Author Archives: amardeep

Dalrymple on Pakistan’s 60th

Posted on by

William Dalrymple has a nice “state of the union” type essay in the Guardian, on the occasion of Pakistan’s Independence Day. (Incidentally, happy Independence Day! Here are two photos from Flickr relating to ‘Azaadi2007’ that mark the celebration: Karachi, yummy mithai at the Quaid e Mazar Mazar e Quaid; and a building in Islamabad, all lit up.)

Considering where Pakistan is and where it’s going, Dalrymple starts with the good news and then surveys the bad. First, the good:

On the ground, of course, the reality is different and first-time visitors to Pakistan are almost always surprised by the country’s visible prosperity. There is far less poverty on show in Pakistan than in India, fewer beggars, and much less desperation. In many ways the infrastructure of Pakistan is much more advanced: there are better roads and airports, and more reliable electricity. Middle-class Pakistani houses are often bigger and better appointed than their equivalents in India.

Moreover, the Pakistani economy is undergoing a construction and consumer boom similar to India’s, with growth rates of 7%, and what is currently the fastest-rising stock market in Asia. You can see the effects everywhere: in new shopping centres and restaurant complexes, in the hoardings for the latest laptops and iPods, in the cranes and building sites, in the endless stores selling mobile phones: in 2003 the country had fewer than three million cellphone users; today there are almost 50 million. (link)

This confirms what I’ve often heard from friends about Lahore and Karachi in particular — there’s a lot of growth, which many people aren’t really aware of.

On to the long list of challenges and serious problems facing Pakistan, which Dalrymple divides into three categories. For Dalrymple, the first two categories are topics we have all heard a lot about in recent years: one is the lack of a culture of democracy, and the second is the threat of radical Islam. But it’s the third problem Dalrymple talks about, education, that I found interesting: Continue reading →

Barkha Dutt on Nasreen: A Double Standard?

Posted on by

Barkha Dutt is a rising star in the Indian media — one of the journalists that makes the Indian news channel NDTV worth watching. Though she gets stuck doing silly stuff sometimes (I saw her interview Brad Pitt a few months ago; oy), Dutt is one of the few journalists that I’ve seen on Indian news channels who isn’t just a glorified “news reader.”

She’s also a very sharp columnist. This week Dutt notes a double-standard in the way Indian secularists have responded to the recent physical attack against Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen, in which a number of elected officials actively participated. Nasreen, for those who don’t know, is a controversial author — she’s from a Muslim background, but has essentially renounced Islam. She’s in exile from Bangladesh after getting hit with a Fatwa; for the past several years, she’s lived in India, though the government has refused to issue her a permanent residency visa.

In a recent column in the Hindustan Times, Dutt compares the assault on Nasreen to an event that took place in Vadodara, Gujarat, just a few months ago, where politicians from the Hindu right sacked an art exhibit at the University of Baroda: Continue reading →

Will the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal Get Nuked?

Posted on by

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is facing the threat of a mutiny from the left parties in his coalition government over the recently-finalized — but still not finally approved — U.S.-India nuclear deal, also known as the “123 Agreement.”

As he addressed Parliament today, some members of Left parties staged a walk-out, while others made so much noise that MPs who actually wanted to hear what was said had to use their translation headphones. On the right, the BJP has also been critical of the deal, though I tend to think it’s more because of political opportunism than anything else: one gets the feeling they wish they’d pulled this off.

Thus far, the Congress Party hasn’t seemed seriously concerned about a collapse of the government; no one is yet talking about votes of no-confidence, mid-term polls, or rejiggering the deal to make critics happy.

Are the Communists and others on the left bluffing when they say they’ll walk away from the Coalition government over this? I tend to think so, though I could be wrong. Indian politics — with the combination of regional and caste parties in addition to the left/right axis — is often so complicated, it makes the U.S. system seem laughably simple. Still the Times has a certain wry tone in its summary of where the opposition is coming from:

At one point in Mr, Singh’s speech, the Left parties, which provide crucial support to his Congress-led coalition government, walked out of the house. The Left has opposed the nuclear accord with the United States since it was announced, less over the specific provisions of the accord than over the general principle of closer ties to America.

