Public Diplomacy in Information Age: Towards the Idea of Soft Power!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Over the years, image of diplomatic community has been largely driven by what American Editor Caskie Stinnett said, “A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that you actually look forward to the trip.” The times are changing, they would certainly do. To describe what lies ahead for Diplomacy of the 21^st century we will be guided by what Robert Frost said in 19^th century, “A diplomat is a man who always remembers a woman's birthday but never remembers her age.” In understanding shift in these two subtle quotes lays the emerging transition of diplomacy. Today we are debating whether death of Ambassador, of Foreign Correspondent and of an Editor is imminent or not. The embassies across the world are reinventing to engage the national citizens, Virtual Communities of respective Diasporas and groups mobilizing Public Opinion on vast cyberspace. So where we are heading? Is it really a border-less world as some religious proponents of globalization think? On the contrary, are we living in multiple concentric borders of social, economic and cultural spheres within the sovereign nation state which itself are subject to the vicious campaign of state and non-state actors through the strategies of war, humanitarian intervention and latest being the Public Diplomacy? 

Public Diplomacy is a seamless web which travels across different exercises of Public Affairs, Public Relations and Public Understanding of the Foreign Policy. Considering this phenomena thriving on democratic virtues, governments across the world representing the public which elect them to office cannot move on to exclude the massive energy, wisdom and emotions of the people they rule. On the other side, governments cannot afford to lose the opportunity to influence, engage and interact with the citizens of foreign country in which the foreign policy is being directed at. It is assumed that in the modern world like us, people should have freedom of expression which in a way includes right to know, right to disagree and right to share the ideas, goods and civilization values for which they stand for. So, relevance, interest and comprehension of the issues surrounding the livelihood of the citizens are taken into account to sustain the survival of the strategic priorities of the nations they represent. This process helps governments to connect to the key institutions, communities and nations in the outer world to form the core operational framework of the Public Diplomacy in the Information Age. 

Is Public Diplomacy another name for Propaganda? Hard power is exercised and soft power is evoked. If we are to understand the concept of soft power can we neglect how the hard power is exercised? End of cold war created the hope that now the Peace will prevail. Instead, we witnessed wars in Iraq, Kosovo, Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Georgia and at many other places. Increasingly states are using the ‘force multiplier ‘of humanitarian intervention to achieve the goals embedded in the strategic doctrine. Still, nations are feeling the urgent need to reach out to the civil society which constitutes the Public Opinion. So, increasingly engaging this significant public opinion which can create Public Pressure through mass media, social media, social platforms, institutional think tanks, academic institutions and cultural exchanges can certainly change the way foreign policy is conducted; from hard to soft ways. 

Governments are considering that Public diplomacy is public good for ‘Public Good.’ The success of it depends on clarity and persuasion of the information and argument. Challenge lies in real time interaction, advocacy and communication of the facts. We are witnessing dynamic media seeking relentless cooperation from the governments for true, comprehensive and sensitive feedback from time to time. We are flooded with the hyperactive mobilization of the anger and frustration due to the sudden events recorded and proliferated through Facebook, Youtube, Orkut, LinkedIn, and MySpace etc. World has witnessed enormous increase in mobile users.

 After developed countries, developing and least developed countries are fast catching up with the internet penetration. Direct to home technology is giving the citizens of the world the ease to access any news channel and source of dynamic developments at their remote doorsteps. There are more journalists outside media organization in the form of citizen journalists. It is interesting to note that in the times when Corporate India contend that privacy laws are being subverted by publishing tapes related to 2G scandal, in the outer world Jullian Assenge has stood for Whistle-blowing and went ambitiously ahead to expose the secret diplomatic conversation which he believed was within public interest. 

Well, Public Diplomacy is no abstract term. It is the same traditional the foreign policy practice with new packaging. It is about listening. After all, listening to the grievances, aspirations and thoughts of the people inside and outside the country is hallmark of this engagement. It is about planning the capacity building to anticipate and response to the events in the making. It is about avoiding the delays; because delayed message is lost message. To identify the source of the information creating the tensions and thus to locate the human and other logistical resources to respond to that information flow is the priority in this exercise. It is about advocacy and statesmanship. It is about promotion and strengthening of cultural bonds between two countries. It is about fostering the mechanisms of exchanges whether in commerce, education, research and development. It is about state supported news dissemination.
 
Even though scholars believe that Public Diplomacy term was invented by USA diplomat Edmund Gullion, it is noteworthy to note what legendary US reporter Edward Murrow said: “Truth is the best propaganda and lies are the worst. To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; to be credible we must be truthful. It is as simple as that.” Murrow worked in London for few years during the years of Second World War. Historians say that Murrow was only foreign correspondent who was allowed to report war from the rooftops when Germans were bombing London. Some even guess that Churchill deliberately supported Murrow to get the point across to USA so as to compel them to join war at the earliest. 

So, pyramid of Public Diplomacy comprises Advocacy, Profile raising and Relationship building. The new context of PD includes new players: International Organizations, Non Governmental Organisations, CEOs, Non State Actors, new social media, Scientists, Artists, Vice Chancellors of reputed Universities, Authors of legendary literature, thinkers, social activists, innovators, environmentalists and everyone who can influence this communication for definite purpose. When India launches campaign ‘!ncredible !ndia’, the credibility of the image of Indian society which can host, which can sustain the values of liberty, fraternity and equality with wide diversity of language, regions and cultures is at the stake. There is new vocabulary of Branding being cooked up outside there. But it comes with the emphasis on openness in sophisticated attitude, global perspective and political behavior. The new multilateral partnerships are being forged on the old limits of bilateral cooperation. New theory of soft power is being tested in the context of uncompromisable and unforgettable hard power reality. 

