Balveer

 Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

‘Europe and India: The Reciprocal Gaze’

Balveer Arora1
The reciprocal gaze is a key instrument for advancing mutual knowledge.
The objective and the motive of the gaze are relevant, because they influence
and can even determine the outcome of the gaze. Learning ofcourse is an
obvious objective, a deeper understanding is perhaps another. When we
consider the relevance of this reciprocal gaze in the context of area studies
centres, we need to ask how and why this relevance has remained resilient to
the globalizing and interconnecting influences of our times.
India and Europe look at each other today with new eyes in order to
enhance reciprocal knowledge. The notion of the reciprocal gaze also suggests
that they take away from this encounter a new understanding of each other.
Neither India nor Europe should normally emerge unchanged from this reciprocal
gaze, unless they treat their worldview as a finished product, immune to change.
This gaze is deeply contextual, shaped by history and geography, but also
by culture and reciprocal knowledge that has been handed down and passed
through various distorting mirrors. Here the importance of the third gaze
becomes relevant. When Europe and India look at each other, they are not on an
island. The United States of America have become the universal interlocutor, and
no dialogue is possible without reference to this third gaze, more so in our
multipolar world. Given this setting, what are the specific issues that arise when
area study centres engage in studying these two very diverse unions, both of
which are in a sense regions that are seeking to encompass their diversity within
a single political entity.
This raises two major issues that are relevant to the concept of area
studies:

                                                                                                               
1  Former  Chairman  Centre  for  Political  Studies  and  Rector,  Jawaharlal  Nehru  

University.  Currently  Chairman,  Centre  for  Multilevel  Federalism,  Institute  of  Social  
Sciences,  New  Delhi.  balveerarora@gmail.com    

  1  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

1. The issue of defining what constitutes an area is complicated by the

fact that we have to deal with shifting boundaries and changing geographies.
Three factors influence the definition of areas (a) geo political and geo strategic
concerns (b) trade and commerce in a globalised economy and (c) the need to
understand the cultural area in terms of cultures of knowledge, on the one hand,
and cultures of governance on the other.
This further raises the wider issue of defining larger regional groupings, as
zones of power and influence from the geo political perspective on the one hand,
as distinctive trade zones and markets, with different cultural attributes and
distinctive tastes and needs on the other.
Pseudo domains have also emerged, such as the Goldman Sachs
fabrication of the BRIC group, which is in reality a financial advisors tool for
guiding investment decisions rather than an entity which can be studied
meaningfully as such.
It is therefore more fruitful to focus on identifiable entities, hence the
significance of the reciprocal gaze between Europe and India, entities that have
withstood the test of time.
2. The second issue concerns the definition of the units of comparison.
The mode of coming together and holding together or staying together of
diverse unions is a case in point. Here the unit of comparison clearly matters. In
the earlier phases of the construction of Europe, major European powers viewed
India as a single country and bilateral relations were the norm in international
affairs. In comparative politics, for a long time the building of SAARC and Indo-
Pak rapprochement were seen as paralleling the construction of the EU and
Franco-German reconciliation respectively.
As Europe began to grapple with the complexities of an enlarged Union
with a common currency and a Constitution that calls itself a Treaty, which could
easily have been called a Compact or a Covenant, it appreciates better the
complexities of the Indian Union as a political entity, and understands that
pluricultural and multinational India is in reality made up of several federated

  2  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

‘countries’ and peoples.

Management guru Charles Handy significantly argues that the smart
strategy for transnational corporations is to adopt the federal principle for their
internal organisation, a federative structure that gives autonomy to their
operations in each cultural area. He recognizes the significance of cultural
specificities in the strategies for effective corporate governance. From the
political standpoint, the specificities of different cultures of governance are
equally relevant for conceptualizing a globalized world.
We now turn our attention more specifically to the reciprocal gaze that
India and Europe have cast upon each other, first viewed historically and then in
relation to the needs and requirements of our times.
(a) India and Europe: An Old Relationship, a New Gaze
As Europe looks at India in new ways, through new lenses, India in turn
reassesses its past relationship and looks to Europe for ideas. Ideas that would
help in thinking the present differently, as well as in imagining the future
differently. Despite its emergence as a new market, change in India is more in
perceptions than in reality. However, perception management is a legitimate
priority for sovereign states, while uncovering reality is a prime concern for social
scientists.
The rediscovery of Europe by postcolonial India brought with it many
surprises. On the cultural plane, India recognised in Europe an old partner in a
continuing dialogue which had a long history spanning centuries, and in which
there were many points of convergence in terms of shared values and concerns.
There were, at the same time, significant ruptures in the relationship during
which mutual incomprehension and even bitter hostility prevailed.
India, which had engaged the attention of serious European scholars in
the early 20th century, slowly slipped off the radar of European scholarly concern
and drowned in a sea of clichés. Europe, it appeared, had ceased to grapple with
the richness of the Indian reality and succumbed to the facility of ready-made
characterisations.

