 |
|
To RS from anywhere Iran’s No |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Bullet of destiny It pierces India’s hockey hopes THE bullet that accidentally injured drag-flicker Sandeep Singh has in a way wounded every Indian hockey lover. At a time when the country was trying hard to elbow itself out of the hole in which it has dumped itself — it finished 10th in the last World Cup in Kuala Lumpur — Sandeep Singh was about the best hope that it had.
Road ahead for N-deal
On the wings of “Bole So
Nihal”
Why grow rice? Shed passive approach to security Victory elusive in modern war and politics
|
To RS from anywhere Tuesday’s
Supreme Court ruling upholding the constitutional validity of amendments to the Representation of People Act that dispensed with the domicile requirement for members and secret ballot for elections to the Rajya Sabha (in August 2003) is significant. It is bound to cheer up over 50 MPs whose election (in violation of the domicile clause) was subject to the outcome of this case. The five-judge Constitution Bench consisting of Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice S.H. Kapadia, Justice C.K. Thakker and Justice P.K. Balasubrahmanyan has settled the law on the domicile requirement once and for all by ruling that a contestant for the Rajya Sabha may stand for election from any state. It rejected the public interest litigation, filed by Mr Kuldip Nayar and Mr Inder Jit, seeking quashing of the amendments on the ground that these were unconstitutional. Significantly, the apex court maintained that the amendments neither violated the basic structure of the Constitution nor disturbed the balance of power between the Centre and the states. Even though the Rajya Sabha is the Council of States, the principle of federalism is not “territory-related”. It ruled that residence or domicile is not the “essential ingredient” of the structure and composition of the Rajya Sabha and hence it cannot be regarded as a constitutional requirement. The Rajya Sabha is designed to serve as a chamber where the states and the Union of India are represented, but the Upper House does not act as a champion of local interests, the court observed. Equally important is the court upholding the open ballot system in indirect elections. If Parliament’s aim is to wipe out the evils of corruption and protect party discipline, what is wrong with open ballot, it asked, apparently preferring to transparency, to the principle of secret voting. Moreover, the Constitution has specifically provided for secret voting for the election of President and Vice-President and left it to Parliament to decide on elections to the Rajya Sabha, it said. On the whole, it is a forward-looking judgement. The Supreme Court, being the custodian of the Constitution, has recognised Parliament’s right to amend laws to define the kind of federal polity the country is to have.
|
|
Iran’s No THE much-awaited Iranian response to the UN Security Council’s demand that Teheran should suspend its uranium enrichment programme by August 31 or face economic sanctions has created a tricky situation. In its 23-page letter Iran has rejected the offer of incentives, including civilian nuclear cooperation, in exchange for abandoning its nuclear power programme. At the same time, it has come out with counter-proposals for further talks but under a “new formula”. Reports suggest that Iran may agree to a suspension of its nuclear programme so long as the talks under the formula it has suggested go on. But it has made it clear that it has no intention to ultimately scrap its nuclear project, which the West suspects is meant for acquiring nuclear weapons. The West is worried that a nuclear programme for peaceful purposes can also help in manufacturing bombs. The Iranian refusal to abide by the Security Council resolution could lead to the imposition of economic sanctions after August 31. But this is not so easy, given the serious differences among the Council’s permanent members plus Germany. Russia and China, which have huge economic interests at stake in Iran, are opposed to a coercive approach to deal with Teheran for its nuclear transgressions. Even if Russia and China succumb to western pressure for a milder sanctions regime, Iran is confident of weathering the storm with its coffers bulging with petrodollars. But Iran should not forget that its being on a collision course with the Security Council can land it in serious, but avoidable, trouble. It is in the interest of Iran as also everyone else to ensure that there is no hardening of attitudes. There is still time for restarting the dialogue process as Iran wants. A solution to the Iranian crisis can be possible only if Teheran is convinced that the drive to prevent it from making nuclear weapons is not meant to punish the present leadership. Iran is giving the impression that all that is going on with regard to its uranium enrichment programme is basically aimed at regime change. And hence its refusal to listen to world opinion.
