 |
|
Fast retraction Punjab on the mat |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
P(l)ots of money Urban growth must be planned OF all the election-oriented, populist announcements made by the Haryana Cabinet on Saturday, the most unsettling one with far-reaching consequences is the decision to regularise some 1,054 unauthorised colonies in the state.
A contentious report by UN panel
An inauguration by B.K. Karkra WE are, indeed, a God-fearing and thrifty people with a high IQ. We can also take pride in the fact that we have been able to solve many intractable problems related to foodgrain production, milk, telecommunications, etc, courtesy the brilliant sons of this soil like Swaminathan, Kurien and Sam Pitroda. But among many things, both good and bad, we are also apparently a nation of bootlickers.
F-16 sale endangers peace process The US too may lose Indian goodwill Dateline Washington by Ashish Kumar Sen New Delhi’s apprehensions about the proposed sale of U.S. defence equipment to Pakistan have become cause for considerable strain in an otherwise robust U.S.-India relationship. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s administration is particularly worried about reports of an impending sale of F-16s to Pakistan. Delhi Durbar Politics of bail plea for seer A minister from Uttar Pradesh, Hari Shankar Tiwari, is said to be behind the filing of a bail petition on behalf of Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayandra Sarswati in the Supreme Court, which ran into controversy with the seer’s counsel submitting that no other lawyer had been authorised to move any petition.
|
Fast retraction Retain Modi and pay a price T HE mystery of actress Smriti Irani’s somersault over her threat to go on a fast-unto-death to demand the resignation of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi has not yet been solved. Her announcement was quite a bombshell. But faced with disciplinary action in which she could have been summarily expelled from the party, she retracted her statement. The date of her fast —December 25, the birthday of Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee — is what lent the whole episode a polemical touch. It is believed that if Mr Vajpayee had his way, he would have asked Mr Modi to quit when the inaction on the latter’s part resulted in the death of over 2,000 innocent people in one of the worst-ever riots in the country.The obvious question was whether the actress, who joined the party much after the Gujarat riots and contested unsuccessfully against Mr Kapil Sibal in Delhi, was fighting Mr Vajpayee’s battle. The former Prime Minister has scotched such rumours by stating that there was no need for Mr Modi to resign. Yet, the question will continue to boggle the mind of many as to why she made bold to speak out on Mr Modi. It is easy to find fault with her sudden pangs of conscience as Mr Modi’s continuance did not bother her when she became a member of the party’s National Executive. Whatever compelled her to retract, the point that she spoke the truth about one of the most shameful events in India could not have gone unnoticed by the discerning. Mr Modi might have won a stupendous victory in the
aftermath of the anti-Muslim pogrom but it certainly did not enhance
the prestige of either the BJP or the nation. The riots continue to
remain a blot on the secular image of the nation as had been admitted
on various platforms by the top leaders of the BJP, including party
president L.K. Advani. Of course, the party is within its rights to
retain Mr Modi as chief minister for as long as it wants but it cannot
escape from the infamy for doing so. It had to pay a heavy price for
this in the last parliamentary and subsequent Maharashtra elections.
If the party refuses to see the writing on the wall and, instead, gags
the voices of dissent, it is its sweet choice.  |
|
Punjab on the mat
THE Punjab Government's decision to remove all the Punjab Police Service
(PPS) officers from the posts meant for the Indian Police Service (IPS)
officers should be seen in the context of the latter's long fight for
justice. Apparently, the government has bowed to their demand, fearing
adverse ruling by the High Court which is hearing a contempt case against it.
It should have promptly rectified the court's order of August 9, 2004, on
cadre management, instead of dilly-dallying for narrow partisan ends. Even
though there are comprehensive rules on the posting of IPS officers, it has
been violating them with impunity. Under the rules, only an IPS officer can
be posted as a Senior SP or SP. It is mandatory for the state to seek the
Centre's prior permission to post non-cadre officers on cadre posts for a
period of three months. If the posting is for six months, the Centre should
report the matter to the Union Public Service Commission and, in the light of
the advice given by it, give suitable directions to the state concerned.
Amazingly, the state gave two hoots to this procedure. This problem is not
confined to Punjab alone. Almost every state is afflicted by this because of
the attempts by the chief ministers to politicise the administrative
machinery under their command. The situation has come to such a pass that
today the number of ex-cadre posts is more than the number of cadre posts.
