Bhagat-Sukhdev-Rajguru - Youth Icons?

Today, i.e. 28 sept., is a day which means a lot for many of us and may START meaning a lot for those who will be able to understand the feelings behind this article. 

Every time these names come to our minds, we are left wondering about their single mindedness, zeal and determination when it came to opposing the foreign presence on our soil. Their remarkable fearlessness, when despite being almost resourceless , they took on the mammoth British Empire. And their acts stand out because of the clarity of vision and maturity they exhibited, which is evident from the fact that their actions were not about anger or outbursts, but well thought out strategies.  When we ponder over the happenings from the day they were sentenced to death to the day of their execution on 23 March 1931 at Lahore, it’s clearly evident that they had foreseen every step that the British Government will take to "silence" them, and they "manipulated" the system into doing just opposite of what Government intended to do, by using the courtyard proceedings to convey their thoughts to the nation, isn’t it obvious when we see the names of these great Martyrs remembered by the nation even after so many years?

Nowadays when we talk about Youth power and youth ICONS and a number of names and personalities come to our minds, but sadly these martyrs, though respected and adored, RARELY make it to that list!  How much ever we refute this, it remains a fact that the "general" thoughts and discussions about these martyrs "generally" revolve around GUNS and BOMBS, and go little beyond that. These discourses rarely go in the realm of their relevance in present scenario. And this doesn’t surprise considering the obvious disdain for such ideologies on the part of those in polity or administration, who are guided more by the sense of just "running things" than a selfless love for nation. Such forces/institutions will go to any extent to erase their names and deeds from our "HISTORY", and in a situation when erasing their names could not be achieved, sustained efforts will b directed towards painting them as "Terrorists". And I am sure all of you remember our Martyrs being called "TERRORISTS" by many "eminent" political personalities. The onus is on US to "understand" what they really stood for, and propagate that between people who are not that much aware of them.

If we look beyond the ‘aura’ that surrounds these Martyrs and the general "perceptions" about them, we could clearly see that they were ORDINARY people, just like us – BUT they rose to the occasion when LIFE presented them with a choice to take the "easier" way of living for BHARAT or pursuing a life centered around  "personal" gains and achievements. These people were same in every aspect EXCEPT when it comes to "weighing" pros and cons when it came to taking on WHATEVER ailed our nation, and unlike most of us, there was NO WEIGHING. And despite this, all the actions were guided and pursued with an unmatched zeal that leaves us amazed at the MATURITY that they displayed, while they were still so young!
 
               Shouldn’t these traits make them obvious "choice" as YOUTH ICONS?? Because with that kind of zeal and grit, it would not be impossible to cross any barriers, reach any milestones or achieve ANY GOALS, with that kind of clarity and VISION, the word "confusion" will be purged from our minds. And once a LOT of start waking up to OUR OWN potential, zeal and the grit that we always HIDE inside us, nothing would be able stop us from taking Bharat to the heights of GLORY and progress, which have become NOTHING but hyped decorative words making it to most of the "speeches" with total disconnect between actions and thoughts that guide them.   

On this auspicious day, let’s together take a vow that all our thoughts, all our actions will be guided by boundless love for BHARAT, and we won’t hesitate to give up ANYTHING when we are faced with THE CALL, that differentiates LEGENDS!
 
Jai Bharat, Vande Mataram

Thorium holds key to India's energy security

As diwan of Travancore, Sir C.P. Ramaswami Iyer struggled desperately with the departing colonial rulers to prevent the kingdom’s riches, including its thorium deposits, from falling into the hands of the Congress Party whose leadership he did not trust. Thorium’s importance has been known since the early twentieth century when a German chemist scouted it for the gas mantles industry. The French also knew its worth and bought beach sand from Kerala. In fairness, Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru banned the export of thorium after setting up the Department of Atomic Energy. Since then, many rare minerals have been found in Indian beach sands – ilmenite, rutile, garnet, zircon and sillimanite.

Thorium is critical to our nuclear energy security and strategic deterrence policy. India’s huge reserves are in the form of placer sand complexes along both southern coasts. Manavalakurichi at Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu, has 30% of the world’s known reserves. Other important sites are Aluva and Chavara (Kerala), Sand Complex (Orissa), Vishakhapatnam and Bhimunipatnam (Andhra Pradesh). These can be accessed with bare hands; most other nations’ reserves are embedded in rocks and involve costly and laborious extraction.

