The dastardly terror strike in Mumbai has shaken the entire nation. It is not just the scale of fatalities with 195 killed in cold blood and nearly 300 injured that hurt the people. The reputation of the nation has been damaged globally with the English cricket team refusing to play any more matches and predictions about a drop in future investments in Indian economy. What is curious is that after a brief consensus against terror among mainstream political parties, the blame game has again resurfaced. While the parties like BJP has found the Karachi connection useful in blaming the Muslims for all the mayhem caused across the financial capital, those opposed to it criticise it for politicising terror for electoral gains. The fact is that there is some truth in both the claims. BJP, which rightly faults Congress on not hanging Afzal Guru despite his conviction on terror charge for appeasing Muslims cannot explain why its foreign minister Jaswant Singh escorted the three notorious terrorists Maulana Masood Azhar, Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar and Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to Kandhar to secure the release of Indian hostages. Nor does it condone why PM Manmohan Singh, while claiming that the neighbouring country will have to take the cost for allowing terror strike from its territory, fails to extract any cost from his own cabinet and allows the Home minister to continue in office. To spread disaffection against the govt., Narendra Modi offers a crore of rupees against the official Rs. 5 lacs, to late ATS chief Karkare’s family by way of compensation. He conveniently forgets that his party was demanding a Narco test on the same IPS officer over the Malegaon terror case, which allegedly involved people aligned to his party. Karkare’s family rejected the offer the same way as Sharma’s family had done when SP leader Amar Singh had sent them a cheque of Rs. 10 lacs following the death of Inspector Sharma of Delhi police after voicing doubts about Batla House encounter. Politicians do not learn and are bent upon dividing the people.
What is more disappointing is that terror strikes have been taking place recurrently and evoking similar responses. A tough statement and compensation for victims followed by inaction till a fresh strike takes place. While the investigating agencies usually unearth all the information and reconstruct the sequence of events, yet they can neither act effectively on intelligence inputs nor pre-empt or prevent future attacks. The columns and blogs are full of comparisons with US, which has not allowed a single terror attack on its soil post 9/11. There are suggestions that the present strike was meant primarily to target US interests on the Thanksgiving Day along with British and Israelis. The choice of the financial capital of India proved handy logistically. The global intelligence inputs pointing out a spectacular strike before Obama is sworn in have been proved right and we have paid dearly since we were complacent enough to believe that the strike will be in US. Nor did our agencies take into account the possibility that with airports and railways better guarded, the terrorists may take the sea route. One wishes the choppers of Indian coastguards had mounted surveillance sooner and averted the loss of innocent lives in the most barbaric strikes.
A question that is being hotly discussed over the net relates to India tackling terror. How can we do it? What needs to be done? It is clear that all of us need to change. First of all we need to treat the issue of security seriously. When Delhi’s LG wanted all citizens to carry some kind of ID proof, politicians pounced upon him and accused him of harassing migrants from places like Bihar. Does it make any sense? When you cannot tell a Bangladeshi from a Bihari or a Bangali, how do you screen potential terrorists? It is a pity none of the local leaders supported the order, which was legitimate and reasonable. Nor did any one support Delhi’s CM, at least publically, when she talked about increasing migration to Delhi exerting pressure on its infrastructure. She was made to withdraw the statement and tender an apology. Do our leaders even understand that such unchecked migration has a security angle too?
There is lack of professionalism among the police as well. One wonders how the terror suspects manage to evade its eye while the street vendors and petty criminals cannot avoid being on its pay-roll. And how does one accept Sharma not wearing a bullet proof jacket at Batla House or Karkare and his men taking them off before the terrorists had been neutralised? It is not just a matter of losing lives but valiant and trained officers. Does one need to explain the advantages of wearing a helmet over an ordinary P-cap to the cops and commandos? The terrorist are far better equipped than those expected to take them head on and the disastrous results are before us. 19 killed and 275 injured by ten terrorists plus the carnage they left behind.
After every terror strike, there is tough talk, a high alert and more frisking till we sink into complacency again and become a sitting duck for terrorists. Let us hope that things will be different this time and the nation will be better prepared to face them in future-from wherever they come.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Saturday, November 22, 2008
On Hindu terror
L.K. Advani, Prime minister-designate of BJP protested during the course of Hindustan Times Leadership Summit today at the use of the term “Hindu terror”. Speaking like the pseudo-secularists his party ridicules everyday; he declared that terrorists have no religion. This must sound like music to many and some may regret that he had to issue such a clarification at all. Rajnath Singh, the President of BJP had similarly protested at the use of the term stating that a Hindu can never be a terrorist. One is reminded of a claim that PM Manmohan Singh made a couple of years ago that no Indian Muslim was involved in acts of terror worldwide. As if to prove him wrong, many indigenous name and organizations sprang up forcing him to eat his words. The latest being the tech-savvy Indian Mujahidin (IM), which not only took responsibility for several serial blasts across Indian cities but also revealed shockingly that those driving the engine of Muslim hate were not products of some non-descript madrassa but a highly educated and well-paid executive of an MNC. One can only hope that Advani and his likes do not have to face the same fate as more and more skeletons toss out of cupboards of Hindu terror every day. The Hindu hate machine has even penetrated the army, which prided itself on its secular values and sense of discipline. Remember the photographs of Abdul Hamid, who martyred himself in the service of India, splashed across newspapers in the wake of Indo-Pakistan war of 1965 and won the highest bravery award, Param Vir Chakra?
Most Hindus also thought that violence was inimical to Hindu ethos. When you had saints who walked barefoot for fear of hurting insects and renounced materialism in all its forms in order to attain nirvana, how could they even think violence, leave alone preaching it? And it was not just Hindus who thought of our faith in such glorious terms. I still recollect interviewing for our college magazine, Stavak, the noted cartoonist of Indian Express, Abu Abraham, at his residence in early seventies. During the course of the interview recorded on a bulky spool tape recorder lying in ruins with me, Abu, a conservative Christian revealed that he had not baptised his two daughters. They were given Muslim and Hindu names, Aysha and Janaki, and the parents read over different scriptures to them. The idea was not to burden them with the faith of their parents but to give them a choice of choosing a faith that gave them maximum solace. Abu went on to say that he had not come across a more liberal faith than Hinduism. After I had clicked a few photographs of Abu with my Russian Zorky camera, I and my friend from AIR, O.P. Dutta left his place in a bit of daze wondering whether we in our twenties could even conceive of such values. I just checked on the net and learnt with dismay that Abu passed away in his native Kerala in the winter of 2002. R.I.P. May his ideals continue to inspire our nation!
The overwhelming question is how is it that the liberalism of the same faith that evoked the envy of several non-Hindus created men who could torch people alive, rape women and destroy mosques and churches? There is a school of thought that violence by Hindus is retaliatory and caused by relentless appeasement of minorities for electoral gains. This is not an invalid assumption. Critics of post-Godhra riots rarely if ever referred to the torching Hindu karsevaks in the coaches of a train. Political parties like the SP rake up the Batla House encounter case with an eye on Muslim votes. Not to be undone, Congress indulges in the same kind of double-speak it accuses others, especially the BJP of, when it also demands a probe into it. Did the BJP ever sought justice for hundreds of innocent men and women hounded out of buses, segregated and shot at point blank range in the fields of Punjab? Isn’t it also guilty of appeasing Sikhs and Akalis? Is pseudo-secularism of Congress and the Left being matched by BJP’s pseudo-communalism? And what about attacking Christians, burning their homes and destroying churches? Haven’t the self-appointed guardians of Hinduism negated the provisions of our Constitution, which guarantees freedom of faith? If the argument is that missionaries are inducing tribals in order to convert them, which may be true, the rites of purification and home-coming being performed by Hindu groups as a pre-condition for allowing the victims to return to their hearth and homes are also involuntary. In any case, most Indian Muslims, Christians and Buddhists are converts from Hinduism. How many can one possibly re-convert back and with what benefit? The only gain can be electoral since such a drive is meant to consolidate Hindu votes. It is clear that using brute force against minorities is a political and not a religious agenda. Has Advani ever taken up the cause of Muslims accused of being terrorists and tortured to extract confessions?
Several Hindu groups of various hues and colours no longer feel shy of embracing violence in thought and action. What is unfortunate is that it is being done in the name of a religion, which has been universally acknowledged as the most liberal faith. One may call it by any name but the repercussions for the country’s unity and diversity will be tragic. Therefore it is important that we, as a nation, learn to respect the rule of law. India must come first and remain foremost.
***
Most Hindus also thought that violence was inimical to Hindu ethos. When you had saints who walked barefoot for fear of hurting insects and renounced materialism in all its forms in order to attain nirvana, how could they even think violence, leave alone preaching it? And it was not just Hindus who thought of our faith in such glorious terms. I still recollect interviewing for our college magazine, Stavak, the noted cartoonist of Indian Express, Abu Abraham, at his residence in early seventies. During the course of the interview recorded on a bulky spool tape recorder lying in ruins with me, Abu, a conservative Christian revealed that he had not baptised his two daughters. They were given Muslim and Hindu names, Aysha and Janaki, and the parents read over different scriptures to them. The idea was not to burden them with the faith of their parents but to give them a choice of choosing a faith that gave them maximum solace. Abu went on to say that he had not come across a more liberal faith than Hinduism. After I had clicked a few photographs of Abu with my Russian Zorky camera, I and my friend from AIR, O.P. Dutta left his place in a bit of daze wondering whether we in our twenties could even conceive of such values. I just checked on the net and learnt with dismay that Abu passed away in his native Kerala in the winter of 2002. R.I.P. May his ideals continue to inspire our nation!
The overwhelming question is how is it that the liberalism of the same faith that evoked the envy of several non-Hindus created men who could torch people alive, rape women and destroy mosques and churches? There is a school of thought that violence by Hindus is retaliatory and caused by relentless appeasement of minorities for electoral gains. This is not an invalid assumption. Critics of post-Godhra riots rarely if ever referred to the torching Hindu karsevaks in the coaches of a train. Political parties like the SP rake up the Batla House encounter case with an eye on Muslim votes. Not to be undone, Congress indulges in the same kind of double-speak it accuses others, especially the BJP of, when it also demands a probe into it. Did the BJP ever sought justice for hundreds of innocent men and women hounded out of buses, segregated and shot at point blank range in the fields of Punjab? Isn’t it also guilty of appeasing Sikhs and Akalis? Is pseudo-secularism of Congress and the Left being matched by BJP’s pseudo-communalism? And what about attacking Christians, burning their homes and destroying churches? Haven’t the self-appointed guardians of Hinduism negated the provisions of our Constitution, which guarantees freedom of faith? If the argument is that missionaries are inducing tribals in order to convert them, which may be true, the rites of purification and home-coming being performed by Hindu groups as a pre-condition for allowing the victims to return to their hearth and homes are also involuntary. In any case, most Indian Muslims, Christians and Buddhists are converts from Hinduism. How many can one possibly re-convert back and with what benefit? The only gain can be electoral since such a drive is meant to consolidate Hindu votes. It is clear that using brute force against minorities is a political and not a religious agenda. Has Advani ever taken up the cause of Muslims accused of being terrorists and tortured to extract confessions?
Several Hindu groups of various hues and colours no longer feel shy of embracing violence in thought and action. What is unfortunate is that it is being done in the name of a religion, which has been universally acknowledged as the most liberal faith. One may call it by any name but the repercussions for the country’s unity and diversity will be tragic. Therefore it is important that we, as a nation, learn to respect the rule of law. India must come first and remain foremost.
***
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Defending Terror Accused
When the Vice Chancellor of Jamia Millia University offered financial assistance to some of its students accused of masterminding bomb blasts in Delhi, there was a hue and cry. Jamia is a central university, which receives funding from the central government through the UGC. In other words, the tax payers’ money was proposed to be used to defend terror suspects. The matter assumed political overtones when the Minister of HRD after a meeting with Jamia’s VC supported his stand. The VC claimed that law assumed everyone to be innocent till proven guilty. Therefore Jamia was not wrong in arranging the legal defence of its students.
This raises interesting questions. If the arrested students did not belong to the minority community, would Jamia and the politicians who swarmed the campus in their support after the encounter of Batla House have still adopted the same stand? Is the real motive to help the so-called innocents or to appease the sentiments of minority community with an eye on their votes? When an employee of a university is arrested even on a petty criminal charge and held in detention for more than 48 hours, the service rules prescribe his suspension. When Jamia’s students have been arrested on a serious charge of promoting terror and are in custody, they are being glorified and offered legal aid by those who are responsible for maintaining discipline in the university.
In a reprehensible bid to encash Muslim votes, the politicians have not only questioned the police action in which a senior police officer was himself shot dead, but also demanded a probe even before the investigation is complete. There was a ludicrous suggestion that the police officer may have been shot dead by his own colleagues to justify a fake encounter. Such absurdities call for a willing suspension of disbelief. The underlying assumption is that Muslims are under attack and whenever a terror attack takes place, only Muslim names crop us. What do the critics expect? A combination of Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Christian names to prove our multi- religious society with perhaps a Parsi name to garnish the recipe? Which names came up when Punjab was on the boil in the eighties? Muslim or Sikh? Similar stories of repression of Sikhs were floated by the vested interests while hundreds of poor Hindus who were dragged out of buses in Punjab and shot dead in cold blood.
The approach belies a lack of seriousness in tackling terror. Almost as a re-run, an ex-Major of Indian Army accused of training those involved in Malegaon blasts in which Muslims were on the receiving end, is being offered legal help by VHP. This is equally condemnable. In a civil society, which respects the rule of law, it is tantamount to indirectly funding terrorism. If the only concern is that the accused may not go undefended, let those keen to act as “Good Samaritans” like the Minister of HRD, the VC of Jamia and the VHP know that the courts are required to appoint amicus curie or friends of court to defend those who lack the means to do so. The powers that be are expected to let law take its own course. If we want India to survive as a democratic, secular and unified nation, we will have to learn to respect the law.
This raises interesting questions. If the arrested students did not belong to the minority community, would Jamia and the politicians who swarmed the campus in their support after the encounter of Batla House have still adopted the same stand? Is the real motive to help the so-called innocents or to appease the sentiments of minority community with an eye on their votes? When an employee of a university is arrested even on a petty criminal charge and held in detention for more than 48 hours, the service rules prescribe his suspension. When Jamia’s students have been arrested on a serious charge of promoting terror and are in custody, they are being glorified and offered legal aid by those who are responsible for maintaining discipline in the university.