So, which are the things which matter for Public Diplomacy? Public Opinion matters because that holds the capacity to shape the social changes, create demand for particular action by the national government. Communicators need to spend more and more resources for that. Listening matters. Diplomat, bureaucracy surely do not have most answers. The expertise in the open society must be consulted and asked for advice. Transparency in the transactions of the communication is must prerequisite. Timing and coordination of delivery of the messages is most significant. Public diplomacy is all about relationships, so individuals matter. Connecting individual to address their interests can create stronger bonds rather than just harping on the rhetoric of power.

Diasporas matter because they are the virtual countries outside the sovereign boundaries. They represent the values the native land stand for. They propagate the assets, strengths, food habits, heritage and culture of the country they come from. They carry out messages. They are the biggest broadcasters of this diplomacy. Initiatives in the information dissemination matter because lack of it may create confusion and may lead toward creeping in of rival point of view which may not be of the interest of the country.

 Understanding, respecting and accommodating the spirit of dissent matters because it gives a strong message of democratic ethos beyond the borders. Dissent represents plurality, diversity of views in best way. Celebration of dissent is a best statesmanship. Mutuality matters because it leads towards reinforcing sympathetic and sensitive recognition of co-existence. Partnerships matters, by all means. Issues of development cannot be solved without partnerships. Policy matters as they are the backbone of what governments stand for. Small stories of the people interest matter because they magnify the realities of the rude world in a delicate manner. After all, eventually success matters, so efficient execution of the programs, initiatives and debate of the issues of interest to the concerned stake holders. 

Economic development, education opportunities, relation building across the borders, business ventures, transnational alliance for R&D are some of the powerful elements of Public Diplomacy keeps going. Architecture, Aesthetics and Beauty of the ancient, medieval and modern heritage remain the icon of this engagement. Pristine nature and exotic environment in the tropical countries are appealing for the tourism so as to consolidate the gains of being undeveloped so long. Emerging cities based on success of free market mechanism are en- cashing the fruits of globalization so as to attract talent and investment for their own sustenance.

 The discussion about Public Diplomacy inevitably leads towards that of quest of soft power. The term of Soft Power is coined by Joseph Nye who originally contributed to the idea of neoliberal institutionalism. Soft power has quality of attractiveness. It embraces media to explain change. It projects moral forces like His Holiness Dalai Lama, Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King and others. When exercising hard power is becoming extremely hard roots of the soft power can be discovered in the culture people of the country live. In conveying the status of soft power, it is more important to express “Who we are...” rather than “What we want to show...” Other point of views also exists. Some believe that power cannot be soft at all. Soft power is a matter of projecting influence of self. ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ is a better way to put it. People anyway interact with each other, across the borders. But governments have the resources to achieve it in smooth manner. French invented the Public Diplomacy through celebration of their culture. Today Public Diplomacy seems more than relevant when there are ideologies are declining and state speech is becoming more and more blur. It may not substitute traditional diplomacy but it will certainly lead towards creating the vision of the new world in coming days ahead of us. 

Public diplomacy is not only about the conversation about the issues outside the country to people inside country or vice versa. Existence, sustenance, progress of the country depends on the country`s ability to address to the core pressing issues of development inside the country. So when NY Times reported that in the decade when USA should have been chasing China to compete with it, USA was chasing Al-Qaida. When President Obama comes India, biggest foreign policy issue for him was not nuclear energy or permanent seat in Security Council for India but the jobs, health care and the tax cuts back in the country. Everything is related to everything. So, when we attribute the mess in J&K to Pakistan, chaos in North East to Bangladesh & China, war waged by Maoists to Red corridor going through Nepal and further; are we convinced that we have solved all the domestic challenges and it is only famous ‘Foreign Hand’ which is involved in the conspiracy towards destabilizing India. Real Public Diplomacy starts with listening, talking to domestic speakers, dissent, anger and dissatisfaction about government and nation at large the constitution of which starts with the words “We, The People of India...!”

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Knowledge and Diversity: Founding Principles of Partnership between Democracy and Economy !!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high
Where knowledge is free
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments
By narrow domestic walls
Where words come out from the depth of truth
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way
Into the dreary desert sand of dead habit
Where the mind is led forward by thee
Into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.”

                                                                                   

Above lines by Tagore has become epitome of the existence of the mission towards which have to relentlessly strive for. Let us remember these words to understand the it`s relation with the diversity. “Plurality of thinking is the bedrock of the Indian experiment of democracy and the successful implications for the diverse communities for their co-existence in India in last sixty years."  Dr. Abid Hussain  was speaking at the Nehru Memorial Lecture at JNU on 30th November 2010. He greatly engaged audience with the founding ideas of the perseverance in the quest of knowledge and tolerance in the search of harmony when we discuss Knowledge and Diversity in the Indian context. “It is the mind which propels us in the 21st century but it is the mindset which keeps us in the 15th century." He was asserting the crucial uncompromising position of the mindset of the coming generation when we deal with the emerging challenges and problems. 

 Three virtues remain pivotal for the sustained maintenance of experiment forged by Indian democracy:

A) Ability to recognize, assimilate, forge common bonds with the diverse opinions.

B) Ability to question the elderly schools of thoughts in a humble, mature and dignified way.

C) Ability to usher with the new interpretation of the classic common sense available in the history for the contemporary scenario.

