The arrest of Indian Diplomat Devyani Khobragade in New York and subsequent diplomatic spat between India and United States is fast becoming tabloid stuff, with supposed hoax videos of Ms Khobragade's strip search doing rounds on the Internet and Indian media changing their story on a daily basis. This affair, however, tells us a few things about new India which is worth taking note of.
First, a quick update on what happened. What we know so far is this: Ms Khobragade's housemaid, Ms Sangetha Richards, someone who was recruited from India and was brought to United States, complained of inhuman treatment against her, and also stated that she was never paid the promised salary, the one Ms Khobragade apparently declared in the visa application form that she signed. After Ms Richards formally complained, Ms Khobragade was formally charged by the prosecutors. This much we know, because no one seems to be disputing this.
Now, the claims: India claimed that Ms Khobragade was strip searched, a claim which was strongly denied by US Marshall's office and never substantiated from the Indian side: We now have a video doing rounds on the Internet, which is claimed to be a hoax. There is a claim by Ms Khobragade's attorney that this is all due to the mistake of an US Visa official, who took what Ms Khobragade got paid herself ($4500) as the amount she would pay the maid. There is also a claim, made by Ms Khobragade's family, that Ms Richards is trying to game the US System and to claim asylum as a victim of human trafficking (a related speculation that Ms Richards was a CIA mole in the Indian embassy surfaced in Indian media, but died down without substantiation).
For normal mortals found in a similar situation, these will be legal arguments played out in a courtroom, for which Ms Khobragade will have plenty of opportunity. If she was unfairly treated by the police, which is unlikely, she can indeed press charges against the officers involved. Given that Indian diplomats (and diplomats from other countries too, it must be said) find themselves regularly on the wrong side of US law with regard to domestic help, seems to give credence to the view that underpaying maids is possibly a common practice. For Indians living abroad, this is an all too familiar story - once in a while, you get to see similar stories played out between domestic help and their sponsors - except for the fact that this has now become a major world news and a source of geopolitical tension.
The escalation of this seemingly common issue to such a level rests of Indian government getting involved claiming that Ms Khobragade had 'diplomatic immunity'. However, since then, it has been clarified that Ms Khobragade had specific diplomatic immunity only related to her consular duties, and did not enjoy full diplomatic immunity that would have saved her from prosecution in an affair of this kind. Indian government has also accepted this view apparently, by moving her to a role in the UN team in New York which allowed her full diplomatic immunity.
So, legal details aside, everyone seems to accept that the maid was paid less than minimum wage, and there may have been a case of lying on the visa application form (whether it is a mistake is yet to be established), a criminal offence. Everyone seems to accept that Ms Khobragade did not have diplomatic immunity, and there is no substantial evidence that she was treated unusually after her arrest.
What we know for a fact, however, is that India has gone ahead and cancelled many diplomatic privileges of US diplomats in India, who had not been convicted of any wrongdoing in India, including their rights to import alcohol. There were speculative statements made by senior politicians about prosecuting gay partners of US diplomats, presumably using a colonial era law which many Indians see as out of date. And, they have also taken completely cavalier steps, like removing security barriers from US embassy in New Delhi, without regard to the considerable threat this embassy is under from Global terror networks (Indeed, if the hated ISI wants to embarrass India, they have been extended an open invitation).
As an overseas Indian, one is struck by this reaction, primarily considering the contrast between India's reaction to this and the French reaction to the arrest of Dominic Strauss Kahn, who at the time of his arrest, was the Head of IMF and a front-runner in the French Presidential race. DSK did something very french, and it was not conclusively proved that he was at fault (indeed, he was acquitted). The French was outraged and indeed, there was talk of conspiracy: However, the French government had the good sense to keep the rhetoric in its place.