In a reprehensible bid to encash Muslim votes, the politicians have not only questioned the police action in which a senior police officer was himself shot dead, but also demanded a probe even before the investigation is complete. There was a ludicrous suggestion that the police officer may have been shot dead by his own colleagues to justify a fake encounter. Such absurdities call for a willing suspension of disbelief. The underlying assumption is that Muslims are under attack and whenever a terror attack takes place, only Muslim names crop us. What do the critics expect? A combination of Hindu, Sikh, Jain and Christian names to prove our multi- religious society with perhaps a Parsi name to garnish the recipe? Which names came up when Punjab was on the boil in the eighties? Muslim or Sikh? Similar stories of repression of Sikhs were floated by the vested interests while hundreds of poor Hindus who were dragged out of buses in Punjab and shot dead in cold blood.
The approach belies a lack of seriousness in tackling terror. Almost as a re-run, an ex-Major of Indian Army accused of training those involved in Malegaon blasts in which Muslims were on the receiving end, is being offered legal help by VHP. This is equally condemnable. In a civil society, which respects the rule of law, it is tantamount to indirectly funding terrorism. If the only concern is that the accused may not go undefended, let those keen to act as “Good Samaritans” like the Minister of HRD, the VC of Jamia and the VHP know that the courts are required to appoint amicus curie or friends of court to defend those who lack the means to do so. The powers that be are expected to let law take its own course. If we want India to survive as a democratic, secular and unified nation, we will have to learn to respect the law.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Aiyer-from a Leftist to a Marxist
Every one knows that Mani Shanker Aiyer is a brilliant and articulate man. But that's not a qualification for getting an important portfolio. When he was moved from Petroleum to Panchayti Raj, he felt demoted and marginalised. It was reported that he complained to Sonia Gandhi that he knew nothing about Panchayati Raj. She is believed to have retorted that he knew nothing about petroleum too when he was given that portfolio. The point is you are given a job and you have to excel at it or quit. He claims in his address that he was always a Leftist. So are most people in their teens when they dream of an equal world. But on growing up, they realize that equality does not even exist in the Communist parties’ politburos. He further claims that the economic reforms made him a Marxist. He should honestly admit that it is his dislike for PM, who didn't let him continue and moved him to Panchayati Raj that makes him question why credit for economic reforms should be given to Manmohan Singh. Either way, it amounts to a confession that Economic reforms are not to be discredited. Marxism only created utopian states, which either collapsed (U.S.S.R., for instance) or embraced capitalism like China. Statistics apart, the fact remains that China has recorded phenomenal growth and exceeded India in every part of the economic game. Aiyer for all his frustration should remember that you need to produce more goods and services for every one to have them and social justice does not mean taking away from some to give to others. Can one deny a communication revolution in the country with ordinary masons, plumbers, carpenters and vendors not just flashing mobile phones but using them to get custom? The answer to inequalities lies in finding ways and means to end them and delivering sermons at the CII is surely not the ideal way.
Monday, October 27, 2008
On the Wagah Border
On the Wagah Border
We sped fast to cover the 30 kms distance from Amritsar to the Wagah border. The cab driver told us that we need to take our place by 4 P.M. to be able to see the Retreat ceremony. Though we made it in time, yet the vantage positions were already occupied. This we realised after the details of the area sinked in. There was a huge gate on the Indian side with a camera crew on top to shoot the ceremony. The sides of the road looked like a stadium with all the steps filled up with people who had thronged to catch a glimpse. I decided to stand in the middle of the road, along the barricade of a thick rope but he BSF sentry would shove me repeatedly asking me to move. Patriotic songs blared at full volume from huge speakers installed on the top of BSF unit’s quarters and an athletic jawan goaded the crowd to cheer and raise the slogans loud enough to reach the other side. For the Pakistani gate, with a photograph of Jinnah visible from a distance of 500-odd meters that separated us, also had hundreds of people seated in a similar fashion trying to drown the Indians by using their lung-power. Hindustan Zindabad met with a piercing sound of Pakistan Paindabad. Some small children on our side tried to outsmart the other side by shouting murdabad as soon as Pakistan was heard over their amplifiers but the BSF jawans dissuaded them from shouting any slogans other than those in praise of India. As seconds turned into minutes and minutes into quarters, the restless crowd was fed with new slogans like “Vande Matram”. There was hostility in the air as BSF jawans and Pakistani Rangers at a distance tried to stamp life out of roads beneath by raising their knees almost to their chests and stamping the earth harshly. Then the unexpected happened. All of us were pushed to one side. When we looked back, we saw the Lahore-Delhi-Lahore bus moving slowly towards the borders as the two gates on Indian and Pakistani sides were opened to enable it cross over. The passengers peeped out and waved and captured the excitement outside on cameras. The crowd of curious onlookers waved back trying unsuccessfully to figure out their nationality. Not an easy job since Indians and Pakistanis look so much alike. Once the bus was gone, the crowds were back to their old game.
As the Sun dipped over the Pakistani horizon, it took a lot of heat away from the proceedings. The BSF jawan explained the contours of the ceremony and asked the crowd to stand up silently. The command into the microphone was the longest one ever heard over the years. The soldiers marched into each other’s territory briefly and began lowering the flags of the two nations by pulling the strings diagonally. There was aloud cheer as the two flags overlapped half way through and the vendors tried to encash the sentiment by offering CDs of the film Border vigorously. The soldiers embraced before the gates were closed in the twilight. The new day would bring new faces to the borders on both the sides and the love-hate relationship between the two neighbours would be demonstrated again. As I turned back, passing by the custom and immigration offices, I could not suppress a thought. If thousands of people throng the border on both the sides just to see a ceremony, how many must be keen to cross over and meet the people of the other side-only if the politicians and police would let them go over!
India-Pakistan relations are held hostage by them. There was a terse reminder of the same as people looked at a double fencing on both sides of the border. What is this passage for? I enquired from an armed guard. What you just saw was only a gate. This is actually the border. The double fence with flood lights is to prevent infiltration from the Pakistani side. The embraces disappeared from my mind and cross-border filled the vacuous space.
***
We sped fast to cover the 30 kms distance from Amritsar to the Wagah border. The cab driver told us that we need to take our place by 4 P.M. to be able to see the Retreat ceremony. Though we made it in time, yet the vantage positions were already occupied. This we realised after the details of the area sinked in. There was a huge gate on the Indian side with a camera crew on top to shoot the ceremony. The sides of the road looked like a stadium with all the steps filled up with people who had thronged to catch a glimpse. I decided to stand in the middle of the road, along the barricade of a thick rope but he BSF sentry would shove me repeatedly asking me to move. Patriotic songs blared at full volume from huge speakers installed on the top of BSF unit’s quarters and an athletic jawan goaded the crowd to cheer and raise the slogans loud enough to reach the other side. For the Pakistani gate, with a photograph of Jinnah visible from a distance of 500-odd meters that separated us, also had hundreds of people seated in a similar fashion trying to drown the Indians by using their lung-power. Hindustan Zindabad met with a piercing sound of Pakistan Paindabad. Some small children on our side tried to outsmart the other side by shouting murdabad as soon as Pakistan was heard over their amplifiers but the BSF jawans dissuaded them from shouting any slogans other than those in praise of India. As seconds turned into minutes and minutes into quarters, the restless crowd was fed with new slogans like “Vande Matram”. There was hostility in the air as BSF jawans and Pakistani Rangers at a distance tried to stamp life out of roads beneath by raising their knees almost to their chests and stamping the earth harshly. Then the unexpected happened. All of us were pushed to one side. When we looked back, we saw the Lahore-Delhi-Lahore bus moving slowly towards the borders as the two gates on Indian and Pakistani sides were opened to enable it cross over. The passengers peeped out and waved and captured the excitement outside on cameras. The crowd of curious onlookers waved back trying unsuccessfully to figure out their nationality. Not an easy job since Indians and Pakistanis look so much alike. Once the bus was gone, the crowds were back to their old game.
As the Sun dipped over the Pakistani horizon, it took a lot of heat away from the proceedings. The BSF jawan explained the contours of the ceremony and asked the crowd to stand up silently. The command into the microphone was the longest one ever heard over the years. The soldiers marched into each other’s territory briefly and began lowering the flags of the two nations by pulling the strings diagonally. There was aloud cheer as the two flags overlapped half way through and the vendors tried to encash the sentiment by offering CDs of the film Border vigorously. The soldiers embraced before the gates were closed in the twilight. The new day would bring new faces to the borders on both the sides and the love-hate relationship between the two neighbours would be demonstrated again. As I turned back, passing by the custom and immigration offices, I could not suppress a thought. If thousands of people throng the border on both the sides just to see a ceremony, how many must be keen to cross over and meet the people of the other side-only if the politicians and police would let them go over!
India-Pakistan relations are held hostage by them. There was a terse reminder of the same as people looked at a double fencing on both sides of the border. What is this passage for? I enquired from an armed guard. What you just saw was only a gate. This is actually the border. The double fence with flood lights is to prevent infiltration from the Pakistani side. The embraces disappeared from my mind and cross-border filled the vacuous space.
***
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
MNS vs. North Indians
MNS vs. North Indians
The MNS activists have repeated their heinous act. They attacked candidates who came to appear for an examination to be conducted by the Indian Railways. Their grouse is that people who do not belong to Maharashtra grab the jobs in the state to the exclusion or disadvantage of locals. This is not the first time they have indulge in such violence against North Indians. Nor do they care about the sense of outrage their actions cause among victims or others. The MNS, off course, is trying to carve out a space for itself following a split with Shiv Sena. Its aggressive posturing is directed to ensure for itself a significant share of the Maharashtrian vote whenever polls are held next in that state. Its ambitions may include a virtual take over of the Shiv Sena’s role in anticipation of a decline in the latter’s fortunes as Bal Thackeray’s hold on the masses lessens with advancing age. MNS is not the only outfit, which arouses regional sentiment in order to derive electoral benefits. TMC recently threw out Tata’s Nano from Singur to make a dent in Left’s share of rural vote in Bengal. It resorted to physical attacks on the unit’s personnel to prevent them from functioning on the site. What is reprehensible about MNS actions is not limited to physically attacking young men aspiring to find employment on the basis of merit. It is the belief that even national entities like the Indian Railways are not free to hold all- India competitions in its stronghold, Mumbai and must restrict recruitment to local candidates. The outfit has been issuing threats to all and sundry over a variety of issues. Jet will not be allowed to fly out of Mumbai. It would not be allowed to impose a salary cut. The people from Bihar can not perform Chat puja in Maharashtra. Nor they can ply taxis in the city. The shops and business establishments can only use Marathi on display boards. In order to enlarge its hold on local population, it can go to any extent while the law and order machinery watches the situation mutely. The reason is that the local administration does not want to acquire an anti- Maharashtrian image. So let the poor candidates and taxi drivers be thrashed in full public view while the Home Minister issues a routine statement condemning the assaults and the police commissioner promises action against the culprits. The warrant of arrest against the man responsible for taking the law unto his own hands is either not executed or is released on a personal bond at his residence itself only for the sake of record. He instigates violence and is set free to repeat his illegal actions. This is not “maha-nirman” but “maha-vinash”. It is futile to argue with organizations like MNS to rise above regional and parochial issues and think in national terms. But the nation does expect from the State and the Central government that those who take law into their own hands, wherever and whoever they may be, should be dealt with sternly. Politics is being increasingly played at the expense of innocent citizens those who are peacefully leading their lives. Their life and liberty must be protected as enshrined in the Constitution.
The MNS activists have repeated their heinous act. They attacked candidates who came to appear for an examination to be conducted by the Indian Railways. Their grouse is that people who do not belong to Maharashtra grab the jobs in the state to the exclusion or disadvantage of locals. This is not the first time they have indulge in such violence against North Indians. Nor do they care about the sense of outrage their actions cause among victims or others. The MNS, off course, is trying to carve out a space for itself following a split with Shiv Sena. Its aggressive posturing is directed to ensure for itself a significant share of the Maharashtrian vote whenever polls are held next in that state. Its ambitions may include a virtual take over of the Shiv Sena’s role in anticipation of a decline in the latter’s fortunes as Bal Thackeray’s hold on the masses lessens with advancing age. MNS is not the only outfit, which arouses regional sentiment in order to derive electoral benefits. TMC recently threw out Tata’s Nano from Singur to make a dent in Left’s share of rural vote in Bengal. It resorted to physical attacks on the unit’s personnel to prevent them from functioning on the site. What is reprehensible about MNS actions is not limited to physically attacking young men aspiring to find employment on the basis of merit. It is the belief that even national entities like the Indian Railways are not free to hold all- India competitions in its stronghold, Mumbai and must restrict recruitment to local candidates. The outfit has been issuing threats to all and sundry over a variety of issues. Jet will not be allowed to fly out of Mumbai. It would not be allowed to impose a salary cut. The people from Bihar can not perform Chat puja in Maharashtra. Nor they can ply taxis in the city. The shops and business establishments can only use Marathi on display boards. In order to enlarge its hold on local population, it can go to any extent while the law and order machinery watches the situation mutely. The reason is that the local administration does not want to acquire an anti- Maharashtrian image. So let the poor candidates and taxi drivers be thrashed in full public view while the Home Minister issues a routine statement condemning the assaults and the police commissioner promises action against the culprits. The warrant of arrest against the man responsible for taking the law unto his own hands is either not executed or is released on a personal bond at his residence itself only for the sake of record. He instigates violence and is set free to repeat his illegal actions. This is not “maha-nirman” but “maha-vinash”. It is futile to argue with organizations like MNS to rise above regional and parochial issues and think in national terms. But the nation does expect from the State and the Central government that those who take law into their own hands, wherever and whoever they may be, should be dealt with sternly. Politics is being increasingly played at the expense of innocent citizens those who are peacefully leading their lives. Their life and liberty must be protected as enshrined in the Constitution.
