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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS