Developing at the Grassroots

Namaste!  Today was our final day of class with very interesting discussion topics! After class we had the opportunity to visit an NGO called Jamghat.  Jamghat has three different programs designed to educate and help children who would otherwise have nothing.  The first program we visited was a girls home.  The home housed 10 beautiful young girls and also served as their school.  These girls receive education, counseling, theatre experience, and the opportunity to live life like a child!  Growing up in the United States I had always had my own bedroom and everything that I ever needed.  I walked into the room where these 10 girls slept and shared their dreams and it broke my heart.  The facility was great but the realization that these girls feel like princesses because they have their own bed under a roof humbled me.  They are so thankful with so little that they have been dealt with in life.  I intruded on their class time and had them tell me what they were working on and what they found the most exciting thing to do everyday.  I expected them to say their favorite thing was their theatre group or playtime yet they responded that they love to study!  It was so encouraging to see everything that this organization has done and the lives that they have changed.   Three of the girls wanted to dance with me so I hummed “Waka Waka” by Shakira and we did the recognizable dance from the music video. 

Next we drove to the boys center that was created for the same purpose.  The boys were in a more formal class setting and had many books in English scattered on the table.  I glanced into another room where I found 5 young boys all under the age of 6 years old.  They were playing a popular board game in India and they quickly taught me how to play.  These boys were full of energy and loved to demonstrate yoga stances and karate kicks for my camera. 

The other center that the organization has is a day-time play center.  Fifty kids attend this center while their parents go to work.  These children live in the street as well but return to their parents at the end of the day.  We asked the workers of the organization how they choose the children that they have to live in the foster centers.  They replied that the students they have were the most extreme situations out of the daytime center and many of them asked them to live there.  Some children their parents have died while others their parents have simply given them up for hopes of a better life. 

Dr. Gawande very wisely asked how much it would cost every month to house and teach one child.  He did this so we would realize the comparison of how we live our life everyday.  The figure was surprisingly higher than I imagined.  For $1,000 a month a child is housed, fed, and educated.  They responded that they insist on providing quality service for these children and is reflected in their extremely high success rate. The organization is completely amazing and inspiring.   There are still millions of children in India who are homeless and in need of an education and their childhood. 

http://www.jamghatfamily.blogspot.com 

Sarah Saunders, MPIA 2012 and Sarah Broussard, MPSA 2011

A New World Order...?

A global government to solve and prevent all conflicts?  Vegetarianism and yoga to make a more peaceful world order?

No way.

Our last lecturer, a former World Bank employee, had views on restructuring world order that basically required a suspension of rational thinking.  I’ve heard the argument before: a single world government would be better suited to mediate conflicts between states.  Now, I don’t want to put out the energy of idealists, but we should not assume dictators and autocrats will suddenly start behaving if we give the UN more authority.  The practicality of a global government ends as soon as one asks, well, practical questions: how are decisions made? who leads? one state, one vote?  votes based on national population? votes on economic strength? what would stop tyrants from consolidating their votes to endanger the security of free nations? etc.  

These are not the only reasons, of course.  Most importantly, why would the United States ever submit itself to a degradation of its sovereignty?  We will act in our interest as would any other country that enjoyed our relative power in the international system.  

Of course, I don’t mean to oversimplify the multiple arguments against international institutions and agreements.  I am certainly not in the camp of reactionary ideologues and hyper-political extremists who wish to suggest that truly beneficial treaties--those that help us improve our economic interests and get closer to a more peaceful, predictable world order--are somehow harming our national sovereignty.  There’s a reason that both Democratic and Republican administrations have sought free trade agreements and arms treaties.  However, what our lecturer spoke of is whole different ball game: the idea that world order can be better enforced from some vague idea of a global government is absurd.  Free and prosperous (i.e. market economy) states which are responsive to their people’s needs and work toward just societies must not sacrifice their independence to the whims of unstable authoritarian or totalitarian regimes.  Quite frankly, I just can’t imagine South Korea giving Kim Jong-Il a vote on security issues, or the Saudis letting the Iranians do the same.  

In some regards, the UN can be an important arena of discussion and creating the politically beneficial perception of legitimacy on certain actions, but by no means should it be a serious constraint to US security interests, as our lecturer would prefer.  The model example I can think of a legitimate American use of the UN is in the run-up to the Gulf War (1990-91, not 2002-2003).  UN Article 51 probably gave the US the right to intervene on Kuwait’s behalf without UNSC approval, but George HW Bush and his team thought it wise to seek international validation through diplomacy and the UNSC.  That being said, not being able to secure UNSC approval probably would not have stopped Bush 41. (Allow me to note right now my opposition to the way that Bush 43 went to war in Iraq, the belief that it would be easier than he thought, and his disregard of the need for broad allied support--and many more reasons.  I’m simply commenting that, in comparing the two cases of seeking international agreement, 41 did a much better job than 43.)

Back to India, though.  I generally think that undeveloped and weak countries perceive the UN as an outlet to voice their opposition to more powerful states.  What surprises me most about a well educated man giving a lecture in favor of global governance is that India is on the rise.  So why would he advocate that India should submit itself to a constraining power?  One would think that only declining powers and the weak states would find more benefits in stronger global institutions that could curb rising powers.  

Then again, this guy also said that worldwide adoption of vegetarianism and yoga would contribute world peace.  That was the point in the lecture when I checked out and realized an active Q&A with this guy was not worth my time.  I know other classmates agreed.  

(One final note: please don’t count me in the crowd of extremists who actively seek to sabotage institutions like the UN.  International organizations do have their purpose and can be a positive force for change in certain areas.  Working toward an ideal world is laudable, but depending on unrealistic hyper-idealism that ignores fundamental aspects of national behavior (i.e. pursuing interests) and human nature is just a step too far.  That being said, a thorough and apolitical discussion of international institutions cannot take place in just one blog post.)

By Steven S., MPIA

Desperate for Right to Information

My favorite lecture in India was about the Right to Information. The Right to Information Act is one of the primary laws that deepen democracy in India.

A democratic country needs governance that keeps wishes of people. But only until 2005, it becomes clear that the India’s 1.2 billion citizens have been newly empowered by the far-reaching law granting them the right to demand almost any information from the government. The law is backed by stiff fines for bureaucrats who withhold information, a penalty that appears to be ensuring speedy compliance. The law has given the people the feeling that the government is accountable to them.