Friday, October 17, 2008
From Singur to Sanand
From Singur to Sanand
Ever since Tata announced the decision to relocate the nano project from the trouble-torn Singur in West Bengal to Sanand in Gujarat, there have been mixed reactions. For the Hindu liberals as well as the progressive Left, there is nothing worse than the master-mind of Godhra and arch-rioter, Modi. The inaction of Gujarat police during the infamous riots directed against the Muslim minority is taken as proof of complicity of state administration in subduing those who dared raise their heads against nationalist Hindus and had targeted the kar sevaks returning from Ayodhya with arson and murder. Frankly, one is either a Modi-baiter or a Modi admirer. Be it in politics or media, there have been few voices, which condemned both-what preceded and followed Godhra. Modi cocked a snook at his critics spread across the media, political opponents within and without, judiciary et al and derided them publically. He called them enemies of the asmita or self-respect of Gujarat and rallied the locals behind himself. What he could not win with his self-effacing ideology, he conquered with a clinically-efficient administration. Be it the building of infrastructure or providing post-floods emergency relief, there was a stamp of his ruthless pursuit of goals. He has been unsparing in action, overbearing in confidence and patient in pursuing ambitions. Few state leaders have shown the dynamic resolve to grab the Nano project by doing the entire homework in ten days. The Opposition in Gujarat stands vanquished and the Modi-baiters across the nation petrified at the turn of events. A Gujarat with its efficient governance but no room for dissent may look like India’s Singapore. The rest of India needs to learn from it how to grow and Modi’s Gujarat needs to re-learn that democratic or human rights are not antithetical to growth. We need to follow our economic goals in a fair and firm manner. The Nano’s progress from a chaotic Singur to a sanguine Sanand should be an eye-opener for those who cannot think beyond stereotypes.
Ever since Tata announced the decision to relocate the nano project from the trouble-torn Singur in West Bengal to Sanand in Gujarat, there have been mixed reactions. For the Hindu liberals as well as the progressive Left, there is nothing worse than the master-mind of Godhra and arch-rioter, Modi. The inaction of Gujarat police during the infamous riots directed against the Muslim minority is taken as proof of complicity of state administration in subduing those who dared raise their heads against nationalist Hindus and had targeted the kar sevaks returning from Ayodhya with arson and murder. Frankly, one is either a Modi-baiter or a Modi admirer. Be it in politics or media, there have been few voices, which condemned both-what preceded and followed Godhra. Modi cocked a snook at his critics spread across the media, political opponents within and without, judiciary et al and derided them publically. He called them enemies of the asmita or self-respect of Gujarat and rallied the locals behind himself. What he could not win with his self-effacing ideology, he conquered with a clinically-efficient administration. Be it the building of infrastructure or providing post-floods emergency relief, there was a stamp of his ruthless pursuit of goals. He has been unsparing in action, overbearing in confidence and patient in pursuing ambitions. Few state leaders have shown the dynamic resolve to grab the Nano project by doing the entire homework in ten days. The Opposition in Gujarat stands vanquished and the Modi-baiters across the nation petrified at the turn of events. A Gujarat with its efficient governance but no room for dissent may look like India’s Singapore. The rest of India needs to learn from it how to grow and Modi’s Gujarat needs to re-learn that democratic or human rights are not antithetical to growth. We need to follow our economic goals in a fair and firm manner. The Nano’s progress from a chaotic Singur to a sanguine Sanand should be an eye-opener for those who cannot think beyond stereotypes.
Monday, October 6, 2008
The Politics of Protest
Following the killing of a VHP leader engaged in reconverting Christians to Hinduism allegedly by some Maoists, Hindu activists belonging to VHP and Bajrang Dal indulged in mayhem in Orissa and some other BJP ruled States like Karnataka. 50 Christians have so far been killed, more than 5000 dwellings razed, over 100 Churches torched and not less than 50 thousand members of the Christian community rendered homeless. This is not the only case where people take the law into their own hands rather than allowing it to take its course. A policeman was lynched by protestors in Jammu as part of protest demonstrations over the Amarnath land row. Not long ago, Gurjars were shown indulging in senseless violence in Rajasthan demanding ST status for their community. They uprooted railway lines, blocked national highways and refused to cremate the corpses lying in the open. The doctors go on flash strikes to protest assaults on them by next of kin of those allegedly neglected in the hospitals. The security guard of a Sikh saint fired a shot at a crowd of his opponents in Mumbai killing one of them. The crowd reacted by damaging trains and hurting their passengers. A couple of children died in a religious ashram and its supporters and opponents fought a pitched battle damaging what ever came in their way. The repetitive attacks on its factory and workers at Singur have made Tata Motors move out its upcoming Nano small car unit out of West Bengal but Mamata Bannerji of TMC who spearheaded the agitation is unrepentant in anticipation of electoral gains.
Curiously, the controversy over transfer of a piece of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board in Kashmir has both Hindus and Muslims complaining of injustice and persecution. Violent processions were taken out by one community in order to save a piece of land while rail and road movement was brought to a halt by the other to demand it. The dispute at Singur also showed TMC and CPM supporters voicing conflicting opinions and charging each other with inciting violence. The violence in Orissa too is attributed by Hindu outfits to forced conversions by missionaries while Christians deny it and blame it on a drive to consolidate Hindu votes by carrying out anti-minority propaganda. A murder should be investigated by the police. Instead of allowing the law to take its own course, the incidents are hijacked by political parties, which create disaffection and discord for their narrow ideological or electoral gains.
It is human to protest especially when one feels aggrieved. Many people around the world feel at some time or the other that they have been given a raw deal. But few take to rioting and destruction of public property with such a sense of glee and abandon as we do. One wonders why in all such situations, the public property often bears the brunt of peoples’ fury. Police vehicles are routinely burnt and fire engines trying to douse the flames stoned. Public buses and trains are damaged and tracks uprooted to bring rail traffic to a halt. Many innocent lives are lost when security forces have to open fire to control rampaging mobs. Have we no respect for law or concern for protecting public property? Should we not think twice before we vandalize what has been built with our own money and for our own benefit? Why rape a nun to seek revenge for someone’s murder? Did the poor woman kill the Hindu leader? We must ponder and refuse to play the games politicians and religious leaders set out for us. The authorities should also redress the legitimate grievances of the people in time and remove the impression that only violent protests are heeded in our country. In a mature democracy, the right to protest must not degenerate it into a licence to kill and destroy.
***
Curiously, the controversy over transfer of a piece of land to the Amarnath Shrine Board in Kashmir has both Hindus and Muslims complaining of injustice and persecution. Violent processions were taken out by one community in order to save a piece of land while rail and road movement was brought to a halt by the other to demand it. The dispute at Singur also showed TMC and CPM supporters voicing conflicting opinions and charging each other with inciting violence. The violence in Orissa too is attributed by Hindu outfits to forced conversions by missionaries while Christians deny it and blame it on a drive to consolidate Hindu votes by carrying out anti-minority propaganda. A murder should be investigated by the police. Instead of allowing the law to take its own course, the incidents are hijacked by political parties, which create disaffection and discord for their narrow ideological or electoral gains.
It is human to protest especially when one feels aggrieved. Many people around the world feel at some time or the other that they have been given a raw deal. But few take to rioting and destruction of public property with such a sense of glee and abandon as we do. One wonders why in all such situations, the public property often bears the brunt of peoples’ fury. Police vehicles are routinely burnt and fire engines trying to douse the flames stoned. Public buses and trains are damaged and tracks uprooted to bring rail traffic to a halt. Many innocent lives are lost when security forces have to open fire to control rampaging mobs. Have we no respect for law or concern for protecting public property? Should we not think twice before we vandalize what has been built with our own money and for our own benefit? Why rape a nun to seek revenge for someone’s murder? Did the poor woman kill the Hindu leader? We must ponder and refuse to play the games politicians and religious leaders set out for us. The authorities should also redress the legitimate grievances of the people in time and remove the impression that only violent protests are heeded in our country. In a mature democracy, the right to protest must not degenerate it into a licence to kill and destroy.
***
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Being Secular
L.K. Advani asserted in media reports at the end of September that he is secular. The claim was made while he was addressing a political meeting in Assam. He referred to his schooling in a Christian school in Sindh and claimed that he has a soft corner for Christians. This claim does not seem credible. Merely studying in a Christian school does not make one secular. Advani's insistence on building a Ram temple at the site where Babri masjid stood and was destroyed in his presence dented his image not only among the Muslims but also liberal Hindus. The continuing attacks on churches in Orissa and Karnataka where BJP calls the shots has harmed India's image both at home and abroad.
Many would remember that Advani had visited Jinnah’s mazar while in Pakistan and labelled the man who split India on religious lines and founded Pakistan as a secular leader. This caused a lot of heartburn among his party men in general and the RSS top brass in particular. One suspects that Advani realizes that a national role for him requires that he should be acceptable to the different communities. An international role would demand it more stringently. He could also not be ignorant of the fact that a sizable section of liberal Hindus disapprove of the Sangh’s ideology of spewing hatred against religious minorities. So he occasionally needs to utter secular thoughts. But the prime minister designate of the BJP, he needs to do more to carry conviction than merely highlighting his Christian schooling. He must condemn violence against religious minorities unequivocally and restrain groups owing allegiance or being inspired by Sangh parivar to regain the confidence of all communities. Till it is done, Advani will only be projecting a double face. It has to be remembered that in the Indian context, secularism is an abiding respect for all faiths and commitment to let them be practised without fear or favour.
Many would remember that Advani had visited Jinnah’s mazar while in Pakistan and labelled the man who split India on religious lines and founded Pakistan as a secular leader. This caused a lot of heartburn among his party men in general and the RSS top brass in particular. One suspects that Advani realizes that a national role for him requires that he should be acceptable to the different communities. An international role would demand it more stringently. He could also not be ignorant of the fact that a sizable section of liberal Hindus disapprove of the Sangh’s ideology of spewing hatred against religious minorities. So he occasionally needs to utter secular thoughts. But the prime minister designate of the BJP, he needs to do more to carry conviction than merely highlighting his Christian schooling. He must condemn violence against religious minorities unequivocally and restrain groups owing allegiance or being inspired by Sangh parivar to regain the confidence of all communities. Till it is done, Advani will only be projecting a double face. It has to be remembered that in the Indian context, secularism is an abiding respect for all faiths and commitment to let them be practised without fear or favour.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Keeping industrial peace
The CEO of a company of a company in Greater Noida was recently lynched to death while some senior officers were seriously injured. The unfortunate incident followed a dispute between the management and some workers who were reportedly laid off a couple of months ago. Industrial unrest is not new to our country and employees’ unions, particularly in the organized sector, have often resorted to militant action to get their demands conceded. However, incidents of such a gory nature resulting in the violent death of the CEO have not been heard of in recent past. The reaction of the Union Minister of Labour advocating a more sensitive approach to labour relations was not entirely misplaced. Indian work force, especially at the lower levels, is often exploited by contractors who keep hefty margins but pay the casual workers less than the mandatory minimum wages. If there is presence of regular and casual workers in the same unit, the disparity in wages and other service conditions becomes a cause of serious disaffection. The private managements invariably refuse to accept any responsibility for the casual workers by passing the buck to contractors. While the hire and fire policy has been accepted at senior levels in the corporate world, it causes a lot of heartburn among the workers. This is understandable since it is relatively more difficult for them to find other employment or make ends meet immediately after the lay-off. The absence of any social security in our country makes the situation more explosive.
This is not to justify the senseless violence, which the mob of workers indulged in Greater Noida but to appreciate the reasons why corporate world cannot treat the highly skilled executives and ordinary workers by the same yardstick. The Minister has rightly apologised if he hurt anyone while espousing the cause of contract workers. The incident highlighted the failure of grievance redressal machinery, which should be in place to solve disputes in all industrial units in a reasonable time-frame. The failure of the police force to promptly respond to the distress call from the company is also a serious matter, which should not be closed with the routine suspension of a few policemen. If industrial peace has to be ensured, we need a multi-pronged strategy. The workers need to be recognized as partners in progress. Therefore they must not be exploited in order to maximise profits and mechanisms evolved to involve them in decision making processes. At the same time, gangs of recalcitrant employees cannot be allowed to hold managements to ransom. Those who obstruct work at the instance of political parties or spread disaffection against the management must be restrained. Summary exclusion of contract labour from the purview of Labour Act should be re-examined and in the event of lay-offs, suitable compensation and rehabilitation packages implemented. The rights of workers and managements need to be balanced.
***
This is not to justify the senseless violence, which the mob of workers indulged in Greater Noida but to appreciate the reasons why corporate world cannot treat the highly skilled executives and ordinary workers by the same yardstick. The Minister has rightly apologised if he hurt anyone while espousing the cause of contract workers. The incident highlighted the failure of grievance redressal machinery, which should be in place to solve disputes in all industrial units in a reasonable time-frame. The failure of the police force to promptly respond to the distress call from the company is also a serious matter, which should not be closed with the routine suspension of a few policemen. If industrial peace has to be ensured, we need a multi-pronged strategy. The workers need to be recognized as partners in progress. Therefore they must not be exploited in order to maximise profits and mechanisms evolved to involve them in decision making processes. At the same time, gangs of recalcitrant employees cannot be allowed to hold managements to ransom. Those who obstruct work at the instance of political parties or spread disaffection against the management must be restrained. Summary exclusion of contract labour from the purview of Labour Act should be re-examined and in the event of lay-offs, suitable compensation and rehabilitation packages implemented. The rights of workers and managements need to be balanced.
***
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Fighting Terror
The responsibility for the recent serial blasts at Delhi was claimed by a terror outfit, which calls itself Indian Mujahedeen. This is ironical because most of our political parties or outfits prefer to highlight their narrow regional, ideological or religious identities. A faction of Shiv Sena has been roughing up the non-Maharashtrians in Mumbai and extracting apologies from those who dared to speak Hindi or put up sign boards in languages other than Marathi. Bajrang Dal has been vandalizing churches for allegedly converting people in states like Orissa and Karnataka with friendly BJP governments turning a blind eye. The TMC would rather shut down the door to West Bengal’s industrialization than lose an opportunity to snatch power from the Left parties. The latter retreat in to an inexplicable silence over China’s claims over parts of Indian territory but wax eloquent over US imperialism. The Congress allots land to Amarnath Shrine Board only to cancel it later in the wake of protests across the valley. Regional parties adopt a sphinx-like silence the moment their traditional vote-banks come under a cloud. While a terror outfit has no qualms about declaring its pan-Indian identity and targets, the political parties fight shy of doing so.
Outrageous though it may sound but we have a lot to be envious about the Indian Mujahedeen. The organization has a sharp focus and targets whomsoever it perceives to be against its faith across India. It is technically savvy and sends email warnings minutes before the bombs go off without leaving a trail for the cyber crime experts. It has the guts to even declare its next target and dares the police to do what it can. It has carefully built up its propaganda machine and feeds the media with its hate messages. What is interesting is that it innovates constantly-from the design and contents of the bombs to the mode of delivery. Had its aims not been so heinous, it would have been complimented on doing a very professional job.