Thorium from monazite sand can be converted into an isotope of uranium and used to feed nuclear reactors; it can be used multiple times to generate electricity, thus creating an endless cycle of fuel availability. Thorium cycles are feasible in existing thermal and fast reactors without major changes in engineering systems, reactor control and reactivity devices. A publication of the International Atomic Energy Agency, 2005, says the thorium fuel cycle can complement uranium fuels and produce long term nuclear energy with low radio-toxicity waste. The transition to thorium can be done through incineration of weapons grade plutonium or civilian plutonium.

As more countries follow Japan in shutting down uranium power plants after the Fukushima disaster, thorium is being seen as the route to safer nuclear energy. Japan is researching new thorium-based hydride fuels for advanced Minor Actinides and plutonium burners with high-safety features, and has just concluded a 15-year agreement with India for supply of the rare mineral. Washington’s Nuclear Energy Research Initiative project has developed an innovative fuel matrix comprising thorium, and is buying all available thorium from India.
 
Recent reports suggest that from 2004 onwards, over two million tonnes of monazite, equivalent to 195,300 tonnes of thorium at 9.3 per cent recovery, has vanished from the Tamil Nadu and Kerala coasts. At a conservative estimate of $100/tonne, the scam exceeds Rs. 48 lakh crore. Under public pressure, Tamil Nadu police have registered a case of lifting sand from temple land controlled by the Dept. of Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment.
Officially, the beach placer mining sector was opened to the private sector in 1998, and beach sand export escalated after 2005. Even radioactive minerals were allowed to be exported unchecked. In 2006, the UPA delisted heavy minerals like monazite and ilmenite from the proscribed substances list vide SO 61 (E), to facilitate export by private companies, with the proviso that they comply with the Atomic Energy Rules of 1984. But the key officer overseeing the process is reportedly close to some private placer mineral industrialists, and thereby hangs a tale. Despite this, last year when RTI activist Kodikunnel Suresh asked if monazite export violated the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board rules, Minister of State, PMO, V. Narayanaswamy said beach sands with heavy minerals were exported, but monazite and thorium were proscribed for export under the Atomic Energy Act.
 
The Bhaba Atomic Research Centre produced the world’s first thorium nuclear reactor, Kakrapar-1 (Surat, Gujarat), in 1993, using thorium rather than depleted uranium to achieve power flattening across the reactor core. This was part of a three-stage fuel cycle plan with the ultimate goal of using thorium-based reactors to meet 30% of our energy demands by 2050. Thorium can theoretically generate 40 times the energy per unit mass compared to uranium; this fuel cycle is slated to begin in 2016.

Post-Pokharan, BARC scientists developed a fast breeder reactor using thorium – the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam; later a 500 MW fast breeder reactor was started at Kalpakkam. This means the bred plutonium has dual use as nuclear fuel for another reactor, or for nuclear-tipped weapons as part of our strategic deterrence. As India ranks among only four nations with thorium nuclear technology competence (after USA, France, Japan), and can potentially export fast-breeder thorium-based N-reactors, it should immediately declare its thorium reserves as a strategic asset, not for export.

The Centre should ban private sector mining of thorium-producing placer minerals like monazite, ilmenite, rutile, zircon, and mineral complexes such as thorite, thorianite, and uranium minerals under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, and Indian Atomic Energy Act 1948. These should form part of the Central List of Part XI of the Constitution. These minerals should be mined exclusively under the control of the Atomic Energy Commission. This will not only protect the fragile coastlines from erosion triggered by reckless mining, but prevent illegal mining in government lands beyond the area specified in the licenses. Existing private leases for mining ilmenite and monazite lack controls to ensure that the thorium contained in such extractions is deposited with the AEC.

A startling fact brought to light by this controversy is that Indian Rare Earths Ltd has been allocated very limited areas for conserving and extracting thorium-rich minerals from placer deposits of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, while private parties have been permitted to exploit vast areas. In fact, government officials and agencies have facilitated certain individuals and companies to develop virtual monopolies in the mining of valuable mineral resources like ilmenite and monazite. And as in the telecom and coal sectors, no auctions were held while bestowing such valuable national resources on crony capitalists.