Surely, if the states have no concern for cadre rules and indulge in blatant
mismanagement of the all-India services, the Centre ought to play a
leadership role and scrap such appointments after due amendments in the
rules. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has selected administrative reforms as
one of the priority areas of his government. He has often spoken about a
fixed tenure for IAS and IPS officers, especially in the districts, and their
effective cadre management. Union Minister of State for Personnel Suresh
Pachouri had spoken on similar lines at a seminar in Chandigarh on Sunday.
However, of what use are these exhortations and policy principles if they
cannot ensure their implementation even in the states ruled by their own
party? |
|
P(l)ots of money
OF all the election-oriented, populist announcements made by the Haryana Cabinet on Saturday, the most unsettling one with far-reaching
consequences is the decision to regularise some 1,054 unauthorised
colonies in the state. This comes as a blow to whatever limited
efforts are made for planned urban growth. Carving out colonies to
cash in on the ever-growing demand for housing has emerged as a
money-spinning business. Profit-minded colonisers try to commercially
exploit every inch of available land, leaving out limited space for
civic amenities. With such official blessings, the chaotic growth of
housing witnessed in towns and cities all over the region is bound to
get a boost. Making houses available at affordable rates is a
challenge in which state housing corporations and boards have
miserably failed. State agencies acquire land from farmers at cheap
rates. But because of corruption and inefficiency, the rates of plots,
houses and flats go up beyond the reach of many. The needy people turn
to private colonisers, quite often without ensuring whether their
dream houses are authorised or not. Easy availability of bank loans,
electricity and water connections helps the growth of private
colonies. By the time the state authorities wake up, it becomes
politically inconvenient to demolish illegal constructions. Such
unplanned urban growth, fuelled by increasing population pressure and
migrations from villages, creates more problems than it solves. In the
absence of an effective drainage system and sufficiently wide roads,
rainwater accumulates and traffic becomes unmanageable. The health and
educational needs of the people are often not taken into account. The
short-term gain becomes a long-term loss. The state is required to
spend heavily to clear the chaos thus created. It is, therefore,
imperative for the state governments to plan the growth of towns and
not to let private builders raise unauthorised colonies. |
|
A statesman is a politician who
places himself at the service of the nation. A politician is a
statesman who places the nation at his service. — Georges Pompidou |
A contentious report by UN panel
BY an unhappy coincidence, the much-awaited UN high-level panel report
on “Threats, Challenges and Change” came within hours after the Wall
Street Journal carried the opinion of an influential Congressman that Mr Kofi Annan should step down for his responsibility for the biggest
scandal that has ever hit the United Nations. The suggestion of the
panel that the Secretary-General should be given substantially more
latitude to manage the Secretariat, and be held accountable sounded
ominous in the circumstances. The general membership has rallied round
Mr Annan, but the timing of the allegations will have a bearing on the
discussions on the report. The report itself has enough to
complicate life for the Secretary-General and the member-states in the
coming year and beyond. With much less to chew, the UN spent a few
years to deal with Mr Boutros Ghali’s “An Agenda for Peace”, which was
the first post-Cold War effort to update the mandate of the UN. The
exercise ended with much of the Charter language being reinstated in
the Agenda, leaving Mr Boutros Ghali exasperated. Mr Ghali was accused
of harbouring ambitions to be a General rather than a
Secretary-General. With the divisive recommendations on an expansion
of the Security Council and other far-reaching recommendations across
the board, most of which require additional resources, the panel
report will be even more contentious. Chairman Anand Panyarachun’s
fear that the UN might commit “a major error” by concentrating on the
recommendation on Security Council expansion to the exclusion of other
recommendations may well prove right. The panel has lived up to the
reputation of the UN for presenting two alternatives with equal merit.
The story goes that a Head of Government once asked the UN
Secretary-General to send “one-handed” experts to his country as he
was fed up with the “on one hand — and on the other hand” kind of
recommendations. As anticipated, the panel could not, like the
relevant committee of the UN, come to an agreed formula on the
expansion of the Security Council and it resorted to presenting two
options, which have already been considered and found not to enjoy
consensus. According to the Panel, the new figure of 24 should be
arrived at either by adding six new permanent members and three new
non-permanent members or by creating a new category of eight rotating
members elected for four years, with the possibility of renewal and
one new non-permanent member. Either way, the four regions — Africa,
Asia and the Pacific, Europe and Americas — will end up with six
members each in the council. As for the criteria for new permanent
members, it is suggested that the top three financial contributors,
top three voluntary contributors or top three troop contributors
should be considered. The panel is strongly opposed to the veto, but
realises that there is no way to abolish the existing veto. It appeals
to the veto-wielding members to refrain from using the veto to the
extent possible and suggests an “indicative voting” without counting
the veto first and then a second formal vote with the veto in
play. It remains to be seen whether one of the two recommendations
will gain greater acceptability as they have been short-listed by the
panel, but if the debate of the last 25 years (India mooted the
expansion first in 1979) is any indicator, no consensus is likely to
emerge on either of the two. A region-wise election of six permanent
members, even with the guidance given by the panel, will be an
impossible task. The rotation idea, which is likely to enjoy greater
support, would be categorically rejected by the aspirants to permanent
membership. In fact, External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh has
fired the first salvo by indicating that the new permanent members
should have the veto. The battlelines are clearly drawn and it is
quite likely that the whole debate will open up again and all
proposals will come back on the table, thus putting the clock back.