  3  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

The problems of a multilingual and multicultural polity of continental

dimensions are common concerns for both Unions. Both of them are parallel
initiatives, which took shape in the context of the post-War world and have built
Unions against heavy odds. Both had their share of sceptics, who declared their
unions unworkable and unviable.
In both Unions, multiple identities seek to coexist within a single political
entity. The goal in both cases is to attain the minimum degree of uniformity
necessary to achieve and preserve the union, without sacrificing in any way the
richness of the pluralism and diversity that are precious facets of their
civilisational heritage.
As the eminent French thinker Edgar Morin puts it, the world is being
propelled by an engine with three facets – globalisation, westernisation and
development. This engine is being fuelled by science and technology, says he,
and an uncontrolled and unregulated profit motive. Global unification, he points
out, is techno-economic, and is simultaneously accompanied by several
withdrawals and closures: ethnic, national, and religious.
The global and the local have been growing simultaneously, each
knowing that it cannot wish away the other, and has to live with it. This imposes
upon us the obligation to critically examine ‘universal values’ in their regional
acceptations, as they cross national and cultural borders. Hence the pressing
need for revisiting the ordering framework of analysis for area study centres.
Political boundaries and national frontiers are the physical embodiment of
the concepts of the nation-state and national sovereignty. Even in this age of the
free flow of capital and social networks, cultural identities remain tenacious and
demand understanding in their historical depth and their social specificities. They
are the imponderables, which give rise to uncertainties. However, we must guard
against the excesses of culturalism, which would render impossible any
comparative framework and even vitiate the reciprocal gaze.

  4  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

Speaking of our collective uncertain future, Edgar Morin cites Friedrich

Holderlin: “Where grows the peril also grows what saves”, and goes on to add
that hope feeds on that which leads to despair.
In the two parts that follow, we first look at the possibilities of developing
comparative insights through the study of India and Europe, for example by
exploring the dynamics of unity and diversity in political unions. In the second
part, we turn to the issues involved in redefining the role and relevance of area
study centres. We also argue that scientific theorisation demands comparative
validation, and unless a concept is validated from both Western and non-Western
perspectives, it cannot be truthfully considered a universal concept. The scientific
authority behind the rejection of non-conforming realities as deviant needs to be
established before it is asserted. In the name of what scientific tenets can we
declare that certain variants of democracy are more or less conform to an ideal
which is itself historically and culturally rooted? The reciprocal gaze lends
strength to the scientific validation process.

I
INDIA AND EUROPE IN COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE
While democracy undoubtedly remains a strong element in European
construction, questions of diversity continue to receive varied responses from
different member states. On the important concepts of the public and the
private, as also of the religious and the secular, a transcultural validation would
come closest to the trans-subjectivisation of key social science concepts which
are projected as being of universal relevance.
It would therefore be instructive to look at the two entities that are the
focus of our discussion today, the European Union and the Indian Union, in a
comparative historical perspective. They have followed not only parallel paths in
the construction of their Unions, but both are grappling with the comparable
problems of the place of local identities and communities in the Union.

  5  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

The Indian Union was born in a sub-continent ravaged by colonial

occupation, adopting largely through the devolutionary path, while the European
Union was built on the ruins of two successive wars via the evolutionary route.
India sought to repair the damage inflicted by colonial exploitation through a
policy of self-reliance and import substitution. Europe, helped by the Marshall
Plan, moved towards the construction of a common market, while India sought
to consolidate its new political union through the mechanism of development
planning.
(b) Europe as an Area of Study in India
What does Europe represent for India today, in a multipolar world?
Among other things, it represents a different tradition of conceptualising the
social, in terms of solidarity, equity and justice, on which India has drawn heavily
in defining its own constitutional objectives. Arising from these concepts are
distinct conceptions of the role of the State in the service of the nation, and the
central idea of public service. The European tradition of the State as a protector
and promoter of the public good has perhaps not lost its relevance. It offers an
alternative path of economic growth with social cohesion, inclusive or
harmonious growth, in which the public sphere retains its significance and the
public good is a strong value.
Two other dimensions need mention:
(a) Europe as a major economic power and trading partner
(b) Europe as an emerging political actor on the global stage, as a united
entity.
In the realm of sharing experiences and perceptions, the European and
Indian Unions are uniquely placed, in a situation that is both peculiar and
promising. Whereas Europe successfully negotiated an economic union, India has
yet to achieve the goal of a seamless common market. On the other hand, a
political union was crafted in India sixty years ago that enables it to encompass
multiple identities in a single state.

