 |
|
|
Hooda
must stand up Buta Singh again |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tackling terrorists
Saving Taj from Mayawati
Left-handed teaset and Hitler
Sumit Ganguly may join
US intelligence body US — China Strategic Competition Chatterati
From the pages of
|
Hooda must stand up As
if the bad blood between members of different castes after the murder
of a Jat youth in Gohana, followed by the torching of the houses of
several Dalits in retaliation, was not alarming enough, the khaps and
maha-panchayats have vitiated the atmosphere even further. One such “sarvkhap” has now served an ultimatum on the Bhupinder Singh Hooda government to withdraw the cases filed against 23 persons on the charge of torching over 50 houses of Dalits by September 20. The ominous “withdraw or else …” tone is unmistakeably an ultimatum and must be treated with contempt. Succumbing to caste pressures will amount to dereliction of duty by the state government. A serious crime has been committed and the suspects cannot be let off only to please some self-styled caste leaders. What these elders must realise is that those belonging to other communities can also indulge in similar blackmail tactics. In other words, all those criminals who are supported strongly by their respective kinsmen will go scot-free. That is an unacceptable situation, whichever way one looks at it. Rule of law and not that of casteist khaps should prevail. Unfortunately, the governments often succumb to such pressures. Politicians look at everything through an electoral prism and are willing to do whatever helps them garner votes. The temptation can be all the stronger in the Rohtak area because of the forthcoming election. All right-thinking persons would expect the state government not to succumb to such sectarian pressure and act in a fair and upright manner. As it is, various community leaders have discredited themselves by issuing patently illegal and unethical orders. If at one place, they have tried to make a legally wedded man and woman to live like brother and sister just because they were thought to be from the same “gotra”, at another, they have ordered a woman raped by her father-in-law to abandon her husband because now he was like her son! It is high time persons peddling such quixotic drivel are shown their rightful place. These extra-constitutional authorities have no place in today’s society. |
|
Buta Singh again The Election Commission has rightly ordered the status quo on the appointments made by Bihar Governor Buta Singh to various commissions and committees of the state government on the ground that these were in gross violation of the commission’s model code of conduct. In the normal course, the Governor (or the Chief Minister, as the case may be) is empowered to make such appointments in the exercise of his powers, but certainly, not when the state is in the election mode and the code of conduct comes into force. It is a pity that in his eagerness to please the RJD chief, Mr Laloo Prasad Yadav, the Governor, though being a constitutional authority, threw to the wind his main responsibility of abiding by the code of conduct laid down by another constitutional body — the Election Commission. Mr Buta Singh’s argument that the commission has been kept informed about the appointments does not stand the test of legal scrutiny because these appointments were notified only on September 3, much after the code of conduct had come into effect. Actually, the commission ordered the status quo on these appointments only after having received a report from a two-member probe team that it had deputed to Patna. Unfortunately, Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda has also been faulted by the Election Commission for not following the code. Only the other day, he was charged with violating the code for issuing the August 25 advertisement regarding the Rajiv Gandhi scholarship scheme and appointment of consultants for setting up a Rajiv Gandhi education city at Sonepat. And now comes the charge that he has sanctioned Rs 5 lakh out of his discretionary fund to a girls’ school in Rohtak from where his son is contesting a byelection on September 28. Why do the constitutional authorities fail to understand that if the code is not enforced strictly, free and fair elections are impossible? Clearly, as the commission has pointed out, the officials of Bihar and Haryana too need to be blamed for their failure to convince their superiors of the need to enforce the code firmly. They can be questioned. |
|
Tackling
terrorists The Memorandum of Understanding signed last week between India and China for cooperation on fighting terrorism, besides working together on many other issues, is significant. It can go a long way in handling the highly complicated problem, which has global dimensions. The agreement provides for the security agencies of the two countries to not only share information but also coordinate with each other on how to deal with terrorism effectively at regional and international levels. The MoU, finalised during Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil’s three-day visit to China that ended last Friday, is important for various reasons. China has agreed with India that cooperation to eliminate the scourge has acquired urgency. It has ceased to be the problem of any one country or region. China’s wholehearted involvement in the anti-terrorism drive has its own significance as it is the only country, besides the US, which can make Pakistan —- from where the monster continues to get maximum sustenance —- dismantle the terrorist infrastructure that still exists there. The India-China MoU is also a measure of the slowly but surely developing friendly relations between the two Asian giants. Both need each other not only for their own peace and economic progress but also for promoting Asian and global efforts in many areas. Moreover, there may be realisation in Beijing that closer India-China cooperation in various areas can enable it to considerably neutralise the impact of Washington’s keenness to increase its influence in Asia at the cost of China. Border and China’s help to Pakistan in military and nuclear areas continue to remain problems, but the MoU shows that New Delhi and Beijing are displaying greater trust in each other than before. That is how it ought to be between the two neighbours. |
|
The greatest gift of any statesman rests not in knowing what concessions to make, but recognising when to make them.
