The Summer of ’47

yasser

You have a heads I win tails you lose strategy. If out of a billion Hindus two praise your false gods you paste that throughout chowk. If out of 30 million Muslims 15 million decide to live in India as Indians you question their Muslimness. Take your head out of sand. It must be getting hot there living with your islamist friends.

Fuzair,

I just find it hard to digest that violence would break out in a Hindu Majority city and it would be started by Muslims. I dont remember where, but it was said, that Muslim Mobs were attacked by apprehensive Hindu Mobs. In any event, just like your pointed out Jinnah didnot have anything to do with it.

Secondly Suhrawardy probably did want to create some riot trouble...... but I dont think one can call him a thug.

Third It is my experience that when people view facts dispassionately and the others color them with their prejudice, the result is ironic and unwanted... for example Ali vs Muawiyah at Siffin not that I want to quote religion to prove anything.

In any event, the day after the Direct Action Day, a Hindu Newspaper from Bombay was praising Jinnah for becoming a true freedom fighter by calling for direct action day! I wonder why this disparity.

From the World Bank report :

The Record. Since Independence, Indian governments have accorded great importance to poverty reduction. All the Five-Year Plans have had poverty reduction as a major goal.

To measure its success in achieving this goal, the Government commissioned a series of household surveys on poverty, beginning in 1951. These surveys provide an unparalleled record of a developing country`s efforts to reduce poverty.!

India has reduced the percentage of population living in poverty since the 1970s, but progress has been uneven over time and across states and the number of poor has continued to rise, albeit at a slower rate.

From the early 1950s to the mid-1970s, poverty rates fluctuated without a clear trend, as shown in Figure 1.12 (See also Annex Table 1.1 and Ravallion and Datt 1996a).

In 1951-55, the average head count index of poverty was 53% , about the same as in 1970-74. Then, from 1973-74 to the mid-1980s, poverty incidence declined fairly steadily from its earlier range- from 54% in 1973-74 to 38% in 1986- 87, a decline of about 2% p.a.

Poverty reduction slowed in the late 1980s, probably due to poor weather conditions and the downturn in agricultural production, but the public distribution system and antipoverty programs kept poverty from rising as it had in such circumstances in the past. Poverty incidence dropped sharply in 1990, for reasons that are not altogether clear, and whatever contribution the macroeconomic situation made was clearly unsustainable.

In 1991-92, a transitory worsening of poverty incidence occurred with the 1991 balance of payments crisis, decline in growth and stabilization measures. However, the increased poverty incidence was also related to other factors - poor harvests, limited agricultural imports, and large agriculture procurement in the following year that kept food prices high - and there may be statistical questions related to the small samples in those years3 and the price indices used to deflate the expenditure data (Tendulkar; Datt and Ravallion 1998; Dubey and Gangopadhyay). By 1993-94 the incidence of poverty had fallen to 35%.

Please take a look at the World Bank report

Report No 19471-IN

India

Policies to Reduce Poverty and

Accelerate Sustainable Development

January 31, 2000

(available on the www.worldbank.org website;

the following is a 17 MB file.

http://www-wds.worldbank.org/pdf_content/00009494600022505304120/multi_page.pdf)

-Arun Gupta

Chowk seems to have eaten up one of my posts,

so here is a little piece, as a test.

A World Bank report, from Jan 31, 2001, states

All recent Governments have discussed the need for a second wave of reforms to launch India onto a higher growth path that reduces poverty faster. However, as noted, reforms have slowed, creating some uncertainty among investors.

Many excellent suggestions for reformn are contained in such reports as the Hussain Committee on Small-scale Sector Reservation, the Rakesh Mohan Committee on Infrastructure, the Tenth Finance Commission on intergovernmental finances, the Fifth Pay Commission on downsizing the civil service, the Tarapore Committee on the capital account and its implications for the macroeconomic framework, the Narasimham Committees on the financial sector, the Disinvestment Commission reports, recent Economic Surveys, RBI Annual Reports, and the 1999 Export-Import Policy. In addition to these contributions, the comprehensive framework outlined above may provide some assistance.

