OF PUPPETS , SURROGATES AND THE REAL McCOY : A "CRASH" COURSE ON THE INDIAN STOCK MARKET

    A disclaimer is in order before I venture into the rest of this piece. These days, any hack of standing has to begin with a disclaimer to show that he is someone to be reckoned with, that his background is of interest to his readers, that he is pure as the driven snow, and that therefore whatever bilge he dishes out is of some import. I reckon that, as someone who has been pulling the flush every week for the last eight years, I qualify for a disclaimer.

   It is a simple one: neither I, nor anyone of my family members (including my short-seller pooch, Brutus) own a single share in any Adani company (at least the known ones, for God only knows how many more he has tucked away among the mangroves in Tonga, the Pantanal and Pitcairn's Island). Actually, it's a bit of an unnecessary disclosure because nobody except Adani owns any Adani shares, and though SBI (State Bank of India) and LIC (Life Insurance Corporation of India) may hold some shares as pledges, they will eventually have to render unto Adani what is Adani's (and also what is Tom, Dick and Harry's, for doesn't the hand of God rest lightly on the gentleman from Gujarat?)

  One of the upsides of growing old is that you continue to learn something new every day. I turned 72 last December, and in just 45 days thereafter I have assimilated more knowledge about the stock market than in the preceding seven decades, thanks to the anti-Hindu-n-berg report, the 408 page smokescreen of Adani Enterprises, and Mahua Moitra, who is pretty good with a taser herself.

   I have now learnt, for example, that "round tripping" is not what Mr. Modi does- a trip to Gandhinagar to remind the people who built Gujarat, and back in time to launch another Vande Bharat. It means sending moneys from place A to Place B, washing it in a local laundromat, and then sending it back to A in some other form. With this knowledge, however, came the realisation that the wife has been doing this for the last forty years, without my suspecting it ! She takes my monthly pay check in Shimla, deducts a small amount for keeping a few loaves of bread on the table, and sends the rest to her sister in Delhi. From there the shekels are routed to Varanasi to purchase Banarsi silk sarees, which then find their way back to Shimla through trusted emissaries. Voila! The round tripping is now complete, with Shukla being short- sold, not a short-seller. Which corresponds to the motto of SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) - "Ignorance is bliss". Or, as the Finance Minister hinted the other day: What you don't know won't hurt you, or me. It is also government policy, what with the RTI (Right to Information) Act being asphyxiated and Parliament doing more expunging than debating.

   Take that other thing, called an IPO ( Initial Public Offering) or, as in Mr. Adani's case, an FPO (F----d Up Public Offering). This is essentially a method of crowd funding where the family is the said crowd. I myself have not floated an IPO, primarily because I consider myself a gentleman and gentlemen, as we all know, prefer bonds. Furthermore, I don't have a large family, or any shell companies in Mauritius, or any contacts in the RBI (Reserve Bank Of India) or SEBI. I also don't know any FII's (Foreign Institutional Investors). Actually, I do: two- ex-colleagues parked in the USA and Switzerland, respectively, but they won't lend me a penny since I still owe them a drink from their last visit to India. According to them, therefore, there are problems with my liquidity as my credit rating is down by quite a few pegs.

   Mr. Adani, however, did float his FPO and came a cropper. My limited knowledge of the Indian stock market tells me that he forgot two things: one, thanks to the impending Cow Hug Day, the proverbial bull on the bourse had been replaced by the cow, which had already bitten off more of his shady shares than it could chew. And secondly, as the Hindenberg report has shown, a stock market can put up with upticks and downticks but not with antics. Perhaps the investors felt that the conglomerate had more ticks than your average mongrel on Dalal street, or tricks than P.C. Sorcar Junior, and decided to watch Pathan instead on the telly. Mark it up as another victory of the bikini over the Houdini.

