Yes to CTBT
IT is tempting to read into the Prime Minister’s UN speech a happy and painless end to the CTBT debate in this country. Also a clearing of the way for an early resolution of the Indo-US policy differences.
Sharif remains hostile
WHATEVER hope Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s statement, at a Press conference in New York which he was not expected to address, raised about improvement in Indo-Pak relations was negated by Mr Nawaz Sharif’s address to the UN General Assembly. It was a case of good news sharing the spotlight with bad news at almost the same time.
Crime most foul
PEOPLE in need of sympathy and succour see in Christian nuns angels who put others’ needs before their own comforts. But the satanical beasts that move about in human cloaks see in them helpless women who are objects of desire.

Pak has no locus standi
by Bhim Singh
SIX-MONTH rule of the BJP-led government has made three major achievements. First, all enemies on the international front have united against India. Second, all the political enemies within the country have united against the BJP government itself and third, the so-called issue of Jammu and Kashmir has received international acceleration following the Pokhran-II adventure.

Disinvestment of PSUs
by N. Malhotra
THE Government of India is considering disinvestment for the last six to seven years and a lot of discussion is going on, but still no concrete action has been taken so far.

Jayalalitha skating on thin ice by Tavleen Singh THIS week I write from Tamil Nadu. I arrive in the wake of several political rallies which hogged large amounts of space on front pages and made headlines in news bulletins. It was as if every Tamil leader were competing in some way for attention from Delhi. Too many cooks on screen by Amita Malik IN my youth, whoever was unemployed called himself a life insurance agent. Then it became freelance journalist. And now, it seems whoever has nothing better to do starts a cookery programme on TV. Scorpion songs by O. P. Bhagat IT was about 10 years before the partition. The gramophone was the neighbours’ envy and the owner’s pride then. We too had such a “proud possession, with quite a large number of discs.

75 Years Ago

Physician, heal thyself
THUS says an Anglo-Indian journal in the course of a leading article on “The Teaching of English in Bengal” — We imagine, however, that the trouble is not so much due to the neglect of grammar — many eminent linguists disdain the study of grammar — but to the failure to encourage the speaking and writing of simple, accurate English among the students themselves.”

Yes to CTBT

IT is tempting to read into the Prime Minister’s UN speech a happy and painless end to the CTBT debate in this country. Also a clearing of the way for an early resolution of the Indo-US policy differences. India’s offer to sign the CTBT by the deadline next year is uncluttered with elaborate conditions. All it wants in return is the lifting of the embargo on the sale of nuclear technology. This is actually a non-condition since the nuclear supply group (NSG) — those countries which have developed safe designs and equipment for reactors — brought in the ban after the first Pokhran testing in 1974 only to prevent India from becoming a nuclear power. Now that it has gone and acquired weapons knowhow and has also agreed to sign the CTBT, continuing with the embargo would serve no purpose. There should thus be no objection to allow this country access to nuclear plants, particularly because there is big money in a nuclear deal. At best the NSG may seek an assurance that India would not produce fissile material and would not sell either such material or share bomb-making knowledge with others. This too is meaningless since New Delhi has no plan to add these to its export list.

The Prime Minister’s readiness to join the CTBT club does not surprise anyone. What should is the radical pruning of earlier demands. India does not any more talk of the Big Five recognising it as a nuclear weapons power (and hence free from the mandatory international inspection of its related facilities), nor does it insist on changes in the CTBT itself. Much emphasis was laid on these two during the early and tough-talking days of Pokhran-II. New Delhi has apparently dropped the two conditions as a result of the ongoing talks between Mr Jaswant Singh and Mr Strobe Talbott. Another way of looking at the issue is that the final shape of the Indo-US agreement is likely to be a straight trade-off with India initialling the treaty and the USA lifting sanctions on the sale of nuclear and duel-use technology. And the Prime Minister has used the UN podium to prepare the Indian people for it. As part of this groundwork the government fielded Prof Abdul Kalam, and for the second time, to assure the people that the security concerns could be fully met without further nuclear tests and that signing of the CTBT is now delinked with the country’s core needs. Prof Raja Ramanna too weighed in with similar views.

It does not mean that the BJP-led combine has everything sewn up. It has political rivals who are chronic critics of its policies. And they may latch on to this question to accuse the government of compromising on vital national interests. This task should be easy in a country where not many understand the structure and implications of the CTBT and where emotions can be whipped up to a fever pitch by twisting simple facts. If the opposition parties succeed in their game, the ruling combine should take a large measure of the blame. Until the other day it fiercely opposed the idea of signing the CTBT in its present form, saying it would not succumb to pressure. Also, it never bothered to build a consensus, though there is an excellent case for signing the CTBT and responsible political leaders understand it. Obviously, the BJP which grossly overplayed the security benefits of the nuclear tests and sought to corner all credit for it, finds it distasteful to involve other political parties in evolving policies. A rare chance at national cooperation has been lost.

