Veterans & Nation Building

When personnel of the defence forces cease to be on the active list, either because of superannuation, retirement or being boarded out on medical grounds, they step into a somewhat alien world, where re-integration with the civil society is not easy. They find that there is a mismatch between the veteran’s aspirations from the society and in turn, the society’s expectations from the veterans in contributing to the well being of the community.

The Indian Army is over 1.1 million strong today. As the strength of the Army increases, so does the strength of the veterans. Added to that is the increase in longevity, which further adds to the strength of the veterans and their families. For a veteran’s population of this size, the number and extent of plans, both for their welfare and using their talents are abysmally low. The existing policies and plans touch peripheral areas, which do not give much satisfaction or joy. Most professional militaries do have elaborate policies and schemes for their veterans, but in India, neither the central government, nor the state governments, nor indeed the service headquarters focus adequately on the veterans. Resultantly, the situation today is that the veterans are playing little role in nation building; neither is their considerable talent being tapped.

BACKGROUND

Nearly sixty thousand personnel of the defence forces retire annually and revert to the civil society from where they had joined the service two, three or four decades back. Our jawans retire in their late thirties; the junior commissioned officers (JCO’s) in their mid-to-late forties and the bulk of the officers retire in their mid-fifties. These are young ages indeed. Even the 15 to 18 three star officers (lieutenant generals and equivalent), retiring annually, do so at the age of 60, which also is a comparatively young age. They still have many productive years ahead.

The veterans bring with them a lot of talent, but find that there are no takers for their expertise, not only in the area of security, but in many diverse fields. The army teaches us many skills, which not only make us win battles and wars, but makes personnel outstanding leaders, managers and administrators, whether they go home as majors or major generals or as a naik or a subedar. Till a few years back, the problem lay with us, as we could not project our skills and worth to the corporate world, as well as others who could have used the military in their ventures, in the language they understood. We have now changed that by translating all skills into corporate language, but the malaise persists.

Most veterans are young and have many family liabilities. Although they get a pension from the government for services rendered to the nation, it is obviously not enough and hence most are under pressure to look for a second career. This is applicable to both officers and men. However, till the last few years, there were no jobs for them. For the jawans, both the central and state governments have reserved some Group C and Group D posts. The reservation in the central government ministries and departments is 10 and 20 per cent in Group C and Group D posts; in public sector undertakings (PSU’s) and banks it stands at 14.5 per cent in Group C and 24.5 per cent in Group D posts. They look nice on paper, but are never fully filled. Only a token are taken and the others rejected on flimsy grounds. The statistics speak for themselves. In 2007, a total of 4, 222 veterans were given employment in civil jobs. The figures for 2006 and 2005 are 7,230 and 3,677 respectively. In any case, there are no reserved jobs in the government, the PSU’s or the private sectors for officers and JCO’s.

Society has vast expectations that the veterans will play a vital role in ‘nation building’ activities. Before we proceed further, there is a need to understand what we mean by the term ‘nation building’. Nation-building, as it is commonly referred to, is a broad effort to promote political and economic reforms with the objective of transforming the society. The aim of such efforts is to redirect the competition for wealth and power, which takes place within any society. Nation building tasks include security in all its manifestations; humanitarian relief, if needed; good governance; economic stabilisation; sustaining democracy; and developmental tasks, which include fostering economic growth, poverty reduction, and infrastructure improvements. The ultimate objective of any nation-building mission is to create a society, which remains at peace with itself. Such tasks take time, energy and funds to accomplish.

Nation-building includes the creation of superficial national paraphernalia, like flags, symbols and so on, but at a deeper level, national identity needs to be deliberately created by moulding different groups into a nation, especially since colonialism had used divide and rule tactics to maintain its domination. Even after 60 years of Independence, this aspect continues to be important.

One may well say that these are tasks for the government, as it has many instruments to perform these tasks. This is theoretically correct, but governments by themselves cannot achieve them, unless the civil society joins in wholeheartedly. Within the civil society, the veterans are the most suitable group that can motivate the others and act as catalysts for this important task. We will revert to this subject a little later, after I have covered some factual details.

It is unfortunate that there are no schemes or plans of the government for involving the veterans in the process of ‘nation building’. In fact, the ground situation today is that the three entities who should have such plans, viz. the army or the defence forces, the central government and the state governments have formulated practically no plans for the veterans. 

