Tata does ethical u-turn
By Praful Bidwai
NEW DELHI - Tata Motors' decision to shift the production site of its low-cost, iconic Nano car from communist-ruled West Bengal state to Gujarat - scene of the 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom - has caused consternation and dismay among liberals and secular-minded people all over India.
The decision was taken personally by Ratan Tata, the company's chairman and one of India's best-known and most well regarded industrialists. Tata Motors hit world headlines in June when it acquired the British luxury automobile manufacturer Jaguar Cars and Land Rover from Ford.
Six years ago, Gujarat was the scene of the worst massacre of a religious minority in India since its independence in 1947, which was allegedly conducted with state complicity and collusion.
Over 2,000 Muslims were burned, stabbed or hacked to death and many more raped in an orgy of violence which spread across several cities in Gujarat. The violence was purportedly carried out in revenge for the deaths of 59 Hindu activists in a fire on a railway coach at Godhra in central Gujarat at the end of February, 2002.
Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), justified the butchery as a natural "reaction" to the original action, which he claimed was a planned act of "terrorism" and a Muslim conspiracy. An expert commission appointed by the railways later found the fire was accidental.
Modi's police refused to save the lives of Muslims who begged for help. Some of his ministers and BJP legislators also allegedly participated in the campaign of looting, arson and physical violence against Muslims or directed the killing and incited militant Hindu-chauvinist activists to take part in it.
Modi, who came to be characterized as India's own Slobodan Milosevic - the former Yugoslav president - has been roundly condemned by secular and democratically minded governments, and people all over the world. He has repeatedly been denied a visa by the United States, most recently this year.
Many are dismayed at the Tata Group's move to Gujarat because it is reputed to be an enlightened, liberal-minded, secular and ethical firm, not driven by profit alone.
The main reason cited by the Tata Group for its decision to relocate the Nano factory was a land dispute over 1,000 acres (404 hectare) needed for its plant, which was led by opposition leader Mamata Banerjee. The decision followed a month of violent demonstrations by activists and evicted farmers who complained they were forced to give up their land for a pittance to make room for the factory. (See
India's little car on crash course
, Asia Times Online, August 30, 2008.)
"But that alone cannot explain the move," said Zakia Jowher, from the Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, an organization for Muslim women campaigning against religious-chauvinist politics, which has long been active amongst the victims of the 2002 violence.
"The West Bengal government was extremely keen on the Nano project,''Johwer said. ''Some alternative land acquisition formulas were proposed, which would have marginally raised project costs, but increased the compensation to farmers/sharecroppers. Tata Motors summarily rejected these."
Ratan Tata said Gujarat offered him incentives and concessions that were even better than those given by West Bengal, said Jowher.
The favorable treatment given to the Tata Group by West Bengal's communist-led government attracted criticism from its own supporters and sympathizers, like former finance minister and eminent economist Ashok Mitra.
The car project was offered full exemption from excise duty for 10 years and from income tax for five years, and land at virtually throwaway prices. Mitra estimates that these concessions totaled the equivalent of US$171 million, or roughly half the cost of the project.
Yet, while moving the factory, Ratan Tata eloquently made a distinction between the "Bad M" (Mamata) and the "Good M" (Modi).
The Tata Group has effectively endorsed Narendra Modi's purported image as a dynamic, no-nonsense leader, and validated what the BJP calls the "Gujarat Model" of development. Critics regard the model as growth based on haphazard industrial expansion, at the expense of human rights violations and environmental destruction.
"The Tatas were probably confident that Modi's ruthlessness, repressive labor policies, and despotically imposed 'stability' would ensure the project's smooth implementation,'' Jowher said.
Secular activists like Jowher are upset that Tata has lent legitimacy to Modi's brand of politics. Last year, Ratan Tata had famously told businessmen: "You're stupid if you're not in Gujarat." Now, he has given Modi's "leadership" the stamp of approval.
