Your cover story on the plight of our prime minister beset by a host of issues was quite telling (One Man on an Island, Jul 7). Given the kind of politics being played out in the country, I doubt if Manmohan Singh will get enough support from political parties on the nuclear deal. The Left has pulled out because the deal is ‘pro-US’; the BJP can’t at any cost end up supporting the Congress. The regional parties are largely indifferent to it, for it hasn’t much to do with local politics. Why, even an unsure Congress, with elections only months away, wants to delay it to the maximum.
George Olivera, Mysore
Seeing your cover disturbed me for the one vice you listed against the PM: personal ego. If you can call someone as down-to-earth as Manmohan Singh egoistic, you have either lost your marbles or are making a subtle move to distance yourself from Sonia Gandhi’s party.
Jatinder Sethi, Gurgaon
Manmohan’s political turn at the G8 confirms that he is more a secretary to the US president than India’s PM.
Aruna Choudhary, Ajmer
Your headline One Man on an Island effectively summed up our PM’s dilemma. Manmohan combines all the traits you mention. He is sensitive about his public image, he wants history to remember him (despite the fact that he hasn’t been elected by the people). That said, he is justified in his stance to a large extent. More often than not, people like him are manipulated, pressurised and taken advantage of. So, if the PM has taken a firm stand on the deal, he deserves to be applauded. It would have been good if the Left recognised that India earned little out of the Non-Aligned Movement, and that a deal with the US could get us something.
Milind Kher, on e-mail
Manmohan battling personal ego? When he himself is a reluctant PM! How easily you forget that he is a scholar first and a politician, if at all, later.
Prof P.D. Gupte, on e-mail
Leadership is all about taking tough, timely decisions. The moment you dither, people lose faith in you. It’s on this quality that our PM has to be judged.
Madhu R.D. Singh, Ambala
You can’t really sympathise with Manmohan Singh. First, he was naive enough to rely on the support of the Left. Then he went about signing the deal without taking his allies into confidence. This, when he’s been virtually a puppet PM.
Dinesh Kumar, Chandigarh
Our PM may look meek, but it was he who initiated liberalisation in the ’90s and strengthened the economy to its present level. The Left is now out to undo it all and take us back to the stone age.
Ramachandran Nair, Ruwi, Oman
Why should the Communists take all the blame for blocking the N-deal? Parliament can pass the Bill should the BJP support it. But the saffron party is taking a hypocritical stand on the matter—they know it’s vital for India but won’t vote for it. The Left’s may be a retrograde stand, but at least they are sincere and consistent.
N.V.R. Saraswathi, Zurich
Just as one bloc alone can’t be accused of blocking the deal, the PM alone can’t take the credit for striking it. One must acknowledge the support Sonia Gandhi is lending him on the issue. For all those who harp on her Italian origins, the Congress chief has once again proved her sense of patriotism as an Indian.
Sarabjit Singh, Delhi
Seldom has Outlook come out with serious criticism of the PM. That way, your cover story was refreshing. It seemed to be toeing the C ommunist line of trashing the PM while letting the rest of the UPA off the hook. I suppose it’s necessary, when you want to keep your options open after the next elections.
Sapna Arun, on e-mail
With the SP all set to support the UPA, the Left’s opposition to the N-deal has been reduced to a mere tamasha. The UPA might just finish its term, and elections may not be held this year. If the Left is serious about its stance, let it publicly declare that it won’t support the Congress after the next election even if that would lead to the BJP-led NDA coming to power, since the unpa has been rent asunder.
S. Raghunatha Prabhu, Alappuzha, Kerala
To India’s misfortune, the CPI(M) is being led by its worst leader at a time when his support to the country is crucial. Prakash Karat, devoid of common sense (forget intelligence), is behaving like a brat. Let Indians not hesitate in throwing out the Left in the next polls.
Kel Sheroy, Glasgow
There can only be two groups of people in the world who would be happy if the deal fails to materialise: the commies in India, the commies in China.
M.R. Sanven, Bangalore
It’s a joke that a political party with a base in just two states is speaking for the whole nation. It’s ironical too, given the way the Communists conducted themselves during India’s struggle for independence.
R.V. Iyengar, Hyderabad
The issue isn’t about the personal ego of the PM, or even that of the BJP or the Left. It’s about the personal ego of one Vinod Mehta. The Congress seems to have consigned his unsolicited advice to the dustbin. His interest is in the progress of the Congress, while the party’s interest is in the nation.
