Who'll Give the Life and Who'll Take it Away?

Not just another philosophical treatise

In one of the episodes of popular American drama series, Boston Legal, a Democrat lawyer (Alan Shore) takes a dig at his Republican colleague (Denny Crane) for his stand on capital punishment, "On one hand, you Republicans favour capital punishment and on the other hand, you call yourselves pro-life."

For those who are unable to comprehend this amusing statement, pro-life campaigners are the ones who favour criminalisation of abortion, as against the pro-choice campaigners who argue for the reproductive rights of the woman, i.e. her right to continue or terminate a pregnancy.

Curiously, while the Republicans view the foetuses and embryos as a person, hence argue for their right to life, they also argue for the continuance of capital punishment, which the Democrats find violative of the right to life of a person.

This is the paradoxy that I'll try to understand here and see where do I stand in these two debates.

If I try to see from the Republican perspective, somehow I can reconcile this paradoxy. The embryo and the foetus form the initial stages in the evolution of a human being, the starting point of the life. Embryo comes into the existence due to the act of someone else. So why should it be deprived of the opportunity to come out of the womb, into the world because of no fault of his/her! On the other hand, capital punishment is granted for an act committed by a person which has resulted in some serious loss to someone else. So, the culprit is liable for his/her grievous action.

I am a liberal, so how come I am upholding the conservative stand of Republicans! The truth is, there are no strict divisions on the two questions. The different viewpoints lie somewhere on an axis, where the so-called Republican and Democratic stands are the two ends. The question is of the degree.

I remember taking part in an extempore some years back where I had to speak in favour of the capital punishment. Luckily, my personal stand was in coherence to the task at stake and I emphatically declared, "If a person can take away someone's life, the State has the right to take away his/her life". Even today, I am pro-capital punishment but as it exists in India. According to the Indian Supreme Court ruling, capital punishment is reserved for the rarest of the rare cases.

On the other hand, I am against the use of capital pinishment as it exists in countries like China and Saudi Arabia where it has been employed as an instrument in the hands of the Communist Party and the Monarchy, respectively to quell any kind of resistance, hence leading to major human rights violations.

However, even in India, a lot of ambiguity lies in the usage of the term 'rarest of the rare', hence leading to different interpretations at different times. There is a need to form a stronger concensus on the types of cases that might fall under it and the types of safeguards that need to be employed to ensure consistency as well as prevent any innocent from being deprived of his/her right to life.

I can understand to some extent, the argument of those against capital punishment that a life-long imprisonment in jail is a harsher punishment for repenting a heinous crime like say, rape and murder of a minor, committed by someone than an instant punishment of death.

However, in Indian scenario, capital punishment is a must to handle issues like terrorism. Keeping the dreaded terrorists in jail for longer periods can act as an incentive for their accomplices to re-enact Kandahar like hijackings or other such operations.

While the issue of capital punishment has been there in debates in India for long, the abortion rights came into limelight just a year ago with the Niketa Mehta case in the Mumbai High Court.

Again the question is of degree. While the Indian law permits an abortion of a foetus upto 20 weeks old; in some western countries, its allowed upto 26 weeks. This upper limit has been decided keeping in mind the concern for the health of both the pregnant woman and the foetus. So, here one of the conflict is based upon deciding this upper limit.

In the immediate case, the foetus was 25 weeks old but had been diagnosed with congenital heart problem. Niketa Mehta moved the court for termination of her pregnancy. However, the court ruled against it exactly an year ago on Aug 4, 2008. Incidentally, she had a miscarriage soon after.

In such a case, where it is known, the child once born will be forced to lead a painful life, one may argue for the right of the mother to decide upon carrying the foetus or not, but in the Indian context, abortion is related to a major social problem of female foeticide too. Today states like Punjab and Haryana are having skewed sex ratios due to the misuse of ultrasound tests and selective gender abortions. Though such tests have been outlawed for long but still the misuse is on.

Hence, it is not easy to take any particular stand without looking at all these aspects. One cannot blindly adhere to pro-life or pro-choice perspective, nor can one totally discard or accept the capital punishment.