There is a message for the quarrelling, squabbling politicians who seem incapable of looking beyond the next elections. If we have to survive the threat of terrorism, we must respond as a nation rather than take pot-shots at our political opponents. We have to be pro-active and anticipate the next move of the terrorists in order to defeat them. Tough laws may be desirable but do not necessarily help in a tardy legal system. When used to harass the innocents, they create a groundswell of sympathy. Security is a serious business and every citizen has to assume responsibility to do his bit. Since the enemy now lies within, the fight against terror can be won only if we govern efficiently, fairly and strictly.
Outrageous though it may sound but we have a lot to be envious about the Indian Mujahedeen. The organization has a sharp focus and targets whomsoever it perceives to be against its faith across India. It is technically savvy and sends email warnings minutes before the bombs go off without leaving a trail for the cyber crime experts. It has the guts to even declare its next target and dares the police to do what it can. It has carefully built up its propaganda machine and feeds the media with its hate messages. What is interesting is that it innovates constantly-from the design and contents of the bombs to the mode of delivery. Had its aims not been so heinous, it would have been complimented on doing a very professional job.
There is a message for the quarrelling, squabbling politicians who seem incapable of looking beyond the next elections. If we have to survive the threat of terrorism, we must respond as a nation rather than take pot-shots at our political opponents. We have to be pro-active and anticipate the next move of the terrorists in order to defeat them. Tough laws may be desirable but do not necessarily help in a tardy legal system. When used to harass the innocents, they create a groundswell of sympathy. Security is a serious business and every citizen has to assume responsibility to do his bit. Since the enemy now lies within, the fight against terror can be won only if we govern efficiently, fairly and strictly.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Letters about India-US Nuclear deal
Letters to Editor on issues relating to India’s Civilian Nuclear deal with US
(26 June-9 Sept. 2008)
Venkaiah Naidu's analysis (IE, June 20) of the political situation is correct. But it does not answer why no party, including BJP, seems to be even remotely interested in what suits India's interest most. The crude oil prices have more than doubled to $ 138 a barrel and even a partial reduction of subsidy has led to 11% inflation. This should be enough of signal to the mainstream political parties that exclusive reliance on petro products shall be harmful for us considering that we import 75% of our requirement. The only viable option seems to be nuclear power and the time to grab the opportunity seems to be running out. But the Left parties are still caught in their ideological quagmire of not doing any business with US notwithstanding the fact that both its mentors, Russia and China are already doing so and the former has actually gone on record to say that the deal is in India's interest. The Hyde's Act does call upon US to call off cooperation with India in the event of latter conducting a nuclear test. However, it provides for a gradual US withdrawal and allows India to secure fuel from other NSG countries, which include Russia and China. Therefore the Left parties should either get us better terms from elsewhere or stop scuttling India's energy program. The BJP's stance is even more hypocritical. The party itself imposed a unilateral moratorium on further nuclear testing following the Pokhran blasts and now rues the fact that the proposed deal would put a cap on it. It needs to answer why it carried out the blasts especially since it only led to a nuclear race in the subcontinent and deprived us of access to the latest nuclear research and enriched fuel. The only plausible reason for its opposition to the deal seems to based on exploiting the Congress-Left differences for electoral advantage and its unwillingness to let the former take credit for it. There is nothing wrong in such tactics provided that it did not damage the national interest on energy front since the imminent change in White House is expected to put a seal on the deal. There is still some time and the political parties should rise to the occasion and unanimously support the deal in national interest.
26 June 2008
It is ridiculous even to suggest that PM should not go to a meeting of the G 8 group of countries in order to appease the Left. While most countries would give anything to become a member of the prestigious group, our own comrades spurn it. They are surely in a time warp and in order to protect their ever shrinking vote bank do not care a fig about national interest and prestige. The time has come when the ruling party should dump them unceremoniously rather than give them an opportunity to withdraw support. The Left has surely become a liability and have become obstructionist. They are pretending to be more radical than even the communist nations like China and Russia who have no qualms about doing business with US and embracing market economies in order to create wealth and improve the standard of life of their citizens. Local comrades would however like to see them in perpetual poverty and ignorance and cut off from the rest of the world. The Left has clearly been left behind and must be abandoned in order to race ahead.
2 July 2008.
CPM's claim that the govt is obsessed with fulfilling the promise given to Bush (The Hindu, July 2) is curious. It was not just a promise but an agreement signed by the two executive heads, which was meant to end India's nuclear isolation and open doors to nuclear commerce not juts with US but the entire nuclear supplier group. Therefore, India has been taking steady steps to gain entry into the group without signing the NPT, as most other member-nations have done or surrendering its military nuclear facilities to IAEA. The deal would allow India to segregate the two and exploit nuclear power for peaceful purposes. The opponents to the deal are correct to the extent that the domestic Hyde's Act, which was passed at the instance of non-proliferation lobby within US Congress and led by democrats, who are favored to win the next presidential elections in US, calls upon the US administration to halt nuclear cooperation with India in the event of latter carrying out further nuclear tests in violation of the unilateral moratorium declared by the NDA post-Pokhran blasts. But there shall be no immediate disruption of the supply of nuclear fuel and India shall be free to secure it from other sources. It is a deal the like of which has not been offered to any other nation and that is why India-specific safeguards are being insisted upon. It is also relevant to note that a request from Pakistan for a similar 123 agreement has been turned down by US and Russia has gone on record to say that the deal is good for India. Therefore it must be assumed so especially in the absence of any other nuclear power offering us a better route to nuclear power.
CPM intransigence over the deal seem to be ideological since it shall find it very difficult to explain to its cadre who have been raised on decades of anti-imperialist rhetoric. But it also has to reckon with fact that it needs to expand its base beyond West Bengal and Kerala. This would require a course correction, which in any case it has been attempting within W.Bengal by focusing on industrialization and convince the masses why it is fine to carry out joint military exercises with China but a blasphemy to do business with US. CPM seems to be out of sync with times and must learn from the experiences of leading communist states like China and Russia. Both have adopted flexible policies and are creating wealth in a globalised economy in order to raise the standard of living of their citizens. We in contrast are still bogged down in petty politics and ignoring growth. There is a genuine danger that CPM is getting marginalized, which will be setback to our polity and strengthen the communal forces.
**
Yechuri fails to make a convincing case (HT, July 3) for dropping the deal. The CMP denoted only the common "minimum" program and did not preclude anything uncommon or outside its ambit. India is still doing business with Iran and with communist nations like Russia and China. Therefore allegations of US-centric foreign policy do not hold good. The deal has been supported by the scientific community and planners who know better about the benefits and cost-effectiveness of nuclear energy in a scenario where crude oil is becoming scarcer and exorbitantly dearer. The Hyde's Act does not restrain other nations from supplying nuclear fuel in the event of US pulling out but it is naive for the world to keep helping us while we continue to explode nuclear weapons. As for the three I's he mentions in his charge-sheet against the NDA, they equally apply to UPA today. Let the deal be done on its intrinsic merits rather than on ideological or political grounds.
3 July 2008
The Left parties' repeated ultimatums to the government threatening to withdraw support are meaningless. Since they have now publically stated that they were never prepared for any compromise over the Indo-US nuclear deal, therefore there was no justification for holding several meetings over the deal. If they were so sure of their stand, they should have parted ways when Bush visited India and inked a pact. The claim that they supported UPA to prevent a communal BJP from assuming power also does not wash. They themselves have used the communal card unabashedly by advising the SP to think about the Muslim votes before supporting the deal. Karat's regret that they never expected a break with UPA over foreign policy is curious. Their word view is so partisan and outdated that it appeals to now except their cadre. While they have never had any problems with India staging joint military exercises with China or entering into a strategic partnership with Russia, they suffer a nervous breakdown at the mere mention of US. Their total silence at the suppression of Tibetan people and support for military regime in Myanmar betrays their lack of commitment to democracy and human rights. They have held parleys with the Maoists of Nepal who have used violence to stage a comeback and are obstructing the formation of a representative government despite lacking a majority. They have not uttered a word against Islamic terrorism for fear of losing the support of local Muslims. They oppose MNCs around Delhi on ideological grounds but had no qualms about acquiring land in West Bengal for foreign business entities. The Left parties seem to suffer from an identity crisis today.
It is time the Left leadership should realize that the world is changing. Many countries including China and Russia have embraced market economies and are creating wealth in the globalized world to raise the standard of life of their citizens. Both the communist nations have signed the 123 agreements with US to ensure energy security. In contrast, we are embroiled in petty politics, which revolves either round outdated ideologies or individuals changing stance to capture or perpetuate power. Ironically it is the young Indians who are driving the engines of growth worldwide but feel frustrated by the events at home. Unless the Left parties carry out a course correction, they may be further marginalized.
5 July 2008-09-09
Will the deal help India? Yes, I think on merits the nuclear deal will help India on several counts. One, it would end India's nuclear isolation, which it suffered post-Pokhran blasts. Sanctions were imposed against us and our nuclear scientists associated with atomic and space organizations black-listed. Import of dual technology materials including nuclear/fissile fuel was stopped. Second, it should enhance power generation, which is essential for economic growth. Third, it leaves our strategic nuclear program in tact so only new nuclear facilities for civilian use come under IAEA safeguards. Hence the talk about negotiating India-specific safeguards.
Why this special treatment to India? This is due to two factors. One, our impeccable record of non-proliferation since, unlike Pakistan or North Korea, we did not share, sell or trade off the technology with other states. Two, the commencement of nuclear commerce would open the gates to India for scores of member nations of Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) bringing them economic benefits. Three, increased power generation In India, which has huge energy requirements due to galloping economic growth, will reduce dependence and consumption of traditional petroleum products and may even lower their prices.
Why then one sees opposition to the deal? Largely on political and ideological grounds. While the communist parties brought up and bred on decades of anti-imperialist propaganda find it difficult to take a U-turn and accept a collaboration with US, the Rightist BJP would rather not let the Congress, its arch-enemy, take credit for it. Therefore, it claims to favor a strategic alliance with US but would prefer to re-negotiate the deal after assuming power. If the present govt. falls under the pressure of the Left, that may happen sooner than later. Smaller and regional parties like INLD, BSP, TDP etc. believe that Muslims by and large are against US following the War on Terror and therefore they should guard their vote-bank rather than worry about the deal. Why is SP an exception? SP is viewing only UP. With BSP emerging as a powerful force and BJP already targeting the Hindu vote, further division of vote between Congress and Sp will do neither of them any good. So why not enter into an alliance?
Confusing? Well, politicians are strange bed-fellows and few of them care about the deal anyway!
6 July 2008 (Metronews, 6th July)
The text of the safeguards agreement makes a lot of sense and addresses India's concerns to the hilt. One wonders what else India can ask for? If the critics of the deal think that we can go on exploding nuclear weapons merrily and still ask for uranium from abroad to set up and run our nuclear plants, they are being naive. While other nations had to sign NPT to become eligible for it, India has been treated exceptionally in the light of its non-proliferation record. If the Left and BJP think we can do without nuclear power, it is a different matter. If we do, this is the best bargain we could have got. It is ironical that while the G8 is pushing us forward, the domestic politics is applying the brakes.
11 July 2008-09-09
The Left parties have gone berserk when they claim that Congress has chosen George Bush over the nation (TOI, July 14). The India-specific safeguards agreement has to be vetted first by the 144-strong IAEA and later by 45 member Nuclear Supplier Group before the US Congress debates and ratifies it. The Left also seems to be unaware of the statement of Democrat presidential hopeful, Obama, who has stated in an interview to an Indian weekly that he would be 'reluctant to seek changes in the agreement". Once the deal becomes final, India shall be free to do nuclear business with any member of the NSG, which include the Left's favorites, Russia and China. Therefore they should drop the misinformation campaign and support the deal in national interest. Alternatively, they should get India a better deal.
15 July 2008
**
Yechuri's charge against the PM (Left hand drive), July 17) is unconvincing. It was the Left, which publically stated that PM's going to G8 will be taken as proceeding to IAEA and they would withdraw support without even waiting for his return. Since the tactics of the Left were dilatory from the start, therefore it is hypocritical to put the onus on PM. Having realized that there is a lot of support for the deal, he is now focusing on foreign policy fallout. While the UPA has at least expressed concern on the reported threat of attack on Iran, the Left had no comments to offer on repression in Tibet. Its democratic credentials are also suspect since it supports the military regime in Myanmar, which usurped power nullifying the results of elections and has been keeping the elected leader under detention indefinitely. Yechuri's meeting with Maoists of Nepal is also significant considering their spread across eastern India and fatalities being inflicted by them on our policemen. He never uttered a word against China for making claims on Arunachal Pradesh; nor against North Korea for trading missiles for nuclear knowhow with Pakistan. It is ironical that Yechuri can simultaneously enjoy the hospitality of the British imperialists and deride the govt. of toeing US imperialism at the same time. The Left needs to correct its world vision since one cannot drive both in the left and right lane at the same time.
17 July 2008
Your edit, "Inclusion principles" (IE, July 21) has faulted the Congress for leaning only towards the Left rather than follow inclusive politics. But the allergy displayed in the past by the Left towards its newly-found friends on the Right may have inhibited the ruling party. The Westminster style of democracy does much more than treat backbenchers reverentially. It also promotes an intense debate across party lines whenever an issue of national importance, especially affecting the foreign policy surfaces. It was evident when members of Tony Blair's own party stood up to criticize his Iraq policy while several voices from Opposition benches backed him. Unfortunately, such conduct eludes our parliament the members of which are bound by whips and ideologies to toe their party line. Hence, the charge that we only borrowed the Westminster model without imbibing its spirit holds good.
**
Karan Thapar's expose of BJP's flip-flop on the nuclear issue (HT, July 20) was interesting. More than the veracity of these claims, the party needs to explain why it rejected the opinion of Dr. Kalam, eminent scientist and former President and Brajesh Mishra, former NSA in favor of the deal. Since both were chosen by the NDA regime, therefore it raises the suspicion that opposition to the deal is not on its intrinsic merits but on political grounds
21 July 2008
The expulsion of Somnath Chatterjee from CPM is curious. The party never publically asked him to resign and actually left the decision to him whether to continue as the Speaker or not. It also regretted including his name in the list of MPs submitted to the President and denied exerting any pressure on him to quit. As Speaker, he neither cast his vote nor violated any whip issued by the party. He was neither issued any show cause notice preceding the expulsion, nor given a charge sheet or a chance to defend himself. The meeting of the politburo in which the extreme step was taken was reportedly attended only by half of its members. Therefore the action taken against him seems dictatorial and lacking intra-party democracy. It is strange that a party, which demanded access to safeguards agreement in the name of transparency itself functions in such secrecy and behind closed doors. The CPM should explain why a senior parliamentarian belonging to it and elected to hold the exalted office of Speaker unanimously was treated with such disdain.