K.V. Sharma, Bangalore
Let’s not forget some of the questions we’d have to address if the deal is struck. Does India have enough facilities to dispose of nuclear waste? Do we have enough security measures in place to keep away products of breeder reactors from terrorists? How prepared are we to dismantle our nuclear plants once they get outdated? And what steps have we taken to ensure decrease in waste?
Manu Rajan, Bangalore
The nuclear deal, I feel, will only benefit India. Our uranium deposits are poor, so we can’t rely on our own nuclear resources for long. We need uranium, more than for generating power, to sustain our non-civilian programmes. No one is going to help us on that—here’s where the deal comes in handy. For, what scarce uranium resources we have now can be channelled for military purposes. Regarding worries if reprocessing isn’t permitted: it may be fine if they supply uranium for the power projects and take away the spent uranium. One is also not worried if you are not permitted to test new weapons. The concept of nuclear deterrent is based on the fact that the enemy will suffer serious consequences in retaliation. So, even if our weapons aren’t very modern, it’s fine so long as they work. And, weapons are meant to work as a threat for the foe; they need never be used.
G. Venkataraman, Mumbai
Let’s not, while debating the N-deal, forget the merits of solar power. It’s time we encouraged its use in a big way.
Bankim Shah, on e-mail
As a keen follower of the 123 agreement, I can firmly say the deal is of immense importance to India’s energy security. Looking at the strict international regime, the concession that is awaiting India is unbelievable. It’s only to justify one’s opposition that they are using ‘Muslim opposition’ to the deal.
Politically Challenged was too simplistic in its premise and conclusion. The issue facing the PM is far graver than something you can explain merely as a bid to find a place in the big picture. The author would seem to be all the more happy if the PM dumped the deal and kept the likes of him and Left content. Mind you, Manmohan started pushing the deal long before inflation worries hit us and his government neared the end of its term. We should be debating minutely the Left’s objections to the ‘merits’ of the deal. The author, sadly, seems intellectually challenged.
Rakshit Raina, Hyderabad
I’m nonplussed every time the press says ‘incorruptible’. Is corruption confined only to considerations of money?
V.B. Lal, New Delhi
The piece looks like a school-format debate—where you have to present a case against a subject even if it holds merit.
Pavittar Singh, On e-mail
Ok, the PM has his reasons to be adamant on the nuclear deal, but why is the Congress too singing the same tune? Has the party too lost its mind?
Rohi Jalol, on e-mail
Inflation and rise of crude oil prices must not prevent India from achieving its nuclear goals (Double Digit Whammy). We all will have to enable India to achieve its energy targets.
S. Lakshmi, on e-mail
Why should anyone think that Muslims are a monolith and think like one about the nuclear deal? (So, Big Deal). They are as sure or unsure about the deal being in national interest as anybody else. One wonders if an average Indian understands the deal enough to form his own opinion. Let’s not forget that our PM had to despatch nsa M.K. Narayanan to give a talk to even a leader like the SP’s Amar Singh on the deal.
Dr Moohi Amir Ali, Mumbai
Prem Shankar Jha says the Congress must risk unpopularity for a cause (An Old Chinese Proverb). The columnist seems to believe the party is still led by Mahatma Gandhi.
M. Srinivasulu, Hyderabad
I was impressed with your profile of historian Upinder Singh (The Privileged Self, Jul 7) for more reasons than one. One, her character: an unassuming academician born to an unassuming prime minister. The life trajectory of both daughter and father mirrors what a middle-class family can achieve intellectually in these money-worshipping times. I can’t agree more when Upinder finds that a historian’s thrill lies in visiting archaeological sites. Overall, a well-written piece.
V.N. Gautam, Delhi
I appreciate the effective portrayal of what my book is trying to do. In fact, the whole write-up. But for a minor mix-up. My younger son—one with political interests and ambitions—is Raghav. His elder brother is Madhav (who is a completely opposite character).
Upinder Singh, Delhi
Clearly, most of our leaders today appear to be so lacking in self-confidence that they crave for immortalisation in something as dry and hard as metal (Bronze Age Booming, Jul 7). The cast of their statues alone, they know, would remain as proof of their existence in the years to come.
Arun Maheswari, Bangalore
I wonder how the Maoists’ coming to power in Nepal would affect the Gorkhaland movement in Darjeeling (The Gathering Hush, Jul 7). Should there be more control at the border between India and Nepal to prevent infiltration and gunrunning? What would be the implication of the India-Nepal treaty now that the Himalayan nation has undergone vast changes politically?
Gaurav Gupta,
San Luis Obispo, US
Shame on Sadanand Menon for mouthing so much hatred and jibes against a film personality like Kamalahaasan (Movie, Jul 7). A film review should talk about the technicalities, the aesthetics—the positives and negatives. Sadanand did none of this. This shows his true intentions! Box-office results of the movie will shut up critics like him.