I think the Right to Information Act has given the poor a powerful tool to ensure their benefits from the economic development. Previously, Indian citizens had few means to know what their government is doing for them and people in the government also try to withhold information from them. But now, with the law, it had a significant effect in combating graft and corruption and it is a good deterrence to future scalawags in government. The introduction of the Right to Information has critically transformed the way citizens can seek transparency in decision making and implementation of policies, programs, legislations in any given sector or particular project. At the same time the Act allows one to demand for disclosure of information which an authority or department has failed to put in the public domain.

Right to Information achieved great successes in the past few years, it not only promotes transparency and accountability in government, but it also minimizes corruption and inefficiency in public offices therefore ensures people’s participation in governance and decision making. Rajiv Gandhi, a former prime minister, once said that only 15% of spending on the poor actually reached them-the rest was wasted or siphoned off. Same as India, millions of money is allocated to the poorest areas by Chinese central government every year, however, the living standard of people there still remains the same.

What I am jealous of India is that their media enjoys a relatively free press and the Government of India is also making headway in as far as supporting people’s freedom of expression and access to free media. Undoubtedly, media plays an active role in the promotion of Right to Information. Media informs people how important is their Right to Information; what the benefits of Right to information are and how people can present their petitions about Right to Information. As long as people are aware of the significance of Right to Information, they will put pressures on the government therefore it is more likely for the government to serve them better. On the contrary, Chinese government controls the media. People have no other sources of information except absorbing monotonous information from the state-owned TV stations or newspapers every day. The media speaks for the government and fools the public for most of the time. For example, since the Sichuan earthquake hit on May 12, the Chinese public has been deluges with rumors and misinformation. Chinese authorities have on several occasions stepped forward to discredit the latter and appeal for the public to access information from authoritative sources. The phenomenon demonstrates how only when information in China is more transparent the public will have the confidence to turn away from rumors. Even though China subsequently promulgated Regulation on Information Publishing of People’s Republic of China in January 2007, without a free press, none of these laws are meaningful. Plus, from the legal status perspective, India’s Act has a higher standing than China’s because it is a law enacted by the country’s National Congress. China’s ,on the other hand, is a regulation put forth by the Chinese Council, who’s regulations are less powerful than those framed by the Chinese government’s legislative organs-the National People’s Congress and its Standing Committee.

-Bei Chen MPIA 2012

If You Educate a Child

Educating a child can lead to a future that is brighter for the entire world.  We started out talking about child labor but I think the conclusion found in this lecture - that all children need to be educated - relates to everything that was talked about today.  Kishore always tells people that we meet with that we will be the policy makers in a few years.  When we are gone there will be a generation behind us.  Every child has the potential to be a leader in world affairs and planting the seed for a child's success in the future can start the moment they are born and someone gives them the opportunity to learn.

Our day started with a lecture on child labor and continued with a lecture on gender in India.  Unfortunately, another event was happening during the gender lecture that I wanted to attend so I was not able to sit in on the talk.  I did ask someone to take notes on the subject though, and was able in the end to learn a little about what was talked about.  Instead of the lecture I went to lunch with a few of my classmates and some representatives from a micro-lending institution.  We then went to meet the rest of the class at the Observatory Research Foundation (ORF) and a few of us went to a law firm after that.  The night ended with a JNU dinner and a suit fitting that could have been better.

Our first speaker was an advocate for children's rights and talked on child labor.  She said that 40% of forced labor comes from children.  She started working on a program to ID children who were bonded to get them released and in school because if a child is in school they are not able to be at work (with this program adults are also targeted and have a livelihood program).  Through this program, alliances were built with the police and labor departments and leaders in different communities. There was also a bridge program for the children to catch them up to their appropriate grade level so they could then be integrated with children their own age.  However, with all of this girls were left out because the girls were often locked in their houses cleaning, fetching water, etc.  This would be their routine for their entire life and as they grew older they would have children who would receive the same fate.  After this was realized, the program started focusing on all children, not just forced labor, saying all children have a right to childhood. Families would say their children had to work because they were too poor and needed the extra income but when children were taken out of the workforce, wages of women increased three times and men's wages doubled.  She, therefore, made the argument that because children work there is poverty and this is helped by the fact that children are forced to work long hours and are cheap.  The program helped deepen democracy by giving rights to children and led to the Right to Education Act allowing greater access to education.  Our speaker concluded with some comments on the ILO 138 & 132 (India is still not a signatory of either) which say that the most extreme forms of child labor need to be abolished (illegal drugs, sex, forced, etc) but this invests in only some children and once you take one child out of one of these positions there is another child waiting to go in so it doesn't prevent anything. There is an enormous demand for education today and parents are willing to sacrifice to get their children into schools but they don't know how to do it. 

I often wonder what a child thinks.  They are too young to defend themselves and if this is the only life they have known, do they even know it is wrong?  If a child worker has known nothing but labor, I would think they would just think of it as a way of life.  Just as in poverty and other cruelties that exist, there needs to be a way to break the cycle.  A future policy makers I think we can help with this but I am skeptical that it will be enough, especially if we are not on the ground seeing what is happening.  Our speaker also said that bonded labor is the first access to credit.  People can't pay their loans back so they do it with labor.  I do think that it is great that people can be lifted out of poverty with credit but I am also hesitant at times because it had caused bonded labor and suicides.  Is there something else that could allow others to increase their well being?

Gender is something I find highly interesting.  Despite which country I am in this is something that is always important.  In India it seems as though there are many gods portrayed as women and yet it is a very patriarchal society.  Even in the US, though we claim all are equal, this is not true and I believe gender does play a role in decision making and there are still some discrimination that exist.  Women bare children, take care of their families, and contribute immensely to their communities and homes and yet men still rule the world (I know this is exaggerated in most cases, but in some places all the traditional "gender roles" are still in place).  I was told that this talk included information on a dowry law.  To attempt to make things better, a dowry law was put into place so that women did not have to be "sold" for a certain amount.  However, when gifts were given by the women's family and something went wrong in the marriage, it was claimed that these gifts were a dowry...another law that was put in place and did not have the intended outcome.  My sister told me that in India women are burned ("bride burning") if they have an insufficient dowry or if a man wants to get remarried and one of my professors said this was true.  It is hard to find a law or policy that will prevent such occurrences and also have a positive outcome without any backlash.  I also talked to some fellows at JNU and they were asking how I felt about the metro having a car for women and one for men.  This segregation was also in the metros in Mexico when I visited.  I said in that case I thought it was good because the reason for the segregation in Mexico was because women were getting assaulted and raped.  In India I didn't know if it was for the same reason or if it was a cultural thing.   The men I was talking to seemed to think the segregation made situations worse because if a woman gets on the train and enters the men's cabin, the men automatically think it is ok to rub up on her because she had the option to go into her own cabin and decided not to. It was a very interesting conversation. 