|
|
Bullet of destiny THE bullet that accidentally injured drag-flicker Sandeep Singh has in a way wounded every Indian hockey lover. At a time when the country was trying hard to elbow itself out of the hole in which it has dumped itself — it finished 10th in the last World Cup in Kuala Lumpur — Sandeep Singh was about the best hope that it had. While the whole nation wishes him speedy recovery, the sad fact is that he is as good as ruled out from next month’s World Cup in Germany. That may mean that his place in the team will go to Jugraj Singh, who was injured in a car crash three years ago in an equally tragic manner and, ironically, Sandeep Singh had been brought in as his replacement. Had Jugraj been fully fit, he would have been a formidable player, but there are question marks on his present fitness. The rest of the probables are somewhat inexperienced for this slot of the game. Destiny thus could not have been more cruel to Sandeep and Indian hockey. He had his seat in another coach of Shatabdi but came to the ill-fated one to be with his teammate Rajpal Singh. If it is any consolation, the presence of Rajpal ensured that medical supervision came to him quickly. The injury occurred because the pistol of an ASI of the Railway Protection Force went off accidentally. Apparently, there was nothing deliberate about it but this was an instance of carelessness of the worst order. There is need to find out if there are other police officers who are keeping their weapons loaded similarly and thus endangering human life in running trains. Players like Sandeep and Jugraj are one in a million, but still in a country like India there should be at least a dozen sportsmen of near-equal talent who should be in a position to step into one another’s shoes at a short notice. To make sure that this ideal situation becomes a reality, the hockey administrators will need to cast their net much wider and aim for a much better bench strength. The absence of one or even two players should not come to mean the end of the road if those who run Indian hockey apply themselves to their jobs, and spend money and effort to train the hockey players who can take on the best team in the world.
|
|
We live, as we dream — alone. — Joseph Conrad
|
Road ahead for N-deal AFTER having wasted huge amounts of the tax payer’s money for two weeks on puerile controversies generated by the foibles, two former Foreign Ministers, Mr Jaswant Singh and Mr Natwar Singh, the members of the Rajya Sabha, showed they are capable of raising parliamentary debate to very high levels that a country can be proud of, on August 17, when the Indo-US nuclear deal came up for debate and discussion. The Left parties pointed out the serious implications of long-term dependence on nuclear fuel from the US on the independence of our foreign policy. The BJP established the dangerous implications for our national security of provisions in proposed US legislation, clearly designed to “cap, roll back and eliminate” our nuclear weapons capabilities. The Treasury Benches came up with spirited replies. But, above all, the day belonged to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who came out with a high voltage parliamentary performance combining nostalgia and emotion, with a clear enunciation of what precisely India would and would not accept in anything the US Congress may legislate. The July 18, 2005, agreement between President Bush and Dr Manmohan Singh was a historic attempt to end the three decades of international sanctions that India has faced from the US and the 45-member US-led Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). The agreement was carefully crafted to assure India continued the supply of nuclear fuel and guarantee the independence of our nuclear weapons programme, while at the same time expressing India’s willingness to participate constructively in international initiatives like concluding a Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty. While India pledged to maintain its unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing, we have always made it clear that this moratorium permitted us to carry out nuclear tests should we find it necessary to do so because of “extraordinary events”. Our unilateral moratorium was certainly not a signal that India would accept the imposition of a de facto comprehensive nuclear test ban in perpetuity. The legislation proposed by the Senate International Relations Committee and the House of Representatives clearly violates all these understandings. On March 7, 2006, Dr Manmohan Singh announced that “the United States will support an Indian effort to develop a strategic reserve of nuclear fuel” for the lifetime of imported reactors and that both countries will jointly convene a “group of friendly countries like Russia, France and the UK” to restore fuel supply to India in the event of a US cut-off. The legislation now proposed states that not only does the US Congress require annual certification of India’s compliance with its views on extraneous issues like relations with Iran, but also requires the US to compel other members of the NSG to end nuclear cooperation with India if so required by US laws. Given our past experience when fuel supplies that the US had guaranteed for the Tarapur Power Plant from 1963 to 1993 were unilaterally terminated and actions taken by the Clinton Administration when the US coerced countries like France and Russia to end nuclear cooperation with India, it would be naďve of India to expect that another President with views like Mr Jimmy Carter or Mr Bill Clinton in the White House, two years from now, would be as friendly and forthcoming as President Bush. Dr Manmohan Singh has also assuaged concerns about our strategic nuclear weapons programme by making it clear that provisions mandating an end to nuclear fuel