While a basic consensus on the need for the Second Wave of Reforms has emerged, for example in the programs of the two major political parties, it needs to be translated into substantive action.

Broadly speaking the reforms would be most effective to the extent they reduce the risk of macroeconomic instability, increase the access of the poor to human development, improve governance and reduce distortions and improve the demand for labor. Poorer states in particular will need to enact these refonns to overcome the initial lags and accelerate development.

---

More later.

Arun Gupta

Yasser:

While total Muslim casualties may have been greater than Hindu ones, every account that I have ever read of the Calcutta riots state unequivocally that Muslim mobs started the violence and there is also no room for doubt on Suhrawardy declaring a public holiday and on the highly inflamatory speech he gave. There is also no doubt that the police and military intelligence knew that something was going to happen in Calcutta on Direct Action Day. As I said, it is entirely possible that Suhrawardy did not plan the pogrom that took place. He may well have wanted a ``manageable`` level of violence. He certainly wouldn`t be the first or the last populist politician to have done this.

The truth, however unpleasant, must be viewed dispassionately. Unfortunately, the truth is often coloured and rarely comes in absolute colors. Its usually some shade of grey. In this case, there is far more evidence against Suhrawardy than there is in his favor. However, it does seem that he repented after seeing the scale of the violence he unleashed--for whatever that is worth to the ghosts of those killed.

Regards.

Fuzair,

I have read alot about Suhrawardy both good and bad, but the picture that emerges in my mind is that of a well educated sophisticated man who eminently pragmatic and rational....

The writers like Collins etc due to their grudging admiration coupled with some accurate research could not blame the calcutta killings on Jinnah, so they chose Suhrawardy, since they knew a lot less people object to slander of Mr Suhrawardy.

The truth is the Calcutta riots happened because the Hindu community was apprehensive about the day`s events and hence took to assume the worst about the Muslims.

-YLH

Re: Sigalph on Suhrawardy

Historians generally assign the blame for the mass killings in Calcutta on Suhrawardy. For example, Lawrence James (p.603 of his ``The Making and Unmaking of British India) quotes Suhrawardy as telling a v. large crowd (estimated at 30,000+) of Muslims, ``I have made the necessary arrangements with the police not to interfere.`` This is the same mob that went out and immediately started to loot the shops of Hindus who refused to observe the strike. Perhaps Suhrawardy did not mean for the looting to turn into a pogrom, but that is exactly what it did and he must be held responsible for it. Commentators on the Calcutta Direct Action Day killings all comment on the reluctance of the police to take any action against the mobs--that is when any police were to be found; most of them simply disappeared.

John Keay (p. 506 of ``India: A History) gives essentially the same account. Collins and Lapiere (``Freedom at Midnight) also put the blame squarely on Suhrawardy for the start of the Calcutta killings, as well as botching the relief efforts for the earlier Bengal famine and making money off it (incidentally, Keay and James also give this same version of Suhrawardy`s corruption). Lt. Gen. Sir Francis Tuker, as GoCinC Eastern Command also puts the blame squarely on Suhrawardy, as do all intelligence reports. All in all, pretty much a thug.

As far as the Wolpert bit about ``self-righteous`` Britishers is concerned, he does have a minor point in that apparently troops were alerted before hand that something was going to happen on Direct Action Day but there was no concrete information about exactly WHAT was going to happen. That is why I think there may be some reason to believe that Suhrawardy did not plan the mass killings, just shops looted, Hindus roughed up, some heads broken, maybe the odd couple of Hindus killed--you know, just the usual day`s work for his private goon squad.

I am very surprised that Wolpert wrote the bit of tripe he did since he MUST know that no British or Indian military officer, not even the GoCinC Eastern Command, has the authority to deploy troops on Martial Law duty at will. ``Aid to the Civil Power`` can only be done if the relevant civil authority asks for help and authorizes the military to take action.