Dr. Hussain greatly emphasized the significance of the place of the university like JNU for engaging in the ideas worthwhile for the conservation of the diversity and the creation, dissemination of new knowledge. He identified the role of students, researchers and scholars as being indispensable for the nation as a whole because they are away from the worldly obligations and responsibilities, which in a sense; limit the capacity to innovate the perspectives for the betterment of the situation in front of us. So, he appealed to the students to debate, question and initiate on their own for the dreams they deem useful for the coming times. After all, Empires of the future are empires of the Mind.  Dr. Hussain regretted that, in these days of globalization and proliferation of knowledge networks, it is the educated mind which is falling prey to the wrong beliefs and lies compared to the innocent and ignorant brains of the uneducated persons. So, it is the educated mind of the students which is going to rescue the sliding attention of the leaders who claim themselves to be at the helm of affairs.

While Dr. Hussain greatly focused on the role of university in a subtle way, a recent contemplation by Dr. Betteille (Béteille, André. Universities at the Crossroads. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.) greatly deals with this aspect of role of university in realizing the goal of Inclusion and the Knowledge creation.  

 While upholding the location of university he says, “The modern university provides a setting for a new kind of interchange not only between men and women but also among persons belonging to different castes and communities. The barriers of language, religion and caste can be overcome relatively easily in such settings, although here identity politics can also reinforce the boundaries between communities instead of softening them. No large and complex society can reconstitute itself without experiencing conflict and disorder, and if the universities appear embattled, it is partly because they are in the forefront of this reconstitution.” 

On the other hand, Dr. Andre greatly exposes the contradictions in the experiment of inclusion when it comes to Knowledge Creation. He says, “Pressures to accommodate new classes and communities have lead to rapid and sometimes reckless expansion of the institutions of the learning. While a modern university must strive actively and continuously to be socially inclusive, it must be academically discriminating in the treatment of its members. We cannot wish out of existence the real and pervasive tensions between the demands of social inclusiveness and those of academic excellence. The democratization of the Indian university has always lead to the unanticipated consequences for the pursuit of study and research. New undergraduate colleges, new postgraduate departments, and new universities have been opened without the consideration of the resources available for their proper functioning. Academic standards have been relaxed, sometimes abruptly and even arbitrarily, in the name of equality and justice through decisions taken outside the universities by persons with little experience or knowledge of science and scholarship.”

This year, India is celebrating the 150^th year of birth of legendary poet Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941). He was a transforming thinker and poet, educationist and cultural icon of not only Modern Bengal but also whole Indian subcontinent. He was poet of devotion, love, integration and nature; and has rare honor of scripting national anthems of two countries of India and Bangladesh. Dr. Narendra Jadhav, Member of Planning Commission, Govt. of India recently authored a book about the diversity of the poems Tagore`s genius gifted to this world. He said, “The lines  of Where the knowledge is free…song of Tagore should have been selected as National Anthem.” When we discuss the knowledge and diversity, the lines in the current national anthem Jana, Gana, Mana… by Rabindranath are true mirror of what he envisages about knowledge when he asserts that “Where the world has not been broken up into fragments, By narrow domestic walls.” 

As we move along, (There is arrogant fashion in this contemporary world to quip “ The world has moved on!”), we forget the legacies, diversities, heritage and rich plurality of thoughts we inherit. Rabindranath again in his cautionary voice alerts us:

“Time is endless in thy hands, my lord.
There is none to count thy minutes.
Days and nights pass and ages bloom and fade like flowers. Thou knowest how to wait.
Thy centuries follow each other perfecting a small wild flower.
We have no time to lose, and having no time, we must scramble for our chances. We are too poor to be late.
And thus it is that time goes try, while I give it to every querulous man who claims it, and thine altar is empty of all offerings to the last.
At the end of the day I hasten in fear lest thy gate be shut; but if I find that yet there is time.”

(Gitanjali, 82.)

tThitBottom of Form

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buck stops here: Of the Media, for the Media & by the Media!!!

In the Dark Corridors of Power!!!

Before he Indian democracy readies itself to weather from the shocks and storms of having failed to understand the gravity of scandals unearthed about ‘Paid News’ cancered around the country and further from the “Radia tape leak controversy”, another great leak has come to uncloak The USA Diplomatic cables through “Wikileaks”. When I recently watched “All The President`s Men, the great epic narrative on the exposing of “Watergate Scandal”, I could not stop myself from watching that movie again and again. The kind of exemplary courage and outstanding determination with which Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward have worked relentlessly to fight the mighty Richard Nixon administration`s effort to defeat the journalistic spirits is unmatchable in contemporary history. It is significant to remember that entire Washington Post management stood behind “Bernstein” so as to result in the perseverant pursuit of the investigation culminating in resignation of USA President.

When thought in the Indian context, what ails Indian media? Where is the investigative spirit? Has it vaporized in the LPG atmosphere post 1991? Or has it lost the steam due to the buoyancy it received from the “corporate-politics revolving doors” which are famous in western countries? To understand the appropriation of the Public Opinion the world renowned term has been “Manufacturing Consent.” Originally invented by American reporter and intellectual Walter Lippman. This term has been the hallmark of the characterization of the ‘Collusion between vested interests hosted by the powerful rulers across the world’ since then. To understand the intricacies of this phenomenon can we understand how the media engages with the problems of defining and by how ownership patterns of the media houses are entangled with multiple stakeholders? Can we understand this by analyzing the content comprehensively by carrying out content analysis, rigorous discourse analysis or any kind of other proven methodology; statistical or qualitative? Can we evolve the sound methodology to do that? These are the questions to which the research being done by Centre For Culture, Media & Governance (CCMG) Jamia Milia Islamia.

