What's in a baby's name?

I recently came across an interesting bit of news. According to a report published by Britain's Office for National Statistics, Muhammad has emerged as the most common first name given to baby boys born in London in 2012, perhaps due to a high proportion of the childbearing age population being non-UK born. Sophia was the top name for baby girls.

England's Royal family names their newborns with names like George, Harry and William. However, it can be said that English no more like to name their offspring with the royal names as all these names are falling in popularity. It appears that their place is increasingly being taken by names of celebrity's children such as Beckhams and Simon Cowell. Yet, Parents are wary of names associated with celebrities, who exhibit bad behaviour.

I think this report represents well, the thinking of modern young parents not only from England but from all over the world, when they decide the names for their newborn babies and may not be specific to England alone. Obviously for other countries, the names are bound to be different, but the line of thinking appears to be on similar lines.

Let us return to India and look through the naming trends, beginning from eighteenth or nineteenth centuries. Indian parents from these centuries, always named their children with names of Hindu Gods such as Shiva, Krishna or Ganesha and girls with either names of rivers, such as Ganga, Jamuna or Goddesses like Laxmi, Parvati. With names of Gods assigned to male children, it became imperative that names of their brides also got changed, when they get married; so that they can match the husband's name, because as per Hindu mythology there are Gods-Goddesses pairs like Shiva-Parvati or Vishnu-Laxmi. Similarly each God has a major river associated with his name such as Shiva-Ganga or Krishna-Jamuna.

After the tradition of child marriages got abolished, a girl's maiden name, assigned by her parents, remained in vogue for a much longer period of more than two decades and came in official records too. Serious mismatches such as a Mahadev getting engaged to Jamuna, started coming up that were impossible to be accepted by the tradition bound society. This perhaps lead to continuation of tradition from child marriage periods that a girls maiden name to be changed after marriage, even when the girl was an adult. So if the Husband's name was again Mahadev, his bride had to adopt a matching name such as Parvati, Uma or Ganga. One of my great grand father had two brothers. Names of these three brothers and their wives should prove my point. Three brothers had names Mahadev-Vaman- Ganesha and their brides Ganga-Jamuna- Sarswati.

During late nineteenth or early twentieth century, the names became more modern, yet they always related to name of some God or other. So instead of Krishna a child could be named as Madhava and later his bride as Ramaa instead of Laxmi. Fortunately Hindu religious works provide hundreds or even thousands of names for the major Hindu Gods. As an example of this, God Vishnu has more than thousand names, giving unlimited freedom and choice to young parents to name their children with newer and unheard of names without loosing the basic script of naming the child after a God.

The hegemony or the dominance of Hindu Gods on names of babies, waned to some extent in the later half of twentieth century with names for wind (Anil), earth (Vasundhara), constellations ( Ashvini, Rohini) getting introduced. Names of some historical figures like “Pratap” or “Shivaji” found many takers. Even some Buddhist names like Amitabha became popular. In addition, names which did not relate to any God such as Sunil, Madhura or those pointing to flowers ( Gulab, Kunda) also became popular. Even the British report I quoted above, says that the most popular name given by Hindu parents in Britain in 2012 to their child was “Aarav” which means peace. Another trend in India, which is very similar to UK is to name newborn with name of some idol; Bollywood or otherwise. Rajesh, Anand or Aishvarya are examples that come to my mind.

However, Indian parents have not shown any inclination at all to name their children after national leaders of India with possible exception of “Subhash” named after Subhash Chandra Bose. In England they still name some children after names of England's past or prospective monarchs but not after their prime ministers or other leaders.

Readers might be wondering about the reason for my describing these naming trends from India and England in details. This is because of a totally different trend in another Asian country, North Korea, which is firmly ruled by Kim family of erstwhile dictator Kim Il Sung. After he died in 1994, his son, Kim Jong Il inherited power. Kim Jong Il reportedly suffered a stroke in 2008 and died in late 2011, when his son Kim Jong Un took over.

What is interesting is that contrary to trends in India and England, North Koreans have great fascination for all three Kims; Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il and Kim Jong Un and want to name their children with names of these three. The reason for this fascination is probably the personality cult carefully created by these leaders. North Korea enforces strict, state-organized public reverence of the Kim family, which serves as the backbone of the family’s authoritarian rule of the impoverished country. All North Koreans are required to wear lapel pins bearing the images of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il and to put the leaders’ portraits on the walls of their homes. Their birthdays are considered the most important holidays in North Korea.

North Korean Government however, does not like trend of naming newborn children with names of Kim family at all. In early 2011 Kim Jong Il had ordered citizens with the same name as his son ( Kim Jong Un) to get new names and had demanded that authorities reject birth registrations of newborn babies with the name. Following the same policy, North Korean Government has not only forbid its people from using the same name of its young absolute leader, but has also banned the use of the names of Kim Jong Il and the country’s founder, Kim Il Sung.