Social scientist Dilip Simeon, a senior fellow at the prestigious Nehru Memorial Museum and Library, said: "Tata has behaved like any other businessman - looking for low-risk investments and high profits. Within the logic of profit maximization, it is hard to fault him. But the Tatas are meant to be ethical and socially responsible. That's why people are shocked."
The Tata Group's admirers attach a mystical value to the Nano as a great managerial/technological achievement, priced at just 100,000 rupees (about US$2,000) it is destined to become a middle class "dream machine". They believe Tata "can do no wrong".
But this premise involves three propositions: Tata pioneered Indian industrialization by building a textile mill and India's first indigenous steel plant; it has an unblemished labor relations and environmental record; and it offers a model of corporate social responsibility.
Tata has established textile and steel as nationalist enterprises, and it set up other industries. While the group's in-house innovation has stagnated, it has expanded through aggressive acquisitions, like the $13 billion takeover of the Anglo-Dutch steelmaker Corus in 2006.
Ever since he became the Tata chairman, Ratan Tata has tightened his family trust's hold on group companies. Under JRD Tata, holding company Tata Sons owned just 3% of their equity. Now, it holds a controlling share.
But the Tata Group's labor record is far from glorious, according to Simeon, who has documented it in his book,
The Politics of Labor under Late Colonialism
.
In the 1920s and 1930s, "The Tata Steel management consciously used violence and intimidation to break up trade unions. It also promoted religious-identity based anti-union groups. This eventually disgusted nationalist leaders like Subhash Chandra Bose who had earlier supported the Tatas," said Simeon.
In recent years, many Tata projects have been involved in environmental conflicts in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Jharkhand and Orissa.
Ratan Tata has recently lobbied for Dow Chemical being allowed to escape its responsibility for the aftermath of the Bhopal disaster, an industrial incident which claimed as many as 8,000 lives, as the heir of Union Carbide. He wants Dow to be freed of its legal liability to clean up the contaminated plant site, which has poisoned water and affected 25,000 people.
Implicit in the Nano factory's move to Gujarat is an endorsement of Modi's style of governance, and above all, sanctification of his vicious communal politics. The decision will be interpreted as an excuse to forget the reality of the massacre in 2002.
The victims of the carnage continue to be denied justice, live in insecurity, and face all manner of harassment, including trumped-up charges, arbitrary arrest and detention. Tata's endorsement of Modi is in line with a long process of the Indian industrialist class "normalizing" Hindu communalism, and helping erase the memory of the pogrom.
This is happening at a dangerous moment in India's evolution. Hindu-supremacist attacks on religious minorities are rising in the states of Orissa, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. Muslims are also, according to widespread news reports, being victimized in the name of fighting terrorism.
The Indian state has been criticized for showing little political will to stop this and bring the culprits to book despite India's survival as a pluralist, secular democracy hinging on this.
(Inter Press Service)
Submitted by The Great Revealer on Fri, 2008-10-24 13:33
- The Great Revealer's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 135 reads
-
See above.
Praful Bidwai is a well-known liar. The number of people killed were about 1,000 - and that includes a large number of Hindus. This was no pogrom - although it was a failure of law enforcement.
Leaving aside Bidwai's lies - one has to take a broader view. Is it a violation of human rights when poor people die due to corruption in the public health system? Or when children remain uneducated because or corruption in the public education system? Or when farmers are driven to bankruptcy and suicide because of a lack of irrigation water?
If yes, then most of the so-called secular state governments in India are bigger violators of human rights. Muslims live better in Gujarat than they do in many states.
There are no perfect political leaders but often you have to chose the least bad alternative. Modi's government is well known to be the least corrupt and most efficient in India. People like Bidwai indulge in omissions and distortions to push their agenda. Other well known liars to watch out for are Yoginder Sikand and Arundhati Roy.
One always needs to look at diverse points of view. Here is another one:
-------------------------------
Why India needs Narendra Modi?