Permanent members will agree to use the veto with restraint, but will
not accept the “indicative voting”, which will only highlight their
use of the veto to secure their point of view. The panel’s other 100
recommendations have the merit of being within the realm of
possibility except for the vast resources required at a time of strict
enforcement of zero growth budgets. Its main contention that security
is the shared responsibility for all is not new, but the argument that
a threat to one State is a threat to all will be hard for many to
digest. The list of old and new threats to international security is
comprehensive and the chilling prospect of a nuclear or biological
attack by terrorists must cause grave concern. But the panel’s brave
attempt to spell out the elements of a definition of terrorism will be
dissected again and possibly discarded as inadequate. The
Secretary-General’s optimism that the governments will give up their
arguments about the use of armed forces against civilians and the
right of people to resist foreign occupation does seem wishful
thinking. The panel has done well to delineate the conditions in
which force could be used either to resolve or prevent violence, but
in the context of the Iraq war, which the panel unequivocally
criticises, some countries are not likely to accept them. Humanitarian
intervention is a concept that many small countries dread. Many of Mr
Boutros Ghali’s suggestions have been revived to strengthen the
peacekeeping and peace-building capability of the UN. Those who did
not like the idea of placing its forces at the disposal of the UN in
1993 may not do so readily in 2005. The various suggestions regarding
the setting up of new institutions, offices and funds (Peacebuilding
Commission, a second Deputy Secretary-General, more capabilities for
mediation, etc.) will be drastically amended by the budgetary
authorities of the major contributors. A useful compilation of the UN
action so far in several areas and the way forward in each will be a
good guide for the various inter-governmental bodies to proceed with
further action. An unfortunate development from India’s point of view
is that Kashmir is repeatedly mentioned as a festering conflict with a
potential threat to international peace and security on the same level
as Palestine and the Korean peninsula. On one occasion, Kashmir comes
even before Palestine. The long period of relative peace in the valley
after India had taken the issue to the Security Council appears to
have been forgotten and terrorism in Kashmir finds no mention in the
panel’s exhaustive review of the phenomenon. Doubtless, the panel
report will be analysed by governments, NGOs, lawyers, students and
the civil society in the months to come and a special summit in
September 2005 will adopt a set of decisions, based on the report. For
those who have been through “An Agenda for Peace” exercise, it will be
déjà vu, but many of them have disappeared from the scene. UN reform
is cyclical in nature and reform often simply codifies whatever has
been done at times of crises. Neither the Charter nor the dearth of
resources has stood in the way of drastic action on occasions like
9/11. The merit of the Charter is that it is resilient enough to bow
to the will of the international community. Outdated concepts and
nomenclatures have remained in the Charter without any damage to the
credibility of the United Nations. Unless the panel’s recommendations
on an expansion of the Security Council gain acceptability, it will go
down in history as another well-intentioned and well-written document
by worthy individuals, who contributed their mite to the betterment of
the United Nations and the world, but did not make much of a
difference to the ways of the world. — The writer, a former
ambassador, has represented India at the UN in New York, Nairobi and
Vienna |
An inauguration by B.K. Karkra W E are, indeed, a God-fearing and thrifty people with a high IQ. We can also take pride in the fact that we have been able to solve many intractable problems related to foodgrain production, milk, telecommunications, etc, courtesy the brilliant sons of this soil like Swaminathan, Kurien and Sam Pitroda. But among many things, both good and bad, we are also apparently a nation of bootlickers. Far too many inaugurations and too little action on the ground provide a testimony to this trait. Here is the story of one such inauguration in the capital of the country.A VIP was coming to the area to inaugurate, of all things, a garbage bin! The invitation to him was justified on the ground that a bin of an entirely new pattern was being introduced. A few municipal officials were lined up there with marigold garlands in their hands. Some onlookers also stood at the scene half-confused and half amused. There was a shamiana on the spot where items like gulab jamuns, chhaina murgi (cubes of cheese with sugar coating) and cashew nuts were already laid while jalebis, samosas and pakoras were waiting for the news about the VIP as these were intended to be served hot. The people in the gathering who hoped to join the feast were sticking to the site steadfastly, whereas the other collected mere out of curiosity were just coming and going. The VIP was already late by a couple of hours. At long last, when his cavalcade was spotted, the officials swung into action. A newspaper was shredded and the pieces scattered on the ground. After being felicitated with garlands and artificial smiles, he was handed over a broom to clean the area of the pieces of paper and then to deposit these ceremonially in the bin. The VIP rather made a good job of all this. An amused spectator appreciatively remarked that that was what the man should have been normally doing. The pungency of the remark was not lost on the officials who heard him. They gave him a caustic look, but soon got busy in the more important task of carrying a jug of water, a washbasin and a towel to the VIP to enable him to wash and wipe his hands. Something was now needed to be said about the municipal
