The extraordinary rapport between President Barack Obama and Dr Manmohan Singh has already been noted, especially in the telling images which showed Obama hugging the prime minister, and the prime minister, after some thought, reciprocating the gesture tentatively. Manmohan Singh is not a man to wear his emotions on his sleeves, and his reciprocal gesture—however tentative—says something about the relationship between the world’s oldest democracy and the world’s largest. Body language at its best.
Actually, the jhappi diplomacy really flowered behind the scenes. In an unscheduled, unscripted one-to-one meeting at 7, Race Course Road, the two leaders met for an hour. Note-takers were conspicuous by their absence. Therefore, no official record exists of what transpired at this highly unusual but, from India’s point of view, desirable meeting. A fly on the wall, in a manner of speaking, told me that on Pakistan in particular, Obama went much further than his publicly stated position of Pakistan needing to shut down terrorist havens. Even as he urged the prime minister to continue to engage Pakistan in a dialogue, he appreciated India’s current stand of dialogue not being possible in an atmosphere of terror or threats of terror. Dr Singh, on his part, once again stressed the dilemma of a functioning democracy like India: dialogue must have public opinion behind it for the leadership to pursue it.
On China, we played our cards nicely. All this American talk of “containing China” and building up India as a countervailing force in Asia to balance the Middle Kingdom’s “new assertiveness” fell on deaf ears in New Delhi. There was some effort to introduce a line in the joint statement to this effect but the PMO and MEA brushed it aside. “Why should India be a cat’s paw for the United States?” was the line. Long after President Obama and other presidents have gone, India has to live and interact with China. We need to do so on our own terms, and not as a proxy in some Great Game. As a risen, not rising, power, India is unwilling to fall into Uncle Sam’s trap.
Navratna at the Gardens
I have been going to Rashtrapati Bhavan banquets for nearly two decades. For the big boys from the United States we always try to do something extra special. First Bill Clinton and then George Bush. While Clinton’s reception was lavish and held indoors, George Bush was sumptuously feted outdoors. To welcome Barack Obama, however, Pratibha Patil organised something magical at the celebrated Mughal Gardens located at the rear of Rashtrapati Bhavan. On a cool, balmy evening spread out against the sky like “a patient etherised on a table”, Michelle and Barack experienced Indian hospitality, not just in terms of food, but in terms of atmospherics, at its very best. The menu became irrelevant; you can serve a great meal but the banquet can still be awful. Flowers, diyas, garlands, rangoli, firecrackers, sparkling fountains were harmonised with understatement, imagination and style to make the evening unforgettable.
The wonderful people who gave us the opening and closing ceremony at the Commonwealth Games, Wizcraft, presented the diversity of our civilisational treasures in a splendid “cultural tribute to friendship” which included singers from Rajasthan, percussionists from Kerala, Bharatanatyam, Odissi and Kathak dancers, rounding off with the Shillong Chamber Choir singing Khasi songs and also Stevie Wonder’s, “I just called to say”. Well done, Pratibhaji.
A Quick (Re)Word
“He is a shy man,” said the well-known American South Asia expert Stephen Cohen (Mr Cohen seems to be a straightforward PR man for the Pakistan army), explaining President Obama’s cold speech at the Taj commemorating the victims of 26/11. Meanwhile, “geopolitical compulsions” was the arcane phrase employed to justify his use of euphemisms like “perpetrators”. While both the justifications are specious, the president’s impassioned and insightful address to Parliament more than compensated for his earlier lapse. I thought Obama went the extra mile on Pakistan, leaving no room for doubt on what our estranged neighbour has to do—a clarity reinforced by the joint statement which mentioned LeT by name. All of which makes the dull Mumbai speech curious. Jet lag, perhaps?
I have no insider knowledge or privileged information to back me up, but it is possible he travelled the extra distance because of the extensive criticism his lukewarm, uninspired and fuzzy address commemorating the victims of 26/11 generated. The media criticism, which some Indian diplomats saw as “premature” and “demeaning”, might, on hindsight, have prodded Obama to shun generalities on the sensitive P-word. Am I giving too much credit to the fourth estate?
I too got my 30 seconds of fame with the leader of the free world. I buttered him up by calling his speech in Parliament “magnificent”, and then blurted out, “Mr President, the star of your India trip is not you but your wife.”
“You got it right,” he replied, “It always happens.”
Apropos of Vinod Mehta’s Delhi Diary (Nov 22), if Obama’s cold speech is attributed to his being a ‘shy man’, what would he say about the insipid Dr Singh?
Varun Garde, Bangalore
Without any “insider knowledge”, Mr Mehta seems to think that Barack Obama “went the extra mile” to send a message to Pakistan. Nothing great about that, sir, even a toothpaste salesperson will tell the customer what he wants to hear.
Manish Banerjee, Calcutta
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Extremely disappointing writing. This can't be the normally astute Vinod we all know and admire.
Like B Raman, Vinod naively believes that a nation, USA, that actively finances and supports the state-terrorism of its allies - notably Israel - can then put an end to terrorism. That's the equivalent of hiring a Jagdish Tytler, a Radovan Karadjic or a Narendra Modi to stop terrorism.
Where has our morality come to that we can deliberate at length on ending jihadi terrorism while avoiding the 'ST' word - state terrorism?
All said and done, there still remains a very major difference between the U.S and India: the former is a nation under god whereas we are a nation above SriLanka.
If Obama is "shy man" what word do you have about the insipid Dr Singh ?
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT