This is regarding your cover story on India’s recent surgical strikes (Midnight Surgery, Oct 10). In a radical break from its policy regarding Pakistan and in what effectively changes the rules of the game for its terror-sponsor neighbour, India carried out ‘surgical strikes’ in PoK, targeting and destroying terror launchpads. It was bound to happen one day. All it required was a push becoming a shove, which Uri provided. But above all, it needed political will and PM Narendra Modi has definitely retrieved the political capital he had lost in the past after not responding to several terror outrages. America’s advice to Pakistan to go after UN-indicted militant outfits indirectly rationalises the operation. Having made its point with deadly force, India must now show restraint. When emotions run high, it is easy to stumble into war. The political leadership should avoid that mistake.
J.S. Acharya, Hyderabad
I was surprised at the Pakistani media. They have questioned India’s assertion of the strikes across the Line of Control, with some calling it a ‘drama’ conducted by the Modi government in order to appease public opinion. Islamabad’s response, a blanket denial that the strikes took place, is both predictable and, in the Pakistani context, smart; it allows military and political leaders to make chest-thumping pronouncements without having to take any real military action. However, India and Pakistan will continue to accuse each other. The martyrs will be forgotten. This is the story of every war.
Meghana A., New South Wales
Apropos ‘Turning Point Uri’, Uday Bhaskar says that surgical strikes in Pakistan won’t help us with the turmoil in Kashmir. Well, the strikes were not even intended to do that. They were to effectively ensure peace by nipping cross border terrorism in the bud.
J.N. Bhartiya, Hyderabad
Whenever we have been struck by terror elements from Pakistan, the oft repeated argument is, “We too are victims of terror.” By demonstrating our resolve to eliminate terrorism by conducting the surgical strikes, we have made a good start. Pakistan should realise that these strikes are also helpful to them as several terrorist camps have been destroyed. Let us hope better sense prevails, and the next time we wish to take on terrorists holed up inside Pakistan, the move should be welcomed by our neighbour.
S. Sreenivas, Bangalore
It would be best to let sleeping dogs lie than open up an emotive issue like water-sharing with regard to Pakistan. Geography, and present dam structures ensure that India has limited ability to flood or choke water flow to Pakistan. Scrapping the treaty with the neighbour will needlessly pit India against the people of Pakistan by playing on an insecurity that has deeper collective psychological effects than the threat of war. Our gallant armed forces and the Indian people have dealt with great frustration in the face of a barbaric enemy. But a wise general strikes wisely, and not in anger.
K.S. Jayatheertha, Bangalore
Not many would have been assured by Modi’s declaration that culprits of the Uri attack will not go unpunished; it's something we had become used to hearing from our prime ministers after every terror attack. But the well planned and well executed surgical strike made it clear that Modi was on the job from day one. After taking over as PM, Modi tried, in a number of ways, to write a new chapter with Pakistan; be it by inviting Nawaz Sharif to his oath-taking ceremony or by making an unscheduled landing to greet Sharif’s on his birthday. The PM also did not overreact to the terror attacks. But the Uri attack proved to be the last nail in the coffin of India’s patience. Now, when Modi has walked the talk, telling Pakistan and the world that India shall no longer tolerate cross-border terrorism, some people, including the author of Outlook’s cover, are out to scare us of retaliation by Pakistan to the extent of even raising the bogey of nuclear war. It is Modi’s diplomacy which has isolated Pakistan, not only in the south Asian region, with seven countries boycotting Islamabad’s SAARC summit, but also in the international community.
M.C. Joshi, Lucknow
This is with reference to ‘The Limits of Friendship’ by Dmitry Trenin. The column presents a good and balanced position. India and Russia have always been close. However, the fact that the exercise was scheduled for Gilgit-Baltistan is not an innocent act. Indians do read it as a definite unfriendly act. Let us see what the future unfolds.
