कहानी लिखना शुरू करने के पहले ही

कहानी के अंत के बारे में सोचता हूँ

सोचता हूँ कि मैं कैसे इसके अंत को

अधिक प्रभावशाली बनाऊँ

और लोग कहते भी तो बस इतना हैं

कि फलां कहानी के आखिर के

दो-तीन अनुच्छेद बहुत अच्छे थे

सिर्फ आखिरी पन्ना पढ़ के

कहानी का मज़मून भांप लेने की

लोगों की आदत भी तो जाती नहीं

तो मैंने भी सोचा कि अगली कहानी का अंत

थोड़ा दमदार बनाया जायेगा।

कहानी का अंत दुखद हो तो

Operation Blue Star in 1984 - to flush out separatists from sacred Golden Temple - is one of the most controversial and at the same time one of the most impactful incidents in recent history of India. There are several books written on this topic and several accounts by journalists are available. Out of them, I have shortlisted 'Operation Blue Star, The True Story' by Lt. Gen. K.S. Brar and 'Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi's Last Battle'. Even Journalist Tavleen Singh devotes one chapter to the Operation and pre and post-operation scenarios in her book 'Durbar'. I started with the book penned by K.S Brar because he was there for the whole duration of operation and also because I wanted to know how military makes and evolves their strategies. Having said that I have always believed that to get a neutral picture of any historical event one has to read as many contrasting views as possible and then form his own opinion based on arguments put before him for it is very easy to get carried away by reading one side of a story.

K.S. Brar was a Major General stationed in Meerut when he was told to report to Western Command of Indian Army. In fact, he was planning a foreign trip with his wife and had to abandon that in view of the task assigned to him. On questions of him not being assertive enough in asking more time for being prepared as Gen. Manekshaw did during Bangladesh Liberation War, Gen. Brar says that the fear of groundswell in favour of Bhindranwale was so real that any further delay would have further aggravated the already serious situation in Punjab. He was given four days to gather necessary intelligence and make his strategy, which he did in due time. All preparations such as cordoning off the area, army's takeover of law and order situation in Punjab and making vantage points outside the periphery of Golden Temple premises were done during this time. 

During actual operation, the army was surprised by the firepower of Bhindranwale and his associates. Also in presence was a battle-hardened retired army officer Shabeg Singh who trained separatists so well that they could hold ground for such a long time as was thought necessary for the news of the attack on Golden Temple to reach to villages and a movement of peasants towards Amritsar could start. Several fortifications and placement of heavy guns, even rocket launchers, tells the level of preparedness and also the acumen of Shabeg Singh. I wondered why Shabeg Singh was so angry with establishment and I got the answer in Tavleen Singh's Durbar. Shabeg Singh was stripped from military services just one day before his retirement on some corruption charges and because of that he could not avail retirement benefits. For an officer who was highly lauded for his role in Bangladesh-liberation War of 1971, this was too humiliating and he said that all this was done because he was a Sikh. No effort was made to address the concern of Shabeg Singh which was a grave mistake.

As army miscalculated the preparedness of separatists, reinforcements were called. Having suffered heavy casualties, tanks were brought inside Golden Temple premises. Although K.S. Brar repeatedly tells us that tanks did not use their main guns and their primary purpose was to provide cover to soldiers but the picture of Akal Takht after Operation tells another story. Although for the fate of Akal Takht, Bhindranwale was no less responsible, as he took shelter in Akal Takht where even no Guru resided. Brar says that the fear of Bhindranwale's associates blowing Harmandir Sahib to provoke the sentiments of masses was very real and that is why soldiers were sent at the earliest possible time. By next day afternoon, the operation was declared successful. 

Brar takes this opportunity to refute many allegations. Brahma Chellaney, then reporting for Western media, sent a dispatch that Sikhs were mass-killed after tying their hands backwards. Brar says that all the persons in the premises including devotees were tied when hostels and sarais were secured so that the militants can be separated from devotees after verification by police and intelligence agencies. In one such a process, a scuffle broke out between a militant and army personnel and he was killed, but Tavleen Singh gives an altogether different account significantly reducing the credibility of Brar's theory. She says that while going towards Amritsar, she saw a truck full of bodies of Sikhs with the turban tied over their mouths and hands tied over their back. It was such a telling picture of the situation in Punjab. Brar also refutes reports that he was seen in person inside the premise. He says in that case if he would have been captured or killed inside, it would have hampered the whole operation. 

