A Priesthood For The Temples of Modern India

India’s spacecraft, Mangalyaan, successfully entered a Martian orbit this morning. It made me very happy.

This evening one of the TV channel had a call-in chat program with a retired scientist from the Indian Space Research Organization. As was only to be expected all the callers said how proud they were. (There was an Indian caller from Germany who said, “Great job guys!” Guys?)

There was one caller who wanted to know how this would affect his life. The guest on the show gave the expected answer – add to knowledge etc. etc.

Will the Mangalyaan clean up the Ganga? Will it stop power outages? Will it counter the terrorism threat? Will it add muscle to our forces facing China? The answer to those, and a lot of similar questions is, no.

Is adding to knowledge justified when the taxpayers see no benefit to their lives?

I believe it is justified. And not just because of spin-offs in technology. The real benefit is the creation of first rate mathematical, scientific and technical minds. 

The country needs to have projects to which national prestige is attached. The best minds will compete to get on to these projects and organizations. The aggregation of the best minds will foster accumulation of knowledge. More importantly even those who do not measure up to the standards demanded of these prestigious projects, will also be improved. It is this humanware spin-off which will impact industries and social systems.

It is for the same reason I believe that IITs, and other institutes of national importance, are not in the business of producing manpower with industry relevant skills. They are – or should be - in the business of producing knowledge. For that purpose they have to select the best available talent and then continue to filter them. The result of the filtering should be people who have the best minds to undertake research work. That is how it ought to work.

“The temples of modern India” was Jawahar Lal Nehru's term.  ISRO, Atomic Energy Commission were started in his time. The TIFR, though started in 1945, was given pride of place. These are temples of modern India.

Temples require “temple priests”. As long as they are selected on acknowledged merit, and merit subjected to regular review, the danger of decadence would be minimized.

India needs these new temples and a “priest-hood” to run them. Those who do not become temple priests will nonetheless be better. And that is what society will gain.

1857 & The Sikhs

Ranjit Singh, Maharaja of the Punjab, died on 27th of June, 1839. In just ten years his empire was gone. On 29 March 1849, after the Second Anglo-Sikh War, Maharaja Dalip Singh stepped down from his illustrious father's throne. So it was barely after 8 years, and two hard fought wars, that the 1857 uprising happened. So why did the Sikh's side with the British in 1857? That is a question I have often wondered about.

I recently finished reading Khushwant Singh's two-volume "History of The Sikhs". I believe the answer lies in the good governance - to use a currently popular phrase - that the British provided in those eight short years. The following points, taken from chapter 5 of the second volume, are, in my opinion, the main factors.

* A three member Board of Administration was established. It was the final court of appeal with powers of life and death.
* The Governor General ensured the most experienced Englishmen, available in India, were sent to the Punjab.
* "Every civil functionary from a member of the board down to the humblest kardar was vested with judicial, fiscal and magisterial powers".
* External and internal security were given top priority.
* Extensive public works were undertaken. Canals were cleaned and extended. Road were improved and new ones built.
* Tax structure was simplified.
* The school system which was already better than in other parts of the country (there were 16 schools for girls) was expanded.

In other words, the Punjab never had it so good! No wonder the Sikhs sided with the British.

BJP's Manifesto Delay

Apparently the delay has been caused because Modi wanted a clear, crisp document, not one that is verbose and full of waffle.

In short he does not want a "legal" document. I am sure that would have p****d off a lot of the lawyers who infest BJP headquarters (as they also infest the Lutyens Delhi offices of other parties).

It is implementation of a manifesto that is important. For those who know how to wiggle out of commitments, making manifestos is easy.

The Shahi Imam

What has the Shahi Imam done to modernize the muslim community? Apparently whatever he has done meets with the approval of the Congress.

The Congress is not a well wisher of the new generation of muslims; recall Rajiv Gandhi and the Shah Bano case.

Second Dictator

Mr Farooq Abdullah does not want another dictator. Who was the other dictator?

Secular Front

AK Anthony asks left parties to join (support?) the Congress. Anything to deny Modi the PM's chair. To do that the Congress would have to get MSY, Behenji, Didi, Amma... on board? Who does the Congress have in mind to project as the prime-ministerial candidate? Is Rahul Gandhi stepping aside?

