|
|
Triumph of democracy
Politics of extortion |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Shape up or ship off
War not an option
My true friends
Neglect of armed forces
Charles Ponzi, the dreamer whose name lives on
Delhi Durbar
|
Triumph of democracy
The
future of the political parties that were in the fray in the just-concluded Assembly elections in Jammu and Kashmir – the Congress, the National Conference and the PDP — lies locked in those sleek electronic voting machines, but the voters have already given their verdict against the separatists who are staunch votaries of violence. The way they defied the boycott calls must have caused frustration to the separatist leaders. Long queues witnessed at most places during the seven phases of the voting were a sign of the determination of the citizens to reject secession through elections. They voted in large numbers and in favour of democracy. It was their trust in the electoral system which encouraged them to defy even death threats. Surprisingly, the voting percentage was refreshingly high even in the former strongholds of militants. Obviously, the voters are thoroughly disenchanted with the politics of violence that the militants represent. The Syed Ali Shah Geelani brand of leaders at times tried their best to organise a sort of “curfew”, but there was no stopping the voters who in their wisdom had come to realise that their redemption lay in choosing their own genuine representatives. It goes to the credit of the Governor’s administration and the Election Commission that they ensured conditions to prevail for a free and fair poll. Whether it was Jammu, the Valley or Ladakh, the voters’ essential concern was development and governance. They wanted leaders who could give them a clean and effective government. Here is hoping that when the results are out, the elected representatives will give top priority to the people’s expectations rather than their own ambitions. They must learn a lesson from the fate of many political jugglers who fell flat in the past because they ignored the people — their real masters.
|
|
Politics of extortion
The
cold-blooded killing of Uttar Pradesh PWD executive engineer M.K. Gupta allegedly by BSP MLA Shekhar Tiwari in Auraiya district on Wednesday has exposed Chief Minister Mayawati’s extortionist politics. All her ministers and BSP legislators function as her cronies, who can go to any extent to satiate their reigning deity’s unending hunger for money. The engineer had to pay with his life because he had the guts to refuse to collect Rs 50 lakh as sought by the MLA to be presented to Ms Mayawati on her birthday on January 15 next. The Chief Minister’s goons — Tiwari and his associates — had the audacity to take the unconscious engineer to the police station in the area and demand the registration of a case against the victim after he was beaten up mercilessly. They showed no fear of the law because they function under Ms Mayawati’s protective umbrella. Ms Mayawati has perfected the art of garnering money through forced gifts. Her birthday is an occasion when her party functionaries — from those sitting in a ministerial chair to MPs, MLAs and BSP members at the village panchayat level — have to hunt for funds from all the possible sources, including government departments and those enjoying official favours in the private sector. The Chief Minister is reported to have expressed her desire for at least Rs1000 crore in cash or kind to be presented to her next month, as Samajwadi Party’s Shivpal Singh Yadav has alleged. Whatever is the truth, reports suggest that it will be a massive show at the state level. It is a matter of deep regret that the Chief Minister of the most populous state does not feel ashamed of the plausibility of these allegations. These illustrate her politics of greed. Can there be greater violation of the Constitution? The time has come to stop this open loot by the Chief Minister and her cohorts. A way must be found to end the practice of extortion in the name of birthday celebrations—an excuse for legitimising illegal collection of money. The BSP czarina describes the occasion as “Arthik Sahyog Diwas” when her party “pools its resources to help the poor”! What, however, she is doing is only promoting corruption and exploitation of the people in a brazen manner.
|
|
|
Shape up or ship off
The
Second Administrative Reforms Commission headed by Mr M. Veerappa Moily has suggested wide-ranging reforms to streamline the administrative system at various levels and make it result-oriented. An important recommendation made in its report on the “Refurbishing of personnel administration — scaling new heights” pertains to a periodic review of the civil servants’ performance and removing the deadwood. Unfortunately, non-performance has become the biggest problem of the Indian bureaucracy. The present system of time-scale promotions has made the IAS and other all-India service officers so secure and relaxed that they get promoted to the next rank and pay scale on the basis of the years of service they have put in, and not on their track record and individual performance. Little has been done to assess whether an IAS officer is suitable for a higher post before promoting him or her. Why should a lethargic and non-performing officer continue in service till retirement at a huge cost to the state exchequer? Significantly, the Moily report has addressed this problem at length and comes out with practical solutions. It says that a civil servant should initially be appointed for a period of 20 years, with a scope for extension subject to his track record. It has proposed two intensive reviews of the officer’s performance, one on the completion of 14 years of service and another after 20 years. In the first review, the officer will be told of his strengths and shortcomings for future advancement. And the second will assess the officer’s “fitness” for continuation in government service. It wants the deadwood to be dismissed from service. Though the remedy suggested is commendable, doubts are bound to arise whether the government will go ahead with the proposals and implement them in letter and spirit. Several reform proposals recommended in the past have been gathering dust. For example, the proposal for lowering the age limit for the Civil Services’ examination has not yet been accepted. The Moily report also has a similar recommendation for inducting fresh talent and brilliant minds. What is the use of these reports if they are not implemented? Increasing political interference has played havoc with the bureaucracy. Officers are shuffled at the whim of the powers that be. There is a need for the political will to implement the reports.