In North Korea, there can be only one Kim Jong and there can be no Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il any more. Isn’t it interesting?

6^th December 2014

North Korea's Dog-days

Singapore's 'Straits Times' happens to be one of my favourite newspaper. I like its format, special features. It has a strong international news coverage section for the simple reason that nothing much newsworthy happens in Singapore itself. It mostly presents a rational and balanced view point about world affairs that I like.

On 24^th December 2013, 'Straits Times' broke a story written by Ching Cheong, Senior Writer and under a headline that said: “ Jang's execution bodes ill for China.” Though the headline itself was nondescript, what the article contained was so explosive that it went viral on the net immediately. The article referred to a news item published in Chinese government official mouthpiece newspaper in Hong Kong, Wen Wei Po, of December 12. The news item in this paper had given the detailed account of the execution of Jang Song Thaek, uncle of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and No. 2 man in North Korea.

Strait Times article says and I quote:

“According to the report, unlike previous executions of political prisoners which were carried out by firing squads with machine guns, Jang was stripped naked and thrown into a cage, along with his five closest aides. Then 120 hounds, starved for three days, were allowed to prey on them until they were completely eaten up. This is called "quan jue", or execution by dogs. The report said the entire process lasted for an hour, with Mr Kim Jong Un, the supreme leader in North Korea, supervising it along with 300 senior officials.”

The article describes further the reasons for this punishment as :

“The official litany of Jang's treason implicated China three times. Jang was accused of underselling coal and other natural resources for which China was virtually the sole customer. He was also charged with "selling off the land of Rason economic and trade zone to a foreign country for a period of five decades under the pretext of paying debts". Finally, he was accused of selling precious metals, thus disrupting the country's financial stability. In fact, China purchased some of North Korea's gold reserves several months ago. He was also accused of aiding Chinese businessmen in securing low prices for North Korean goods and commodities.”

Commenting further, Strait Times article says:

“ Two days later, the Global Times, associated with the People's Daily, a Chinese Communist Party organ, followed up with a sternly worded editorial by Lieutenant-General Wang Hongguang, former deputy commander of Nanjing Greater Military Region, saying that the recent incident showed North Korea had become increasingly provocative and was getting out of (Chinese) control. He urged a complete reassessment of security threats originating from that direction. It also said that the abrupt political change epitomised the backwardness of the North Korean political system. It warned the Chinese government not to coddle North Korea any longer, saying that the majority of Chinese were extremely disgusted with the Kim regime.”

After reading this, I was reminded of some B grade horror movies produced in Bollywood. It is no wonder that western media jumped at this article as it was published in Straits Times, which has a good reputation. The story become fodder for some Western commentators, who ravished on it, though it sounded absolutely incredible. What is unsettling, apart from the story itself, is the fact that given North Korea's reign of secrecy, it is almost impossible to verify. The story could be true or could be a fabrication either by Chinese or North Koreans themselves.

However some indication comes from South Korean news media. The story was not picked up by mainstream South Korean news media at all. Normally South Korean media,citing defectors or other sources, report many other stories from the North. For the South Korean press, the dog story was too sensational even by North Korean standards. No South Korean official has confirmed the report, indicating that the story is likely to be a Chinese fabrication.

As the dust settled down, many western commentators started raising doubts about the gory details of the execution. The Telegraph says: "tempting - probably too tempting to be true. The thing about North Korea is that it's so mad, so gruesome that it's difficult not to believe whatever tall story you hear about it," he writes. "Kim Jong Un ate a baby? The army uses kittens for target practice? Kim Jong Il's reanimated corpse stalks the countryside scaring children? It all seems possible." Even then, it's important to look at the agendas of the people who are spreading this story: The Straits Times is a respectable and widely read publication, but it's often been accused of being the mouthpiece of Singapore's ruling party and is staunchly anti-communist - so political bias is possible. Finally, we can't dismiss the possibility that China itself has fabricated or at least encouraged the story to send a message to Pyongyang. Kim's uncle was the architect of closer economic ties between the China and North Korea and there is thought to be a lot of anger about his death.”

The Washington Post says: "The fact that the Western media have so widely accepted a story they would reject if it came out of any other country tells us a lot about how North Korea is covered - and how it's misunderstood,"

Slate magazine says: “If the North Korean government commented publicly on stories like this - but it's called the hermit kingdom for a reason. So given the Internet's insatiable appetite for weird North Korea stories, it becomes a bit of a free-for-all. The North Korean government does so many bizarre things we can confirm that a few of these dubious rumors must surely be true, right?"

Perhaps we shall never know the truth. But the fact remains that whether this dog story is true or not, as long as North Korea keeps on trampling on the basic human rights of its citizens, its dog-days are unlikely to be over.

