|
 |
ARTICLE |
 |
Brisk start to Modi era
Deft diplomacy dominates day one
Inder Malhotra
AT the start of the Narendra Modi era, diplomacy rather than domestic affairs dominated the show, although late in the day something important was done on the domestic front too. His compact Council of Ministers - totalling 45 as against 74 that constituted the ousted government - was sworn in late in the evening on Monday. On his first working day, however, most of Mr Modi’s time and energy were devoted to summit diplomacy. This was the result of his own sudden initiative to invite the heads of state or government of all the members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) plus Mauritius to his government's inauguration.Mr Modi's original idea was to reach out only to his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif, and ask him to be by his side for the “celebration of the Indian democracy”. But he knew that the best way to ensure this was to invite him together with others heading the governments in the region. Despite a number of difficulties, including differences between Mr Sharif and the Pakistan Army, and an attack on the Indian consulate at Herat in Afghanistan, Mr. Sharif decided to come. His brother, Shahbaz Sharif, had taken care to get the agreement of the Army Chief, Gen Raheel Sharif. It is perhaps needless to add that although eight heads of government were in Delhi and were treated with equal respect, not only the Indian and foreign media but also the people in general were all fixated on Mr Sharif. Before leaving for home, he expressed satisfaction with the “cordial and constructive” talks with Mr Modi and hoped that India felt the same. There was, of course, no breakthrough or even an advance in the conversation. On the contrary, Mr Modi had underscored the problem of terrorism and stated that India-Pakistan relations could not improve until terrorism from Pakistan’s territory and the territory under its control was ended, and the masterminds of the savage terrorist attack on Mumbai on November 26, 2008 were punished. The Indian side also demanded that Pakistan should cease sheltering India's most wanted Dawood Ibrahim responsible for the massacre during the serial blasts in Mumbai in March 1993. When during the election campaign Mr Modi had raised this demand Pakistan’s interior minister had rebuked him rudely. Remarkably, Mr Sharif evaded this issue, made a brief reference to the “core issue” of Kashmir but expressed satisfaction that the “ice had been broken” and the roadmap for further talks would be prepared by the foreign secretaries of the two countries. India broadly agreed but there was a significant difference of nuance in the statements of the two sides. Mr Sharif, who delayed his meeting with the media until after the Indian Foreign Secretary, Sujatha Singh’s televised press briefing said categorically that the two foreign secretaries would “meet soon”. Ms Singh declared that they would be “in touch”. There was, however, no ill-will on either side. More on this subject presently, but something needs to be said first on the composition of Mr Modi's ministerial team. He has combined experience with youth. Veterans like Rajnath Singh, Arun Jaitley, Sushma Swaraj (who was basically a dissident), Venkaiah Naidu and Ravi Shankar Prasad have been assigned the main portfolios. But 11 ministers of state also hold independent charge of departments that are important enough. The Prime Minister has received well-merited appreciation for giving women one-fifth representation in the Cabinet. The widespread concern over the allocation of both finance and defence to Mr Jaitley has been dissipated after his declaration that he is holding “additional charge” of defence only “temporarily”. The shorter this period is the better. Reverting to the brisk diplomatic activity, it must be reported that the terrorism issue acquired greater salience when Afghan President Hamid Karzai told an Indian TV channel that the ghastly assault was the handiwork of the Pakistan-backed Taliban controlled by the ISI, the notorious Pakistani intelligence agency. By the time of TV talk shows in the night commentators on both sides were saying the meeting between the two prime ministers was “more symbolic than substantive”. Even so, both sides seemed agreed that some “low-hanging fruits” could perhaps be reaped. For instance, the 2012 agreement on the resumption of full trade could be implemented without further delay, especially because Pakistan badly needs Indian electricity that this country is willing to provide. Similarly, people-to-people contact would greatly improve if the agreed arrangement for liberalising the visa system is enforced. In order to do that Mr Sharif would have to overcome the opposition of the Army and the jihadis who are holding the Pakistani state and society to ransom. Next to Mr Sharif the foreign dignitary that attracted attention was President Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka. Because of the denial of legitimate rights to Lanka's Tamil minority even after the end of the ethnic civil war there was great opposition to an invitation to him in Tamil Nadu. Even Mr Modi's Tamil allies staged black flag demonstrations against the Sri Lankan President. In their official talks Mr Modi told Mr Rajapaksa to lose no further time in implementing the long-delayed 13th amendment to the Lankan constitution that provides for devolution of powers to the Tamil minority. A brief word now on a fine domestic decision the Modi government took late on Tuesday evening. For three years the Manmohan Singh government had dragged its feet on the Supreme Court's directive to appoint a Special Investigating Team (SIT) to expose those who have stashed black money in foreign tax havens. The Modi government set it up on day one. Unfortunately, a junior minister in the Prime Minister's Office simultaneously caused a sharp and potentially explosive row with the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah, by indicating that the Central government would repeal Article 370 that gives the sensitive state special status. During six years of his rule (1998-2004) Atal Behari Vajpayee had put this item on the BJP agenda in cold storage.