Sharif remains hostile

WHATEVER hope Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s statement, at a Press conference in New York which he was not expected to address, raised about improvement in Indo-Pak relations was negated by Mr Nawaz Sharif’s address to the UN General Assembly. It was a case of good news sharing the spotlight with bad news at almost the same time. The glad tidings were conveyed by Mr Vajpayee, who showed remarkable composure in answering questions from a hostile Pakistani Press, when he shared with the media the outcome of the meeting he had with the Pakistan Prime Minister. The decision to have a direct bus service between Delhi and Lahore (will it be a safe journey?), establish a road-cum-rail link between Munabao (Rajasthan) and Khokrapar (Pakistan), re-establish the hotline between the two Prime Ministers, ease visa restrictions, stop cross-border firing at the LOC, discourage anti-government propaganda against each other and finalise the modalities for the purchase of electricity from Pakistan would, under normal circumstances, have been enough to share with Mr Vajpayee the optimism about the “beginning of a new chapter in Indo-Pak relations”. But Mr Nawaz Sharif’s address to the General Assembly in which he raked up the Kashmir issue and launched a vicious attack on India left no scope for doubt that Pakistan is still not ready to tread the path of reason and diplomacy for improving relations with India. It must be understood that the spirit of the “Gujral Doctrine” has guided India’s policy towards Pakistan even before it was enunciated by Mr Inder Kumar Gujral. The Nehru-Liaqat Pact, the Tashkent Agreement and the Simla Accord provide enough evidence that India has always believed in the policy of peaceful co-existence.

What Mr Vajpayee did in New York was to revive the spirit of the agreements and accords of the past between the two countries in the hope that Pakistan too would give up its anti-India policy and accept the offer of building bridges of understanding and cooperation through improved trade and cultural ties. From Colombo to Durban to New York India has consistently offered the hand of friendship to Pakistan. The outcome of the latest round of talks between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan is revival of the Foreign Secretary-level meetings. The first such meeting would be held in Islamabad next month, to be followed up by another round in Delhi in November. But the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan cannot be expected to go beyond the brief given to him by the country’s political leadership. Going by the tone and tenor of Mr Nawaz Sharif’s address to the General Assembly, it would be naive for India to expect substantial progress in the Foreign Secretary-level talks between the two countries. All that can be said at this moment is that Mr Vajpayee has taken several steps forward in one go in his effort to ease tension with Pakistan while Mr Sharif has not budged from his anti-India position. Is he the same Nawaz Sharif who had made improving ties with India part of his poll campaign? Instead of succumbing to domestic pressure and reverting to the old tune, he could have followed an aggressive pro-India policy by pointing to the massive mandate he received on the basis of the pre-poll promise of his party. The only reason why Pakistan may yet soften its stand once the process of bilateral interaction gets under way next month is the domestic tension caused by the stand-off between Afghanistan and Iran.

Crime most foul

PEOPLE in need of sympathy and succour see in Christian nuns angels who put others’ needs before their own comforts. But the satanical beasts that move about in human cloaks see in them helpless women who are objects of desire. It is the latter types who were on the prowl on Wednesday night in Navapara Bhandariya village of the tribal Jhabua district of Madhya Pradesh. On the pretext of seeking medicines, these 12 intoxicated men forced their entry into the hospital-cum-school run by Christian missionaries there and criminally assaulted the hapless nuns, besides looting the institution run by them. One of the four nuns raped by them is fighting for her life. Through their heinous crime, the vermins have not only insulted the nuns but also defiled the very concepts of faith and humanity. The centre, “Preeti Sharan”, was doing yeoman service for the poorest of the poor. By their barbaric act, these lustful beings have robbed people of the area of a ray of hope and the punishment for them should be exemplary to ensure that such a crime is never repeated. At the same time, there is need to realise that their horrendous deed was not an attack on any particular religion. It is just that these people crossed all limits of civilised behaviour. They would have gone about their devilish deed even if the women were persons practising other religions. That is why it is imperative for the people of every religion and community to condemn the incident and express solidarity with the aggrieved missionaries. Political parties, on their part, should refrain from using this ghastly incident for their advantage.