“We do not share the optimism that India can become a great power with the help of the United States,” Prakash Karat, the general secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), said on Saturday. (link)

(This is where I sniff in Prakash Karat’s general direction.)

For those who have kind of let the whole U.S.-India nuclear deal slip past them in recent months, Siddharth Varadarajan has a good point-by-point summary of the agreement here. And the full text of the agreement, released by the U.S. State Department, is here. Continue reading →

Does Diversity Cause Us to Mistrust One Another?

Posted on by

Via Ruchira Paul and 3QD, an article in the Boston Globe about the work of Robert Putnam, a Harvard University political scientist. The Globe summarizes the gist of the article as follows:

It has become increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.

But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

“The extent of the effect is shocking,” says Scott Page, a University of Michigan political scientist.

The study comes at a time when the future of the American melting pot is the focus of intense political debate, from immigration to race-based admissions to schools, and it poses challenges to advocates on all sides of the issues. The study is already being cited by some conservatives as proof of the harm large-scale immigration causes to the nation’s social fabric. But with demographic trends already pushing the nation inexorably toward greater diversity, the real question may yet lie ahead: how to handle the unsettling social changes that Putnam’s research predicts. (link)

What makes this all more interesting is the fact that Robert Putnam is not himself a conservative, but a progressive-minded scholar who supports diversity. He didn’t expect these findings when he started this project, and has worked hard to make sure they are understood correctly — though anti-immigrant conservatives have definitely been eating this up. Continue reading →

“King of Bollywood: Shah Rukh Khan”

Posted on by

Also out in the U.S. this week: Anupama Chopra’s King of Bollywood: Shah Rukh Khan and the Seductive World of Indian Cinema. As the title suggests, King of Bollywood is a full-length book meant for a general readership, looking back at the life and career of Shah Rukh Khan — aka, the “Badshah”. Chopra traces the various changes in the Bombay film industry in the 1990s, and argues that Shah Rukh is in many ways the face of the new, Yuppified, transnational Bollywood. From earlier conversations on SM, I know that some readers are a bit sick of Shah Rukh, though I would argue that Amitabh Bachchan has been far more over-exposed in the past few years (Shah Rukh has been only doing about one movie a year). The question Chopra is interested in isn’t “is Shah Rukh Khan a great actor,” it’s “how and why has Shah Rukh been such a success in the Bombay film industry given his outsider status?”

Derived nearly entirely from face-to-face interviews, there’s a lot of factual material about Shah Rukh Khan in Chopra’s book that I didn’t know — and I suspect that all but the most diehard fans won’t know most of it either. Continue reading →

Review: new CD from Falu

Posted on by

falu.jpg People interested in Asian Underground music have probably already heard of Falu, a singer who first appeared on Karsh Kale’s Realize back in 2001. Since then she’s been featured on a number of other people’s CDs, but today she releases her own, self-titled CD. Rather than going for more in the way electronic beats, here Falu works with a live rock/desi fusion band, doing a mix of English and Hindi/Urdu songs.

It’s a strong first effort. Falu has trained in Hindustani classical music with Ustad Sultan Khan, and there are several nice Hindi/Urdu tracks on the CD. The strongest is certainly her version of “O Lal Meri” (aka, “Dama Dam Mast Qalandar”); here the music is traditional, and Falu gets to really show off her Qawwali chops. I found Falu’s version of Asha Bhosle’s “Dum Maro Dum” less exciting, perhaps because I’m too attached to the original — and to Asha Bhosle’s voice (still, Falu’s rock/fusion band seems to be having a good time rocking out a bit here). Also good are “Rabba” and “Poojan.” Ustad Sultan Khan himself shows up playing Sarangi on two tracks, and he joins in the vocals to “Copper Can.”

