JLF Retrospective Pt 2: Amartya Sen, A Living National Treasure

JLF keynoter Amartya Sen

After hearing from Amartya Sen twice on the opening day of JLF, I tweeted that India ought to declare him a living national treasure, as the Japanese do for some of its greatest artists and thinkers. I wasn’t kidding. Of course, there could be a down side to such an act, as he seems now on permanent loan the U.S. as a professor at Harvard (and take that, Cambridge!), and perhaps he’d be called back to India full time. In any event, he’s a cosmopolitan man and a real gem. He comes across as humble, generous, humorous, and brilliant. In his keynote address, he imagined a conversation with the “goddess of medium things” to ask seven wishes for India. I’ll share my notes about those wishes below. Indians and the rest of the world would do well to keep them constantly in mind:

1.      Sen asks for a renewed concern for classical education and the humanities. In his interview during a later session, this Nobel prize-winning economist told his audience that he studied Sanskrit and mathematics in college. If you read a book like The Argumentative Indian, his collection of essays about India, you appreciate his knowledge of India that extends back into the classical era. Against this, India is awash in engineers and IT guys without such grounding. A new balance is needed. Sen mentioned that Tagore (whose school Sen attended) emphasized the need for science education. Now the positions are reversed. By the way, I’ll make the same wish for America and the rest of the world.

2.      Sen wishes for a pro-business party on the right that is not associated with communalism (which we Americans would consider a religious or ethnic party). While not mentioned by name, he probably was thinking of the BJP, the Hindu nationalist party that scares non-Hindu Indians (and there are millions of them, mostly Muslim). But like the Republican Party in the U.S., it is an amalgam of business interests and voters who believe that they can advance only if someone else gets trampled upon. In the U.S., white men tend to vote Republican although Republican policies favor plutocrats over working people. So, again, I’ll take Sen’s wish to the U.S. with me.

3.      Sen wishes for a stronger party on the Left, one genuinely concerned for the severely deprived (millions in India) and not chasing the boogieman of “American imperialism”. I got a good chuckle out of this comment, as I believe that he was making an oblique reference to The (Khodograbe) Arrest. More than one commentator about that affair noted that the old guard in India still wants to man the barricades with the old Marxist rhetoric of anti-imperialism. The young, I think, look upon this as so much nonsense, although as with many of the young, you can expect a strong nationalist streak. In any event, the really poor should be the concern of the Left according to Sen. I say ditto for the U.S. If the Democrats have any concern for the poor (and they do have—some, they are ahead of the Republicans, but that’s not saying much at all. Both the Left  in India and  Democrats in the U.S. are too beholden to wealthy donors and middle-class interests to do what’s really best for the really poor, but Sen’s next suggestion addresses this problem.

4.      Sen wishes for a better media. The media must overcome its reluctance to investigate and reveal abuses that strike close established interests, such as subsidies for petroleum and electricity that mainly benefit the wealthy and middle-class and that do little for the really poor. The really poor don’t have access or much use for electricity or much in the way of petroleum. The media conveniently ignores these abuses of the public purse. Sen wants to see subsidies ended and funds directed to health care, immunizations, infrastructure, and other public goods. Sen suggests that funds are best spent for better schools, better higher education, toilets for all, and gender equality, among other things. While economic growth has allowed some improvements in each of these areas, economic growth without a political sector that provides for public goods will fail to allow for the improvement of everyone’s life. For models, Sen suggests that India look to the East Asians (whom, I must say, have left India behind).

5.      Sen asks for an end to the criminalization of homosexuality, a vestige of mid-19^th century British attitudes. (Here is one area in which the U.S. has made some very real gains and seems well underway to ending this discrimination.) \

6.      Sen asks for an improvement in the political culture of India and a better recognition of issues. He, like many, is heartened that corruption has become a political issue. Improved governance is a good that needs reinforcement and that can aid in many other causes, such as the eradication of polio and improvements in the condition of women.

