My interview was on March 21, 1977, day Emergency was revoked: Jaishankar recalls UPSC journey
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Sunday reminisced about his entry into the civil services, saying his UPSC interview in Delhi took place on March 21, 1977 -- the day the Emergency was lifted."(1977) Election results were coming from the previous day... The sense of the defeat of the Emergency rule was coming into understanding. In a way, that is what got me through the interview," he said in his address at an event here.Walking down memory lane, Jaishankar, then 22, said he had returned from the interview with two key takeaways -- the significance of communication under pressure and that important people may be living in a "bubble".In his address to a gathering of the fresh batch of entrants to the civil services, the EAM termed the UPSC examination akin to an 'Agni Pariksha' (trial by fire), and said it is a "very unique" testing system in the world to select candidates for the services.The real challenge is the interview, Jaishankar said, and cited his own UPSC interview that took place 48 years ago."My interview was on March 21, 1977. That was the day the Emergency was revoked. Revoked! So, I go in for an interview at Shahjahan Road... First person that morning," recalls Jaishankar, now 70.Nearly a month ago, the Modi government marked the 50th anniversary of the imposition of the Emergency by the then prime minister Indira Gandhi, with events held across the country to recall what its leaders called a "dark chapter" in Indian democracy The 21-month Emergency was imposed on June 25, 1975 and lifted on March 21, 1977.The Janata Party, a coalition of opposition leaders, emerged victorious in the 1977 elections, handing a defeat to Indira Gandhi, and Morarji Desai became the prime minister.Jaishankar said, in the interview, he was asked about what had happened in the 1977 elections.Citing his association with JNU as a student and his subject of political science, the EAM reminisced, "I was lucky.""We had taken part in the 1977 election campaign. We had all gone there and worked for the defeat of the Emergency," Jaishankar said.So, in response, "I forgot I was in an interview", and at that moment, "my communication skills somehow came together," he added.Jaishankar, a veteran diplomat who earlier served as foreign secretary and has widely travelled, said at that time, to explain to people who were "quite connected, sympathetic to the government, what had happened, without offending them, was actually quite a challenge".And, the second thing he said, he learned that day, of this "Lutyens' bubble"."These people were really shocked, they could not believe that this election result had happened, whereas for us, the ordinary students, we could see that there was a wave against the Emergency," the EAM recalled of the interview experience.From that day, he said he learned how to communicate under pressure and to do it without offending people."How do you persuade, how do you explain. This was one carry-away. The second carry-away was that important people may be living in a bubble and not realising what is happening in the country," the Union minister said.And, people in the field, because students like him who were part of the campaigns, and had visited places such as Muzaffarnagar, "we had picked up a sense on the ground", but, people sitting in Delhi, with all the information from all the systems, "somehow they missed it," he said.In his address, he also asked what the barometer is to assess a successful democracy, saying it is not by voting record or voting percentage."To me, a successful democracy is when opportunity is given to the entire society; that is when democracy is working. They have the right to express themselves, but it is not a few people, on behalf of the whole society... expressing themselves," Jaishankar said, without elaborating.He exhorted the gathering of successful UPSC candidates to remember that they are all "entering into a service"."This Amrit Kaal of 25 years is your era. Your era, because you will have to work, you will have to deliver, and you will be the beneficiaries of this era, you will be the leaders of this era," the EAM said.He urged them all to contribute to the vision of a Viksit Bharat by 2047."I want you to think 20 years ahead... When we move towards the journey of Viksit Bharat, what will be your contribution? And, the mindset that you have to bring to realise that dream of making a developed nation," he added.He emphasised that good governance is also related to national security.To new entrants to the civil services, he emphasised that "representing India abroad, representing India before the world, is the greatest privilege, the greatest honour that any Indian can have".The EAM said he had "no doubt that by 2030, we will become number 3, economically. But, moving to number 2 and eventually up, will be a big deal, and it will be tough, and will need big, national efforts".In the next 20 years of your service, you have to know that "big changes" will be coming. The coming era will be of AI, drones, space and EV and green hydrogen, he asserted.The external affairs minister said in the Indo-Pacific region, "Our capabilities should be such that whatever challenges come, India is ready to step forward and assume responsibility, we call it a first responder. How do you prepare India to be a first responder?"