Lippman first identified the tendency of journalists to generalize about other people based on fixed ideas. He argued that people—including journalists—are more apt to believe "the pictures in their heads" than come to judgment by critical thinking. Humans condense ideas into symbols, he wrote, and journalism, a force quickly becoming the mass media, is an ineffective method of educating the public. Even if journalists did better jobs of informing the public about important issues, Lippmann believed "the mass of the reading public is not interested in learning and assimilating the results of accurate investigation." Citizens, he wrote, were too self-centered to care about public policy except as pertaining to pressing local issues. Lippmann saw the purpose of journalism as "intelligence work". Within this role, journalists are a link between policymakers and the public. A journalist seeks facts from policymakers which he then transmits to citizens who form a public opinion. In this model, the information may be used to hold policymakers accountable to citizens. This theory was spawned by the industrial era and some critics argue the model needs rethinking in post-industrial societies.”

Editorial bias: five filters

Herman and Chomsky's "propaganda model" describes five editorially-distorting filters applied to news reporting in mass media:

1.         Size, Ownership, and Profit Orientation: The dominant mass-media outlets are large firms which are run for profit. Therefore they must cater to the financial interest of their owners - often corporations or particular controlling investors. The size of the firms is a necessary consequence of the capital requirements for the technology to reach a mass audience.

2.         The Advertising License to Do Business: Since the majority of the revenue of major media outlets derives from advertising (not from sales or subscriptions), advertisers have acquired a "de-facto licensing authority". Media outlets are not commercially viable without the support of advertisers. News media must therefore cater to the political prejudices and economic desires of their advertisers. This has weakened the working-class press, for example, and also helps explain the attrition in the number of newspapers.

3.         Sourcing Mass Media News: Herman and Chomsky argue that “the large bureaucracies of the powerful subsidize the mass media, and gain special access [to the news], by their contribution to reducing the media’s costs of acquiring [...] and producing, news. The large entities that provide this subsidy become 'routine' news sources and have privileged access to the gates. Non-routine sources must struggle for access, and may be ignored by the arbitrary decision of the gatekeepers.”

4.         Flak and the Enforcers: "Flak" refers to negative responses to a media statement or program (e.g. letters, complaints, lawsuits, or legislative actions). Flak can be expensive to the media, either due to loss of advertising revenue, or due to the costs of legal defense or defense of the media outlet's public image. Flak can be organized by powerful, private influence groups (e.g. think tanks). The prospect of eliciting flak can be a deterrent to the reporting of certain kinds of facts or opinions.

5.         Anti-Communism: This was included as a filter in the original 1988 edition of the book, but Chomsky argues that since the end of the Cold War (1945–91), anticommunism was replaced by the "War on Terror", as the major social control mechanism.

Objectivity of Journalists & Independence and Diversity of news sources

If journalists are merely the link between the people and policy makers, then the line between the being journalistic about gathering information and lobbying for particular interest becomes very very blur. In the context of recent uproar about 2G Spectrum scam tapes leaks, it is worthwhile to note what Senior Journalist Swapan Dasgupta has to say, ““The relationship (between journalists and politicians), however, is based on understandings. The 'source' may tell you everything that has transpired in a crucial, closed-door meeting. The price of violating the understanding is future exclusion. To survive in political journalism you can't spit and run. Every political journalist develops a cosy relationship with sources. The relationship, however, is symbiotic. Politicians often ask us for information about developments in which they are not players. If you can't enlighten them without compromising your other sources, don't mislead them. Also sometimes it helps to say: "I don't know." Many journalists find this very difficult. (We should not be in illusion about)

A)    Journalists are habitually accustomed to boast about their contacts and their easy access to the homes of the high and mighty. This is plain vanity. Many of the Radia tapes are replete with boasts.

B)    Journalists often play courier between politicians. This isn't necessary but sometimes it helps to gather additional info. Equally, it may be a labour of love. It may suggest political bias/preference. But it doesn't necessarily imply corruption.

C)    Being in touch with lobbyists, PR companies and advocacy groups is part of the news gathering game. No one can be tarred for just being in touch with Radia who, after all, represented two big corporations. What, after all, is the difference between Radia and some NGOs. Aren't they all lobbyists?

D)   Arranging pre-scripted interviews of anyone breaks all media code of ethics. I know journos who tempt their subjects with assurances of a "soft" interview. But a pre-scripted interview with a dress rehearsal takes the biscuit.

E)    Hinting about the ability to 'fix' the judiciary suggests criminality. It is not journalism. It is as despicable as those business journalists who deliberately manipulate news to play the stock markets. Or those who use their police contacts to run a lucrative private practice.

F)    There are rotten eggs in the media basket. They must be discarded, if necessary through public pressure because the owners often wilfully turn a blind eye to their criminality in return for collateral favours.”

There is another scathing attack by senior sociologist Dipankar Gupta about the increasing trend in the media to rush towards unauthentic sources to retrieve information when other credible means are present around. He says, “Really, do politicians know more than experts on almost everything? On a few things, yes; but everything? Yet, judging from the proliferation of political hitmen on TV, it would appear that knowledge resides primarily in them. This not only politicizes matters unnecessarily, but, what is worse, viewers get a plethora of half-baked, calculated political opinions which are packaged as debate.”  (http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267564)

Damaging symptoms in Indian media...

Senior journalist Shoma Chaudhary, Editor (Features) Tehelka  affirms that “In a sense, the Radia tapes are as much a window into a sociological phenomenon born out of the peculiar power leavened corridors of Delhi as an exposé on the state of Indian media. The conversations in the tapes show a kind of moral flaccidity, a clouded vision born out of too much proximity, a kind of loose-tongued insincerity. The list of these serious issues is legion. One of the most damaging symptoms in Indian media today is its slavish relationship with corporate power. Political misconduct is often brought to book, corporate crime almost never. There are crippling structural reasons for this. In print, media must be the only business in the world that loses money on its selling price. Indians are willing to pay 50 for a packet of chips or a coffee but they baulk at paying that for a magazine or newspaper. Unless consumers of news train themselves to pay for truth-telling, they will always be hostaged to advertisers and vested corporate interests.” 