Worse, reports suggest that in some of the thorium sand containing areas, the private operators have set up a virtual parallel regime where their writ alone runs and the law and order machinery is kept at bay, as happened with iron ore mining. Most of these areas are currently inaccessible to scientists and researchers. This is a grim confirmation that minerals or areas not covered in the lease contracts are being mined and exported. We urgently need a national policy that treats all natural resources as sovereign national wealth, not to be indiscriminately exploited by the private sector.

Sardar Patel - The architect of modern United India

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Rashtriya Ekta Trust (SVPRET) today considered connecting Vadodara with the proposed Statue of Unity to be built on the Narmada near the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) dam site with a Metro Rail and six-lane highway.

The SVPRET expects one lakh tourists per day to the ambitious project and hence the Metro and Highway projects. Other features of the project, besides the 182-metre high statue of Sardar Patel, touted to be world’s highest, include a bridge from Kevadia Colony to the statue, convention centre, memorial garden, amusement park and a hotel.

The meeting presided over by Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi decided to handover project management and construction management of the ambitious project, estimated to cost Rs.2,500-crore, to a world-class consultant. Six important studies, including total survey of the project, variation in water level and high flood level, wind and water velocity, seismic survey and model study and mathematical analysis of Pune have been completed, while that on environment effects is on progress.

Meanwhile, work order has been placed for constructing Garudeshwar weir on the Narmada river downstream Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP) dam. In another, it has been decided to develop both the banks of Narmada river and also the Bhadbhut Canal from the SSP dam site to Bharuch up to the seacoast.



The trust resolved to fulfill the dream of iron man Sardar Patel and complete the SSP project, with Chief Minister Narendra Modi having taken the height of the dam to the crucial height of 121.92-metres to generate 1,950 MW of electricity and the world’s longest 458 km canal during the last ten years.

The meeting took note of the Chief Minister’s dynamism to take forward 2.200-km canal-based drinking water pipeline, besides Narmada branch, minor and sub-minor distribution canals. His latest initiative to build solar power project on the canal as a unique concept.

Rig Vedic Polytheism and Punya Bhumi

The Rig Vedic worship of many gods and goddesses provoked commentators from Abrahamic faiths (mainly Christians) to call the system polytheism (the worship of many gods). Modern Hindus are no longer intimidated by the polytheist label. Hindus believe that their land isPunya Bhumi (sacred earth) inhabited by the gods and goddesses of the universe, who are invited to special open air feasts (yagnas) and also housed in temples built for them by devotees. Perhaps no country in the world has so many temples, from north to south, east to west, and no other religious tradition has invoked the presence of deities in the Vedic yagnasand their successors in the Agama traditions of ritual and worship.

The Hindu bhakta knows that the gods actually EXIST, but the educated Hindu elite are reluctant to admit to their heritage thanks to the massive indoctrination by the Macaulay-ian educational system and the missionary onslaught on Hinduism which denounces it as ‘pagan’, ‘polytheist’ etc. They contrast it with their ONE true god in whose name they have visited death and destruction on the planet.

Recent commentators from the Hindu side, such as Swami Devananda Sarasvati (a Dasanamisannyasin) and earlier still, the chronicler late Sita Ram Goel, have pointed out that the contemporary educated Hindu elite have been misled by their ill-conceived identification of Monotheism and Monism, and their inability to understand that the difference is crucial to understanding Polytheism.

Sita Ram Goel prefers the word Panentheism to Polytheism (to describe Hinduism) since the former emphasises the special Hindu concept of Ishta-devata, the special deity to whom a worshipper can relate to (a phenomenon unique to Hinduism).

The crucial difference between Monotheism and Monism is that the former believes in a ONE true god, and denounces the gods of other faiths as ‘false gods’, whatever that means, for how can a god be ‘false’ if the concept of god is real?

Monism believes in the Infinite existence of the Divine, which is characterised by Existence, Consciousness and Bliss (Sat, Chit, Ananda). This is better known as Advaita Vedanta or Non-Dualism (Unity, non-divisiveness). Its best articulation came with Adi Sankara (788 -820 CE). There are two other major Vedantas, the qualified non-dualism of Ramanuja and the Dualism of Madhva.

Modern practitioners of Monism are many, the most renowned being the Kanchi Sankarachariar who specially highlighted the importance of the many gods in Hinduism:

“… a yagna is making an oblation to a deity in the fire with the chanting of mantras. In a sense the mantras themselves constitute the form of the deities invoked. In another sense, themantras, like the materials placed in the fire, are the sustenance of the celestials invoked…” (Hindu Dharma: Chapter on The Vedas).