|
|
|
We are prepared to go to the gates of Hell — but no further. — Pope Pious VII
|
War not an option
IN just three words — “Nobody wants war” — Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has set the record straight. What is needed instead is that Pakistan must fulfill its dual promises of punishing the masterminds of the monstrous Lashkar-e-Taiyaba attack on Mumbai and ensuring that its soil would never again be used for mounting terrorist attacks on this country. The Prime Minister has emphasised this adequately, adding that Mumbai-like onslaughts, targeting India’s “economic ambitions”, would not be tolerated. It is possible that Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee’s repeated statements to the effect that “all options are open” have contributed to the widespread impression that an India-Pakistan war is in the offing. But he had taken care to warn the media and others not to misinterpret his remarks or rush to hasty conclusions. Yet, a surprisingly large number of people seem to have done precisely that. The reality is that it is the Pakistan Army and its notorious spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), that are out to provoke a military conflict with this country, and the Pakistani media has joined them in creating war hysteria. The flexing of muscle by Pakistani military and bellicose statements by it speak for themselves. Let the motivation of the Generals in the GHQ at Islamabad be put in perspective. For more than 50 years Pakistan has been the “most allied ally” of the United States. To be sure, there have been interludes of estrangement between the two, but their close relationship has continued. It acquired a special importance after 9/11 because of the US need of Pakistani cooperation in the “war on terror” in Afghanistan. This should explain the indulgence America has shown to General Pervez Musharraft first and to his successors later, despite American unhappiness with their policy of hunting with the American hound and running with the jihadi hare. The horrific Mumbai outrage has brought about a remarkable change in this state of affairs, judging from the consistent US condemnation of the Pakistani responsibility for what happened and the concomitant demand that Pakistan must take action against terrorist outfits operating in its territory. The other day the US Secretary of State, Ms Condoleeza Rice, in an unusually strong statement, called Pakistan’s stand on terrorism as “shifting and shifty”, and warned the Pakistanis that if they persist in their attitude towards terrorism, this “poison would consume Pakistan itself”. However, the key question is whether hard words alone would suffice. Nothing like Pakistan’s brazen denial of its responsibility has been witnessed before. Ignoring the word of the former Prime Minister and leader of the Muslim League (N), Mr Nawaz Sharif, and other incontrovertible evidence, the Pakistan government continues to deny that Ajmal Qasab, the sole surviving terrorist now in Indian custody, is a Pakistani national. Under the circumstances, the US has to lean very heavily on the Pakistan army and the ISI to get any result. These two institutions are the real ulers of Pakistan. President Asif Ali Zardari and his civilian government are, as Newsweek has said, mere “bystanders”. The Pakistan Army knows that it has some leverage even in relation to the mightiest country that it must work on. In the first place, it is transition time in Washington. No firm American policy can be finalised therefore until the President-elect,Mr Barack Obama, takes over on January 20. Even after he settles down, he is almost certain to be preoccupied by the economic meltdown. This obviously explains the timing of the unspeakable Mumbai assault. Secondly, and more importantly, Pakistani military leaders know that America’s need for their cooperation persists, especially in view of Mr Obama’s declared intention of having an Iraq-like “surge” in the number of troops in Afghanistan. It is no coincidence, therefore, that NATO trucks carrying essential supplies to Afghanistan via the Khyber Pass have been attacked and interdicted at Peshawar in the North-West Frontier Province. Seventy per cent of the supplies required by the existing NATO troops in Afghanistan and the Afghan National Army have to go from Pakistan. The US is thus under notice that it must either relax its pressure on Pakistan or forgo supplies to Afghanistan. Under these circumstances the possibility of America succumbing to the Pakistan Army’s blackmail cannot be ruled out. The primary duty of Indian diplomacy, therefore, is to see to it that this possibility does not materialise. It is arguable that the Foreign Minister’s statements may have been addressed as much to the US as to Pakistan. And that is where the Pakistani military’s frenzied activity to precipitate a war with India comes in. Nothing would suit it more than an armed conflict with India because this would enable the GHQ to move the bulk of Pakistani troops from the Afghan border to the eastern frontier. In any case, the Pakistani Army does not want to fight the Taliban, Al Qaeda and other extremists in the tribal lands on the Afghan border. The slogan that India is the only existential threat to Pakistan has always come very handy to the Pakistani military. By the same token it would be wrong for India to fall into the Pakistan army’s trap. A military conflict would divert the world attention from Pakistani terror to the need to maintain peace between South Asia’s two nuclear powers. Even a “surgical strike” would quickly escalate. To advocate avoidance of war is not a counsel of despair. It is sound policy. India must keep its powder dry and be prepared for all eventualities. But between war and the present state of face-off there are quite a few options. For instance, diplomatic relations can be broken as a first step. Islamabad has already been told that there can be no “business as usual” until the terror issue is settled appropriately. The cancellation of the Indian cricket team’s Pakistan tour should be followed by a message to Sri Lanka that its team’s Pakistan tour would be an “unfriendly act”. Indian clout should be used fully to make Bangladesh banish the ISI from its soil. It is entirely doable.n