So where does the ownership issue hurts most. Sir Harold Evans, more than decade long Editor of The Sunday Times says, “There are any number of reasons to worry that the media is in crisis.

A)     There are ownerships that twist the news to fit their own political prejudices or commercial interests. No one can reasonably object to ownership expressing opinions in columns clearly designated as opinion, but reporters bring shame on themselves when they are accessories to the pollution of news columns. The governor of Louisiana in the ’30s had a colourful way of ridiculing the way the media moghul, Henry Luce, did this in his successful Time magazine. “He’s like a shoe store owner who stocks only the shoes to fit hisself.”

B)     There are laws conceived for good purposes that end up prohibiting disclosure in the public interest. Editors have a duty to resist, as world press hero Arun Shourie did in fighting all the way to India’s Supreme Court to defend The Indian Express report on the Bhagalpur blinding, winning a victory for all Indian journalism.

C)      There is understandable concern in print media about the way the internet is eating into core print revenues, which newspapers and magazines need to cover foreign news and undertake risky and expensive investigations. It is a serious issue, particularly when websites have not yet achieved the revenues to fill the gap. There are some excellent websites (disclosure: my wife edits The Daily Beast), but the internet is also a vehicle for an unverified flow of messages, with falsehood masquerading as fact in cyberspace.”  (http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267583)

Ultimately, is the access to truth is so easy? Noam Chomsky has been articulating since decades that so called liberal media are busy in covering up the establishment. Same goes with the subtle and delicate analysis by Pankaj Mishra. He says, “The misty idealism that surrounds the word ‘democracy’ can make it as much an ideological smokescreen as ‘free trade’ was in the 19th century, covering up a host of cruel but institutionalized imbalances of power and opportunities. Unlike authoritarianism, its grand formal structures—parliaments, a ‘free’ press and the judiciary—help prevent any thorough examination of systemic corruption and violence. Special interpretative tools are needed to go beyond the obvious, and cut through cliches. But they seem beyond the reach of the average foreign correspondent in India.” (http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?267569)

So, to use the popular parlance, “Where does the buck stops?”

A recent interview Doyen of Indian investigative journalism, Mr. Arun Shaouri gave to Karan Thapar throws sunlight on many of the complex issues discussed above. (http://ibnlive.in.com/shows/Devil%27s+Advocate.html) He says that, “The challenge is to protect the independence of the media in the times when media has no longer remained the sacred fourth estate. But, he says, we have to do without letting the atrocities and invasions of other institutions to do themselves. So way forward is more liberal debate, interaction, information exchange about the allegations being leveled about the allegations, grey areas and the seamless web of the greed journalist are vulnerable to. So, challenge is we have to keep going consistently commenting on each other`s performances. Print on electronic, electronic on internet and internet on both of them.” My take is this kind of self regulatory watch will be real revolving door of enlightenment for Indian media and press at large; rather than allowing extra-media authorities to strangulate the proud neck of “Journalism of Courage.”

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------

"Power to ati jati rahati hain, lekin logonke dil me jagah banana, unke liye kam karna sabse badi bat hain !" --- Nitish Kumar

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed,

And everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity."

--- From ‘The Second Coming’ by W.B. Yeats

Above lines have haunting relevance for contemporary international geopolitical upheaval. After witnessing two world wars, the urge of mankind was to avoid another catastrophe. After going through blood shedding pages of history, it reaffirms centuries old adage ‘The only lesson we learn from history that we don`t learn from history.’ The journey of mankind after two devastating world wars is so tragic that total number of civilians killed in civil war and conflicts thereafter outweigh the deaths and causalities in both the world wars. Then world has never stopped watching the cycles of violence repeating again and again due to mistakes and deliberate interventions of superpowers complemented due to failure of international community and institutions like United Nations to enforce peace and prevent conflicts. 

What is the notion of power, or for better reference to the current debate and dust of applause about emerging or emerged India, what does it really mean by 'superpower'? Is it mere array of strategic/geopolitical strengths and assets or is it ability to survive the challenges domestically about education, health, food security, cutting edge science and technology research, resilience in the crisis, value system of the societies we are living in and principles of the societies still who are emerging in the form of our young  minds and younger aspirations and youngest skilled/unskilled human resource in the coming world. Institute of Defense Studies and Analysis recently organized Inaugural Former Defense Minister Yashwantrao Chavan Memorial Lecture. Dr Sunil Khilnani, the author of 'Idea of India', is Starr Foundation Professor, Director of the South Asia Studies Program at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies at John Hopkins University and was speaking on this occasion on "The Great Power Game : India in the New World".  Another fascinating scholarly analysis by Prof. Wang Hui of Chinese Language and Literature at Tsinghua University, Beijing dealt with "How to Interpret China". Prof. Hui is the author of the masterwork "The Rise of Modern Chinese Thought," and most recently "The End of the Revolution".

            The concept of superpower is increasingly questionable. The rising challenges in 'Post American World' in the context of realization that 'The World is Flat', are compelling the warmongers from the hyper-power, allies of cold war era, defenders of free trade, critics of liberal media in communist societies and anti-obscurantists in developing societies the concept of superpower more and more vulnerable to the paradox of process of level playing field and increasing disparities in the globalized world. 

