Amartya Sen quits Nalanda University but his sour exit does him no credit
by R. Jagannathan Feb 21, 2015Amartya Sen is miffed that the NDA government is no hurry to extend his tenure as Chancellor of Nalanda University (NU), a global university being set up under an act of parliament in Bihar's Rajgir district. In a letter to the NU board, which is dominated by many international names, Sen said “it is hard for me not to conclude that the government wants me the cease being the chancellor of NU after this July, and technically it has the power to do so.”
While sending this letter, quoted by The Indian Express today (20 February), Amartya Sen also could not resist taking a potshot at the centre: “I am also sad, at a more general level, that academic governance in India remains so deeply vulnerable to the opinions of the ruling government, when it chooses to make political use of the special provisions. Even though the Nalanda University Act, passed by the Parliament, did not, I believe, envisage political interference in academic matters, it is formally the case - given the legal provisions (some of them surviving from colonial days) - that the government can turn an academic issue into a matter of political dispensation, if it feels unrestrained about interfering.”This statement is surely not the whole truth. There is no evidence whatsoever that the central government meddled with “academic matters” - unless its (apparent) reluctance to appoint Amartya Sen is deemed as one such interference. The Ministry of External Affairs is the nodal ministry in the governance of Nalanda, given its proposed international character.
I would not quarrel with anything Amartya Sen has to say about political interference in academic institutions. This has been the case all along in many places. The sooner it is ended the better.
However, one wonders why he thinks his own appointment as chancellor of NU was not political in nature.
There is little doubt that Amartya Sen was the intellectual father of many of Sonia Gandhi's social spending schemes. And Sen himself kept making political statements in support of “my friend' Manmohan Singh, and, famously, said that he would not like to see Modi as Prime Minister.
For so political a person to complain about how politicians are meddling with academic institutions is interesting.
But, even assuming the Modi government is not keen on his continuing as Chancellor (we don't know that as yet), there are good reasons to consider other options beyond Amartya Sen once his term ends this July.
First, Sen is well past 81. Why should someone this old be running a young institution? When the university formally opened for its first academic session last September, Sen did not turn up for the event.
Second, Amartya Sen has not distinguished his tenure as chairman of the board (and de facto chancellor) by setting any great example of high-minded governance. In fact, the keyappointments to the university have been dogged by controversies relating to nepotism and non-transparency.
For example, the Vice-Chancellor, Gopa Sabharwal, was just a reader at Delhi's Lady Shriram College when she was appointed to the top job and given a salary of over Rs 5 lakh per month. While this may not be objectionable in a university that has a global mandate, this salary was nearly twice what the Delhi University VC was getting. The brouhaha forced her to take a cut. But despite the fact that NU is based in Rajgir, where a 450-acre campus is being planned, she is reported to be functioning out of Delhi.
Third, many key appointments appeared to point to the influence of Upinder Singh, a historian and daughter of Sen's friend Manmohan Singh. Soon after Gopa was appointed VC, Upinder was appointed as guest faculty at the University.
According to this Bihar Times report, Sabharwal appointed another friend, Anjana Sharma, as officer on special duty, again with a hefty salary.
Bihar Times lists Upinder Singh, Anjana Sharma, Gopa Sabharwal and Nayanjot Lahiri as four “sahelis” from Delhi who are closely associated with Nalanda.
The newspaper also notes that APJ Abdul Kalam, former President and the man who first suggested the idea of reviving Nalanda's past glory in 2006, declined to become its First Visitor (President Pranab Mukherjee is now the First Visitor, an honorary position) as he felt that the university needed a full time Chancellor and VC and not someone with other preoccupations. This implies that he did not think highly of the appointment of Sen as Chancellor, or his VC (read Kalam's note here).
Sen is right to flag political interference as a big issue in Indian academics, but he does protest too much. He appears to have done little to distinguish his own tenure at Nalanda with unimpeachable appointments that everyone would have lauded.
