Not a time for denial and self-denigration Population fears

are at play here.

BY NOEL G DE SOUZA

India’s Independence Day celebrations should be an occasion for celebrating the country’s achievements and not for lament and selfdenigration. Yet that is exactly the impression one gets from three special articles in the prestigious The Times of India. These articles create the impression that India has gone backwards since Independence.

That is not the message which the leaders of the USA, Britain, France and Portugal have conveyed in recent times. Their visits to India have included tributes about India’s progress. They have been promoting economic and scientific ties with India as it emerges as one of the world’s leading powers.

Do some Indians revel in self-denigration? That was justifiable at the time of India’s independence because India then had a lot of ground to make up to catch up with the developed world. The penchant for selfdenigration apparently still prevails.

One Times of India article by Amit Bhattacharya is entitled Food Fight: When will we get freedom from hunger? This well-meaning article intends to highlight the case for better food availability. The article, however, relies heavily on UN figures.

Stating that “numbers speak for themselves”, it quotes that 27% are undernourished, 43% underweight and that 70% under-5 children are anaemic. This unquestioning and uncritical quoting from foreign reports such as by the United Nations World Food Program is what Indians need to eschew. The article accepts the dubious ranking by the Global Hunger Index 2009 and the Millennium Development Goals (2010) which say that hunger has increased from 20% to 21% from the years 2000-2002 to 2005-2007.

It is one thing for UN agencies to survey health and nutrition in small North European countries with small homogeneous populations. It is entirely different to estimate health and nutrition in India with over a billion people and a high degree of diversity. The figures are at best guesstimates. Cannot Indian writers living in India see the situation for themselves and critically evaluate and question foreign reports?

Has it been considered that North European countries, unlike India, have ageing populations, small population growth, high-energy consumption and high carbon emissions? With regard to anaemia, has it been considered that thalassemia, an iron deficient genetic disease, is widespread in South Asia as it is in southern Europe (such as in Italy) and the Middle East? Genetic factors

Rather than lament, it would be more appropriate to consider the enormous progress that India has achieved with regard to food production since Independence despite its population tripling since then. Has India forgotten the extremely serious periods of food shortage that took place during the British Raj such as the infamous Bengal famine?

Rather, India’s food problems lie elsewhere.

As S. Viswanathan writes in The Hindu (Fighting Hunger: Role of Media and Judiciary), there is a clamour in India for adequate food storages and all public food distribution system. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a petition that large quantities of food are being wasted because of inadequate storage facilities.

Again, the article The Hollow Language Of Women’s Empowerment by Nandita Sengupta relies on quotes from academics which paint a sorry picture of Indian women. India, unlike several neighbouring countries, gives freedom of expression to its women and does not threaten its women writers. Indian women occupy high positions; universities have good female enrolment, and women freely act in movies. None of this appears in the article.

In another piece, A Million Mutinies Now, Subodh Varma laments separatist tendencies, the clamour for new states, caste politics and lack of freedom for young people to choose their marriage partners. That there are demands for smaller states is not per se unacceptable as smaller units are better governable. That India as one nation is accepted, for the most part, is to be applauded.

On the other hand, The Hindustan Times gives the opposite story providing hope and optimism. Acknowledging that social security programs initiated by the Indian government to eradicate poverty are often frustrated by corruption and mismanagement, it points out that reforms are afoot to use technology and talent on a scale never seen before anywhere in the world. The name of this project Imagining India comes from the title of the book by former Infosys CEO Nandan Nilekani.

In The Silent Glow of Innovation, Vivek Wadhwa points out that whilst in 2004, India produced 17,000 Masters and 900 PhDs in engineering, in 2007 India’s top five IT companies produced 120,000 engineers. President Obama repeatedly cautions Americans that India and China are forging ahead in producing scientists compared to the USA.

As Samar Halarnkar says in How We’re Creating The New, New India, “Despite the limitations imposed by the country’s weak infrastructure and antiquated education system, India has rapidly evolved into a global knowledge and innovation hub.”