supplies in the event of another nuclear test were unacceptable. He has also clarified that India will join the FMCT only if such a treaty, which would involve a capping of production of enriched uranium and plutonium for nuclear weapons, is “non-discriminatory, multilaterally negotiated and verifiable”. Given the continuing clandestine transfer of nuclear weapons materials, designs and know-how between China and Pakistan and the growing strength of nuclear weapons and missile capabilities in our neighbourhood, it would be foolish for India to accede to any treaty ending fissile material production, unless all China’s nuclear facilities are subject to the same rigours of international inspection as those of India. One hopes that in future parliamentary debates an assurance will be obtained that the government will ensure that there is no shortage of funds provided to our nuclear research establishment for our indigenous fast breeder reactor programme. Despite the scepticism that has been voiced about this programme by some well-meaning foreign experts, energy security can by guaranteed only by the success of this programme and not by dependence on imports. It should be evident that even strenuous efforts by President Bush will not lead to unacceptable conditions being placed by the US Congress being withdrawn from the final legislation that will emerge from both Houses of the US Congress. It is also going to be difficult to conclude a mutually acceptable bilateral agreement with the US on nuclear cooperation in the face of these ground realities, though it would be useful to find the diplomatic space for concluding such an agreement. We also need to see how the NSG ends its sanctions and how countries like France, Russia and the UK respond to opposition to the removal of sanctions from the Scandinavian countries and members of the “New Agenda Coalition” that still cherish fond illusions that India will “cap, roll back and eliminate” its nuclear weapons programme. We have for the past few years played a less than active role in promoting the cause of global and verifiable nuclear disarmament, losing the moral high ground we had earlier, primarily out of fears of American opposition. A renewed push for such global nuclear disarmament should be high in our diplomatic agenda. Over the past two years there has been a noticeable drift in national security policies. We now have no Central legislation to deal with terrorism. Our missile programme is in the doldrums with inadequate testing of missiles like the Agni 1 and Agni 2 and the failure of the much-delayed Agni 3 test. Our Air Force is grossly under strength, with programmes for new acquisitions proceeding at a leisurely snail’s pace. One wonders whether our Nuclear Command Authority ever meets. While Dr Manmohan Singh has resorted to new and imaginative ways to carry forward the dialogue with Pakistan on all issues, including that of Jammu and Kashmir, resort to “out of the box” thinking on issues like a withdrawal of forces from the Siachen, without demarcating the existing positions, could well prove costly for future generations. One would do well to remember that General Musharraf was emboldened to intrude across the LoC in Kargil in 1999 after India had lost the qualitative edge it enjoyed earlier, following drastic reductions in the defence budget in the early
1990s.
|
On the wings of “Bole So Nihal”
THE Malaysian Airlines late-night flight to Kuala Lumpur to Delhi is delayed by good 50 minutes because a number of passengers are still waiting in the long queues. Those on time start drowsing after the long rigmarole at the Indira Gandhi Airport following the July bomb blasts at Mumbai. And then they are suddenly woken up not by the pilot’s announcement but a rather joyous cry of “Bole so nihal, Sat Sri Akal.” The cry rises from the economy class cabin and resounds all over. The sleepy ones wake up with a smile and two Chinese men facing the pretty air hostess in her floral batik sarong ensemble ask her with a laugh: “What is this?” The lovely girl replies with a smile, “Well, they are remembering their God.” Yes, these are young Malaysian Sikhs making their way to their home away from home. Sikhs are scattered in abundance all over the globe and “Truly Asia” is no exception. The first Sikhs arrived in Malaysia in the 1870s courtesy the British connection for recruitment in the paramilitary and police units of the old Malaya. In the multiracial Malaysia of today the Sikhs have kept their identity amidst the Malay, Chinese, Tamil and others that form the mixed population. This is evident from the large number of gurdwaras in the Capital city of Kuala Lumpur. There are as many as 56. A request to visit one of the older gurdwaras has the Malay guide excited and he gives instructions to the driver to take us to the Bengali temple in Jalan Sungei Besi. He is obviously making a mistake and we are quick to correct him: “No, we wish to visit the Punjabi Sikh temple”. The guide smiles and makes us wise: “Well, the local people call the Sikhs Bengalis and thus the gurdwaras are known as Bengali temples”. The first of the Sikhs of North India who came here embarked on their voyage from the port of Calcutta and the misnomer continues till date. Interestingly, the Chinese feared the stout Sikhs and called them “Munkali Kwai” or “Devils”. But that is all done and past and now these “devils” of yore are well assimilated in modern Malaysia. The Chinese too seem to have forgotten old prejudices and at the Chinaman-owned Genting Highland Resorts, you find young chinky folks dancing away to the tune of Chadhdi Jawani. The cry of “Bole so Nihal...” is not heard on the evening flight home even though the Sikh presence is there. This so, perhaps, because one needs to remember one’s God more when travelling to the alien
land.
|
Why grow rice? CROP diversification in Punjab is generally wrongly understood. Any programme of substituting a few lakh acres of rice-wheat in general and rice in particular to more paying alternatives, is construed as if it is going to place the food security of the country in jeopardy. This is not true. Punjab has some 34-35 lakh hectares under wheat and some 25-26 lakh hectares under rice. With infrastructure support and political back up, its natural resources and competitive environment will support, in the long run, about 30 lakh hectares of wheat and some 17-18 lakh hectares of rice. The strategy should be to develop specialised levels of high-income alternatives that would also secure high growth for the farmers in their otherwise stagnant incomes. This will benefit the farmers, the state and the country. Productivity of wheat increased 5 times in the last 5 decades, from less than a ton per hectares to more than 4.5 ton per hectares now. In contrast, the story of rice in Punjab is one of rising from almost ‘zero to hero’ in one decade, the 1970s, and then of hero-cum-villain for the two decades till now. It is the phenomenal increase in rice area, replacing maize, groundnut and even cotton and almost anything else in areas where irrigation water was available, which has come to be beyond the capacity of natural resources of soil and water. The farmers’ foremost objective is profit maximisation on a continuing basis. Some economists wrongly argue that the choice open to commercialised Punjab farmers is limited to specialisation in wheat and rice cultivation versus specialisation in some other crop rotation combination, cultivated on an equally large scale. Large scale yes; equally large scale, it can never be, and the scale of rice and wheat, as argued in the beginning, will still remain very large. They feel that no feasible and near alternative crop rotation combination seems to exist that can replace wheat-rice rotation. The consequence of this policy would be that the farmers will continue to be stuck with same incomes, with little growth, if any. Rather, the policy message should be to change the parameters and conditions. This is exactly the line Punjab needs to adopt and is adopting. The present parameters are being changed and constraints are being removed for enhancing the farmers’ incomes. It is not diversification for the sake of diversification. Consider, for instance, fruits and vegetable production for export and niche domestic markets, which have been constrained in the past on account of a poor market clearing system arising from inadequate infrastructure and institutional support. Likewise, efforts are afoot to facilitate large scale export of potato to cold weather countries after getting phytosanitary certification, and encouraging a production system which is based on EUREGAP standards. This will help to handle the glut and smoothen the cyclical fluctuation for potato farmers. Similarly, commercial dairy farming is a sound alternative to rice-wheat system and offers better income and employment opportunities in rural areas. The point that the Punjab farmers and farm labourers have become experts in wheat-rice cultivation culture and it will be very difficult for them to acquire the same expertise in other crop cultures is a myth. It is known that the Punjab farmers produced a glut of many other crops in the past and the markets failed to handle these, frustrating the farmers. The glut cannot be produced without mastering the expertise in the crop cultures. Grapes at one time, kinnows in many years, potatoes in some years, even sunflower once, and sugarcane, continue to be mired in a cyclical trap. This or that vegetable, here or there, is always in glut in Punjab. The system has developed into a cyclical pattern of over-production, market failure farmers receding back, production falling, prices shooting, up farmers responding and again being led into over-production, with lower incomes. These are the parameters and the constraints which a positive policy framework should honestly address to bring the farm economy again on a high-growth in farm income scenario rather than keeping them entrapped in the existing level of incomes from rice and wheat alone. This is exactly what the policy makers and development administrators in Punjab are attempting. The myth that the double cropping on almost the entire cultivated area is possible only with wheat-rice rotation is being falsely spread. The fact of the matter is that at the State level, only half of the cultivated area is under rice-wheat rotation. Rice is followed by some other crops on some areas, and wheat follows other crops, and there are crop rotations with neither rice nor wheat. Thus the other half