Recently, one of India’s astute political leaders, Sharad Pawar, while talking to media on some current political issues conveyed his perception about the findings of the short-seller Hindenburg Research on the Adani Group and felt that the findings looked to him targeted.
He also spoke about the demand for a JPC probe on the issue and felt this was not necessary if the Supreme Court were to conduct an inquiry as that course would provide a better chance of the truth coming out.
He was clear that big business houses of India have made significant contribution to our economy; but if they have committed wrong there was no harm attacking them but we should not forget the huge infrastructure they have created.
The experienced political leader was alluding to the need for criticism with a sense of responsibility. He said it did not create an anti business atmosphere if questions were raised against industrial/business conglomerates. Such questions, he said, have been raised in the past as well.
We cannot rule out articulation of differences in a Democracy even on crucial economic matters. In fact, such articulation is the quintessence of democratic temper. Dissent must have a decent space in our public discourse; but it needs to be based on reason, not emotion; on facts, not on imagination.
Great Parliamentarians like Jawaharlal Nehru and Atal Bihari Vajpayee have facilitated free articulation of differing views and strengthened the democratic spirit. Dissent should invite respect rather than a sneer.
India’s sustained economic growth has been big news the world over. Our quick revival after the Pandemic has been nothing short of a marvel. The country has demonstrated its diplomatic astuteness during difficult times. Its oil purchase from Russia to safeguard our economic interest, while the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine made major western economies to resort to sanctions against Russia, demonstrated India’s diplomatic astuteness necessitated by national interest.
Such bold and independent course did not create ruffles among friends in the western world. India’s determination to curb terrorism has shown results. The country is in a state of much greater preparedness to defend its borders.
In such a situation, it is not unnatural that India would be talked about and its political leadership commented upon. The tone of such talk could be appreciative; it could be jarring as well. A Big Democracy like ours needs to demonstrate a big heart towards critics as well as well-wishers.
It is perhaps neither desirable nor necessary to respond to each and every comment of a foreigner. Our response has to be selective, dignified and effective. Country’s image and its interest must be protected and attempts to damage them must receive an effective response. Response to a private foreign individual despite his/her clout need not be only from the government. Such a response only unwittingly enhances the image of the mischief monger, he gets more respectability.
Such irresponsible outbursts should be addressed by the country’s civil society, by respectable opinion makers. A responsible Opposition could take up the responsibility to uphold country’s image and prestige. Such an approach would lend more credibility and strength to our response.
George Soros' certain recent remarks including on Gautam Adani’s connections with Prime Minister were said as a part of a broad set of themes in his 50-minute speech, that as The Telegraph reported “oscillated between climate change, Russia-Ukraine war, rumbling[s] in the US, Turkey disaster and failures in China”. Soros devoted only a couple of minutes to India and Adani.
The 92-year-old philanthropist, one of the wealthiest men in the world and founder of Open Society Foundations that is spread over seventy countries and which gives grants to groups and individuals that promote “democracy’, ‘transparency’, and ‘freedom of speech', said that the turmoil at Gautam Adani's business empire may weaken Prime Minister Narendra Modi's hold on the government and would open the door to push for more needed institutional reforms.”I may be naive’, he said, “but I expect a democratic revival in India”.
His comments drew appropriate response from Union Minister Smriti Irani, who said, “The man who broke the Bank of England, and is designated by the nation an economic war criminal, has now pronounced his desire to break Indian democracy. George Soros, an international entrepreneur, has declared his ill-intention to intervene in the democratic processes of India.” She said such forces try to bring down governments in other countries to ensure that “their hand-picked people” are in power. The remarks, she said were a “declaration to destroy India’s democratic processes” and that Indians have defeated such “foreign powers” that tried to meddle with India’s internal affairs earlier as well, and will do so again. “I urge every Indian to give a fitting reply to George Soros,” she said.
It is indeed significant that Congress leader, Jairam Ramesh too has responded to the unwarranted comments of George Soros. He said whether the “PM-linked Adani scam” sparks a democratic revival in India “depends entirely” on the Congress, Opposition parties and India’s electoral process. This has nothing to do with George Soros.
While the Indian response has been quick, adequate and has been enriched by the response from the Congress, it is desirable that opinion makers, intellectuals, academicians, business leaders and political forces are engaged more and more for objective and informed articulation on issues of national importance.
Sharad Pawar surely echoed such sentiment when he said issues against business conglomerates have been raised in the past. A Democracy of 140 crore people can ill afford to drift towards a zone of silence. Responsible criticism must get the space it deserves. Ultimately it the citizens of this country, not always the government of the day, that would fight for and safeguard the democratic values.
(DISCLAIMER: This is an opinion piece. The views expressed are the author’s own and have nothing to do with OTV’s charter or views. OTV does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same. The author can be reached at lonewalker.1942@gmail.com)