7.      Sen requests that India become less “defeatist”. I would say “fatalist”, but the intention is the same. Far too often I perceive that Indians take a “what’ya gonna do?” attitude. But I believe—and hope—that demonstrations  and elections in Delhi and elsewhere about corruption and the abuse of women indicate a new activism that might lead India to address its many failures of governance. Of course, we in the U.S. take too much for granted, and for every “gov’ment can’t do nothing right” yahoo in the U.S. I meet, I’d like to bring them to India and say:  “Here’s what it looks like with little or no effective government”. What unreconstructed Indian lefties and American anti-government types don’t ponder enough is why Indians emigrate to the U.S. (and U.K. and Australia) and not vice versa. It’s all a package, and right now Indian’s package of opportunities and goods remains far short of that of the U.S. and even China. However, if India grants Amartya Sen his seven wishes—as only Indians and not the goddess can—then watch out, India could stand astride the world stage. 

The more that I think about it, maybe somebody should wise-up and invite Amartya Sen to make seven wishes for America, where he now lives (part-time) and teaches. We, too, could use a dose of his good advice.

Jaipur Literature Festival 2014 Retrospective Pt 1

Fun for the whole family: cool, cloudy weather doesn't dampen our spirits as we enter JLF on Day 1

C, the Glamorous Nomad, Abbas, and I returned to Jaipur over a week ago to see old friends and attend the literature festival. What a treat! I'll do a bit of a retrospective and commentary about the festival over the next few posts, but first, a few words about Jaipur, our home last year.

Upon arriving in Jaipur, C and I felt a pang of nostalgia. Compared to TRV, it's a much livelier, more interesting city. We also have many friends in Jaipur that gave us a rather active social life, while in TRV we've fewer contacts. Part of the explanation seems to be the people and part of it our circumstances, such as living in a high-rise versus the Jaipur Heritage House, my lack of a local work place, and so on. But I perceive that the people of the north are more outgoing and their English-speaking ability no less than that of those living in the south (suggestions by northerners to the contrary notwithstanding). I find the food in the north more varied and interesting, and I've even developed a soft spot for Hindi compared to Malayalam. To my ear, Malayalam seems an absolutely incomprehensible mouth full of syllables and soft consonants spoken as if the speaker is in a race to the end of a seeming endless stream of syllables. (Do you know how long it's taken me to learn to say "Thiruvananthapuram"?)

Of course, Jaipur still has its downsides. The traffic remains utterly chaotic and noisy. The "honk every three seconds" rule remains in effect. I noted that after the hard rain, the storm sewers and parts of the recently paved road (in honor of a Sonia Gandhi visit) were collapsing. I'm certain that when the motorcycles take to the sidewalks during rush hour as they do each night, several riders would flip over the tops of their cycles when they hit the holes created by the cave-ins. Nobody seems to care about much about the maintenance of infrastructure. The mass transit line is closer to completion, but friends told us  that it wouldn't open until after the election this spring. Of course.

Finally, I must comment on the weather. When we left Jaipur last June, it was--quite literally--110 in the shade. Certainly, last winter temperatures dropped, sometimes into the 30's overnight, which made our unheated apartment amazingly cold. It rained a couple of times overnight, and we had one early morning hailstorm. But each day the sun came out and warmed us up.

Not so this year. The weather was for the most part cloudy and cool, with only intermittent rays of sunshine at the Festival. On the final day, an early morning downpour flooded a couple of outdoor venues. Organizers were forced to transform Char Bargh from a 400-seat venue to about a 40-seat venue. Everyone trooped on, but to say the rains dampened spirits is a cliché that just seems too apropos. During the opening session of the final day, English novelist Jim Crace said he felt right at home with persons straggling in to avoid the rain and cold regardless of the topic. The bookstore, in a tent, was closed the final day. Fortunately, we'd been through our book-buying frenzy before then, so we didn't have to leave any titles behind that we simply had to have. We had enough in overage baggage charges as it was, but some may not have been so lucky.

