 |
|
Guns boom again Haryana’s
dishonour |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Loyalty index
Operation Shakti
and after
Death be not proud
No hiding from Hyde
Act Russians eager for
Soviet-style glory Chatterati
|
|
Haryana’s dishonour THE sickening regularity with which honour killings continue unabated in Haryana is a matter of shame and disgrace. The manner in which a Jat family killed their daughter, 20-year-old Sunita, and her lover Jasbir in Balla village in Karnal district needs to be condemned in the strongest possible terms. In a modern society, wedded to liberal values and democratic ethos, boys and girls falling in love cannot be prevented from doing so. While falling in love is not a crime, killing a couple is the most heinous crime. Television visuals showing Sunita’s parents and villagers justifying the murders speak volumes about the insensitivity of the people concerned. They have fixed death as the price for defying social codes based on caste and community affiliations. This is a challenge to the administration by a society that is least bothered about the established system of governance and the rule of law. Honour killings can be checked only if the culprits are given the severest punishment. Even though such incidents are on the rise in Haryana, Punjab and Uttar Pradesh, the state governments have done little to check the menace. Surprisingly, no such category of crime exists in government records. Such crimes are mostly classified under the category of general crimes. Moreover, most cases go unreported. Even otherwise, FIRs are not filed and postmortem not conducted. The rate of acquittals is also very high in such cases. Even when couples attempt marriage under the Special Marriage Act, as in Uttar Pradesh, most applications are rejected on grounds of procedural lapses. Political parties in most states have failed to challenge the fatwas issued by caste panchayats. These outfits are an anathema and must be banned because their decisions militate against constitutional rights. There is need for policy intervention at various levels, including a commitment by all political parties to uphold the right to choose one’s own spouse. Relevant changes in the laws to help courts take suo motu notice of honour killings and take action against the culprits have become imperative. |
|
Loyalty index WHEN does loyalty degenerate into sycophancy? How does one distinguish a ‘political aide’ from a factotum? Such questions arise not from random reflections on, for example, the distinction between erotica and pornography, but are occasioned by the utterances at the release of Kanhaiyalal Nandan’s book on Union HRD Minister Arjun Singh, entitled Mohin Kahan Vishram. There may be nothing erotic about the book but certainly those looking to understand the pornography that Indian politics often is may find some clues to it in the debate over “loyalty” triggered by the book. Whether Mr Singh seeks controversy or controversy finds him is a moot point. But, like all things to do with Mr Singh, the book and its release at a function attended by President Pratibha Patil and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have revived the controversy over what constitutes “loyalty” — at least within the Congress party. Speaking on the occasion, Mr Singh said that the assessment of loyalty in the party is being judged from “a narrow and limited perspective”. Now, it does not require great punditry to decipher that Mr Singh was bemoaning his loyalty to the Nehru-Gandhi family not being rewarded to the extent he expected. One man’s loyalty is another man’s treachery. So, we have no less a political luminary than Mr R K Dhawan attacking the HRD Minister for maintaining he is loyal even while his actions suggest otherwise. It is hard to decide between these two eminences, which one of them represents loyalty as a virtue. The question of whether loyalty should be to the Congress party, the family or an individual is just one among many that remains unanswered. Loyalty may have its rewards, but it is not without risks — such as falling out of favour. All Congressmen know that. Those opposed to Congressmen can take heart from the fact that with such loyalists at each other’s throats, internal damage will achieve what external forces fail to inflict. |
|
In her inventions nothing is lacking, and nothing is superfluous. — Leonardo da Vinci on nature |
Operation Shakti and after
Nearly
seven months after I had taken over as Army Chief, Director-General, Military Operations, informed me that although there was no official information, 58 Engineer Regiment supporting the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) at Pokharan had intensified its activities. Both of us understood its significance. Earlier, 8 Engineer Regiment had maintained two deep shafts in the area dug in 1981-82, added some more, and had gone through similar activities in 1995. Besides, the newly installed NDA regime had already declared that it favoured India becoming a nuclear power state. So, when a call came asking me to meet Prime Minister Vajpayee at his residence — 5 Safdarjang Road — on a holiday morning without indicating any agenda (similar calls had gone to the other two Service Chiefs), I had some idea of the discussion that was likely to take place. A few days later, India conducted Operation Shakti and became a nuclear weapon state! It is very unlikely that any political leader or nuclear scientist will remember the Corps of Engineers on the 10th anniversary of Operation Shakti. I must, however, do my duty to acknowledge and compliment the Corps, particularly its six regiments — 62, 113, 107, 267, 8 and 58 Engineer Regiments — which were deployed at Pokharan from 1973 onward till the success of the mission in May 1998. Post-nuclear tests reaction in military circles was of “great satisfaction”. Ever since 1979 when the Joint Intelligence Committee had informed the Chiefs about Pakistan’s efforts to go nuclear (China had conducted a nuclear weapons test in 1964), they had recommended “nuclear deterrence” as the best security option. It was better late than never! But the international reaction led by the United States was immediate and severe. President Clinton imposed economic, military and technological sanctions and went out of his way to make China an ally against India’s nuclear weapons requirement and aspirations. The Indo-US cooperation slate was wiped clean. After the US many other countries also imposed similar sanctions. A decade later all that is history. India and the US are not open-ended “natural allies” but Washington is prepared to sign the nuclear deal with New Delhi that would enhance India’s nuclear energy, technological and strategic capabilities. Unfortunately, many of our political leaders have not learnt the basic lesson from this episode, i.e. national interest and security are the ultimate goal of any government. This must be pursued relentlessly without fear or favour. Let us now turn to some other nuclear security-related issues. India prepared its draft nuclear doctrine -- an extremely fine job -- in 2001. But the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) did not give it the official clearance for two years. We did not know whether it was an official policy or just a draft. Mr Jaswant Singh kept it ambiguous but used its contents depending upon the occasion. As a result, there was no clarity on its operational mechanism. Operationalisation of the nuclear doctrine was reviewed officially in January 2003. The Press release on the subject had eight one-line statements restating important contents of the doctrine. It also made public the formation of the National Command Authority, the Political and the Executive Councils. According to the Press release, the CCS reviewed the existing command and control structures, state of readiness, targeting the strategy for retaliation and operating procedures for various stages of alert and launch. The CCS approved the appointment of C-in-C, Strategic Force Command, and the arrangements for an alternate chain of command. Since this last review publicly we continue to remain silent on strategic and operational aspects of our nuclear doctrine except the not-so-frequent missile tests. The Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile Agni -3 was tested a few days ago. It is yet to be inducted into the strategic arsenal. Whatever improvement may have taken place so far, there has been little impact on our nuclear capability, credibility and deterrence. There some obvious weaknesses and doubts in our nuclear capability and credibility: Technical claims of Pokharan-2 have been challenged by many scientists. One is not worried about the challenges made in the Western media. But many of our own scientists have created doubts in the mind of the public and, more importantly, of the end users — the armed forces. This doubt is compounded by the fact that our DRDO scientists are known for tall claims and over-optimistic public statements. Our long-term policy on fissile weapons and thermo-nuclear weapons is not yet clear. What progress has been made in this regard? Do we have adequate material for warheads to be made in future? How long are we going to take to develop the triad i.e. land, air and naval-based launch systems? The time taken to develop the Agni missile system shows that the current progress is far too slow. Why is the government unable to push this programme? Is it a political or technological problem? The nuclear doctrine calls for full integration of the doctrines concerning the armed forces, foreign policy, atomic energy, the DRDO and several other elements. How far have we been able to achieve this? Do our political leaders have the idea and the will to employ nuclear weapons in times of crisis? The lack of consensus on serious strategic issues like the Indo-US nuclear deal or our policy towards China does not inspire confidence. We now have the Strategic Forces Command, an inter-Services entity for strategic command and control. Have the Services developed a joint operational doctrine on the employment of nuclear weapons? Have we been able to interface the nuclear capability with conventional capability and plans in military strategy and force structuring? Nuclear doctrine calls for multiple agencies involved with storage, movements and assembly of devices. Has the Strategic Forces Command been able to interlock with the other agencies involved in this effort? Will these agencies be able to achieve these tasks in different contingencies in the “shortest possible timeframe”? Then there is also the psychological aspect of the deterrence. We should remember that if our leaders indulge in nuclear rhetoric about our nuclear arsenal/deterrence, it is considered irresponsible by the international community. But if we keep the capability highly secret, nuclear deterrence does not become credible. Our people must follow a clearly laid down public policy. There is no doubt that Pokharan-2 created some political, economic and technological difficulties for India initially. But before long, political and strategic advantages began to accrue. Besides enhanced security, we also achieved enhanced status in the international community. However, there is also a feeling among many strategists that the gains that we made soon after Pokharan-2 have been frittered away because we have succumbed to international pressure and due to lack of political consensus within the country. We have not pursued a clearly laid down nuclear deterrent policy with adequate determination. This must be done in the interest of national security, political differences
notwithstanding.
The writer is a former Chief of Army Staff
|
Death be not proud NOBODY in The Tribune had ever met Ambarish Dutta (43), when he started stringing for the paper from Guwahati. He would inundate my inbox in the mobile with messages about stories he was planning or had sent. While we appreciated his enthusiasm, we had to tell him that we expected only stories of national interest from Assam. He took it in his stride and tried to measure up to our expectation. An agency man who initially craved for a byline, he was thrilled when we took him as a Special Correspondent at Patna. He took his job so seriously that I would often get up hearing a beep in the mobile. If another beep followed immediately, I knew it was Ambarish’s. Once when I told him it was pointless to send a message twice, he replied with a laugh, “Dada, it is an old habit. It is just to ensure that you get the message”. I did not have the heart to tell him that once a message was sent, it would either reach me or bounce back to him. Whenever we asked him to do a special story or a feature, he would not take a breath till it was done. In Patna, he stayed in a hotel. “I had a similar arrangement in Guwahati. Since my wife is unable to join me as she is employed in Kolkata, I do not want to waste my time maintaining a house and cooking food”. I told him about a friend, engineer Bari, a chief engineer in the State Electricity Board who stayed all his service life in a hotel on Fraser Road, though he was entitled to a bungalow. Well-versed in the Quran and the Bible, bachelor Bari led a frugal life spending most of his salary on orphan children. “Dada, it is for convenience and to be in the heart of the city that I stay here,” explained Ambarish. One day he gave me depressing news about his high blood sugar. His strict regimen of food and exercise was in vain. The disease did not slacken his work, though it forced him to return to Kolkata for better treatment. He was suffering from an infection of the pancreas. A slight improvement and he was back in Patna, this time with his father. He tried to be as live-wire a reporter as possible but he had to return to Kolkata. The doctors in Kolkata referred him to Christian Medical College, Vellore. The Vellore doctors found that he was not healthy enough to undergo an operation and was advised to return after a few months. He had just returned from Vellore when I visited him while attending a conference in Kolkata. “Dada, you are the first Tribune person I have met. I would like to come to Chandigarh and meet all my colleagues to thank them for their support”. The second time he went to Vellore, they diagnosed that he had cancer. Finally, he underwent the operation in Kolkata. Ten days ago, he told me that with proper medication, he could lead an active life for at least 10-15 years, that is till his only school-going son was settled. For the first time, his confidence seemed to wane when he added, “Of course, I know what my fate is but I will never give up”. But that did not prepare me for the message on Sunday morning that he passed away at 5 am. The Tribune has lost a hardworking journalist who saw his job as a
calling. |
No hiding from Hyde Act OUR country’s need for nuclear materials is unquestionably genuine and urgent. But does that justify signing of the proposed 123 agreement? The supporters of the agreement assert that the Hyde Act should not bother India – it applies only to the US. Another seemingly profound proposition making the rounds is that under the USA’s legal system, once the 123 agreement passes through the Congress, all earlier laws including the Hyde Act will be superceded. If these two assumptions are legally tenable, the proposed 123 agreement need not wait. Unfortunately in the present context, both are substantially fallacious. What if the Hyde Act survives the treaty – i.e, the 123, which will become a treaty once it is approved by the US Congress? What possible harm may it cause to our interest? If, on careful scrutiny, none is anticipated, sign the 123 now; but not before this aspect is examined. Soon after the Indo-US joint statement of July 18, 2005, the US House of the Representatives passed an Act called ‘Henry J. Hyde United States and India Nuclear Cooperation Promotion Act of 2006’. This enactment is India specific as the heading itself denotes. It is in force since July 27, 2006. The relevant part of Article VI of the US Constitution reads: “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land”. The Act and the treaty when approved by the Houses will both be the ‘supreme laws’ of the USA. In case of conflict between the two, the latter will prevail to that extent. The Hyde Act has two broad parts – the first deals with the US Executive’s role until the agreement becomes effective – the “sunset” clause in the Act puts an end to that part from the moment the agreement becomes effective. No one need be concerned with that part. The second part obliges their President to continuously, periodically or year after year take certain steps during the whole of the long life of the treaty. India should be concerned about this part. For removal of all doubts, one may look at Article 2 of the 123 agreement, which specifically states, “Each party shall implement this agreement in accordance with its respective applicable treaties, national laws and regulations…concerning the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.” Compare this with the 123 agreement between China and the US: there was no China specific Act like the Hyde Act. The Hyde Act undoubtedly is one of the applicable US national laws on the subject and with the signing of the agreement India would agree that the US would implement