23 July 2008
The reasoning put out by the CPM for the expulsion of Mr. Somnath Chatterjee is curious. If the Speaker who is a veteran parliamentarian continues to be bound by the party discipline and is expected to relinquish office the moment the latter withdrew outside support to the govt., he should have been consulted when the strategy to pull down the govt. was being formulated. The manner in which his name was included in the list submitted to the President without his consent, it is clear that the party took his consent for granted and undermined the office of the Speaker since, once elected, the Speaker is constitutionally above party politics . While publically maintaining that it was up to the Speaker to decide whether to resign or not, the younger members of the politburo continued to exert pressure on him indirectly. Elevation of Mr. Chatterjee by a unanimous vote brought honor to CPM and not vice versa. But little else can be expected from a party, which denied the prime minister ship to Mr. Jyoti Basu at the insistence of the same politburo, which was described as a "historic blunder" later. What is more interesting is that only half of the members ("available politburo") were present to take the historic decision and the procedure adopted was totally undemocratic since no show cause notice was given nor an opportunity given to Speaker to defend himself. CPM can legitimately claim that it was an internal matter of the party. However, a party, which claims to be democratic and demanded access to the text of an international agreement before its finalization in the name of transparency, should seriously examine its own record of functioning. Charity after all, begins at home.
24 July 2008
The public display of wads of currency notes in the closing hours of debate in parliament was surely disturbing and requires an impartial investigation. Since the accusing MPs chose the dramatically reveal the goings on in Lok Sabha, the onus of finding the truth has fallen on an all-party committee constituted by the Speaker. We must wait for its findings. The run up to the event was indeed shocking. Most Indians thought that they were to witness a lively and enlightening debate on the merits and demerits of the nuclear deal. It eluded them. What they got were claims and counterclaims of govt. being in a minority or otherwise; of MPs changing sides overnight from the ruling alliance as well as most opposition parties. The Chief Ministers of States were summoned to Delhi. MPs were being guarded like bullion. New fronts came up; the prospective PM was also named. Neither side spared any effort to dislodge the other. It wasn't just cash-ministerial offers and seats in the next election were freely on offer. Kulkarnee may feign ignorance but most leaders wore soiled shirts. A parting thought! Why didn't the accusing MPs call in the police when they were being bribed? Probably the answer to the question lies in the infamous JMM trial. The court acquitted the accused ruling that it had no jurisdiction over events within parliament. So bringing in wads of money (thank God it was just paper money!) or displaying it in front of cameras was a safe act. It could derail the vote without inviting any risk. The PM must come clean whether he was aware of the goings on or not. The leader of BJP MPs too must explain his mysterious absence from house preceding the high voltage drama. The nation does feel betrayed.
27 July 2008
Your edit about Internal Security (IE, Aug. 2) raises serious concerns. When the Lt. Governor of Delhi announced that everyone in Delhi should carry some kind of identification and produce it on demand, there was a hue and cry from all political parties. It was claimed that the step would target those flowing into the city in thousands every day. Several years back, the then Home minister, had similarly ignored the suggestion that instead of spending crores on just election cards, the country should go for a Social Security Card on US pattern, which would have had biometric data and served several purposes. The list of VIPs who demand exemption from security checks at airports has been growing steadily though they don't mind frisking at foreign airports. Even the common man is seen arguing with security personnel at DMRC stations why he is being checked despite being a regular user of Metro rail. It is not just about appeasing one community or the other. We, as a nation, do not take security seriously. Hindus defend Godhra riots as retaliatory and even the local judiciary falls for the divisive sentiment. Muslims give in to the vicious propaganda about their community being targeted and willingly play into the hands of religious leaders and foreign agents. Even Sikhs inflicted senseless violence in Punjab for over a decade harbouring secessionist ideas about Khalistan. Naxal violence is condoned even today as arising out of socio-economic factors. When did we last see a politician adopting a national stance? If Afzal is guilty, the State should have the courage to hang him but those who demand his hanging should similarly decry violence in thought and action among their own followers. The problem is that we only indulge in blame game. We want to teach a lesson to other communities; other faiths; other parties; other nations in order to acquire and then perpetuate political power. When we learn to think and act as a nation and respect the rule of law, internal security shall improve. Obama, when asked in an interview whether he would change the Indo-US Nuclear Deal in the event of becoming the president of United States, stated on record that he would be "reluctant to seek changes". If Bush's opponent can recognize American interest and accord it primacy, why can't we do likewise? If US can protect it post 9/11, why can't we do so likewise? The reason is that we have yet to understand that security is serious business
2 August 2008
The contents of the commentary in People's daily of China(TOI, Sept. 2) are curious. One is surprised by the timing and aggressiveness of contents. As soon as the Olympics get over, China drops the friendly airs and targets India whose record of non-proliferation is impeccable while China colluded both with Pakistan and North Korea. One wonders whether there is any connection between the Indian communists, who kept up their dilatory tactics by first opposing the deal and then withdrawing support ensuring leeway to the Chinese government. This congruence of interest between the government in Beijing and the CPM politburo in Delhi raises serious apprehensions. One hopes the two parties are not working in tandem but the Indian government better watch out.
2 September 2008
Sudheendra Kulkarni"s article about the nuclear deal (IE, Sept. 7) is along predictable lines. He evades the point that the present government only reiterated what Mr. Vajpayee declared at UN ; namely that we shall continue to observe a unilateral moratorium on further testing. India still sticks to the "no first use" position but will have to face the consequences the same way as it did in the past if it chooses to carry out further testing. However, several experts have declared that it will not be necessary since adequate data has been obtained from the first two tests. If BJP, like the Left parties, is so obsessed with the Hyde's Act, it can similarly pass a legislation in parliament that in the event of any of our neighbours carrying out a nuclear test, India shall reserve the right to do the same. Our nuclear plants have been working at only 40% of their capacity for want of adequate fuel. Therefore it is hypocritical to oppose civilian nuclear cooperation and simultaneously argue that our reactors meet only 3% of the total power generation. It is illogical to assume that the world at large could end our nuclear isolation and supply us the latest knowhow and fuel along with enrichment rights while we merrily go on exploding nuclear weapons in its face. The deal opens a window of opportunity and only future shall tell how we use it to our advantage.
7 September 2008
With reference to the report Nuclear dawn (September 7), the BJP’s opposition to the deal is inexplicable. Since the present government has committed itself to the same unilateral moratorium on further testing announced during the NDA regime, the charge of sacrificing nuclear sovereignty does not stick. The statement that India has still the right to test while the world has the right to react, sums up the situation aptly. However, it is hypocritical to assume that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) members shall continue to supply us the latest nuclear knowhow and fuel while we explode weapons in their face. The waiver opens up a window of opportunity to do nuclear commerce and we must use it to our benefit.
9 Sept. 2008 (Hindustan Times)
Apropos Karan Thapar’s article, Thank you, Mr Bush (Sunday Sentiments, September 14), it is ironic that the NSG, which was created in the wake of India’s nuclear blasts, gave us a waiver to engage in civilian nuclear cooperation. This shows the inherent deficiencies of the non-proliferation regime. The US surely did not do this as an act of penance, and has an eye on India’s huge requirement for equipment and fuel.
Hindustan Times, Sept. 21
(26 June-9 Sept. 2008)
Venkaiah Naidu's analysis (IE, June 20) of the political situation is correct. But it does not answer why no party, including BJP, seems to be even remotely interested in what suits India's interest most. The crude oil prices have more than doubled to $ 138 a barrel and even a partial reduction of subsidy has led to 11% inflation. This should be enough of signal to the mainstream political parties that exclusive reliance on petro products shall be harmful for us considering that we import 75% of our requirement. The only viable option seems to be nuclear power and the time to grab the opportunity seems to be running out. But the Left parties are still caught in their ideological quagmire of not doing any business with US notwithstanding the fact that both its mentors, Russia and China are already doing so and the former has actually gone on record to say that the deal is in India's interest. The Hyde's Act does call upon US to call off cooperation with India in the event of latter conducting a nuclear test. However, it provides for a gradual US withdrawal and allows India to secure fuel from other NSG countries, which include Russia and China. Therefore the Left parties should either get us better terms from elsewhere or stop scuttling India's energy program. The BJP's stance is even more hypocritical. The party itself imposed a unilateral moratorium on further nuclear testing following the Pokhran blasts and now rues the fact that the proposed deal would put a cap on it. It needs to answer why it carried out the blasts especially since it only led to a nuclear race in the subcontinent and deprived us of access to the latest nuclear research and enriched fuel. The only plausible reason for its opposition to the deal seems to based on exploiting the Congress-Left differences for electoral advantage and its unwillingness to let the former take credit for it. There is nothing wrong in such tactics provided that it did not damage the national interest on energy front since the imminent change in White House is expected to put a seal on the deal. There is still some time and the political parties should rise to the occasion and unanimously support the deal in national interest.
26 June 2008
It is ridiculous even to suggest that PM should not go to a meeting of the G 8 group of countries in order to appease the Left. While most countries would give anything to become a member of the prestigious group, our own comrades spurn it. They are surely in a time warp and in order to protect their ever shrinking vote bank do not care a fig about national interest and prestige. The time has come when the ruling party should dump them unceremoniously rather than give them an opportunity to withdraw support. The Left has surely become a liability and have become obstructionist. They are pretending to be more radical than even the communist nations like China and Russia who have no qualms about doing business with US and embracing market economies in order to create wealth and improve the standard of life of their citizens. Local comrades would however like to see them in perpetual poverty and ignorance and cut off from the rest of the world. The Left has clearly been left behind and must be abandoned in order to race ahead.
2 July 2008.
CPM's claim that the govt is obsessed with fulfilling the promise given to Bush (The Hindu, July 2) is curious. It was not just a promise but an agreement signed by the two executive heads, which was meant to end India's nuclear isolation and open doors to nuclear commerce not juts with US but the entire nuclear supplier group. Therefore, India has been taking steady steps to gain entry into the group without signing the NPT, as most other member-nations have done or surrendering its military nuclear facilities to IAEA. The deal would allow India to segregate the two and exploit nuclear power for peaceful purposes. The opponents to the deal are correct to the extent that the domestic Hyde's Act, which was passed at the instance of non-proliferation lobby within US Congress and led by democrats, who are favored to win the next presidential elections in US, calls upon the US administration to halt nuclear cooperation with India in the event of latter carrying out further nuclear tests in violation of the unilateral moratorium declared by the NDA post-Pokhran blasts. But there shall be no immediate disruption of the supply of nuclear fuel and India shall be free to secure it from other sources. It is a deal the like of which has not been offered to any other nation and that is why India-specific safeguards are being insisted upon. It is also relevant to note that a request from Pakistan for a similar 123 agreement has been turned down by US and Russia has gone on record to say that the deal is good for India. Therefore it must be assumed so especially in the absence of any other nuclear power offering us a better route to nuclear power.
CPM intransigence over the deal seem to be ideological since it shall find it very difficult to explain to its cadre who have been raised on decades of anti-imperialist rhetoric. But it also has to reckon with fact that it needs to expand its base beyond West Bengal and Kerala. This would require a course correction, which in any case it has been attempting within W.Bengal by focusing on industrialization and convince the masses why it is fine to carry out joint military exercises with China but a blasphemy to do business with US. CPM seems to be out of sync with times and must learn from the experiences of leading communist states like China and Russia. Both have adopted flexible policies and are creating wealth in a globalised economy in order to raise the standard of living of their citizens. We in contrast are still bogged down in petty politics and ignoring growth. There is a genuine danger that CPM is getting marginalized, which will be setback to our polity and strengthen the communal forces.
**
Yechuri fails to make a convincing case (HT, July 3) for dropping the deal. The CMP denoted only the common "minimum" program and did not preclude anything uncommon or outside its ambit. India is still doing business with Iran and with communist nations like Russia and China. Therefore allegations of US-centric foreign policy do not hold good. The deal has been supported by the scientific community and planners who know better about the benefits and cost-effectiveness of nuclear energy in a scenario where crude oil is becoming scarcer and exorbitantly dearer. The Hyde's Act does not restrain other nations from supplying nuclear fuel in the event of US pulling out but it is naive for the world to keep helping us while we continue to explode nuclear weapons. As for the three I's he mentions in his charge-sheet against the NDA, they equally apply to UPA today. Let the deal be done on its intrinsic merits rather than on ideological or political grounds.
3 July 2008
The Left parties' repeated ultimatums to the government threatening to withdraw support are meaningless. Since they have now publically stated that they were never prepared for any compromise over the Indo-US nuclear deal, therefore there was no justification for holding several meetings over the deal. If they were so sure of their stand, they should have parted ways when Bush visited India and inked a pact. The claim that they supported UPA to prevent a communal BJP from assuming power also does not wash. They themselves have used the communal card unabashedly by advising the SP to think about the Muslim votes before supporting the deal. Karat's regret that they never expected a break with UPA over foreign policy is curious. Their word view is so partisan and outdated that it appeals to now except their cadre. While they have never had any problems with India staging joint military exercises with China or entering into a strategic partnership with Russia, they suffer a nervous breakdown at the mere mention of US. Their total silence at the suppression of Tibetan people and support for military regime in Myanmar betrays their lack of commitment to democracy and human rights. They have held parleys with the Maoists of Nepal who have used violence to stage a comeback and are obstructing the formation of a representative government despite lacking a majority. They have not uttered a word against Islamic terrorism for fear of losing the support of local Muslims. They oppose MNCs around Delhi on ideological grounds but had no qualms about acquiring land in West Bengal for foreign business entities. The Left parties seem to suffer from an identity crisis today.