Nalanda University, which will be fully funded by the centre to the tune of over Rs 1,000 crore, deserves someone younger and more committed to the idea of reviving its past glory as a knowledge centre. It was ransacked and burnt by Muslim marauders in the 11th century AD.http://www.firstpost.com/india/amartya-sen-quits-nalanda-university-but-his-sour-exit-does-him-no-credit-2110977.html
by R. Jagannathan Feb 21, 2015
Amartya Sen is miffed that the NDA government is no hurry to extend his tenure as Chancellor of Nalanda University (NU), a global university being set up under an act of parliament in Bihar's Rajgir district. In a letter to the NU board, which is dominated by many international names, Sen said “it is hard for me not to conclude that the government wants me the cease being the chancellor of NU after this July, and technically it has the power to do so.”
While sending this letter, quoted by The Indian Express today (20 February), Amartya Sen also could not resist taking a potshot at the centre: “I am also sad, at a more general level, that academic governance in India remains so deeply vulnerable to the opinions of the ruling government, when it chooses to make political use of the special provisions. Even though the Nalanda University Act, passed by the Parliament, did not, I believe, envisage political interference in academic matters, it is formally the case - given the legal provisions (some of them surviving from colonial days) - that the government can turn an academic issue into a matter of political dispensation, if it feels unrestrained about interfering.”
This statement is surely not the whole truth. There is no evidence whatsoever that the central government meddled with “academic matters” - unless its (apparent) reluctance to appoint Amartya Sen is deemed as one such interference. The Ministry of External Affairs is the nodal ministry in the governance of Nalanda, given its proposed international character.While sending this letter, quoted by The Indian Express today (20 February), Amartya Sen also could not resist taking a potshot at the centre: “I am also sad, at a more general level, that academic governance in India remains so deeply vulnerable to the opinions of the ruling government, when it chooses to make political use of the special provisions. Even though the Nalanda University Act, passed by the Parliament, did not, I believe, envisage political interference in academic matters, it is formally the case - given the legal provisions (some of them surviving from colonial days) - that the government can turn an academic issue into a matter of political dispensation, if it feels unrestrained about interfering.”
I would not quarrel with anything Amartya Sen has to say about political interference in academic institutions. This has been the case all along in many places. The sooner it is ended the better.
However, one wonders why he thinks his own appointment as chancellor of NU was not political in nature.
There is little doubt that Amartya Sen was the intellectual father of many of Sonia Gandhi's social spending schemes. And Sen himself kept making political statements in support of “my friend' Manmohan Singh, and, famously, said that he would not like to see Modi as Prime Minister.
For so political a person to complain about how politicians are meddling with academic institutions is interesting.
But, even assuming the Modi government is not keen on his continuing as Chancellor (we don't know that as yet), there are good reasons to consider other options beyond Amartya Sen once his term ends this July.
First, Sen is well past 81. Why should someone this old be running a young institution? When the university formally opened for its first academic session last September, Sen did not turn up for the event.
Second, Amartya Sen has not distinguished his tenure as chairman of the board (and de facto chancellor) by setting any great example of high-minded governance. In fact, the keyappointments to the university have been dogged by controversies relating to nepotism and non-transparency.
For example, the Vice-Chancellor, Gopa Sabharwal, was just a reader at Delhi's Lady Shriram College when she was appointed to the top job and given a salary of over Rs 5 lakh per month. While this may not be objectionable in a university that has a global mandate, this salary was nearly twice what the Delhi University VC was getting. The brouhaha forced her to take a cut. But despite the fact that NU is based in Rajgir, where a 450-acre campus is being planned, she is reported to be functioning out of Delhi.
Third, many key appointments appeared to point to the influence of Upinder Singh, a historian and daughter of Sen's friend Manmohan Singh. Soon after Gopa was appointed VC, Upinder was appointed as guest faculty at the University.
According to this Bihar Times report, Sabharwal appointed another friend, Anjana Sharma, as officer on special duty, again with a hefty salary.