Our China and Africa experts, a/k/a The Glamorous Nomad & Abbas, warm up with some delicious Diggi Palace chai

Despite the weather, the Festival was again a success. The attendees were enthusiastic and the presenters for the most part quite lively and knowledgeable. I was again impressed by the young Indians who attended in large numbers and asked questions and made comments. Sometimes India strikes me as so slow and cumbersome and out of date, but then you see again that India has lots of everything, including a core of bright young people. (The question is whether the core is large enough to help India to lift-off, which remains to be seen.) Also, India does have a vibrant literary and scholarly scene as well, which has been widely recognized before this, but festivals like this one reinforce that knowledge and certainly serve to move public awareness of their insights forward.

Two favorites of C, the Glamorous Nomad & Abbas: Gloria Steinem on the left. I opted for another session but I received a full report. JLF is full of some tough choices. 

In following posts I'll share some thoughts gleaned from the various sessions that I attended and authors that I heard speak. It was an intense and engaging five days. 

An Uncertain Glory: India & Its Contradictions by Jean Dreze and Amartya Sen

Two things drew me to this book. First, the co-author, Amartya Sen, winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, whose work goes far beyond mere economics into history, political theory, and a good deal about his native India. He’s co-authored works with Jean Druze before. (And, he's the keynote speaker at the Jaipur Literature Festival this year!) But even if the authors hadn’t captured my attention, the sub-title would have: “India and Its Contradictions”. Sometimes a subtitle tells us more than the title, and this is such a case. As an extended visitor here in India, nothing has impressed me so much as its immense contradictions. 

When talking with friends and family back in the U.S. about India, I usually preface my remarks by saying that within sight of any trait that I identify is a counter-example. Extreme poverty, opulent wealth; beautiful buildings, collapsing buildings; bright capable individuals, ignorant masses (ignorant as in unschooled)—I could go on, but you get the idea. In all, India holds huge but largely unrealized potential. Compared to its neighbor China, which I visited this fall, India lags far, far behind. Why? 

Both India and China entered the post-World War II era with similar states of deprivation. China, of course, went through hells of famine, The Great Leap Forward, and the Cultural Revolution. India, a democracy since its birth, did not suffer such calamities. Yet today, China has entered the modern economic world at rocket speed while India remains at a plodding pace similar to the speeds of the animal carts one still encounters on the roads. Did India make a mistake opting for democracy? 

Sen and Dreze address these questions and others. They note the impressive rates of growth of the Indian economy in the last decade and more (now significantly slowed). Despite these growth rates and other markers of success, India lags behind many of its peers in the arenas of education, healthcare, inequality, and other markers of social well-being. China, on the other hand, performs much better in almost all of these areas. Indeed, Sen and Dreze note that China’s lead in education and health came long before the market reforms beginning in 1979 with Deng Xiaoping. Mao’s regime established basic standards. Indeed, within India the authors find significant gaps between many of the states, with Kerala (where we now live) and Tamil Nadu performing much higher on many of the measures of performance. Both have competitive elections with Communists and other left groups having held power. 

Toward the end of the book Sen and Dreze address the need for political action in India. Indeed, this book seems to bolster the contentions of Acemoglu and Robinson in their book, Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. My one line summation of the Why Nations Fail: it’s all about the politics. Sen and Dreze seem to arrive at the same conclusion: a different direction of the political body politic would have taken India in a better direction, and it still can. Overcoming old mindsets, clientism, corruption, caste and class loyalties, and so on, won’t be easy. But until India decides to take a very different course, it will remain toward the back of the pack, all of the new billionaires notwithstanding. 