India`s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, according to Prof. Khilnani, "After independence in 1947, - through the pursuit of what he termed ‘intelligent self-interest’ - managed to transform this almost ludicrously optimistic ambition into a relatively effective policy of state: in the polarized and unpropitious circumstances of the Cold War, he established an international voice for his country, based not on ‘hard’ power but rather on a dextrous combination of moral legitimacy and realpolitik." From giving birth to Non-alignment ideology towards the constant need of multipolar world in the context of current financial crisis and weakened United Nations, India has witnessed helpless journey Indian Foreign Policy through the horrific channels of history where humanitarian-non humanitarian intervention in the other countries has been the order of superpowers of the day.

            Somehow Indian scholars, diplomats and leaders failed to capitalise on this idea of non-alignment. Its name might have been irrelevant but the idea enshrined in those words is still contemporary. Prof. Khilnani captures this irony in very subtle words like: "If India is to maximize its international position, it should begin to
operate with a more nuanced conception of power. If one limits the understanding of power merely to a narrow realist dimension, then it is hard to see how India can rival the prowess of the world’s great states in the foreseeable future. It will remain in a middle group, well behind the first rank of present great powers, if one measures power purely in economic or military terms. However, ‘world power’ today is a complicated, continuous strategic project, not a once and for all acquisition. Some of its aspects are tangible enough; but others, no less important, emphatically are not." 

 Khilnani further maintains: "As a matter of policy, India has long staked its international power heavily on multilateral institutions - variously, the Commonwealth, the Non-Aligned Movement, the UN and, in some respects, the WTO. It has often worked these effectively; but given the reality that in many matters of vital concern to India it will be US attitudes that determine the scope and efficacy of multilateral institutions, India will need to explore other avenues and methods to push its interests. Historically, India has tended to position itself somewhere between the powerful and the powerless, the rich and the poor - and between contending ideological groups. Its primary mode of exercising autonomy in the international domain has been negative: refusing to participate in alignments, treaties and markets which it viewed as skewed in favour of the more powerful. This was perhaps an extension of the Gandhian strategy of boycotts and fasts; as Nehru put it in the mid-1950s: ‘Asian strength exists in the negative sense of resisting’."

A recent IDSA Paper maintains that: "Nehru’s aim in advocating the principles of internationalism was to realize the creation of the ideal of One World centred on the United Nations which represented the world community. Keeping this in mind, he crafted independent India’s foreign policy composed of five elements: opposition to colonialism, imperialism and racialism; concept of non-alignment vis-à-vis the two Cold War blocs to preserve Asia in particular as an ‘area of peace’; prevent internationalization of conflict; disarmament; and peaceful co-existence as embodied in the Panchsheel agreement for the evolution of a peaceful and co-operative international order, thus paving the way for realizing the ideal of One World. These elements became the framework through which the foreign policy of India was conducted, mostly connected and identified with ‘non-alignment’. The author clearly expresses that all these elements including non-alignment were designed for the realization of the ideal of One World.” (Source: The Indian Advocacy of Internationalism in the Nehru Years by S. Kalyanaraman on November 19, 2010 as Fellows' Seminar at IDSA, New Delhi )

 Wang Hui’s monographs include, in Chinese, From An Asian Perspective: The Narrations of Chinese History  2010); The Rise of Modern Chinese Thought (four volumes), (2004–2009); and Rekindling Frozen Fire: The Paradox of ModernityThe Rise of Modern Chinese Thought The End of Revolution: China and the Limits of Modernity (Verso, 2010); China’s New Order: Society, Politics, and Economy in Transition, translated by Ted Huters and Rebecca Karl (Harvard University Press, 2003) etc. (2000). His books translated into English include the forthcoming (four volumes), which is expected to be finished by 2010.

            Prof. Hui asserted that Confuscious thought has influenced the Chinese intellectual tradition since centuries. Confucianism represents the collected teachings of the Chinese sage Confucius, who lived from 551 to 479 BCE. His philosophy concerns the fields of ethics and politics, emphasizing personal and governmental morality, correctness of social relationships, justice, traditionalism, and sincerity. In Confucianism, human beings are teachable, improvable and perfectible through personal and communal endeavour especially including self-cultivation and self-creation. A main idea of Confucianism is the cultivation of virtue and the development of moral perfection. 

Confucianism holds that one should give up one's life, if necessary, either passively or actively, for the sake of upholding the cardinal moral values. Humanity is core in Confucianism. A simple way to appreciate Confucian thought is to consider it as being based on varying levels of honesty, and a simple way to understand Confucian thought is to examine the world by using the logic of humanity. So, according to Prof. Hui, different dynasties in Chinese tradition and history not only adopted different philosophies from time to time moreover weaved in the Confuscious tradition, they also sought 'Legitimacy' from outer world for the survival of their dynasty.

 Self defence has always remained controversial due to its ramifications on aspects of sovereignty and legality. Self-defence is always provided as a justification for unjustified intervention in another state`s territory. Though for use of self defence, premise is established in a manner that it is temporary departure from strict legal norms for fortifying bedrock of rule of law. But history has witnessed everlasting peace cannot be established through the gun barrels. Self-defence also touches many sensitive issues under international humanitarian law, gross violations of human rights, atrocities committed by aggressors, non state actors to highjack conscious of general public either to support or rebel against pre-emptive or preventive use of force as the case may be. 

 The very foundation of United Nations was to prevent future generations from scourge of war which is also enshrined in its charter. This charter prohibits use of force by its members as a basic principle. The only justification which is available for use of such of force in absence of such authorization by UN is self defense. But powerful nations have sidelined this basic principle under the garb of self-defense. Such kind of unilateral invasion has instigated unending cycle of violence. In the era of technological advancements, invention of nuclear and weapons of mass destruction, it will be very heavy price for achieving Millennium Development Goals. Voice of major reformists in working style of Security Council should accelerate the process of actual changes. Keeping in the view long-lasting unfulfilled goal of enduring peace and sustainable development, one should remember that the issue of self defense should not only be viewed from the prism of ‘legality’ but also from the perspective of ‘legitimacy.’