Let me now briefly focus on the veterans’ organisation in USA, as a comparison.The United States has the most comprehensive system of assistance for veterans of any nation in the world. The Veterans Administration (VA) was established in 1930, by the Congress enacting a law. The responsibilities and benefits programmes of the Veterans Administration grew enormously during the following six decades. World War II resulted in not only a vast increase in the veteran population, but also in large number of new benefits enacted by the Congress for veterans of the war. The World War II GI Bill, signed into law on June 22, 1944, is said to have had more impact on the American way of life than any other law in the previous 100 years. Further educational assistance acts were passed for the benefit of veterans of the Korean Conflict, the Vietnam Era, Persian Gulf War, and the All-Volunteer Force.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was established as a Cabinet-level position on March 15, 1989. President Bush hailed the creation of the new Department saying, “There is only one place for the veterans of America, in the Cabinet Room, at the table with the President of the United States of America.”

The VA health care system has grown from 54 hospitals in 1930, to include 171 medical centres; more than 350 out patient, community, and outreach clinics; 126 nursing home care units; and 35 domiciliaries. VA health care facilities provide a broad spectrum of medical, surgical and rehabilitative care. For Financial Year 2009, the budget proposal for the veterans is $ 93.7 billion. There are many other details, but it is not possible to include them here.  

Let me now make some recommendations. First, what can the army do? Soldiers make a life-long commitment to the army. Consequently, there is need to maintain a continued sense of belonging. The army needs to foster these ties and provide adequate opportunities to continue the link between the veterans and serving personnel, in terms of camaraderie, consultations, concern for their welfare and support. Our personnel need a sense of belonging even more after they leave the army. One answer is to set up an Army Association, with chapters in each state. The Indian Air Force already has an Air Force Association. The Navy too has The Naval Foundation.

There is also a need for the army to aggressively market the competence of all ranks of the army. The army has a major shortage, but for some reason I am unable to fathom, the army avoids using the services of retired officers to fill at least some of the voids. Such suggestions are superficially heard, but dismissed as impracticable. Can retired officers fill vacancies in training establishments, static headquarters, specialised technical appointments in projects where continuity is a major requirement, like war gaming or components evolving various systems for net-centric warfare and so on? I strongly feel they can. There are other places too, where the veterans can be employed within the army. Some of the major inhibitions of the army are considerations of seniority, demands for equal facilities, lack of control and so on. All these are minor issues, easily resolvable. One solution is to employ the veterans on a contractual basis for specified periods. I would urge the army to give this a serious thought.

Let me now briefly focus on the veterans’ organisation in USA, as a comparison. The United States has the most comprehensive system of assistance for veterans of any nation in the world. The Veterans Administration (VA) was established in 1930, by the Congress enacting a law. The responsibilities and benefits programmes of the Veterans Administration grew enormously during the following six decades. World War II resulted in not only a vast increase in the veteran population, but also in large number of new benefits enacted by the Congress for veterans of the war. The World War II GI Bill, signed into law on June 22, 1944, is said to have had more impact on the American way of life than any other law in the previous 100 years. Further educational assistance acts were passed for the benefit of veterans of the Korean Conflict, the Vietnam Era, Persian Gulf War, and the All-Volunteer Force.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) was established as a Cabinet-level position on March 15, 1989. President Bush hailed the creation of the new Department saying, “There is only one place for the veterans of America, in the Cabinet Room, at the table with the President of the United States of America.”

The VA health care system has grown from 54 hospitals in 1930, to include 171 medical centers; more than 350 outpatient, community, and outreach clinics; 126 nursing home care units; and 35 domiciliaries. VA health care facilities provide a broad spectrum of medical, surgical and rehabilitative care. For Financial Year 2009, the budget proposal for the veterans is $ 93.7 billion. There are many other details, but it is not possible to include them here.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Let me now make some recommendations. First, what can the army do? Soldiers make a life-long commitment to the army. Consequently, there is need to maintain a continued sense of belonging. The army needs to foster these ties and provide adequate opportunities to continue the link between the veterans and serving personnel, in terms of camaraderie, consultations, concern for their welfare and support. Our personnel need a sense of belonging even more after they leave the army. One answer is to set up an Army Association, with chapters in each state. The Indian Air Force already has an Air Force Association. The Navy too has The Naval Foundation.