Bihar Times lists Upinder Singh, Anjana Sharma, Gopa Sabharwal and Nayanjot Lahiri as four “sahelis” from Delhi who are closely associated with Nalanda.
The newspaper also notes that APJ Abdul Kalam, former President and the man who first suggested the idea of reviving Nalanda's past glory in 2006, declined to become its First Visitor (President Pranab Mukherjee is now the First Visitor, an honorary position) as he felt that the university needed a full time Chancellor and VC and not someone with other preoccupations. This implies that he did not think highly of the appointment of Sen as Chancellor, or his VC (read Kalam's note here).
Sen is right to flag political interference as a big issue in Indian academics, but he does protest too much. He appears to have done little to distinguish his own tenure at Nalanda with unimpeachable appointments that everyone would have lauded.
Nalanda University, which will be fully funded by the centre to the tune of over Rs 1,000 crore, deserves someone younger and more committed to the idea of reviving its past glory as a knowledge centre. It was ransacked and burnt by Muslim marauders in the 11th century AD.
Nobel laureate Amartya Sen says Modi government wants control of academic bodies
Sen said the Modi government has failed to understand that a market economy needs successful public services.
NEW DELHI: In a move that could intensify the confrontation between the Modi government andNobel laureate Amartya Sen, Sen has now gone public with what he calls his "ouster" from the Chancellor-ship of Nalanda University.
In a 4000 word candid essay about to be published in the August issue of the New York Review of Books, Sen has written about his exit from Nalanda University and said that Nalanda is by no means an isolated incident but part of a wide ranging attempt by the Modi government to seize direct control over academic institutions.
READ ALSO: Modi govt does not want me to continue as Nalanda University chancellor, says Amartya Sen
Speaking exclusively to TOI ahead of the publication of the essay, Sen lashed out at what he called the "extraordinarily large" interference by the government in academia. He also said the economy is doing badly, and he is extremely worried that budgets for health and education have been drastically slashed. "I have never been anti industry but no country can become an industrial giant with an uneducated and unhealthy labour force," Sen said.
Sen is slated to step down as Chancellor of Nalanda on July 17, when he will be replaced by George Yeo, former foreign minister of Singapore.
"I was certainly ousted from Nalanda," Sen said. "Some members of the Board, especially the foreign members were keen on carrying on the battle for me but I stepped aside as I did not want to be an ineffective leader. The government may have held up finances or statues had I continued."
"Nalanda not a one off incident. Nothing in this scale of interference has happened before. Every institution where the government has a formal role is being converted into where the government has a substantive role."
Sen pointed out that at the TIFR, the government refused to ratify the director's-Dr Sandip Trivedi's__ appointment. This has never happened under any previous PM. Sen said its not just the HRD ministry but the entire Modi government which is to blame, as Nalanda comes under the MEA.
READ ALSO: Academic freedom is under threat in India, says Amartya Sen
He pointed out that at the NBT, its head the famous writer Sethumadhavan was asked to step down and an RSS ideologue was appointed as head. He also said that at the ICCR, Dr Lokesh Chandra who has been appointed is someone who believes PM Modi was a greater personality that Mahatma Gandhi. He said at the ICHR, the head, Yellapragada Sudarshan Rao has not done any historical research, instead is someone who has written an article saying the caste system was wrongly blamed for being exploitative when it did a lot of good for India.
"The Delhi IIT Director, Raghunath Shevgaonkar resigned, the IIT Bombay Board chairman, Anil Kakodkar, expressed that he could not help the government in anything in the future, for the IIMs they have introduced a bill where instead of having indirect power of withholding the signature which they did in my case or they did in Trivedi's case, now they would directly like to appoint the director. That's the new bill. Instead of having effective power, this becomes direct control."