officials who had so painstakingly arranged the show. This comment was
also not very late in coming. Someone from among the spectators
suggested that the VIP should sweep these fellows also into the bin as
garbage. Their jaw momentarily fell over this public reaction. But
they soon realised that their career needed the blessings of the VIP,
and the wretched public really did not matter. So, they happily left
for the dining table behind the VIP. |
F-16 sale endangers peace process The US too may lose Indian goodwill Dateline Washington by Ashish Kumar Sen
N ew Delhi’s apprehensions about the proposed sale of U.S. defence equipment to Pakistan have become cause for considerable strain in an otherwise robust U.S.-India relationship.Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s administration is particularly worried about reports of an impending sale of F-16s to Pakistan. While External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh told members of Parliament last week that the Bush administration had assured New Delhi “no decision (on the F-16s) has been taken and is not imminent,” South Asia analysts say the sale is likely to go through in the near future. The sale of the fighter jets is “very likely to be announced soon,” said Sunil Khilnani, director of the South Asia Studies Program at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies in Washington. “We’re talking about a sale made long ago, and this is merely the delivery of these planes - it is debatable to what extent it is really militarily significant,” he said. “The timing is curious, but I suppose (U.S. President George) Bush feels he has to reward (Pakistan President Pervez) Musharraf.” Anupam Srivastava, co-director of the South Asia Program at the Center for International Trade and Security at the University of Georgia, said the Pentagon was determined “that if supply of major armaments, including F-16s, is what will be critical to securing Pakistani support on the Afghan front, then such sales should go forward, notwithstanding Indian protests.” An Indian Embassy official in Washington maintained the Bush administration “has told us that as far as F-16s are concerned … that particular part of the arms package is still on the table.” On November 16, the Defence Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) notified the U.S. Congress of a possible sale to Pakistan of six PHALANX Close-In Weapon Systems (CIWS), 2,000 TOW-2A missiles, 14 TOW-2A Fly-to-Buy missiles and eight P-3C aircraft with T-56 engines as well as associated equipment and services. The Indian Embassy official said New Delhi was opposed to the “entire [arms] package for Pakistan… it’s not just about the F-16s.” Senior Singh administration officials have warned the Bush administration against the sale saying it could endanger the peace process between New Delhi and Islamabad and may also cost the U.S. Indian goodwill. U.S. Defence Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was in New Delhi on Thursday where he tried to allay these concerns in meetings with senior Indian officials. “The Indian leadership has correctly reminded the U.S. government that sales of weapon systems such as F-16s are inadvisable, given that they are inherently unsuitable for employment in counter-insurgency operations on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border,” said Dr Srivastava. “As happened with the transfer of U.S. arms to Pakistan during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, such weapons will ultimately be deployed against India,” he added. According to the DSCA notification, the proposed sale will contribute to “the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that continues to be a key ally in the global war on terrorism.” Prof Khilnani said India should “react coolly, making clear its displeasure, but not really making a big issue of it.” “It doesn’t really threaten us, especially if we get the Patriot systems,” he added. The Bush administration has offered India top-of-the-line military hardware including the Patriot anti-missile system, C-130 stretched medium lift transport aircraft and P-3C Orion maritime surveillance planes. Ambassador Teresita C. Schaffer, director for South Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said the F-16s are “symbolically very important” to Pakistan. “The Pakistani F-16 fleet has suffered from lack of spares and replacements, but mostly, it’s because that was the big sale that was blocked in 1990.” In 1990, Washington halted the delivery of 28 F-16s it had previously promised to Pakistan, citing Islamabad’s inability to meet U.S. requirements that it did