Anyone familiar with Indian politics might despair at this point. Both Congress and BJP seem wedded to the status quo. However, there are rays of hope. The Aad Adami (Common Man Party), running primarily on an anti-corruption platform, ran very strongly in Delhi recently and has now formed the government there. This may be the middle class political uprising that India needs. I’ve contended that until a politically motivated middle class takes the helm of politics, governance here—which remains poor—will continue to lag, and with it, the whole nation. In addition, the outcry from women’s groups after the ghastly rape and murder in Delhi last year suggest the political agenda may move away from the status quo, client-driven politics that mark the current climate. Some political leaders should be able to establish an agenda that provides the poor with both protection and real opportunities, while providing the middle class with a better quality of life. (The rich can take care of themselves.) 

India should exist as a beacon of hope as the largest democratic nation in the world, not as a laggard compared to its authoritarian, non-democratic neighbor China. An Uncertain Glory should serve as a bucket full of icy water in the face to wake-up Indian elites and the middle class to their current plight. A successful government isn’t one that will simply see a successful mission to Mars or focus on diplomatic tit-for-tat, but one that strives to provide a billion plus people the potential that can be theirs, one where disease, ignorance, and poverty aren’t driving forces in their lives and where those who’ve made into the middle class can enjoy a better quality of life. 

Cross posted @ Taking Readings. 

India Journal: My Riffs on The Hindu About the Vice-Consul's Arrest

This editorial in The Hindu today about the arrest of the Indian consul officer is rather sensible, and the writers raise some points that bear further consideration:

"A strip search, examination of body cavities and the possible use of restraints other than handcuffs such as waist chains and shackles, are grossly over-the-top steps to use against any detained person. These are automatic, non-discriminatory and legal post-arrest procedures, but that does not make them any better."

This raises a couple of important points. First, the standard protocols of the USMS (Marshal Service) may be too rigorous and intimidating. But if the protocols are too harsh, they are so "for any detained person." So the question isn't whether a counselor officer should have been processed in this manner, but whether anyone should have been. Drug lords? Murderers? Flight or suicide risks? Suicide attempts by persons not shocked by the experience of jailing are not that rare, and any jail must have precautions in place. Precautions must certainly include a search of the prisoner, so even persons accused of non-violent crimes such as this one will undergo an extensive search. So, either the protocols are good for everyone, or at least every class of arrestee, or they should be changed for everyone.

But all of this leads to a deeper difference between the U.S. and India perspectives. Americans are rule-oriented and egalitarian, our dramatic increase in economic inequality in the last 40 years notwithstanding. India, despite its democratic political system, is still very hierarchical and exhibits telling instances of social deference. Also, rule-governed conduct is less common here. Thus, some in India expect special treatment, while others (lower status persons) expect nothing in the way of courtesy or respect. (Not that they don't want courtesy and respect, of course.) The caste system has been officially outlawed for decades, but it's lingering effects--much like those of slavery in the U.S.--remain today, just beneath the surface. I suspect that the endemic corruption of India is exacerbated by a sense of social entitlement combined with the generic motive of greed.

Another interesting point from this article in The Hindu makes the claim that the diplomat is from a Scheduled Class (caste). (ST is scheduled tribe.) The quotes states:

The DMK’s Kanimozhi said one could not shut one’s eyes to the fact that the victim belonged to the SC and such action across the ocean would prove detrimental in the uplift of the community. Pointing out that SC and ST girls had to struggle to come up in life, Ms. Kanimozhi said Ms. Khobragade’s was an example to the community but if she was insulted it would not only instil fear in the community back home but also affect its growth.

It's against the law to criticize a SC/ST (ask Ashish Nandy). Like any betterment program for the under-privileged, it can be gamed, especially by politicians. Thus, this angle on the controversy plays a high value trump card in national politics. 