For lunch we met with some representatives from Basix, which is an institution that deals with microfinance.  The entire class had visited the institution and some sites of clients but I had not arrived in India so I was very thankful for the opportunity to talk to people about about the program and learn what Basix had to offer and what the model was all about.  I think it is more intriguing for me because I wrote my economics thesis on microfinance and joint liability.  I am very interested in seeing how different countries form their models and if their programs are successful. I talked a lot with one of the men about group lending.  He said that they assist with larger groups and help them get connected with banks to take out loans but they do not deal with large groups.  At Basix there are groups of 4-5 and they self select to be in the groups.  This helps because the (mostly) women know the characteristics of the other women and therefore will not let someone in their group unless they have reasonable certainty that this woman will not default on her loan.  He said that there is a very good repayment rate, except for in one area where a Maoist group is telling the women not to repay their loans and offering them alternatives with lower interest rates.  Other than this, the repayment rate is excellent.  He also said that they work with households who are already involved in economic activity and are not working with the "ultra poor."  I was able to see that what I found in my case study, that was a case study on Ayacucho, Peru, was also true in this case.  Unless there are other outside factors, in an infinite game where women need to pay their loan back to be able to get another loan, they will pay their loan back because it is better to pay it back than to default and have nothing.  It was very exciting to talk to someone involved in the field and to see what I have researched has been successful in India.

Adding to the excitement of this busy day, we got to visit a think tank, the Observatory Research Foundation, and talk to a former ambassador and his his senior staff.  We were allowed to ask any question we wanted and talked to them about energy, security, the economy, liberalization, the foreign service, and politics.  It was an extremely unique and enriching opportunity. 

After visiting with the ambassador, a small group of us went to talk to Dr.Goswamni's cousin, Lira Goswami, at her law firm.  This was also a very enriching experience for all of us interested in law and the economy.  She talked about how the law and business are, of course, intertwined.  We talked about companies setting up different branches - as liaisons, trading offices, and subsidiaries and how research needs to be done on the industry, regulatory framework and the most effective way to structure taxes.  There are also different treaties for different countries regarding taxes.  Of course the US is always worried about corruption, which there is a lot of in India.  I know in some interviews and classes we have talked about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and some firms will not enter into a business contract unless the other party also abides by this.  Lira said that in addition to India being extremely corrupt, this problem has also been getting worse.  However, India does have an integrity clause/contract. 

In 1992-93 there was a lot of liberalization and almost every sector can have investment without government approval.  There are still some sectors like defense, media, etc. where the government thinks it is important, from a national security view, to keep control of.  The impact MNEs have in GDP is minuscule because India is not dependent on foreign investment but she said they benefit in terms of perception and ability to do business.  India is a large emerging market and there is a huge potential for growth.  It needs to maintain a 9% growth rate to help with employment so it is important to open up to foreign investment.  India has a large middle class, English, good educational institutions, skilled labor and a democracy.  This gives them a leg up.  One thing they need to work on is certainty in tax laws and avoiding frequent change in the laws.  I think there is definitely room for growth, especially since there is such little foreign investment in India and business have only just begun to enter into the market.  I am also determined to find out how much MNEs help with growth and what this potential could be.  I also think that India being a democracy could have a play in investment in the long term.  With both India and China growing, if more certainty and rights are seen in India they may have a huge advantage.

Our night and semi wrap up for India included a party at JNU.  There were a bunch of JNU professors there including some fellows.  I spent most of my night talking to two fellows - one was originally from Canada but has been teaching in London for the past 10 years and the other was originally from the UK but has been working in South Africa.  It was a pretty fun night

Democracy as a Means not a Value

Is democracy an outcome?

India has had many triumphs and Indians have much to boast. We have noticed our lecturers are proud of their country’s democracy. As any good patriot is wont to do, they argue that India’s political system surpasses its peers; its achievement of democracy through nonviolent, widespread, grassroots political movement was an end in and of itself.

While this perspective is natural and grounded in academic dialogue, we couldn’t help but take issue with the notion of democracy as a value. Rather than an ideal or an outcome, democracy is a means or a tool by which we achieve other outcomes. It’s a system of governance that facilitates participation and self-determination (and a good one!). It’s an institution that allows the voice of the people to be expressed through free and fair elections and representation in decision-making bodies.

We find democracy to be a means to an end. It is a way that people can live together in community so that the best possible decisions are made in the fairest way possible. While not the most efficient means of organizing people, it seems to be the best system out there for protecting people’s rights—but therein lies the distinction. Democracy is a way to achieve the more important outcome of upholding freedoms and supporting the general welfare.

These other values supersede the notion of democracy as an absolute value. People require the right to make choices about their livelihood, the ability to participate in decisions made regarding their fate, to have informed consent when one of their liberties might be withdrawn or exchanged. But what good is democracy if it doesn’t deliver? Why have a government if not to protect citizens from external powers and realize the will of the people?

Does democracy deliver?

Government, which has been around in some form or fashion just as long as humanity, has appropriately evolved along with human civilization. Whereas civilization used to be nomadic tribes, government used to be a tool of the powerful; civilization has become increasingly complex and now consists of modern societies. Government too has changed: constitutions the world over currently acknowledge that government ought to be of the people, by the people, and for the people. India, of course, embodies these ideals best of all developing nations, thanks to its democratic institutions and values. And yet, for many people in India, this striking achievement means little.

If the point of modern government is to serve the people—as in, actually give them services such as education, security, and justice—then it is by these criteria that government should be judged. When people’s lives and livelihoods are at stake, simply being a democracy is not good enough. India urgently needs to deliver infrastructure, education, and health care to its people, regardless what kind of government it has. Indeed, for Indians living in the slum, education is their definition of freedom; thus they are not free, despite the fact that they live in the middle of a country which has adopted the world’s most best and free system of governance.