It is time the Left leadership should realize that the world is changing. Many countries including China and Russia have embraced market economies and are creating wealth in the globalized world to raise the standard of life of their citizens. Both the communist nations have signed the 123 agreements with US to ensure energy security. In contrast, we are embroiled in petty politics, which revolves either round outdated ideologies or individuals changing stance to capture or perpetuate power. Ironically it is the young Indians who are driving the engines of growth worldwide but feel frustrated by the events at home. Unless the Left parties carry out a course correction, they may be further marginalized.
5 July 2008-09-09
Will the deal help India? Yes, I think on merits the nuclear deal will help India on several counts. One, it would end India's nuclear isolation, which it suffered post-Pokhran blasts. Sanctions were imposed against us and our nuclear scientists associated with atomic and space organizations black-listed. Import of dual technology materials including nuclear/fissile fuel was stopped. Second, it should enhance power generation, which is essential for economic growth. Third, it leaves our strategic nuclear program in tact so only new nuclear facilities for civilian use come under IAEA safeguards. Hence the talk about negotiating India-specific safeguards.
Why this special treatment to India? This is due to two factors. One, our impeccable record of non-proliferation since, unlike Pakistan or North Korea, we did not share, sell or trade off the technology with other states. Two, the commencement of nuclear commerce would open the gates to India for scores of member nations of Nuclear Supplier Group (NSG) bringing them economic benefits. Three, increased power generation In India, which has huge energy requirements due to galloping economic growth, will reduce dependence and consumption of traditional petroleum products and may even lower their prices.
Why then one sees opposition to the deal? Largely on political and ideological grounds. While the communist parties brought up and bred on decades of anti-imperialist propaganda find it difficult to take a U-turn and accept a collaboration with US, the Rightist BJP would rather not let the Congress, its arch-enemy, take credit for it. Therefore, it claims to favor a strategic alliance with US but would prefer to re-negotiate the deal after assuming power. If the present govt. falls under the pressure of the Left, that may happen sooner than later. Smaller and regional parties like INLD, BSP, TDP etc. believe that Muslims by and large are against US following the War on Terror and therefore they should guard their vote-bank rather than worry about the deal. Why is SP an exception? SP is viewing only UP. With BSP emerging as a powerful force and BJP already targeting the Hindu vote, further division of vote between Congress and Sp will do neither of them any good. So why not enter into an alliance?
Confusing? Well, politicians are strange bed-fellows and few of them care about the deal anyway!
6 July 2008 (Metronews, 6th July)
The text of the safeguards agreement makes a lot of sense and addresses India's concerns to the hilt. One wonders what else India can ask for? If the critics of the deal think that we can go on exploding nuclear weapons merrily and still ask for uranium from abroad to set up and run our nuclear plants, they are being naive. While other nations had to sign NPT to become eligible for it, India has been treated exceptionally in the light of its non-proliferation record. If the Left and BJP think we can do without nuclear power, it is a different matter. If we do, this is the best bargain we could have got. It is ironical that while the G8 is pushing us forward, the domestic politics is applying the brakes.
11 July 2008-09-09
The Left parties have gone berserk when they claim that Congress has chosen George Bush over the nation (TOI, July 14). The India-specific safeguards agreement has to be vetted first by the 144-strong IAEA and later by 45 member Nuclear Supplier Group before the US Congress debates and ratifies it. The Left also seems to be unaware of the statement of Democrat presidential hopeful, Obama, who has stated in an interview to an Indian weekly that he would be 'reluctant to seek changes in the agreement". Once the deal becomes final, India shall be free to do nuclear business with any member of the NSG, which include the Left's favorites, Russia and China. Therefore they should drop the misinformation campaign and support the deal in national interest. Alternatively, they should get India a better deal.
15 July 2008
**
Yechuri's charge against the PM (Left hand drive), July 17) is unconvincing. It was the Left, which publically stated that PM's going to G8 will be taken as proceeding to IAEA and they would withdraw support without even waiting for his return. Since the tactics of the Left were dilatory from the start, therefore it is hypocritical to put the onus on PM. Having realized that there is a lot of support for the deal, he is now focusing on foreign policy fallout. While the UPA has at least expressed concern on the reported threat of attack on Iran, the Left had no comments to offer on repression in Tibet. Its democratic credentials are also suspect since it supports the military regime in Myanmar, which usurped power nullifying the results of elections and has been keeping the elected leader under detention indefinitely. Yechuri's meeting with Maoists of Nepal is also significant considering their spread across eastern India and fatalities being inflicted by them on our policemen. He never uttered a word against China for making claims on Arunachal Pradesh; nor against North Korea for trading missiles for nuclear knowhow with Pakistan. It is ironical that Yechuri can simultaneously enjoy the hospitality of the British imperialists and deride the govt. of toeing US imperialism at the same time. The Left needs to correct its world vision since one cannot drive both in the left and right lane at the same time.
17 July 2008
Your edit, "Inclusion principles" (IE, July 21) has faulted the Congress for leaning only towards the Left rather than follow inclusive politics. But the allergy displayed in the past by the Left towards its newly-found friends on the Right may have inhibited the ruling party. The Westminster style of democracy does much more than treat backbenchers reverentially. It also promotes an intense debate across party lines whenever an issue of national importance, especially affecting the foreign policy surfaces. It was evident when members of Tony Blair's own party stood up to criticize his Iraq policy while several voices from Opposition benches backed him. Unfortunately, such conduct eludes our parliament the members of which are bound by whips and ideologies to toe their party line. Hence, the charge that we only borrowed the Westminster model without imbibing its spirit holds good.
**
Karan Thapar's expose of BJP's flip-flop on the nuclear issue (HT, July 20) was interesting. More than the veracity of these claims, the party needs to explain why it rejected the opinion of Dr. Kalam, eminent scientist and former President and Brajesh Mishra, former NSA in favor of the deal. Since both were chosen by the NDA regime, therefore it raises the suspicion that opposition to the deal is not on its intrinsic merits but on political grounds
21 July 2008
The expulsion of Somnath Chatterjee from CPM is curious. The party never publically asked him to resign and actually left the decision to him whether to continue as the Speaker or not. It also regretted including his name in the list of MPs submitted to the President and denied exerting any pressure on him to quit. As Speaker, he neither cast his vote nor violated any whip issued by the party. He was neither issued any show cause notice preceding the expulsion, nor given a charge sheet or a chance to defend himself. The meeting of the politburo in which the extreme step was taken was reportedly attended only by half of its members. Therefore the action taken against him seems dictatorial and lacking intra-party democracy. It is strange that a party, which demanded access to safeguards agreement in the name of transparency itself functions in such secrecy and behind closed doors. The CPM should explain why a senior parliamentarian belonging to it and elected to hold the exalted office of Speaker unanimously was treated with such disdain.
23 July 2008
The reasoning put out by the CPM for the expulsion of Mr. Somnath Chatterjee is curious. If the Speaker who is a veteran parliamentarian continues to be bound by the party discipline and is expected to relinquish office the moment the latter withdrew outside support to the govt., he should have been consulted when the strategy to pull down the govt. was being formulated. The manner in which his name was included in the list submitted to the President without his consent, it is clear that the party took his consent for granted and undermined the office of the Speaker since, once elected, the Speaker is constitutionally above party politics . While publically maintaining that it was up to the Speaker to decide whether to resign or not, the younger members of the politburo continued to exert pressure on him indirectly. Elevation of Mr. Chatterjee by a unanimous vote brought honor to CPM and not vice versa. But little else can be expected from a party, which denied the prime minister ship to Mr. Jyoti Basu at the insistence of the same politburo, which was described as a "historic blunder" later. What is more interesting is that only half of the members ("available politburo") were present to take the historic decision and the procedure adopted was totally undemocratic since no show cause notice was given nor an opportunity given to Speaker to defend himself. CPM can legitimately claim that it was an internal matter of the party. However, a party, which claims to be democratic and demanded access to the text of an international agreement before its finalization in the name of transparency, should seriously examine its own record of functioning. Charity after all, begins at home.
24 July 2008
The public display of wads of currency notes in the closing hours of debate in parliament was surely disturbing and requires an impartial investigation. Since the accusing MPs chose the dramatically reveal the goings on in Lok Sabha, the onus of finding the truth has fallen on an all-party committee constituted by the Speaker. We must wait for its findings. The run up to the event was indeed shocking. Most Indians thought that they were to witness a lively and enlightening debate on the merits and demerits of the nuclear deal. It eluded them. What they got were claims and counterclaims of govt. being in a minority or otherwise; of MPs changing sides overnight from the ruling alliance as well as most opposition parties. The Chief Ministers of States were summoned to Delhi. MPs were being guarded like bullion. New fronts came up; the prospective PM was also named. Neither side spared any effort to dislodge the other. It wasn't just cash-ministerial offers and seats in the next election were freely on offer. Kulkarnee may feign ignorance but most leaders wore soiled shirts. A parting thought! Why didn't the accusing MPs call in the police when they were being bribed? Probably the answer to the question lies in the infamous JMM trial. The court acquitted the accused ruling that it had no jurisdiction over events within parliament. So bringing in wads of money (thank God it was just paper money!) or displaying it in front of cameras was a safe act. It could derail the vote without inviting any risk. The PM must come clean whether he was aware of the goings on or not. The leader of BJP MPs too must explain his mysterious absence from house preceding the high voltage drama. The nation does feel betrayed.
27 July 2008
Your edit about Internal Security (IE, Aug. 2) raises serious concerns. When the Lt. Governor of Delhi announced that everyone in Delhi should carry some kind of identification and produce it on demand, there was a hue and cry from all political parties. It was claimed that the step would target those flowing into the city in thousands every day. Several years back, the then Home minister, had similarly ignored the suggestion that instead of spending crores on just election cards, the country should go for a Social Security Card on US pattern, which would have had biometric data and served several purposes. The list of VIPs who demand exemption from security checks at airports has been growing steadily though they don't mind frisking at foreign airports. Even the common man is seen arguing with security personnel at DMRC stations why he is being checked despite being a regular user of Metro rail. It is not just about appeasing one community or the other. We, as a nation, do not take security seriously. Hindus defend Godhra riots as retaliatory and even the local judiciary falls for the divisive sentiment. Muslims give in to the vicious propaganda about their community being targeted and willingly play into the hands of religious leaders and foreign agents. Even Sikhs inflicted senseless violence in Punjab for over a decade harbouring secessionist ideas about Khalistan. Naxal violence is condoned even today as arising out of socio-economic factors. When did we last see a politician adopting a national stance? If Afzal is guilty, the State should have the courage to hang him but those who demand his hanging should similarly decry violence in thought and action among their own followers. The problem is that we only indulge in blame game. We want to teach a lesson to other communities; other faiths; other parties; other nations in order to acquire and then perpetuate political power. When we learn to think and act as a nation and respect the rule of law, internal security shall improve. Obama, when asked in an interview whether he would change the Indo-US Nuclear Deal in the event of becoming the president of United States, stated on record that he would be "reluctant to seek changes". If Bush's opponent can recognize American interest and accord it primacy, why can't we do likewise? If US can protect it post 9/11, why can't we do so likewise? The reason is that we have yet to understand that security is serious business
2 August 2008
The contents of the commentary in People's daily of China(TOI, Sept. 2) are curious. One is surprised by the timing and aggressiveness of contents. As soon as the Olympics get over, China drops the friendly airs and targets India whose record of non-proliferation is impeccable while China colluded both with Pakistan and North Korea. One wonders whether there is any connection between the Indian communists, who kept up their dilatory tactics by first opposing the deal and then withdrawing support ensuring leeway to the Chinese government. This congruence of interest between the government in Beijing and the CPM politburo in Delhi raises serious apprehensions. One hopes the two parties are not working in tandem but the Indian government better watch out.
2 September 2008
Sudheendra Kulkarni"s article about the nuclear deal (IE, Sept. 7) is along predictable lines. He evades the point that the present government only reiterated what Mr. Vajpayee declared at UN ; namely that we shall continue to observe a unilateral moratorium on further testing. India still sticks to the "no first use" position but will have to face the consequences the same way as it did in the past if it chooses to carry out further testing. However, several experts have declared that it will not be necessary since adequate data has been obtained from the first two tests. If BJP, like the Left parties, is so obsessed with the Hyde's Act, it can similarly pass a legislation in parliament that in the event of any of our neighbours carrying out a nuclear test, India shall reserve the right to do the same. Our nuclear plants have been working at only 40% of their capacity for want of adequate fuel. Therefore it is hypocritical to oppose civilian nuclear cooperation and simultaneously argue that our reactors meet only 3% of the total power generation. It is illogical to assume that the world at large could end our nuclear isolation and supply us the latest knowhow and fuel along with enrichment rights while we merrily go on exploding nuclear weapons in its face. The deal opens a window of opportunity and only future shall tell how we use it to our advantage.
7 September 2008
With reference to the report Nuclear dawn (September 7), the BJP’s opposition to the deal is inexplicable. Since the present government has committed itself to the same unilateral moratorium on further testing announced during the NDA regime, the charge of sacrificing nuclear sovereignty does not stick. The statement that India has still the right to test while the world has the right to react, sums up the situation aptly. However, it is hypocritical to assume that the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) members shall continue to supply us the latest nuclear knowhow and fuel while we explode weapons in their face. The waiver opens up a window of opportunity to do nuclear commerce and we must use it to our benefit.
9 Sept. 2008 (Hindustan Times)
Apropos Karan Thapar’s article, Thank you, Mr Bush (Sunday Sentiments, September 14), it is ironic that the NSG, which was created in the wake of India’s nuclear blasts, gave us a waiver to engage in civilian nuclear cooperation. This shows the inherent deficiencies of the non-proliferation regime. The US surely did not do this as an act of penance, and has an eye on India’s huge requirement for equipment and fuel.
Hindustan Times, Sept. 21
Friday, September 5, 2008
A POINT OF VIEW - We can’t have our c...
A POINT OF VIEW - We can’t have our c...
T here is uproar over an alleged leak of a docu- ment in US, which ipso facto states that nuclear cooperation with India would cease if the latter ex- plodes a nuclear device. There are demand...read more...
T here is uproar over an alleged leak of a docu- ment in US, which ipso facto states that nuclear cooperation with India would cease if the latter ex- plodes a nuclear device. There are demand...read more...
Monday, August 25, 2008
A POINT OF VIEW - People, govt must act ...
A POINT OF VIEW - People, govt must act
...
People, govt must act
sensibly in J&K
S
oon after the street protests broke out in Srina-
gar recently, the migrant labourers packed their
bags and left. They confided that they were asked...read more...
...