Little has been said or written about the servant whom the accused brought over and then is alleged to have failed to have properly paid. Many here have household servants, and treatment of servants isn't always good. We Americans are used to "Upstairs/Downstairs" or (for the younger crowd) "Downton Abbey" master and servant relationships, all genteel and, at least to some degree, reciprocal. I don't think that this is the norm here. As an American, I'm still ill at ease with all of the serving gestures that I receive from many locals, such as spreading a napkin in my lap (mastered that at age four) or the guard who stands when I walk by the  gate. I'm not the Pope, the president, or an important person. One doesn't encounter this type of deference among all locals; it's a much more familiar social milieu of relative equality when you're not dealing with serving persons. In India, social standing receives a lot more consideration, and higher-ups receive much greater deference when we're considering whether a person has received appropriate treatment, .

The Hindu editorial goes on:

Never known for taking on the U.S on substantive policy issues, the government’s unusually aggressive reactions — and those of political parties too — on behalf of a diplomat, smell of political considerations ahead of an election. From the Prime Minister and Ministers of Home and External Affairs to the Bahujan Samaj Party leader, everyone has weighed in on her side. In the furore, it has been all but forgotten that there are serious charges against the diplomat, and that the domestic worker is also an Indian. It is certainly odd that the domestic worker’s family was able to obtain visas to travel to the U.S even while Ms. Khobragade’s request to have her traced remained pending. Despite Indian diplomats being embroiled in similar cases in the past, each time blaming the domestic worker’s motives — in all previous cases, the complainant got long-term residency in the U.S — the government has only now started giving serious thought to managing the practice of officials taking domestic staff along on postings abroad

The Hindu's editorial stance makes a strong point here. The seriousness of the offense in U.S. eyes (see above for possible contrasts with the Indian perspective) and  the plight of the servant in questions have been mostly lost on this end of the controversy.

The Hindu editorial continues:

Both sides could have found a mutually acceptable way to defuse the controversy — often in such cases, the issue is closed by withdrawing the diplomat. That the government chose instead to transfer Ms. Khobragade to India’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York, with a view to enhancing her immunity, is questionable and casts India’s claim of a nation ruled by law in poor light.

I am surprised that all of this wasn't resolved behind the scenes to avoid this kind of stand-off, where Indian pride and dignity are staked against American ideas about the rule of law and the applicability of that law without fear or favor (albeit an ideal not always achieved). I suspect that tucking the diplomat away at the U.N. won't work. Rather than finding a speedy resolution, such a tactic could lead to a long-term stand-off. Neither nation would benefit from that.

India Journal: Diplomatic Kerfuffle

A photo of India's deputy consul general in New York, Devyani Khobragade

On December 12, U.S. Federal Marshals arrested an Indian diplomat (Devyani Khobragade) in NYC for falsifying a visa application for a servant. The gist of the complaint claims that the servant was to have been paid one amount but was in fact paid much less, even less than the minimum wage. The diplomat was arrested while dropping off her daughter at school. The arrest was processed, and the diplomat was jailed until she posted bond.

We first read about this in The Hindu, that we subscribe to and that we consider one of the better papers. When I first learned of this Monday, I searched the NYT for a report, but I couldn’t find one. Today, the headlines in The Hindu reported about the retaliatory actions of a very unhappy Indian government, while the NYT reported about the retaliation in an article as well. The Indian government is indignant about the arrest and treatment that its diplomat received. The American authorities haven’t said much, but they seem to be treating it as a relatively unremarkable matter.

When I read about this arrest initially, I wondered about diplomatic immunity, but the Americans argue that lying on the visa application for the servant (done by the diplomat) and wage and hour violations are not covered by diplomatic immunity. In fact, there is a difference between immunities provided to diplomatic as opposed to consular staff. Given the lack of much argument about this from the Indian papers, I’m inclined to believe that diplomatic (or consular) immunity does not apply in this instance (but I’m no expert).