The Congress is saying, "You think 2009-2014 was bad? Wait till you see what we will do in 2014-2019. You ain't seen nothing yet!!!"

Ab Ki Bar, Modi Sarkar.
Uske Baad, Bar Bar Modi Sarkar!

Should there Be A Modi-Kejriwal Debate?

The TV channels want it. No Surprise there. Modi's name will send TRP thru the roof.

Kejriwal wants it. Again no surprise. With Modi's name pulling in the audience, it will allow him to get his message at no cost. Of course, if he comes off second best, that will be because the media has been purchased.

But why should Modi want it?

Large crowds turn up for his rallies. He has a team that is out in the field, getting his message across. What more reach can a TV debate get him?

Modi is directly addressing the voters. The voters are the real judges. The Congress and the APP too are making their pitch. There is already a 24 x 7 debate taking place across media, across the country. So why have a 60 minute TV "debate"? On voting day the people of Varanasi will decide who won the debate.

India-China War of 1962: The Maxwell Papers

The Henderson-Brooks report has once again been selectively leaked by Neville Maxwell - an Australian journalist. The report was authored by Lieutenant General Henderson-Brooks and Brigadier (later Lieutenant General) Bhagat, VC. The inquiry was commissioned in 1963, by the then Chief of The Army Staff, General JN Chaudhuri.

The contents of the report, even today, are described by the Government of India (GoI) as " ... not only extremely sensitive but are of current operational value, ...".

Of what operational value could it possibly be? I am sure the report talks of the state of our lack of training for high altitude warfare, our weaponry, our equipment, our lack of logistic support, the politicization of the chain of command,  ... These could only be of "current operational value", if India's operational state and plans remained as they were 50 years ago! In any case these have been known and written about by many people. Its hard to imagine what possibly the Henderson-Brooks report could add to what is already known about operational details. The higher command and control deficiencies too have been written about. An assessment of the current deficiencies is the K. Subrahmanyam Committee report on the Kargil war. That report is in the public domain. So why not declassify the Henderson-Brooks report?

Is Nehru's reputation being protected? Even an admirer like MJ Akbar says, "The humiliation of 1962 was primarily the fault of Jawaharlal Nehru" (pg 535 of "Nehru: The Making of India", Roli Books). The quote is the second sentence of the chapter titled, "China: A Stab from the Front". MJ Akbar does not consider that Mao stabbed Nehru in the back. Whatever is being talked about the "forward policy" today is covered in the chapter. It is also covered in today's ToI.

Nehru, Menon, Kaul, Mullick, all have had their reputations tarnished. All are dead. If there are still any hidden culprits, they would be insignificant players. Besides, they too would be nearing the end of their days. Reputations are not being preserved by not declassifying

Nehru has been held guilty of the debacle for a long time. The Henderson-Brooks report could not make him any more guilty. Will it affect the Congress Party? I doubt it. If it could damage the Congress, the BJP would have declassified it when they were in power. The BJP is now saying that they will declassify the report once they are in power. I doubt if they will.

I suspect, the report contains, or points to, material that is inimical to our position on the border issue. That is why the BJP too will not declassify the report.

AG Noorani, in his book "India-China Boundary Problem, 1846-1947 History and Diplomacy", provides a well documented history of the problem. After reading the book, I for one am convinced that Nehru should not have treated the border as having any historical sanctity. The Indian nation, as we know it today, did not exist prior to 15Aug1947. The Chinese government came to power in 1949, after defeating the KMT government of Chiang Kai Shek. Any boundary agreements made between predecessor states would just be pieces of paper. More so, if we took no measures, or were not capable of taking measures, or did not intend to take measures, to demonstrate that we held the border. We should have negotiated in good faith.

It is time we revisited the border problem. Today's first editorial in the ToI says: "Declassifying the report, following recommendations of the 2006 Veerappa Moily commission, will be an opportunity to revisit past China policy which should now hinge on a more flexible approach to the border dispute. Instead of displaying unbending cartographic nationalism, New Delhi must take up the old Chinese proposal on a territorial swap involving eastern and western sectors. A pragmatic negotiating position, built by political consensus, should settle the dispute once and for all."