One question which Brar brings for discussion is that whom should army has its allegiance to - the nation or the government. Brar says that 'loyalty to the nation' is very vague term until there is an authority which is thought to represent the nation and in this case it was a duly elected government. Army officers and soldiers getting killed in action and later getting blamed for the bloodshed is not acceptable as they were following government orders. Both state and central governments should be blamed for mishandling the situation both before the operation leading to military intervention and post the operation causing mutinies by soldiers at few places and the 1984 riots. With decisive governments, these incidents could have been avoided. 

There are many books on the topic ' the definition of India.' Many of them presenting their own theories, some of them meticulously researched and some of them written with an aim to propagate a particular ideology. The Idea of India is one such book which defines "Indian-ness" from the viewpoint of Sunil Khilnani, a Professor of Politics, and Director of the King's College London India Institute. The author describes the events of past hundred years to tell us what is the unifying us as Indians. Or is there any unifying thing at all? Or is the respect of diversity is unifying India? When the Indian Union was formed in 1947 many in West prophesied that India won't survive owing to its own differences. The Western Idea of nationalism meant that India is a continent with different cultures like Europe is. But India stands today united and stronger than earlier. The author tries to find the reasons behind this. 

In the first section named 'democracy', Khilnani talks about how India transformed into a democracy and he presents a timeline which starts from British Raj. The aim of the British Raj was to sustain their rule in India and in the process they introduced few steps to improve the social living of India or they presented these steps like that. Although congress was established in 1885, it did not demand independence till a decade or two after its inception. It was used a platform for debate, but as the representation of different sections of society increased in Congress, it considered itself true representative of India masses and rightful inheritor of Raj. Gandhiji dominated the Congress from the 1920s till his death and he had his way as in the case when Subhash Chandra Bose had to step down as Congress president. With the demise of Gandhiji, the idea of village self-rule was dropped and India adopted a democracy then popular in the west. Khilnani also shows the contrast between Nehru and Indira. He also considers the 1962 war with China as his greatest failure as does Ramachandra Guha in India after Gandhi. Khilanani says that while Nehru was inclusive and tolerated dissidence to a level, Indira Gandhi was more authoritarian and she established a direct contact with masses giving them hopes. She portrayed constitution and other authorities as hurdles coming in her way while she was working for the masses. During Indira's days, the party became merely an instrument to bring votes and young people in youth congress saw politics as a shortcut to reach the top. Among many of the deformations that entered the democratic system, there was one positive point too. Public's faith in the voting system increased more and more, and it became a norm for voices standing for suppressed people to enter the election system.

In the second section titled "temples of the future", the discussion is on the economic policies and their achievements since independence till 1997. The author starts with describing socialist democratic policies of Nehru in early 1950s and ends the section with an account of India's situation post-Liberalization drive of 1991. Nehru gave priority to heavy industries and along with Planning Commission, a body formed to give economic policy directions, India wanted to achieve economic growth and security through these heavy Industries. It is a different story that we did not succeed too much in that initiative and most of the state-owned enterprises started incurring heavy losses. Planning Commission itself lost its authority that it had in Nehru's period and economic policies were being decided by Finance Ministry after Indira Gandhi's rule. The author discussed in detail the role of P. C. Mahalanobis in giving scientific direction to India's economic policy formulation. During Indira Gandhi's rule, actions like the abolition of Privy Purses, nationalization of banks and expansion of state-owned enterprises, aimed more towards getting political mileage than being guided by economic thoughts. State-owned enterprises became a symbol of patronizing and they failed to create any wealth for the state. Although the rate of inflation was in control for most of the period since independence till the late 1980s, things started deteriorating so much so that in 1991 we had foreign reserves enough for only two weeks of imports. India was on the edge of a serious fiscal crisis and faced the possibility of defaulting on its own borrowings. IMF gave loans to India on one condition that a range of comprehensive structural reforms will be carried out. At that time, a new government was formed and liberalization of economic regime started. 