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/why-india-needs-narendra-modi/375103/
Suhel Seth
Posted online: Oct 19, 2008 at 2338 hrs
Let me begin with a set of disclosures: I have perhaps written more articles against Modi and his handling of the post-Godhra scenario than most people have; I have called him a modern-day Hitler and have always said that Godhra shall remain an enduring blemish not just on him but on India’s political class. I still believe that what happened in Gujarat during the Godhra riots is something we as a nation will pay a heavy price for. But the fact is that time has moved on. As has Narendra Modi. He is not the only politician in India who has been accused of communalism. It is strange that the whole country venerates the Congress Party as the secular messiah but it was that party that presided over the riots in 1984 in which over 3,500 Sikhs died: thrice the number killed in Gujarat.
The fact of the matter is that there is no better performer than Narendra Modi in India’s political structure. Three weeks ago, I had gone to Ahmedabad to address the YPO and I thought it would be a good opportunity to catch up with Modi. I called him the evening before and I was given an appointment for the very day I was getting into Ahmedabad. And it was not some official meeting but instead one at his house. As frugal as the man Modi is.
And this is something that the Gandhis and Mayawatis need to learn from Modi. There were no fawning staff members; no secretaries running around; no hangers on…just the two of us with one servant who was there serving tea. And what was most impressive was the passion which Modi exuded. The passion for development; the passion for an invigorated Gujarat; the passion for the uplifting the living standards of the people in his state and the joy with which he recounted simple yet memorable data-points. For instance, almost all of the milk consumed in Singapore is supplied by Gujarat; or for that matter all the tomatoes that are eaten in Afghanistan are produced in Gujarat or the potatoes that Canadians gorge on are all farmed in Gujarat. But it was industry that was equally close to
his heart.
It was almost like a child, that he rushed and got a coffee table book on GIFT: the proposed Gujarat Industrial City that will come up on the banks of the Sabarmarti: something that will put the Dubais and the Hong Kongs of this world to shame. And while on the Sabarmati, it is Modi who has created the inter-linking of rivers so that now the Sabarmati is no longer dry.
He then spoke about how he was very keen that Ratan Tata sets up the Nano plant in Gujarat: he told me how he had related the story of the Parsi Navsari priests to Ratan and how touched Ratan was: the story is, when the Navsari priests, (the first Parsis) landed in Gujarat, the ruler of Gujarat sent them a glass of milk, full to the brim and said, there was no place for them: the priests added some sugar to the milk and sent it back saying that they would integrate beautifully with the locals and would only add value to the state.
Narendra Modi is clearly a man in a hurry and he has every reason to be. There is no question in any one’s mind that he is the trump card for the BJP after Advani and Modi realises that. People like Rajnath Singh are simply weak irritants I would imagine. He also believes that the country has no apolitical strategy to counter terrorism and in fact he told me how he had alerted the Prime Minister, the Home Minister and the NSA about the impending bomb blasts in Delhi and they did not take him seriously. And then the September 13 blasts happened! It was this resolve of Modi’s that I found very admirable. There is a clear intolerance of terrorism and terrorists which is evident in the way the man functions; now there are many cynics who call it minority-bashing but the truth of the matter is that Modi genuinely means business as far as law and order is concerned.
I left Modi’s house deeply impressed with the man as Chief Minister: he was clearly passionate and what’s more deeply committed. When I sat in the car, I asked my driver what he thought of Modi and his simple reply was Modi is God. Before him, there was nothing. No roads, no power, no infrastructure. Today, Gujarat is a power surplus state. Today, Gujarat attracts more industry than all the states put together. Today, Gujarat is the preferred investment destination for almost every multi-national and what’s more, there is an integrity that is missing in other states.
After I finished talking to the YPO (Young President’s Organisation) members, I asked some of them very casually, what they thought of Modi. Strangely, this was one area there was no class differential on. They too said he was God.
But what they also added very quickly was if India has just five Narendra Modis, we would be a great country. I don’t know if this was typical Gujarati exaggeration or a reflection of the kind of leadership India now needs! There is however, no question in my mind, that his flaws apart, Narendra Modi today, is truly a transformational leader! And we need many more like him!
The writer is Managing Partner, Counselage
Just lazy, but now it's better!
we don't want to be giving free advertising :)