Since the Governor of Bengal, Burrows, did not think that anything was going to happen on Direct Action Day that the police could not handle, it took time to get authorization. There probably was a great deal of reluctance on the part of some Britishers to get involved in a purely internal squabble--whats new about Muslims killing a Hindus or vice-versa?--since it was pretty clear by now that the Raj was dead and it was simply the vultures fighting over the corpse. I think Tuker would have preferred to declare Martial Law BEFORE the start of Direct Action Day but the glory days of the Raj were over and Mountbatten was there to wind it up at the lowest possible cost to the British: Let the Wogs kill each other all they want, as long as they leave the white women alone.

The first troops were deployed on August 17th and it was six days before relative calm was restored. Given the size of the city and the fact that only six battalions of infantry and one armour regiment was available, this is pretty fast and commendable work. According to James, the troops shot and killed 115 rioters.

I suggest you read some unbiased accounts about Mr. Suhrawardy and then decide if he is worthy of admiration.

Regards.

re truth`s

``Sorry to hear that. Its tough to have RSS types in the family.``

I know. But Providence being fair, I have been compensated by having theose types on Chowk:):)

re truth`s

``Sorry to hear that. Its tough to have RSS types in the family.``

I know. But Providence being fair, I have been compensated by having theose types on Chowk:):)

Re: Fuzair

I think that everyone (including the Indian Govt.) is aware of WHAT needs to be done, but most are clueless on HOW to do it:

Mr. Sachs and Mr. Bajpai set the following goals for Indian planners in their paper ``The Decade of Development: Goal Setting and Policy Challenges in India`` (Jeffrey D. Sachs and Nirupam Bajpai)

http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidwp/062.htm

-- A decline of infant mortality rates from around 80 per 1000 live births to below

30 per 1000 live births by 2010. This should be combined with explicit targets for halting the AIDS epidemic, and treating key diseases such as malaria, tuberculosis, and other major killers.

-- A reduction of adult illiteracy from around 45 percent to less than 20 percent by

2010.

-- Universal primary education for ages 5-14 for girls and boys by 2010, with a

school for all within 5 kilometers of home.

-- All villages possessing electricity, a trunk road, telephone and internet

connectivity, a school, clean water and sanitation, a village health worker, and

local self-government by 2010.

I would like to see some concrete evidence and not just handwaving, that the Government has written off 1/3 - 1/4 of the Indian population.

In fact, at least a couple of state governments have decided to use the UN Human Development Index as the metric for development.

-Arun Gupta

Re: previous post

``...this is not to say that there is also a tendency...``

should read

``...this is not to say that there is NO tendency...``

Re: Fuzair

Points well taken. I would argue that the reason that the bottom 1/4th have not benefited is primarily due the short-sighted policies of Indian planners and politicians, and not for a lack of intention (this is not to say that there is also a tendency amongst the S. Asian elites to ignore their social and civic responsibility of helping the underpriviliged). Case in point: the Communists of Bengal and Kerala have not succeeded in putting their states on top of the human development list in India, despite the rhetoric and actions of the politicians in those states. The Congress (Indira`s Garibi Hatao sloganeering) and various left-leaning governments have traditionally banked on the underpriviliged`s votes, but have also left a legacy of financial profligacy and plain dumb economics,with the govt. running everything from handlooms to nuclear power plants.

In short, the problem is too much government in areas that there should be none, and too little where there should be more (primary education).

Fuzair:

Reg IIT/IIM. First of all, you will be surprised at what a large number of IIT students are non-elites. Now granted ``non-elites`` does not directly translate into ``poor``. But there are a large number of IIT students who are middle middle class from semi-urban backgrounds. And thanks to the interplay of IIT education and American free markets, IIT students who have made good in the US are paying back to the system in large amounts. I agree that primary education is a higher priority but IIT education is beginning to pay off for India. While it is often said ``the road to hell is paved with good intentions``, sometimes good intentions do pay off. I think that is true for IITs and IIMs.

