A tale of two Indias 

  A gated development for the subcontinent's super-rich ... and a funeral for a 
cotton farmer, forced into suicide because of spiralling poverty. India's 
economic growth is dazzling but, in the new, globalised era, its inequalities 
are becoming even more polarised.

  By Randeep Ramesh 
  The Guardian | Wednesday April 5, 2006
  
A blue-suited Boris Becker strokes his chin, shakes
his head and speaks into the lens. "No, no. I'm sorry,
I can't think of any place I like to live in as much
as this place." Flanked by wooden, Swiss-style chalets
and manicured, verdant lawns the former Wimbledon
champion then saunters off, presumably to find his
place. The advert, which has been shown repeatedly on
Indian television screens for the past month, promotes
the impression that Becker wants to live the rest of
his life in the shadow of the Sahyadri Hills, an oasis
of greenery in the dust of the Indian state of
Maharashtra.

What is being advertised is a first in the country - a
private enclave that will eventually separate 35,000
wealthy residents from the teeming poverty in India.
In the process, 11,000 acres of prime forest are
slowly being converted into a city, called Aamby
Valley, which is sealed off by eight-foot-high brick
walls topped by an electric fence. Inside, every home
has a panic button and streets are lined with
closed-circuit television cameras. Gated and guarded
by a gun-toting police force, the township is out of
bounds to non-residents - intentionally cut off from
the rest of India.

In many ways, Aamby Valley resembles a luxury holiday
resort rather than an exclusive utopia. It boasts some
of the best weather in the country, with the
temperature rarely rising above 32C, and it is cooled
by year-round breezes. There are water parks, hiking
trails, rock-climbing walls, an 18-hole golf course, a
tribal village, five-star restaurants, a 1,500-bed
hospital and an airport for private jets. With just
250 of the 7,000 homes built, Aamby Valley has the
creepy feel of an abandoned Hollywood set.

But the township is more than just a flash housing
development. Its construction marks a step change in
India's evolution from dirt-poor country into a
middle-income one, unembarrassed by the fact that the
rich are getting richer - some of them very rich
indeed.

Previously, the wealthy have had to deal with the
choking poverty of the country, edging their Mercedes
past lolling cows and avoiding pavement pools of urine
in their Manolo Blahniks. There was no way to shut out
the crime, traffic and noise that pervade the
country's city streets. Until India globalised in the
1990s, Indians tended to identify with the poor - a
societal trait that drew inspiration from the example
of the ascetic Mohandas Gandhi.

Gandhi's India, or at least his influence on
economics, has all but disappeared in the past decade.
>From 1947 until 1991, the economy grew at 3.5% a year,
the so-called Hindu rate of growth which championed
equality and social stability over wealth. After 1991,
that all changed. Notions of speed and efficiency were
stamped on to a civilisation that traditionally took a
slower, more relaxed view of life. Economic growth
rose to 6% a year. In the past three years, it has
zoomed to 8% a year - meaning that the economy will
double in size in a decade. The message now is similar
to that of China during the 90s, in the phrase
attributed to Deng Xiaoping: "To get rich is
glorious."

Not that the wealth has reached all of the country.
India is one land, but the rich and poor exist on
apparently different planets. Virtually unreported are
some awful daily realities: the rate of malnutrition
in children under five is a shamefully high 45%. Less
than a third of India's homes have a toilet and most
women have to wait until the dark of evening to
venture out to answer the call of nature. The talk of
making poverty history sounds hollow in India, a land
which is home to a third of the world's poor and where
some 300 million people live on less than $1 a day.

Yet another world is growing up, fuelled by the
immense wealth that is being amassed by India's new
monied classes, who shop for brand-name luxury goods,
ski in the Alps and send their kids to Harvard. Very
soon the country will have 3.8m households with an
annual income of 10m rupees (£130,000).

Below them in any rich list is the middle class,
estimated to number about 150 million. Their hunger
for goods has seen a new money culture - how to make
it and how to spend it. India's masses were, under the
more equal state-run economy, denied shopping choices.
The country is today undergoing a consumer boom. For
some, this is proof enough that, in opening up, India
has gained from globalisation - allowing Dior, Bulgari
and Rolls-Royce into the country. Consumption in this
India is nothing if not conspicuous.

Aamby Valley offers Indians a way to buy their way out
of the state: a couple of acres costs 70m rupees
(£900,000). In British terms it may not sound like a
fortune, but the price of the cheapest wooden
two-bedroom chalet is 15m rupees (£190,000) - 90 times
the average Indian family's annual income. This alone
will ensure that flourishing India is kept well apart
from the unwashed masses.