This is not the time for self-denigration but rather for celebration.

BY TANVEER AHMED

My family has always voted Labor during Federal elections. It is not unlike supporting a football team, in that there is often little regard to actual performance or a scrutiny of the actual policies offered, but an emotional attachment and bond. This bond was cultivated from our act of migration in the 1980s, which was seen by them, just like many other immigrants, as a direct result of the policies implemented by the Hawke government. In their minds, Labor is the party for immigrants seeking to start a new life in Australia.

In contrast, the combination of the White Australia policy which was initially begun by the conservative Menzies government and the hardline asylum seeker policy implemented by the Howard government, has tainted the Liberals with a racist tinge. The infamous Howard line about asylum seekers, “We will decide who comes to this country and under what circumstances…” has tarnished Australia in the eyes of many, both locally and internationally.

But the reality is more complex.

The debate about what is being termed “sustainable population” became a major topic during the most recent Federal election. Both parties were competing over who would be seen as more hardline on blocking asylum seekers from entering Australia. When voters in key swing seats such as those in western Sydney were quizzed about what made them vote for the Coalition, many said they wanted an end to what they perceived as illegal immigration. The Coalition’s simplistic but effective war cry of “Stop the Debt. Stop the Boats” was clearly successful in delivering a hardline message.

labour market, as anyone who has visited a service station, a Coles or Woolworths or caught a taxi, would notice.

As a result, the ALP was essentially outflanked on immigration on the Right by the Coalition, and outflanked on the Left by the Greens on the environment. In attempting to maintain a centrist position, many voters deserted them.

The history of the ALP suggests it is not naturally the party of immigration. From the very first act of Federation, the unions conspired to exclude Asians of Chinese descent and Melanesian workers from competing with their members. Australia was founded on an act of racism. But then, as it is now, the discrimination was as much about economics as it was about race.

Now the ALP will find it difficult negotiating a growing “unholy alliance” between environmentalists on the Left who support a dwindling intake of migrants on the basis that the unique geography of Australia cannot support a population over 30 million people, as well as those on the Right who are reluctant on the basis of social cohesion and an excessive racial diversity that they see as too far detached from our Anglo-British roots.

Australia recorded the highest percentage increase in immigration numbers during the Howard years, particularly skilled migration and those on temporary working visas. This is particularly relevant to the South Asian community because a large number of IT workers have benefitted from this policy.

vote Labor (this election), opting instead for

Rudd essentially continued this trend and his pronouncement of wanting a “Big Australia” has been widely publicised. But the direction has abruptly turned with Gillard’s ascension and a number of insiders have suggested to me that the caretaker PM has little interest and familiarity with foreign policy matters.

This was also the election when many non-white immigrants, often for the very first time, didn’t vote Labor, opting instead for either the Greens or Independents. A number of acquaintances of mine from a South Asian background voted for the Coalition, citing their policies with regard to international students and visa requirements, a feature that the ALP is likely to restrict.

The segments within the Liberal Party that are most aligned towards business are also pro-immigration. They cite the need to help fill skill shortages and, although business leaders wouldn’t like to admit it, keep wages low in the lower end of the labour market. International students now fill large segments of the bottom end of the

The issue of asylum seekers is really a symbolic issue and doesn’t necessarily reflect the stance of the parties to the issue of immigration, more broadly. Television images of boats turning up on our shores resonate with some visceral fears of working class and rural Australians in particular. Many of them feel insecure by their suburbs being transformed in the past decade by growing numbers of non-white immigrants.

Australia is currently in the midst of a potentially transforming period in its stance on immigration, one driven primarily by emotional factors. It is one that may have damaging implications for the South Asian community.

Dr Tanveer Ahmed is a psychiatrist at Sydney’s Northside West Clinic. He is also an opinion columnist for The Sydney Morning Herald