India`s new role of Bridging the have`s and have`s not world depends on how Indian foreign policy establishment understands following situation. It may be economic/financial packages of the Chinese in Africa, Latin America or whether it is military intervention of USA in Asia and Europe, India has to assert its role in the world irrespective of the position in the Security Council. Ultimately amidst the twister of the geopolitical discourse, we have to remember the warning of legendary doyen of strategic thinking in India K. Subrahmanyam: “The meaning of Superpower means only and only to ensure ‘Right to Education and Right to Food’ along with the investments in science and technology for betterment of the humankind.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information Driven Innovation Economy !!!

This week everyone in the capital and country to some extent was immersed in the Obamania. Every media person, strategic analyst was guessing what Obama will speak in Parliament or whether he will mince any words on core issues to the Indian concerns. On the sidelines of an historic occasion marking the bilateral relations, speech in Parliament was indispensable to any other speeches he made. But more than that if we consider the substance of his visit-- driving more jobs to home and sustain business in troubled trauma of financial crisis, the speech he gave at Chicago American Library Association Conference in 2005 holds more relevance than his at the Indian Parliament on 8th November 2010.

 At Chicago, in 2005 he said:
“Only a few generations ago it was possible to enter into the workforce with a positive attitude, a strong back, willing to work, and it didn’t matter if you were a high school dropout, you could go in to that factory or work on a farm and still hope to find a job that would allow you to pay the bills and raise a family. That economy is long gone. And it’s not coming back. As revolutions in technology and communications began breaking down barriers between countries and connecting people all over the world, new jobs and industries that require more skill and knowledge have come to dominate the economy. Whether it’s software design or computer engineering or financial analysis, corporations can locate these jobs anywhere in the world, anywhere that there’s an internet connection. As countries like China and India continue to modernize their economies and educate their children longer and better, the competition American workers face will grow more intense, the necessary skills more demanding. These new jobs are not simply about working hard, they’re about what you know and how fast you can learn what you don’t know. They require innovative thinking, detailed comprehension, and superior communication.


But before our children can even walk into an interview for one of these jobs, before they can even fill out an application or earn the required college degree, they have to be able to pick up a book and read it and understand it. Reading is the gateway skill that makes all other learning possible, from complex word problems and the meaning of our history to scientific discovery and technological proficiency. And by the way, it’s what’s required to make us true citizens. It’s not enough just to recognize the words on the page anymore. The kind of literacy necessary for the 21st century requires detailed understanding and complex comprehension. And, yet, every year we pass more children through schools or watch as more drop out. These are kids who will pore through the help-wanted section and cross off job after job that requires skills they don’t have. Others will have to take that help wanted section over to somebody sitting next to them and find the courage to ask, “Will you read this for me?”


Three events this week emphasized this whole perspective about crucial aspect of reading, its place in knowledge economy of radical-frugal innovations and its larger significance for our societies which are urgently seeking the attention of the best brains of the world who are busy solving the problems of the rich who do not have any problems actually.

Within hours of Obama leaving New Delhi, the next day it was a corporate world which jumped to catch the baton for further cooperation between India and USA. The meeting was titled ‘US-India Conclave: Partnership for Innovation -- Imperative for Growth & Employment in both Economies’. The need to forge better partnerships was inspired from belief in the urgent need to address many challenges. As Indian government`s National Innovation Council understands: "The needs of the new knowledge economy in the 21st century demand new thinking, new responses and new mindsets. The challenges of our times in health, agriculture, education, environment, energy and governance demand more efficient and sustainable solutions which meet the needs of our people. Innovations are the key to unleashing this mindset change because they have the potential to re-define and re-shape everything – from products and services, to governance, organisations, processes, people, economy, institutions, business and technology. Innovation fulfils needs which cannot be met by conventional products, processes and institutional forms and can have a significant impact in terms of social and economic value. Innovation is all about change and related opportunities to improve access, affordability, sustainability, efficiency, productivity and competitiveness.”


On 11th November this week, National Youth Readership Survey 2009 sponsored by National Book Trust, India and conducted by National Council of Applied Economic Research with collaboration of ‘Nelson Research’ was released. In the era of fast changing world, youth as human capital has the ability to modify itself and other inputs. In 2020, an average Indian is expected to be only 29 years old, as against 37 years in China and the US, 45 years in West Europe and 48 years in Japan. While developed world is observing the higher rate of ageing, India will have 47 Million more people in the working age group population by 2020. In order to reap the benefits of this "demographic dividend" it is necessary that the knowledge and skill levels of our young population need to be at international standard. Objectives of the Study:

• To prepare a detailed demographic profile of Indian youth according to sex, age, level of education, occupation and other socio-economic characteristics;
•  To study the usage pattern of various information sources both print and electronic media in terms of accessibility, frequency, time spent, place of exposure, etc;
•  To comprehend/assess the readership status, reading habits and preferences, with particular reference to voluntary leisure reading among the youth;
•  To identify and assess the role of motivational factors that influence reading habits and preferences;
•  To understand the purpose behind and attitude towards reading among the youth and know how the two attributes shape their aspirations, perceptions and attainments; To ascertain the extent of awareness, interest and informedness among the youth about the various youth developmental programs; and to understand youth perception on important social and developmental issues;
•  To study the aspirations and perceptions of the youth, their role in nation-building activities and their satisfaction levels and the challenges ahead;
•  To assess the level of awareness about NBT initiatives towards creating a strong culture of reading and motivating the youth to become enthusiastic readers and also to know the youth perception in this endeavour.