He also said the Modi government has failed to understand that a market economy needs successful public services. "India spends 1.2 per cent of GDP on public healthcare, China spends 3 per cent. Now even that 1.2 has been cut to 1 per cent. There is confusion in India is wanting high growth rates like China but overlooking that China has improved public services dramatically. It has pretty much guaranteed healthcare for all, they have everyone in school, they have complete coverage. That has been the Asian pattern of development. You do it together: market economy and the state's role. The market economy needs a complentarity with the public services."
He also believes that while the UPA's 2013 Land Acquisition bill was confusing, the new NDA bill is "comprehensively wrong". What has gone wrong with this government is the fundamental understanding that human beings are at the centre of development, Sen said. Sen's forthcoming book 'The Country Of First Boys', a collection of essays, also dwells on his experiences at Nalanda.
READ ALSO: Govt sitting on awards given on Amartya Sen's name
In a 4000 word candid essay about to be published in the August issue of the New York Review of Books, Sen has written about his exit from Nalanda University and said that Nalanda is by no means an isolated incident but part of a wide ranging attempt by the Modi government to seize direct control over academic institutions.
READ ALSO: Modi govt does not want me to continue as Nalanda University chancellor, says Amartya Sen
Speaking exclusively to TOI ahead of the publication of the essay, Sen lashed out at what he called the "extraordinarily large" interference by the government in academia. He also said the economy is doing badly, and he is extremely worried that budgets for health and education have been drastically slashed. "I have never been anti industry but no country can become an industrial giant with an uneducated and unhealthy labour force," Sen said.
Sen is slated to step down as Chancellor of Nalanda on July 17, when he will be replaced by George Yeo, former foreign minister of Singapore.
"I was certainly ousted from Nalanda," Sen said. "Some members of the Board, especially the foreign members were keen on carrying on the battle for me but I stepped aside as I did not want to be an ineffective leader. The government may have held up finances or statues had I continued."
"Nalanda not a one off incident. Nothing in this scale of interference has happened before. Every institution where the government has a formal role is being converted into where the government has a substantive role."
Sen pointed out that at the TIFR, the government refused to ratify the director's-Dr Sandip Trivedi's__ appointment. This has never happened under any previous PM. Sen said its not just the HRD ministry but the entire Modi government which is to blame, as Nalanda comes under the MEA.
READ ALSO: Academic freedom is under threat in India, says Amartya Sen
He pointed out that at the NBT, its head the famous writer Sethumadhavan was asked to step down and an RSS ideologue was appointed as head. He also said that at the ICCR, Dr Lokesh Chandra who has been appointed is someone who believes PM Modi was a greater personality that Mahatma Gandhi. He said at the ICHR, the head, Yellapragada Sudarshan Rao has not done any historical research, instead is someone who has written an article saying the caste system was wrongly blamed for being exploitative when it did a lot of good for India.
"The Delhi IIT Director, Raghunath Shevgaonkar resigned, the IIT Bombay Board chairman, Anil Kakodkar, expressed that he could not help the government in anything in the future, for the IIMs they have introduced a bill where instead of having indirect power of withholding the signature which they did in my case or they did in Trivedi's case, now they would directly like to appoint the director. That's the new bill. Instead of having effective power, this becomes direct control."
He also said the Modi government has failed to understand that a market economy needs successful public services. "India spends 1.2 per cent of GDP on public healthcare, China spends 3 per cent. Now even that 1.2 has been cut to 1 per cent. There is confusion in India is wanting high growth rates like China but overlooking that China has improved public services dramatically. It has pretty much guaranteed healthcare for all, they have everyone in school, they have complete coverage. That has been the Asian pattern of development. You do it together: market economy and the state's role. The market economy needs a complentarity with the public services."
He also believes that while the UPA's 2013 Land Acquisition bill was confusing, the new NDA bill is "comprehensively wrong". What has gone wrong with this government is the fundamental understanding that human beings are at the centre of development, Sen said. Sen's forthcoming book 'The Country Of First Boys', a collection of essays, also dwells on his experiences at Nalanda.
READ ALSO: Govt sitting on awards given on Amartya Sen's name