The power of a democracy is that every citizen can use his voice to be heard, to choose, and to enact change if it is needed. But if the government continually fails, then choice becomes worthless; if one regime after another cannot deliver, then votes become meaningless. And there is nothing that democracy by itself can do about this, because democracy is only a method of government; it is only a tool. What India needs is a development strategy which will translate their ideals and values into reality—and it absolutely needs to realize that democracy is not that strategy—at least in the form it is today.

Do other forms of government deliver?

We have also noticed that while many of our professors expound upon India’s democracy, they simultaneously criticize the Chinese method (aka “Market-Leninism.”) Much of what we hear sounds almost condescending, as though India is automatically superior to China because of its political system. But our generation, which has watched China rise, may not believe a country is successful just because it’s a democracy.

While the professors constantly refer to the many problems that come with the Chinese system (and we readily admit that there are many problems—the least of which, human rights.) But there is no talk of the many benefits that the Chinese government has provided for its people – benefits that the Indian government has not provided. For example, the literacy rate in China is close to 90% while in India it’s only 65%; the PRC government has made primary education a priority. And the Chinese government has invested billions of dollars in the country’s infrastructure, and in combating issues like water shortages and climate change.

Also, the argument that the Chinese government does not provide for its people because they are not elected is misguided. The CCP’s number one priority is staying in power. If they did not make any effort to better the life of China’s citizens or to keep the country’s growth rate steady, they would not remain in power for very long. The economic growth of the country is the CCP’s lifeline. This is not to say that we agree with authoritarianism—quite the contrary. But to write off China as a lesser country because it is authoritarian is too simplistic. A government should be judged by how much it provides to its citizens, not just on the fact that it is voted into office. And in the Indian system, it seems to us that many officials are voted into office, and then fail to live up to many promises.

Pushing democracy

No democracy is perfect. We can point out flaws in every state claiming to be democratic—India and the U.S. notwithstanding—just as we can point out flaws in every state across the globe. However, that doesn’t mean that we should be complacent about their shortcomings. Each citizenry should push its elected officials (no matter how corrupt) to look and act more like textbook democracy and to live out the desired outcomes of democratic rule: free and fair elections, clean drinking water, access to primary education, self determination, informed consent, participation, and the freedom to support one’s own livelihood.

It is these values that must be protected and lauded. Democracy exists to make sure states protect people’s fundamental rights. Without a just system of governance like democracy, people may not be able to satisfy the needs of the human condition. Winston Churchill reminds us that “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all other forms of government.”

While we are discussing these issues of democracy, we learn that Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords has been shot in Tucson. This has brought up new problems in regards to how democracy can flourish. How can elected officials remain in touch with their constituents if they fear for their safety? The US system of democracy should clearly be affected by this event. Our work as a citizenry is to respond to the brokenness we find in our system—to the safety of elected officials in the US, for example, to the corruption that detracts from public goods in India.

All this said, we would like to point out that we are patriots. We love America. But what kind of citizens would we be if we didn’t grapple with democracy as a governance structure and participate in making it better? After all, Gandhi reminds us to be the change we wish to see in the world. So we question the idea of democracy as a value, and push democracy further to be the means to fulfilling greater goals—of human dignity, the ability to make choices, and the freedom of self determination.




Dori Enderle, MPIA 2011; Elizabeth Solch, MPIA 2012; Joy Jauer, MPSA 2012

Old Delhi

We woke up this morning and were prepping to leave for the Delhi Tour when the power went out. Daunted by the prospect of taking bucket showers in the dark, some of us went to the salon down the street to have our hair washed and dried. In the meantime, Pamposh employees working to return the power started an electrical fire in the main lobby.* Fortunately, it was small and extinguished before most of those still in the hotel had a chance to evacuate.

Our biggest stop on the Delhi Tour was the Jama Masjid in Old Delhi, reputed to be the largest mosque in India. There were as many Delhians milling around the inner plaza as tourists, most in small family groups outside to enjoy a Sunday afternoon. They had a small square roped off for birdseed, mobbed by dozens of pigeons. Two teenage boys were preparing to fly a kite. When they saw we had cameras, several groups of pre-teen girls approached us and requested to have their photo taken with us. They were most excited just to see the photo on the camera screen afterward—it gave the impression that they didn’t see digital photography very frequently.

In addition to removing our shoes and covering our heads, we girls were given long floral robes to put on over our winter coats. Unlike our other stops, we weren’t approached by any of the men for photos, but some of them started sending the girls sharp looks if the young girls spoke to us for too long. Most of the group was herded out about ten minutes before the call to prayer. I’m so glad we had the opportunity to visit these places of worship—the mosque, the Sikh temple, and a couple of Hindu temples. It reminded me of how Christian churches in the U.S., both across denominations and even within one denomination, can have strikingly different atmospheres. Witnessing believers of a religion in active practice gives you an understanding that no textbook can: a first-hand insight into how certain cultures and social practices rise up around religions.

The rest of Old Delhi is a maze of narrow, crowded alleyways, lined by old two- and three- story buildings all crowding in on each other and criss-crossed by a maze of electrical wires. The alleys are so narrow it’s not possible for cars to pass through most of the neighborhood, so people travel on foot, by bike or rickshaw. We finished the day with a stop at a reputed sari shop in Chandni Chowk and by sharing a whole goat at Karim’s. Even though Old Delhi is predominantly Muslim, the neighborhood was filled with Indians of all backgrounds. We passed Sikh merchants outside a Sikh temple, were seated near a Hindu family at Karim’s, and asked directions from a Muslim rickshaw driver. The customers and the merchants throughout Chandni Chowk appeared to be from all of these religions, too.

Our lecturers have spoken about how diverse India is, and how over time the main cultural traditions impact each other and evolve. Visiting Old Delhi was a perfect way to witness this interaction in real life.

*See Casey and Heather’s blog post

Diane Raub MPIA 2011

Beautiful Ground Palace

Saturday was our much anticipated trip to Agra and the Taj Mahal!  After waking up to leave at 6, we arrived in Agra around lunch time and piled into golf carts for the short trip down to the Taj.  We cannot speak for everyone, but the Taj lived up to every previous expectation.  The majesty of the entire site is overwhelming, especially considering that it was constructed hundreds of years ago.  