As, I say so often, things are not always black or white. Its important to identify the different shades of grey that lie within. However, a person must strive to recognise his distinct shade of grey rather than hopping from one blurry grey to another all the time. This post was an attempt to find my distinct shade of grey. Though I failed in this endeavour, I find myself closer to it. So while I keep trying, you too give it a thought!

P.S.
The image relating to abortion might look insensitive to some of the readers. I'll like to apologise to them for the same.

Don't miss my latest review and recommendation of Frost/Nixon

Image Courtesy:
http://ash1973.files.wordpress.com and http://hyerstandard.com (edited)

Parasitic Politics of Polarization

"A polarized city isn't necessarily a bad thing for a politician. Black or White."

These words are spoken by Marty Kaufman¹, a character in Barack Obama's 'Dreams from my Father' (the book I am reading these days), in context of Chicago of early 1980's.
However, isn't this statement true for the socio-political nexus of any place at any given time? Lets take a proximate example, that of India. Here the 'Black or White' can be substituted by 'Hindu or Muslim', 'Upper Caste or Lower Caste', 'Outsiders or Native' or by any such polarization and we are instantly reminded of the politicians and parties which made the best out of it.
Its not necessary that in a society polarized into two groups A and B, the politician has to be the member of the group A to win its loyalty. Even a pseudo-support can do. However, even if the support is genuine, it cannot be denied that the polarization helps him to create a vote-bank.
It is hard to find a much needed polarization along the lines of political ideology and we end up having elections fought on the platforms of Hindu Rashtra and Marathi Manoos among others.
Moving back to U.S.A., they have elections fought between the Democrats and the Republicans on the broad issues like 'for/against gay rights', 'pro-choice/pro-life abortion laws', 'progressive/regressive taxation', 'diplomatic/belligerent foreign policy' and 'gun-control/gun-rights' respectively. However, these issues remain epidermal and on seeing beneath, one can notice clear polarization based on socio-economic conditions.
So, while Democrats have a huge support of Black and Hispanic populations; the main-stay of Republicans are Whites. However, within Whites too, while religiously orthodox and the richer sections stick to Republicans, the educated liberals and lower-income voters converge towards Democrats.

***

However, who is to be blamed for this polarization, Politics or the Society?
It is like asking, "Who came first, the hen or an egg?"
Polarization has always been there, thanks to 'God' and 'Men' alike. So while God² decided to send his creations to the Earth in all sizes and colours, susceptible to polarization; His creation, the Men decided to compartmentalise themselves further on the basis of their belief system, occupation, birthplace, etc. This polarization is itself an act of Politics³, i.e. the competition between individuals or groups for power and leadership.
With time, Politics, i.e. the art and science of winning and holding control over a Government, was born and it very conveniently clung to this already polarized society like a parasite⁴. So while it fed upon it to prosper, it used all the resources available to aggravate the polarization and hence kept feeding itself and prospering in turn.
However, why couldn't the Society remove this parasite and throw it away? It was because the various sub-systems of the Social System like religious factions, economic groupings etc. benefited from this politics of polarization while the overall Social System degraded.
This is an ideal antithesis to the principle of Synergy⁵ where 2+2 becomes -5 instead of 5.
So Society at large allowed the Parasitic Politics of Polarization (the 3-P's) to prosper while some concerned individuals and groups sulked.
Continuing with this symbiotic⁶ analogy, we have an ideal example of Mutualism⁷ in politics of polarization too. It is the recent election drama enacted in Pilibhit constituency of Uttar Pradesh. While Varun Gandhi, the BJP candidate tried to garner Hindu support through his shameful vitriolic against Muslim brethren, the BSP government under Mayawati went overboard and booked him under N.S.A. to gain the appreciation and votes of Muslims. However, this turned out to be an antithesis to mutualism as Congress, another pesudo-secular party turned out to be a net-gainer in U.P.
Sadly, the distasteful concoction of these 3-P's seem perpetual. However, education can act as a great tool to erase polarization from an individual's mind and hence check the further degradation of Society at large. One hopes that a day comes when the reverse process of depolarization begins. However, to hope that this polarization will ultimately end one day is nothing but wishful thinking. Nonetheless, a dose of Empathic Libertarianism will definitely help.

