Kethoser Kevichusa
“You may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one” - John Lennon
Today, July 25, 2007, is the day when President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam demits office as the 11th president of India. In the conscious memory of the people of India, there has not been an Indian president more loved, more admired, and more popular than Kalam. He is “The People’s President,” and his name is a household name. It is obvious that the man is a genuinely spontaneous, disarmingly friendly, and sincerely concerned “first citizen.” With his mantra of “ignited minds” he has also captured the imagination and hearts of the people of India to “dream” - and to dream big. He himself is a dreamer.
Kalam reminds people of another man. That man is Kalam’s own hero, the Jewish scientist, Albert Einstein. What is common between Einstein and Kalam - besides their equally embarrassing hairstyles! - is their “ignited minds.” But more than that is their common association with the “atom bomb.” While Einstein claimed himself to be a pacifist, his scientific theories and influence (it is said) played a key role in building the world’s first nuclear bomb. Under Kalam, India also built and successfully tested its first nuclear bomb in 1998 (and put India into the world’s elite “nuclear club” of countries). Justifying his actions in building the bomb, Kalam said, “We must think and act like a nation of a billion people, and not like that of a million people. Dream, dream, dream!” Every Indian nationalist understands and loves such language. India thus rewarded Kalam when it not only nicknamed him “The Missile Man of India,” but also made him the president in 2002.
When it comes to the nuclear bomb, there are two completely opposite views. There are those who think that it is one of the most important securities for world peace. Kalam himself, while interacting with young school students (as he loves to do wherever he goes) during his fairly recent visit to Kohima, said that India’s bomb was for “national security” and “national peace,” so that “we can be busy on development.” Adherents of this position also point out to the time when the world was divided between the Western and the Eastern blocs (or, more specifically, capitalist USA and communist USSR). They claim that what kept these two blocs from going to war was that both possessed nuclear weapons. Each knew that if they went to war, it would ensure mutual destruction, and, quite literally, the end of the world. So they did not go to war. The result? If not “world peace,” at least “cold war.”
The other view is that the nuclear bomb is one of the greatest threats to world peace - both during the cold war era and (more so) today. With the disintegration of the USSR, there is the terrible danger of its nuclear stockpiles being “black-marketed” into the hands of so-called “rogue states” like Iran and North Korea or, worse, terrorists. But even if these nations or groups do not get hold of these Russian bombs, it is just a matter of time before they build their own. The fear of countries like America is that these “bad guys” might actually use the bombs. In fact, one of the main reasons given by President George Bush in the 2003 invasion of Iraq was that Saddam Hussain was acquiring “weapons of mass destruction.” Bush, in a 2002 speech, outlining his reasons for planning to invade Iraq, also concluded by saying, “And by our actions, we will secure the peace, and lead the world to a better day.” But nuclear weapons were, of course, not found. Neither has the war in Iraq ended. Peace has not been secured. The world has not been led to a better day. So the nuclear bomb - whether someone possesses it or not; whether someone uses it or not - is today’s biggest threat to world peace.
America must also not be allowed to forget that it is the only nation in history that has ever actually used the nuclear bomb when it bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the Second World War. When it has historically proven that it is ready to nuke civilian populations, and when it continues to sit on thousands of active nuclear warheads, America has little right to stop others from building their own nuclear bombs. Neither do the other members of the nuclear club. (Britain recently voted in parliament to renew its nuclear weapons program, Trident, till at least 2050.) Nations like Iran and North Korea must be told not to build their nuclear bombs, and they must listen. But let it be nations with “no nuclear weapon policy” (that is, countries that have either abandoned or never started nuclear weapon programs) that tell them so. Only these nations are the real “good guys” when it comes to the nuclear issue. Not even nations like India with their “no first use policy.” When it comes to the nuclear issue, it matters little whether one is the world’s “oldest,” “greatest,” or “largest” democracy. Others see it as “democrisy” - the hypocrisy of democracy.
Coming back to Kalam, responding to another question from a young student in Kohima, on if there was anything more that he wanted to achieve in life, the president said, “I would like to see India transforming into a developed nation and its billion plus will be happy, prosperous and safe.” The question is: Does the nuclear bomb ensure or threaten that? Have the nuclear warheads of the missile man increased or decreased the chances of his young adoring children growing up in a “happy, prosperous and safe” India? For Kalam, it has increased their chances and ensured their future. But could it also be that they have only increased the possibility that the dreamer’s dreaming children might one day be rudely awakened by the nightmare of a nuclear holocaust? History will be the judge and the children the witnesses.
India may love Kalam; America may have voted for Bush; the world may admire Einstein. But I, for one, love and admire another Indian - Mahatma Gandhi, another American - Martin Luther King Jr., and another Jew - Jesus of Nazareth. Yes, all of them - Luther King Jr., Gandhi, and Jesus - suffered violent deaths themselves; they may also not have the best hairstyles. But when it comes to dreaming of a better and more peaceful world, I will take my cue from these “dreamweavers.” They are the masters, the others pretenders. Let them talk, and I will gladly listen. Let them lead, and I will gladly follow. As for those who ignite bombs and win wars, even if they have the most ignited minds, a thousand bombs, a billion people, or the fanciest hairstyles on their side, they will not ignite my imagination and they will never win my heart.