— Prince Metternich
|
Saving Taj from Mayawati The Chief Vigilance
Commissioner's report to the Supreme Court regarding the prosecution of Ms Mayawati in the Taj corridor case has once again brought to sharp focus the issue of corruption in our public life. The question whether Ms Mayawati or any other individual is guilty of wrong-doings or not would be settled by the courts of law in due course. But the case has another important aspect: the basic infirmity of our democracy. Unfortunately, little attention is being paid to this by the nation. Let me elaborate. The Taj corridor project envisaged reclamation of about 30 hectares of land from the Yamuna bed in the area lying between Taj Mahal and Agra Fort, and construction a food and shopping plaza, amusement park, Appu Ghar and other buildings there. It was given out by the U.P. government that this project, which attracted wide public attention in June-September, 2003, was a part of a scheme which had the approval of the Union Ministry of Environment and the Planning Commission and for which 50 per cent of the cost (Rs 600 crore) would be met from the Central funds. The project of interfering with the natural flow of the Yamuna and construction of buildings behind the Taj was inherently unsound and environmentally untenable. But the Uttar Pradesh government’s response to the queries raised in this regard was vague. The reply of the Ministry of Environment, too, was not of much help; it would not go beyond saying that it had not sanctioned any such project. What I saw at the site was shocking beyond belief. There were scores of bulldozers, trucks and other machines inside the bed and a huge quantity of stones, clay and bricks had been stored nearby. Strong disapproval of what was going on was conveyed to the local officials who accompanied me to the site. They could not give any satisfactory reply to the question as to how a massive development-cum-construction work could be undertaken in the area falling within the prohibited zone of two “protected” monuments, the Taj and Agra Fort, without obtaining specific approval of the Agra Development Authority, the Archaeological Survey of India and other agencies concerned. All that they could say was that the entire matter was being handled at the state government’s level. The state government and the Environment Ministry were told to get the work stopped. After holding out a promise to look into the alleged wrong-doing in sanctioning the project, releasing the first instalment of Rs.17 crore and getting the work commenced without even calling competitive tenders, Ms Mayawati suddenly called a Press conference and announced that she had demanded from the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minster that I should be removed from the Union Cabinet forthwith. The issue assumed the form of a serious national controversy, particularly because the BJP and Ms. Mayawati’s party, the Bahujan Samaj Party, were coalition partners in the state government. I stuck to my stand. The controversy ultimately led to the fall of the Mayawati government and the abandonment of the project. Thus the Taj, India’s most famous monument, whom Rabindra Nath Tagore described as “a tear-drop on the face of eternity”, was saved from being ravished. Ms. Mayawati, however, saw to it that in the parliamentary elections held shortly afterwards the followers of her party worked and voted against me. The intelligentsia, which had warmly applauded my stand during the period of the controversy, remained passive and did nothing to support me electorally, proving once again that in our country right-thinking persons do not assert themselves at the hustings and forget that “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”. Separately, in a case, M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India which had been under the consideration of the Supreme Court since 1984 and in which a number of orders were passed by the court from time to time, the issue relating to the reclamation of land from the bed of the Yamuna was also raised. The court was incensed over what the U.P. government had done and ordered the CBI to probe the case. This aspect of the case is still pending in the Supreme Court. It is a tragedy of the Indian democracy that, while enlightened sections of the people show only skin-deep commitment to good causes, the unsavoury elements, with a narrow outlook, are mobilising large groups of voters, with non-discriminating minds, and exploiting them in the name of caste, creed and community. Consequently, an unhealthy pattern of polity is fast emerging in the country. No wonder, our institutions are malfunctioning, corruption in public life is increasing and even criminals are entering our legislatures in a large number. In 2004, as many as 100 persons with criminal records became members of the Lok Sabha and Transparency International ranked India 90th in the annual global corruption index. The country is crying for a fundamental change — a change that would bring creative, constructive, committed and compassionate persons in the forefront of our public life and place the levers of power-structure of the state in their hands. Unfortunately, no one in our national leadership is applying his or her mind to bring about this change. It is not only political but also intellectual, cultural and social leadership that is failing the nation. Will the leadership wake up to its responsibilities before it is too late? For the elimination of corruption and other maladies afflicting our polity, what matters most is the moral and social climate of a country. If this climate is healthy, dry and dirty bushes would not come about. The soil would support greener pastures which would throw up upright and earnest people who in turn would choose upright and earnest leaders. One would reinforce the virtues of the other. And the nation would move from clean to cleaner public life, from strength and stability to greater strength and stability. It is this issue of a moral climate that has been totally ignored by the state and society. That is why, despite government’s “humming” and “hawing”, legislatures passing several laws and the judiciary’s frequent angry outbursts, the caravan of corruption has gone on, daily swelling its ranks, adding to its length and breadth, front and rear. n The writer is a former Union Minister.