Footnotes:

1. Marty Kaufman was the man who hired Obama to come to Chicago to work as an organiser in 1980's. In 2004, Obama revealed his true identity as Gerald Kellman.
2. By God, I mean the Source of Origin without any religious connotations.
   
3. The word politics can have two interpretations as already elaborated in the post. Firstly, in general terms, it stands for the competition between individuals or groups for power and leadership, without any specific relation to governance and public policy. Secondly, it stands for the art and science of government, of guiding or influencing governmental policy, or winning and holding control over a government.
4. Parasitism is a form of symbiotic relationship where one member of the association benefits while the other, known as host is harmed.
   
5. Synergy is a term used to define a situation where different entities cooperate advantageously for a final outcome. Simply defined, it means that the whole is greater than the sum of individual parts.
6. Symbiosis describes a close and often a long-term relationship between different biological species.
   
7. Mutualism is another form of symbiotic relationship where both the members of the association derive benefit out of it.

Image Courtesy:
http://www.wvwnews.net/ (edited)

In the shadow of Global Warming

How can India survive this meltdown?

In my zeal to increase my blogging output, I have been writing on various aspects. However, somewhere in this race for quantity, I felt as if my blog was losing its quality and its essence, i.e., empathic libertarianism. So I thought of exploring it once again.
Climate change and global warming, it seems are the ‘in’ words. No discussion seems to end these days without a faint reference being made to them. Here, I am not going to elaborate on these discussions of the intelligentsia or the masses but will succinctly show, where India stands in all this and explore the options it have.
Global warming is a common problem for the humanity (and sadly, of the humanity and by the humanity too). Who-so-ever might be responsible for it, it has to be tackled by everyone in unison. Take the example of the global economic meltdown. It originated in USA but engulfed all the world economies disproving amongst others, the decoupling theory. We all are facing the repercussions and we all have to act together. Ironically, in the middle of this economic crisis, the harbinger of the problem unleashed a protectionist regime; unlearning the Smithsonian legacy, it so avidly advocated to others, all these decades.
Coming back to global warming, India’s stand on its mitigation has been quite myopic. It has been using its low ‘per capita carbon emission’ figures as a justification to continue with the high growth rate of carbon emissions (three times the world average, as per an estimate).
Statistically, it’s true that our total emissions per person are way below the industrialised nations'. But the simple question here is can we afford to take such a micro view. After all, who will be more adversely affected by the climate change, the countries with high population density or those with low?

When the coastal areas (like our cities of Mumbai and Chennai) get submerged and people move inwards, the pressure will be felt most by the countries like India. USA with a size, 3 times larger than ours and population, 3.5 times lower, can easily afford moving the people inwards. But can we?

Here, I put it in very simple terms taking just one example. However, to elaborate, I'll add that whatever be the negative consequences of global warming; unbridled climate change, receding glaciers, drying up of perennial rivers, drop in agricultural output, complementary floods and famines or the submergence of land as already mentioned; it will be felt the hardest by a country like India which supports a sixth of the world's population on just 2.3% of the total land mass.
Sadly, it has been authenticated that the Himalayan glaciers are fast receding and the islands of Gangetic delta in West Bengal are already loosing their land mass. Even if the recent flood havoc by the Kosi river in Bihar is a distant example for many of us, it can not be denied that the summer this year is getting a bit too hot than the previous years. Hence, our policymakers need to take a much wider view of the situation.
However, with this argument, I don’t intend to absolve the developed world from all the sins they have committed all these years. As per an estimate, today the rich nations of the world, with just 20% of world population, already occupy three quarters of atmospheric space. These nations have to take the responsibility and provide the developing world with technologies and resources to tackle their emissions.
Clean Development mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol wherein industrialised countries can invest in projects that reduce emissions in developing countries as an alternative to more expensive emission reductions in their own countries, is such an arrangement. However, it tends to give such rich nations a license to continue emitting unabated. Hence, further safeguards are needed within the CDM too.
On India’s part, no time should be lost in developing better mechanisms for controlling climate change and the country should vociferously ask the richer nations for financial and technological aid for itself and fellow developing nations.
Search for better alternatives to carbon-emitting fuels should be taken up seriously by both government and the civil society at large. At the same time, efforts must be made to attenuate the various carbon sources and develop appropriate carbon sinks. For example, better public transport, if made available to the people, will automatically act as a deterrent to private vehicular traffic and the associated pollution and carbon emission. Along with it, demarcating 'green zones' in the city precincts or growing trees along the roads will help in reducing the impact of pollution.
There have been some welcome moves in this direction in recent period.

• In June 2008, the foundation was laid for a 2-MW solar power plant at Asansol in West Bengal and this marked the inauguration of work on the first grid connected solar power plant in India. Other states like Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Rajasthan are also taking steps in this direction.
• India's first tidal power project is slated to come up in Durgaduani creek in the Sundarbans in West Bengal with 90% of the funds being sanctioned by the Central government. The project is expected to be completed by the end of 2010 and will help in developing further capabilities in the Gangetic delta of Sunderbans as well as Gulf of Khambat and Gulf of Kutch in Gujarat.
  
• Delhi Metro Rail Corporation became the first railway project in the world to be registered by the United Nations under CDM which will make it possible for the corporation to claim carbon credits.
• Project Green was launched as a joint initiative of the Energy and Resources Institute (TERI of Rajendra Pachauri fame) and Bharat Petroleum wherein farmers are being provided elite planting material, technical help and training. They are also being organised into groups for local decentralised expelling of oil. This oil is proposed to be used both locally and for the production of biodiesel.

The list presented above is based on some articles which I came across in newspapers and documented for further reference for my examinations. It is not exhaustive but only indicative of the proactiveness shown in India in last one year or so.
One has to hope, more such initiatives are taken up not only to develop alternative sources of energy but also develop a common understanding of the problem and a strong commitment to its mitigation among the government officials, private sector and above all the people at large.

Update (June 24, 2009)
Nearly a year ago, on June 30, 2008; Prime Minister Manmohan Singh released India's first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) outlining existing and future policies and programmes addressing climate mitigation and adaptation.
The plan identifies eight core 'national missions' running through 2017. These missions cover the areas like solar energy, improvement in water use, enhancing the energy efficiency, ensuring sustainable habitat, conserving Himalayan ecosystem, afforestation, sustainable agriculture and developing strategic knowledge for Climate Change.
The existing programmes enumerated include those dealing with power generation, renewable energy and energy efficiency.
It is yet to be seen if these initiatives just remain on the paper or are religiously implemented by the concerned ministries.

Image Courtesy:
http://www.fanpop.com (original)