   Another dreadful realisation dawned on me the other day as I was fondly leafing through my bank passbook- I practically belong to Mr. Adani, or at least all my assets do, which is the same thing. Just consider the facts, all ye bhaktiveers: my bank deposits have been given to Mr. Adani's many companies, and with a debt to equity ratio of 2021% (Adani Green) there is a good chance I may not get them back. The moneys I have invested in mutual funds  have also been given to- you got it right first time!- Mr. Adani. The premium I have been paying faithfully every year to LIC is invested in Mr. Adani's shares, which are estimated to be over valued by at least five times. Hell, I belong to the Company Store, just like those wildcatters in the Max Brand and Zane Grey novels I grew up on. In fact, I might as well delete the name of Neerja (the long suffering but round tripping wife, folks) as my nominee in all my accounts and substitute it with Mr. Adani's name- he's going to get it all some day in any case!

  Moving swiftly from the economics to the politics, one has begun wondering why we need 543 MPs and a Parliament at all ? Most MPs are nowadays zip-locked into silence, Ministers have become nodding mannequins in front of the Adani Mall, and Parliament itself has become a necropolis where democracy is buried a little deeper with each session. Why spend tens of thousands of crores and millions of manhours in electing MPs and Prime Ministers when the shots are being called by someone else? If Mr. A is to make industrial and environmental policies, if Mr. A is to make all our airports, ports, power plants, roads, coal mines, if Mr. A has the first right over all financial resources of the public and the state- then why have a government at all? Why install puppets to give the pretense of a government when the puppeteer himself holds all the strings? Why settle for a surrogate when you have the real McCoy, as it were ? Why not just do an Ayatollah Khomeini and appoint him the Supreme Leader ?

   And now you must excuse me; I have to rush to Dal me Kala street because my broker informs me the shares of toilet paper have touched, quite appropriately, a new bottom- it's an opportunity to wipe the slate clean and rise again from the ashes, or whatever has hit the fan.

BOOK REVIEW - MAPPING A COUNTRY'S HISTORY

                                 

BOOK REVIEW:  WE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATES OF BHARAT

                               [ Sanjeev Chopra. Harper Collins. 2022. ]

( This review was originally published in the TRIBUNE)

AMALGAMATING HISTORY WITH GEOGRAPHY.

 The book is essentially a work of history, but from a different perspective. Historical accounts are usually narrated from either the victor's angle, or the loser's; based on either events or individuals; seen through either spatial or temporal lenses. But this book approaches the history of post-Independence India from an entirely different and novel angle- the cartographic lines that shaped the units which comprise the states of modern India. It examines the cartographic footprints of political decisions, linguistic, ethnic, religious and social aspirations that determined where the internal boundaries of states should be drawn, and in the process ends up as a fascinating account of how the Indian republic evolved from 1947 to the latest carving up of Jammu and Kashmir in 2019.

   The author traces the course of India's internal geography from the first Hindi map of India in 1952 to the reorganisation of J+K in 2019. He explains the rationale for the disappearance and reappearance of Tibet on our maps, the role of the States Reorganisation Commission, the integration of Portuguese and French territories into the republic, the dismemberment of Assam into seven states and the creation of Nagaland, the merger of Sikkim, the formation of Jharkhand, Chattisgarh and Uttarakhand, the inevitable birth of Telengana, the disputes over state capitals such as Madras, Chandigarh and Hyderabad, the new outlines of Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh, among many accounts. It is a fascinating narration of political movements, regional aspirations, linguistic demands, and an example of what can be achieved by dialogue, accommodation, wise counsel and statesmanship.

   Of particular interest are the chapters relating to the merger of the 562 princely states( 9 opted for Pakistan) and 9 provinces, and the manner of drawing their boundaries. Chopra lays bare, through first rate secondary research, the moves and compulsions of the Congress, the Muslim League, Sheikh Abdullah and Maharajah Hari Singh in Kashmir: though they finally led to the signing of the Instrument of Accession on 26th of October 1947, that still left a legacy which bedevils us today: of Kashmir's total area of 222236 sq.kms Pakistan and China continue to occupy 78114 sq.kms and 42735 sq.kms, respectively.

   It's not possible to recount the cartographic background of each state in a short review, but a flavour of the book can be gleaned from the chapter pertaining to the erstwhile princely state of Hyderabad, the jewel in the Chamber of Princes. The then Nizam, Osman Ali Khan, tried to position himself as a rival of Jinnah for leadership of the Indian Muslims during and post 1947. In an ironic paradox, Kashmir and Hyderabad had reverse similarities- both were ruled by sovereigns belonging to a religion different from the majority of their subjects, with the religions reversed! Chopra explains how the activism of the Congress, Hindu Mahasabha and the Arya Samaj gradually made the Nizam's position of sovereign independence untenable. He received no support from either Mountbatten or Jinnah; the latter, in fact, saw in him a rival and did not want him in Pakistan. The matter was finally decided by Operation Polo when the Indian army marched in on 15th September 1948 and Hyderabad was integrated into the dominion of India.