In contrast, what India seems to demanding for Ms Khobragade is not diplomatic immunity (she did not have any), but the impunity the Indian elite usually operates with. It is proving the point that many Indians including Arundhati Roy makes, that the Indian elite and the Indian state have become one and the same, and that it does not believe in equality before law (and the privileged must be allowed to do whatever they wish). It is ready to put the country's geopolitical interests in line (the relationship with United States is important because the Indian government itself says so: Manmohan Singh could not think of any greater achievement in his 10 year premiership than the nuclear deal with the United States) for someone who seems to have a very well connected father. The affair also tells us something about Indian journalism: That even the mainstream media in India can not control its tabloid streak when one of their own is touched, and indeed, it has no respect for rule of law like rest of the elite.
In a few months, Indian democracy will be trumpeted about and the world will be reminded that India is world's most populous democracy. In that sense, this affair is timely to remind everyone that democracy is not an end in itself, and divorced from rule of law and accountability of various institutions, it can indeed turn into a very ugly affair.
Popular posts from this blog
A friend has recently forwarded me a quote from Lord Macaulay's speech in the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835. I reproduce the quote below: "I have traveled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation, which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self-esteem, their native self-culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation." The email requested me to forward me to every indian I know. I was tempted, but there were two oddities about this quote. First, the language, which
Introduction : The Business of Gift Giving Business gift giving has always been common and contentious at the same time. Business gifts are usually seen as an ‘advertising, sales promotion and marketing communication medium’ (Cooper et al , 1991). Arunthanes et al (1994) points out that such gifting is practised usually for three reasons: (a) in appreciation for past client relationships, placing a new order, referrals to other clients, etc.; (b) in the hopes of creating a positive, first impression which might help to establish an initial business relationship; and (c) giving may be perceived as a quid Pro quo (i.e. returning a favour or expecting a favour in return for something). The practitioners of gift-giving generally argue that doing business is often an aggregation of personal interactions and relationships, and gift-giving should be seen as a natural way of maintaining and enhancing these relationships. ‘Business gifts, especially one given in the course of the festive s
Buzzwords have disadvantages. Right now, experiential learning is one, and that means we put the label on everything and it stops to mean anything. Also, this means reasonable conversation about experiential learning becomes difficult - at times such as this, either you preach experiential learning or you are traditional, antiquarian and hopelessly out of touch. But, overlooking the limitations of experiential learning can cause big problems. Experiential Learning does many things - putting practice at the heart of learning is an important paradigm shift - but not everything, and it is important to be aware what it does not do. Usually, we equate the terms Project-based Learning (the method) with Experiential Learning (the idea) and Learning from Experience (the ideal), treating them as one and the same and using the terms interchangeably. Any talk about distinctive meaning of these terms is usually seen as pedantic, but really represent very different ideas about education.
In most societies today, making profits are accepted as moral, if not especially praiseworthy. This was not as obvious as it appears today – people used to be embarrassed about making a profit not so long ago. Crazy as it seems today, it is worth thinking why it was so. Profits, as economists will put it, is the reward for risk-taking, for putting a business enterprise together in the pursuit of an objective. In this definition, remember, profits are not what it is commonly understood to be – the gross middle-line towards the bottom – but a figure net of entrepreneur’s earning [wages for his labour], dividends and interests on borrowed capital, and provisions for building and other physical assets [a sort of rent, offsetting what these assets could have earned if leased out]. This pure profit – surplus – accrues to a business as a reward to its organisation, for the act of entrepreneurship itself. Economists were divided on how this surplus comes about. The conventional wisdom was,
Today, Helen Goddard, 26, a highly popular music teacher of a City School for Girls, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison. Her crime was to carry out a year long lesbian affair with one of her pupils, who appeared in the court and admitted that the affair was consensual and it was she who pressured Helen into the affair. For Helen, a bright musician and a devout Chistian, this is an extraordinary lapse of judgement. Also, she was teaching in the £13,000 private girls only school in London. She was surely aware what the consequences of her action will be. The fact that she still could not stop herself tells us that lovers do not always act rationally, something we always knew. There is more in this affair than personal tragedies. For a start, this has all the dramatic elements: a bright, beautiful teacher more in Julia Roberts mould [as in Mona Lisa Smile], a stiff upper lip school [not unlike Wellesley] and a story like Notes On A Scandal with an added twist. Indeed, Helen