|
||
My true friends The new-generation homosapiens called journalists are my “true friends”. They appear from nowhere. On your mobile, when you are in an important meeting, peep through your room when you are busy (just to say hello), or sometimes they have specific agenda you will never know. As an IAS officer I have had to smilingly interact with them almost everyday (as most of my colleagues do, I suppose). Beleaguered, as I am, I have learned this unique art in a hard way. On my first appointment as SDM in 1984, I complained to an editor of a national daily about journalese of an aggressive correspondent who was continuously writing against me. And alas, the bigot editor instead of reprimanding the antagonist reporter delightfully published my original letter on front page as to how “officialdom” was interfering in the “fair and transparent” reporting by their “upfront” journalist. I confess that was my first and last letter to any editor. I have memorised the “media mantra” that “Jo bikta hai wahi dikhta hai” (You see more what sells more). Later, as Deputy Commissioner, once I politely requested the management of a local college for admission of a ward of my security guard. Next day, a national Hindi daily reported that I have threatened the school to admit my recommendee. The “hot and spice story” of my “atrocity” kept appearing for more than a fortnight consuming tonnes of paper, before dying its natural death. Alas, my poor “recommendee” never got the admission. Once, as Secretary to Governor of UP, a belligerent journalist from Lucknow, who had already verified my “antecedents” wanted to interview me instead of Lat Sahib. He wanted to know why I got the “coveted” job ignoring 540 IAS officers of UP. To the utter disbelief of Lat Sahib and me he carried a front-page negative story labeling me as the “most obliging” bureaucrat of the country. Even today, defiantly, I keep counting my “vertebrates” to prove that the story was untrue. Once, while having coffee with a bullying journalist, I candidly “disclosed” something “important” which was not getting immediate attention of the government. Next morning “my friend” journalist combatively quoted me “verbatim”. I was instantly transferred from the “coveted” post. I never saw the face of that journalist after that. I have a vague feeling that the news was “planted”. By now, I have become immune to provocative news items reporting good or bad about me. Believe me, now instead of “divulging” I try to “extract” news from journalists. If I want to know the latest “happenings”, I do not call up IAS colleagues. Surely I will never get the authentic information. I just dial a fierce journalist to know the “news” before it is published. Ever wondered why “bad” news gets preference over “good” news? One journalist unveiled the marketing principle: there are hundreds of aeroplanes flying in the air everyday but the one which crashes makes the “news”. That’s the mantra of media. Three cheers for my “friend”
journalists.
|
||
Neglect of armed forces
The
blame-game, which has inevitably reared its ugly head in the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, instantly reminded me of the fervent appeals of the three successive chiefs of R&AW to naval HQs in recent years to loan them naval officers for an analysis of maritime intelligence. They were seriously concerned that they did not have the necessary in-house expertise available to draw right conclusions and inferences from the mass of information the agency collected from open, human and technical sources. And very correctly they approached the Navy. Lack of maritime intelligence has also been the Navy’s bane for years, so we understood the handicap R&AW worked under, fully shared their concern and felt that it was the Navy’s duty to help. I recall (as the Chief of Personnel) having personally selected some officers for deputation to R&AW, but to my consternation, I learnt within a few months that most wanted to return to the Navy. Before I go any further, let me just say that this piece is not about intelligence failure. It is about a failure on a larger scale which represents an equal degree of danger to the nation. The naval officers deputed to R&AW did not wish to continue with their deputation (and I learnt that this was not a new phenomenon) because when they were assigned their desks in the Cabinet Secretariat they found to their dismay that they had been placed under officers who were many years their junior in terms of service. Having taken this stoically, they then found that they were deprived of things like telephones, stenographers and transport because the “status” assigned to them did not entitle them to these utilities. The R&AW authorities were most sympathetic but pleaded that they were not in a position to alter the equivalences, apparently “laid down” by a Kafkaesque Department of Personnel. Neither pay-scales nor years of service nor any logic seem to guide this fixation of relativities of armed forces officers with civilian counterparts. It was not that we had not experienced such discrimination earlier — the Service HQs have always been chary of sending their