Horrifying that the rape is, an even worse crime has been perpetrated almost simultaneously in Punjab. Those who molested the nuns were lawless criminals. But a migrant woman was raped in a train compartment on the Ludhiana-Lohian section by none other than a three-member police escort. They even had the gumption to beat up the three male companions of the woman. It scares one to think that the very people who were entrusted with the security of the passengers perpetrated the crime. That increases the gravity of their misdeed manifold. It is because of such incidents that the common man hardly has any faith in the police. To an average citizen, it matters little whether the wrongdoers are policemen or Home Guards jawans as in this case. In his eyes, anyone who dons the khaki uniform is a representative of the government and such wolves in the sheep’s clothing thus blacken the face of the entire government. One hopes that instead of trying to protect the criminals in any way, the police force will itself go out of its way to nail them promptly so that public confidence in the system is restored somewhat.

Pak has no locus standi
Need for a national policy on J&K
by Bhim Singh

SIX-MONTH rule of the BJP-led government has made three major achievements. First, all enemies on the international front have united against India. Second, all the political enemies within the country have united against the BJP government itself and third, the so-called issue of Jammu and Kashmir has received international acceleration following the Pokhran-II adventure. Old friends like Yasser Arafat and Nelson Mandela have fallen prey to the Pakistani disinformation campaign vis-a-vis Jammu and Kashmir.

Why India has gone defensive on the issue of Jammu and Kashmir is a matter of regret and needs a critical investigation. The OIC (Organisation of Islamic Countries) with 52 members hailed the first-ever Islamic bombs of Pakistan. Naturally, a morale boost for Pakistan, which had almost lost her credibility among Muslim nations following its pro-American stance vis-a-vis Palestine and in the Gulf war by sending its troops against Iraq under the US command. The Anglo-American axis has again chosen to hold the old “colonial” temperament against India. The latest “outbursts” of the British foreign Minister, Ms Robin Cook at an NRIs’ function in London accusing India as a “trespasser” in J&K, Yasser Arafat offering to mediate and a friend like Nelson Mandela expressing concern in the NAM countries’ conference in Durban, deserve a serious attention of the government. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan mentioned J&K in his annual report. That leaves no doubt that BJP’s foreign relations have gone to the lowest ebb. Justification given by the office of Mr Kofi Annan was simple. Of course the UN is seized of the “J&K situation” as India’s protest letter of 1947 is still lying with the UN. When Pakistan defied the UN resolutions of August 13, 1948, the Anglo-American bloc floated “the Dixon Plan” to bail out Pakistan and embarrass India.

The “Dixon Plan” suggested division of J&K on communal lines. The UN while up holding the aggressor’s status of Pakistan in J&K had asked it to vacate all occupied areas of J&K and to withdraw its civilian settlers as well. Pakistan, instead, chose confrontation without having “locus” in J&K, which had acceded to the Union of India in accordance with international law.

Mr Narasimha Rao in 1994 got a resolution passed in Parliament to the effect that the only unfinished agenda vis-a-vis J&K with Pakistan was the liberation of Pak occupied areas of J&K comprising 32,500 sq. miles of territory. The BJP Premier could not maintain this stand even while addressing the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on India’s Independence Day in 1998.

J&K became an integral part of India on October 27, 1947, when the Instrument of Accession was signed by the Maharaja, the only competent authority to decide the future of J&K. Even the top legal luminary of Pakistan, Sir Zafar-Ullah Khan, could not dispute the aspect. Mr Mohd. Ali Jinnah had stated on the floor of the National Assembly of Pakistan in 1947 that the ruler (Maharaja Hari Singh) was the only competent authority to decide the future of J&K. For 50 years, this question has never been raised as to what is Pakistan’s claim over J&K. Having failed to capture it, Pakistan invaded J&K in 1947 to usurp it by force and again in 1965. Then came the latest aggression through mercenaries and fundamentalism.

Pakistan faced rebuff from the people of J&K and realised that the Muslims in J&K had rejected the two-nation theory in 1947. Later, majority of the Pakistanis demolished this theory by separating Bangladesh. When the administration reacted to save the innocent public, it became a subject of “human rights violation” for Pakistan. India went on the defensive.

The strategy has been changed from “invasion” to “infiltration” resulting in a full spate of terrorism in Kashmir, another violation of UN resolutions and Tashkent and Simla pacts. This resulted in the death of nearly 40,000 youths.

The Muslim leaders of the highest clergyhood order were shot dead, or butchered or hanged by the so-called “Islamic republicans”. Among those killed were Maulana Masoodi, 84-year-old freedom fighter, Maulvi Farooq, Mirwaiz of Kashmir (whose son Omar Farooq headed the Hurriyat Conference), Dr Qazi Nisar (Mirwaiz of South Kashmir), Dr Abdul Ahmed Guru, Mr Mir Mustafa (He was hanged with hand tied behind his back), media chief, Lassa Kaul, Tika Lal Tiplu, advocate and human rights activist, Abdul Ahmed Guru, the spirit behind “Azadi movement” and many prominent leaders of the political parties.