There is also a need for the army to aggressively market the competence of all ranks of the army. The army has a major shortage, but for some reason I am unable to fathom, the army avoids using the services of retired officers to fill at least some of the voids. Such suggestions are superficially heard, but dismissed as impracticable. Can retired officers fill vacancies in training establishments, static headquarters, specialised technical appointments in projects where continuity is a major requirement, like war gaming or components evolving various systems for net-centric warfare and so on? I strongly feel they can. There are other places too, where the veterans can be employed within the army. Some of the major inhibitions of the army are considerations of seniority, demands for equal facilities, lack of control and so on. All these are minor issues, easily resolvable. One solution is to employ the veterans on a contractual basis for specified periods. I would urge the army to give this a serious thought.

At Government Level

Secondly, at the government level, there is an imperative need to ensure that the large manpower of highly disciplined, motivated and skilled personnel that leaves the army every year is gainfully utilised during the productive years of the soldiers, when they have maximum potential to contribute their worth. An assured placement after leaving the army would provide greater confidence to officers and soldiers and this knowledge itself would motivate them to do better even in service. It will also be a major incentive to attract better individuals to the army, which is reeling under major shortages of officers today. Massive media effort needs to be generated to make both the private and public sectors change their attitude to soldiers and employ them, in accordance with their considerable and varied skills.

Nation Building Tasks

Thirdly and perhaps most importantly, is the need for the central and state governments to involve the veterans in nation building tasks. Precedents already exist, where the contributions of the army have been outstanding. Training imparted in the Services to the officers, Junior Commissioned Officers (JCO’s) and men, not only makes them good leaders and soldiers, but inculcates skills and more importantly values which they imbibe during their service, which make them ideal material for carrying out developmental activities and employment in developmental schemes.

The need is to set up hierarchical organisations, on the lines of army structures, for carrying out developmental activities in towns and villages. The manning of the organisation at successive levels should largely be by the veterans.

The examples of Land Armies, which did excellent work in Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh, can be cited. The Karnataka Land Army was constituted in the 1970’s to tackle the problems of unemployed youth of rural areas. The main objectives of the scheme were:-

            a. To inculcate a sense of discipline in youth.

            b. To train them in the art of working together as a body.

c. To make use of the labor force thus available, for the creation of permanent productive assets.

“Our main asset was the practical application of the knowledge of man-management we had acquired during our service. The officers from the armed forces have one distinct advantage over bureaucrats. They are trained to take decisions and habituated to see that orders from these decisions are carried out. The bureaucrats do not like taking decisions, and once orders are passed, take little care in implementing them”.

The positive traits of the veterans do need to be exploited for the good of the nation. Although the bulk of our population is still rural-based, our villages have not developed, are poor, and lack even the basic necessities of life. The employment of veterans in projects, which would substantially enhance infrastructure and bring prosperity to our villages would be greatly beneficial and would add to ‘nation building’.
The National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme that has been recently launched is one scheme where the veterans can play a major role. The scheme promises that one member from each of the country’s 60 million rural households is guaranteed 100 days of work each year. They will receive a minimum wage of 60 rupees ($1.35) or an unemployment allowance if there is no work. It is the biggest social security net ever provided in India. But will it succeed or go the same way as many major schemes launched in the past?

A large number of schemes and programmes initiated by the Government in the past, for employment, housing, area development and so on, like Jawahar Rozgar Yojna, Million Wells Scheme, Self-employment and Entrepreneurial Development Programme, Ganga Kalyan Yojna, Indira Awas Yojna and so on have largely been failures. It is not that the schemes were flawed, but they failed on account of lack of effective monitoring, implementation and accountability. The new schemes will also suffer the same fate, if we do not revamp the entire work force. The present implementers are the same senior and junior bureaucrats, corrupt to the core, who will siphon away all the funds and the poor rural folk will continue to remain poor. Neither will any meaningful infrastructural improvement take place. We need to create self-reliant villages and an organisation composed of veterans from top to bottom, for the effective monitoring, implementation and accountability of such schemes for rural areas. I strongly make a plea that special purpose vehicles like the Land Armies of the past be formed.

Suggestions for the Veterans 

Having highlighted what the three concerned institutions in our country – the defence forces, the central government and the state governments are doing or not doing about veterans, it would be appropriate to say a few words about the veterans themselves.