Surveying her six-acre plot, Savitha Mansukhani, the
wife of a multi-millionaire electronics tycoon, says
that her home city of Mumbai is too crowded and
"everybody knows somebody who has been robbed at
home". "Here I will feel completely safe. It is a
walled city and nobody can walk in. Only the right
sort of people."

Apart from feeling secure, Savitha gushes forth about
Aamby Valley's benefits: its broadband connections,
its poolside dining, its watersports centre. Her
husband Vijay, who has a mild heart condition, loves
their Spanish-style villa overlooking the lake. She
lingers in describing her plans for a chintzy inside
waterfall and the about-to-be-laid Italian marble
floors. "For the first time I wish I was 10 years
younger. Then I would have longer to enjoy it all."
Another two sprawling private suburbs are planned just
a few hours' drive away.

At the heart of these ventures is the privatisation of
India's urban spaces. Aamby Valley is run by a private
company, Sahara, an Indian business conglomerate which
launched a national airline, runs television stations
and operates a rural banking network in north India.

The townships' rules and regulations, currently being
formulated, are reminiscent of a Singaporean zeal for
law and order. Few will regret prohibiting the
unsavoury Indian habit of spitting red streams of
"paan", a chewy paste made from betel nut that stains
most streets, or forbidding men from using the kerb as
a public toilet. But within a decade Aamby Valley will
be handed over to a contractor who will run the city's
services. The township will be governed by a council
that will be "selected not elected", and a new set of
regulations will spring up to determine what colour
each chalet can be painted and where denizens can park
their limos.

All this points to a deeper trend: a swelling class of
people with a deep mistrust of government who dream of
creating an Indian Shangri-la. The new wealthy in
India are quietly abandoning the state: paying for
their own private police force and playing golf at
private clubs. There appears to be little concern
about supporting public services or about the poor who
are stuck with decrepit hospitals and schools. This
kind of institutional inequality has its roots in the
caste system, India's social hierarchy, but it will
soon be criss-crossed by another set of divisions that
will see older cities becoming dumped with an Indian
underclass.

One only has to turn on the television to see this new
India being created. Characters in Indian car
advertisements always seem to be driving along
pristine highways in the forests of Austria or along
the beaches of California, with never a rut or a holy
cow in sight. Aamby Valley's promotional video sees
Daley Thompson apparently rendered speechless as he
relaxes in an outsized Mediterranean cottage. There is
an exultant sense among the country's wealthy that a
brash, bold India is claiming its appropriate place in
the world. The thinking goes that in an age of
outsourcing, high technology and nuclear weapons,
India's image overseas can no longer be shrunk to one
of elephants, maharajahs and rag-clad, swollen-bellied
children.

It often takes celebrity to lift the poor in India out
of anonymity. On a sultry spring evening in Delhi last
month, the novelist Arundhati Roy could be found in
the middle of a troupe of chanting, sari-clad women,
who were hoping to draw attention to a terrible blight
on the rural landscape: farmers' suicides. Thousands
of farmers have taken their own lives, having found
themselves with a debt that, in dollar terms, would
scarcely buy an iPod, but which is enough to
impoverish a family.

Roy likens the country's progress to two convoys of
trucks: a small group that is on its way to a
"glittering destination near the top of world", and a
more massive pack that "melts into the darkness and
disappears". "A section of India has seceded from the
nation," she says. "This project of corporate
globalisation has created a constituency of very rich
people who are very thrilled about it. They do not
care about the hawkers being cleared from the streets
or the slums that are disappeared overnight." As she
sees it, India is not coming together but coming apart
because liberalisation has convulsed the country at an
unprecedented, unacceptable velocity. In the cities,
the hammer and bulldozer are, often, noisily
demolishing slum block after slum block, making way
for shiny new apartments. Nowhere is this shift more
profoundly felt than in the country's villages where,
Roy says, "India does not live. It dies".

India is largely a mosaic of 500,000 villages, each
with a population of about 1,000 people. This basic
demographic unit has, for centuries, acquiesced to an
unseen order, governed by caste rules, harvests and
religious festivals. Yet the blooming of capitalism
that, in India's cities, translates into rampant
consumerism, extravagant architecture and looser
sexual mores has had a more wrenching effect in the
nation's villages.

