Here is another question hidden inside the question published above… Is Gandhian philosophy of non-violence relevant in today’s world? Indian fought with British forces 7-8 decades ago. Here, we are talking about the effectiveness of Gandhian philosophy of non-violence in Burma and the UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi opted to skip the issue of Burma during her address to UNGA on the occasion of 1st International day of non-violence.


Why this double standard? The reason behind the show of double standard is simply because these leaders know very well that Gandhian philosophy has become the ornaments of words printed in the books based on Gandhi’s life. In Indian context, Gandhiji was dealing with a direct opponent, who was, to some extent, responsible and answerable. While dealing with such people moral righteousness does the work. But, against irresponsible and unanswerable people the tactics would have actually backfired. So, the question is that is this right to use Gandhian way of non-violence against each and every question that rises across the world or even in our neighbor.


Sonia Gandhi knows it well that’s why she did not say a single word of condemnation on the violent crackdown by military rulers on protesting monks in Myanmar while she was teaching the representatives of 193 nations about the courage to practice the Gandhian virtue of non-violence and pleaded for it not to be reduced to a ritual.


Let the people of Burma fight for their own rights in their land. We can extend our moral support to them but only within the limitation of the International standards (That we Indian practice most). Forget Gandhian philosophy, Indian leaders have not yet said a single word of support to the monks fighting to establish the democratic institutions in Burma. And we say we area the largest democracy in world…This is shameful

In 1935 Burma had been isolated from India.Myanmar got freedom on 4th january 1948.The roots of relationship between India and Burma are in History culture and customs.India helped myanmar after freedom to make constitution in 1951 Both countries signed memorandum of understanding for healthy relationship.India is the world’s largest democracy and always supports democracy.During1962 Burma is under the militants rule.After many struggles in1988 elections were held in Burma but militants refused to leave the reign.At thta time international pressures are on the militry rule but they ignored every pressure.in1991 when mr. Narsimha rao was indian prime minister developed ”LOOK East Policy’at that time India looked towards east and the leader of Myanmar Mr. Suki awarded with ”NEHRU SANTI PURASKAR” But The result was nothing because India was not interested.Our relations are cultural but i think India has ignored the condition of Burma.
According to me Non violence is not relevant in todays condition not only for Burma but any of countries of the world even for India .Now the situations are totally changed even today we couldn’t get freedom for India.That was the time when Nuclear power was not so powerful but today is.To say that India got freedom BY non violence it will be the insult for Bhagat Singh.Subhash chandra bosh,Mangal pandey.Offcourse non violence played a very important role for freedom but the sacrifices can not be ignored.But in todays situation non violence is only exploitation.Without any war our world is suffering for many types of exploitations.I think pratyush is right we are the largest democracy when we can’t support then we have no right to be proud on this democracy.In my point of view in this Nuclear era non violence may be a way to express own will for democracy but can not enough to get the democracy.

Reyaz said as...”I m surprised its same very people who argued at distance that whats happening in Afghanistan or Iraq is gross terrorism.and international authority must come forward.......” After reading this comment I was forced to read the previous comments given by me in this section on other stories related to ’Gross Terrorism’ to find out the sentences where I have written any single word on the terrorism and on whom should support ABC to restrict terrorism....

I failed to find and I request my ’learned friend’ Reyaz (I would prefer taking name in spite of showing any double standard here..) please tell where he found the double standard in my previous and recent comments.

And one more thing.. I want you to sense the language used in the comment.... I wrote the last two sentences as...(Forget Gandhian philosophy, Indian leaders have not yet said a single word of support to the monks fighting to establish the democratic institutions in Burma. And we say we are the largest democracy in world…This is shameful... )This was a comment from my side on the ”double standard” showing by Indian political leaders in this matter that at one hand we say with great voice that we are biggest democratic country and on other hand we can’t even support the fighters for democracy in our neighboring country...

I wrote...[Let the people of Burma fight for their own rights in their land. We can extend our moral support to them but only within the limitation of the International standards (That we Indian practice most)] ...because Indian political leaders enjoy no respect for their voice at international level on International politics so, we should keep our mouth shut..sense the comment behind the comment dear... I request again to go through the comment.. invest time to think what it says actually and then do comment on the comment ..