In the later years of my service in the army, I always felt and sometimes articulated that some veterans were the biggest pain in the neck for serving persons. After I demitted service and joined the ranks of the veterans, this view, instead of diminishing, has been further reinforced. Aspirations of some veterans are akin to the proverbial bottomless well, for they seem never to be satisfied. Perhaps there are good reasons for this, which my limited intelligence is unable to comprehend. Be as it may, let me make a few quick points.

The first is that the veterans must accept the fact that they are no longer serving personnel and consequently there has to be a reduction, if not elimination of the perks and privileges they had enjoyed earlier. The earliest this sinks in, the better would be your quality of life as well as peace of mind. You must have expectations, of course, but these must be commensurate with your new station in life.

My second point relates to your behaviour and life style as a veteran. In the defence forces, you had led an extremely active life, working hard, ready for operations at short notice, training hard, participating in sports and partying hard when time and resources permitted. Can you suddenly change and become a civilian? Obviously not! Therefore, remain a soldier, sailor or airman and do not succumb, whether it is in the field of deportment, character, turnout, adhering to time, disciplined approach to life, obeying orders and so on. There is a lot of respect for soldiers, both serving and veterans amongst the citizens of this country. We need to be worthy of this respect by our actions.

Thirdly, ‘Izzat’ or honour is probably the most important single value that a soldier seeks. It must continue to occupy that position of pre-eminence when you join the ranks of the veterans. I would also urge the bureaucracy and people from other walks of life to bear in mind the importance soldiers of all categories attach to this.

Fourthly, veterans must find their rightful place in national development. Veterans the world over have been accepted as important pillars of the nations polity. Although ‘nation building’ by the veterans finds acceptability amongst the public, there is also hostility. A large number of veterans have done highly creditable work in reviving and turning around dying or dead organisations, both in the public and private sectors. They have found opposition from bureaucrats and technocrats, who feel the veterans are intruding in their domains. This hostility needs to be contained in the interest of the nation. Veterans need to rise to meet the aspiration of millions of our poor people. Merely living in the small realm of your own fraternity will make you both tired and retired, when in actuality you are neither.

Fifthly, get united. In the milieu in which we live, your voice will only be heard if it is the voice of the group, not disparate individuals. It should not be like this, but the sad fact is that it is.

Many veterans, without waiting for plans and schemes to be floated by governments, have commenced working for the people on their own or by forming or joining NGO’s, which are carrying out useful work for the betterment of those of our compatriots who have needs or come under the category of “weaker sections of society”. I know many who are deeply involved in such welfare work, in both cities and villages. I am myself heading an institution – the War Wounded Foundation – which has been set up to assist our comrades who have been disabled in war or war like conflicts. You too can choose a cause, which appeals to you.

My last suggestion to the veterans is to remain busy and do so in the area that appeals to you most. It is the panacea for a healthy life. Please remember that there is also a world beyond the golf course, which beckons you. According to the Indian way of life, “karma is dharma”. It is as much applicable to the veterans as to every one else. So do your dharma for the nation and the society.

CONCLUSION

Personnel of the defence forces learn many skills during their service. These include leadership skills of a very high order, even amongst our non-commissioned officers (NCO’s). Depending on their Arms and Corps, as well as their trades and specializations, they have a large variety of skills, both technical and non-technical.

It is unfortunate that the Nation has been unable to utilise these considerable skills and talents, because of lack of will and focus, as well as suitable organisations, which can voice their aspirations and bring forth their availability to the attention of the policy makers of our country, as also to the captains of our industry. The Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare is supposed to do this, but our experience with this organisation or its earlier ‘avatar’ has been less than satisfactory.

Review: Text And Context, Quran & Contemporary Challenges by Arif Mohammed Khan

It was a  simply a coincidence that while I was driving to Lucknow to board flight to Delhi for a seminar, I stopped by at my friend Omar Farooq’s residence where my friend Irshad Ilmi gave me a book meant for someone to read and return while I am travelling to use my time. The book was Arif Mohammed’s Text and Context: Quran and contemporary Challenges. My review is as follows:-

The book was an interesting and timely collection of mostly newspapers articles written by the author over a period from 2008 to 2010. Taken together, the articles convey a statement of the author’s conviction and understanding of Islam as a religion in modern India. It is the voice of someone who has served the Indian state in a number of capacities and breaks with the dominant Muslim establishment positions on Muslim personal law (Shah Bano case and others) and the general tendency towards marginalization and ghettoization. The book is appropriately dedicated to Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan, the nineteenth-century Indian modernist, and may be read as a continuation of that tradition. In general, it appeals for a direct reading of the Qur’an for its values and its teachings, with only occasional reference to the history of its exegesis or some of the other ways in which the meaning of Islam developed in the past and present (jurisprudence, exegesis, theology, mysticism or philosophy).