not have a “nuclear explosive device.” Pakistan was later reimbursed for the undelivered jets. The DSCA notification assured members of the U.S. Congress the sale of this equipment to Pakistan would not affect the basic military balance in the region. In a recent interview with CNN, Gen. Musharraf said Pakistan sought “a balance in our region to be maintained in the conventional weapons. Now, in that balance, there is some imbalance which is being created because of the purchases being done by the Indian forces.” In New Delhi, Mr Natwar Singh assured the Parliament “that in case of U.S. arms supply to Pakistan, the UPA government will not hesitate to take steps to ensure that our defence preparedness is not compromised in any way.” These remarks have raised concern about the possibility of an arms race breaking out in the subcontinent. Mrs Schaffer said the likelihood of this happening depended on two things - “whether they (India and Pakistan) start making some progress in their peace talks, and money.” “Pakistan’s desired purchases come to much more money than the $300 million/year that the U.S. is prepared to finance under its aid package. Pakistan has not tried to match India’s increases in the defence budget, but there’s always an element of competition,” she added. Mrs Schaffer
noted that India will be unhappy with the U.S. if it concludes a major
transaction with Pakistan, “but India will make its decision on peace
talks with Pakistan based on its interests in Pakistan, not based on
any pique with the U.S.” |
|
Delhi Durbar Politics of bail plea for seer A minister from Uttar Pradesh, Hari Shankar Tiwari, is said to be behind the filing of a bail petition on behalf of Kanchi Shankaracharya Jayandra Sarswati in the Supreme Court, which ran into controversy with the seer’s counsel submitting that no other lawyer had been authorised to move any petition.Advocate A P N Giri, who filed the petition in the name of Shankaracharya, was specially deputed from UP to move the apex court by Tiwari, MLA from Gorakhpur. According to the grapevine, Tiwari is acting at the behest of U P Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav, who is perhaps working on a bigger plan. If Mulaym succeeds in securing the release of the seer from jail, he hopes to reap a rich political dividend of Hindu votes. Venkaiah’s legacy Venkaiah Naidu may not be at the helm of the BJP. But his imprint was evident in the arrangements made for the conference of Finance Ministers of BJP-ruled states in the Capital last week at his 30, Aurangazeb Road residence. The conference was inaugurated by Jaswant Singh. Although Naidu was not in the Capital, the setting in the conference hall, the pandals and food (typical South Indian snacks and dishes arranged from a popular South India food chain) was a reminder of the arrangements that used to be when Naidu was the President of the party. This prompted one journalist to quip “Naidu may be out, his legacy remains.” Problem of height Although Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee stands tall in Indian politics, he had a problem of height recently when Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov was in town. The lectern kept in front of the two ministers during the joint press conference turned out to be much higher than would be comfortable for Mr Mukherjee and actually had the Russian minister towering over him. However, the displeasure shown my Mr Mukherjee had its desired effect on the next occasion when US Secretary for Defence Donald Rumsfeld visited New Delhi recently. The staff in charge of preparations for the joint press conference actually raised the rostrum from where Mr Mukherjee was to stand alongside Rumsfeld, ensuring that this time he was seen adequately by his audience. Advani favours Uma’s return Against the wishes of second-rung leaders, L.K. Advani seems keen on revoking the suspension of Uma Bharti from the party. He would have revoked the suspension last week itself, but for a story in a weekly about a letter, allegedly written by her, in which she has vented her anger on the second-rung leaders. A website or cobweb? The official website of Jharkhand continues to show the list of MPs of the 13th Lok Sabha, making a visitor wonder why it has not been updated even six months after the general election. Possibly, the BJP mandarins want to maintain the illusion of the party’s glorious past, forcing an opposition leader to comment: “It is not a website, but a cobweb”. — Contributed by S.S. Negi,
S Satyanarayanan, Anita Katyal and Satish Misra |
Do not avoid the man who tells you in harsh words what you must not do. Do not avoid the man who administers reproofs. If you are intelligent, you will follow him like you would the one, who leads you to hidden treasure. —The Buddhism The pure at heart are innocent of the meannesses of the world. Purity sustains their belief in God. God reveals Himself to those who believe in Him unconditionally. Innocence is a great pathway for reaching God. Small pettinesses and large greeds Are boulders and chasms on this path. —The Bhagvad Gita Look at the lovely white mansions of the king. Every one of them bears his coats of arms. Even a king needs to identify his dwelling for the easy understanding of his subjects. —The
Mahabharata |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