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
22 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Nimisha Priya's case shows formal diplomacy is not enough; we also need faith-based mediation
Written by Shameer Modongal On July 16, Indian nurse Nimisha Priya faced the threat of imminent execution in Yemen after being convicted for the murder of her Yemeni business partner, Talal Abdo Mahdi. Though the threat has been averted for now, the execution might happen anytime. Given that India has no formal diplomatic ties with the Houthi-led administration in Yemen – they are in touch with 'friendly governments' — the Centre has informed the Supreme Court that it had made all possible efforts within its diplomatic reach. This case highlights a crucial limitation of traditional state diplomacy. When governments are unable to negotiate due to political or legal constraints, alternative approaches are required. In Nimisha Priya's case, the intervention of religious leadership — specifically Sheikh Abubakr Ahmad (Kanthapuram A P Aboobacker Musliyar) — opened a new pathway. He initiated talks with the family of the victim through renowned Yemeni cleric Sheikh Umar bin Hafiz. It was critical since, under Islamic law, the family of the deceased holds the power to forgive the offender. Islamic law (Sharia) provides a unique mechanism for justice that prioritises the role of victims and their families. Specifically, in cases of murder or bodily harm, the system of Qisās (retributive justice) allows the victim's family to demand equal punishment, accept diyah (blood money), or forgive the offender entirely. This legal flexibility allows justice to be administered with a focus on healing and reconciliation. This contrasts with conventional criminal justice systems rooted in retributive justice. The conventional model views crime as a violation of state law, with the primary questions being: What law was broken? Who committed the crime? What punishment is deserved? Victims typically have no direct role in the legal process. In contrast, the Islamic system — particularly in Qisās cases — centres on restorative justice. It asks: Who has been hurt? What do they need? Who is responsible for addressing these needs? Victims, offenders, and their communities are recognised as central actors. This system encourages open dialogue, emotional expression, and healing, empowering those most directly affected by crime to participate in its resolution. Justice (‛adl) is a foundational goal in Islam, repeatedly emphasised in the Qur'an and Sunnah. It emphasises forgiveness, repentance (Tawbah), and moral reform. The Qur'an urges believers to forgive others even in moments of anger, and extols the value of kind speech and forgiveness over charity. Although retribution is a permitted option, forgiveness is regarded as morally superior and divinely rewarded. In the context of Nimisha Priya's case, the key to securing clemency lies in convincing the family of Mahdi to forgive. However, this is not merely a legal or financial matter. The trauma they experienced, the loss of a loved one, and the anger toward the offender are powerful emotional forces. Political or legal arguments alone are often inadequate to address such profound grief and pain. This is where religious and spiritual frameworks can offer meaningful support. In the Arab world, Sulha — a traditional, religiously infused form of mediation — has long been used to resolve conflicts, including those involving serious crimes like murder. Rooted in Islamic ethics and community traditions, Sulha emphasises restoring broken relationships, acknowledging harm, repentance by the offender, and forgiveness by the victim's family. Sulha is both ritualistic and spiritual. It provides a structured process where the offender shows genuine remorse and responsibility, while the victim's family is encouraged to forgive and move toward reconciliation. The process involves respected third parties, often religious scholars or elders, who are seen as morally trustworthy and neutral. Through prayer, religious counsel, and social rituals, Sulha fosters spiritual healing and social reintegration. In Nimisha Priya's case, Sheikh Abubakr Ahmad reached out to Hafiz for mediation, who sent his students to engage directly with Talal's family, seeking to persuade them of the Islamic virtue and reward of forgiveness. Their effort represents a powerful example of faith-based diplomacy, where religious leaders act as moral intermediaries beyond the reach of formal diplomatic or legal institutions. Nimisha Priya's fate still lies in the hands of Talal's family. Whether they demand retributive justice or offer forgiveness — either with or without diyah — will determine her ultimate fate. Both paths are permissible under Islamic law. Yet, the success of future negotiations may largely depend on the continued involvement of religious actors and the use of spiritual language that emphasises mercy, healing, and divine reward. Trusted religious figures, such as Imams or Sufi leaders, serve as mediators, leveraging their moral authority and community respect to foster trust and resolution. In many parts of the Muslim world, especially in contexts of weak or fractured state institutions, religious leaders maintain high moral legitimacy and influence. Their transnational networks can also facilitate people-to-people diplomacy even when state-to-state diplomacy is blocked due to political tensions. This case illustrates the growing importance of spiritual diplomacy — the use of religious soft power to resolve conflicts, build bridges, and promote justice in emotionally and politically complex situations. The path to justice in Nimisha Priya's case does not run through courts or embassies alone. It runs through the hearts of those affected by the tragedy. Only through healing that reaches both the emotional and spiritual realms can reconciliation be achieved. The writer is visiting scholar in residence, American University, Washington DC, and the author of Islamic Perspectives of International Conflict Resolution (Routledge)