Atul Chandra, Mumbai
The Russo-Pak joint military exercise is not at all inconsequential. During the Cold War, Pakistan was an American ally. It was the conduit of the supply of American weapons to the Afghan mujahideen fighting with Russia. And during the Bangladesh war (1971), Russia stood directly by India when the US had sent its Seventh Fleet to scare India. Therefore, it was quite inconceivable for many to forsee Russia and Pakistan bury the hatchet. The breaking of the ice started when Russia lifted its long standing arms embargo on Pakistan in 1914. India’s ever-growing bonhomie with the US may have incited Russia to develop its ties with Pakistan and China, in order to balance out the pressure. It is quite an ominous sign when Russia maintains reticence when India is in deep water.
Buddhadev Nandi, On E-Mail
I am not a war-monger, but I can't help feeling good about India's surgical strikes in Pak.
Dinesh Kumar, Chandigarh
This is about the movement for Maratha reservation that is gaining strength in Maharashtra (Victimhood Turned Upside Down, Oct 10). Though the reporter has thrown a clear light on the issue, it's more complex. Firstly, no one has so far identified the masterminds in these rallies. They are well-planned and neatly managed, and so provides a unique challenge to the authorities. But truly, there are a handful of Marathas who are financially sound, but most are not. So their demands for reservation are genuine and need to be carefully scrutinised.
Keshav Sathaye, Pune
The apolitical agitation by Marathas for reservation and the upholding of Maratha pride reminds me of the spontaneous and successful agitation by women workers of tea plantations across Kerala recently. Now that Jats, Patidars, Gujjars and now Muslims all are pushing for reservation, and political parties are supporting one group or the other, keeping in mind captive votebanks, the Centre should take the initiative to bring an ordinance to make the whole nation a reserved republic. Since equal opportunity is enshrined in the Constitution, let everyone get the benefit of reservation in equal measure!
K.P. Rajan, Mumbai
The Marathas have three demands—reservation for Marathas, a modification of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and punishment for the Kopardi rape accused. Under the mentioned law, stringent punishment is given to those who hurt the sentiments of Dalits. The Marathas claim the Act is being misused. All three accused in the rape case that triggered the protests are in fact Dalits. While protesters have demanded justice for the victim, their rallies have been used as a pretext for Marathas to reiterate a long-standing demand for reservation under the OBC category. I wonder why nobody wants to be included under the SC category.
J. Akshobhya, Mysore
This refers to The Gandhi in the Opposition (October 10), the excerpt from Bertil Falk’s biography of Feroze Gandhi. There is more to the Nehru-Feroze relationship than is known to the public or uncovered by Falk. Feroze was a student at the London School of Economics while courting Indira, who was at Somerville for a year. Subhas Bose’s nephew Amiya—a student at Queens, Cambridge, from 1937 to 1940, who would go on to qualify for the bar at Lincoln’s Inn—has said that Nehru once quipped in his presence: “How can my daughter go around with a fellow who hasn’t been to Oxbridge?” Amiya claims Nehru also asked him to “look after Indira, and try and make something of her.”
Years later, when Amiya was visiting New Delhi and went to the PM’s residence for breakfast, Nehru sat at the head of the table with him and Indira on either side, while Feroze was banished to the other end, “below the salt”. Not a word was said to Feroze as he ate his breakfast and then disappeared. No wonder he became a trenchant critic of Nehru as a successful Opposition spokesperson. While Feroze has been derided as an alcoholic and worse in Congress circles, he was, in fact, a good student and a doughty freedom fighter who was treated shabbily by Nehru and whose wife deserted him with their two sons for the comfort of the PM’s residence. It is Nehru’s complexes and arrogance that come through in his dealings with Feroze.
Dwarka Bose, Calcutta
Apropos your leader comment ‘Rao’s Gallery’ (Oct 10), let me say that the doubt persisted all these days but was never perhaps publicly know: that Outlook is a mouthpiece of the Gandhi family and will go all out to protect them and discredit all others who may threaten that legacy. P.V. Narasimha Rao was the prime minister who brought this country out of the economic hell-hole it was in and we see the results of his reforms today. Discrediting him is nothing short of a homage to the family, and Outlook’s new editor in chief has done that commendably. Defaming Rao and blaming him for the anti-Sikh riots is to exonerate Rajiv Gandhi (who was the prime minister then). How shameful! It’s as if orders have come from the Gandhi-Nehru family to propagate such falsehoods at a time a few books on Rao have been released. Outlook seems to be taking the lead in following those orders. What a shame!