Thus far, I’ve been somewhat less excited by the English language songs on the CD, though there are some notable exceptions. The lyrics to “Without You” are a mix of English and Urdu, and it’s intriguing to hear Falu do Qawwali-esque vocal trills on the English as well as the Urdu parts of the song. “Hey Baby” is entirely in English (albeit with a desi musical touch), though from listening to the lyrics it occurred to me that Falu is replicating in a secular, English, rock idiom the themes that are also prevalent Qawwali music: longing, desire, and the inaccessibility of the beloved. The difference, of course, is that in Urdu the longing is for God, while in English the longing is for a lover. (Note: you can listen to “Hey Baby” on Falu’s Myspace page)

You can get this CD at Falu’s website; it’s also available on Itunes and at Amazon. Readers in the New York area might want to hit the CD release party at Canal Room tomorrow (more details here). I won’t be able to go; perhaps Falu and her band will come to Philly sometime…

[Disclosure: the folks at Press Here music sent me a review copy of this CD.] Continue reading →

M.I.A. Talks Smack, and a Brief Review of ‘Kala’

Posted on by

kala-cover-thumb.jpg Tipster Sparky left a link to an interview with MIA on the News Tab. The part that seemed most interesting had to do with the role producer Diplo has played in her music. According to M.I.A., the influence of Diplo has been seriously overplayed by the media, for reasons that might have to do with gender and race:

M.I.A.: Yesterday I read like five magazines in the airplane– it was a nine hour flight– and three out of five magazines said “Diplo: the mastermind behind M.I.A.’s politics!” And I was wondering, does that stem from [Pitchfork]? Because I find it really bonkers.

Pitchfork: Well, it’s hard to say where it originated. We certainly have made reference to Diplo playing a part on your records, but it seems like everyone plays that up.

M.I.A.: If you read the credits, he sent me a loop for “Bucky Done Gun”, and I made a song in London, and it became “Bucky Done Gun”. But that was the only song he was actually involved in on Arular. So the whole time I’ve had immigration problems and not been able to get in the country, what I am or what I do has got a life of its own, and is becoming less and less to do with me. And I just find it a bit upsetting and kind of insulting that I can’t have any ideas on my own because I’m a female or that people from undeveloped countries can’t have ideas of their own unless it’s backed up by someone who’s blond-haired and blue-eyed. After the first time it’s cool, the second time it’s cool, but after like the third, fourth, fifth time, maybe it’s an issue that we need to talk about, maybe that’s something important, you know. (link)

Go, Maya. As she goes forward, she puts more emphasis on the gender question, and less on the whether “people from underdeveloped countries” can have “ideas of their own”: Continue reading →

Obama on Pakistan

Posted on by

Today Senator Barack Obama gave a speech outlining his strategy on terrorism if he were to be elected President. obama.jpgThe speech has three solid paragraphs relating to Pakistan:

As President, I would make the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional, and I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan.

I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges. But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.

And Pakistan needs more than F-16s to combat extremism. As the Pakistani government increases investment in secular education to counter radical madrasas, my Administration will increase America’s commitment. We must help Pakistan invest in the provinces along the Afghan border, so that the extremists’ program of hate is met with one of hope. And we must not turn a blind eye to elections that are neither free nor fair – our goal is not simply an ally in Pakistan, it is a democratic ally. (link)

The AP article on the speech interprets this as a threat: if Musharraf doesn’t do the job, we’ll invade.

Actually I think the lines in question could be interpreted differently — I think Obama is merely suggesting that U.S. troops could be deployed to take out selected targets in the border provinces, and then removed. “Targeted strikes” isn’t quite the same as “invasion,” though it’s close: it does sound like Obama is saying such operations could be conducted even without Musharraf’s express permission.