Having realised that it has been “held guilty” for the “death and destruction” in J&K, by the general public of Kashmir, Pakistan started sending foreign mercenaries to continue killings and bloodshed to instigate civil war, particularly in Kashmir valley and in Jammu region. History shall remain a witness that the people of Jammu in spite of their diametrically opposed ideologies stood together in defence of the cultural ethos of secularism, putting the killers and the mercenaries to shame. After having failed on all fronts and having realised the possible consequences of a referendum, Pakistan has started harping on “mediation”. Pakistan has so far offered the job to the USA, Britain, OIC, Iran, France, China and now to Nelson Mandela.

Though India has rejected this proposition and reiterated “bilateral talks” with Pakistan, it appears that the BJP government has unfortunately succumbed to the American pressure. Using the handicapped government, the USA has almost assumed the role of a mediator. Otherwise, what was Mr Strobe Talbott doing in Delhi and Islamabad? For what business the PM’s envoy has to rush to Washington, Frankfurt and Manila at the call of Mr Talbott? The BJP government cannot escape the responsibility for making a mess of the J&K situation at home and abroad. It cannot hide the “hidden-dialogue” with the master of the new world order. What locus standi does Pakistan have in J&K? Absolutely none, except that it was judged as a “trespasser” by UNCIP in 1948 and still continues to be so.

“Experts” must understand that J&K was not a part of the British India and, therefore, the theory of partition on a communal basis did not apply to J&K. “The Maharaja of J&K was the only competent authority to decide the future of J&K”. Consequently on August 14, 1947, J&K became an independent state as it did not accede either to India or to Pakistan according to the Act of British Parliament. It was Pakistan which attacked J&K on October 19, 1947 in spite of a standstill agreement with the Maharaja. This was the first betrayal of Pakistan against the people of J&K. The Maharaja had exercised his sovereign authority which was vested in him by the India’s Independence Act by British Parliament. The ruler acceded to the Union of India on October 26, 1947 as the sovereign of the state in the exercise of the powers vested in him under the municipal and international laws requesting the Union of India to send their armed forces to repulse the attack abetted, supported and aided by Pakistan.

The United Nations in its resolution dated August 13, 1948, had directed Pakistan to vacate all occupied areas of J&K and to withdraw its army as well as civilian settlers from the occupied areas. The resolution of the United Nations on which Pakistan has been misleading the world community for the past five decades had further directed Pakistan to hand over the entire occupied areas of J&K to the Indian forces thus judging Pakistan as an aggressor. The United Nations itself had directed India only to reduce the strength of its army sufficiently to maintain law and order. It was, therefore, obvious that the presence of the Indian Army was held justified by UNCIP. The United Nations categorically refused to recognise the government established by Pakistan in the occupied areas which Pakistan has called “Azad Government”. UNCIP expressly said in its resolution that the UN recognised only one government with its headquarters in Srinagar, which was headed by Maharaja Hari Singh. The Maharaja continued as the constitutional head till Monarchy was abolished in 1952.

Unfortunately, the leadership of India failed to communicate to the international community the actual happenings and the events that shook the sub-continent. The world community has to understand that it was Pakistan which defied the UNCIP resolutions.

Pakistan did not vacate the occupied areas of J&K. Nor did it withdraw its armed forces or the private civilians from the occupied areas as directed by the UN. Pakistan instead of implementing the UN Resolution, annexed the entire 28,000 sq. miles of the territory of J&K known as Gilgit-Baltistan region as late as September, 1948, after the ceasefire was agreed. The Indian government failed to take appropriate action to save Gilgit from forcible annexation by Pak army for reasons which need to be investigated. Pakistan again defied the UN Resolution by recognising the “Azad Kashmir Government” and signing a fraudulent agreement with the government to annex Gilgit”. A total fraud ! Yet India kept quiet.