The third section is devoted to the development of Indian cities, the seats of colonial power. The author describes the tendency among early nationalists of Congress to unseat the British from these cities and occupy the high chair while everything else remained unchanged. That tendency changed only after the advent of Gandhi in the political landscape in India when the focus shifted to villages, although Gandhi himself had started off his political career in a city and was successful because of his ability to mobilize people in cities, but he refused to follow the British model of power blindly. Big port cities of Bombay, Madras, Calcutta were huge commercial and economic centers but British Raj needed something more magnificent, something which does not mix with the past and can be shown as an example of modernity to the Indians. And thus was born the city of New Delhi. The author agrees that the  British control of India existed because the cities existed. What Raj tried to do with New Delhi, Nehru did same with Chandigarh, a city built as an example of modernity. In near future, India can become the country with the highest population in cities because of increasing pace of urbanization.

In the fourth section, the author tries to find the answer to "Who is an Indian." Then he travels through history to say that there was no geopolitical entity called India and it was British Raj which created India by amalgamating different princely states and declining Mughal Empire. Even after fifty years of independence it is asked that what is the definition that defines an Indian? While searching answer of this question, the author describes various nationalist movements which happened in India during last two hundred years. He also describes the version of Gandhi, that of a village rule with daily tolerance among all communities and the version of Nehru, that was based on his version of, sometimes imaginative, history where "India appeared as a space of ceaseless cultural mixing, its history a celebration of the soiling effects of cultural miscegenation and accretion." The author also contests against the Idea of Hindu Nationalism and described them as something inspired by Western nationalism movements but which was unlikely to work in India because here we do not have a common language, religion or ethnicity, but a mixture of these. The political developments of the late 1980s and early 1990s also cemented the identity of different regions and communities. In words of the author one who honors all these diversities is a true Indian.

While describing these things the author could have been more neutral instead of sticking with a particular ideology. The author heaped lavish praise on Jawaharlal Nehru for his thoughts, comfortably ignoring his few deeds such as the Sino-Indian war in 1962. In fact, author rues the war because it led increased military expenditure and military officers ending up having more say in strategic matters. What author fails to emphasize that the Idea of India can flourish only if its borders are safe. Also, the author criticized home-grown nationalist movements more than he did British Raj for colonialism. Overall this book is an interesting read especially first two chapters even if you do not agree with author's viewpoint, presented in nice story-telling style. 

'Falling over backwards - an essay against the reservation and judicial populism' is one of the most meticulously researched and persuading book written by a person with a zeal and a mission in his mind. And the mission was to make it a point that individual should be the unit of the governance, not the interest groups or communities. The author Arun Shourie who has written many more books on the topics which just do not get too much attention in the public discourse predominant today. Written in 2005, Shourie took many cases from the history,  words from the constitutional amendments, and excerpts from the judgments of the High Courts and the Supreme Court just to debate on the merit of the reservations being given on any basis. In this book, Shourie emphasizes on basically three things : first, the tendency among the public to register as uppers castes during British Raj and subsequent loosening of the caste boundaries; second, the politicians' approach to identity politics and seeing this as a chance to rise in Indian political landscape; third, the response of High Courts and Supreme Courts and the arguments given by progressive judges. These are three main areas in which the author researched and put forward his arguments. Let us look at them one by one. 

When the census was started in British Raj, the caste-based census was also started by them. Among other reasons, this was also done to see if different communities can be given proportional representation which was then strictly based on religion. When this was started there were two main trends visible among people. First was caste consolidation, in which many similar caste and sub-castes formed one umbrella group and wished to be enrolled as such. One example that author gives in his book is that of Yadav surname which was adopted by different castes such as Ahir. The second trend was the tendency among people to enroll as upper castes. So many castes so far deemed as lower castes enrolled as different categories of Kshatriyas and Brahmins. People were eager to leave the lower caste stamp on them. The other advancements such as Railways also contributed in fighting with this taboo. People sitting together in railways won't ask the caste of the fellow passenger whereas in villages untouchability was still prominent. The overall effect was that caste boundaries were slowly and slowly getting less relevant. In fact, different communities enrolled as different caste or caste groups in the census and as an altogether different caste or caste groups in the subsequent census. This had a hit on the reliability of census data. British Raj discontinued the caste based census in 1931 citing the unreliability of data so collected.