|
Left-handed teaset and Hitler
Naturally enough many stories which gain currency about the top leader of a country end up in a manner very complimentary to him (or her). Sometime, however, a stray one is of a different variety. Talking to Hitler once, Goebbels said that while he agreed fully with the national policy that the Jews deserved to be wiped out, they had the quality of quick thinking of which use could possibly be made. “I do not at all agree with such nonsense,” was Hitler’s cold response. “Spare a little time and I shall show you what I mean”, countered Goebbels. He then took Hitler to a chinaware shop run by a German, and asked to be shown a left-handed teaset. The proprietor looked most puzzled and said he had never heard of such a set. Two other German shopkeepers gave the same answer to a similar request. The next shop was that of a Jew. He thought for a fraction of a second and then beamed: “How very fortunate, Sir”, he said, “I received one after waiting for months”. He turned to bring it out from the store. (He had decided to place a normal teaset on a tray with the handle of each of the items on it rotated to the left). At this Goebbels hurriedly made an excuse to say he had changed his mind about buying the set and walked out of the shop. He looked at Hitler and enquired if he saw the point he (Goebbels) was making. Hitler’s reaction was of puzzled surprise. “What is the big deal? It was pure chance that the last shop had what you wanted”. Goebbels said nothing more. Discretion, he realised, lay in silence. Sometimes no doubt a very thin line divides speed on the uptake and plain sharp practice. A dealer in spectacles was explaining his pricing policy to a close friend. “When a customer likes a pair and asks its price I look steadily at his face and say ‘15 dollars’. If he does not flinch I add “for the frame”. If he still does not flinch, I go on to say. “And 15 dollars for the lenses”. If he retains his composure even now, I say “Each”. So the price range is between 15 dollars and 45 dollars depending upon what can be said to be the flinch-level of the customer! Invited to a party to celebrate the golden marriage anniversary of a friend, four men of different nationalities had to decide on the gifts they would want to offer on the occasion. One of them chose a gold coin; another was content with presenting a goldfish. The third’s mind ran to a packet of Gold Flake cigarettes. The fourth beat the others completely: he took with him to the party his friend called “Goldberg”. |
Sumit Ganguly may join
US intelligence body
Sumit Ganguly, a professor of political science who occupies the Rabindranath Tagore chair of Indian Cultures and Civilizations at Indiana University in Bloomington, is tipped for a job at the newly constituted South Asia Bureau of the National Intelligence Council, which advises the President and oversees the US intelligence apparatus. Prof. Ganguly declined to comment on rumours of his impending appointment. But, stressing that he was speaking merely as an academic, he discussed recent developments in the U.S.-India relationship and the challenges that lie ahead. Excerpts: Q: Some members of the United States Congress argue that President George W. Bush’s nuclear agreement with India rewards “irresponsible behavior.” How would you respond? A: India was never part of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so there is no question of rewarding anyone’s behavior. India has steadfastly opposed the non-proliferation regime, so the notion that it is violating any principle only exists in the overworked minds of members of the non-proliferation community. Q: There is concern among the “nonproliferation ayatollahs” that the deal will encourage other nuclear states — specifically China and Russia — to proliferate nuclear technology. A: This is a unique deal because India has agreed to separate its civilian nuclear facilities from its military facilities. Whether or not it can actually do so is an open question. But India should be given an opportunity to do it. India’s behavior has been exemplary. It has not peddled nuclear wares to the world unlike its neighbor to the west. There is also evidence that India rebuffed offers of oil from Iran and Libya in return for Indian nuclear assistance. Unless other countries can demonstrate a similar record they don’t fall into the category that India falls into. Q: Do you foresee a tough battle ahead for Congressional approval? A: Yes, I’m afraid I do. Q: How must the Bush administration go about making its case to Congress? A: Unless the Bush administration makes a concerted effort it is likely to be embarrassed and this can be an embarrassment to the administration of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh as well, who has come under criticism from the irresponsible Left and the opportunistic Right. Q: Should the Bush administration have taken members of Congress into confidence prior to the initiative? A: In all likelihood they did it (rushed the deal through) deliberately. If you had given them three months to attack it would have been like shooting fish in a barrel. People who are opposed to this deal would have had a field day. So, in a sense, the administration was quite deft in a strange kind of way. But it would have been nice if they had taken my senator (Senator Richard Lugar, Indiana Republican) into confidence. (Mr Lugar chairs the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee whose approval is vital for the deal to become a reality. According to congressional sources, Mr Lugar is upset he had not been consulted.) Q: Are you optimistic about this deal becoming a reality? A: In a sense I am compelled to be optimistic because I see it as a turning point in the Indo-U.S. relationship. If the U.S. is genuinely serious in working with India as a major and emerging power rather than mouthing platitudes, then this deal really does need to go through. I am more than aware of the odds. But those who are opposing the