   The merger of the fractious princely states was a monumental task without parallel in global history; the sheer magnitude of the achievement can perhaps be appreciated by just one example- the Kathiawar region of Gujarat alone had 222 separate princely states! This book's primary feat is that it takes us back in time to reveal how the states of today took shape after balancing competing demands, as in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Punjab, Himachal, Andhra Pradesh, Madras, Madhya Pradesh to name just a few. New states were formed, old ones like Hyderabad and Baroda disappeared, and ( an interesting but little known titbit) the seeds of Telengana were sown in 1957 when a Gentleman's Agreement was signed between the leaders of the two regions for sharing power. 

   We also learn of little known nuggets of history: how the merger of Bengal and Bihar into a super-state was narrowly avoided because the proposal was never formally submitted to the States Reorganization Commission even though both the Chief Ministers had agreed upon it. The reader is also told about the international ramifications of the merger of the French and Portuguese enclaves, the graphic history of the strategic Andaman, Nicobar and Lakshadweep islands, the convoluted passions and concerns of the peoples of the NE states, an issue not yet fully resolved, the soft spot of the British for the Nagas ; the difference between the Parts A,B and C states; the subtle distinctions between Instrument of Accession, Merger Agreement and a Standstill Agreement.

   We The People  is a treasure trove of little known facts and a subtle blend of history and geography. Rome was not built in a day,  nor was the Indian republic. In fact, it is still a work in progress 75 years later, which just shows how stupendous was the task which confronted the founders of our nation. This book should be a tribute to those statesmen, visionaries and administrators who navigated their way through those tempestuous seas to reach the safe harbour that is the thriving and united Republic of India today. This book should be made compulsory reading for today's Parliamentarians and politicians who are doing their best to undo the phenomenal achievements of their predecessors in creating a nation out of chaos.

   

A WEEK OF CONSPIRACIES, NATIONALISM AND DELUSIONS.

   

                                                   THE  NEW  INDIA  WHINING

This last fortnight has not been a good one for the BJP or its bhaktiveers, even if we discount the irony of an autocratic despot being invited as the Chief guest at our Republic Day function. One would have expected that the wiseacres of MEA (Ministry of External Affairs) would, in between rejecting assorted documentaries and financial exposures as conspiracies, have advised the Prime Minister that a person who tears up his own country's Constitution is not the best choice to preside over another nation's commemoration of its still intact (though fraying at the edges) Constitution. But then one should expect this from our new were-wolf warrior diplomacy, I guess. As they say, a man is known by the company he keeps.

  Of greater import, however, was the official overkill on the BBC's two part documentary on The Modi Question. Hastily putting on his saffron tie and without even bothering to see the documentary, the MEA spokesperson informed the media that it was a conspiracy against India and indicative of a colonial mind set. This is what I term a typical lazy "Augmentin" response. For my more healthy readers, Augmentin is a broad spectrum antibiotic: when a doctor is too lazy or incompetent to identify the exact cause of your infection he will prescribe a broad spectrum antibiotic, hoping that it will work against your virus too. It's like a cluster bomb, and of late it has become the weapon of choice of the MEA, led as it is by another ( to continue with the ordnance phraseology) loose canon.

  Even the twitterati will concede that the BBC's credibility is slightly higher than that of our govt. spokespersons, Kangana Runout or Amit Malviya. It is funded by the British taxpayer  (the British govt. is just a conduit, though most rashtraveers here will miss this fine distinction) and its loyalty is to the former, not the latter. A couple of years back it had released a similar factual documentary on the Bengal famine of 1940, squarely holding Churchill and the then colonial govt. to account. It never let up on Boris Johnson as Prime Minister and carried full reports on his Partygate shenanigans during Covid. It is therefore a bit rich when our own TV anchors- TRPveers- who long ago sold their grandmothers to the highest bidder, tell us that the BBC is compromised and has no credibility.

