Many Indians — regardless of whether they have studied, worked and lived in India, abroad, or both — are too critical about their country. Self-criticism is a very healthy exercise if it is factual and not overdone — for example, by feeding exaggerated stories to foreigners.
One can be self-deprecating for one of two contradictory reasons. Self-deprecation can emerge from a genuine awareness of weaknesses. At the other extreme, it can be a sign of confidence, that one is strong enough even to admit to natural follies.
However, at times, it is also necessary for us to recognise, and speak about, the strengths of our nation. These strengths can become even more apparent against the backdrop of economic and political developments that take place in other regions of the world. The present debt crisis in the European Union is one such occasion — and that is what has prompted me to write this article.
In the context of the crisis facing the European Union (EU) due to the debt mountain built up by Greece — as well as Portugal — it is interesting to compare the structure and functioning of the EU with that of our own Indian Union. The two are similar in that each of them is a union of states — unlike the US, which is a truly integrated United States.
The difference between the EU and the US is in the allocation of key functions. In the US the key functions of defence (external and internal security), monetary (currency) policy and major fiscal (taxation) policy are all in the hands of the federal government. In contrast to this, in the European Union the defence forces are separate for each country, and they function together under a multinational command only with the US as a partner in what is called the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) — which is dominated by the US. This special military was set up to counter any attack by the Soviet Union and its internal structure was specially designed to prevent any possibility of Germany emerging on its own as a dominant military power at any future date — and, in the fears of the founders, initiating a World War III as it did in the two previous World Wars. And Nato has effectively performed this role for the last 70 years.
Now let us compare the characteristics of the European Union to those of the Indian Union. The dominant functions of defence, external affairs, monetary policy and main fiscal policy are the prerogative of the Indian Union. The individual states, the municipal corporation in each metropolis and the village panchayats have their own rights to impose local taxes to meet their own expenses towards policing and maintenance of local administration, law and order, etc.
This is indeed a unique achievement of the founders of the Indian Constitution for the following reasons. First, unlike the US, which has one dominant language (English) and one dominant religion (Christianity), India is a country which is divided into a multitude of constituents. They speak different languages. They practise different religions. Even within the dominant religion of Hinduism, divisions on caste lines can at times supersede religious barriers. Several people tend to retain their caste affiliation even after conversion from Hinduism to other more recent religions — for example, Nadar Christians vs Brahmin Christians in Tamil Nadu or Syrian Christians vs “convert” Christians in Kerala, and so on.
Even stronger than religious differences are the differences in language loyalties. A Keralite Christian like me has more in common with a Hindu (whether Nair or Menon or Pillai) from Kerala, then with a Christian from Bengal or even the neighbouring state of Tamil Nadu. Language tends to determine one’s choices and preferences more than one’s religion.
It is in some ways a miracle that the Indian Union of states has held together and even got stronger over the last seven decades. Over this period several of the states in the Union have had different parties in power. Meanwhile, coalitions of varied parties have exercised power at the level of the Central Government. Yet the country has moved forward steadily. Yes, perhaps more slowly than its potential. But considering the internal disparities this indeed is an achievement that India can be proud of.
The writer is a former chairman of Hindustan Unilever
