Rejecting a dream

• The nation should be relieved about the much delayed decision on the Gorshkov. Your editorial (IE, Januar...

• The nation should be relieved about the much delayed decision on the Gorshkov. Your editorial (IE, January 20) says it all — except that the “best on an aircraft carrier” should not be expected to merely defend the navy. It is time we gave up a “defence mindset” in our outlook and go beyond it. India is a potential pole in this multipolar world and one sure way of projecting our presence and exhibiting our military-industrial complex is to do it through indigenously built ships. We have come a long way since the Nehru-Menon era during which sound foundations were laid for becoming self-sufficient in military hardware. Unfortunately, we gave up on the HDW submarine building project because of an irresponsible opposition and slackened efforts to build a carrier in the Kochi shipyard.

— Mukund B. Kunte New Delhi

Private/Public

• We have as a society become heartless (‘Living with the Chandras’, IE, January 21). How many of us will go as far as to stop an atrocity committed on a woman? In fact, if I am to be honest, I don’t even know how I will react if confronted by such an incident. What we forget is that a “private” issue sometimes has “public” consequences. Normally, such incidents evoke a passionate article, some support to the victims and the whole thing fades out from public memory. Then what?

— Karma Negi On e-mail

Wrong conclusion

• It is regrettable that Saeed Naqvi’s in his article ‘Vajpayee clears the way’ (IE, January 16) observes that while the Congress struggles in vain for a gameplan, Sonia Gandhi is a handicap to the Congress and would be so in future. In fact, she is the uniting factor for the party as well for the nation. The often repeated about her foreign origin will not have any relevance in these elections. The masses who are poor and illiterate are not bothered about her foreign origin but look for a national leader as they did in 1980 when they voted in Indira Gandhi.

— K. Venkatakrishnan New Delhi

Saviours?

Story continues below this ad

• Renuka Narayanan had in her article (IE, January 6) exposed the true face of Karunanidhi. K. Venkatakrishan has in his letter (IE, January 17) tried to create an impression that non-brahmins had been subjected to discrimination at the hands of the brahmins by stating falsehoods. In fact he has twisted facts in such a way that DMK leaders like Karunanidhi and Annadurai appear like saviours of the ‘poor Hindu non-brahmins’! In the 40s and 50s, upper caste Hindu non-brahmins were ruling the roost and holding high positions under government. Even the vice chancellor of the Madras University was a Mudaliar, a high caste Hindu non-brahmin. While brahmin boys had to work hard to get government posts it was offered on a platter to the Hindu non-brahmins belonging to upper castes.

Dravadian parties aligned themselves with the high caste Hindu non-brahmins like Mudaliars, Pillais, Naidus, Chettiars and other prosperous communities and did not care for the low caste Hindu non-brahmins whom Gandhiji chose to call Harijans. It was a brahmin — Subramania Bharati — who made a Harijan boy wear a poonool (holy thread) and declared him a brahmin. It was another brahmin — Mudarai Vaidyanatha Iyer — who took a group of low-caste Hindus and entered the Meenakshi temple in Madurai.

— B. Krishnamoorthy New Delhi