‘Gauri Lankesh built movements': interview with author Rollo Romig
In the Introduction, you say you wanted to write a book on South India. Why did you then choose to write about the life and death of Gauri Lankesh?
I have been writing about South India for over a decade now, covering the region from various angles. The story of Gauri Lankesh touched on what interests me about South India, its literary scene, language cultures, character of its cities and legacy of communal harmony which was Gauri's signature cause as an activist. I really felt Gauri's story illustrated for me so much of what I love about South India and what is presently under threat.
Investigation into who killed Gauri Lankesh also becomes an investigation into who she was in the book. As someone who did not meet Gauri in her life, what was your impression of her?
It is odd to write a book about someone whom you have never met. Trying to know her through her friends, I was struck by how people who knew her when she was young could never imagine what she became before she died -- very political, passionate and outspoken. She had metamorphosed so much. Actually, her work as a journalist is not as important as her work in connecting people. The outpouring of grief following her death, showed how she connected with such diverse sets of people. Even those who turned up did not know how many more people she had connected with. Her talent to connect people really matured into movement building talent, the kind of talent that often goes underappreciated. People realise it's important only when a person who has been doing it is gone.
The book also dives into another investigation as to why Gauri Lankesh was killed. Tell us more about that.
There was a lot of speculation that slain scholar M. M. Kalburgi and her advocacy for the Lingayat cause may have led to them being killed. But investigations have now shown that the primary motive for both their murders are single quotes from single speeches. The killers seem to have decided that they can't allow the person who said this to live. Maybe who Gauri Lankesh was and what she did also came into play. But both the statements of Gauri Lankesh and Kalburgi were taken out of context. They fell victim to the contemporary sound bite culture, where you seize on a single sentence and the viewers always give them the least positive explanation, a sign of extreme polarisation. This also shows how Hindutva has been making a concerted effort to narrow down what is acceptable as Hinduism, trying to introduce an element like blasphemy, completely absent in Hinduism which is essentially a vast constellation of cultures.
Gauri Lankesh openly rejected neutrality, that traditional journalism swears by. As a journalist, how do you assess her journalistic work?
Gauri really made me think about this question of neutrality and she has influenced me a lot on this question. Her father P. Lankesh, an English professor and a modern Kannada fiction writer, was also a non-traditional journalist. Gauri then was a more traditional neutral journalist. But once she took over the paper after her father's death, she became more and more non-traditional in another way and took it to activism. She rejected many traditional practices, like she did not fact check, never used allegedly, did not seek the version of the other side. In these aspects, I think I will stick to the traditional practices of journalism.
But I have come to see neutrality as a defensive false position, essentially favouring the status quo. I have an opinion and I won't pretend that I don't. Should I strive to listen to all viewpoints, yes. But I have realised that some ideas are dangerous and cruel and I am now less hesitant to say so any more.
You have included two interludes unrelated to Gauri Lankesh's story in the book, but still interact with the way we perceive her story. Why did you write these two interludes?
These are two different stories in the neighbouring states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which I had been covering simultaneously. It was an instinctive decision to include these. In ways that I am not able to articulate it yet, having them has made the book more complete, I feel. However complicated your storytelling is, you can't capture the sense of a place and time without telling multiple stories. The interludes are also a tribute to the Indian form of epic storytelling as a mesh of multiple stories.
I Am on the Hit List; Rollo Romig, Context, ₹799.
adhitya.bharadwaj@thehindu.co.in
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
India, US to finalise 10-year framework to boost defence ties: Pentagon
Defence Minister Rajnath Singh and his American counterpart Pete Hegseth have agreed to firm up a 10-year framework to further expand defence and strategic ties between India and the US. The decision on the defence framework was mentioned in a Pentagon statement that was released on Wednesday, a day after Singh and US Defence Secretary Hegseth held a phone conversation. "Secretary Hegseth and Minister Singh agreed to sign the next 10-year US-India Defence Framework when they next meet this year," it said. It said the two sides discussed pending major US defence sales to India and the imperative of close defence industrial cooperation between the two countries. "Secretary Hegseth emphasized the priority the United States places on India as its key defense partner in South Asia," the Pentagon said. It said the two leaders reviewed the "considerable progress" both countries have made toward achieving the defense goals set out in the February 2025 joint statement by President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. "The two discussed pending major US defence sales to India and the imperative of close defense industrial cooperation between the two countries," the Pentagon readout said without providing further details. In the phone conversation on Tuesday, Singh urged Hegseth to expedite the delivery of GE F404 engines to power the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, people familiar with the matter said. Singh also pitched for early finalisation of a proposed deal between Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL) and US defence major GE Aerospace for joint production of F414 jet engines in India, they said The delays in supply of F404 engines by GE Aerospace has resulted in HAL missing the deadline to supply Tejas Mark 1A aircraft to the Indian Air Force. An Indian readout on Tuesday said Singh and Hegseth discussed a wide canvas of issues ranging from long-term cooperation in the defence sector, including training and military exchanges, to expanding industry collaborations. "They agreed to further build upon the momentum of this critical & mutually beneficial partnership across all its pillars such as interoperability, integration of defence industrial supply chains, logistics sharing, increased joint military exercises and cooperation with other like-minded partners," it said.
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Deal Or Deceit? US Pressures India To Open Farms – Is Washington Pushing A One-Sided Trade Trap?