Research Questions were:

• How often, how much and what Youth read?
•  What are the types of reading materials used?
•  What are their reading preferences and interests with regard to the reading subject matter? 
•  What are their purposes and motivations for reading?
•  Do they read to acquire new skill and knowledge or to improve their present ones?
•  What are their opinions and attitudes towards reading as a pastime activity?
•  Does other sources of information (TV, Computer) affects reading habits? Reading and Reading Habits

Reading is the art of interpreting printed and written words. Reading is one of the most effective means of systematic development of language and the personality. Reading habits of youth have been a matter of much interesting educator, parents, publishers, librarians and other stakeholders. Reading interests and reading habits is a life-long process which begins in the home, improves systematically in the school and is carried on in later life depending on individual’s social role and positioning. What is Readership Research? Readership research is a scientific process in which readers’ perceptions, attitudes, satisfaction, and expectations about a publication are quantitatively collected and analyzed for better decision making and offering of the publication. Strong culture of reading and motivation is certainly equip youth to develop and maximize their potential to the fullest since reading is the one of most effective means of systematic development of the personality. In this context, National Book Trust (NBT), on its Golden Jubilee celebrations conducted a “National Action Plan for the Readership Development among the Youth (NAPRDY).

The 21st century is truly the era of the “learning society.- continuous learning is necessary if economic development is to be ensured. Progress in science and technology is happening at such a pace that conventional or class room education is no longer sufficient. The young people today need to read more than their forbears to fulfil their obligation as responsible citizens as well as to meet their personal and social objectives. The country can compete with the developed countries only if creates a strong culture of reading among its youth. Without a regular reading habit, advantages accruing from literacy or what is learnt in school may be quickly frittered away. Therefore it is high time that our educators think in terms of imparting what is known as “life-long education or life-long self education”. Globally reading is on decline, leading to widespread erosion of comprehension skills even in developed countries. There is an urgent need to reduce the missing link between literacy and library. It is possible by providing books to the people rather than waiting for the people to come to the books, providing books to people which are easy enough for people to enjoy and the continuously investing in the ongoing programes like Right to Education.

On 12th November this week, Thomson Reuters Innovation Awards for India were given by National Innovation Council Chairman Dr. Sam Pitroda. The winners from were Bharat Heavy Electricals (BHEL), Ranbaxy Laboratories, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the National Institute of Immunology (NII). Speaking at this occasion Dr. Pitroda urged to think towards new vistas of questioning the traditional mindset. He narrated different initiatives taken by National Innovation Council (NIC) to identify the drivers of the innovation. This work which will be based on the previous 300 recommendations of National Knowledge Commission will strive to make India, not only a Innovation Driven Business hub, economy but also Governance, Education System, Agriculture, Health Research and to a larger extent nature of society. Dr. Pitroda emphasised on changing our whole mindset as a nation. He said, “We’re living in the 21st-century knowledge economy; but our schools, our homes, and our culture are still based around 20th-century and in some cases 19th-century expectations. We have 19th century mindset, 20th century processes and 21st century problems.”


NIC will provide a broader PLATFORM for Innovations everywhere to include: Products, Services, Organisations & Institutions, Processes, Research and Development, Science & Technology, Governance, Social and Cultural, Mindset and National/ State/ Sectoral Councils. NIC will focus on KEY DRIVERS: Multidisciplinary, Collaborative, Transformative, Generational Change vs. Incremental Change, Durable vs. Disposable, Need vs. Demand, Nature as Nurture Locally Relevant, Globally Connected & Competitive and Focus at the Edge. NIC will expand Space for Discourse on Innovation in the country by: Discussions, Debates Seminars, Conferences, Best Practices, Alternative Dialogue, Re-thinking, New Ideas Media and Innovation Portal. NIC will facilitate the creation of necessary ECO-SYSTEMS through: Incentives & Awards, Innovation clusters at universities, Innovative business clusters, Innovation in MSMEs, Organisational Autonomy & Flexibility, Policies & Programmes, New Institutions & Infrastructure, Risk/ Venture Capital, Intellectual Property/ Patents and Web & ICT as tools. NIC will encourage Innovations for INCLUSION aimed at the Bottom of the Pyramid through: Awareness, Access, Affordability, Availability, Scalability, Sustainability, Quality, Pervasive Growth, and Innovations for/ by the people, Innovations for the Bottom of the Pyramid.

The NIC aims to re-define innovations to go beyond formal R&D parameters; facilitate innovative solutions that lead to inclusive growth for the people and by the people; foster an innovation eco-system across domains and sectors to strengthen entrepreneurship; focus on key drivers to ensure sustainability, durability and quality and expand the space for dialogue and discourse on innovation. NIC will also be involved in facilitating State level and sectoral innovations. This will create an eco-system to boost innovation performance in the country. Creating a framework for evolving an Indian model of innovation, with focus on inclusive growth, to delineate policy initiatives within the Government, required to spur innovation, to develop and champion innovation attitudes and approaches, to create appropriate eco-systems and environment to foster inclusive innovation, to explore new strategies and alternatives for innovations and collaborations, to identify ways and means to scale and sustain innovations, to encourage Central and State Governments to innovate, to encourage universities and R&D institutions to innovate, to facilitate innovations by SMEs, to encourage all important sectors of the economy to innovate, to encourage innovation in public service delivery and to encourage multi-disciplinary and globally competitive approaches for innovations.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------