Sun, on e-mail
I understand everyone has an opinion, but while writing one should be free of personal biases. Sadanand comes across as an immature cinegoer, innocent of the basic tenets of criticism. Such reviews can hurt the reputation of Outlook.
Senthil Prabhu, Bangalore
I propose the author be sent to a mental hospital—soon.
Karan N., Chennai
All I can tell Outlook readers who haven’t watched Dasavathaaram is watch the movie, and judge it by yourself.
Vaitheeshkanna, Bangalore
Sadanand clearly hasn’t seen Dasavathaaram as a movie per se, but as a vehicle of a certain philosophy and religious belief. Such reviews shouldn’t be encouraged.
Ajay Kumar, by e-mail
This film is a classic. No other Indian actor can match Kamal in versatility and diversity of the roles. Sadanand should refrain from writing film reviews. Maybe he’s just on a higher intellectual plane!
V. Shrinivasan, Bangalore
Excellent review, Sadanand. I have always believed that trying too hard didn’t necessarily make Kamal a great actor. Mere gimmickry does not make a good actor. And now we have this wildly narcissistic movie with a plot dreamt up by a bunch of acting school kids on a sugar high.
Vaishna Roy, Chennai
Outlook should start publishing the following statement whenever a South Indian movie is being reviewed: The reviewer does not understand Tamil/Telugu/Kannada/Malayalam, and has only a vague notion of what was going on screen. Hence any contention that the review was not insightful shall automatically be deemed untenable.
Jeyaraj S., Chennai
With the handsome premium of Daichi vis-a-vis the valuations of Ranbaxy, the stake sale is an win-win deal (Got Top Dollar, Jul 7). It puts enough money in the hands of the promoters to let them do more than what they could have done for the country through their stake in Ranbaxy. There’s no reason why the promoters should have acted differently.
Ravi Bedi, Jodhpur
Is it not ironical that teachers, who ought to be natural stakeholders when it comes to textbooks, rarely get to articulate their views on them (Not Under This Tree, Jul 7). Their marginalisation mirrors the way education is being disengaged from actual learning and getting turned into a venue for the play of political symbolism. How can teachers, in this scenario, offer the kind of intervention that helps students access their texts? Especially in subjects like history that are suffering a loss of prestige? It’s quite sad—for the ncert textbooks, warts and all, are actually commendable efforts and have failed only for want of the right kind of classroom mediation. But who’s debating the mysterious processes of teaching? All the obsession is with the ownership of authority, as if textbooks will automatically confer understanding on all.
R.S. Krishna, Hosur, Tamil Nadu
Kerala’s ‘Class vii Social Studies’ is not an especially innocent textbook. Perhaps in seeking to impart a Marxist spin to the subject, it’s managed to rile everyone. Even if the charge of ‘atheism’ is exaggerated, its disproportionate focus on peasant struggles and ‘reform’ figures begets a natural bias. Every story needs its villains. Thus, it’s rife with crude characterisations of evils: in ‘savarna’ society (Namboodiris, landlords) as well as Muslim and Christian set-ups. The harm, for me, is that it’s akin to teaching animals to be ashamed of their nakedness. The child’s worldview is surely not political: no child is ever involved in the eruption of riots. Why insert, slyly or otherwise, caste, class and religious antagonisms into their texts? Why fill their minds with differences they are not aware of? And what if the boy in that fable Mathamillatha Jeevan, whose parents postpone the decision about his religious denomination, grows up to curse them for not granting him reservation benefits!
P.C. Menon, Bangalore
Twenty-five years ago, a few of our national heroes won us a world cricket champions title; they are now rewarded. Days later, a field marshal called Sam Manekshaw, who won a historic war for the country, is rewarded with nothing but ingratitude by today’s rulers (‘Gentlemen, there will be no more retreat’, Jul 14). Well, he wouldn’t have cared, anyway!
Ravi Bedi, Jodhpur
Sadanand Menon’s piece on southern stars (The Systolic Tide, May 19) says the late ntr used to dispense blessings to busloads of fans from Andhra Pradesh, stepping out of his Madras home—painted up in "shocking blue". What a white lie! In any case, his first role as Krishna in a colour Telugu film came only in the late ’70s. Till then, there was nothing ntr could gain by painting himself up in any hue. ntr, a punctual maverick, used to report in full make-up to the sets by the break of day. If people so spotted him in mythological attire, it’s incidental, not intentional.
Pratap R. Reddy, Mumbai
