used her maternal instinct to nurture the needy and penned their struggles in earthy prose. She managed to find her identity not once but twice; once through poetry, then through prose. In neither did she give vent to rancour or cynicism.

There is an important lesson here for today’s turbulent times. However many shades there might be of grey raw sexuality, one shade would override them always. That is the shade of empathy and sisterhood. It does not need to take recourse to baring the body in sexual exhibitionism. Its purveyance is so vast and strong that it can offer multiple shades to both men and women, with no need for either calling the other, a slut.

To write something like Erica Jong’s “Fear of Flying” offers an easy option to popularity, but do many women writers choose this option? Or, take the long road of empathy like Mahadevi Verma did.

The writer is a well-known Hindi novelist

Mahadevi Verma Simone rebelled against the religiosity of her time and took refuge in the companionship of another rebel, a flesh and blood lover, friend, philosopher and guide. Mahadevi rebelled against the constraints of her social milieu, pursued an education against the dictates of the elders. She refused to go to her husband’s house and insisted on the annulment of a marriage promulgated by others.
There is an important lesson here for today’s turbulent times. However many shades there might be of grey raw sexuality, one shade would override them always. That is the shade of empathy and sisterhood. It does not need to take recourse in baring the body in sexual exhibitionism.

— Mridula Garg