Asian Regional Reviews
India: From Midnight to the Millennium by Shashi Tharoor. Harper Collins
Publishers, New York, 1998. 392 pages. $14.00, paperback. ISBN: 0060977531. Review by
Major Randy Koehlmoos, US Army, a South Asia FAO stationed at USCENTCOM, MacDill AFB,
Florida. koehlmrl@centcom.mil
One could erroneously assume from the title that this is a historical work beginning with the
creation of India at midnight on 15 August 1947. On the contrary, the major part of the book is
devoted to the situation in contemporary India and not to the last 50 Years of Indian history.
When author Shashi Tharoor mentions historical incidents though, they are related to present day
events. In this text he looks back at India's first 50 years as a nation, describing its challenges
(illiteracy, poverty, sectarian violence, and the ever-present caste problems) and its triumphs
(democracy and a growing economy). After he examines some of the challenges India has faced
over the past five decades, he looks as well at what lies ahead for the nation. He believes the
solutions to the aforementioned challenges will determine what kind of world the next century will
bring for everyone, and since Indians account for a sixth of the world's population, their choices
will resonate throughout the globe.
Tharoor's is a subjective look at the forces that have made today's India. The text presents
stories of village life, reflections on the Hindu religion, accounts of political turmoil and upheaval as
well as of the author's own experiences as an expatriate. He states in the introduction that
Indians stand at the intersection of four of the most important debates facing the world at the end
of the twentieth century. These are not merely academic debates but are being enacted on the
national and world stage. First, he is confident that democracy in India can deliver the goods in
the bread verses freedom debate because Indians stand for democracy, openness, tolerance, and
freedom. Democracy can be unbearably inefficient, but efficiency without democracy can be
simply unbearable. Second, the centralization verses confederation debate. Does India require a
strong, central government to keep together this kaleidoscope called India, or would confederation
or even the extension of autonomy found in Article 370 of the Indian Constitution with regard to
Jammu and Kashmir prove to be a better form of government? Many people have also debated
whether the presidential form of government would benefit India more than the current
parliamentary one. He believes that regionalist decentralizations can be dangerous, but
devolution of power will strengthen democracy rather than dilute it. Third, pluralism verses
fundamentalism. Is the secularism found in the Indian Constitution too Western an idea or is it
essential in a large pluralist society like India? Indians are not by nature secular people, but
Tharoor believes that Indian secularism should mean letting every religion flourish, rather than
privileging one above the rest. Finally the Coca-Colonization debate of globalization verses self-
reliance. Does opening up India to the world economy help or hinder the effort for economic self-
reliance? Tharoor is definitely a follower of the former view, and believes that 'Indianess' has the
ability to absorb foreign influences and transform them.
Tharoor is particularly able to describe all that India and Indians are not: not the same
ethnicity, religion, or language. He explains in some detail that there is no such thing as a majority
within India and acknowledges that Indian identity is multi-religious, multi-ethnic, and pluralistic.
His view is multi-layered, because he describes as well what it is like to be a native of the
southern Indian State of Kerala, whose language Malayalam he and his family do not even speak
fluently. Though similar to many other countries in that India is a nation greater than the sum of its
parts, India can only be compared with India. He arrives at the nation's essence by stating that
"the singular thing about India is that you can only speak of it in the plural."
Tharoor believes that socialism was a poor choice as an economic model at the time of
independence in 1947. Though Indian Prime Minister Nehru was a strong fan and supporter of
five-year plans based on the Soviet's example of centralized planning, this type of economy
overlooked the desire of individuals to not be sheep following an authoritarian shepherd. The
problems with the Indian economy that arose from this situation are staggering because the
government sanctioned unproductivity. Government controlled operations such as this will not
match the initiative displayed when the same operations are managed by the private sector.
Tharoor substantiates his hypothesis by giving examples of Indian inefficiency and low productivity
as compared to the South Koreans.
Tharoor discusses how globalization has resulted in a spider web of interrelated events and
outcomes and points to the fact that events such as the recent Asian economic crisis don't occur
in a vacuum and have global impacts. This crisis showed India (and many other countries) how
unstable its economy is, and how much India relies on the outside flow of capital into its banks.
The recent liberalization of Indian economic policy has allowed the relaxing of regulations placed
on foreign investors. This is the result of the realization that outside capital is needed to jumpstart
the Indian economy, but still carries the risk of economic re-colonization by incurring external debt.
He rightly questions Indian businessman and writer Gurcharank Das' charge that as long as
education improves, the global economy will carry India on its shoulders. That view is pure
irresponsible optimism and wishful thinking; India must be proactive and globally competitive.
Tharoor does not try and hide the fact that problems exist in India, especially along the lines
of religion and violence. Muslims make up about 13% of the Indian population, and the global
image of Islam as negatively fundamentalist, terrorist, and extremist definitely has an adverse
effect on Muslims living everywhere. This stereotype must also have led to difficulty for
traditionally liberal and secular Hindus to support Muslims in India, further isolating them. He
states that one Muslim has commanded the Indian Air Force, but the number of Muslim officers in
the Indian military is far less in percentage than are represented in the overall population. Tharoor
lays the blame for the current level of violence within India at the feet of the RSS (Rashtriya
Swayamsevak Sangh-National Volunteer Organization) and its various affiliates like the VHP
(Vishwa Hindu Parishad-World Hindu Council) and the current ruling party BJP
(Bharatiya Janata Party-Indian People's Party). He is proud of his Hindu religion, but finds
fault with those who use it by violent means for political gains.
