I am a regular follower of CK Lal's ability to offer a different perspective on issues. His articles have an optimistic balm. But, somehow, reading "Distant neighbours" (#110) made me feel sick. What is he actually trying to project? That our independence is more of a burden for us than a boon-well, it might be, in terms of some material gain, but not when you take into account the dignity and pride factor. It might be a matter of shame for him to carry the passport of one of the poorest countries of the world, but not for all those migrant people for whom he seems to have so much sympathy in his column. In fact, I find Nepali migrant workers here in India talk about being Nepali with a great sense of pride. CK Lal has made being Nepali somehow shameful. He should realise that monetary gain is not the only thing required in life-or else why would people all over the world be struggling for dignity, independence and identity? The fact that such an opinion is coming from an advocate of freedom and self-identity makes it much worse. Is he trying to nullify all our efforts to develop and maintain an identity of our own for centuries? Or is it that while trying to outsmart the "Indian diplomat", he himself became more Indian than Indians?

Shovendra Gautam
Calcutta