  I believe that Mr. Swapan Dasgupta (who used to be a journalist in pre-Vedic times), and who has been given more than his fair share of screen space as an apologist for the BJP in the documentary, is the Media Advisor to the Prime Minister. If so, he should be shown the door immediately for the govt's decision to ban the film on digital platforms, and, as a logical follow up, to use force to prevent its viewing in public or in university campuses. For now this documentary has become the second most sought after video after Pathan and Deepika Padukone's panties.

  If Mr. Dasgupta had not spent all his time defending the indefensible he would perhaps have learnt about the Streisand effect. It all began when in 2003 the California Coastal Project Report uploaded a picture of the coastline in which Barbara Streisand's Malibu mansion was also visible. The intention was to develop proper policies for combating coastal erosion. But the  actress filed a suit claiming US$50 million for invasion of privacy. The attendant publicity, however, had the opposite effect from what she had intended: where earlier the photograph had only 6 downloads, her action resulted in 420000 downloads in the following months! Attempts to suppress or to hide information only ensure wider dissemination and draw even more attention to it. Which is what is happening to the BBC documentary much to the embarrassment of the bhaktiveers.

  The double whammy, based on a similar principle playing out, was delivered by the film Pathan. It has been obvious for some time that, for reasons I cannot fathom, Shah Rukh Khan is the right wing's bete noire; maybe there's something here none of us is aware of. For he has always comported himself in public as a gentleman, has stayed away from politics and has been reticent to a fault. I suspect that that is what angers some people. He does not conform to the image of the "enemy" that these lumpens target, and he refuses to endorse the politics of the day (as most of his peers have spinelessly done). But he is India's biggest superstar and therefore must be brought down, if only to convey that people of his community cannot be allowed to succeed in this new rashtra.                                                                                                                        Internationally, Bollywood is the preeminent face of India's soft power, from the time of Raj Kapoor to AR Rehman. And the face it presents is one of joyful cultural diversity, multi-faith, multi-community, whether it be in its content, songs, dances, lyricists, directors, singers or actors. This is not acceptable to the present dispensation and its adherents, which want desperately that India should be viewed only through a single religious and cultural prism. And since Shah Rukh Khan is the recognizable face of the other Bollywood he has to be brought down and "in the dust be equal made" with the Vivek Agnihotris and Akshay Kumars of the world.                                                                                                                                                                    The unconscionable targeting of his son in a patently false drug case boomeranged on the government last year. So Pathan, his first film in five years, could not be allowed to succeed. Controversies were manufactured, TV debates engineered to build up public opinion against it, social media was swamped with "boycott Pathan" calls, threats were held out liberally by petty minions of power. But the Streisand effect came into play again, as it had done earlier for Brahmashastra too, and Shah Rukh's movie is well on its way to becoming our own Titanic or Avatar. The push-back from Bollywood appears to have finally started.                    Is the toxic nationalism virus becoming weaker, like the Covid one, or are we developing greater immunity to it ? Time will tell, but these two developments last fortnight are a harbinger of better times (which should not be confused with "acche din"). As I write this, a triple whammy has just been delivered by the Hindenberg report on the Adani conglomerate whose valuation has plummeted faster even than the moral values of our TV anchors. The story is still a work in progress but, as usual, the "conspiracy" and "anti-India" cards have been pulled out of the deck again to counter the report. It didn't help much that the CFO of Adani Enterprises, in a televised address on Tuesday, wrapped himself in the national flag and compared the carnage of his shares to the Jalianwala Bagh massacre ! At least he spoke, even though it was burlesque at its worst, for there has been a resounding silence otherwise- not even a well-oiled squeak out of the Finance Ministry, the RBI, SEBI, the Stock Exchanges or SBI so far. It's not a question of who will blink first (Adani has already blinked by cancelling his FPO last night), the real question is: who will speak first ? For all I know the facts presented in this report or in the BBC documentary may be wrong  (though I suspect they are not), but surely this great nation cannot be equated to two individuals, notwithstanding their delusions of immortality ?

  Not a very auspicious beginning to the Amritkal or our much vaunted G-20 presidency, is it ?