India Unbound

Lord Meghnad Desai wears criticism with style. His latest book ‘The Rediscovery of India’ has been written off as best read by ‘philistines’,professional historians have declared that he knows no ‘history’,but Desai swallows the outrage with a healthy pinch of salt,and humour. “There has been a lot of re-writing of history. It’s always fair to interpret historical facts and form your opinions on nation building,” says Desai,in Kolkata for an event organized by an entrepreneurs’ body. “Only when Bal Thackeray rubs a Shah Rukh Khan the wrong way,that this generation wakes up to contemplating India as a nation. It’s then that the youngsters feel violated and solemnly declare that Mumbai belongs to all Indians. How many know that the issue is probably as old as pre-Independence India?” says Desai. The book,published by Penguin,questions among other things the popular tendency to define India as a single entity almost as a retaliatory statement against hostile nations. ‘Indians appear to have lost a unity of identity,except when it concerns an external enemy’,he writes. “Within itself,India has a lot of definitions. Popular history has been mostly divided between the royal court stories of north India which includes the Mughal and Pathan rulers and the Hindutva story which traces the origin of Indians to the Hindus,the Aryans. Where is south India,where is North East in the narrative?” he asks. Something,that Desai feels,is reason enough for a reconsideration of Indian history. And when the Centre and state administrations are being driven up the wall by the demand for separate linguistic territories,Desai declares that there’s no need to feel threatened by linguistic differences. “If the demands of a separate linguistic territory are valid,then a neutral body should take a call on the issue and let a new state be formed,” says Desai. On being asked if a ‘neutral body’,the Parliament in the case of India,can really take an apolitical,objective decision on a matter like this,Desai quite curiously seems to have placed his faith in the voting system of the nation. “I presume that people vote with their self interest in their hearts,” he reasons.

In a section called Bharat Bites India,Desai takes up the case of land acquisition in Bengal as a prototype for the problems in identifying the varied interests of the people of the country. He moots the idea of handing over the process of acquiring land to private agents,with the government as an overseer or a regulator. When you question what makes him place his faith on the ingenuity of private bodies over the government,he points at industrial models across the world. “That is how things are done in the rest of the world. Letting the private agencies purchase lands will lead to better deals for the people giving away the lands. The government can always oversee the process,” he argues.

One of the reasons that the book has drawn a lot of flak,says Desai,is because it attributes the birth of the Indian ‘nation’ to the British. “If the British hadn’t defeated the other European powers,India would be a territory divided between French,Dutch,Portugese etc. Also,the feeling of nationhood came as retaliation to British claims that India wasn’t a nation,” he adds. Bitter pills,at times,Desai would say,have to be swallowed!