deal fail to recognise the growing importance of India to the American foreign policy calculus. Where were the howls of outrage from the nonproliferation zealots when (Pakistan President Pervez) Musharraf only tapped Abdul Qadeer Khan (after revelations of aiding widespread proliferation) on the wrist and promptly proceeded to pardon him? There is this twisted logic that people have resorted to suggest that A.Q. Khan was an independent agent. Q: Would India’s decision to go ahead on a gas pipeline with Iran have any ramifications? A: Probably. There are people in the Bush administration who take an extremely jaundiced view of Iran and have an unrelenting hostility toward the Iranian regime. But the gas pipeline is a completely pragmatic deal between India and Iran. The U.S. on occasion has dealt with perfectly unsavory regimes and continues to do so. The hardheaded policymakers in Washington should understand that the pipeline venture is not an Indian endorsement of the Iranian regime but a cruel recognition of India’s energy needs. Those who criticize this deal need to suggest viable options for India. Minister of External Affairs Natwar Singh’s statements in Tehran smacked of an earlier period of Indian diplomacy. This was a time when India sought to comment on matters of little direct consequence to its immediate national interests and needlessly piqued the United States and other key Western powers. Q: There are suggestions that if India were to engage in this deal with Iran it would bring Tehran out of diplomatic isolation and open a channel of communication which could be beneficial to Washington in times like the ongoing nuclear crisis. A: That is a distinct possibility. |
|
US — China Strategic Competition During a recent visit to Australia to attend the annual Australian-American
Leadership Dialogue in Sydney, Richard Armitage, until recently deputy secretary of state, expounded at length on the theme. Even though his primary focus was on the Australia-US dialogue, it was nevertheless couched in regional terms. He highlighted how the “whole centre of gravity in the world” was shifting to Asia with the rise of China and India. Against this backdrop, he cautioned Australia against cozying up too much to China. “If I were Australian…and I was beginning to feel the tectonic plates move a bit by the ascension of China and the ascension of India, then I think I would opt on the side of ‘maybe I’ll just keep this security alliance (with the US) a while longer’, because ultimately that’s the guarantor that Australians will continue to enjoy their lifestyle.” The United States must be fairly worried, if it feels that it has to remind Australia to hang on with it lest China gobble it up along the way. More importantly, it shows how much the level of strategic competition with China is heating up all the time. As Armitage put it bluntly, his country was in a “very active competition” with China for influence in the Pacific, and that “we’re not doing very well.” It is not just the Asia-Pacific region where the United States is being challenged. China and Russia are also actively seeking to eject the United States from Central Asia. The entire region is now a refurbished version of the 19th century Great Game played out between Tsarist Russia and the British Empire. Instead of the British Empire, we now have a reinvigorated and emboldened China (backed by Russia) staking its claims to the region. And the Game now has even higher stakes because of the potential oil and gas bonanza. The US oil conglomerates would like to pump oil and gas though an intricate network of pipelines through Afghanistan, to Pakistan and India and beyond the Indian Ocean; and from Azerbaijan, through Georgia, to the Turkish Mediterranean coast. It is a high stakes game in a very volatile region. China and Russia are using the Shanghai Co-operation Organization, which includes the four former Soviet republics, to transform the region into their own backyard. China’s economy is growing at a frantic speed. It has its dangers but that is another story. What is relevant here is that it is creating a rush for scarce global resources, particularly oil and gas, between China and the United States. Returning to the Asia-Pacific region, the exclusion of the United States from the East Asia Summit, scheduled to meet in Kuala Lumpur in December, is a serious blow. It is difficult to imagine the United States being left out of an important regional Asia-Pacific forum, when it is a significant political, military and economic presence in the region. Richard Armitage is worried at his country’s exclusion from the inaugural East Asia Summit. He, therefore, has suggested that Australia should represent US views at the conference. It doesn’t look like Canberra would be too keen to play the US proxy, having worked hard to secure an invitation to the Summit. Will China translate its Taiwan threat into practice? Not in the near future, considering that the United States is standing by its commitment to defend Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act. And this not withstanding the new bonhomie between China and Russia as evidenced in their bilateral military exercises. But it will keep up the pressure all round to wear out Taiwan and the United States. |
|
Chatterati
The capital was flooded when the Bollywood Khans decided to play host to page 3. The occasion was the launch of Mrs Feroz Khan’s boutique. Unlike many openings, this one was on time. Son Fardeen Khan’s fiancé Natasha Madhvani, daughter of yesteryears’ bombshell Mumtaz, was present. So was sis-in-law Zarine Khan, with jewellery designer daughter Farah Khan, and son, actor Zahed Khan with a really weird hair-do. Designer Tarun Tahilani thought it was a good collection with flowing cuts. The next day was Farah Khan’s fashion show of jewellery. The guest list was the same. Some of the jewellery was nice. Prices? Don’t even start guessing. Its Bollywood, my dears. Where there is more moolah than brains.