People, govt must act
sensibly in J&K
S
oon after the street protests broke out in Srina-
gar recently, the migrant labourers packed their
bags and left. They confided that they were asked...read more...
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Letters on Tibet
Letters on Tibet
Your edit on The Question of Tibet (March 26) was surprising. It is strange that there was not a single word of sympathy or understanding for thousands of Tibetans who are being forced to live in exile across the world. In India too they have lived and carried on their lives peacefully without causing any unrest or clash of cultures. Their right to protest democratically against the violation of their human rights cannot be denied. Therefore it is unethical even to suggest that India should exercise pressure on them to toe the Chinese line. India has been home to refugees from various lands and it is only recently that attempts are being made to muzzle their voice. If China were only a progressive or benevolent State as has been portrayed, it would have been difficult to stage manage protests inland as has been suggested. In spite of a categorical assertion by the Dalai Lama that they are neither against Chinese government nor people and seek only a genuine autonomy, the Chinese have shown no inclination to resolve the issue. In contrast, they have accused the "Dalai clique" for orchestrating violence and used force to crush it. Dalai Lama on the other hand has denounced violence unequivocally and even threatened to resign if it continues. It is possible that the warring parties may be offering only half truths but violence in Tibet and elsewhere may well be due to suppression of the democratic aspirations of the people who have been denied to right to live in their homeland for half a century. This would not have happened If China were such a progressive and benevolent nation as has been portrayed. Our response to the crisis next door should be based on universal respect for human rights rather than the economic clout or military might of China. (Sent to Editor, The Hindu on 26.03.2008)
Barkha Dutt's account of how the world has failed Tibet (HT, March 29) was touching. In realpolitik, political parties and the governments run by them are largely dictated by ideology and self-interest. That is why CPM's Yechuri's had "no views to offer on Tibet". Viewed thus, nothing happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989 and nothing is happening in Tibet now. But there is no need for pessimism. Gandhi's non-violent struggle against the British, despite a similar skepticism among the middle classes, ultimately succeeded. So did the movements against apartheid in South Africa and Congress' internal emergency of 1975 at home. China, despite its economic or military might, shall not be able to wipe out those it oppresses with an iron fist. On our part, we must support the Tibetans since they deserve to return to an autonomous homeland. (Sent to Hindustan Times, on 29.03.2008)
The assertion by China's Consul-General in Kolkata that Olympics belong to the world and should not be boycotted makes sense. So is his claim that sports and politics should not be mixed. However, his own country is refusing to act as a generous host by suppressing local Tibetans and forcing others to live in exile. If China wishes to earn universal goodwill, it will have to facilitate their return to a genuinely autonomous homeland and also enable them to participate in the Olympics. (Sent to Hindustan Times on 3.04.2008)
Your edit rightly faults the govt. over the decision to cut down the route of Olympic flame (IE, April 5). The official assurances given to Chinese government have been demeaning and slighting to our self-respect. Have the Chinese ever expressed regrets over the noise it made over PM's visit to Arunachal Pradesh or grabbing of Aksai Chin? Did it feel sorry for denying visas to civil servants belonging to Arunachal Pradesh on the ludicrous claim that they were Chinese citizens? India, unlike China, is a democracy in which all citizens, including the Tibetans living in exile, have the right to protest. The ruling party must act strongly and liberate itself from the ideological grip of its Left allies who issue threats about Indo-US strategic relationship everyday but have no views to offer on repression in Tibet. An independent foreign policy is one that protects national interest and upholds universal values.
(Sent to Indian Express, 5.04.2008)
Your question why India should carry the torch of China's Olympian intolerance (IE, April 12) is pertinent. But CPM, which said it had "no views to offer on Tibet" is unlikely to provide an answer. Nor would it explain why India's military exercises with China, despite the latter's claim on Arunachal Pradesh and occupation of Aksai Chin, are acceptable while any strategic relationship with US send it into a shiver. By allowing Chinese security men to guard the torch during its truncated run in Delhi, the govt. has undermined confidence in India's security apparatus. It has also transformed the torch into a Chinese asset, which needs to be protected by its own soldiers. Unfortunately the Congress, only keen to last its full term, can do no better by taking its ally to task for banning a Tibetan protest rally in Kolkata. The torch may run but its spirit has already been extinguished.
(Sent to Indian Express, 12.04.2008)
Your edit on The Question of Tibet (March 26) was surprising. It is strange that there was not a single word of sympathy or understanding for thousands of Tibetans who are being forced to live in exile across the world. In India too they have lived and carried on their lives peacefully without causing any unrest or clash of cultures. Their right to protest democratically against the violation of their human rights cannot be denied. Therefore it is unethical even to suggest that India should exercise pressure on them to toe the Chinese line. India has been home to refugees from various lands and it is only recently that attempts are being made to muzzle their voice. If China were only a progressive or benevolent State as has been portrayed, it would have been difficult to stage manage protests inland as has been suggested. In spite of a categorical assertion by the Dalai Lama that they are neither against Chinese government nor people and seek only a genuine autonomy, the Chinese have shown no inclination to resolve the issue. In contrast, they have accused the "Dalai clique" for orchestrating violence and used force to crush it. Dalai Lama on the other hand has denounced violence unequivocally and even threatened to resign if it continues. It is possible that the warring parties may be offering only half truths but violence in Tibet and elsewhere may well be due to suppression of the democratic aspirations of the people who have been denied to right to live in their homeland for half a century. This would not have happened If China were such a progressive and benevolent nation as has been portrayed. Our response to the crisis next door should be based on universal respect for human rights rather than the economic clout or military might of China. (Sent to Editor, The Hindu on 26.03.2008)
Barkha Dutt's account of how the world has failed Tibet (HT, March 29) was touching. In realpolitik, political parties and the governments run by them are largely dictated by ideology and self-interest. That is why CPM's Yechuri's had "no views to offer on Tibet". Viewed thus, nothing happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989 and nothing is happening in Tibet now. But there is no need for pessimism. Gandhi's non-violent struggle against the British, despite a similar skepticism among the middle classes, ultimately succeeded. So did the movements against apartheid in South Africa and Congress' internal emergency of 1975 at home. China, despite its economic or military might, shall not be able to wipe out those it oppresses with an iron fist. On our part, we must support the Tibetans since they deserve to return to an autonomous homeland. (Sent to Hindustan Times, on 29.03.2008)
The assertion by China's Consul-General in Kolkata that Olympics belong to the world and should not be boycotted makes sense. So is his claim that sports and politics should not be mixed. However, his own country is refusing to act as a generous host by suppressing local Tibetans and forcing others to live in exile. If China wishes to earn universal goodwill, it will have to facilitate their return to a genuinely autonomous homeland and also enable them to participate in the Olympics. (Sent to Hindustan Times on 3.04.2008)
Your edit rightly faults the govt. over the decision to cut down the route of Olympic flame (IE, April 5). The official assurances given to Chinese government have been demeaning and slighting to our self-respect. Have the Chinese ever expressed regrets over the noise it made over PM's visit to Arunachal Pradesh or grabbing of Aksai Chin? Did it feel sorry for denying visas to civil servants belonging to Arunachal Pradesh on the ludicrous claim that they were Chinese citizens? India, unlike China, is a democracy in which all citizens, including the Tibetans living in exile, have the right to protest. The ruling party must act strongly and liberate itself from the ideological grip of its Left allies who issue threats about Indo-US strategic relationship everyday but have no views to offer on repression in Tibet. An independent foreign policy is one that protects national interest and upholds universal values.
(Sent to Indian Express, 5.04.2008)
Your question why India should carry the torch of China's Olympian intolerance (IE, April 12) is pertinent. But CPM, which said it had "no views to offer on Tibet" is unlikely to provide an answer. Nor would it explain why India's military exercises with China, despite the latter's claim on Arunachal Pradesh and occupation of Aksai Chin, are acceptable while any strategic relationship with US send it into a shiver. By allowing Chinese security men to guard the torch during its truncated run in Delhi, the govt. has undermined confidence in India's security apparatus. It has also transformed the torch into a Chinese asset, which needs to be protected by its own soldiers. Unfortunately the Congress, only keen to last its full term, can do no better by taking its ally to task for banning a Tibetan protest rally in Kolkata. The torch may run but its spirit has already been extinguished.
(Sent to Indian Express, 12.04.2008)
Letters on Tibet
Letters on Tibet
Your edit on The Question of Tibet (March 26) was surprising. It is strange that there was not a single word of sympathy or understanding for thousands of Tibetans who are being forced to live in exile across the world. In India too they have lived and carried on their lives peacefully without causing any unrest or clash of cultures. Their right to protest democratically against the violation of their human rights cannot be denied. Therefore it is unethical even to suggest that India should exercise pressure on them to toe the Chinese line. India has been home to refugees from various lands and it is only recently that attempts are being made to muzzle their voice. If China were only a progressive or benevolent State as has been portrayed, it would have been difficult to stage manage protests inland as has been suggested. In spite of a categorical assertion by the Dalai Lama that they are neither against Chinese government nor people and seek only a genuine autonomy, the Chinese have shown no inclination to resolve the issue. In contrast, they have accused the "Dalai clique" for orchestrating violence and used force to crush it. Dalai Lama on the other hand has denounced violence unequivocally and even threatened to resign if it continues. It is possible that the warring parties may be offering only half truths but violence in Tibet and elsewhere may well be due to suppression of the democratic aspirations of the people who have been denied to right to live in their homeland for half a century. This would not have happened If China were such a progressive and benevolent nation as has been portrayed. Our response to the crisis next door should be based on universal respect for human rights rather than the economic clout or military might of China. (Sent to Editor, The Hindu on 26.03.2008)
Barkha Dutt's account of how the world has failed Tibet (HT, March 29) was touching. In realpolitik, political parties and the governments run by them are largely dictated by ideology and self-interest. That is why CPM's Yechuri's had "no views to offer on Tibet". Viewed thus, nothing happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989 and nothing is happening in Tibet now. But there is no need for pessimism. Gandhi's non-violent struggle against the British, despite a similar skepticism among the middle classes, ultimately succeeded. So did the movements against apartheid in South Africa and Congress' internal emergency of 1975 at home. China, despite its economic or military might, shall not be able to wipe out those it oppresses with an iron fist. On our part, we must support the Tibetans since they deserve to return to an autonomous homeland. (Sent to Hindustan Times, on 29.03.2008)
The assertion by China's Consul-General in Kolkata that Olympics belong to the world and should not be boycotted makes sense. So is his claim that sports and politics should not be mixed. However, his own country is refusing to act as a generous host by suppressing local Tibetans and forcing others to live in exile. If China wishes to earn universal goodwill, it will have to facilitate their return to a genuinely autonomous homeland and also enable them to participate in the Olympics. (Sent to Hindustan Times on 3.04.2008)
Your edit rightly faults the govt. over the decision to cut down the route of Olympic flame (IE, April 5). The official assurances given to Chinese government have been demeaning and slighting to our self-respect. Have the Chinese ever expressed regrets over the noise it made over PM's visit to Arunachal Pradesh or grabbing of Aksai Chin? Did it feel sorry for denying visas to civil servants belonging to Arunachal Pradesh on the ludicrous claim that they were Chinese citizens? India, unlike China, is a democracy in which all citizens, including the Tibetans living in exile, have the right to protest. The ruling party must act strongly and liberate itself from the ideological grip of its Left allies who issue threats about Indo-US strategic relationship everyday but have no views to offer on repression in Tibet. An independent foreign policy is one that protects national interest and upholds universal values.
(Sent to Indian Express, 5.04.2008)
Your question why India should carry the torch of China's Olympian intolerance (IE, April 12) is pertinent. But CPM, which said it had "no views to offer on Tibet" is unlikely to provide an answer. Nor would it explain why India's military exercises with China, despite the latter's claim on Arunachal Pradesh and occupation of Aksai Chin, are acceptable while any strategic relationship with US send it into a shiver. By allowing Chinese security men to guard the torch during its truncated run in Delhi, the govt. has undermined confidence in India's security apparatus. It has also transformed the torch into a Chinese asset, which needs to be protected by its own soldiers. Unfortunately the Congress, only keen to last its full term, can do no better by taking its ally to task for banning a Tibetan protest rally in Kolkata. The torch may run but its spirit has already been extinguished.
(Sent to Indian Express, 12.04.2008)
Your edit on The Question of Tibet (March 26) was surprising. It is strange that there was not a single word of sympathy or understanding for thousands of Tibetans who are being forced to live in exile across the world. In India too they have lived and carried on their lives peacefully without causing any unrest or clash of cultures. Their right to protest democratically against the violation of their human rights cannot be denied. Therefore it is unethical even to suggest that India should exercise pressure on them to toe the Chinese line. India has been home to refugees from various lands and it is only recently that attempts are being made to muzzle their voice. If China were only a progressive or benevolent State as has been portrayed, it would have been difficult to stage manage protests inland as has been suggested. In spite of a categorical assertion by the Dalai Lama that they are neither against Chinese government nor people and seek only a genuine autonomy, the Chinese have shown no inclination to resolve the issue. In contrast, they have accused the "Dalai clique" for orchestrating violence and used force to crush it. Dalai Lama on the other hand has denounced violence unequivocally and even threatened to resign if it continues. It is possible that the warring parties may be offering only half truths but violence in Tibet and elsewhere may well be due to suppression of the democratic aspirations of the people who have been denied to right to live in their homeland for half a century. This would not have happened If China were such a progressive and benevolent nation as has been portrayed. Our response to the crisis next door should be based on universal respect for human rights rather than the economic clout or military might of China. (Sent to Editor, The Hindu on 26.03.2008)
Barkha Dutt's account of how the world has failed Tibet (HT, March 29) was touching. In realpolitik, political parties and the governments run by them are largely dictated by ideology and self-interest. That is why CPM's Yechuri's had "no views to offer on Tibet". Viewed thus, nothing happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989 and nothing is happening in Tibet now. But there is no need for pessimism. Gandhi's non-violent struggle against the British, despite a similar skepticism among the middle classes, ultimately succeeded. So did the movements against apartheid in South Africa and Congress' internal emergency of 1975 at home. China, despite its economic or military might, shall not be able to wipe out those it oppresses with an iron fist. On our part, we must support the Tibetans since they deserve to return to an autonomous homeland. (Sent to Hindustan Times, on 29.03.2008)
The assertion by China's Consul-General in Kolkata that Olympics belong to the world and should not be boycotted makes sense. So is his claim that sports and politics should not be mixed. However, his own country is refusing to act as a generous host by suppressing local Tibetans and forcing others to live in exile. If China wishes to earn universal goodwill, it will have to facilitate their return to a genuinely autonomous homeland and also enable them to participate in the Olympics. (Sent to Hindustan Times on 3.04.2008)
Your edit rightly faults the govt. over the decision to cut down the route of Olympic flame (IE, April 5). The official assurances given to Chinese government have been demeaning and slighting to our self-respect. Have the Chinese ever expressed regrets over the noise it made over PM's visit to Arunachal Pradesh or grabbing of Aksai Chin? Did it feel sorry for denying visas to civil servants belonging to Arunachal Pradesh on the ludicrous claim that they were Chinese citizens? India, unlike China, is a democracy in which all citizens, including the Tibetans living in exile, have the right to protest. The ruling party must act strongly and liberate itself from the ideological grip of its Left allies who issue threats about Indo-US strategic relationship everyday but have no views to offer on repression in Tibet. An independent foreign policy is one that protects national interest and upholds universal values.