Ravindranath Ramakrishna, On E-Mail
How long will you keep transferring the blame for the mess left behind by mediocre leaders of the Congress to P.V. Narasimha Rao? Aren’t you shifting the goalposts by blaming a home minister for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots and the prime minister for Babri so that in both cases that blame falls on Rao? And did you ever write an article on the 60 years of misrule that left India in the economic doldrums? If, despite the frenzied denigration by his own party, Rao comes back and is remembered in books, isn’t it a sign of the strength of his legacy?
Ramesh B.H., Calgary, Canada
When Rao is home minister, the home minister is to blame for the anti-Sikh riots, and when Rao is prime minister, the prime minister is to blame for the Babri demolition. Excellent!
Abir Mishra, Calcutta
Your leader comment blows the lid off the borrowed glory of P.V. Narasimha Rao. The survival of his minority government was always on top of his mind. In keeping it alive, he made several sinister plans.
C. Chandrasekaran, Madurai
Let us hope L.K. Advani’s trip abroad (‘Advani, Ad Libertatem’, Oct 10) has opened his eyes. Hope he atones for his Rath Yatra, which raised communal tension in the country and led to the Babri demolition.
T. Nayak, Washington
Dear Chief Minister,
So your ‘sushasan’ has gone to your head and you have assumed the role of moral guardian of Bihar. Today you are deciding what a citizen of Bihar should drink (fruit juice) and should not drink I(liquor). Maybe tomorrow you will decide what he or she may eat and may not eat, may wear and may not wear, and so on.
I am an old man of 85 and I have been drinking India-made foreign liquor (IMFL) since I was thirty. In these 50-plus years, I have never been accused of neglecting my family, indulging in domestic violence, or committing rape. After you imposed prohibition in Bihar, my evenings have gone dry, affecting my mental and physical health. The hue and cry about alcohol consumption being related to domestic violence and negligence towards one’s of a family is the creation of a sick mind. Cases of domestic violence and non-maintenance of family are to be dealt with under appropriate laws meant to deal with these problems and not by imposing prohibition. In fact, women should be made aware of how they can seek redress for being subjected to domestic violence or if their husbands refuse to take care of the household.
Mahatma Gandhi, to be sure, wanted people to give up drinking, but he was against all forms of coercion. Had he been alive today, he would have been the first to raise his voice against the imposition of prohibition. It’s well known that many Congress leaders of those times would drink, but Gandhi never issued a fatwa against drinking or prevented those who drank from joining the party.
Mr Chief Minister, Sir, are you in search of a new constitution, being apprehensive of your future in Bihar politics owing to the re-emergence of the RJD in the last general elections? Total prohibition across India—that may sound like a good war cry. But addictions are an inherent part of human nature, whether it is addiction to gambling, smoking, drinking or drugs. Indians are no exception to this, and even in Vedic times, people celebrated with som rasa. Though no one now knows what it was, it was most likely an intoxicant. The Mahabharata speaks of Lord Balaram (Sri Krishna’s elder brother) being a habitual drinker and of the Yadav clan coming to ruin because of heavy drinking. And country beer, local wines and distilled spirits are very much a part of tribal rituals and ceremonies. Imposition of total prohibition will mean interference with their religious practices. Mr Chief Minister, you seem to have shown great concern for toddy-tappers, perhaps because the community is a votebank, but for tribals, who do not perhaps constitute a votebank, not a jot of concern.
Mr Chief Minister, may I also point out to you that followers of Tantra and the Shakti cult consume liquor as part of their rituals and, of course, it’s well known that wine, in Christianity, symbolises the blood of Christ and is used in the celebration of Mass.
Mr Chief Minister, Sir, please do not make prohibition a prestige issue. After all, more than half the people in the world drink and in this age of globalisation, there is so much intermingling of cultures that more people than you would like to believe enjoy their tipple.
What India really needs is to unite in the fight against religious intolerance and bigotry. Please do not waste time and energy in imposing prohibition.
Suprakash Roy, Patna