The articles together arguably constitute a statement told partly, but not wholly, in response to the terror attacks in Mumbai in 2008.  A large number of articles are directed against the idea of Islam as a foundation of a nation such as Pakistan; and against terror in the name of Islam to which such religious nationalisms are indelibly linked in the view of the author. The author says relatively little on Muslims and other minorities as targets of Hindu nationalism, except as reactions to how Muslims, or the religious establishment in particular, have chosen to identify themselves as a distinct and embattled minority. Khan focuses much more on the Indian state’s effort to keep its secular direction on course, and little about its own embattled history with religion. Thus, for example, he recalls Indhira Ghandi’s reminder to the Deoband theological school in 1980 that they belong to India rather than her own more controversial political record on religion and nationalism. The longer history of religion and the Congress is not touched by the author.

More than three hundred pages, the book covers a large number of entries and topics. Helpfully, they are divided into seven sections: Education and Knowledge (5 essays); History (4); India (26); Islam (12); Muslim society (5); Pakistan (6); Terror and Jihad (12). The number of essays on India clearly dominates the book. This number may be increased if other essays focusing entirely on India are added to the twenty-six. Most of the essays are fairly short (2 or 3 pages), sharply-written and to the point. Often, it seems that they are they much too short for the important issues being raised. But they are very successful in putting forward a point for the reader to reflect upon. Some of the issues raised are repeated, but this is not surprisingly given the nature of the original publication. There are two fairly long entries that stand out. The first is a review of an Atlantic Report on the need to support Pakistan in its fight against terrorism and radicalism, in which the author dilates on his views on the foundation of Pakistan and that connect (inevitable according to the author) with radicalism.  The second long entry in the book is an interview with Abu ‘l-Kalam Azad on India, Islam and the impending partition. The interview is much welcomed as a perspective on Islam and the state in its own right.

The first section (Education and Knowledge) opens the author’s central focus on India. It extols India as the home of human scientific enquiry. Furthermore, it also introduces the author’s model of Islamic scholarship and vision in the person of Mawlana Abu ‘l-Kalam Azad. And it also decries the division of sciences into religious and non-religious sciences. The last-mentioned topic opens the first of many salvo against his adversaries, the ulema, who have ironically thrived on this clearly modernist division of the sciences between the secular and the religious. Ironically, modernity inaugurated and promoted the clear separation of religion from other spheres of human activity. The next section on history sheds light on the record of religious pluralism that Muslims promoted. There were, of courses, other approaches as well. The author reflects on the Khilafat Movement that introduced a new kind of religious politics for the modern period; “command politics” which instrumentalized religion. This legacy has sadly continued into the 20^th and 21^st centuries.

The central section on India covers many topics. There are two central issues that are prominent. The first is that Muslim historians (such as the great historian al-Tabari (d, 923) were familiar with India and were writing very appreciably about its scholars and tradition. And the second point relates to the author’s central view on religion in a state. The main argument here for Khan is that religious identity is very similar to other social identities such as language and culture. All these identities are very different from national identity. All Indians share a national identity even as they differ from each other in other respects. In support of his arguments, he reflects on religious reformers within India that stressed the unity and convergence of religions; on the British who emphasized these identities in order to secure power; and the mistake of Muslims to demand special favours on the basis of their religious affiliation. With respect to the latter, he supports special measures for the disadvantaged, but not for groups such as Muslim who include both privileged and the under-privileged persons. Khan displays’ great erudition as he also turns to Ibn Khaldun’s theory of the state to support his argument. In his correct reading of the latter’s famous Muqaddima (Prolegomena), tribal and religious solidarity were clearly separated. He uses this insight to suggest a foundation for arguably the different matter of the separation of religious and national identities. Such suggestive readings abound in the book, but the congruence between the solidarities of Ibn Khaldun and modern identities remains to be unraveled. He also touches on the history of Islam in India, pointing to the vast gap between the rulers and the ruled. Less convincing is his cursory treatment on Kashmir where India and Pakistan are presented as neatly divided good and evil national intentions respectively.

The next two sections, Islam and Muslim Society, captures Khan’s view on Islam. Islam is derived mainly from the general teachings of the Qur’an, and not in specifics. Values of reasoning, generosity and tolerance form the cornerstone of Islam. Sir Sayyid Khan comes up as the model reformer, but Azad’s idea of ‘shared truth’ (mushtarak haq) seems to capture an important foundational principal. These were thwarted by politicians in the history of Islam, but most importantly by religious leaders (ulema). And in independent India, in particular, the latter were preserving a culture and mode of life that perpetuated abuse and injustice. Personal status convictions, symbolized in the Shah Banoo Case, created a barrier between the state and individuals. The state in this scenario was a source of justice and liberation. I felt myself ambivalent in Khan’s presentation. On the one hand, I could not agree less that Personal Status law in India (and elsewhere) were sheltering and covering up family abuse (particularly directed at women). At the same time, the success of the ulama was guaranteed by the generally invasive instruments of the modern state. This function of the ulema needed more careful attention to detail to ascertain the balance between communities and the state, particularly in comparison with other apparently benign projects of the state.

The penultimate section gets into Pakistan. This section is also about India, since it creates a binary opposition with the two countries. Pakistan is clearly founded, according to the author, on a policy of hatred towards the other. India, on the other hand, is based on a shared Indian heritage. Khan also draws a direct link between this founding policy and the rise of militancy and terrorism. The section contains the interview with Abu ‘l-Kalam Azad that I have mentioned before. The interview is telling, both against those who founded Pakistan on the basis of Islam, and in my opinion, also against Khan. Azad does not seem to have such clear idea of a secular polity and private belief system as Khan. The interview brings out the complex way in Islam was conceptualized by these early Muslim leaders. On the other hand, it may be an important statement of how secularism has come to be supported by Muslims in India as it is more extensively discussed by Irfan Ahmad in a recent book.

 The final section, Terror and Jihad, consists of short essays mostly on the terror attacks in Mumbai in 2008. Apart from reiterating his conviction of religious values, Khan brings out an important way in which Muslims are usually addressed in global discourse. He points out that in all the references to peoples and groups in the American President’s address, only Muslims are singled out by their religious identities. He reminds the readers that Sir Sayyid opposed the pan-Islamic values of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, suggesting an unlikely link between all modern Islamic political activism and radicalism. In this final section, Khan does include an important point on rejecting the use of jihadis, preferring the use of fasadis (sowers of anarchy) to deprive them of their legitimacy but also using a Qur’anic term to label them.

In general, this is a useful set of articles on which there will be much disagreement. There is no doubt, however, that the issues raised by the author needs attention by all South Asians. In conclusion, I want to turn to the title of the book for a final comment. This pair (text and context) has become very widely used in local and global discourse since it was raised by the Pakistani intellectual Fazlur Rahman more than half a century ago. It has become a slogan for the reform of Islam to solve the problems of Muslims in the modern world. The author does not deal with the issue directly, but readers may read these essays as an expression of Indian Islam (to be clearly contrasted with Pakistani Islam). From an observer’s perspective, this reading would not be too far off the mark.

However, it is not clear if the author would agree with this judgment. Khan is more adamant about some permanent values for Islam that in his view have too often been hijacked in the past and present. His is appealing to a fundamental core of an Islamic essence, rather than the contextual articulation of someone living in a particular time and place. Khan is not alone, and his conviction was shared by all modern Muslims since Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan. It was a sentiment shared particularly by those who argued for change and reform within Islamic tradtions. They formulated a new essence and a new social project which they declared embodied the real, true Islam. Like Khan in this book, they offered some good advice and made some good suggestions. However, they could have presented their new conceptions with a little more self-reflexivity. In the spirit of ijtihad, they often forgot to repeat the phrase “And God knows better.”

The book presents an excellent window into another voice of Islam in India. I am tempted to put it aside as a glib Indian apology, but feel attracted to its perspectives that are too often overlooked and ignored. In 2010, however, I would have loved to see some self-reflexivity on the modern Islamic project as its critical vision on the Islamic nationalistic and ghettoized one. And God knows Better.