The son of Shah Jahan, the Taj builder, also built a famous landmark in Agra – Agra Fort. After visiting the Taj Mahal, we had a guided tour of the fort. Before returning to Delhi, we stopped at a local restaurant for dinner and drinks. One of the things that struck us while visiting the two sites in Agra is the interplay between family and religion in Indian culture. The Taj was built for Shah Jahan's dead wife as a monument to honor her. It is built in Muslim style with readings from the Quran on its face.

On the other hand, Shah Jahan's son, Aurangzeb built Agra Fort with a combination of Muslim and Hindi traditions to accommodate his two wives. Aurangzeb arrested his father because of their differing religious values, including excessive use of state money to build the Taj Mahal and taxing non-Muslims in Agra. We have also witnessed the variety of religious culture in modern India. 

As previous blogs have explained, we have visited numerous religious sites. While they are strikingly different, we have noticed underlying similarities, such as the importance of family, significance of rituals, and respect for one another. In our short time here in India, we have grown to appreciate how the religious values permeate into everyday life. Indians go out of their way to accommodate guests. Whether it be a local store, restaurant, or salon, they treat every customer as a member of their family and do everything possible to make them feel at home.  

Gotta go, the house is on fire.  Literally. And there's no sign of Kishore.

Casey Braswell and Heather Gregory

Stand Like an Elephant, Sting Like a Bee

Our afternoon lecturer came to us from the Center of Policy Research, one of the oldest think tanks in India.  Because he was our only speaker on India’s security issues amidst a sea of econ classes, the two security students were eager to blog about his policy recommendations.  He began with a discussion on India’s concerns regarding Pakistan, particularly radicalization, nuclear terrorism, and its exaggerated threat perception of India.  He suggested that the wars between India and Pakistan are more akin to communal riots than wars, with no conflict lasting longer than fifteen days with fewer total casualties than those that usually result from police action in one year in either country.  Furthermore, he stressed their common culture and kinship which he believes has moderated the violence in the past and will keep the two countries from nuclear escalation.  In his opinion, Pakistan defines itself as “not India”, and this negative identity results in its sometimes aggressive behavior. 

We found many opportunities to critique his views.  First of all, he admits Pakistan sees India as an existential threat, which, to him, justifies its military spending to counter the India threat (and deploying up to 80% of its troops on its southern border with India).  This begs the question: where is the common culture, religion, and familial ties of the military elite. Why would brother India develop nuclear weapons unless it hoped to achieve some sort of primacy to SMASH little brother Pakistan?  Furthermore, the radicalization of Pakistani Muslims and the immigration of Hindus from the country, push the country further from India culturally, and simultaneously creates a Pakistani culture of its own.  In the future we can’t expect the pattern of limited war to continue.  Even if his hypothesis of common culture exists, we would argue that radicalization combined with fading institutional memory of a united India would lessen these cultural and familial ties.  This constructivist argument contradicted his “hyper-realist” stance on China.

The professor argued that the government was not thinking strategically about how to counter its primary (and existential) threat, China.  Just a few of his suggestions included balancing China by nuclearizing Vietnam, testing more (and larger) thermonuclear weapons, and possibly establishing an Indian naval base east of the Straits of Malacca in the South China Sea to prevent the Chinese navy from entering the Indian Ocean.  He also mentioned adding 9 armored divisions to the Tibetan plateau in case of a land war with China and ending India’s no-first-use policy.  It was around this point that he admitted to being called a “hawk” in the Indian foreign policy circles.  How the Dragon would react to these measures was, incidentally, not mentioned. 

We would argue that India is militarily and economically at a complete disadvantage vis-à-vis China, and should focus its energies on maximizing its comparative advantage in order to counter the Panda.  One of the few areas India would be able to contend with China from a position of strength would be in submarine warfare in the Indian Ocean.  The professor explained that this is due to the varying and unique thermal layers in the Indian Ocean that prevent accurate detection by even the most accurate radars in existence.  The Indian Navy has mapped these layers (hydrographic data) which will enable its sonar systems to overcome the detection problems faced by other radars. For this reason, the Indian Navy holds this information very near and dear.  While this was mentioned in response to a question as an afterthought, we found it to be the most interesting part of his lecture, and further believe India should exploit China’s lack of information in this area instead of trying to compete in the South China Sea. 

We were also concerned that, despite India’s advantages in science and technology, they have invested little in cyber and electronic warfare capabilities, instead of investing in a nuclear and conventional arms race that they will surely lose.  India should instead look to its strengths, instead of trying to compensate for its weaknesses.  They would have a much better chance of deterring or denying by investing in defensive capabilities and in cyber and electronic warfare technologies.  If nothing else, India needs to bolster its survivable second-strike capability with nuclear subs. 

Our speaker critically discussed the strategic naiveté of Indian foreign policy elites.  But we found a severe discontinuity in his application of IR theory.  If his offensive military suggestions were followed, India would undoubtedly face a heightened security dilemma with China.  He simultaneously applies constructivist theories to Pakistan, and offensive realist theory to China, further evidencing the contradictory nature of his lecture.  India needs to think strategically about how to defend itself, but at the same time, the country faces the mother of all guns v butter dilemmas.  India is in a unique position as a developing democracy with severe security challenges.  If India is going to spend millions of rupees on its defenses instead of feeding its population, it should at least spend in smart, strategic areas that capitalize on its formidable strengths.     

Reporting for duty:

Riley Barnes & Laura Joost, MPIAs 2011

Failures in Democracy

I have always wanted to come to India not only because it has comparably splendid history to China, but also because it is the world’s most populous democracy. In early 1990s, a lot of people predicted that India will surpass China as the largest developing economy owing to its democracy and legal system. However, 20 years have passed, it turned out that China, which is ruled by dictatorship has achieved greater success than India.

In the past few days, I have learned about the history of democracy in India and how does it serve the poor. In 1947, India gained independence from Britain, thanks to Mahatma Gandhi’s national movement of non-violent civil disobedience, and in 1950, India became a republic with a new constitution, ensuring an elaborate parliamentary democracy. But I personally think that democracy has hampered progress of India.

What history demonstrates is that democracies should be introduced or developed only after economic take off; the early development of the United States had strong leadership and was already active in world markets from the start. Strong leadership can be the active form such as in Japan and Singapore, or passive as in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Any economy has to get up and running before much of anything else can be done. Active leadership means that the government takes an active role in directing and not just creating opportunity" for economic activity. The passive form is where the government ensures that impediments to  economic developments such as bureaucracy and corruption are effectively removed. In return, there will be sacrifice of economic efficiency.