Power swings 2008

Politics, economics and Cricket

As the year 2008 comes to a close, it is interesting to look back at some of the developments that challenged the existing order and made one ponder if these are indications to an eventful 2009.
The U.S.-Russia tussle saw two major geographical manipulations in the Russian vicinity. The first was triggered by U.S. support for declaration of independence by the Serbian province of Kosovo in February, the latest thread in the Balkanisation process. However, the month of August gave Russians a chance to return the favor, thanks to Georgian belligerence in its northern province of South Ossetia. Russians routed the Georgian army and recognized South Ossetia's right to secede along with another Georgian province of Abkhazia. U.S. might have triggered this event too but the Russians had the last laugh while U.S. was left fuming at the sight of its beleaguered ally.
There was more to come at the strategic level. U.S. in its move to bring the NATO forces and artillery closer to the Russian borders; supported the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine in the cross-Atlantic body, and made known its intentions of installing air defense systems in Poland and Czech Republic, under the garb of Iranian threat. As the year came to an end, Russian fleet too set its sails towards the American seas to hold joint war games with Venezuela. Moreover, Russia too plans to strengthen its defenses (and offenses) in Kaliningrad Oblast bordering U.S. allies, Poland and Lithuania.
On the energy front too, Russia has successfully brought together the Gas exporting countries under an OPEC-like institutional framework which has further added to its clout, much to the dismay of U.S. It will be interesting to see what course this age-old rivalry takes in the coming year.
While the above developments hurt U.S.A.'s international standing badly, its homegrown sub prime and mortgage crisis triggered such events that now threaten its economic hegemony too. World saw the Gulf sovereign funds coming to the rescue of American banks, an unprecedented development indeed. Though the decoupling theory proved wrong, but still India and China seemed better prepared for the crisis than ever before. A couple of weeks back, China, Japan and South Korea summit saw new economic partnerships being forged to work out a coordinated strategy against the global financial meltdown, an indication of countries looking beyond U.S.
Earlier in July this year, Doha rounds, the free-trade negotiations of W.T.O. collapsed in Geneva, as the developing countries led by India and China refused to yield to U.S. terms and conditions. Moreover, the recent revelation of Maddoff Ponzi scheme brought further disrepute to the Wall Street and the U.S. nation as a whole.
Away from all this politics and economics, another superpower is being threatened and the year 2008 has been very tough for it. Australian Cricket can never be the same again. They started the year defeating India in the controversial Sydney Test thanks to the magical over bowled by Michael Clark. However that was the end for them and a beginning for the bruised Indian team. India won the next test and though lost the test series, came back with vengeance in the One-dayers. In the three final matches tri-series, India under Dhoni never needed the third final.
There was more to come in October-November when Australians came to India for the next edition of Border-Gavaskar Trophy. They did come with the trophy but could not take it back, being defeated 2-nil by the resurgent Indians. In between India tied a test series with South Africa at home and lost to Sri Lanka at their home but returned the favour in the one-dayers.
Indians brought the year to an end with an inspiring test victory at home against England. In the first test, the Sehwag blitzkrieg left the Englishmen clueless and the cricket lovers bedazzled. However the year ending has proved dismal for the Aussies. Proteas' heroics in the first test at Perth saw South Africa scaling a target of 414 with great agility and confidence. With the Boxing Day Test, the final and the most crucial test match of the year having started just half an hour back (and Hayden continuing with his poor form, already back to the pavilion), one wonders how the Kangaroos will fair this time. Australia might have amassed a lot of points on the test ranking table, thanks to the likes of McGrath, Warne and company but with these stalwarts retiring from the international scene, the going is getting tougher for the Ponting men or rather boys. India and even more strongly, South Africa have started fancying their chances to bring an end to the Australian hegemony in cricket.
In the corporate sphere of cricket, BCCI continues to extend its hegemony. With the successful conduct of PCL, Lalit Modi has become one of the most powerful sports executive in the world. Hence, the year 2009 holds a lot of promises for India in the cricketing arena. One hopes the good performances of 2008, seen in the other sports like shooting and boxing continue the next year too, to give a better platform for the Indian contingent at Commonwealth Games to be held in the National Capital in 2010.
Coming back to politics, U.S. saw a major domestic power swing as Democrats under Obama came back to power. Republicans had their eight years under Bush and they ended up doing all that should not have been done. Bush revealing earlier this month that his biggest regret was the U.S. intelligence failure on Iraq sums it up.
However, back home, power politics kept swinging all through the year. NDA's Karnataka victory earlier this year, saw them gaining a lot of mileage for the coming general elections but the results of recent assembly elections in Chhatisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Delhi humbled the saffron brigade to some extent and filled a new zeal and confidence in the Grand Old Party of India, which was fearing for worse.
"We have taken a risk", is what Chief Election Commissioner had to say on announcing the schedule for elections to the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly, back in October. Earlier in the year, the way events had unfolded around the Amarnath shrine board issue, it seemed the separatists will have a field day if and when elections are conducted. Air in the Valley seemed rife with secessionist emotions and no one predicted that democracy could have the last laugh.
However, with all the seven phases of election over in the state, one is amazed at the voter turnout figures, much above than the previous occasions. Hence, the year ending saw the power swinging back in the favour of the democratic process in the northern-most state of India. In another couple of days, we will come to know, who will wear the crown and hopefully, strengthen this process further in 2009.
On the corporate front, Indian companies continued their foreign acquisitions, though at a lesser pace than in 2007, led by Tata's takeover of Land Rover and Jaguar brands from Ford. However, the Japanese firm's takeover of Indian pharmaceutical giant Ranbaxy spoilt the party to some extent.
India's successful moon mission, Chandrayaan was another step in the Indian as well as Asian elevation in space technology. With Indian-built European satellite W2M being launched last Sunday from French Guiana, it adds further to ISRO's clout and coffers.
Further on technology and more importantly strategic front, India signed the Nuclear Cooperation Deal with U.S.A. , Russia and France after getting unprecedented go-ahead from NSG and IAEA. By successfully carving out a special place for itself in nuclear arena, India has successfully de-hyphenated itself from Pakistan.
Recent developments post-Mumbai terror attacks are seeing Pakistan being further marginalized. Even its strong ally China has not come out with open support as on previous occasions. Year 2009 is going to be very crucial for India-Pakistan relations and may see major power swings in South Asia with U.S. committed to escalate its war against terror in Afghanistan under Obama.

