Oped-2

There’s no big deal about the lady Veep! (800 words)

The euphoria over Kamala Harris’s ascendancy to the post of the Vice
President of the United States as the first female incumbent is not just hollow but
rooted in fallacy and shallow treatment of a serious social goal of female
empowerment. The kind of effusive emotional outpouring, we have witnessed all
over the globe only shows the ease with which people tend to come under the
omnipotent sway of the propaganda machinery - both traditional media including
mainstream liberal US media and today’s social media tools like Facebook, twitter
and instagram.

2. What makes me say that? Let me first recap the constitutional position of the
Vice President of the United States to give you a rough idea of the ‘real’ power,
which Harris is yielding. Legally speaking, the Vice President of the USA is the
President of the Senate, and takes over the role of the President if he/she is unable
to perform his duties, in case of death, resignation, incapacitation or removal by the
Vice President and majority of the cabinet. Thus, it is left to nobody’s imagination to
assess the diminutive political power, which Harris holds and at best the stepney tire
role, she would perform to the President of the US. Secondly, the political role is
indeed several shades paler than what several other similarly politically
accomplished women including Hilary Clinton, Condoleezza Rice and Madeleine
Albright have had earlier played as Secretaries of State with demonstrative élan
under various presidencies. All of those ladies have had an illustrious record of civil
service/public life and are remembered for their actions, rather than mere identity.
Rice, for example was the inaugural National Security Advisor under Bush
administration before taking up the role of Secretary of State. I fail to recall any
excessive media hullaballoo, the kind of which is being played ad nauseam these
days over Harris, over their gender or race on their appointment. Although, people
may argue that the post of the Veep is the highest ranking elected office for an
American lady to occupy, but nobody can deny the meager policy and executive role
invested in the post, a mere ceremonial role bereft of any tangible administrative
powers.

3. Talking about exercising real political power by the women, I think, the US is a
miserably disappointing case. In spite of its tall claim to be the oldest democracy,
female political empowerment has been a distant dream for average American
women. According to Pew Research Centre report, dated Sep 2018, around 70 %
women and 50% men concur that there are too few women in high political or
business positions in the US. Two decades of the twenty first century have already
passed, and the Americans, who are always eager to express concern over failing
democratic institutions or women rights in other nations, are yet nowhere near
having a female President. All of us know, what happened to the female challenge
for the US top position in more than twenty attempts, beginning with Victoria
Woodhull in 1872 to the Tulsi Gabbard, Kamala Harris etc. in the 2020. To get a
perspective, let’s turn our attention to South Asia (where I come from), which has
seen truly powerful lady leaders like Indira Gandhi (India), Benazir Bhutto (Pakistan),
Begum Khaleda Zia, Sheikh Hasina (Bangladesh), Chandrika Bandaranaike
Kumaratungam, Sirimavo Bandaranaike (Sri Lanka) – all of who wielded power in
the primary executive posts of prime ministers/presidents in their respective
countries. Being, myself born in the third tenure of Indira Gandhi as the Prime
Minister of India, she is still remembered as the ‘Iron lady’, who made hard and
politically decisive choices like nationalizing banks, conducting India’s first nuclear
test, suspending democracy by imposing emergency, defeating Pakistan and
liberating Bangladesh, and stood up to racist and sexist Nixon, so much so, she is
likened to the war goddess Durga of the Hindu pantheon.

4. Coming back to Harris, her almost two-decade long public career is not
entirely without controversies, including her refusal in 2004 to pursue death penalty
against the murderer of San Francisco police officer, however, later, making a
complete U-turn as California attorney general, when she declined to support two
ballot initiatives that would have banned the death penalty, implying policy
inconsistency on a critical policy issue. Besides, she was mysteriously unsure of her
half Indian parentage until her campaign fundraisers for Senate elections indicating
sheer identity-based political opportunism.

5. When identity of any kind, be it gender or race, both of which have been
overtly exploited in Harris’s case become the only qualifications for a powerful
position in the world’s oldest democracy, the signs are ominous for democracy in
general and female empowerment in particular. To conclude, notwithstanding the
engineered and fallacious jubilation, the elevation of Harris as the Veep doesn’t
benefit women substantially.