Elsewhere, the Sankarachariar remarked that the devout Hindu also sees the forms of the celestials appearing in the yagna fire.

These preliminary remarks are intended to emphasise the link between Hindu Monism and Rig Vedic Polytheism. It allows for an enriched Hindu Pantheism where the devotee does not consider his/her chosen deity (ishta devata) as the only true god, and does not anathema-ise the gods of other faiths, as happens in Abrahamic monotheism. This is, of course, the difference between Abrahamic monotheism and Hindu pantheism.

Abrahamic monotheism must be rejected by Hindus for two reasons: [1] political, [2] religious.

Politically, monotheism has been the source of conquest, violence and intolerance, both in Christianity and Islam. It is important that Hindus are always vigilant to this dimension in the interests of security. The security question arises not only in the crude context of everyday dangers such as the throwing of a severed cow’s head by miscreants inside a Hindu temple or the verbal abuse of Hindu scriptures and temples, but the equally looming danger of sophisticated Inculturation. Here we perceive both Islamist and Christian attempts to find their monotheistic doctrines reflected in the Rig Veda, and the sophisticated attempts to wrest the ‘Rishi tradition’ as they call it, from the Hindus, distort it and appropriate it for their own purposes.

In this project, the Vedas are no longer dismissed as ‘paganism’, but viewed as harbingers of the two monotheistic faiths. This can range from the crude attempt by evangelical Christians (and Islamic counterparts) to find references to Jesus in the Rig Veda, and/or references to the coming of the prophet and so on, to the more sophisticated attempts by scholars (mainly Catholic, but also such persons as Dr. Zakir Naik) to find parallels in the thinking of the Veda and their own scriptures and beliefs.

In this way, Inculturation, or the process by which another’s culture is absorbed into one’s own, has become a current trend. The aim, of course, is to eradicate the visited local culture. It is not some gentlemanly exercise or purely scholarly enterprise. The agenda is clearly there.

The link between Hindu Monism and Rig Vedic Polytheism establishes the richness of both dimensions: the Infinite Divinity and the infinite manifestations of this Divinity in the gods and goddesses that Hindus worship. One can theorise about this link, as have the great Hindu philosophers such as Adi Sankara, Ramanuja and Madhva. But for our purposes it is important to keep in mind that these manifestations are the murtis (derided as ‘idols’ by monotheists) that Hindus consecrate and install in temples and worship. Hence, the importance of murti reverence and temples in Sanatana Dharma.

When the barbarian invaders arrived, their first task was to destroy as many temples as they could. Thousands of Hindus lost their lives in defence of these temples. The shocking desecration of murtis by Islamists and Evangelicals continues to this day, though on a smaller scale, and mainly by Evangelicals.

If the underlying unity between Monism and Hindu Polytheism is not clearly understood, many Hindus get misled to believe that the ONE god of the monotheists is the same asSatchidananda (Infinite Divinity) and go on to downgrade Vedic polytheism as an accidental/ incidental feature of Hinduism, which Hindus outgrew in their historical development, and are now presumably moving towards the higher (sic) faith of Abrahamic monotheism. This is a profound mistake and merely parrots the narrative put forward by the ONE god-ists. Nor is the ONE god the same as the ishta-devata of Hindus. The ONE god is held by its followers to be the ONLY true god with all other gods being FALSE gods. Whereas the ishta-devata is only one among many gods and each devotee is allowed to worship freely his/her own ishta-devata(who may be different from the kula devata or even the grama devata).

The difference is politically significant since the ONE god-ists are prone to intolerance, violence, conquest and proselytisation, as happened historically and continues with a renewed sense of urgency by the Evangelicals today. Hinduism, thus, is always in danger of attack from the ONE god-ists. The punya bhumi is the land peopled by the gods and goddesses of the Rig Veda and many other divinities and eminences of the Indic tradition who are not mentioned specifically in the Rig Veda. It has to stay that way.