The Indian government and political class seem more upset about the treatment of the diplomat rather than the substance of the charges. My response is that the treatment doesn’t sound like anything special. Federal law enforcement, in my limited personal experience as well as my reading, can be heavy-handed indeed, but they probably played this one by the book. U.S. Marshals can be brusque, but they don’t tend to discriminate in that regard. I suspect that the diplomat received the same treatment as anyone else arrested on a federal felony charge.  (By the way, the issuance of an arrest warrant means that a judicial magistrate found probable cause to believe that the crime alleged had been committed.) Searches and jailing, I expect, would have followed normal procedures. (I’ve seen nothing to indicate the contrary.)

To say that U.S. and Indian norms for the treatment of women differ a good deal is a titanic understatement. As Hari Kumar points out in the NYT, for airport searches in India, women go through a separate line and go behind a screen for personal searches beyond the metal detector. Thus, we have an issue of diplomatic protocol as well as a difference about how the genders are treated. As to an arrest while dropping (or picking up) a child at school, I can only say that this wouldn’t appear to be any different from what law enforcement officials would do with any other person sought for arrest. Once they have an arrest warrant, you can expect them to do whatever is required of them to apprehend the subject. Federal law enforcement officials don't operate like the constable in an Agatha Christie country house mystery.

All of this happened in NYC, which has a long history of dealing with diplomats accused of crimes, especially since the location of the U.N. there. Given that the subject is an Indian diplomat, one has to assume that the highest levels of prosecutors and State Department officials were advised of the plan and approved of it. The Hindustan Times reports: 

While the state department is reviewing if all the correct procedures were followed,[State Department spokesperson] Harf stressed that the Indian embassy in Washington had been informed of the allegations against the consular official as long ago as September.

As a consular official, Khobragade does not have full diplomatic immunity, but has consular immunity which "only applies to things done in the actual functions of one's job," Harf added.

The diplomat had been arrested by the State Department's diplomatic security bureau, and then handed over to the US Marshals Service (USMS) to be processed through the court system.

In a statement, the Marshals confirmed she had been strip-searched and "was subject to the same search procedures as other USMS arrestees held within the general prisoner population in the Southern District of New York."

Although it did not confirm reports that Khobragade was placed with drug addicts, the statement added that she was held in a cell with other female detainees.
"Absent a special risk or separation order, prisoners are typically placed in the general population," the Marshals statement said, adding she had been put in an "available and appropriate cell."

Khobragade was released on a bond the same day, and after a review of her case the US Marshals found that the service had "handled Khobragade's intake and detention in accordance with USMS policy directives and protocols."

"All indications are that appropriate procedures were followed. But nonetheless. We understand this is a very sensitive issue, and we're continuing to review exactly what transpired," Harf told journalists on Tuesday.

One interesting sidebar: the head prosecutor is an NRI. What difference, if any, did that make? I don’t know, and I’ve seen no conjecture about it. 

The main point that I’d make to any Indian readers is that I’m not aware of any sub-text to the arrest. I’ve not read anything, nor can I conjecture about, any ulterior motive for the arrest. If the diplomat had been from Pakistan, Brazil, or Canada, I don’t know why the matter would be handled any differently.  Remember that when International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn was arrested in New York City he had to do a perp walk. It's not kind, gentle, or considerate, but it does convey a powerful message about law enforcement.

American-Indian relations have been good, and one can only hope that this whole thing will pass without untoward gamesmanship on either side. I don’t know what the Americans have to gain from it.

For American readers, this should provide a glimpse of how delicate our relations with other countries can be. We’re the big boys on the global block right now, and nations will easily take offense if they perceive the U.S. as disrespectful or callous about their dignity and standing. (Most nations can tolerate, if the price is right, to have their interests thwarted, but not their honor.)

The retaliation by the Indian government seems more annoying than threatening. Taking down traffic barriers around the embassy will likely reduce the amount of business that the embassy can do, which, based upon my visits there, is quite a bit. Very many Indians want to travel to the U.S. to see family, go to school, or to emigrate, so I’m not sure that this is a wise move. The other acts I think more annoying than harmful. 

In any event, it shows how touchy the diplomatic world can be.Let's hope that the matter is soon laid to rest.