Fuzair #270
Thanks for your post. Others more knowledgeable can respond your post better. I think its relevant to know the composition of this lower 1/3rd or 1/4th which you say is `written off`. Unfortunately I donot know whether this group consists mainly of the rural landless poor or it includes the rural landed poor, too and perhaps the urban poor too?

Anyway firstly figures:
India`s size is apparently a demographers/statisticians nightmare/paradise and its hard to tell whether poverty is increasing or decreasing, apparently.

There was an related article on chowk, and the interacts were informative too:
http://www.chowk.com/bin/showa.cgi?mabaig_may2300

Secondly, intentions of the policymakers and not wanting to do anything about the bottom 1/3rd or 1/4th.

Well, I donot know anything about the Tenth?/Ninth? Plan expenditures planned specifically for the lower 1/4th. Again demographic composition of this groups matter.

Then there are issues. Mark Tully, ex-BBC correspondent quoted Rajiv Gandhi as saying once that only 15% of the development expenditure of the government actually reaches the intended beneficiaries.

As far as I know there are/were many poverty allievation schemes which were basically handouts or one-time investments. The problem is if you lend to a aspiring small business owner, his success doesnot depend solely on your giving him the capital to begin his business. I think the planners ought to figured how to put some of those humongous (and now lost) poverty alleviation crores into getting roads and electricity to remote and not so remote areas as the more sustainable poverty alleviation method.

I`m sure infrastructure is the huge task where creative ideas and hard cash are the hardest to come by. But failures cannot be interpreted as `write-offs` I am thinking.

Re intentions of elected leaders :
Well, they keep offering humongous subsidies as campaign promises. My guess is its the same poor you mention who benefit most from the subsidies and keep electing the leaders offering the most(like Jayalalitha).

There is a balance here: is a subsidy a good poverty alleviation method? When does it go from alleviating genuine distress to acting as a drag on the exchequer and discouragement for more productive sustainable solutions?

Because governments have to be elected, realisation of the correct balance is much less than ideal, but if the governments were not elected and accountable, it would have solely depended on good intentions and good character and those are really hard to come by.

Re globalization/liberalization, I`m sure Indian policymakers know the Indian economy is anything but New, I think the Indian economy is heavily dominated by agriculture and industrial production. Did you know that the computer predictions on the date of onset/strength of the monsoon are now withheld from the general public to avoid opportunistic speculation on commodities and other things?

My layman`s view is that globalization/liberalization is not seen as the single solution to India`s economic problems and poverty allievation. Rather these are seen as opportunities for much-needed increased DOMESTIC economic activity, from which the Central government/ state governments can be prevented from going deeper into the red than they are.

Fiscal discipline is the casuality when the priorities are to keep hold on elected office through populism, such as in subsidies and in not wanting to confront unions in handling lossy public sector enterprises and general inattention to the real business of governance.

A standard observation living in the South is state governments live beyond their means due to
1. campaign promises of subsidies (Rs 2 rice, subsidized electricity, subsidised fertilizer, seed, transportation, writing off of loans).
2. Huge government payrolls
3. Not enough emphasis on generating revenue through encouraging industrial/economic activity
4. Pure mismanagement

Someone was discussing the other day that the practice till recent times was that the CM of a state would rush to N. Delhi to stave off a cash flow crisis and get the Centre to overlook its own guidelines by releasing (Plan) funds and then use this money (meant for other things) merely to do fiscal (nonPlan) firefighting back home.

Apparently, the present NDA government, though a shaky coalition in peril of regional partners walking off in a huff, is being strict in this regard, and is trying to ensure that state governments adhere to guidelines to meet their own fiscal targets of generating revenue and in not giving them a free ride.

The `happiness` about liberalization/globalization has to be seen in this context. Any intentions of the planners cannot be realised without money in hand and fiscal discipline while spending it.

Now there are apparently millions who may remain beyond the reach of electoral power, populist schemes, Planned development, increased economic activity. Well, maybe we need a Ministry of the Lower One-Fourth! Care to take office :)?

Sorry for the long post.
Sadhana