Just a few hundred kilometres from Aamby Valley, in
Vidarbha, the farming belt in eastern Maharashtra, are
fields of black soil that once reaped a rich harvest
of "white gold", as cotton was known. But the crop has
lost its lustre in recent years. The arrival of new
pesticides, genetically modified seeds and swanky
tractors that soak up increasingly expensive petrol
has pushed up the cost of the production. At the same
time, India dismantled the wall of duties that kept
out foreign cotton as part of its liberalisation
drive.

Vidarbha's farmers, unprotected by market controls and
tariffs, have to compete with growers from the
European Union and US who are subsidised to the tune
of billions of dollars a year. The last vestiges of
Indian government support were withdrawn a few months
ago. The result is that Indian cotton farmers have
become impoverished in a few short years. Many have
borrowed to stay alive - first from banks and then
from usurious moneylenders. Chained in poverty by
debts they cannot pay, farmers began to sell first
their carts, then their cattle, followed by land and
homes. Some offer their kidneys for 100,000 rupees
(£1,300).

Others have put up entire villages for sale. The 800
acres of Dorli village in Wardha district, complete
with accommodation for 46 families, can be yours for
200m rupees (£2.5m), about the same as three plots in
Aamby Valley. "I can negotiate," says Sujata Halule,
the 27-year-old elected member of the village council
who senses a sale in my questions. "We have no food,
no clothes ... dogs live better here now." On the
front page of the local newspaper there is a grisly
running tally of farmers' suicides in the area: the
six-month total on the day I arrive is 348.

Kadu Petkar became one of them in February when he
swallowed a bottle of insecticide, lay in the cool
dawn shade of his string cot, vomited and died.

Past parched, yellow fields and sun-bleached lanes is
Petkar's house in Kurjhi Fort village. The home, which
is low-slung and made of brick and mud, has space for
three or four small rooms which, when I arrive,
quickly fill with jostling mourners. Petkar's mother
squats on the floor holding her arms and rocking
slowly back and forth, often dissolving into tears.
>From beneath her brown chiffon scarf, Petkar's
daughter Nanda speaks of finding her father's body in
the early morning, his lips cold and caked with the
contents of his stomach.

The 45-year-old had borrowed 31,000 rupees (£390) a
decade ago; despite occasional repayments, the debt
had tripled by the time of his death. The bank had
already come to collect its dues, forcing the sale of
some of his land.

Left to sink further into poverty are Petkar's wife,
75-year-old mother, 80-year-old father and four
children. The older members of the family have taken
to working in the fields as daily labourers for less
than a pound a day. Sixteen-year-old Nanda will soon
join them. Although she would like to continue her
studies "in the big city and go shopping like the
other girls", her father's death has all but
extinguished such ambitions. "Now I do not have any
dreams," she says.

Last month, 77 farmers took their own lives, at a rate
of almost three a day. Some Indian writers have called
it a "great depression", but in the week that grisly
death toll was published, there were more stories on
Mumbai's fashion week in the newspapers than on rural
desolation.

Globalisation in India has been a broad and brutal
process, creating a country in vital and vulgar flux.
The bigger the gains in India from open markets, the
bigger the disorientating changes. And the Indians who
count themselves among the losers from this process
easily outnumber the winners. More than 400 million
farm workers each earn India just $375 (£230) a year
in output. The comparable amount made by the million
or so software engineers is $25,000 (£16,000).

It is such inequalities, particularly in a culture
that has come to promote assiduously the accumulation
of wealth, that fuels predictions by the CIA and
investment banks such as Goldman Sachs that India,
along with China, will come to dominate the world
economy in the next few decades. China is already the
globe's second-largest economy; India is on the verge
of overtaking Japan to become the third biggest. A
future of even greater wealth seems assured. But so
does today's reality that India remains a terrifying
place to be poor.




«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥««¤»¥«¤»§«¤»
This is ZESTEconomics. Post economics-related articles and event info to 
[email protected]

If you got this mail as a forward, subscribe to ZESTEconomics by sending a 
blank mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR, if you have a Yahoo! ID, visit 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/join

==theZESTcommunity======================================

[1] ZESTCurrent: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCurrent/
[2] ZESTEconomics: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/
[3] ZESTGlobal: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTGlobal/
[4] ZESTMedia: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTMedia/
[5] ZESTPoets: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTPoets/
[6] ZESTCaste: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTCaste/
[7] ZESTAlternative: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTAlternative/
[8] TalkZEST: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TalkZEST/ 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZESTEconomics/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to