their part of the agreement in accordance with – among others – the Hyde Act. Consequently, India will be obliged to cooperate with the US President by providing him with information or assistance to enable him to perform the post treaty duties imposed by the Hyde Act. Will that be possible without compromising our sovereignty? Therefore the argument that the Hyde Act need not bother India is not just specious – it is an exercise in self deception. Ostensibly, the Hyde Act was enacted, “To exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 a proposed nuclear agreement for cooperation with India”. But it covers a much larger area. The Act authorises the US President to exempt India from the requirement of S.123 a (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 that imposes a condition that the United States will not export nuclear material to non-nuclear weapon States, unless IAEA safeguards are maintained with respect to all peaceful nuclear activities. It further authorises the President to waive the application of S128 that sets out additional export criterion. The waiver however “shall cease” if the President determines that India detonated a nuclear explosive device – among other activities specified. The Act prescribes restrictions on nuclear transfer to India in the future. It further provides that no item under the agreement be transferred to India if that would violate the transfer guidelines of the NSG. The Act also provides for the termination of nuclear transfer under the treaty. There is another significant provision which states that if nuclear transfer to India is restricted pursuant to the Hyde Act and other named Acts the President should seek to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment material or technology from other participating Governments in the NSG or from any other source. Obviously these provisions start operating only after the agreement comes in to effect. There are other significant provisions affirming the continued post treaty operation of the Hyde Act. It commands the President not later than “January 31 of each year” to submit to the Committee of the House a progress report on achieving each of the many policy objective in section 3(b). One such policy objective reads: “Secure India’s full and active participation in United States efforts to dissuade, isolate, and, if necessary, sanction and contain Iran for is efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction...and the means to deliver weapons of mass destruction.” The President shall also report to the House on issues like the amount of Uranium mined, how much was used for weapons, and details of production of all fissile material for nuclear explosive devices. India will be bound to allow the US to gather such information, if necessary by posting their inspectors on our soil and at our facilities. Can we afford to suffer these consequences for securing uranium? There is also the question of soundness of the proposition that, as a rule in the US, a treaty supercedes an earlier law. According to Justice Homes in Missouri v. Holland (1920) “Acts of Congress are the supreme law of the land only when made in pursuance of the Constitution, while treaties are declared to be so when made under the authority of the United States. It is open to question whether authority of the United States means more than the formal acts prescribed to make the convention.” Opinion of an executive like Richard Boucher or that of even the US President would neither shrink nor expand the scope of an enactment like the Hyde Act. Serious issues with a potential to affect our country’s freedom should rest on a firmer
foundation.
The writer is a Supreme Court lawyer |
|
Russians eager for Soviet-style glory MOSCOW – The armoured personnel carriers led the way, groaning in the cold sunlight past the cafes and boutiques of Tverskaya Street and, finally, over the vast cobblestone stretches of Red Square. The tanks came after, machine guns pointed skyward. Then missiles, some of them with the capacity to carry nuclear warheads. Russia’s new president, Dmitry Medvedev, smiled. Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, who hovered over Medvedev’s shoulder on the reviewing stand, stared somberly. Russians cheered as bomber jets sliced the sky, low over the rooftops and church steeples. The military parade that streamed through the historic heart of Moscow last week revived yet another iconic Soviet tradition: For the first time since the disintegration of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, tanks and missiles rumbled over Red Square to commemorate the anniversary of the end of World War II. The display of military hardware was intended as a show of muscle, a declaration of Russia’s return to power after a tumultuous and humiliating tumble into post-Soviet disarray. “A demonstration of our growing potential in the defense sphere,” Putin said earlier this week. “We are able to protect our people, our citizens, our state, our wealth, which is not inconsiderable.” But it was also an inadvertent reminder of Russia’s soft spots. Its military still is considered weak despite heavy spending and heady promises of reform. And the country is pushing forward into an uncertain political era – and falling back on old Soviet symbols, drained of ideology but held aloft as talismans of a stronger, more straightforward era. “People are nostalgic for Soviet times,” said Anton Izmestyev, a 23-year-old advertising manager who had yanked a ball cap over sleepy eyes and wandered down to Tverskaya to see the tanks pass. “We are a new generation, and we missed the whole thing. We want to see the great military glory of Russia