Pakistan not only annexed the area but it changed its demography as well as its name by calling it “Northern Areas”. Pakistan thus divided the occupied areas into what they called “Azad Kashmir” comprising 4500 sq. miles of territory of J&K from Mirpur to Muzafarrabad in the erstwhile Jammu Province. The other annexed areas described by Pakistan as “Northern Areas” were taken under its direct military control. Pakistan executed another illegal agreement with China in 1969, known as the Bhutto-Chou-en-Lai Agreement leasing out 4600 sq miles of the territory of Gilgit region for 99 years to enable China to build Karakoram highway to connect Beijing with Peshawar. Pakistan again violated the UNCIP resolution and its mandate control by dropping thousands of its paratroopers by air in Poonch and Rajouri in 1965 resulting in a bloody war between India and Pakistan. Pakistan signed an agreement at Tashkent just to gain time. She again signed the Simla Agreement with India in 1972. Now it has undertaken a proxy war by sending mercenaries and fundamentalists to destabilise India’s secular foundation.

Having failed in the proxy war too, Pakistan has again switched its game plan from proxy war to “mediation” just to keep the issue alive. It is not Pakistan alone, it is the Anglo-American axis which is interested in seeking space in South East Asia for its military adventures. They find Gilgit-Ladakh region a fertile land for their military operations. It should be understood that Pakistan has no claim on J&K; neither political nor religious, nor legal. The government must learnt the ABC of J&K situation which arose in 1947 following the Pak aggression. Therein lies the need to evolve a definite national policy on J&K based on the agenda resolved by Parliament in 1994.

Disinvestment of PSUs
by N. Malhotra

THE Government of India is considering disinvestment for the last six to seven years and a lot of discussion is going on, but still no concrete action has been taken so far.The Finance Minister in his last Budget speech on June 1, 1998 has stated that:

The regular Budget takes credit for a receipt of Rs 5000 crore from disinvestment in the current year and investment in non-strategic industries should be 26 per cent and in strategic industries to 49 per cent. Further the Government to make the compensation package attractive for the employees before the closure of the unrevivable PSUs and also to create Restructuring Fund for compensation to the workers. Once the labour is separated, the assets of the units will be available for disposal at the best economic prices.

Before considering the actions required to be taken for PSU disinvestment, it is essential to know why PSUs were set up and what is the necessity now to get rid of these units. PSUs were essential for the economic development of India after Independence, when the capital was shy, entrepreneurial skill was not available, latest technology was not there, labour was unorganised, infrastructure and power generation were inadequate etc. Therefore, undertaking economic development in mixed economy, certain investments were made in the non-strategic industries like hotels, textiles, shoes, bicycles, consumer durables etc. The investments in certain strategic and non-strategic PSUs have outlived their utility, particularly after liberalisation of 1991-92.

PSUs are not in a position to compete with the MNCs or organised private sector on account of indecisiveness or decision taking capabilities. PSUs could generate employment and show profits so long as there was scarcity and no competition was there. Most of the products of PSUs were monopoly items and sold against quota or advance booking. Once the market economy has taken over, competition from the partial controlled economy has become very severe particularly when recession has set in in India and other South Asian economies. Most of the PSUs are showing heavy losses and even an organisation like the Steel Authority of India has lost over Rs 311 crore in the first quarter of 1998-99, which is one of the biggest 500 companies of the world.

The losses in the PSUs are there not because the chief executive officers of these units are incompetent but because the CEO or BODs or PSUs are not competent to take timely decision because of political interference or contradictory directions from the authorities, bureaucratic involvement, fear of audit from CAG, vigilance, CBI and above all redtapism and favouritism etc. Further, the fate of most of the PSUs had worsened on account of political uncertainty and the bureaucracy is shirking taking risky responsibilities. Under such circumstances even Cabinet decisions are losing authority.It has been observed for the last four months that the moment there is a sign of political stability or positive reaction by the government, the share prices go up and on the other day again the prices go down by the utterances of some other ministers or allies of the government,which have repercussion on the economic policy of the country.

Keeping in view the present political conditions, if the Government is serious about PSUs’ liberalisation and want to achieve a minimum target of over Rs 5000 crore, the disinvestment policy should be given a specific look. The basic guidelines for disinvestment should be made for all the strategic and non-strategic industries. The success of even strategic industries depends on privatisation as the success of American supremacy in defence is also due to vigorous growth in the private sector. Diamonds sparkle on account of internal reflection. As such, if the PSUs have to survive they should have total internal liberalisation.

A few suggestions for disinvestment of PSUs are:

The persons who make policy planning should be different from the persons who actually implement PSU disinvestment. Otherwise, there is always an element of doubt by the sanctioning authority that some motive may be there behind the suggested policy. This is the major cause of indecisiveness by the previous governments.

PSUs’ employees should be allowed to invest in their organisation to the extent of their share in the employees provident fund (EPF). They may be allowed to withdraw this amount from EPF or from their own sources.

The employees should be given the shares at the workout price discount 20%. However, they may not be allowed to sell these shares for three years from the date of allotment so that the workers of PSU may have sense of belonging for its revival.