The catch is in "political consensus". I think "unbending cartographic nationalism" will prevent the declassification of the Henderson-Brooks report.

Kaali Peeli Kumar Vishwas

What are the nurses in Kerala wanting the AAP candidate for Rae Bareilly to apologize for? The AAP party claims to represent the aam person. The aam person, from any part of the country, considers a fair skin essential for good looks. Needless to say the aam person regards himself/herself as a "fair and lovely" person. I am sure the AAP hopeful from Rae Bareilly does.

To be fair to the AAP candidate, when he was clowning for his supper he could have hardly imagined that he would one day be contesting a parliamentary election.

Are nurses to be selected for looks? What about doctors?

What about members of parliament? Why should the voters choose a "kaali peeli" AAP candidate over "gora chitta" Rahul?

The AAP & The Normandy Landings

Another book that I was reminded of was  Crossing The Chasm by Geoffrey Moore. In the book Moore describes the second stage in the life of a successful product. It is analogous to establishing a beach head in a military operation

Arguably one of the biggest and riskiest military operations of all times was the allied invasion of Europe in WWII. The strategy rested on first establishing a beachhead in Normandy, where the opposition could be expected to be the weakest, consolidating the beachhead and then breaking out.

The urban youth, particularly the middle class, is the AAP's Normandy.

AAP & The Innovators Dilemma

Watching the reactions of the national political parties to the emergence and methods of the AAP, I was reminded of   The Innovators Dilemma by Clayton M. Christensen.

As I understood it, the basic thesis of the book is:

1. Not that large established corporation cannot innovate, its just that they prefer to, or "have" to, innovate for their established customers.
2. Not that they do not have people who understand the new market realities, they just cannot get around people who have careers invested in the current way of doing business.
3. When it first emerges, a disruptive product is never considered a serious contender. The target market is considered insignificant.
4. A disruptive product is not based on new invention. The technology is available to all. The big companies too know about it. They just have very powerful internal vested interests that prevent its exploitation (Think Xerox and all the technologies developed at Xerox's PARC. Think IBM and the IBM PC and DOS. Think British Army, Horsed Cavalry and the Tank. ...)
5. A market exists that is just not considered viable by the current players. Their revenue models do not justify it; neither do their costs.

I could go on and on but the above should suffice to show what the established players are up against. Its not AAP. The established parties are crippled by their past. The 160 years of the Congress is a shackle.

One of the great "what-if"s of current times: What if, instead of depending upon a bunch of clever lawyers, Rahul Gandhi had walked out of 10 Jan Path and cast his lot with the Anna Movement? ... Asking too much I suppose:-(

All Our Executives Are Busy

I just finished booking a cab with the EasyCab people. I book it by phone as the phone app on Android really ticks me off; but that rant is for some other time.

I was 8th on the waiting list and slowly got bumped up. No problems. But do they really have to inflict that, " ... All our executives are busy ... Your call is important to us ...." on me ***seven*** times?

Here are some USP ideas for call-center software
1. Just tell me my position in the queue and the expected wait-time. Surely computing the expected wait-time does not require an advanced degree in computer science!
2. Play some music. Not some 5sec loop, but tracks that loop after 30mins. Keep a set of  tracks shuffle between them. You can even ask for the caller's preference. Make the supervisor also the DJ let him/her relay internet music.
3. Do not make me hold my phone. Ask me at what Q position I would like to be given a "wake-up" call. Charge me for it.

Hindi & the Spread of AAP

A few years ago I attended a PAN-IIT meet. The PAN-IIT meet is a get-together of the alumnii of all the IITs. There are panel discussions covering many subjects.

One panel had Arvind Kejriwal talking about corruption - Lokpal, CBI, ...

There was a bunch of us IIT Madras guys sitting together. I will not be far from the truth when I say that I was the sole non-Tamil speaking person. Arvind started his speech in Hindi. He was promptly shouted down by the IIT Madras crowd. Arvind switched to English.

If the AAP is to spread, they need committed local leadership who speak the local language. And these should be on the same standing as the founder members. That should not be much of a problem as long as the party practices inner party federalism. A "High-Command" will make it difficult..