(Sent to Indian Express, 5.04.2008)
Your question why India should carry the torch of China's Olympian intolerance (IE, April 12) is pertinent. But CPM, which said it had "no views to offer on Tibet" is unlikely to provide an answer. Nor would it explain why India's military exercises with China, despite the latter's claim on Arunachal Pradesh and occupation of Aksai Chin, are acceptable while any strategic relationship with US send it into a shiver. By allowing Chinese security men to guard the torch during its truncated run in Delhi, the govt. has undermined confidence in India's security apparatus. It has also transformed the torch into a Chinese asset, which needs to be protected by its own soldiers. Unfortunately the Congress, only keen to last its full term, can do no better by taking its ally to task for banning a Tibetan protest rally in Kolkata. The torch may run but its spirit has already been extinguished.
(Sent to Indian Express, 12.04.2008)
Sunday, August 17, 2008
A POINT OF VIEW - Read between the l...
A POINT OF VIEW - Read between the l...
T
he Prime Minister in his Independence Day
speech has mentioned the Right to Information
Act as a major achievement of the UPA government.
Passed in 2005, the Act empowers citizens to seek
a...read more...
T
he Prime Minister in his Independence Day
speech has mentioned the Right to Information
Act as a major achievement of the UPA government.
Passed in 2005, the Act empowers citizens to seek
a...read more...
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Let us work towards a safer India
Let us work towards a safer India
T
he spate of bombings ?rst in Bangalore and
later in Ahmedabad brought the focus back
on the issue of internal security. Had the countless
bombs planted all over Surat gone off, the toll woul...read more...
T
he spate of bombings ?rst in Bangalore and
later in Ahmedabad brought the focus back
on the issue of internal security. Had the countless
bombs planted all over Surat gone off, the toll woul...read more...
Saturday, July 26, 2008
A POINT OF VIEW - Lessons in dealing wit...
A POINT OF VIEW - Lessons in dealing wit...
T
he residence of one of BJP’s rebel MPs who
abstained during the recent vote of con?dence
was vandalised allegedly by the party activists while
the scared MP bolted himself in a room to escap...read more...
T
he residence of one of BJP’s rebel MPs who
abstained during the recent vote of con?dence
was vandalised allegedly by the party activists while
the scared MP bolted himself in a room to escap...read more...
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Speaker's expulsion
The reasoning put out by the CPM for the expulsion of Mr. Somnath Chatterjee from the party is curious. If the Speaker who is a veteran parliamentarian continues to be bound by the party discipline and is expected to relinquish office the moment the latter withdrew outside support to the govt., he should have been consulted when the strategy to pull down the govt. was being formulated. The manner in which his name was included in the list submitted to the President without his consent, it is clear that the party took his consent for granted and undermined the office of the Speaker since, once elected, the Speaker is constitutionally above party politics . While publically maintaining that it was up to the Speaker to decide whether to resign or not, the younger members of the politburo continued to exert pressure on him indirectly. Elevation of Mr. Chatterjee by a unanimous vote brought honor to CPM and not vice versa. But little else can be expected from a party, which denied the prime minister ship to Mr. Jyoti Basu at the insistence of the same politburo, which was described as a "historic blunder" later. What is more interesting is that only half of the members ("available politburo") were present to take the historic decision and the procedure adopted was totally undemocratic since no show cause notice was given nor an opportunity given to Speaker to defend himself. CPM can legitimately claim that it was an internal matter of the party. However, a party, which claims to be democratic and demanded access to the text of an international agreement before its finalization in the name of transparency should seriously examine its own record of functioning. Charity after all, begins at home
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
A POINT OF VIEW - Should the Speaker r...
A POINT OF VIEW - Should the Speaker r...
A
s the D-day for the confidence vote comes
nearer, there is a scramble among parties for
each and every vote. The sound bytes, both for and
against the deal, have also become louder. In con-
...read more...
A
s the D-day for the confidence vote comes
nearer, there is a scramble among parties for
each and every vote. The sound bytes, both for and
against the deal, have also become louder. In con-
...read more...
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Left's Right Turn!
These are interesting times. The Left, which was supporting the Congress-led UPA government from outside finally withdrew support over the civilian nuclear deal with US. While the ostensible reason given for the move was attributed to the Hyde's Act, which makes the US government terminate cooperation with India in the event of latter exploding a nuclear device, the real parting of ways came when the govt. decided to approach the IAEA with India-specific safeguards agreement. The CPM declared that it would stop the deal with US at any cost even if it meant voting along with its arch-enemy and "communal " BJP to topple the government. It did not matter if other communist states like Russia had declared the deal to be good for India or China itself had signed a much-less favorable 123 agreement with US. Nor did the Left's opposition take into account the fact that we now live in a unipolar world and it is virtually impossible not to do any business with US.
The BJP off course has other reservations. Its spokesperson said in a televised debate that it can consider the deal friendly only if India was free to go for Pokhran III. In other words, we should merrily go on exploding nuclear weapons while enjoying the latest nuclear technology imports from the Nuclear Suppliers' Group (NSG). It hawkish stand also overlooks the fact that post-Pokhran II, we faced sanctions, which affected our nuclear power plants adversely and lead to Pakistan first acquiring and then trading nuclear weapon technology with other states like North Korea. It was also the nuclear statues of Pakistan, which made our forces stay for months eye to eye on the border during the Kargil conflict without resorting even to conventional warfare. Those with a better memory would recollect that it was the fierce US diplomatic effort, which made us observe a ceasefire for 72 hours providing a safe passage to Pakistanis occupying hill top positions. Pokhran II did confer upon us a nuclear weapon status. But its negative fall out can not be ignored. In any case, after the BJP-led NDA govt. declared a unilateral moratorium on further nuclear testing and with our experts, including the former President Dr.Kalam, certifying that we do not need any more real tests, rejecting civilian deal on this ground makes little sense.
Therefore one has to conclude with regret that there is merit in the observation that opposition to the deal is ideological on Left's part and political on BJP's. It is not based on merits. The tactical alliance between the Left and Right is illogical and must be decried unequivocally.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Tackling Oil Prices
The hike in oil prices have evoked strong feelings and justifiably too. Who wants to pay more for fuelwhen 8% inflation is still hurting every one and the present hike would push it up by another 1%. While the PM has predictably referred to increasing oil prices in the international market (India produces only 30% of its needs!) and has appealed to the people for conserving oil, he has woken up a little too late when calling upon his colleagues to observe austerity and cut down foreign travel.The reaction of the Opposition parties has been surprising. While the Left has criticised the govt. for increasing prices rather than cutting duties,it has provided no answer on how the consequential loss in revenue should be met. The BJP has called the hike an "economic terror" almost puting the PM in the list of terrorists. While its concerns with terrorism are well-known, it chose to ignore the fact that with crude oil prices having shot up from about 66$ a barel at the time of last revision to 139 $ in recent days, no govt. could continue to sell oil at old rates. Unlike the Left, it did not even make any suggestions. Interestingly the demand for CNG kits has doubled after the hike since its price, unlike that of petrol, has actually fallen recently. What kind of steps should be initiated to counter the ol crisis? One,the public transport must be strengthened on a war footing. Metro rail projects should be executed immediately by increasing allocation and support. Simultaneously parking charges should be raised substantially to discourage private transport. Two, fuel-guzzling cars (luxury and SUVs for instance) must be taxed higher to discourage people from using them. Swift sells in Singapore at three times its price in India and cars meant to be driven during non-peak hours and weekends offered cheaper. India could do with some such measures. But before we ask the citizens to cooperate, let the leading political figures set an example by doing away with a fleet of cars following them everywhere. Charity, after all, begins at home.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Recording & presenting History
ABVP activists recently ransacked the History department of Delhi University over inclusion of a piece entitled "Three hundred Ramayanas"in the recommended readings for B.A. students, which they claimed hurt the feelings of Hindus. The action was rightly condemned by the academic community since the activists chose violence over debate to settle an issue. The sense of outrage felt by them is also understandable since the attack was seen as an attempt to restrict academic freedom to pursue religious and mythological subjects. The objection, after all, was to description of Three Hundred Ramayanas with interesting differences in content and style. Those who took offense neither challenged the sources nor the content in substantive terms and referred only to "rumors" to malign their faith. The fact that the History department of University of Delhi is headed by a Muslim scholar and the interpolation of the name of the PM's daughter in the list as an editor were sufficient grounds to launch the offensive. The fact that the essay was written by a Hindu scholar of repute, who is no more to defend his writing, was neither known nor cared for.
However, two facts cannot be wished away. One, academic freedom to pursue subjects, especially involving faiths of people must be exercised with sensitively. The chief of a religious sect among Sikhs faced the ire of the entire community and the State government for merely dressing up like the last Guru. There is no dearth of similar variations, like the ones portrayed in Ramayana, in other faiths. Most faiths have descended down the ages through telling of tales and lack authentic documentation. For instance, Christianity has several testaments and a particular sect from Kerala had to conduct its Sunday Mass in a Balmiki temple in Central Delhi when thrown out of a nearby church over religious differences. Shias and Sunnis too have had conflicting beliefs in Islam and are have been at loggerheads for ages . The learned historians must be aware of many more instances from our rich and varied heritage but did one ever find their echoes in the text books of Delhi University? And that too at the undergraduate level when the students are just out of school and the minds immature? While research in theology is normal, controversial content at
B.A. level may not be. Now that tempers have cooled down a little, the academic fraternity should ponder over the issue and treat religious issues with greater sensitivity and caution. Academic freedom, like any other freedom, cannot be absolute and must be tempered with sensitivity.
However, two facts cannot be wished away. One, academic freedom to pursue subjects, especially involving faiths of people must be exercised with sensitively. The chief of a religious sect among Sikhs faced the ire of the entire community and the State government for merely dressing up like the last Guru. There is no dearth of similar variations, like the ones portrayed in Ramayana, in other faiths. Most faiths have descended down the ages through telling of tales and lack authentic documentation. For instance, Christianity has several testaments and a particular sect from Kerala had to conduct its Sunday Mass in a Balmiki temple in Central Delhi when thrown out of a nearby church over religious differences. Shias and Sunnis too have had conflicting beliefs in Islam and are have been at loggerheads for ages . The learned historians must be aware of many more instances from our rich and varied heritage but did one ever find their echoes in the text books of Delhi University? And that too at the undergraduate level when the students are just out of school and the minds immature? While research in theology is normal, controversial content at
B.A. level may not be. Now that tempers have cooled down a little, the academic fraternity should ponder over the issue and treat religious issues with greater sensitivity and caution. Academic freedom, like any other freedom, cannot be absolute and must be tempered with sensitivity.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Violence in politics
The violent attack on the office of CPM in Delhi by the BJP activists was deplorable. Strict action must be taken against the culprits,including the Mayor of Delhi, for spearheading the attack since such violence has no place in a democratic set-up. However, CPM too cannot wash its hands off by merely stating that attacks on its political opponents in Kerala are a State-subject since it has raised its voice against violence perpetrated in places like Gujarat. Besides, the Kerala High Court itself has asked for deployment of central forces, which shows a lack of confidence in the local police. It also suggests implicitly that the fatal attacks are either sponsored or condoned by the State. The activists of both the parties have been displaying a violent streak and need to be restrained to protect the national fabric
Friday, March 7, 2008
Budget
The reactions to the budget have been varied and predictable. Barring BJP, which only saw a streak of communalism in it, the proposals have largely been welcomed. While the fixed income groups have welcomed the increased exemption limit and adjustment of tax slabs, especially for women and senior citizens, the industry despite its dismay at persisting with corporate tax rate, has benefitted from an excise duty reduction. The 60,000 crores worth of loan waiver, funds for which are still being found, is causing tremors among the banking circles and a slide down in the stock markets. A similar uncertainty also persists around the Pay Commission, whose report is expected by March-end. The Finance minister has again made no provision for implementation of the revised pay scales. Nonetheless, the liberal pay outs have also created a feeling that the ruling party may call for early polls to capitalize on the feel-good factor. To say the least-a populist budget.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Parliamentary (Un)Functioning
The repetitive disruptions and adjournment of both houses of parliament day after day are a matter of serious concern. The opposition seems to have run out of ideas and only focuses on rushing to the well of the house and shouting its lungs out. Both the ruling party and the opposition appear interested in running down the other in front of TV cameras. The presiding officers surprisingly appear to be quite helpless and keep pleading without any result. Since working of parliament is made possible with taxes, most of which are paid by ordinary salaried employees, therefore the principle of "No work-no pay" must be enforced on members of parliament also. The speaker should name the members, who hold the parliament to ransom and evict them in order to to carry out listed business. The government should also consider switching off the live display of proceedings so that members focus on work rather than playing to the gallery.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Sledging in Cricket
Well, the final between India and Australia is stil acouple fo days away and we have Aussies at their old game of sledging again. Bhajji or Harbhajan is an "obnoxious weed" if they are to be believed and little bit to "unsettle' the other team is or its players is O.K. But one retaliatory word from the other side- kid Ishant for instance- is enough to flare up Ponting and his Symonds with charges of racial abuse with umpires-third fourth or whatever willing to impose fines, albeit on Indian players only. Is this the same Cricket, which was lauded as a gentlemen's game? Why does sledging become in integral part of it only in Australia? Are Indians prone to overreact or the Australians in need to be disciplined? Or is it just a storm in a tea-cup to raise the temperature a little and get spectators on the field?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)