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Tharoor to be kept away from all Congress events in Thiruvananthapuram: Muraleedharan
T'puram: At a time when the status of Shashi Tharoor 's relationship with his own party remains uncertain, senior Congress leader K Muraleedharan has said the party has decided to keep the Thiruvananthapuram MP away from its functions in the state capital, from where Tharoor was elected for four consecutive terms. "It is up to the party high command to decide whether to take action against him or not. But we have decided that he should be kept away from all the party functions in Thiruvananthapuram," said Muraleedharan. In response, Tharoor said he had "nothing to comment". The state leadership has been distancing itself from Tharoor ever since he started defying the AICC leadership's directive. Despite his criticisms against former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi on the incidents that occurred during the Emergency, AICC has not responded strongly against him yet. It is at this juncture that the state leaders of the party have declared an "unofficial" ban on Tharoor for the party functions. He was not even invited for the campaigning for the Nilambur by-election last month.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Twice axed from the CPM Politburo, V S Achuthanandan marched to the beat of his own drum
With a deeply ingrained habit of taking principled stands and sticking to his guns, V S Achuthanandan remained a rebel throughout his political life, twice getting removed from the CPI(M) Politburo for going against the party line. Achuthanandan died here on Monday at the age of 101. For VS, as the former Kerala Chief Minister was popularly known, the first major defiance of party line came as early as 1962 during the India-China war that divided the Indian Communists. VS was among the Communists jailed in the Thiruvananthapuram Central Prison. His plan to donate blood as well as money earned from the sale of rations from jail to Indian soldiers did not have the party's consent and was construed as helping the government. The party found Achuthanandan's approach anti-Communist, and he was demoted from the central committee to the district secretariat, where he spent a year. In 1988, when the Left Democratic Front (LDF) government led by E K Nayanar explored establishing a nuclear power plant in Kasaragod, the pro-Left Kerala Sasthra Sahithya Parishad stood against the move. VS, despite being the party's state secretary, stood with the Parishad, inviting party censure. Two years later, when CPI(M activists abducted two party councillors of the Thiruvananthapuram Municipal Corporation, the then party general secretary, E M S Namboodiripad, asked Achuthanandan to settle the issue. But for five days, Achuthanandan, then the state secretary, did not move. After consulting Nayanar, the CM, a judicial probe was ordered. Following this, the CPI(M)'s central leadership summoned the entire state secretariat to Delhi, where Achuthanandan was censured. In the last two decades of his active political life, VS faced the party's ire mainly due to intra-party feuds in which he found himself at the opposite end of the leadership. After the CPI(M) state conference in 1998, he was censured for orchestrating the removal of rivals, mainly CITU leaders, from the state committee. For several years, one of his bitter rivals in the party was Pinarayi Vijayan, the current CM. The intense factionalism got so bad in 2007 that the CPI(M) removed VS, the CM at the time, from the Politburo in what is one of the rarest punishments in the party. The leadership also suspended Vijayan. Six months later, both were reinstated, but rebelliousness continued to be irresistible for VS, then in his eighties. In 2009, when the SNC Lavalin corruption scandal hit the CPI(M), VS questioned the party's stand that the case against then state secretary Vijayan was fabricated and politically motivated, and wanted his younger colleague to step down. This again put him on a collision course with the party leadership, and VS was again removed from the Politburo. A member of the party's supreme body since 1980, the veteran leader never managed to get back to it after that. This, however, did not stop Achuthanandan's run-ins with the CPI(M) leadership. In 2012, the party publicly censured him for criticising it following the murder of rebel T P Chandrasekharan by a CPI(M)-backed gang. VS, the Opposition leader at the time, had alleged that the party was involved in the conspiracy behind the murder in May 2012. In October that year, the Central Committee publicly censured VS for attempting to visit Koodankulam to express solidarity with the anti-nuclear plant agitators. The next censure came in 2013 on the eve of his 90th birthday, again for raking up the SNC Lavalin case. In a TV interview, the former CM criticised the party's stand on the issue and for favouring Vijayan. The last time the party cracked the whip on Achuthanandan was in 2017, two years before he retired from active life following a stroke. At the time, the Central Committee pulled him up for repeated violations of party discipline and organisational principles. On several occasions, Achuthanandan's rebellious nature eclipsed the party at crucial moments. When a bypoll to the Neyyattinkara Assembly seat was held on June 1, 2012, VS left the party red-faced by visiting Chandrasekharan's wife. In February 2015, when the party's state conference was in progress in Alappuzha, Achuthanadan walked out in protest against an attack from rival delegates and the party secretariat passing a resolution against him for an anti-party stand.
