Baghdadagiri, here we come

Then she appealed to all peace-loving people to raise their voice against the war and “urged world leaders to exert pressure on the US”. “Condemning” the US in “strong words”, the press release tells us, she exhorted every peace-loving citizen of the world to raise his voice against America’s “dictatorial tendencies”.

And before you could say, look, who’s talking, and remind her of the way she rail-roaded her Vidhan Sabha just the other day, she warns us that the responsibility for the hardships the “entire world” suffers because of America’s “dadagiri” would “lie with George Bush”.

What will she do next? Book Bush under POTA and strike the fear of God into his heart? And hopefully send his aircraft carriers sailing back to Diego Garcia, Hawaii or wherever they came from?

In any case, you do not need too much evidence to charge somebody under POTA. In this particular case we even have the testimony of our honourable defence minister who has already announced that this war may give rise to more terrorism. Since the war is Bush’s doing, it should be perfectly fine for Mayawati to book him under POTA. Or, maybe, transfer him summarily to Dulles, Texas. If she can do it to all her own police officers why not to the self-styled policeman of the world as well?

The issue here is not the propriety of a state chief minister holding forth on foreign policy. We live in the global village now and you cannot expect the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh to confine herself to issues like sugarcane prices and ways to further the memory of Ambedkar (and if the Constitution comes in the way, well, at least we can’t say it was drafted by any Manuwadis). Just a point in passing, how would the political system, particularly the BJP and its siblings, have reacted if such a statement had been made by Mufti Mohammed Sayeed? He would have been immediately reminded that even under the pre-1952 special dispensation for Kashmir, foreign affairs was entirely with the Centre.

To be fair, though, Mayawati is only reflecting the anger you see in so many sections of “civil society” the world over. A small item catches your eye on the Reuters wires saying that a hotel in Koh Samui (an island resort in Thailand) has decided not to accept any American guests. Knowing how the Thais thrived on the stressed-out GIs during the Vietnam war, you wonder if the hotel is adding its bit to world peace or protesting why the war is not taking place someplace closer in the neighbourhood so it could feather its nest with some R&R dollars as well. Closer home, we have an announcement from Bangalore, from the Indian unit of an international activist group called People’s Health Movement, raising the cry of “drop their shops and stop the war”.

Its boycott call includes, besides Levi’s, Wranglers and Colgate, such global health hazards as Pepsi, Coke, Cadbury, Kelloggs, Benson & Hedges and 555. Why should it take an US assault on Iraq for our samaritans to boycott these lethal products is what you might find difficult to understand.

The boycott fire is now raging more fiercely than the oil wells Saddam Hussein’s been setting on fire. In India, the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind has announced a boycott of American goods and if only the Swadeshis would give a similar call as well, we will have a genuinely secular joint front against American hegemony. In several upscale schools in Delhi (and I presume in other major cities), boycotts are being threatened. The students of Doon School, I am told on good authority, are meeting one of these evenings to boycott American goods and imports and I presume the new headmaster designate, Kanti Bajpai, who is an alumnus of such instruments of imperialism as the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Brookings, should be quaking in his boots.

With Coke and Pepsi bearing the brunt of our collective anger — so what if they bankroll most of our cricket — the prospect of French wine becoming our national drink is a truly delicious one. Except it now seems a matter of time before this French Revolution too begins to nuance itself. Already, you may have noticed today that France was the first country to send Tony Blair a message of condolence on the first British casualties in Iraq. The Germans are already prevaricating and are believed to be increasing their contingent of commando troops already carrying out special operations in the mountains of Afghanistan — alongside, and under the command of their American “allies”. Chances are they are not saying no to Coke and Pepsi yet.

The larger point is not whether Bush is right or wrong but how well we serve ourselves by confusing emotional and moral outrage with global realities and national interest. This situation is underpinned on three givens: the self-destruction of NATO, the humiliation of the UN and the isolation of America. We did not make these happen, we can do nothing to influence these givens. We have to mould our responses to these realities. After weeks of waffling, our government has nuanced its position quite brilliantly now. The line in the MEA’s official statement expressing regret at the Security Council’s inability to come to a conclusion on the issue is genuinely clever. But who is to meanwhile underline it to so many who claim to speak on behalf of our government and our people?

We are a most interesting people. Educated, upper crust Indians are so outraged over the war on Iraq and believe it will increase terrorism. But they are always willing to go to war with Pakistan to “fight terrorism” as soon as possible, and preferably with nukes. Then, we want to boycott Coke, Pepsi and Colgate to punish the evil Anglo-US axis but fill up the auditoria when Pakistani musicians, from Abida Parveen to Adnan Sami, come here to perform.

This boycott business is, actually, getting quite serious now. The Americans have announced that they will field a team in the next cricket World Cup. Who knows, perhaps the only superpower is so insecure over our recent strides in this game they want to cut us to size? We could respond to that threat, still four years in the future, by getting some minister of state with a harmless portfolio like coal or food processing to tell some television channel that if that happens, India is “likely” to boycott that World Cup to protest the US invasion of Iraq. We could make a beginning today by announcing a boycott of this World Cup final because 2,000 Australian troops are fighting alongside the Americans. There couldn’t be a better way to avoid a missile called Brett Lee who Hans Blix and the UN must immediately take note of. Meanwhile, who knows, Jagmohan Dalmiya may even swing a deal with the ICC for India and Australia to share the title.

Don’t be so ridiculous now, you so-and-so, get real, you might tell me. And with good reason. But would you please say the same to Mayawati and the boycott brigade as well?

E-mail the Author