New Delhi: The clock is ticking. Only a few days left before the July 9 deadline set by U.S. President Donald Trump. Hopes of a limited trade deal between India and the United States still linger. But the mood around the negotiating table feels anything but settled. The White House has publicly hinted that the deal is all but done. In New Delhi, officials have echoed a similar sentiment, calling the potential agreement 'big, good and beautiful'. Trump claimed it would open Indian markets to American goods. But behind closed doors, things remain tangled in tough back-and-forth. Key concerns have refused to budge. Agriculture, auto parts and steel tariffs continue to dominate the conversation. Indian negotiators have extended their stay for another round of talks. On the other side, India has made it clear that there will be no compromise on protecting farmers and dairy producers. The United States, however, keeps pushing for greater access. Time is running out. Optimism hangs in the air, but so does doubt. Experts tracking the talks believe the coming week could bring clarity. Either a small deal materialises or both sides walk away. At least for now. Agriculture remains the biggest sticking point. The United States wants access for corn, soybean and cotton. India resists. Food security and the livelihood of small farmers weigh heavily on the Indian side. Experts say India is unwilling to slash support prices or reduce public procurement. These programmes offer a safety net to millions of rural families. No cuts expected on rice, wheat or dairy tariffs. These sectors carry political risk. Over 700 million people depend on them, directly or indirectly. Rural India cannot afford shocks. A policy paper by a government think tank recently recommended tariff reductions on several U.S. agricultural goods. Rice, dairy, poultry, corn, apples, almonds and GM soy were all listed. But officials have yet to confirm if this reflects the government's official position or remains a draft proposal. Experts warn that if the United States insists on farm access as a precondition, the deal might collapse. They believe expectations from Washington may have been set without considering India's political realities. Non-tariff barriers are another headache. The United States has raised concerns over India's increasing quality control orders. More than 700 are now in place, most tied to the Make in India campaign. These rules aim to block low-grade imports and boost domestic manufacturing. But they have also made it harder for American goods to enter the Indian market. Some Indian economists have described these policies as restrictive. They argue that such controls hurt small and medium businesses by driving up compliance costs. Trade in agriculture between the two countries already stands at $8 billion. India sends rice, shrimp and spices. The U.S. ships almonds, lentils and apples. But the United States sees a trade gap of $45 billion. It wants to shrink that by exporting more farm produce. Experts fear tariff relaxations could open the door to pressure on India's support programs. The worry is not abstract. It is political, economic and rural. A mini-deal now appears more likely. Something modest. A gesture. A step forward, if not a leap. Experts suggest the agreement could include tariff cuts on industrial goods, especially in automobiles. In return, India may grant limited access for items like ethanol, raisins, olive oil and select wines. But agriculture will likely remain off-limits. No major concessions expected there. Beyond goods, Washington wants India to make big-ticket purchases – oil, gas, aircraft, helicopters and even nuclear reactors. Foreign investment rules in retail also remain on the table. U.S. companies like Amazon and Walmart stand to benefit. New Delhi has been cautious. The United States is also eyeing flexibility in regulations for refurbished items. That would ease entry for used electronics and other products. Experts say if this mini-deal happens, it will revolve around tariff cuts and strategic purchases. Larger issues like digital trade, intellectual property and service exports will be shelved for future rounds. Initially, the two sides seemed aligned. A simple principle guided them – America would focus on capital-intensive goods and India on labour-driven ones. That equation now feels out of sync. If the talks collapse, the fallout may be limited. Experts do not expect Trump to reimpose the full 26% tariff on Indian goods. A flat 10% under Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rates seems more likely. These are the standard tariffs World Trade Organisation (WTO) members apply to each other. In April, 57 countries faced those U.S. tariffs. Only the United Kingdom managed a deal. Singling out India would raise eyebrows. Still, observers remain cautious. Trump is known for surprises. And surprises can override expectations.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Trump announces trade deal with Vietnam that will let U.S. goods into country duty-free
President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with Vietnam on Wednesday (July 2, 2025) that would allow U.S. goods to enter the country duty-free. Vietnamese exports to the United States, by contrast, would face a 20% levy. On his Truth Social platform, Mr. Trump declared the pact "a Great Deal of Cooperation between our two Countries". In April, Mr. Trump announced a 46% tax on Vietnamese imports — one of his so-called reciprocal tariffs targeting dozens of countries with which the United States runs trade deficits. Mr. Trump promptly suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to allow for negotiations like the one with Vietnam. The pause expires Tuesday (July 1, 2025), but so far, the Trump administration has reached a trade agreement with only one of those countries — the United Kingdom. (Mr. Trump has also reached a "framework" agreement with China in a separate trade dispute.) 'Vietnam has been very keen to get out from under this," said Mary Lovely, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "This is forcing a smaller country to eat it, basically. We can do that. It's the big countries that everybody's keeping their eyes on." She doubts that Mr. Trump will be able to impose such a lopsided agreement on big trading partners such as the European Union and Japan. The United States last year ran a $122 billion trade deficit with Vietnam. That was the third-biggest U.S. trade gap — the difference between the goods and services it buys from other countries and those it sells them — behind the ones with China and Mexico. In addition to the 20% tariffs, Mr. Trump said the U.S. would impose a 40% tax on "transshipping" — goods from another country that stop in Vietnam on their way to the United States. Washington complains that Chinese goods have been dodging higher US tariffs by transiting through Vietnam. In May, Vietnam approved a $1.5 billion project by the Trump Organisation and a local partner to build a massive golf resort complex near Hanoi, covering an area roughly the size of 336 football fields. Vietnam was a beneficiary of American efforts to counter China's influence. Companies looking to diversify their supply chains away from China flocked to Vietnam. In 2023, it became the only country to host both President Joe Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on state visits. That year, the US upgraded Vietnam to its highest diplomatic status — comprehensive strategic partner — placing it on par with China and Russia.
