Tehelka comment / 11.1.02

Gerlinde

Nationalist fervour drowns out national interests

While cross-border terrorism is a serious concern, war hysteria should not be allowed to kill all other concerns - the dismal state of the economy, rampant corruption and attempts to distort educational texts, among many others, says Abhik Siddiqui

First came September 11, then December 13. This last year has been very kind to the Central government. It has given policy hawks within the ruling establishment many opportunities to drum up nationalistic feelings. Now, with India and Pakistan on the brink of war, that nationalist fervour has turned into war hysteria. The leaders of the government are talking the tough language. We are repeatedly told that India is not a soft State, and will fight against the international terrorism sponsored by Pakistan.

Forget the fact that the rate of our industrial output has plunged to its lowest level in 20 years, our exports have gone down drastically, our currency has touched a new low against the dollar and we have lost close to one million jobs in the organised sector during the year 2000. Forget the fact that our honourable tehelka-tainted defence minister, George Fernandes, is back in the Cabinet and shouting louder than others about the need to fight terrorism. Also forget the fact that unqualified historians appointed by the government have taken upon themselves the task of rewriting our history textbooks.

We are told that all these things are secondary, and our main goal right now must be to support our government in this hour of crisis, when the citadel of our democracy, our very own Parliament is under attack. In this moment, any kind of criticism of the government could be deemed anti-national. Those attempting to question the government on sensitive issues, like corruption and the state of the economy and society, will not be heard.

With war clouds gathering over our heads, we have forgotten the fact that this government kicked ethics and morality out of the window not so long ago. In this mindless war hysteria, there is no space for discussion and introspection. The government seems least bothered about the over all well-being of the nation. A few years ago, this same government exploded the nuclear bomb and whipped up nationalist hysteria. This time, the nationalism and jingoism of the government comes at a period when we are really in a big financial and political mess.

Although we cannot ignore the enormity of the crisis the government faces after the terrorist attack on Parliament, we must keep in mind that an overdose of jingoism prevents us from looking at the overall picture, and deflects attention from more pressing economic and social concerns. We need cool heads, ready to accept criticism in order to make a realistic assessment of the policies of the current coalition government. We also need a responsible Opposition that does not get sucked into the nationalist fervour and suspends all debate and discussion under the pretext of "national interest". The Opposition must keep an honest record of the failures of the government in different sectors of our national life.

In an article in The Hindustan Times on December 30, 2001, titled "Among the appeasers", its editor-in-chief Vir Sanghvi dismissed the concerns of the so-called members of the intellectual class and media about the war-hysteria being generated by the government. He said that they treat ordinary citizens like "an ignorant bunch of simplistic citizens", and use words like "war mongers" and "knee-jerk reaction" to dismiss their feelings towards the terrorism sponsored by Pakistan.

While it is true that some intellectuals may be snobbish about their views, and do not behave in the way a true nationalist would behave in this hour of crisis, we must keep in mind that democracy needs them, as much as it needs "ordinary citizens". Jingoism is fine if it can fill empty stomachs and keep the Opposition on its toes, but that is not the case in the present situation. Moreover, this "war hysteria" prevents debates on issues that would have taken place in normal circumstances, and draws an "iron curtain" on many important events.