The second part that Arun Shourie touched upon is the politics over the reservation. With reservation for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes firmly in place, demands started for reservation to other backward classes. But with no criteria to define a backward class upon which everybody agreed, castes became synonymous with classes as far as reservation is concerned. Politicians losing credibility resorted to the identity politics and during 1980s demands were so strong that it was possible to achieve those demands from a weak government. Here too it is noteworthy that many times the proper procedures to define a caste as backward were not followed. Procedures said that a backward class commission will study the social, economic and educational status of a community before awarding the status of backward class, but in practice, those groups who had enough electoral clout and those who could protest were included in the backward classes list. The trends that we saw in the early twentieth century where people enrolled them as upper castes are reversed now and there is a clamor in these communities to be declared as backward classes. Then this fact should also be not ignored that the reservation was given based on the data of last caste-based census of 1931. This basis has two arguable assumptions - first, the rate of population growth has remained same and second, the demographics of various regions have not changed despite uneven economic development in different areas in fifty years and a large scale migration due to partition. 

The third thing that Shourie studied was the response of the High Courts and Supreme Court. To cite the many examples given by Shourie in his book, many times courts would deliver judgments citing Manu Smriti, the impact and influence of an ancient text itself under question and many time they would leave the decision on the executive (the government). Arun Shourie makes one point that in the Western countries, the prospective law officials have to study the judgments of higher courts. In India, this was hardly the tradition leaving many monumental judgments go unnoticed and escaping academic scrutiny. In India, whatever new acts and constitutional amendments were passed by the political class in parliament were later given nod by courts. This has the result that reservation looked more like permanent although it was implemented for a predefined time-period. 

It would be wrong to say that reservation did not bring any benefit to the communities for which these were enacted, but the point is that these benefits should be debatable and how more deprived people can be given benefits in other ways, apart from the reservation, should be considered too. The fact is that reservation is a reality and no political party can reverse that, we must analyze in retrospect the effects of the reservation and its alternatives. In this book, Shourie's love for detail is impressing but many times many arguments become repetitive and same characters keep coming in at different places for different points to prove. This book is not that an easy read but it is a well-researched book on a political topic full of facts which are hard to find anywhere else.

सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्त, भोर और साँझ 

प्रकृति की दो प्रक्रियाएँ हमेशा से ही आकर्षित करती रही हैं। वो हैं - सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्त। भोर की वेला का आकर्षण होता है सूर्योदय और वैसे ही साँझ वेला का मुख्य आकर्षण सूर्यास्त होता है। मुझे अच्छी तरह से याद है कि बचपन में स्कूल की दीवारों पर लिखी हुई सूक्तियों में एक यह भी हुआ करती थी कि "सूर्य न तो अस्त होता है और न उदय, हम ही जागकर सो जाते हैं।" अब बाल मन ने कहावत पढ़ी और अनदेखा कर दिया, हर दिन। उस समय इस कहावत के खगोलीय और दार्शनिक महत्व के बारे में ज्यादा पता न था। और अब हालत ये है कि सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्त को देखते ही मेरे अंदर का दार्शनिक जाग उठता है। हालाँकि दिनचर्या ऐसी है कि इनको देखना कम ही हो पाता है। और ऐसा भी नहीं है कि सूर्योदय को देखकर सबके मन में सिर्फ दार्शनिक विचार ही आते हैं। लेखक जरॉड किंट्ज़ ने तो सूर्य के चाल-चलन की ही शिकायत कर दी। कारण भी ये कि भोर में सूर्य रेंगते हुए खिड़कियों पर चढ़ आता हैं और वहां से झांकता है। लेकिन घबराइये नहीं। सूर्य के चरित्र-हनन का मेरा कोई इरादा नहीं है। 

उखीमठ, उत्तराखंड में गढ़वाल मंडल विकास निगम के गेस्ट हाउस की एक भोर आज तक नहीं भूलती है। वैसे तो हिमालय में सूर्योदय के उत्तम दृश्य देखने के लिए कुछ जगहें ही उपयुक्त कही जा सकती हैं और वो इसलिए क्यूंकि ज्यादातर पहाड़ी बस्तियां पर्वतों से घिरी होती हैं। जब तक सूर्य पहाड़ों के ऊपर आता है, तब तक दिन काफी चढ़ चुका होता है और सूर्य अपना नवजातपन खो चुका होता है। मुझे याद है कि एक बार हृषिकेश में सूर्योदय देखने के लिए हमने रात्रि-जागरण किया था लेकिन सुबह सूर्य दिखने तक भोर का नामोनिशान गायब हो चुका था। खैर उखीमठ ने हमें निराश नहीं किया। वहां से हिमाच्छादित पहाड़ों की छटा बस देखते ही बनती थी। सामने गुप्तकाशी और बीच में घाटी में बह रही मन्दाकिनी नदी की कर्णप्रिय आवाज और फिर बादलों से अठखेलियाँ करता हुआ सूरज। जनवरी के महीने में सूर्य की गुनगुनी किरणें किसी वरदान से कम तो नहीं लग रही थीं। और सूर्य की लालिमा से बादल और बर्फ से ढके पहाड़ भी लाल लग रहे थे। 

