As the US debates its readiness to accept a woman such as Hillary Clinton as president, India has already done so, with the election of Pratibha Patil. Although in India the presidency is primarily a ceremonial post that carries less weight than that of prime minister (the position once held by Indira Gandhi), it is symbolically significant. Sonia Gandhi, the leader of the ruling Congress Party, who pushed hard to promote Patil's candidacy primarily on gender grounds, calls this election "a special moment for women across the country."
Moreover, India can claim a great deal of pride in the fact that the last two presidents were from minority populations -- one from the lowest of castes (Harijan, formerly referred to as "untouchables") and another one from the Muslim community.
As a daughter of a woman who fought for women's rights during the independence movement and was instrumental in starting one of the first women's institutions in India, I should feel a genuine sense of pride in the election of Patil.
But I have mixed emotions.
Both of India's last two presidents had distinguished themselves in professional careers before being elected -- one in the Foreign Service and the other in nuclear physics -- and their reputations were above reproach. Patil, on the other hand, is a controversial figure, with questionable qualifications. Most of India's major news outlets highlighted in their coverage of the story charges of corruption and ineptitude. One well-respected publication even called Patil's selection "embarrassing."
Women hear over and over that we have to be twice as good as men to be perceived as successful, deserving leaders. Even if we disregard some of the accusations against Patil as baseless, it is hard to imagine a less powerful candidate for the highest ceremonial post in the largest democracy in the world.
All the same, I applaud Sonia Gandhi for her commitment to appointing a woman to this important position. In a country full of contradictory attitudes toward women -- ranging from the worship of the powerful goddess Durga to the killing of innocent young brides -- such gestures can be very powerful.
But gestures cannot be a substitute for real action, or for the hard work that is necessary to empower all Indian women. Indeed, one could argue that such symbolic acts may even create a blind euphoria that obscures the fact that, as a result of less education and lower pay, young females in India continue to have far fewer resources than their male counterparts.
While the Indian president may be only a ceremonial head of state, during periods of political instability -- especially in the age of coalition governments -- it is the president who makes crucial decisions about governing parties. Many past presidents have also used the position to throw their intellectual weight behind such important issues as education and India's cultural diversity.
So President Patil has large shoes to fill. One can only hope she will prove her critics wrong. For those women in India who have proven themselves to be effective leaders, it would be wonderful if she can demonstrate early on that she has the intellectual and professional gravitas that befits the position.
Vishakha Desai is the president of the Asia Society.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS