A pleasant and comfortable day

Sir — Much as I dislike strikes and bandhs, I still feel like congratulating Citu for the strike it sponsored on August 8. The streets of Calcutta were free of auto-rickshaws, resulting in little or no traffic snarls. There cannot be a bigger blessing than this for the daily traveller. The pollution levels were lower than the average day, the roads were cleaner, and the bus-rides comfortable. Like most Calcuttans, I had such a pleasant day that it left me hoping that Citu would call such strikes at least once every month. I am even willing to volunteer to find them ‘issues’.

Yours faithfully,
Arijit Manna, Calcutta

Freedom queries

Sir — Swapan Dasgupta, in his “What if India had not become independent” (Aug 15), has lamented the fast-forward actions following India’s independence. He believes that if our energies were not wasted on building steel and heavy industries, India would have been shining more gloriously by now. Dasgupta seems to think that a delay in the transfer of power would have led to greater internal competition among provinces and a fillip to public enterprise. But what has private enterprise and free trade done for us? On a visit to any shopping mall — according to some the hallmark of our progress — one is greeted with foreign labels, and some fake foreign ones too. The ritual annual presentation of CII’s charter of demands from the government — and in turn the nation — in the form of tax sops, SEZ’s et al makes one wonder if our industry has come of age yet. Had they matured, the Singur car would have been an all-electric one instead of an abridged version of the traditional car.

Yours faithfully,
Kalyan Kumar Ghose,

Calcutta

Sir — Sujan Dutta has been quite comprehensive in his answer to the question, “What did India learn from its wars” (Aug 15). However, I would like to add four points. One, the Indian army has always been let down by our political leaders, as evident in the 1947, 1965 and 1971 wars with Pakistan. Our battlefield victories were gifted to the enemy by Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi in the three wars respectively.

Two, Kargil showed the pusillanimous posturing of our fossilized political leadership when the army was strictly forbidden to cross the line of control. A young and dynamic leadership would have encouraged our troops to breach the line, and that would have finished off the war in eight days instead of eight weeks, besides saving lives.

Three, Operation Parakram was a win-win situation for Pakistan. Indian politicians were so rattled by the attacks on the parliament that, in a typical knee-jerk reaction, they ordered the meaningless deployment of armed forces along the border, primarily to fool the public. The media was manipulated into publicizing how New Delhi’s ‘statesmanship’ prevented a nuclear war. But the truth was that the National Democratic Alliance leadership just did not have the guts to retaliate. Our soldiers had to bear the brunt yet again.

Four, Pakistan has been sponsoring terrorist strikes in India for a long time, and its success owes to political support from within the target area, mainly in return for money and other favours.

Sujan Dutta is quite right when he mentions the jawan questioning his superior about why he is being used as a scapegoat in Jammu and Kashmir and the North-east, the sordid consequence of which is the rise in fragging, considered by many as the biggest threat to India’s democracy.

Yours faithfully,
J.K. Dutt, Calcutta

Erratum

Sunanda K. Datta-Ray’s article, “The luck of the draw” (Aug 15), mentions Indira Gandhi failing her exams in Cambridge. Indira Gandhi studied in Oxford. The error is regretted. — The Editor