UPA, come out from the cold

Representatives of the South Centre, led by former UN chief Boutros-Boutros Ghali, were in India a few days ago to persuade the developing countries to take a united stand at WTO. The Centre has been making such efforts for many years, with little success. It is, in fact, a product of the South-South report which Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, as secretary-general of the South-South Commission, had prepared some years ago. His proposal was that the countries in the South should organise a concerted response to the strategies of the developed world. At a luncheon where the future plan was discussed, it was surprising to find members saying openly that the Cold War was not over. Words such as 8216;8216;imperialism8217;8217; and 8216;8216;exploitation8217;8217; were freely used against the first world. I found it strange that such fears were expressed in connection with globalisation, considered to be the panacea for all ills. 8216;8216;There is an effort to impose a new world order,8217;8217; raged some members. This is understandable. The manner in which small units in India are being crowded out and the way in which hundreds of thousands have lost their jobs and vocations shows how globalisation can wreak havoc.

What was rightly emphasised at the luncheon meeting was that the third world could not avert the 8216;8216;danger8217;8217; without the support of its people. This would mean democratising the regimes in the developing and underdeveloped countries. How could anyone accept the royal coup in Nepal, the military junta in Pakistan and the extremism in Bangladesh? Were rich nations to continue reducing the living standards of the poor countries by cornering more and more concessions, the poor would have no escape from dictators or adventurers who would promise them the moon. The casualty would be democracy. People can be a check only if allowed to elect their rulers.

In India, we have sustained a democratic polity. But we have destroyed the instruments of self-sufficiency built with toil and tears over the years. Belatedly, we are awakening to some of the subterfuges deployed by the developed countries in the name of globalisation. That may be the reason why we have resisted American and European dictates in the field of agriculture. It embraces 80 per cent of our population. Our holdings go below one acre, while those in the developed countries run into thousands of acres. Farmers in America and Europe also get a high subsidy 8212; put together, one billion dollars a day. How can our agricultural products compete with theirs?

The use of high yield in seeds was a critical technological input for the Green Revolution. Public research institutions, the National Seed Corporation, state-supported agriculture universities, seed multiplication farms and extension programmes, all played a crucial role in the process. In recent years, state assistance has been withdrawn or reduced. As a policy, the role of big seed companies is being encouraged. Under WTO regulations, the multinational seed companies have emerged as powerful agents proceeding towards complete control over the Indian seed industry. No democratic government can afford to sacrifice its vital interests for a few concessions in trade. What is disconcerting is that the developed countries continue to push the third world to the wall. They pit one against the other to entice some to vote in their favour at the WTO.

The choice is between gradual social, economic change based on constitutional government and rapid economic revolution based on a police state.

India8217;s first prime minister preferred the first. In Democracy, Communism, Socialism and Capitalism 1958, Jawaharlal Nehru examines the main economic and political alternatives that confront the contemporary world. As a disciple of Mahatma Gandhi, he strongly believes that 8216;8216;wrong means will not lead to right results8217;8217;. Nehru8217;s thinking avoids violence and repression on the one hand and inequality and inefficiency on the other. This is what should guide rich countries. They should not impose their system on the third world, definitely not their ways of trading, banking and servicing. They are far too exploitative.

Indeed, real social progress will come only when an opportunity is given to the individual to develop, provided 8216;8216;the individual8217;8217; is not a selected group but comprises the whole country. The touchstone should be how far any political or social theory enables the individual to rise above his or her petty self and think in terms of the good of all. The current budget proposals should be judged from that point of view, not by the rhetoric of Finance Minister P. Chidambaram. The Manmohan Singh government will have to go back to the core of the Common Minimum Programme, which the coalition partners have accepted, to ensure a livelihood to the lower half of our population. They have lived too long in the cold.