Crossed swords The rare occasions that people from the small state of Himachal Pradesh make it to the top of national institutions, are always cause for cheer. Dr. Anil Wilson is one of these. After a stint at HP University Wilson became one of the more celebrated principals of the country when he took over as principal of the renowned St. Stephens College. Wilson just narrowly survived pressure to resign on account of an out of turn admission to a Chandni Chowk jewellers’ ward. Crossing swords with the church establishment is a dangerous thing. Though institutions run by minority communities deserve both praise and support, their independence makes them a target for pressures and accusations. Though the controversy has now blown over, with Wilson having offered to withdraw his resignation, the entire tussle provoked emotions and raised controversies. Drawing teachers into the line of battle is an unfortunate fall out of this fight, and now the number of those taking sides has only increased. Church officials will have to move very quickly to insure that St. Stephens does not fall into the same trap a prominent Mumbai college fell into when a TV sting exposed corruption and connivance in matters of admission.
Lawyer Cherie UK’s first lady Cherie Blair had such a hectic schedule here, including a luncheon interaction with women journalists. Her dreams as a little girl were to fall in love with an Indian prince and to be Britain’s first lady Prime Minister. Well, she hasn’t done too badly. Cherie wears many hats in fact. Those of a distinguished human rights lawyer and a social activist ensure that her cup of responsibilities is brimming full. A lady who minces no words, she urged both the nations to work towards empowerment of women. She floored a rapt audience including the Chief Justice of India and Attorney General Soli Sorabjee with her speech, which was peppered with references to land mark cases in Indian legal history. She took time off to visit the Loomba Trust, a charity created by UK based businessman Raj Loomba, of which she is president. This trust supports widows in India who do not have social security back up. She sent her security into a spin when she decided to make a hasty and unscheduled visit to the Supreme Court. Well, obviously the profession comes first for her.
|
|
July 6, 1905 OFFICIAL INDIFFERENCE It is significant that side by side with the great efforts that are being made in England to rouse British conscience o the unaccountable indifference of the Government of India to the ravages of plague in India a serious dispute is going on between the Bombay Municipal Corporation and the Local and Supreme Government on the latter’s decision that no further assistance would be granted to the Corporation from Imperial Revenues towards plague expenditure. The Corporation has resolved to address a memorial to the Secretary of State for India protesting against the Governments, which had declared the suppression of plague in Bombay an Imperial necessity, have lately laid down that they would assist those Municipalities only which are practically bankrupt, which principle is open to the altar of those that are bankrupt. In proposing the resolution the Hon’ble Mr Rahmatullah showed that the incidence of taxation per head in Bombay (1792 pice) was higher than in Calcutta (1152 pice) and Madras (396 pice). |
Real happiness is not dependent on external things. The pond is fed from within. The kind of happiness that stays with you is the happiness that springs from inward thoughts and emotions. You must cultivate your mind if you wish to achieve enduring happiness. —Book of quotations on Happiness Friend, the more I live the more I learn. —Ramkrishna Our world stands on the foundation of our thoughts. —The Buddha Never curse your life or your problems. These are challenges meant to sharpen your abilities. Without them, you would be just like a stone or some deadwood. Be happy that you have a challenge to prove your worth. —Book of quotations on Hinduism
|
| 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 | |