again.” Routing themselves from home on a national holiday, Russians packed the side streets along the parade route. They brought their children, their beer and their cameras, and craned their necks excitedly for a glimpse of the weaponry as it raced past. “All these years, for dozens of years, we’ve been hearing only bad news. This is bad, that is bad,” said Alexei Chuguyev, 42. “Now it’s time for us to feel confident in tomorrow. Maybe this means the black tide is behind us.” On Red Square, the parade began with goose-stepping soldiers displaying the Russian and Soviet flags. Eight thousand troops stood at attention. World War II veterans and invited dignitaries squinted in the morning sun. When Medvedev stood to address the crowd, Putin stood behind him. “Our army and fleet are gaining strength, they are getting stronger together with Russia itself,” said the president, who was inaugurated Wednesday. “Their current might is based on the historic glory of the Russian weaponry, on the victorious traditions and high spirit of our army.” In what sounded like a veiled reference to the United States, Medvedev warned that wars are created by “those whose irresponsible ambitions prevail over the interests of countries and whole continents, over the interests of millions of people.” Reminders of Soviet days have cropped back into use throughout Putin’s rule. There was the red Communist flag, preserved at Putin’s insistence as the symbol of Victory Day, and the anthem. There was the trend of printing “USSR” on caps and workout clothes; the reappearance of the hammer and sickle on government posters; the trendy use of Soviet insignia by fashion designers. Putin’s Russia also witnessed the return of Kremlin-backed youth groups, propagandistic news coverage and a de facto ruling party – not to mention the cult of personality that swirled around Putin as his days in the presidency waned. Putin himself, a former KGB officer, has called the fall of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.” But analysts and people on the street say the popularity of the images doesn’t indicate a sincere desire to return to Soviet days. The familiar icons are embraced because they evoke a time when the Soviet Union was a feared superpower, when people felt strong and protected, and Russians lived on a relatively equal plane. And just as today’s Russia is a far cry from the Soviet Union, the military on display Friday was a rusted and limping remnant of its Soviet glory days, military experts say. Putin had hoped to rebuild the Russian military, and oversaw the transfer of billions of dollars into its budget. But analysts say much of that money was lost to corruption. By arrangement with
LA Times-Washington Post |
|
Chatterati THE drama over the women’s reservation Bill may not be quite finished. With the Yadav gang led by Lalu Yadav threatening to withdraw from the UPA if the Bill was insisted on in its current form, the push and pull surrounding this Bill will increase. The physical drama in the house when law minister Bharadwaj was placing the Bill in the Rajya Sabha was a camera moment. The sight of women having to physically defend their Bill against attacks by male legislators made for great television but was terrible for the image of a country that claims it is modernised There is no doubt that the Bill will pass muster. The combined might of the communists, the BJP and the Congress will now have the majority needed to pass the Bill when it reaches the Lok Sabha. But even an Act can only change the letter of the law. What is even more critical is changing of attitudes.
Battle of the CMs The Karnataka polls are turning into a battle of former chief ministers. There are four in the fray and three others leading the campaign. The seniors are H. D. Deve Gowda and former Maharashtra governor S.M. Krishna of the Congress. Both are star campaigners. Then there is M. Veerappa Molly, whose high-profile job has taken him to Delhi. He is more behind the scenes. Other ex-CMs who are deep into it are H.D. Kumaraswamy (JD(S)), B.S. Yeddyurappa (BJP), N. Dharam Singh (Congress) and S. Bangarappa (Samajwadi Party). Yeddyurappa and Bangarappa are fighting each other. The police are finding it difficult to coordinate the former CMs’ tours. It is a nightmarish situation when the programmes are within an hour of each other’s public meetings. The police become tense when campaigns continue well over time because the area has to be cleared for the other leader. Can you imagine the scene when three former CMs crisscross each other? But the Congress has the maximum headache with senior leaders such as Krishna, Margaret Alva and C.K. Jaffer Sharief vying for the top post. That’s not all. The contenders include Mallikarjun M Kharge and Siddaramaiah.
Movie incentive Political parties seem to have had enough of film stars, thankfully. Bad experiences with Dharmendra in Rajasthan and Govinda in Maharashtra seem to have done the trick. Politicians are playing it safe now. They would rather pay to watch movies now than pay the stars or give them constituencies to fight from. The government of Madhya Pradesh has bought DVD rights of Chak De India, Taare Zamin Par, Munna Bhai MBBS and Lage Raho Munna Bhai. These films are being screened in rural areas of Madhya Pradesh in state-sponsored vikas raths to attract more public attention and make people aware of the achievements of the Chauhan regime. After every 15 minutes of a film, the BJP regime’s achievements are played as part of the package. Well, a new idea, much more catchy without any star tantrums. But expect the BJP to come up with something innovative and new. |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
