In “Traffic”, Michael Douglas is a DEA official about to launch a “war against drugs”. At the last moment, he walks out of a press conference angrily recognizing the illogic of waging a war against one’s own own daughters and sons, victims and perpetrators in the uncharted waters of drug addiction.
The same question strikes me when I read the many arguments and counter-arguments about the Maoist struggle in the mineral laden states of India; the most recent of these were Arundhati Roy’s outstanding essay in Outlook and the CPI(Maoist) spokesperson interview’s in The Hindu. Anyone reading these (sometimes overly) impassioned pieces cannot but be moved by the poignant (and soon-to-be tragic?) struggle of illiterate men and women with muzzle loading rifles and pitchforks who take on the sophisticated legal might of Vedanta-like corporations, the financial and logistical muscle of the Indian government and the savagery of the Salwa Judum. Especially notable is Roy’s brief, acerbic dissection of the twisted language of war (“the Maoist infestation”, “The greatest threat to Indian democracy” etc). But all the literary eloquence of the world cannot mask the stench and horror of 75 dead CRPF men killed last week. So what is it that pits the Indian government to move battalions of police against terrorists… and also its own people? Minerals, apparently. Millions of tonnes of minerals.
A few good answers A couple of months back, I met an LSE grad who had done her PhD on the Maoist movement in India – she had visited Bihar, Jharkand, Uttaranchal etc and clocked miles and hours with both comrades and government officials. She summed up her findings thus - Wherever there are scarce natural resources, there are also fierce power struggles to control them. And inevitably, the local populace suffers and often suffers terribly. This is not a new chapter in human history: Red Indians were driven off their lands and away from their hunting grounds by American settlers looking for ranching land, gold and bison. The island of Nauru was thoroughly strip-mined of all its minerals by the British Phosphate Commission and left to die (or rather, to exist on pittances from becoming a tax haven and running detention centres for illegal Australian immigrants). “Avatar” rehashed this storyline, with humans attempting to wrest control of Unobtainium ore from the Pandorans. In an eerily similar real-life tale, a friend at Amnesty International shared with me their campaign against Vedanta’s attempt to mine the Niyamgiri Hills, sacred to the Dongria Kondh community.
I do not possess the legal, political or philosophical bandwidth to discuss issues of whom the land belongs to and which is the greater good; but whomsoever it belongs to and whatever its worth, surely there must be a more humane process to work this issue through… a process that does not completely condemn barely literate tribals to the mercies of unscrupulous corporations (make no mistake, I am a U.Chicago grad, all in favor of capitalism and free markets, but I was also alive when Bhopal happened to my countrymen), money-making chief ministers and masochistic vigilante organizations.
In this context, I disagree with Shankar Aiyyar of India Today who declares Maoists as terrorists (Yes!) and calls for a new strike force (considering sketchy human rights record of such forces, strike against whom exactly?) brushing aside what he calls “pacifist”(as opposed to a government’s war against its citizens?) objections. His strongest premise is particularly weak in an Indian context: that “a democracy affords many avenues to seek justice and violence is not an option”. I would invite Mr.Aiyyar to the Indian hinterland and ask him to go through the simple motions of registering any kind of complaint in a police station - what a joke! The only avenues of justice available in the Indian democracy are limited to those with one or more of the following:
A. An education
B. An income or wealth that can support bribery and legal costs
C. Extensive contacts in the political or bureaucratic system.
D. The means to inflict violence.
Let us try to guess which of these opulent options an Adivasi in the jungles of Jharkand could (not would) choose. Duh.
I suppose one should be relieved that the Honorable Home Minister of India and the Air Chief Marshall are unsure about the option of using air power for fear of collateral damage; apparently, it’s not just our government servants who are weighing such mighty choices – Harper’s Magazine (currently absconding behind a pay-wall) in a recent article by Ando Arike chronicles the many slippery-slope measures that authorities are considering against protesting and pestering populations. Options include microwaving people, low intensity lasers to make crowds singe and piss, flash-bang grenades that puncture ear-drums, all adding to a range of strategies & tactics to ensure success in “asymmetric confrontation” against restless civilian elements. Us unruly masses need to be taught unforgettable, humiliating, painful lessons on the consequences of naughty behavior, apparently.
Rants aside, why Pandora cannot exist It is stupid to argue that the earth be left in its pristine glory with minerals safely ensconced in their ore… it is only a matter of time before someone discovers/creates shortcuts to make a grab at such resources. Human need has driven human action and will do so forever, wherever, flattening the mountains of America and damning the rivers of China.
Neither does it make sense to always rant against MNCs the way Roy goes on about the Tatas, Vedanta and every other large company. The world does not possess enough resources that match the gentle alternative model that Roy suggests nor do its inhabitants possess the time and patience to wait for such a model’s results. Every day, the iPhones and Priuses of the world demand Bolivian lithium, lithe Formula 1 machines need Nigerian petroleum and millions of Indians want their feisty steel-clad Nanos - now! Such a world we have chosen and wrought, go figure. Rather than confining our reflections to the beauty of a night in the Jharkand jungle, we need to ask more pertinent, more realistic and more urgent questions, like:
PREMISE: Given that large corporations, mining industries, well-paid lobbyists and giant Chinese, American, Russian and Brazilian metal extractors and the irrepressible appetites of global consumers are here to stay…
QUESTION 1: How can we ensure that the transfer of scarce resources from traditional regional inhabitants (guardians?/ owners?/ people?) to industrial economies happens in the most civilized manner possible with the least costs inflicted upon human inhabitants?