India received its democracy before it had developed a strong economic base, and because of that, it can hardly take off economically. Democracy did not have to be inevitable in 1947. It came to India at the wrong time. The financial support of the infrastructure of democracy in a first world industrialized nation is daunting, not to mention to maintain the infrastructure of a democracy in an already poor nation. A large percentage of a developing nation’s financial resources are spent on “party” support to campaign expenses rather than on producing goods or even providing other services which could be marketed.

In addition, the people who have been chosen by the Indian people are not educated enough and capable enough to run the government properly. In some sense, because of the way the system is built, lots of regulations and formalities come into picture. The bureaucracy leads to delays.

Democracy does not work in India. That is not to say that the fault lies with the idea of democracy. It is
because its necessary conditions are not met.

--Bei Chen, MPIA '12

How Can We Help the Poor?

Back at JNU, our group was delighted to listen and participate in two very distinct lectures.  During the first lecture, Professor Gupta presented the question, "How does a democracy serve the poor?"  It's fascinating that in all of our lectures, the poor has been a foundation for many of our discussions.  It is surely difficult not to notice the unfortunate beggar or the dirty children in the street.  It can break your heart – and it usually does.  However, our professional roles as policymaker and analysts will study why a development of growth can exist in poverty, like it does here in India. Despite the facts and discussion of private versus public schools – our main policy requirement is how can we make a difference?  Gupta discussed three interesting solutions on many fronts: seeking foreign collaboration, learning from Europe's past successes and failures, and making sure policies are adequate for society and not just the poor.  


 The afternoon session shifted gears as our new guest lecturer; Professor Mahalakshmi, dove into India's diverse history.  As the United States usually claims the role of a cultural melting pot, the title seems more fitting with the state of India.  The many foreign influences, languages, regions, peoples, and religions all combine into the rich and unique history of this great nation.  There are many comparisons that can also be attributed to the United States.  As policy professionals, we must realize the impact that India can have on the United States and vice versa.    


Time to spread out the laundry on the bed – because it's too cold to dry….  


 Ben Maddox '11 & Steven Snodgrass '11

The Democratic Legacy of Nehru and Gandhi

Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Museum 

Today we had classes at the Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Museum and Library where we learned about Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru’s backgrounds and their nfluence on Indian nationalism. Nehru was India’s first prime minster and was responsible for the ‘Nehruvian’ consensus: that India would be a sovereign democracy moving toward capitalism.

Our first lecture of the morning was given by Aditya Mukherjee, the Director of JNIAS and coordinator of our program. He spoke on India’s development strategy since independence, focusing on India’s political economy and leaders who enabled both democratic and economic reforms. For example, Gandhi saw democracy as the best protector of the well-being of the poor and as the best way to improve India’s prosperity. Gandhi believed in their innate political savvy and their dignity as human beings, adopting a very atypical respect for the poor and uneducated masses. We found Gandhi unusual because in many ways because he was a groundbreaking intellectual, but he was also extremely in touch with people- two characteristics that do not often coincide.

Gandhi and Nehru exhibited great self-awareness in their contributions to Indian democracy. In particular, they recognized the maxim that there is ‘no room for individual heroes’ in democracy. The two leaders purposely empowered the masses as much as they could, which was important and rare in a budding democracy. So often, when colonial regimes transition, whoever grabs power first spends most of their time trying preserve their power. In contrast, Gandhi and Nehru constantly spoke and acted in ways to curb their own power and welcome alternate ideas. Gandhi’s principles sunk into the populace so much that service and freedom became values. One mechanism of Indian democratization was students who voluntarily moved out into villages to serve and remained there the rest of their lives.

India is remarkable among post-colonial societies because it adopted the best parts of British democracy. In other parts of the world, the colonizing power became so demonized during the transition process, little hope was left for democracy. The Indians were able to simultaneously harbor two very opposite desires: one to end colonial domination and the other to recognize the imperative for independence. India’s success lies in the fact that these leaders chose economic arguments instead of inciting racial, religious or partisan fervor.

We were also impressed by the attitudes Nehru and Gandhi adopted after spending so much time in prison. Nehru was imprisoned nine times for a total of 3,262 days, and Gandhi for even longer. We’ve read many stories about how prison time radicalized Muslim intellectuals across the Middle East. It is striking how Nehru and Gandhi’s prison time made them staunchly advocate peaceful dissent. Perhaps this is because as Dr. Goswami puts it, “The British were civil in their evil.” We think the emergence of civil disobedience as a social movement tool and political mechanism could also springs from India’s culture, especially the peaceful Hindu traditions.

In the second lecture on building a democratic and secular society, Mridula Mukherjee gave multiple examples of how Gandhi and Nehru educated Indians on how democracy works. Gandhi led by example, even defending his political opponents within the Indian National Congress. He realized the importance of free debate, saying “unless this simple rule is observed, we will never evolve democracy.” Mukherjee also stressed the importance of arriving at democracy by democratic means. India’s democratization represented the will of the masses. This speaks to the idea that democratization cannot be imposed because to do so would be to corrupt democracy with autocracy. Rather, as in India, it must be supported from the local level up. It seems to us that a leader with the skill and vision of a Nehru or a Gandhi would really help in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The day ended with a tour of the library and archives. There, we got to handle photos of Prime Minister Nehru with U.S. presidents and see microfilm of British newspapers the day after India’s independence. We also viewed a film on how Gandhi’s teachings on civil disobedience inspired peaceful civil liberty revolutions throughout the 21^st century.

--Laura Joost & Diane Raub, MPIAs 2011

--Jawaharlal Nehru

Informal, Inc.

Traveling around the streets of Dehli, you will find small enterprises set-up on the sidewalks by locals. These entrepreneurs make their livings selling a variety of goods from hair-cuts to fake Kama Sutras.  Development specialists term this economic activity as the informal sector because this economic activity is not counted in the GDP and employment measures, but provide 'unofficial' income to the poor.  Unlike the black market, the informal sector activity would not be considered illegal in the United States or other developed countries, except for their lack of permit or meeting of safety standards.  While many lesser developed countries have a substantial informal sector presence, India's 'brand' of the informal sector tends to be more aggressive in their sales pitch and offer a more varied selection of goods.  Here, children come up to us after dinner hugging us and trying to use sympathy to peddle necklaces for the older boy standing a few feet away.  Each tourist location have men continuously hounding foreigners to buy their post-cards and flutes. For locals, small haircutting and shaving stations are set-up with chairs and mirrors or peanuts toasted on an open flame are scooped off the sidewalk and sold.