The nationalised banks should be given the shares at the net worth or fixed price to the extent of loan granted to the PSUs as equity share i.e. underwriting. They may be allowed to sell in the public at any price after one year or earlier when the total shares have been sold.

The nationalised banks should be allowed to sell shares to the retail investors at 5% discount of the fixed price for upto three months. After that, small investor may have to buy from the nationalised bank or from the open market at the quoted price or at market price.

Scorpion songs

by O. P. Bhagat

IT was about 10 years before the partition. The gramophone was the neighbours’ envy and the owner’s pride then. We too had such a “proud possession, with quite a large number of discs.

Once a Muslim friend of the family lent us some of his discs. They did not appeal to my boyish taste. However, I was tickled by the opening line of one of the songs: Bichhua ne mara dunkwa, main mar gayi Allah.

It was a wail of a song — a wail which the singer uttered as tunefully as the pain of the scorpion’s sting permitted.

That was the only song of its kind I had heard. Time passed, but for no apparent reason that line often echoed in my ear. Then I saw Bimal Roy’s Madhumati which has a scorpion song. But it was a different experience.

Bichhu lad gaya... This song, from the Amitabh and Sridevi starrer Inquilab, made it a trio. Sare badan mein zaher chadh gaya, goes the second line. You’d expect the singers to be howling or screaming in agony. But they sing rather merrily as if broadcasting an adman’s jingle.

Then for a long time there was no new scorpion song. Ila Arun broke the spell with her non-film Rajasthani album in which the title song is Bichhuda.

Neither loud nor screaming, the song tells in the singer’s husky voice the effect of the scorpion’s sting in its own way. Actually, the sting is the surge of passion. It rises in the blood like the poison until all resistance fails.

In the video version of the song the camera captures every passionate moment of it. It is a string of cameos which even Kama would like to look at a second time.

Ang ang mein dard sa hai jaga, says the girl (Madhuri Dixit) to the boy (Anil Kapoor) in a “Rajkumar” duet. Why? Bichhu prem ka mujhe das kar bhaga, she explains. A good rhyme, but it does not have a good reason.

There is no cry or groan or exclamation of pain. Instead, she croons in a soft, sensuous voice as if telling of a nicely pricking sensation. Maybe it was a plastic scorpion. Or one of those species whose sting causes a mere itch.

But accurate is the Udaan girl in her solo. While she was lying alone on her roof and dreaming sweet, dreams, gaya re dunk mar bichhua. Only the tune is a bit too lively for a sting that leaves one livid.

This is because the song is set to a pop beat. The mood and the motif do clash. But you will like the mod scorpion number for the novelty of it.

Actually, before it “Chamatkar” too had a scorpion song with a fast beat. It is presented as a comic interlude at the start of the picture.

A small town simple boy gets into the “dibba zennana” of a train. There he finds himself besieged by a dozen girls. They rag him as they would a college fresher to the chanting of a rollicking song: Bichhu, ye bichhu mujhe kat khayega.

The humorist, they say, sees something to laugh at in any situation. He can even make you smile at a likely scorpion sting.

Also of its own kind is the “Madhumati” song. It is a folk number in a factual setting. A village belle tells how a scorpion stung her while she was relaxing in the shade of a pipul tree. Koi utaro bichhua, she begs as its poison causes her increasing pain.

A vaid comes. He mutters a mantra, but in vain. The girl feels the burning pain all over her body. It seems that nothing will give her relief.

Just then the song takes a new turn. The girl thinks of her love. Piya ghar aa re, she moans. And that soothes her pain.

What began as a poignant scorpion song, ends as a joyous love song.

Jayalalitha skating on thin ice

by Tavleen Singh

THIS week I write from Tamil Nadu. I arrive in the wake of several political rallies which hogged large amounts of space on front pages and made headlines in news bulletins. It was as if every Tamil leader were competing in some way for attention from Delhi. The Prime Minister himself attended the first of the rallies which was held in Chennai. His would-be-nemesis, Jayalalitha, did not attend. She had her own rally in Trichy and Star News reported this to be the more impressive of the two. It established beyond doubt, the reporter said, that Jayalalitha loomed large on the landscape of Tamil politics. The reporter interviewed people at the rally who said they had come long distances to show their support to Amma. “We wanted to show that Amma is strong” one man said “we have shown it”. But, no sooner was Amma’s rally over than vast crowds descended on Tirunelveli to attend a rally by the Chief Minister and his DMK party. The Indian Express reported this as a “big show of strength”.