  6  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

Where both have much to learn from each other is in linking economic
growth with human development. By looking at each other instead of looking
past each other. The reciprocal gaze, we believe, is embodied in the concept of
comparative area studies, in a pluri-disciplinary perspective.
II

REDEFINING THE ROLE AND RELEVANCE OF AREA STUDY CENTRES

Since we are engaged in looking at the past, present and future of area
studies, it is important to step back and see them contextually. Born in the
postcolonial context and the rivalries of the second half of the 20th century, these
centres have changed in terms of both geography and focus. The watershed
developments in Europe in 1989-91 had global repercussions. They accelerated
economic resurgence in India by compelling it to move more forcefully along a
path of economic liberalisation that has sustained impressive growth rates over
two decades. The face of Europe has also changed vastly.

In this context, what new thrust can be given to these study centres, what are
the gaps in reciprocal knowledge, what are the capacities that need building or
strengthening?

The stated goal of the workshop is to try to find out if a solid ground for area
study centres still exists in this age of globalization. In attempting to do this,
three major issues arise and raise questions that demand answers:

(a) What policy perspectives govern the creation of these centres? There are
ofcourse the needs and requirements of foreign policy perspective
planning. What are the other needs, notably in the fields of cultural and
commercial diplomacy and the requirements of business and professional
organisations? This is directly related to the development of relevant skills
for employment and professional development.
(b) What is the best mode of integration of these centres into the University
system? This involves also the relationship between teaching and

  7  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

research. Student motivation should play an important part in determining

priorities for study and research. The primary obligation of universities is
to their students. Other needs and interests should play a secondary role
in determining research orientations.
(c) What would constitute a fruitful relationship between the two sets of
Centres involved in this reciprocal gaze, those studying India in Europe
and those studying Europe in India? Do they have anything to contribute
to each other’s work and understanding, because of their shared
commonalities? Simply put, do I understand Europe better through the
eyes of a European who also understands India and vice versa?

Comparative area studies pose a different set of conceptual and

methodological issues and challenges. Two such issues that could be
listed in conclusion are:

(a) There is on the one hand the accusation of under-theorisation of area

studies from a comparative perspective. The charge, as summed up by Mark
Tessler, is that “the work of area specialists lacks rigour and, above all, that it is
not scientific in that it favours description over explanation, lacks analytical
cumulativeness, and shows no interest in parsimony and generalisation.” The
challenge therefore is to further develop a methodology for refuting such
charges, which are far from being proved in any case. Cultural relativism and
exceptionalism should not be viewed as the norm in area studies. They are to be
viewed rather as deviations that detract from the scientific character of the larger
enterprise, which is and ought to remain firmly embedded in the comparative
perspective. In my opinion, theorisation emerging from comparative area
studies has perhaps greater scientific credibility, precisely because it incorporates
transcultural scientific perspectives. That there could be more of it is another
question, but its contribution to comparative social science theory is undeniable.

  8  
Balveer  Arora:  IEUSCP  Workshop  on  Area  Studies  Centres:  17-­18  January  2011  

(b) On the other hand, it is increasingly clear that global macro trends are
not intelligible without reference to local dynamics. Globalisation has been
accompanied by cultural differentiation, and in recent times, the importance of
better understanding non-Western cultures of knowledge and governance has
gained in significance.

Hence, the utility of the transcultural gaze in the validation of concepts.

Concepts in the social sciences can only be considered to have been scientifically
validated and universally applicable if they have been subjected to critical
scrutiny from a cultural perspective different from the one in which they
originated. A transcultural analysis of concepts would reveal the commonalities
and differences that accompany their interpretation, and the obstacles in their
acceptance as universally tenable. This is particularly relevant for the validation
of ‘universal’ values across cultural borders. For example, the Turkish writer
Orhan Pamuk bemoans the fact that love in the hands of Marcel Proust is
considered to be universal love, whereas in his writings critics dub it ‘Turkish
Love’. The conflation of the western and the universal is becoming increasingly
problematic and contentious.

To conclude, we began with the objective of assessing the relevance of

area studies in our globalised and interconnected world. Area studies have not
only retained but also increased their relevance for the understanding of
contemporary processes at work, particularly in their historical depth. They have
a distinct space in the social sciences and humanities, provided they steer clear
of the extremes of rational choice theories on the one hand and raw culturalism
on the other. Finally, they are essential for promoting and enhancing reciprocal
knowledge, in a world where borders still retain their significance and people
cling tenaciously to their cultures and memories.

  9