At the surface, the informal sector seems to be a completely beneficial way for the poor to fill a need within a market and earn an income.  However, this sector posses a few issues.  Why are these children out at all times of the day, talking to strangers and remaining unsupervised? How can these vendors be able to achieve sustainable growth for their business when they only have two hands to hold their inventory? Many of these entrepreneurs are marketed as nuisance or a government failure to provide decent jobs for its citizens, but in many cases, they represent an opportunity for the government or private enterprise to incorporate more of these low wage earners into the mainstream market. One way to achieve this goal includes developing a market place for these sellers.    These markets alleviate the coordination failure of small entrepreneurs of having goods from their villages and homes and not being able to sell them in a secure fashion.  Today, we went to a market that accomplished this; the Delli Haat market welcomes hundreds of rural and urban craftswomen and men to sell their goods directly to the buyers.  We saw a variety of goods being sold at this market from across all Indian states, which in turn, allowed us to see the greater diversity of goods that India can produce.  A draw back of these markets is that they do not solve the issue of the begging children or harassing men; these markets are simply too small to accommodate everyone.  Longer term solutions need to be implemented, such as day care programs and sufficient education, to handle to large scale effects of the informal sector in India.

This strong entrepreneurial spirit of getting out there and trying to make a living out of nothing can empower a nation as it has with the United States.  If the Indian government can harness and incorporate this spirit more into its economy, India can help further develop its crusade of a democratic path to development without leaving this informal sector behind.

--Michele Breaux, MPIA 2011

A Sunday Afternoon in Delhi

 Today was a spectacular day in Delhi.  In the morning we attended mass at St. Luke's Catholic Church (which the U.S. Ambassador attends), then traveled to Purana Qila, had lunch, and then went to Lakshmi Narayan Mandir and Lodi Gardens.    


St. Luke's is the largest Catholic parish in Delhi, but has the smallest facilities.  The priest said about 2,000 families attend St. Luke's yet the building is only a little larger than the standard American living room.  The architecture outside is very Indian, but the inside looks like a Hispanic parish.  Tinsel streamers were hung from the ceilings and the artwork was very colorful.  Collaborations of culture and religion are apparent in that some women of the church wore traditional dress and head covers. The mass schedule also included services in four different languages, showing that India is a place of many tongues.   We plan on attending the church next Sunday in hopes of also attending with the American Ambassador who attends frequently.   


Our next stop, Purana Qila, was a citadel built by the Mughal Emperor Humayun.  Although this place is now in ruins, it is still very beautiful.  The walls are about 30 feet tall and stretch for a mile and part of the citadel is surrounded by what seems to be a moat.  Inside the walls, the grounds are quiet and unlike most of India, there is plenty of free space.  When exploring the ruins we found that you could go into them and at one point, some of us found a hallway that went underground to what looked like a secret room.  Surprisingly, people also live in the walls of Purana Qila!  There was laundry hanging up and a police station inside.  This site felt very authentic in that they still serve as shelter to the locals and that it is apparent that government funds have not been utilized to preserve the establishment as it would need to be to appeal to tourists.  Purana Qila seems to be a hot date spot for Indian couples as we saw many couples having romantic picnics on the lawns, fifty six to be exact.  However, most amazing was Purana Qila's similarity to Humayun's Tomb in terms of architecture and the symbols used.    


Once we were out of Purana Qila, we hopped on to Rickshaws and traveled back to Panera Park.  There we had lunch at HaveMore, a Indian restaurant that plays western music and was very delicious.  This restaurant was a bit more up-scale at around 800 rupees a meal.  Many of us tried pickled onions for the first time!  They were especially good with the sauce paired with them.  However, it was the activities that took place outside the restaurant that peaked my interest.  After lunch, many of us had the opportunity to sit next to a snake charmer.  He had two snakes, one that looked like a large Garter snake that was obviously not poisonous and a cobra.  Those who sat down were made to wrap the non-poisonous snake around their neck while the snake charmer opened the basket and started charming the cobra.  Then you were asked to hold the basket with the cobra inside.  It was quite an experience for those that decided to participate!   


 Our next stop was Lakshmi Narayan Mandir, which is a lovely Hindu temple.  Sadly, we were not allowed to take pictures inside because people were worshiping.  The inside was gorgeous and it's amazing how detailed Hindus are with their idols.  Each god or goddess was clothed in real clothing and people were laying yellow and orange marigolds at their feet.  What made the trip even more interesting was Dr. Goswami's commentary about the Hindu faith. He explained to us the significance of each god or goddess in the temple and the legends of how they came to be.  We also learned that many temples put special emphasis on one god, despite Hindus being polytheistic.  This was also apparent in the Lakshmi Narayan Mandir because the temple had a separate building about half the size of the main temple that housed one idol, while all the others were housed in the main temple.  Dr. Goswami explained that emphasis is put on gods, usually by geographical region and south India and north India tend to emphasize different gods.   What was particularly interesting upon exploration were the Hindu quotations on the wall of the temple.  Much emphasis is put on wisdom and the pursuit of knowledge yet does not translate into education policy in India.    


The last stop of the day was Lodi Gardens.  This is a beautiful park with the ruins of a mausoleum and a mosque.  However, our first stop at the park was playing cricket with some locals.  Some of us had the opportunity to take a turn at bat, which is much harder than it looks despite the width of a cricket bat.  From there we walked around the mosque and the mausoleum, which were very lovely.  We were able to climb through windows and unto the roof of the mosque and many of us took pictures on and from the rooftop.  We also had the pleasure of seeing acting lessons take place, even those this scared some of us initially because the man was acting desperate and depressed.  However, we watched his show and gave him a standing ovation.  After a short stroll around the park we were on our way back to Pamposh.   




This was a very exciting day in Delhi and all the architecture and history we've seen has made me very curious to learn the history of this enchanting place.  Class starts tomorrow, so hopefully we will get a better understanding about what we are seeing, which will make the adventure that much more interesting!    


Sarah Broussard 2011

Naya Saal Mubaarak!