The conclusion of his book seems cluttered with a multitude of topics that the author did not
get to previously fit in. At one point the text starts to look like a social cookbook as he describes
the food of India, and then switches to a discussion of the LTTE (Liberation Tigers Tamil Elam) in
Tamil Nadu. He discusses many other issues that may lead one to think India does not have the
capability to solve problems on its own. Upon closer examination, he seems to be writing with a
sense of optimism about the future and confidence in the ability of Indians to find solutions within a
democratic political system. As always, no book on Indian politics and current affairs is complete
without mentioning intervention and meddling by the 'foreign hand' in terms of the Pakistani Inter-
Services Intelligence Directorate (ISID).
Tharoor's comments are mostly insightful and even humorous at times, when he tries to
speak for the Muslim community with whom he obviously does not fully relate. Tharoor states
"there is no India without Islam, and no Islam without India." Islam (like colonialism) plays an
undeniable role in Indian history and historiography, but to imply that India permissively allows
Islam to remain within its perimeter places far too great agency in New Delhi's ability to control
actions within its own borders. Tharoor also makes references to the Muslim painter who depicted
Indira Gandhi as a Hindu Mother Goddess after the third India-Pakistan war. It seems that he is
trying to place a barrier between Indian and Pakistani Muslims in order to further strengthen his
idea of a pluralistic India. What he is actually doing by this is reinforcing the main entity that holds
Pakistan together as a nation- Islam and its united opposition to India. He erroneously states that
Islam has priests, and also states that religion and language have proved themselves an
inadequate basis for nationhood. Though some other so-called experts continue to consider
Pakistan (founded on Islam and the language of Urdu) a failed state (defined along the same lines
as North Korea and Sierra Leone both being failed states), history has yet to validate this
presumption.
Tharoor's suggestion that a possible solution to the current myriad of problems in India is for
the Indian Army to take control of the country is the worst possible option for India and contradicts
his belief in democracy. I sense he makes this statement because it has happened many times
before in neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh, and the Pakistan Army has quite a bit of
experience with civil rule. The Indian Army has little experience in domestic matters such as this,
and when it has tried to do so in the past its heavy-handed approach has alienated many within
the population. Though Tharoor addresses activities of the LTTE, he avoids mentioning the
problems the Indian Peacekeeping Force caused in 1987 in Sri Lanka which would erode the
validity of successful intervention in Indian domestic politics by the Indian army.
He may also be basing his trust in the Indian Army on his false assumption that the 1962
Sino-India War united the Indian people. Conversely it was a time when agricultural output was
stagnant, industrial production was below expectations, and the economy was growing at only half
the planned rate. Not only was this severe loss an embarrassment to India, the defeat left Prime
Minister Nehru physically debilitated and mentally exhausted; maybe it even had something to do
with his stroke and death shortly thereafter. A much more valid example of trust in the army would
have been to note the deployment of Indian troops into the Maldives in 1988 to quell the
attempted coup. This was a definite success story for India as it showed the Indian government
was able to perform their equivalent of crisis action planning, quickly make strategic level
decisions and successfully implement them in a timely manner.
Tharoor's blaming of Hindu fundamentalist parties for the country's problems seems to be a
vicious circle of blame like a dog chasing its tail. If there is anyone who has to be held responsible
for the state of affairs in India, it has to be those who support these radical groups, and not the
groups themselves. We then again have to ask why people seek refuge in organizations that
profess manifestos of Hindu nationalism and India as a Hindu Rastra, a land of and for the
Hindu majority. Have the people as a last resort turned to groups such as these only because of
the failure of the policies of other ruling parties like those who govern the Indian State of Bihar, or
do they truly want a sectarian nation?
Too often within this work Tharoor discusses problems within India without offering viable
solutions. The world already has more than enough problem identifiers; if he really wants
someone to take notice and listen he needs to offer viable alternatives. This book also seems to
be an argument for the importance of India to the future of the industrialized world. I agree with
Tharoor's contention that education is key to success, but India and the rest of South Asia must
get over the negative issue of colonialism (not likely in our lifetimes). Granted, the British
colonized India and today India is a reflection of the effects associated with it. If Indian youth have
no colonial hang-ups to hobble them as Tharoor states, we should expect to see changes in the
near future as they mature and begin to hold positions of greater authority and influence.
The best quality of Tharoor's monograph is that it touches on the current key issues of
economic changes and religious fundamentalism, and integrates gender relations in terms of other
events instead of being presented in a politically-correct separate chapter. A portion of Tharoor's
writing though leads me to skepticism about the rest, as occasionally simple facts are erroneous.
Things might have changed between his last visit to India and my own, but the point is that I now
question which portions of the book are factual, and which are merely comical hype to tell a more
interesting story and sell more copies of the book. Tharoor makes the statement that each time
he comes home [to India] he stands in the sun and feels himself whole again in his own skin. I'm
sure that is made much easier by the fact that he knows he can quickly access his foreign
currency account, get back on a plane, and depart Hindustan whenever he wants.
The simple prose of this book flows as a continual story and makes for an easy read. There
are those who may say that this book is uninsightful and pretentious because Tharoor represents
the Westernized, English speaking, privileged, and urban upper class environment who are out of
touch with the reality of the country and not members of the majority of the population. I believe
that his history of being born and raised in India but then living outside of India for half of his life
allows his look at India to be more objective. This background also further legitimizes his frequent
use of personal anecdotes. Other reviews written by many Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) seem to
also identify with the author's background and his feelings about India. This text can not be
considered scholarly, but it is certainly not senseless either. The book has some faults and
inherent contradictions, but it is still very much worth reading and will appeal to regional experts
and laymen alike.
2001, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve
Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org