Image Courtesy
http://www.mcs.alma.edu (original)

Obama Coming

A month left for the inauguration

November 4, 2008 was a historic day. A lot has been said, written and discussed about it by commentators around the globe. As it became clear that Barack Hussein Obama will emerge as the 44th American President, people from lands far far away rejoiced and marveled the American Dream. Even I was one among those who saluted the audacity of hope shown by Americans in electing their first black President.
Slavery might have been abolished in mid-19th century by Lincoln but half a century back the blacks were still fighting for basic civil rights and unconditional enfranchisement. Who could have imagined back then, that the very first decade of 21st century will see such an epoch setting development in the United States of America.
Indian media and political establishment have been analysing pros and cons of Obama's accession, to India. While his views on Kashmir issue and his commitment against unabated outsourcing and nuclear testing have put the Indian polity in a tizzy, his anti-Pakistan stand has given them a sigh of relief.
I'll refrain from any such analysis and let time reveal the facts. This post is only dedicated to the man who campaigned for change and those who imbibed his mantra and proved 'yes, we can!'
Obama's coming to power has ignited a hope that he will herald the world into a new era. A month from now, when he takes his seat in the Oval Office, he will become the most powerful person in the world. However, with power and authority comes responsibility. His predecessor shirked this very responsibility when he adopted a belligerent foreign policy. His domestic policies too, sent the country and along with it the whole world into a deep economic mess. So before Obama can 'do' anything, he has to 'undo' a lot of things.
Obama's life story until now holds a lot of promises. Obama was born to a Kenyan father of Muslim lineage and an American White Christian mother, in Hawaii. He spent his early life in Indonesia with his mother and Indonesian step father and returned to his maternal grandparents in Hawaii at the age of 10. So this man truly has an international upbringing and it is expected of him to be more sensitive while dealing with other nations. Obama went on to take up a teaching job in Chicago and was also a very active community organizer before that. Moreover, having a colored lineage, it is expected of him to be sensitive to the inequities in the American society and work for bridging the gaps. So, Obama enters the White House with such a baggage of expectations. However, he can not complain as he is the one who told his people 'yes, we can!'
However, for those who expect just too much out of Obama, the following words of Samir Amin, a noted Egyptian economist explain my point of view precisely. In a recent interview to Frontline, he says,"For sure, Barack Obama is better than a John McCain. Also, from the point of view of the evolution of U.S. society, it is something positive for an African American to be elected President. But from the point of view of policies and politics of the U.S. vis-a-vis the rest of the world, little will change. Perhaps the tonality, the language will change but the targets will be the same."
Obama might have made history but the true protagonists in this scheme of events are those who enabled him to do so. They are the Americans - white, black, Hispanic, college-goers, senior citizens, blue-collared, executives or paupers. All came together to throw away their biases and show the world that democracy is based on the principle of merit more than anything else and even a common man has the requisite intelligence to judge this merit.
Obama's victory is the America's victory. The Americans have earned back the respect they lost thanks to Bush's myopic world view. Time will tell if Obama actually delivers but there is no doubt that Americans have delivered and shown the world the meaning and the power of democracy. They have justified the government by the people(masses) component of the Lincoln's claim. Now it's up to Obama to justify the remaining part, i.e., government of the people (not just elite) and government for the people.
Can we Indians also be proud of our democracy which has allowed a dalit woman to dream of becoming the Prime Minister in the coming elections. I don't believe it's right to draw such a similarity. Isn't such a dream based more on the numbers and loyalty of one's community members rather than merit. U.S. elections also hold lessons for the Indian politicians to stop designing their campaigns, catering to a particular section of society but to generate such an enthusiasm among the people from all the sections that their election campaign itself becomes a mass movement.
India is a young democracy and here the politics has mostly prospered on the basis of divisions in the society. Its time that we, the Indian masses too, take a cue from the U.S. elections and see beyond our caste, religion, region or ethnicity to choose our representatives. That's my audacity of hope.