of the cultivated area, which is not under rice-wheat rotation, is also double cropped. Crop combinations involving vegetables, short duration pulses and oilseeds offer more than that. Secondly, seeking economy in land preparation and harvesting, another myth being falsely advocated in favour of rice-wheat rotation, is not the objective; other alternatives and getting higher returns is the objective, with changed parameters through improved infrastructure and investments. Infact, if rice-wheat rotation, which is the main plank, were so cost-friendly, the Punjab farmers would not have been under stressful indebtedness of Rs 24,000 crores. All limits are crossed when someone says rice-wheat rotation is not responsible for the fall in water table, which will be the same with any other crop rotation. Wheat is not the culrpit; the farmers irrigate wheat very judiciously, being always afraid of a little excess irrigation to wheat doing more damage than good. But rice is the only crop, which requires standing water, and that too in the hottest days and months of the year. The enormity of water requirements of paddy is reflected by the fact that an electric motor of 6+ HP, on the average, is being used for about 300 hrs per hectare for rice and only about 40 to 50 hrs per hectare for groundnut/soyabean and for most of the other kharif crops. The writer is Member Secretary, Punjab State Farmers’ Commission.
|
|
Shed passive approach to security Another strike at Mumbai has benumbed our nerves and made us feel helpless in the face of the inevitable. India’s history right from 1947 onwards had been to yield, to buy peace. We are fighting a proxy war launched by our hostile neighbour on our own land, whether it is in Punjab, J&K, Assam, Bengal, Maharashtra, U.P, Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh. We dare not cross the border and inflict unacceptable damage on the staging camps of these Jihadis. We resorted to massive mobilisation of the Indian army on the border after the Jihadi attack on our Parliament and demobilised without firing a single shot. It made Pakistan bold, and its President minced no words in saying that Pakistan had won without fighting a war. Very soon after independence “Islamic Pakistan was defining itself through the prism of resistance to Hindu India”. President Ayub was a firm believer in the policy tripod developed within the first few years of Pakistan’s creation, one, identifying India as Pakistan’s eternal enemy, two, Islam as a national unifier and three, the United States as the country’s provider of arms and finances. For the Jihadis, India is ‘Darul Harb’ They talk of the final conflict between Iman (belief) and Kufr (disbelief) and that this conflict must take place in the region known in much of Islamic history as Khurasan (present day Afghanistan) and Hind (India)” In this Jihad, Kashmir is the first step, where they want to set up a Caliphate, ‘Nizame Mustafa, rule of Allah’. Youseff Bodansky, Director of the US Congressional Task Force on terrorism has said in his book “Bin Laden: The man who declared war on America” that “Bin Laden and the ISI had struck a deal under which the so called Mujahideen would carry out spectacular terrorist strikes in India and that he has set up major cells in the southern cities of Bangalore and Hyderabad” The latest terrorist incidents have proved him right. Again, according to Rohen Gunaratna, an expert on Asian terrorist groups, “It is only a matter of time before Al-Qaida fully targets India” Chief of Pakistan based Lashkar-e-Toiba, Hafiz Saeed, when asked about the greatest threat faced by the world, said: “We must fight against the evil trio of America, India and Israel…The need for Jihad against India is paramount” About fifteen to twenty million Bangladeshis have migrated to India and are illegal residents. Separation of the North Eastern states from India has been the strategic objective of Pakistan since its creation. Because of unchecked illegal migration of Bangladeshis, T.V. Rajeshwar, former Governor of West Bengal, has said: “there is a distinct danger of another Muslim country, speaking Bengali predominantly, emerging in the eastern part of India in the future, at a time when India might find itself weakened politically and militarily”. Amir Taheri, editor of France’s leading journal the Politique Internationale has said: “Pakistan’s strategy is to keep India caught up in the irrelevant. There is no policy on Kashmir. The initiative is entirely with Pakistan. If they want to turn the heat on, they turn it up. If they want to cool it, they turn it down. India is like a woman in a tango performance, it follows what the male does.” We have to change the passive and indecisive psyche of our nation.