 |
|
 |
OPED
— History |
 |
He put Punjab on India’s financial map
Nina Puri
Between
a glorious beginning and a calamitous end unfolds the story of a fascinating personality. His career graph of over half a century in undivided Punjab rose much higher than his diminutive physical stature.

|
This palatial Victorian bungalow in Lahore was Harkishen Lal’s home and is at present the Lady Fatima Medical College |
Born barely a decade and a half after Punjab was annexed by the British in 1847, Harkishen Lal (1864-1937) had, in a mere 23 years, catapulted himself from a small dusty town, Leiah, in the North-West Frontier Province to the pinnacle of academic acclaim by being awarded a fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge in 1887 for a tripos in mathematics.

Harkishen Lal was a visionary leader |
Harkishen Lal was a man of many contradictions. Irony often defined him. An ardent nationalist, he admired everything Western — from lifestyle and sartorial inclinations to ideas and ways of thinking. Always well groomed, he dressed like an Englishman; this lent him the veneer of an aristocrat. For most of his life, Harkishen Lal lived in a palatial Victorian bungalow in Lahore (presently Lady Fatima Medical College). His entire ministerial salary went towards its furnishing and upkeep. His children were brought up by English governesses. Patron of arts Harkishen Lal sent his daughter and three sons abroad for their higher studies. A patron of the arts and artisans, his residence housed a library as well as a museum. He was the first in Punjab to own cars. When his assets were liquidated, the flower-pots alone were sold for Rs 3 lakh. Today, his private collection of books is in the Dwarka Das Library, Chandigarh. Known for his gracious hospitality, Harkishen Lal entertained the high and mighty of his time in splendid style. Viceroys, ministers, colleagues and friends were entertained lavishly. He ran separate kitchens, western and Indian, even engaging Muslim cooks. Exquisite cuisine served in silver dishes became legendary. Many Congress leaders like Moti Lal Nehru, Madan Mohan Malviya, Gopal Krishen Gokhale, Dinshaw Wacha, Sir Hasan Imam and many others on various occasions were his house guests. Yet, he himself chose to live in a small room surrounded by portraits of beggars as a reminder of his humble beginnings. Tribal leaders and people from his home-town were invited to stay with him. With a liberal mindset and a secular outlook, Harkishen Lal respected all religions. Drawn towards the Sikh religion, a granthi came every day to read the Guru Granth Sahib. All his four children married outside caste and community. Harkishen Lal’s second wife was a Maharashtrian. His German daughter-in-law, Elizabeth Gauba, ran a school in Delhi; initially Rajiv Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi studied here. His elder son, Kanhaiya Lal, a Punjab legislator and prolific writer converted to Islam and married thrice.