8^th January 2013

Reacting to a neighbour's big bang

North Korea is perhaps one of the most sanctioned and isolated countries of the world. With the exception of China, who is North Korea's top ally and trading partner and who also supplies the impoverished country with crucial economic and humanitarian assistance, there are not many friends for this country. Acting under a perennial fear psychosis, that US, Japan and South Korea have made it their highest national goal, to obliterate it from map of the world, it has developed a range of rockets that can hit targets from few hundred to few thousands of Kilometers and has been making efforts to develop atomic war heads for its rockets. In continuation of it's efforts in this direction, North Korea conducted its third nuclear test on February 12, despite warnings from the international community. It has also been in forefront in the illegal trade to supply missile parts and designs to some other rogue countries.

The test has caught China on a wrong foot, who always believed that it was one of the few nations who would be able to influence Pyongyang. The international observers feel that this nuclear test is not a good development for China, North Korea has embarrassed China with this test and it is hugely insulting to it. Chinese also have found it to their horror that the test was conducted at a site, barely an hundred Kilometers from the border. China’s state news agency, Xinhua, has vocally condemned Pyongyang’s nuclear test, saying it was “another manifestation of the attempt of a desperate DPRK” to keep the threats it perceives from the U.S., Japan and South Korea “at bay.”

I however found reactions from Chinese netizens published on the web, far more representative of what ordinary Chinese think of this test. Sina Weibo, a Twitter-like service in China, was full of caustic comments, critical of North Korea and some netizens even compared North Korea to a canine. Here are some excerpts.

One netizen writes, “ Pyongyang was like a “crazy dog” that had humiliated Beijing.”

A user says that “Mao raised a dog to watch the door, turns out the dog is crazy.”

Another one writes that “North Korea slapped China. China raised a dog to bite its owner.”

“The watchdog is making trouble in front of the owner’s door,” wrote another. “But the owner can’t do anything.”

TeaLeafNation.com, a well respected e-magazine devoted to China, reports even more comments of Chinese netizens. According to the magazine, a Sina Weibo user wrote, “That fatty Kim really is a mad dog,” referring to North Korea’s leader Kim Jong-un. The post has since been deleted. Another commentator called for China to stop giving aid to North Korea, and said, “Every Chinese person with a conscience, right now is asking: Why do we support North Korea?”

Another sarcastic comment on Sina Weibo, is one of the best. A netizen says that the test is potentially positive for China. The reason for “ China to benefit is that now in comparison to North Korea, it doesn’t look so bad.”

Another user, does not agree with this comment and says, “Not so, North Korea simply doesn't trust China and is not willing to be inhibited by China."

Zhuanshengben, another Weibo user ridicules Chinese policy and says, "For China alone to emphasize China and North Korea's so-called friendship, this is the ultimate stupidity."

I found this cartoon on the web at PareshNath@cagleblog.com, which summarizes Chinese reaction very aptly.

According to new reports from Bejing, Chinese Government is hard put trying to allay fears of people about possible radiation threat from across the border as the test site is only about 100km away from the border and tries to reassure the public that their country is safe from nuclear contamination.

A statement by the environment ministry on China Central Television on 14^th February 2013 morning says,"North Korea's nuclear test has not affected China's environment or public health. " Ministry's web site assures that readings from 25 monitoring stations, on and near the border, were at normal levels at 10:00 local time on 13^th February 2013.

The official Chinese reaction is however much more guarded even when it recognizes the potentially dangerous situation. A latest report on BBC website, gives more details and I quote.

Peng Guangqian of the Chinese Academy of Military Science in an interview with Xinhua, calls the nuclear test "regrettable" and "unwise", but reminds the international community, especially the US, to exercise restraint and take full account of North Korea's security concerns. Yu Sui, professor at the China Centre for Contemporary World Studies, dismisses North Korea's test as "half helplessness and half bluff" meant at raising its "bargaining price", but also lays the responsibility on the US to sort out the crisis. Wang Fan, an expert on Korean studies at the China Foreign Affairs University, is worried in his interview with China Daily that the US and its allies, Japan and South Korea, may exploit Pyongyang's nuclear test as an excuse for a military build-up in the region.

Qiao Xinsheng of Wuhan's Zhongnan University of Economics and Law, a regular commentator on foreign policy, writes on China Review News, a state-affiliated commentary website that the Chinese military must guard against a refugee influx if the UN Security Council backs US-led air strikes on North Korea. He adds,"North Korea is entirely to blame for where it has headed today. China has paid a heavy price amid a series of instances of nuclear blackmail," He adds, "If North Korea does not change its ways by immediately promising not to conduct further nuclear tests and rocket launches, China will no longer assume the obligation of protecting North Korea. North Korea must then face a military strike from the US alone.”

I find this change in Chinese attitude, hugely interesting. They are in real quandary and just do not know, how to react to the situation as is clearly seen from the reactions. It would be interesting to see, how they would finally respond in security council, if United nations security council decides to back US-led air strikes on North Korea.

16 February 2013