On a separate note, it’s good to see Obama emphasizing the value of inculcating secular education and a culture of democracy in Pakistan. It’s now become increasingly clear that there are millions of Pakistanis who want another try at democracy; the demand that Musharraf relinquish some of his power can no longer be shrugged off. Continue reading →

A Documentary About Sanjay Dutt on YouTube

Posted on by

As many readers probably already know, actor Sanjay Dutt was just sentenced to six years ‘rigorous imprisonment’ for possessing illegal weapons, including an AK-56. Last winter, he was cleared on more serious terrorism/conspiracy charges relating to the Bombay blasts of 1993. My first thought was, oh well — no Munnabhai 3, I guess. (Or, who knows? Intezar karo, Munnabhai?)

But then there are more serious questions — one might be, is it really a fair sentence? Readers, what do you think?

In my view, even if, it’s legally a reasonable sentence, Sanju does have an explanation for owning a weapon in 1993. For one thing, as a film star (and as the son of two very famous actors), his family was a target for the criminal underworld; I’m sure he wasn’t the only one to have these kinds of weapons in his possession at the time. Secondly, as of 1992/3, the Dutts were also apparently getting regular death threats from communalists following their humanitarian work on behalf of Muslims in the areas affected by the 1992 riots. Given the total lawlessness in Bombay at the time as well as his family’s own prominence, both on screen and in politics, one can understand what he might have been thinking.

On YouTube, you can watch a BBC Channel 4 Documentary on Sanju, called Sanjay Dutt: To Hell and Back, that talks about the Dutt family, Sanjay’s troubled youth (did I mention he was a heroin addict in the 1980s?), and the events surrounding the trial. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. (Part 2 is the section that deals the most with the events leading up to the arrest.)

I also think the fact that Dutt has had this trial hanging over his head for fourteen years is pretty severe punishment in itself. While I respect the court’s judgment, today I feel bad for Sanju. The Bollywood actor who should really be in jail is probably Salman Khan: Sanjay Dutt may have been a bad boy, but at least he never killed anyone, eh? (Ok, allegedly killed anyone.) Continue reading →

USCIS Goes Nuts; Immigration Lawyers’ Group to Sue

Posted on by

A few weeks ago I wrote a post about what I feel has been chronic mistreatment of H-1B workers by the immigration system. This week, yet another chapter in the American Immigration Bizarro-land story has unfolded, as thousands of legal workers, following an official State Department advisory, prepared to file Green Card applications, only to be told, in some cases after they had already filed, that the USCIS would not be accepting any applications at all.

The Times explains the complicated chain of events as follows:

The episode started on June 12, when the State Department announced in a monthly bulletin that green cards would be available starting July 2 for applicants across the range of high-skilled categories. That was a signal to immigrants who have been working in this country on temporary visas that they would be able to apply to become permanent residents.

Thousands of immigrants rushed to obtain certified documents, assemble employer sponsorship papers, take medical examinations and dispatch their applications. Many canceled travel plans so they could be in the United States when their applications arrived on July 2, as the law required.

But on Monday, the State Department announced that no more green cards were available. Snared in the turnabout were well-educated, highly skilled, legal immigrants, many of them doctors and medical technicians, with long work experience in this country. All had obtained federal certification that no American workers were available for the jobs they hold. (link)

There’s more to it — the goal here was to reduce the extensive USCIS backlogs — but the reversal means the backlogs are reinstated. Now potential applicants may have to wait as many as four or five years to apply again, leaving many people in limbo. (The Times has a good interview with an Indian doctor in Illinois, who is deeply distraught about this.) As I’ve said before, the cost of an extremely slow and unpredictable immigration system comes in people’s lives: waiting 5-10 years for a Green Card without being certain of success is dispiriting at best, and soul-crushing at worst.

Incidentally, there is also an illuminating breakdown of this bizarre episode at Murthy.com. And our blog-friend Arzan Wadia had a post on this this past Monday, where he made his feelings known.

Are you one of the people who applied for a Green Card this past Monday? You may want to get in contact with a Lawyers’ Group called American Immigration Lawyers Federation (AILF). They are planning a class-action lawsuit against the USCIS over its sudden reversal, and will probably be looking for plaintiffs who meet a certain profile to join the case (see this PDF FAQ). Continue reading →