Introduction Erna Petri née Kürbs, a farmer’s daughter from Herressen in Thuringia, arrived in Ukraine with her three year old son to join her husband Horst in June 1942. Horst, an SS leader inspired by Nazi ideologue Dr Richard Walter Darré, settled in the plantation of Grzenda, just outside today’s Lviv, to become a German Gentleman-Farmer. Erna saw Horst beating and abusing the workers in the plantation within two days of arriving there, which was, as Horst explained, necessary for establishing authority. Erna joined in enthusiastically, settling into a combination of roles of ‘plantation mistress, prairie Madonna in apron-covered dress lording over slave labourers, infant-carrying, gun-wielding Hausfrau.’  However, there were clear rules in the plantation, and Erna was very much expected to play the woman’s role of being a Cake-and-Coffee hostess. When four Jews were caught in the estate while trying to escape from a transport to a death camp, Horst told Erna and her female
A week into lockdown and things are beginning to change. Mornings are late, afternoons are lazier and evenings never end; meditations are filling out the time for Yoga routines and Netflix profiles are strewn with half-finished movies. This state-mandated, state-funded period of idleness is being likened to being called up to serve, but is nothing like that: Such a comparison is really an affront to the idea of service. Instead, this is just one long streak of panic; of the centre not holding and life not going on as usual. With the usual patterns and rules in suspended animation and business talk - and business - being rendered meaningless, space is opening up for unusual questions: Is Capitalism about to end? Is this the death of globalisation? Does it get uglier from here? My grandfather's generation would have scoffed at us. They saw through wars and pandemics. But, in fairness, we haven't had a life-ending crisis of our own. Notwithstanding the experiences of th
I wrote a note on Kolkata, the city I come from and would always belong to, in July 2010. Since then, the post attracted many visitors and comments, mostly critical, as most people, including those from Kolkata, couldn't see any future for the city. My current effort, some 18 months down the line, is also prompted by a recent article in The Economist, The City That Got Left Behind , which echo the pessimism somewhat. I, at least emotionally, disagree to all the pessimism: After all Kolkata is home and I live in the hope of an eventual return. Indeed, some change has happened since I wrote my earlier post: The geriatric Leftist government that ruled the state for more than 30 years was summarily dispatched, and was replaced by a lumpen-capitalist populist government. Kolkata looked without a future with the clueless leftists at the helm; it now looks without hope. However, apart from bad governance, there is no reason why Kolkata had to be poor and hopeless. It sits right
The ‘Why’ Question? Adolf Hitler was appointed the German Chancellor by President Von Hindenburg on 30th January 1933. This was an extraordinary turn of events. Previously, President Von Hindenburg consistently refused to appoint Hitler the Chancellor, despite the impressive electoral performance of NSDAP in July 1932, Hitler’s uncompromising demand of the Chancellor’s post and a repeat election in November 1932 which failed to break the deadlock. Explaining his refusal, Hindenburg wrote in a letter on 24th November, “a presidential cabinet led by you would develop necessarily into a party dictatorship with all its consequences for an extraordinary accentuation of the conflicts in the German people.” The question ‘why’ Hitler was appointed Chancellor, despite the President being acutely aware of what might follow, is therefore a significant one. The NSDAP had election successes throughout 1932, and was already the biggest single party in the Reichstag and various Landtags acros
Introduction: Hastings in the history of Indian Education Whether or not one includes Warren Hastings in the history of Education in India is a matter of perspective. If writing the history of education means writing the history of schools, the impact of Hastings' administration would be quite limited. If anything, the rapid implosion of local rulers in Eastern, Southern and Northern India during Hastings' tenure had meant a bleak period for the indigenous education system, as patronage and funds would have dwindled away for many of them. The Company administration really concerned itself with the schooling of the natives only after 1813, as Nurullah and Naik rightly pointed out ( see my earlier post ) and one can legitimately start the story at this point. However, if history of Education in India is to encompass the transformation of Indian Scholarship, on which foundation the new, colonial, system of Education would be built, the story must start with Warren Hast
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.