The further philosophical /religious/ spiritual dimension of the Satchidananda-Polytheism link is that while Vedanta stresses the former aspect, the latter is important for the householder (grihastha). The four stages of life (varnashrama dharma) each have their owndharma. Even Adi Sankara, as far as is known, stressed that the householder must fulfill his/her duties before taking up the last stage of sannyasa (incorporated from the Jaina ascetic tradition). In this he was different from the Buddha, for whom the monastic life could be taken up at any time that the individual desired.

J&K Interlocutors' report: Unconstitutional ploy to destabilize India

The criminal silence of the Congress leadership on the highly provocative and vicious 179-page report of three interlocutors submitted to Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram in October 2011 is an alarming signal vis-à-vis the future constitutional relationship of Jammu & Kashmir with the rest of the country. The appointment of three faithful musketeers on such a sensitive situation smacks of a connivance of the Union Home Ministry with the ruling National Conference to destabilize the Indian Union and create confusion regarding the constitutional relationship between the State and the Union of India with an ulterior motive to please the Anglo-American Bloc. The silence of the Congress leadership on the Interlocutors’ report is questionable and amounts to acceptance.

The report calls for the revision of all Central Laws extended to J&K after 1952. In other words, Central Laws which were introduced by the legislature of J&K after the dismissal of Sheikh Mohd Abdullah in 1953. These laws or legislations include the authority of the Supreme Court of India, the control of Comptroller General of India, the promulgation of the fundamental rights as incorporated in Chapter III of the Constitution of India as well as the supervision of the Chief Election Commission of India.

A revision of these legislations means revising the existing constitutional relationship of the State with the rest of the country. This recommendation is totally violative of the mandate of the Constitution of India as also the mandate of the Constitution of J&K.

Moreover, after having signed Indira-Sheikh Accord (as this understanding between the two leaders is called) in 1975, this issue was closed once for and for all. Sheikh Abdullah’s successor to the post of chief minister has no right to demand revision of the existing State-Centre relationship. The report of the interlocutors amounts to challenging the credibility as well as the validity of the Indira-Sheikh Accord. Sheikh Mohd. Abdullah in 1981 had firmly shut this chapter himself after the two reports prepared by two different committees headed by his cabinet colleagues had suggested closure of the issue for good.

The interlocutors have heavily pleaded for making Article 370 a permanent feature of the Indian Constitution; least realizing that Article 370 was a temporary provision as intended by Dr. Ambedkar. Making this provision as permanent is tantamount to the virtual secession of J&K from India. This would mean that the Parliament of India shall have no control over the affairs of J&K and the constitutional status of J&K shall revert back to the pre-1947 arrangement. This could lead to a civil war in the state. This report falls within the meaning and scope of Section 120, 121 etc. of the Indian Penal Code as it pleads for secession of the State.

The interlocutors have deliberately chosen to avoid the most important issues relating to about 85000 Pakistani refugees who were settled in J&K in 1947/48 by the then administrator appointed by the Maharaja Hari Singh, namely Sheikh Mohd Abdullah. They have been living in J&K as persona non-grata without any civil or political rights. The report has completely rejected the issue of nearly 1.5 million refugees of POK who have been living as migrants in Jammu region since 1947.
The report has completely ignored the political issue relating to Delimitation of Assembly Constituencies which has affected largely Jammu Pradesh, where seven Assembly constituencies stand reserved for the SC category. If Delimitation is barred, all the reserved seats in Jammu Pradesh shall remain un-rotated for 40 years. This may give rise to another cause of civil conflict.

The interlocutors have completely ignored the findings of State Finance Commission headed by Dr. Mehmood Rehman which had suggested equity proposition to remove discrimination with Jammu Pradesh and Ladakh regions.

The interlocutors have deliberately ignored the popular will of the people of J&K that stand for frequent movement of residents of the two sides of the state i.e. between the residents of POK and J&K. The notables from both sides of J&K, who met in 2005 and again in 2007 in Intra J&K ‘Heart to Heart’ Meet in New Delhi, had conveyed to India as well as to Pakistan that movement across the Line of Control should be made feasible and possible for the passport holders of the respective countries. It should be made easy without visa requirement. This is the need of the hour and in the interests of lasting peace between India and Pakistan.

What needs to be done is that India and Pakistan should continue dialogue. A constructive and positive result is possible only when Pakistan is represented by a democratically elected government. Stability and return of democracy is essential to make the peace initiative a success.
J&K should be reorganized within the meaning and scope of Article 2, 3 read with the provisions of Article 370 of Constitution of India. Article 370 should be amended so as to empower the Parliament of India to legislate on matters falling within the scope of the Union List vis-à-vis J&K. This shall remove all doubts about the constitutional relationship of J&K with the rest of the country.