As posted yesterday, 2011 started with a bang! We took January 1 slowly, exploring the neighborhood around Pamposh, the sites of Delhi, and another shopping market. After a hearty American breakfast, one group headed off to see the sites of New Delhi, including Gandhi’s memorial, while another group ventured downstairs to Domino’s, across the park to buy scarves, and into a market to buy tailored suits. We even managed to ride in traffic next to two elephants and two camels! Quite a sight, considering what we are used to outside of car windows at home. We also dealt with beggars at our windows – another sign that asking for money is an occupation here, instead of a last resort.

Casey and Heather were particularly struck by the deviations within the shopping and eating experiences here. Walking into the restaurant, at least 28 employees were working behind the counter at Domino’s to serve the no more than 15 restaurants patrons. Then, at the market, the employees of the suit shop were willing to bend over backwards to make our experiences more pleasant (offering water, tea, coffee, anything we wanted). The service culture here is drastically different from what we are used to in the States – the tailors are coming to our hotel to fit the suits! They go out of their way to make all transactions a positive experience.

We ended our day with a trip to an Australian bar (Americans, in India, at an Aussie bar?!). There, we were able to reflect on our first week in India and discuss with Dr. Gawande and Dr. Goswami the intricacies of the Indian culture. We discussed the future of India as a global power, and remarked about what obstacles India has to overcome in order to compete successfully with countries around the world. Currently, infrastructure and education are lacking fortitude, and these areas must be addressed in order to further develop India.

While today ended up being a day of catch-up before we start classes on Monday, it was not without the experiences that have become inherent to everyday here. We continue to be struck by the similarities and differences between our two cultures, and look forward to being able to further explore these at JNU.

--Heathery Gregory, MPSA 2011 & Casey Braswell, MPIA 2012

Mel's in India: Shopping

Mel's in India: Shopping: "Today was quite a relaxing and fun day. In the morning a bunch of girls went to a salon to see what they offered. We ended up st..."

Indian New Years Eve

Each day here in Delhi is somehow better than the one before. Yesterday we did several of my favorite things: getting pampered, shopping, and night clubbing. Each was a cultural experience in its own unique way. Some things were the same, some were completely different, and some transcended cultural barriers.
Four of us went for massages at a spa across the park from our hotel. We were greeted with water to drink in a comfortable waiting area. Ashton and Ben were escorted off to the men's area and Elizabeth and I to the women's. We were instructed to put our things in a locker and change into our white waffle robes and slippers. But there was a twist in the old favorite spa routine—disposable bikinis made from the same paper cloth we use as grocery store shopping bags at home. We donned our robes and shower caps and waited in the lounge for instructions…with 8 or so masseuses hovering together watching our every move, seemingly fascinated by the novelty of having foreigners in their company. We couldn't understand what most of them were saying, but gestures are certainly an international language. For the next 90 minutes we steamed, got massages, and took warm showers, emerging relaxed and happy. But we understood the necessity for the paper bikini—not only did they correspond with India's more conservative women's clothing practices for communal steam time, they covered us during the stretches during our massages (which seemed more like movements a trainer  would do at the gym rather than a massage therapist at the salon.)

After lunch, we all piled into the JNU bus (to which we affectionately refer as "Penelope") and headed to Connaught Place for some shopping. We wandered through the Emporium and then made our way through rows and rows of stalls across the street. I started on the fourth floor of the Emporium and worked my way down, picking up gifts for my family. There are wares from cottage industries all over India sold at fair prices—both to the end consumer and the producers. Each area has its own register, and shoppers are meant to leave the items to be purchased at the counter in exchange for a receipt. Once they've gotten receipts from each department, customers bring them down to the cashier who rings up the items on the receipts; then they go over to delivery and pick up shopping bags from each department. I picked up several goodies to bring home, but the best part about this store was the fabric—intricate silk patterns, bold colors of raw silk, thick cotton weaves—all from different regions around India. I bought 3 meters each of silks in bright purple, a golden orange, and a blue pattern for a friend as well as a light periwinkle and gold pattern and a gorgeous baby blue raw silk for myself to be made into a dress. Working with the tailor and the fabric salesmen was quite an experience. I drew a design and tried to explain the sash concept and pockets which couldn't be captured as easily on paper as my v-neck, v-back, A-line drawing. Elizabeth and I had fun communicating with them and making decisions about the dress. I can't wait to go back for a fitting next Thursday after class. Then we went with Dr. Gawande to buy pashminas. That was the highlight of my day. We found a store that had the right weight of cashmere wool—we were taken upstairs to be shown "the good stuff." Dr. Gawande taught us how to judge cashmere to see how pure or how much of a blend it is. If the scarf is pure cashmere or close, you can slip a ring over a corner and it should glide easily down to the other corner. With the best cashmere, the ring will fall by itself—pass over the pashmina from end to end, the entire rectangle of woven goats wool slipping easily through a circle the size of my pinky finger. The ones we found were pretty darn close. Satisfied with the quality, we looked at several colors, spreading each pashmina out to get a good look at it. Burgandies, creams, blues, purples, oranges, beiges, blacks, teals, all feather light and goosedown warm. Rs. 4,500 later, we were invited to enjoy a cup of chai tea with the Kashmiri owner who offered to let us come back and talk politics with him. I hope we have time (can MAKE time) to go soak up his perspective on the conflict over his homeland.

After going back to the hotel and gussying up a bit, we headed over to  UrbanPind where we had booked tickets to ring in the new year. The club was just like any at home—dark but with flashing disco lights, lounge areas for bottle service, not enough bar space, and not enough washrooms to accommodate the number of guests—but for one difference. The music was a mix of Bollywood, techno, and American pop. This was only fun to us—after all, dancing is similar everywhere in that it's just a bunch of bouncing, arm flailing, and twisting to the beat of the music. Lots of us met our fellow club goers who ranged from those native to Delhi to Afghanis to Swedes. (We told the Afghanis we were from Canada…) At midnight, the lights went dark for a few seconds and then confetti spilled down over us. There were no noisemakers, countdowns, or kitchy New Years paraphernalia (crowns and such) and considerably less cheers-ing than I was used to. But it was a great start to 2011. Especially with the war hymn at 12:05. The rest of the club probably thought we were crazy (that may be partially true…), but we had a great time swaying and yelling "Saw Varsity's horns off!

It was a great day with lots of relaxing, haggling with vendors, and celebrating—a perfect close to the year.