My other writings
Cricket 24 x 7
Jaagruthi
Yahoo! 360
Mayajaal
My Bloglines
My 43 things
My LinkedIn
On Orkut
Badri's Tamil thoughts
Ganesh's Happily Haphazard
Nitin's Acorn
Prabhu's Pethals
Raghu the reluctant Delhiite
Samanth's blahg
Sankhya the busy idler
Srini the movie critic
Rabble Rousing Random Ramblings by S Jagadish is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
Barack Hussein Obama, the person and not the Japanese city, transitioned from being the president-elect to being the president of the USA an hour or so ago. I found it very surprising that news channels in India were telecasting the swearing-in ceremony live.
It is undoubtedly a key moment in politics in that country. Is it an equally momentous occasion in world politics? Perhaps not, because I don't think a country's foreign policy is decided on the basis of the leader's race, religion, etc. Would people of the USA celebrate if someone from a "backward caste" became India's Prime Minister? Would they celebrate if Sri Lanka had a Tamil as president or PM? How about if France had an Arab-origin president or PM? How about if the UK had a Catholic PM? Indeed, would the world be different in such situations? So why're we "celebrating" Barack Obama becoming the president of the USA?
As for the ceremony, I didn't understand why there was a religious invocation at the event in the first place, let alone why the pastor, Rick Warren, invoked Christianity. I've never understood why "God bless America" is a constant chant used by just about anyone in a position of power. Barack Obama used a Bible (the same one that Abraham Lincoln used) while taking oath. Why this heavy reliance on a specific religion in a nation that prides itself on liberty & equality regardless of race or religion?
Thankfully Obama mentioned Christians, Moslems, Jews, Hindoos and non-believers in the list of people he wanted to take along. He is a fantastic orator. But the time for speeches is past.
There's a huge job ahead to set right his country's economy & foreign policy first. He has already displayed naivete and tactlessness when he spoke of his belief that resolving Kashmir would help switch Pakistan's focus towards Afghanistan, something that David Miliband echoed. There's talk of investing money in using Keynesian models for creating infrastructure, generating wealth for workers, etc.
PS: Dick Cheney is actually a real living organism and not some mythical creation that no-one has seen!
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
On November 4 2008, Barack Obama was declared the winner of the 2008 US presidential election. For quite a few days before that, ever since he was announced as the Democratic Party's candidate, TV channels in India kept talking about whether just like Barack Obama rose to be a contender, could an event of equivalent significance happen in India. So much so that Rajdeep Sardesai asked "Who will be India's Obama?". Once the election results came in, the same questions started pouring in.
Several opinions were provided, and there seemed to be consensus that such an event was possible in Indian politics, especially given Mayawati's stratospheric rise ever since the trust vote in July.
While I wouldn't rule out the possibility, it seems to me that such an event would end up being largely symbolic. We're a nation that prides itself on symbolism. We take great pride in listing it out. We've had a woman prime minister, a Sikh prime minister, 3 Muslim presidents, a Dalit president, a Sikh president, a woman president, Christian party leaders, etc.
Yet, a few aspects of our symbolism are bloody obvious. For one, the presidency is not the single most important political job in India. In fact, it isn't even a political job. So making someone from a minority section of the population (based on gender, religion or caste) as the president doesn't mean a thing, in my opinion.
To compare it with the USA election where an African-American was elected (by direct & indirect voting) as the president is very much an apples-oranges comparison.
The voters of the USA knew well in advance that Barack Obama was the candidate of the Democratic party. In India, the equivalent would be a party announcing before the elections that someone from a minority (gender, religious or caste) section of the population would be the Prime Ministerial candidate. For e.g., the Congress (I) announces that Manmohan would be the man or the UNPA announcing that Mayawati was the front's candidate.
How likely is that? Not too likely, I'd say.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Barack Obama isn't totally African-American. His mother, Ann Dunham, is white. I'm fairly sure that had an impact on the white voters who were ambivalent about voting for him.
In short, I don't quite subscribe to the notion that the time is ripe for an Obama-like upheaval in India's political circles for the simple reason that any such event would be the result of a movement largely symbolic in nature.
PS: I write this from Cambridge, Massachusetts where I landed on Sunday. I'm here on a business visit till December 5. The weather is not as cold as I expected, so the going is good for now. I rather like the city, and will do some roaming around in Boston & Cambridge over the weekend. It isn't often that you land up in a city that has two great educational institutions and was the venue of a momentous protest in the country's history.
Labels: obama, president, symbolism, travelogue, usa, usa 2008
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Obama's remarks on a Kashmir quid pro quo with Pakistan
In an interview with MSNBC, US Presidential candidate Barack Obama indicates that if elected, he would 'facilitate a better understanding between Pakistan and India and try to resolve the Kashmir crisis so that they can stay focused not on India, but on the situation with those militants.'
I guess he is implying that in return for the USA stepping in & facilitating an agreement between India & Pakistan on Jammu & Kashmir, Pakistan will automatically switch focus away from the eastern border and help out with isolating and eliminating Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorism on the other border.
Unfortunately, that's just wishful thinking. Jammu & Kashmir is just one of the thousand cuts that the Pakistani establishment (civilian, military and intelligence) wants to use to make India bleed.
Labels: jammu and kashmir, obama, pakistan, president, terrorism
Did you like the post? [ Subscribe to the blog feed - |
Some of the links may now be broken/not take you to the expected report since the original content providers may have archived/removed the contents.
All opinions expressed are mine alone. My employers (past, present or future) are in no way connected to the opinions expressed here.
All pictures, photographs used are copyrights of the original owners. I do not intend to infringe on any copyright.
Pictures and photographs are used here to merely accentuate and enhance the content value to the readers.