|
|
Victory elusive in modern war and politics IN the wake of the war in southern Lebanon, claims of victory are legion. Hardly had the shooting stopped than Sheik Hassan Nasrallah was asserting that Hezbollah had triumphed. Others see Syria or Iran or even Shiite Islam as the big winner. Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, seconded by President Bush, doggedly insists that Israel came out on top. What are we to make of these competing claims? What is victory anyway? Ardently pursued, victory in the modern era has been remarkably elusive. Genuine victory implies something more than military success; it must have a political dimension. Even then, results often prove other than expected. Understanding why requires that we appreciate the intimate relationship between war and politics. “Victory” that defeats the enemy but leaves intact the issues giving rise to war in the first place is likely to prove hollow. The ensuing “peace” is false; after a brief interval, hostilities are likely to resume. World War I offers a classic illustration. The 1945 Allied victory finally solved the German problem. But the military victory in 1945 – as clear-cut as any in history – emphatically did not produce peace. Instead, it created the conditions for a new conflict, the Cold War, which began almost immediately. Ambiguous shooting wars in places such as Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan ensued, as did a succession of conflicts in the Middle East. In 1967, conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors yielded what appeared to be a decidedly unambiguous outcome. But what did this exemplary battlefield success produce? Apart from preserving the Jewish state from destruction — a considerable achievement — the fruits of victory over Egypt, Jordan and Syria in the Six-Day War proved disappointing. A more dangerous conflict with Egypt ensued just six years later. More tragically, victory-induced dreams of a Greater Israel served only to enlarge and aggravate Israel’s Palestinian problem. Out of the ugly, debilitating conflict that ensued came Hamas and Hezbollah. Since 1967, Israel has won a thousand little fights, but victory that actually settles something remains a chimera. The truth is that absent an Israeli willingness to engage in total war, as the Allies did against the Axis, the Palestinians will never submit — and even then the Arabs would be unlikely to make peace. When the Cold War finally ended in 1989, many in the West proclaimed it the greatest victory since 1945. But it was a paradoxical victory: We did not defeat the enemy militarily, and yet the political issues underlying the Cold War had quietly vanished. The Persian Gulf War produced a seemingly stupendous military victory for the U.S.-led coalition. Saddam survived, so the underlying political problem remained. The United States invaded Iraq in March 2003 intent on correcting the “mistake” of 1991 by getting rid of Saddam. This time we had finished the job. Yet to our dismay, once again a military victory produced not peace but something akin to chaos. Frustrated American hawks and some anxious Israelis now want to up the ante. Believing that big victories require big wars, some advocate attacking Iran. But even if a war against Iran was winnable militarily — a large assumption indeed — would victory solve our political problems? History says don’t count on it. Bacevich is professor of history and international relations at Boston University
|
|
From the pages of India is not Indira
“India
is Indira and Indira is India,” said the Congress President. If Indira is India, what are the remaining 59,99,99,999 people? That India is not Indira and Indira is not India, any more than Mr Bansi Lal is Bhiwani or Mr Sanjay Gandhi is Amethi, has been proved beyond the shadow of a doubt by the election results. While announcing the election, Mrs Gandhi said that in a democracy the Government should report back to the people and seek their sanction. She also said that every election was “an act of faith”. Because she betrayed the faith which people had reposed in her, they have withdrawn their mandate from her to be their first servant, let alone be their ruler. She said that it was not important whether she remained Prime Minister or not. But the institution of the Prime Minister was important and the deliberate political attempts to denigrate it were not in the interest of democracy or the nation.
|
| 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 | |