QUESTION 2: How can the resultant benefits be spread across fairly across the chain - from the dwellers of the land to the sellers of the metals?
I know, I know, infinitely easier said than carried out. One would think that the world's largest democratic system would at least make an attempt to answer this with some modicum of decency … but no, the Indian government seems to have utterly failed. By abandoning legal and moral responsibilities to the whims of rapacious industrial partners and local politicians out for a quick buck, state and central governments have created a power vacuum, one that dacoits/ extortionist mafias/ Maoists moved to fill in quickly.
In the mines and quarries of Bellary, Naxalbari and Keonjhar, we sowed the wind… And an angry whirlwind visits us in Dantewada, reminding us of the questions we forgot to answer and the bodies that we need to bury. Thanks to the Roys, the Muhajirs, the Sainaths and the Hindus of the world who force us to confront the truth, almost swept under the carpet of economic growth.
Convoluted PS: The act of labeling something as “terrorism” and undertaking all further action based on that premise should not hold one back from recognizing, understanding and ultimately preventing the conditions that led to its formation in the first place. (Prevention not necessarily limited to scorched earth tactics that create desolation and call it peace). No?
PPS: Noompa does a neat job of explaining exactly where Arundhati Roy went too far and why it is a great “disservice to the compelling power of her underlying arguments”. Also note her links which lead on to some measured and rational responses.
7 comments:
Brilliantly written. Have some disagreements though. I wouldn't take Arundathi Roy's word for anything. The LSE grad's words mean a million times over an armchair liberal's.
Danks u, Tyler! I would wonder about using "armchair liberal" on A.Roy - as that article explains, she too seems to have trekked far and wide with "the comrades" in penning this story. I agree that a lot of her judgments are too quick, too extreme and too general... but consider the listening ear that she lends which reveals anecdotes, facts and vignettes reminding us that these comrades are humans and were humiliated citizens of India before they became cop-killers and arms bearers... something that I personally haven't heard from the mainstream media (refer links to Burkha Dutt and Shankkar Aiyyar) which seems to comfortably tweet and launch ripostes about using air power... whose is the armchair and who is in the jungle?
@ Ganja Turtle: thanks for the feedback (I am a "he" incidentally!) I absolutely agree on the thoughts on Roy: we need people like her, even though I disagree with her a lot (both substantively and methodologically). Its nice to see someone in the mainstream media engaging with such issues at the very least.
@Tyler Durden: There are many things that Arundhati Roy is (Manichean, reductionist, manipulative), but armchair critic is not one of them. She takes the time to meet the people she writes about and display her convictions and for that, we should applaud her.
@GT & Noompa
It was probably unfair of me to put Roy and Dutt-types in the same "armchair critic" bucket. I do agree that she has contributed both time and money towards projects like Sardar Sarovar. Somehow, I still don't agree just her "listening ear" in this matter is good enough. That, or maybe I am biased against her :-D. Dutt, on the other hand, is a piece of work. Watch out, she usually googles up her own name to find blogs and then sue them for defamation.
I think another question to add to your list is how does a state or a society reconcile two world views of what constitutes being 'civilised' or 'advanced' or 'developed'?
Many indigenous people are perfectly happy if the land affords them self-sufficiency, as the anecdotal evidence from Orissa seems to suggest. This "man" who wants to exploit the earth's natural resources is usually from somewhere else! Does he/she have a right to impose his worldview of development upon communities who may not want it? Vedanta boasts about having built schools, hospitals etc. but a lot of the respiratory problems that the adivasis in the Niyamgiri Hills are experiencing at the moment didn't exist till the Vedanta refinery started up.
Sorry that was a long rant.
@Tyler: Yes, I know, her listening ear is the left ear... bad pun :-( but I am glad someones listening and pointing out to our failure to do so. As for BD, I find it puzzling, that a woman who can articulate issues quite well on shows could be so inane/petty... I guess its both a caricature that we build as well as more human faults exposed by the spotlight being always on.
@Alaphia: Thank you for the long rant, much justified though. I did consider this question for quite some time... I just finished the Sainath book and found many an example of tribals maintaining a balanced sustainable relationship with their land and natural resources until the Forest Dept or some conglomerate moved in next door.
But maybe I am being too much of a pessimist/realist here... when I look at history from Africa/America/Brazil, I find too many examples of villages/civilizations being silently annihiliated while the debate goes on. I wonder if a more equitable split(the premise of which which may be morally questionable in the first place, as you rightly point out) of the proceeds might have granted these victims a better deal than what they are getting now, which is next to nothing.
While I understand the importance of the question that you raise, it seems terrible that people hidden from common sight lose their homes/health/lives while us, denizens of the civilized world, ponder over which is the more righteous worldview.
By the way thanks for the Sainath book. I know KK warned you that you may not see it for a while. I have a thick, engrossing tome to finish before that and I'm trying to be disciplined by reading only one book at a time. But I do promise to return it, eventually.
Post a Comment