The Kashmiri leadership has always been hostile to the Treaty of Amritsar 1846, signed between Maharaja Gulab Singh and the East India Company, which established the State of J&K and included Ladakh and Gilgit regions. All the three regions of J&K, namely, Ladakh, Kashmir and Jammu Pradesh, have independent and distinguished cultural, linguistic as well as geographical identities. This is an era of upholding the identity or identities of the people or a region or State.

The three identities can survive in harmony and peace provided each one is recognized on the basis of its cultural, linguistic and geographical identity. Jammu Pradesh has multiple of social and political problems which include permanent rehabilitation and settlement of the migrants and refugees fromPakistan and POK. Jammu Pradesh has remained ignored in the field of development, education, agriculture, and otherwise. Ladakh has suffered on all counts of development and communication. The three units shall survive strengthening the bonds of national integration the day they are treated as equals. The interlocutors report is fit for the dustbin and should remain there forever. Let the Central leadership decide what needs to be done.

Thousand Years' of Disgrace

India, our holy motherland, since the prehistoric times had abundance of natural resources. From the start of human civilisation, i.e the bronze age, one can see the vast expanse of civilisation stretched across the lengths of vast rivers like Sindhu, Saraswati, etc. India is truly 'The Golden bird'.

As an amateur historian, I have read and researched about various other civilisations throughout the world. Be it be the Gold laden Egyptian Civilisation better known as 'Misr', The civilisation between the two great rivers of Iran: Euphrates and Tigris, the Yanking Civilisation of China, The Greeks of Europe, The Romans of Italian peninsula, the Phoenicians who spread throughout the Mediterranean, etc. But one thing I must say that no other civilisation has that kind of distinction with respect to society, philosophy, theology, science,etc. The Indian civilisation is a class apart civilisation.
Even though it outlived many other civilisations of the world who are now dead or just lingering in historical accounts, there is enough amount of mutations in this Indian 'way of life'. The glorious past is just a shadow here where intellectual subversion, pseudo-secularism has taken deep roots in the Indian Society. The society where God resided in knowledge and unhindered flow of knowledge, freedom for each soul, etc. is now taken the form of blind worship and imitation of the west or the Arabic world. Despite this grave condition, the Sanathana way of life lives, desperately seeking the desire to be revived back to life.

We all know the glory of our motherland, but we rarely ponder about the fact that in these 1000 years, India has been deprived of her place in world politics. What is the reason for this? Why this perfect society fell to the wave of invaders? Well I have tried to make some analysis on this topic:

Inter-State Relations in the Ancient Righvedic India:

The Righvedic scholars understood the urge and ambitions of the Kings to expand their territories of the kingdom. But they also created a set of rules which all the Kings must follow. Here are some of the rules:

1. Armies must only fight on the battlefields and not lay siege on cities.
2. No civilian of either kingdom must be harmed economically or physically during the course of war.
3. Battle between armies must happen only during day time.
4. Same army units must fight similar army units, i.e.: Archers must only fight only with the archers of the opposite side; Cavalry units must fight only with the cavalry units and infantry with only infantry…
5. Rulers had to follow righteous methods of war, during the course of war and even after the war.
6. Conqueror was to remain satisfied if the conquered paid tributes.
7. Conqueror was not to annex conquered Kingdoms.
8. Conqueror must not disturb the local laws, traditions, philosophy or the way of life of the conquered subjects.
9. New subjects must be treated properly.

These are some of the important rules which Ancient thinkers framed in the Indian Subcontinent. Most of the times, rulers were engaged only in negotiations with neighboring states and were to resort to war against them as a last resort.

To quote, these were the immediate advantages of the above stated rules in the Indian subcontinent:

1. Cities were never harmed in wars.
2. Civilian casualty was minimal.
3. No form of deceit was possible.
4. Mass massacres of armies didn’t happen. (For Ex: If archers were allowed to fight against infantry, archers would have killed many infantry units and may not even get harmed by the infantry units!)
5.  The basic framework of kingdoms was more or less stable.
6. As local laws, traditions, way of life was not disturbed; the lifestyle of the subjects didn’t change drastically.
7. As there was less attention towards Imperial policies, peace was ensured in the Indian subcontinent.
8. Due to this, intellectual and spiritual growth of the nation was visible.