So, is Amma, or the fat lady from Chennai as we in Delhi have come to think of her, really as strong and powerful in Tamil Nadu as she would like the BJP to believe? This was my first time back in Tamil Nadu after she lent her support to the BJP government only to start harassing it on a daily basis, and I was curious to find out whether the average Tamilian was as displeased with their Amma as other Indians were.

Few provincial politicians have had the instant advent into national politics that Jayalalitha has. But, it has been a bad beginning. She may have made her name known nationally but in most cases people speak it with a certain contempt. Instead of damaging Vajpayee’s image she had ended up damaging her own.

Where the Prime Minister has appeared accommodating, self-effacing and eminently reasonable she has appeared arrogant, grasping and completely unreasonable in her tantrums and demands. The problems began even before the government actually took power. Remember how she delayed sending her letter of support to the President on the grounds that she had not been treated well by the senior BJP leadership? At the time when I made inquiries about what had annoyed her so early on in the relationship a senior Cabinet Minister said: “To tell you the truth we didn’t do anything ... It’s just that she is used to such a high degree of sycophancy from her own party that she takes offence if she doesn’t get it from everyone else as well”. Apparently, the first sulking fit was provoked by the fact that the Prime Minister had not come personally to receive her at the airport.

After that it has been pretty much a tantrum a day. She did not like the fact that Subramanyam Swamy was not made Finance Minister. She did not like the portfolios her other Ministers were given. Above all, as everyone knew, she did not like the fact that the Prime Minister did not dismiss the Tamil Nadu Government. When news of her tantrums got into the newspapers she called a press conference and imperiously informed reporters that her demands were really demands for Tamil Nadu. She wanted her State to get justice on the issue of sharing the waters of the Cauvery. When this happened, though, she was even more infuriated and said that she did not accept the accord anyway. Pout, pout. Sulk, sulk. The tantrums and daily threats to withdraw support have continued ever since and the end result is that she had become a joke figure in national politics, a caricature, a cartoonist’s delight. In Delhi, journalists who knew her in the days when she was only a Rajya Sabha member whisper dark stories about her strange illusions and fixations.

In Tamil Nadu, though, she appears even at the worst of times to have maintained a certain hold over people’s hearts and minds. So, I sort of expected when I stopped in my first village, en route from Coimbatore to Codaikanal, that I would meet people who spoke of her favourably. It took me by surprise that I did not. People said that they had voted for Jayalalitha only because she was in alliance with Vajpayee (they did not say BJP) and they felt very let down by the way she had behaved. “She has made lots of trouble for Mr Vajpayee” a village elder said “but she would not have got votes without him”.

In another village, further up the mountains, which described itself as an “AIADMK fortress” people said that they still liked Jayalalitha and that they would vote for her but they did not like the way she had behaved. They said that she should have made up her mind once and for all whether she wanted to support Vajpayee or Sonia and she should have stuck with her decision. In this village the DMK government was not popular. People said that Jayalalitha had done much more for them although they were not very clear about exactly what it was she had done.

By the time I got to Kadaikanal the impression I had formed was that although Karunanidhi was not very popular Jayalalitha had definitely blotted her copy book by harassing the BJP government. There was also the feeling, since we were not very far from Madurai, that Subramanyam Swamy had been an evil influence on her. “He will never win again from Madurai” one man told me darkly. “People have been seeing how he has behaved and they have also seen that he has done nothing for his constituency”.

In Kodaikanal, where this year the tourists have hardly come, Jayalalitha continues to be feared and hated. People remember that her friend, Sasikala, virtually stole a property belonging to the Kodaikanal International School. Her thugs marched in one day, threw the school furniture out, and occupied the property. It has taken a court case and several years to get the property back but local people remember what happened. They also remember that Jayalalitha was involved in a hotel which had been charged with illegal construction.

An old Tamil Nadu hand, whom I met in the Carlton Hotel, told me that Karunanidhi’s son, Alagir, was believed to be making huge amounts of money on government contracts but the truth was that people still remember the Jayalalitha days as being much, much worse. In other words, the fat lady from Chennai appears to be unaware that she has been skating on thin ice.

Too many cooks on screen

by Amita Malik

IN my youth, whoever was unemployed called himself a life insurance agent. Then it became freelance journalist. And now, it seems whoever has nothing better to do starts a cookery programme on TV. Gone are the days when monopolist DD invited friends and relations to come in their best saris and diamond jewellery to demonstrate homely dishes while their mangal sutras dipped into the gravy and their diamond rings got bogged down in dough.