हृषिकेश में सूर्योदय देखने का सौभाग्य हमें प्राप्त नहीं हुआ, लेकिन सूर्यास्त जरूर देखा यहाँ पर। त्रिवेणी घाट से हमने सूर्य को नीचे मैदानों की तरफ जाते देखा। उस जगह से गंगा नदी भी एक मोड़ लेकर आँखों से ओझल हुई जा रही थी और सूर्य भी अस्त हो रहा था। ऐसा लग रहा था कि उस जगह तक प्रकृति की सत्ता है और उसके बाद मनुष्य की। मसूरी की साँझ भी कम शानदार नहीं कही जा सकती। पहाड़ों से रहित एक साँझ में हमने पूरा सूर्यास्त देखा। सूर्य को धीरे धीरे लाल होते देखा और फिर पूरा क्षितिज लाल था, पहाड़ों का बस धुंधला सा खाका देखा जा सकता था। कुछ देर बाद सूर्य जब और अस्ताचल की ओर बढ़ चला तब आसमान में एक रेखा साफ़ देखी जा सकती थी जिसके नीचे अंधकार था और जिसके ऊपर लाल रौशनी जगमगा रही थी। जब सूर्य दिखना बंद हो गया तब लाल आकाश के नीचे देहरादून शहर में जलते हुए प्रकाश बिम्ब साँझ की शोभा बढ़ा रहे थे। 

कभी कभी सोचता हूँ कि मनुष्य को सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्त क्यों अच्छा लगता है। सूर्योदय को अच्छा लगने के पीछे यह कारण हो सकता है कि मनुष्य की इस धारणा की पुष्टि होती है कि अंधकार नित्य नहीं रहेगा। हमारी संस्कृति में अंधकार को बुराई और प्रकाश को अच्छाई का प्रतीक माना गया है। प्रतिदिन सूर्योदय उस बुराई पर अच्छाई की विजय का प्रतीक है। और सहज ही समझा जा सकता है कि पुराने समय में लोग सूर्योदय की इतनी बेसब्री से प्रतीक्षा क्यों करते होंगे। और रही बात सूर्यास्त की तो उसको भी अच्छाई-बुराई से जोड़ते हुए यह कहा जा सकता है कि लोगों को पता है कि यह जो अँधेरा सूर्यास्त ला रहा है वो क्षणिक है, कल फिर सूर्योदय होगा और अंधकार पराजित होगा। इसलिए वो उत्साह से भोर का इंतज़ार करते हैं। 

कभी यह नहीं सोचा था कि सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्त में ज्यादा कौन अच्छा लगता है। मुझसे यह प्रश्न हिंदी साहित्य जगत के नवांकुरों में से एक ने पूछा था। मैंने थोड़ा सोचा इस बारे में, लेकिन बुद्धिजीवियों को संतुष्ट कर पाने वाला जवाब नहीं मिला। मैंने बताया कि सूर्यास्त ज्यादा अच्छा लगता है क्योंकि वो आँखों को ज्यादा सुखदायी होता है। तब उस नवांकुर ने बताया , "किसी चीज की सुंदरता का एहसास तब ज्यादा होता है जब वह हमसे दूर जा रही हो, बजाय इसके कि जब वह चीज हमारे पास आई हो और काफी दिन तक साथ रहे। और जब हम किसी चीज को जाते हुए देखते हैं तो हम उसे देखने के लिए रुकते हैं। उससे आत्मीयता का एहसास होता है। उगते हुए सूरज की वैसे तो कुछ लोग पूजा भी करते हैं लेकिन उसे उगते हुए देखने के लिए कोई रुकता नहीं है जैसे कि लोग अस्त होते हुए सूरज को देखने के लिए रुकते हैं।" सचमुच इस प्रश्न का इससे खूबसूरत दार्शनिक जवाब संभव नहीं था।

मसूरी की एक साँझ (तस्वीर धर्मेन्द्र कुमार  के सौजन्य से )