Image Courtesy
Self-Sketched and Photographed (edited)

India's foreign policy

From Non-alignment to Multi-alignment

It was India under Nehru, which along with erstwhile Yugoslavia, Indonesia, Egypt and Ghana gifted the world a bold doctrine to thaw the Cold War which was compartmentalizing the world into two parts freezing the mutual interaction between them. Did India actually follow this doctrine religiously or eventually wavered towards the left is an issue for genuine debate. However, what I am talking about here is the shunning of this doctrine by the Indian State half a century hence and the adoption of a more pragmatic outlook towards ongoing international developments in the form of what I am calling here multi-alignment.
Visits of the U.S. Secretary of State and the Russian President with just a day between the two are in itself a sign of this major policy change. While the U.S. diplomat was here on an emergency meeting to show solidarity and promise cooperation to India which suffered an unprecedented terrorist attack, the Russian President has landed on a pre-planned visit which will see the signing of the nuclear cooperation pact between the two nations today.
Day before yesterday, seeing the way Condoleezza Rice asserted India's right to act in any way to safeguard its sovereignty, my father was surprised at this unprecedented support of the U.S. which until now had been warning India against flirting with an idea of war in the subcontinent. He asked me if all this bonhomie between the two nations will affect India's relation with Russia, the age old partner of India. A valid question indeed. But the answer is a simple 'no'.
The way things are turning out; I believe India will have a major role to play in preventing any tensions from developing between the two powers. During the days of Cold War, India took the step of non-alignment. At that time such a step might have been important for a young democracy but in present scenario India can not close its eyes from the international developments which are seeing another spell of Cold War emerging.
If India wants to assert its place in the comity of nations that drive the economy and politics of the world, be it through U.N. Security Council or G8 or other forums, it has to come forward and take the initiative and sides as well. Taking sides mean, not allowing any other nation to dictate us our foreign policy and the relations with other nations, and siding with those who are playing the right game. There should not be an India, preaching the doctrine of Non-alignment to the world and at the same time signing a 'Friendship Pact' with the leader of one of the blocs as in 1971. Similarly, there should not be an India which is cooperating in the nuclear field with the only superpower but stalling the progress of a highly beneficial gas pipeline with the superpower's adversary, as has been happening since the last couple of years. Everyone has to make compromises in the light of realpolitik but as far as possible India should play a fair game. It's because of this fairness on the part of India that today, world had to acknowledge our special place in nuclear arena while our adversary across the border could just cry fowl.
Non-alignment, no doubt was a balancing doctrine but so is Multi-alignment. The bonus is, the latter is also pragmatic as mentioned already. As far as the new Cold War is concerned, the resurgent Russia under Putin has been asserting its clout of late. If U.S. is trying to contain this large nation by supporting the 'colored revolution' governments around its western borders, Russia has also perched out to join hands with those to the south of U.S. In such a situation where the world is again polarizing, the bigger players are staying away. So we have E.U.(specifically its major members like France and Germany) and China not committing themselves to any one of them but at the same time cooperating with both. This is the stand which India has also taken. In this era of globalization, cooperation between the nations is a must. Through Non-alignment, such cooperation becomes difficult. Political and economic realities force even these competing blocs to cooperate with the same set of nations. Hence the polarization is averted. With the new found friendship with U.S. and the existing friendly ties with Russia, India has a great role to play in the international arena. Let's hope our domestic troubles don't hinder us from taking this initiative.

Images Courtesy
http://im.rediff.com and http://www.japanfocus.org (edited)