And now, it is the monopoly of the five-star hotels and their PROs to demonstrate fancy dishes on the screen with exotic ingredients available to five-star hotels. It makes the fat cats who watch the programmes feel very five-star, even if the pretty girl who stands around has nothing to say except “Add the salt now?” and keep on looking dumb, while more enterprising side-kicks dip their fingers in the dish and lick them, then go back for more. Most un-Indian, in this land which is particular about jootha.

So the five-star hotels get their free puff, the producer gets the five-star hotel chef free and everyone lives happily ever after. Except that one five-star hotel chef who is the darling of the fat cats once said he took one and a half hours to cook a bread and butter pudding. Probably for 500 people.

However, we also have non five-star but very watchable TV cooks, not to forget our five-star very own Madhur Jaffrey. Siddharta Kak is always fun and two women, Karen Anand and Rupa Gulati certainly liven up the TV cooking scene. I find Rupa charming, articulate, very professional in her demonstrations and with a wide range of recipes. I had only faulted her so far on an important point, that she frequently adds her own innovations to standard dishes without clearly stating that it is her own recipe, so that viewers mistake it for the real thing. Since many of her innovations were amusing, I let them pass.

But I must lodge a strong protest when she makes a farce out of a well-known Bengali dish, the Chhokka. I cook a pretty good chhokka myself, but so as to make triply sure, I rang up two authorities on Bengali cuisine, Mrs Madhabi Chatterjee and Mrs Chitra Ghosh. Which is what Rupa should have done too. They expressed as much horror as I did about Rupa’s travesty of a chhokka. The phoron is tej patta, dried red chilly and panch phoron (Rupa heaped the oil with too many red chillies and slit green chilies, the last never used at this stage.) She wrongly split up the panch phoron into single units. Then, horror of horrors, she added large dollops of dahi. This is unheard of in chhokka. Then, to add insult to injury, instead of the famous panch phoron powder and asli ghee which is the final garnish, Rupa sprayed cummin powder, coriander powder and a decoration of still more slit geen chillies.

To cite the humble chhokka as a seasonal dish was bad enough — there are several more interesting seasonal Bengali dishes — then to mislead viewers with a travesty of chhokka was the final blow. Both Mrs Chatterjee and Mr Ghosh emphasised that chhokka cooks in its own juices on a very slow fire (it never needs yoghurt) and that a touch of sweet is usual. The moral of the story is, when you cook a traditional regional recipe, don’t play about with it. There are too many gourmets and class cooks watching. And you’ll get caught.

Chat shows seem to be growing as fast as the population of India. And the worst things about them are first, that they mainly feature the same old Delhi politicians and second, that one person can have two chat shows on the screen, such as The Shotgun Show and The Shotgun Shoot. I watched perhaps the most saccharine show in years with Maureen Wadia talking to Zubin Mehta. It was too, too precious for words, and made Rendezvous with Simi Garewal seem like an inquisition.

The politicians seldom bother about TV manners or style, so full are they of their own importance. And the irony of it was that while Karan Thapar has mellowed his panel got completely out of control with Sushma Swaraj shrieking as if at a market place and crudely interrupting others, including Karan. For soothing contrast, one had Sheila Dixit in a Question of Answers, cool, polite, sophisticated and making her points much more effectively than Swaraj. Our politicians clearly need lessons in TV technique.

Tail Piece: I watched the Clinton testimony like the rest of the world, but frankly found it depressing as well as revolting, perhaps because I am not a natural voyeur. I watched it more as a newsperson. I should not be surprised if Clinton gets some sympathy and support from the showing of the tapes.

75 YEARS AGO
Physician, heal thyself

THUS says an Anglo-Indian journal in the course of a leading article on “The Teaching of English in Bengal” — We imagine, however, that the trouble is not so much due to the neglect of grammar — many eminent linguists disdain the study of grammar — but to the failure to encourage the speaking and writing of simple, accurate English among the students themselves.”

One would have thought that the writer of an article, which is intended to show that the teaching of English is very defective in this country and that even fairly well-educated men and women cannot write correct English, would himself have been careful not to perpetrate an obvious solecism.

One is reminded, in this connection of the experience of the author of a pretentious textbook on grammar in the closing years of the nineteenth century, who gave to one of its chapters the heading “Babu’s English.”

The description really nettled one of the Babus, who took the author severely to task and among other things pointed out an obvious grammatical error in the very title of his book.

It is a matter of common knowledge that the rebuke had an almost immediate wholesome effect, and not only was the slip corrected in the next edition, but the heading of the chapter was changed into “Common Errors.”

We would ask the journal concerned to remember that the race of Lal Behari Deys is not wholly extinct, though undoubtedly it is true that the present generation of Indians have far more serious things to attend to than the perfection of their mastery over a foreign language.