Editorial Viewpoint
Understanding Areez
He didn’t go quietly. Till the very end Areez Khambatta maintained his belligerent, offensive stance throwing the Parsiana representative out of the June 3, 2007 Ahmedabad Parsi Panchayat (APP) evening gathering to announce the results of the keenly contested elections for trusteeship and managing committee vacancies.
Even after the meeting and his turbulent reign of office was over he could not refrain from verbally abusing the Parsiana representative who was chatting with Khambatta’s former confidants on the board, saying “you’re wasting your time talking to (Parsiana)… he is not fit to be called a Parsi… he favors conversion and convertists (sic). He should be ashamed to be a Parsi. I supported (Parsiana) the maximum but did you ever see my face on the cover while other people got theirs?”
It was vintage Khambatta: loud, arrogant, self-destructive and angry. And yet instead of feeling resentment or hostility towards the man, one felt a sense of sorrow. Here was an individual who had built up a national brand, Rasna, from scratch, substantially augmented the family coffers, won accolades from the business world, headed the local Panchayat. And yet as he lumbered away in the evening darkness one felt a major aspect of his public career had ended in ignominy. Despite his largesse and his success at enhancing the Panchayat coffers and income he had become a despised man in his home community.
Aware of his falling status he wisely chose not to seek reelection to the board of trustees. He thereby denied his opponents the opportunity to deliver him a crushing electoral defeat. Not only Khambatta but even his erstwhile supporters, barring one, lost or did not seek reelection. Proximity (real or seen) to the unpopular president was sufficient to unseat most candidates.
When did the towering leader sow the seeds of his fall from grace? As journalists we primarily observe our leaders at public events. We are not in a position to intimately know them in a manner that a biographer may, reading correspondence, studying files, interviewing family, friends, foes and all. We mainly see the final product that is put on display. And this may result in a shallow understanding of the complexities that shape an individual’s personality. But public occurrences do provide a glimpse of the underlying pressures and tensions that drive people.
For Khambatta the defining moment when he crossed the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior was at the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meeting in Ahmedabad in 2004.
Here the autocrat unexpectedly turned on his friend and onetime holiday travel companion Nariman Mogrelia, the then president of the Madras Parsi Zarthosti Anjuman. The conflagration started when the mild mannered Mogrelia spoke about a survey taken to ascertain the views of the Madras Parsis on the issue of granting admission into the Jal Phiroj Clubwala Daremeher to children of Parsi women married to non-Parsis. Khambatta grabbed the microphone and started berating the perplexed Mogrelia for raising the subject. Khambatta then instigated the orthodox supporters mustered from Surat and elsewhere by orthodox leader Khojeste Mistree to join the verbal attack on the Madras chief. They also lambasted Mogrelia for using the term “Inshallah (God willing)” accusing him of being a Mussalman.
Mogrelia had raised the subject at a previous Federation meeting and, had the orthodox proceeded on the merits of the case, they should have cheered Mogrelia for refusing to permit entry to the offspring even though 90 percent of those who responded to the poll favored admission. So Mogrelia was a surprising target for Khambatta’s ire. [When one Madras delegate was asked why Mogrelia did not agree to amend the agiary’s constitution/rule to permit the children entry, the person replied, “Bau bailo chè” (He is very meek).”]
But the Ahmedabad president had been off m
Even after the meeting and his turbulent reign of office was over he could not refrain from verbally abusing the Parsiana representative who was chatting with Khambatta’s former confidants on the board, saying “you’re wasting your time talking to (Parsiana)… he is not fit to be called a Parsi… he favors conversion and convertists (sic). He should be ashamed to be a Parsi. I supported (Parsiana) the maximum but did you ever see my face on the cover while other people got theirs?”
It was vintage Khambatta: loud, arrogant, self-destructive and angry. And yet instead of feeling resentment or hostility towards the man, one felt a sense of sorrow. Here was an individual who had built up a national brand, Rasna, from scratch, substantially augmented the family coffers, won accolades from the business world, headed the local Panchayat. And yet as he lumbered away in the evening darkness one felt a major aspect of his public career had ended in ignominy. Despite his largesse and his success at enhancing the Panchayat coffers and income he had become a despised man in his home community.
Aware of his falling status he wisely chose not to seek reelection to the board of trustees. He thereby denied his opponents the opportunity to deliver him a crushing electoral defeat. Not only Khambatta but even his erstwhile supporters, barring one, lost or did not seek reelection. Proximity (real or seen) to the unpopular president was sufficient to unseat most candidates.
When did the towering leader sow the seeds of his fall from grace? As journalists we primarily observe our leaders at public events. We are not in a position to intimately know them in a manner that a biographer may, reading correspondence, studying files, interviewing family, friends, foes and all. We mainly see the final product that is put on display. And this may result in a shallow understanding of the complexities that shape an individual’s personality. But public occurrences do provide a glimpse of the underlying pressures and tensions that drive people.
For Khambatta the defining moment when he crossed the line between acceptable and unacceptable behavior was at the Federation of Parsi Zoroastrian Anjumans of India meeting in Ahmedabad in 2004.
Here the autocrat unexpectedly turned on his friend and onetime holiday travel companion Nariman Mogrelia, the then president of the Madras Parsi Zarthosti Anjuman. The conflagration started when the mild mannered Mogrelia spoke about a survey taken to ascertain the views of the Madras Parsis on the issue of granting admission into the Jal Phiroj Clubwala Daremeher to children of Parsi women married to non-Parsis. Khambatta grabbed the microphone and started berating the perplexed Mogrelia for raising the subject. Khambatta then instigated the orthodox supporters mustered from Surat and elsewhere by orthodox leader Khojeste Mistree to join the verbal attack on the Madras chief. They also lambasted Mogrelia for using the term “Inshallah (God willing)” accusing him of being a Mussalman.
Mogrelia had raised the subject at a previous Federation meeting and, had the orthodox proceeded on the merits of the case, they should have cheered Mogrelia for refusing to permit entry to the offspring even though 90 percent of those who responded to the poll favored admission. So Mogrelia was a surprising target for Khambatta’s ire. [When one Madras delegate was asked why Mogrelia did not agree to amend the agiary’s constitution/rule to permit the children entry, the person replied, “Bau bailo chè” (He is very meek).”]
But the Ahmedabad president had been off m
◆ ◆ ◆
From the archive