As I have mentioned pros of these rules, I would also like to mention the cons of these rules. Though the cons of these rules became real and visible only after 1000 A.D.

1. No uniform one rule in the Indian subcontinent.
2. Over-dharma reliability of the army proved to be the cause of defeat in the battles between invading armies who didn’t followed the ethics of battle.
3. These rules ensured peace between states but the enmity was not resolved. This enmity proved the basic reason for treachery of many Kings with the holy motherland in order to meet their selfish motives.
4. Rulers wanted their lines to rule for eternity. For this they introduced new forms of languages by mutating Sanskrit and Tamil (Sanskrit in North India and Tamil in South India) in order to ensure their separate cultural hold over their subjects. This paved way for multi-lingual states in the Indian Subcontinent.
5. Though the people residing in the Indian Subcontinent had same ‘way of life’, rules, ethics, traditions, etc. they distinguished themselves on petty differences based on caste, language, philosophy, etc.
6. The very long duration of peace made people of the subcontinent to neglect the butchery which happened around the Indian Subcontinent.

Though from this point of view much good can be seen about the political theories of human nature of the ancient Indians, it is a fact that as they had not permitted the annexation of the conquered states to the conqueror, no other ancient Indian monarch except Chandragupta Maurya under the able guidance of Acharya Chanakya,  could establish a sound political unity of the Indian people in such a manner that they could be able to repel the dangers which constantly lurked ob the North-Western  borders of India and which brought Indian Independence always in danger…

These cons were slightly visible during the period of Alexander’s invasion of India. But the invasion of the Macedonians never proved to be too grave for India. Many invaders followed their path like: White Huns, Kushanas, etc. but these invader rather imposing their foreign rules, absorbed the local rules of India and became a part of the Indian Subcontinent. But by the beginning of 1000 A.D, the Islamic invaders entered into the Subcontinent and wrenched havoc throughout. They never followed the ethics of war which the armies of numerous kingdoms of Bharata held as their pride. In spite of this, the brave warriors of the holy motherland held the brutal Islamic invasion with courage and bravery. But due to deceit and enmity between small kingdoms, this proved to be fractures and cracks through which Islamic invaders pushed into the subcontinent.   They were brutal on the conquered subjects. Mass massacres took place in many parts of India. Conversions by force took place. The normal way of life in the subcontinent was totally disrupted.

I know many of the enthusiasts of Indian History (who know what true history of India is!) would like to know why this nation which consisted of brave warriors, brilliant scholars, and able rulers fell to the wave of Islamic invaders. I have drawn here some conclusions by using the ‘cause-effect’ phenomena. Sometimes those rules which may seem to be beneficial to the people currently may prove to be the cause of destruction later…

Narendra Modi as Prime Minister in 2014

The next general election is two years away. The contours or nature of the next government is anybody’s guess. The only thing that seems certain for now is that it will not be a government led by the Congress party. However, speculation about the next prime ministerial candidate is rife. Strange as it may sound, but for some political formations and many among the paparazzi, the question is not who should be but ‘who should not be’ the prime ministerial candidate.

Narendra Modi himself has not spelt out his desire to become PM. He may have an ambition to become prime minister, but frankly which politician does not harbour such ambitions? Some time back, asked whether he had any prime ministerial ambitions, Lalu Prasad Yadav shot back, ‘why not?’ There may be many Deve Gowdas who secretly hope to be ‘the monkey that arbiters between the two cats’! This category includes Chandra Babu Naidu, Jayalalitha, Mamata Banerjee, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Naveen Patnaik, Nitish Kumar and maybe, quite a few others. The name of Chandra Babu Naidu may be out of sync in this list as unlike the others, he lost two successive general elections and if the present is anything to go by, there is no hope in the world that he would win the next. But stranger things have happened in the past. In 1991, a concatenation of events resurrected P. V. Narasimha Rao from a self-imposed politicalvanavas and anointed him PM.

The BJP is yet to take a call on ‘who’ its prime ministerial candidate will be. The party claims – maybe, truthfully - that it has a number of ‘prime-ministerial candidates’ in its ranks and Narendra Modi is only one among them. There are a number of state elections between now and 2014 including one in Gujarat, where obviously Narendra Modi would like to see his party ensconced for a third term in office. He is entitled to it on the strength of his development record which, those in the know say, is comparable to no other state in India but to China, the epitome for development in the twenty-first century.

