An Indian diplomat to the US named Devyani Khobragade was arrested in New York on charges of forging visa documents for her house maid, making the maid work long hours, and not paying the agreed upon sum of money. The maid had filed the complaint. Ms. Kobragade lamented that she was handcuffed, strip-searched and treated like a "common criminal." The U.S. prosecutor involved in the case, Mr. Preet Bharara, defended that there was no violation of protocol. He asserted, "Is it for U.S. prosecutors to look the other way, ignore the law and the civil rights of victims or is it the responsibility of the diplomats and consular officers and their government to make sure the law is observed?"
The fury the arrest incited in India was astounding. The prime minister and the parliament expressed outrage against the arrest of the diplomat. They removed security barricade from the U.S. embassy, expelled a consular, blocked the flow of whiskey for the embassy staff (one has to wonder what incites creativity in Indians!). There were editorials condemning the U.S. There were enthusiastic flag burners in the street. Media reported that the maid's family was threatened. Even our own fierce proletariat Prachanda's foreign relations advisor penned an OpEd lamenting how was it possible for the poor diplomats to survive with a maid on meager USD 2000 per month if they pay the minimum wage demanded by the law of the land (my simple advise to the advisor in such a profound dilemma would have been: not own a maid).
I was flabbergasted by the Indian response. A person who had abused a vulnerable, powerless worker, lied to the authorities, was arrested following the law of the land following the complaint of the victim. And the whole country was vouching for the person who had committed the crime!
She howled, she was treated like a "common criminal." And the country said, "yes she is no common criminal, she needs to be treated special!"
"It is a matter of our national pride, the pride of our mother country, the pride of our flag, the pride of our government and parliament, brothers and sisters!" said the Indians. "Yes!" everyone said.
The crime vanquished from the conversation. Why bother what the grievances of the maid might be? The whole focus turned on: why was Ms. Khobragade treated like a "common criminal?" The turning of this beyond-common elite to a common was what hurt the conscience of the elite India.
That is the entitlement of the elites of these regions. They have been so used to trampling over the rights, dignity and conscience of the powerless that if they are told otherwise they feel out of space. As if the reality has been distorted. I had learnt about it a little while back at smaller scales seeing our "Sirs" at public institutions. But I had never imagined that this can play out at the national scale as well. While at the smaller scales the tools of chauvinism are "insider"/"outsider", "senior"/"junior", "obedient"/"non-obedient", the tool at these national levels seem to be that of unreasoned nationalistic pride.
In this perverse reality, countless of her citizens end up working in extreme conditions in middle east, her daughters and sisters raped and abused with none to voice the agony, her children denied basic dignity. Where is that diplomatic muscle where it is really needed? Where is that diplomatic muscle when it concerns the powerless?
No comments:
Post a Comment