Promoting women’s education Education was a priority for Harkishen Lal. In the late 19th century he, unlike Lala Lajpat Rai, vigorously promoted girls’ and women’s education, as well as institutes for technology. He did not hide his preference towards western education. When his grand-daughter joined the Ganga Ram School in Lahore, he retorted that the school was for behanjis! Arrogant remarks like this might not have gone down well with many people. There was many a falling-out with prominent Arya Samajis over political and socio-cultural issues. Dyal Singh Majithia greatly admired Harkishen Lal and nominated him as a Managing Trustee on all his Trusts: The Tribune, College & Library. In 1910, Harkishen Lal started Dyal Singh College. When Dyal Singh’s wife, Rani Bhagwan Kaur, contested Dyal Singh’s will in the court for the Tribune Trust, it was Harkishen Lal who defended the will. Punjab was largely a province of traders. Harkishen Lal brought Punjab onto the industrial and financial map of India. Recognised as the doyen of commerce and industry, he was familiarly known as the Napoleon of Finance in Punjab. His terms of reference and inspiration may have been Birmingham and Manchester, but they were translated into Swadeshi when it came to planning the country’s economic resurgence and development. Indian fabrics were used to furnish his home, and his clothes were made with indigenous fabric because he wanted to promote the country’s weaving industry. A visionary, Harkishen Lal recognised there could be no political progress without economic progress. He could justifiably be described as the father of indigenous banking and insurance companies in the Punjab. Supported by Dyal Singh Majithia, he founded the Punjab National Bank in 1895. In 1896, he founded the Bharat Insurance Company. A couple of years later, he started the Peoples’ Bank because he and Lala Lajpat Rai could not see eye to eye on several issues while running the Punjab National Bank. He offered special interest rates for widows students and public institutions. Pioneering industrialist Harkishen Lal set up numerous industries between 1901 and 1906: flour mills, brick kilns, soap factories, ice factories, cotton-weaving mills and saw mills. Control over finance gave him immense power. In 1905, he was instrumental in funding a Commercial Academy in Lahore. This metamorphosed into what it is today the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry. After attending the Delhi Durbar in 1911, Harkishen Lal brought the entire generating plant to Lahore and started the Lahore Electric Supply Company in 1912. For the first time, the streets of the city were lit. Other cities followed. A run on banks in 1913 adversely affected his financial and industrial business. Honest to the core, he later returned, with interest, every penny to his shareholders. From 1913, Harkishen Lal returned to practising law, and was back in the fold of the Congress, actively organising its annual industrial exhibitions. In 1925, he opened the New Peoples’ Bank of India and ran the biggest combination of mills and factories east of the Suez. He was the chairman of more companies than anybody else in India. In 1926, at the Indian Industrial and Commercial Congress held in Delhi, a resolution was moved — under Harkishen Lal’s presidentship —to approve the establishment of an Indian Associated Chamber of Commerce. This initiative was the precursor of the Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FICCI). Recognised for his intellectual and business acumen, Harkishen Lal was invited to participate and provide evidence in several government and financial committees and conferences. Before the Simon Commission, he candidly deposed against the government system of Dyarchy. The Central Banking Enquiry Committee constituted in 1929, appointed Harkishen Lal to represent Indian indigenous banking. Several provincial maharajas engaged him as their financial adviser. An ardent nationalist and patriot, Harkishen Lal played a pivotal political role in the Indian National Congress, particularly from 1893 to 1919. Dyal Singh being unwell, Harkishen Lal was asked to read his reception address at the first Indian National Congress held in Lahore in 1893. At the 1909 INC session held in Lahore, as Chairman, Harkishen Lal read an inspiring address. Congressman, Dr Satya Pal, credited him for his pioneering work in its early years, stating, “It is to Harkishen Lal that the Congress in the Punjab owes its existence.” Both Harkishen Lal and Lala Lajpat Rai in 1904 were members of a committee of the INC to study the question of writing a Constitution for the Congress. In 1907, Harkishen Lal was asked to mediate between the extremists and moderates during the Surat split of the Congress. Accused of fanning the agitation against the Rowlatt Bill, Harkishen Lal, along with Lala Duni Chand and Rambhaj Datt, was sentenced to prison for life. The ensuing Montford Reforms, however, earned them complete reprieve within six months. Thereafter, followed a twist in the tale: Harkishen Lal and Mian Fazl-i-Husain, both barristers, were appointed ministers in the Punjab government. Their respective portfolios were agriculture and industry, and education. K.L. Gauba writes “both were strong men; what power they had they used, what they did not, they created”. Harkishen Lal resigned as minister when he planned to give evidence before the Privy Council in England in the famous Michael O’ Dwyer vs. Shankaran Nair case. Rejection of British titles Lala Lajpat Rai and Lala Harkishen Lal may have lived in different worlds, but both “dominated them dividing the Province between them”! The two men maintained a constant love-hate relationship. Gandhi’s call for non-cooperation and boycott of British goods and institutions found them on opposite sides of the fence. Not a votary for “boycott” advocated by Gandhiji, Harkishen Lal preferred to initiate reforms by joining the government. Being a true Swarajist, he never accepted a British title. When it comes to patronage, diversity of interests and the command of capital and personal influence, there were very few people at the time in the same position as Harkishen Lal. However, in the 1930s world-wide economic depression hurtled him towards financial ruin. He was also mired in court cases. In 1934, Chief Justice Douglas Young sounded the death knell for all his concerns. A man who would “rather break than bend”, he was awarded an indefinite prison sentence for contempt of Court for not apologising by Young. (Incidentally, only after this harsh judgment was the law amended to a maximum prison term of six months.) The Napoleon of Finance had met his Waterloo, fast forwarding his death. Harkishen Lal’s business, political and social engagements over half a century find resonance even today. The writer is the author of Political Elite and Society in the Punjab. She is working on the biography of Harkishen
Lal.
 |