But speculation about ‘Narendra Modi as PM’ has electrified the mainstream media. Just google “narendra modi as pm” and the query returns a mind-boggling (for once the phrase is no exaggeration) 17,700,000 results in 0.39 seconds! There may be strong opinions ‘on both sides of the divide’ to use a media cliché but none can deny that he is a serious contender.

Before we consider the reasons his detractors might put forth against his candidature let us look at the positives in Narendra Modi’s favour:

Does he have an ennobling vision for the future?
He does not believe in offering sops but putting in place mechanisms for empowering people. In his vision, the first step for building the value chain of empowerment is developing infra-structure. It includes sources of water supply (both for drinking and irrigating agriculture); hassle-free power supply (again for homes and industries) road and internet connectivity and more importantly education for all.

The second step is generation of employment opportunities by encouraging investment in industry. In most states starting industries is mired in bureaucratic red-tape and corruption. The difference that Gujarat under Narendra Modi makes in this aspect is demonstrated in the setting up of the Nano car factory. When the Tata’s had to exit Bengal because of Mamata Banerjee’s cussedness and myopia, at least five states including three developed southern states and Maharashtra were vying for its location in their state. Even while these states were scrambling for the acquisition of land, Narendra Modi was ready with an offer. The land he offered was immediately handed over, with all infra-structure facilities in place. As a result of the one quick decision-making and acting on it, car manufacturers from all over the world are scrambling to build manufacturing facilities in Gujarat. The setting up of such major industries has a spin-off effect. It spawns setting up of a spew of ancillary industries generating jobs in lakhs.

While the ongoing foreign NGO-funded agitation has been delaying production in the Kudankukalam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu, work has been silently going on in Gujarat for the construction of the first nuclear power plant under the Indo-US civilian nuclear co-operation agreement.

Speaking on the economic crisis that is currently gripping the nation and on how to overcome it by attracting investments in industry, he has this to say in an interview to the Economic Times (Red carpet, not red tape for investors, is the way out of economic crisis: Narendra Modi, June 7, 2012):

“It is a crisis. In the new economic scenario, the government can’t do all that is needed to pump growth. We have to encourage private investment, not just in infrastructure but also in the social sector. We have to open up new investment avenues for people who want to invest.

But before any individual or company invests, they look for safety of their money and profit from the investment. We can provide safety for their money through clarity in policies, transparency in decision-making and decent implementation.

Can he make his followers see his vision through expressive language and communication?
If the recent BJP Natioanl Executive Committee conclave in Mumbai is anything to go by, he certainly can make his followers share his ennobling vision for the future. His every word was lapped up and the points he made lustily cheered by the crowds. This is but an example. His every speech in every meeting is crafted to paint glorious visions of the future for the listeners to visualise.

Does he take personal risks and makes personal sacrifices?
Narendra Modi leads a spotless Spartan life, works eighteen hours a day for realising his vision of a glorious future for his state.

No other political leader in India or anywhere in the world would have faced the kind of relentless onslaughts and vilification campaigns as Naredra Modi did in his career as Chief Minister of Gujarat in the last ten years. Undeterred by these, he has been marching ahead in his single-minded pursuit of development for his people.

Does every citizen identify with and believe in Narendra Modi’s ennobling vision?
His detractors and sections of the media might say what they want but the people of Gujarat, of all sections and communities have unshakeable belief in the leadership of Narendra Modi because of what he has already achieved. They identify with the golden future that he has in store for them.

Viewed differently, the question also means whether he can provide strong and effective leadership to his followers. The answer to it is a firm ‘yes’. One needn’t elaborate, for the all round development of his state and the rapid strides the state is making in different fields is proof positive of his strong and effective leadership. Just to mention two areas, the state saw deserts bloom and agriculture has been galloping at over 10% growth year on year whereas in the rest of the country it has been hovering at 3%. Some might say that his leadership lacks a consensual approach and is autocratic. One must remember he is an elected leader and he has been consistently delivering results. If he were to act only after all objections are convincingly answered it would lead to systemic sclerosis resulting in policy paralysis, something which we are witnessing with the central administration.