officers on deputation — but one felt that intelligence was an issue of national importance and certainly worth undergoing some inconvenience. But we found that naval officers would accept such assignments only with utmost reluctance. I have used this example only because it is symptomatic of a larger malaise: the lack of coordination between organs of the Government of India (GoI) which has contributed to the recent Mumbai fiasco. This should not come as a surprise because the GoI is so laissez faire in its approach that it will not intervene to eliminate inter-agency inequity which can result in even crippling disfunctionality. In this context, if you progressively and with great deliberation proceed to marginalise, downgrade and degrade your own armed forces, you are undermining the security of the state as surely as the nation’s worst enemy. At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, I would venture to state that this is exactly what the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) seems to have achieved. Today, there is a distinct impression that the CPC has erred grievously on many issues relating to the armed forces because they were not represented in the commission, and its recommendations have spread confusion and consternation. One of the most serious consequences (whether intended or not) is the sudden and arbitrary alteration of relativities between the armed forces and their civilian counterparts, to the detriment of the former. The resulting change in relationships between the armed forces and para-militaries has grave operational implications, which do not seem to have been understood at all at the political level. Ex-servicemen too are confounded to see the number of anomalies thrown up by the CPC. Take just one example: no one understands by what logic a Lieutenant-General, a Major-General and a Brigadier are going to be paid exactly the same pension as a Colonel (with half the service) will receive just one hundred rupees less. The GoI has yet again rejected the “one rank, one pension” demand, but not even a feeble attempt has been made to bridge the yawning gap between today’s and yesterday’s pensioners of the same rank. There is also a distinct impression that the CPC recommendations have been fiddled with, and even changed by the bureaucracy, without due authorisation at the political level. Such is the level of discontent that one hears, with deep
dismay, of planned hunger strikes by ex-servicemen. The most logical way to avoid this confusion and the resultant sense of grievance in the armed forces and the ex-servicemen would have been to place a Service representative, if not in the CPC, then in the review committee. Either the committee would have convinced this representative of the appropriateness of the issues or the other way round; thus avoiding controversy, speculation and unhappiness. A few retired Service Chiefs (including this writer) had written to the PM to accord this concession but the appeal remained unanswered. Spreading unhappiness amongst the nation’s armed forces or demoralising them and the 2-3 million strong ex-servicemen community does not serve anyone’s interest. Should someone in authority not sit up and take notice?
|
|
Charles Ponzi, the dreamer whose name lives on Sorry, Mr. Madoff. Despite your prodigious alleged accomplishments—$50 billion of investors’ money, vaporized!— you’re no Charles Ponzi. The feds, in their complaint, allege that you, Bernard L. Madoff, admitted to colleagues that you’ve “been conducting a Ponzi-scheme” through your investment advice business. Some Wall Street experts, struggling to convey the scope, say it’s perhaps “the biggest Ponzi scheme in history.” But for all your Palm Beach Country Club connections and sterling Wall Street resume, you’re still just walking in the shadow of the great Charles Ponzi, along with all the other get-rich-quick guys, the pyramid schemers, the land-deal scammers. Now, if you, Mr. Madoff — sounds like “made off” — were made of a little of Ponzi’s stuff, first of all, you wouldn’t have allegedly admitted anything to anyone. Show some moxie, man! You’d have kept up appearances for the sake of the game — as if you really believed in it. As Ponzi’s world was collapsing in Boston that wild summer of 1920, his notorious deeds splashed all over the front pages, he would put on a sharp suit and a big smile, grab his fine walking stick and go mingle with the public. Some would jeer — but others would cheer! Reporters followed him everywhere. He’d give long, good-humored quotes. He’d lunch at the Kiwanis Club, and at night he and his wife would sit in their box at the movies. When newsreels about him came on, the audience would cheer some more. From the Oxford English Dictionary: “Ponzi scheme: A form of fraud in which belief in the success of a fictive enterprise is fostered by payment of quick returns to first investors from money invested by others.” Like so many great self-made-American stories, Ponzi’s began with him landing on these shores with little money — in 1903, at 21, with just $2.50. (He lost a couple of hundred bucks gambling on the voyage from Italy.) He traveled the country, taking odd jobs, dreaming up schemes. He did some prison time in Montreal, for passing a bad check. But he wasn’t a bad guy. In Blocton, Ala., an acquaintance had been badly burned and needed a skin graft. Ponzi donated 120 square inches of skin off his back and thighs. He married Rose Gnecco, the love of his life, who stood by him through everything. Ponzi stood 5-2 and weighed 130, after a big meal. “He was enormously charismatic, he was charming, he was this sort of dapper figure. I call him a banty rooster of a man,” says Mitchell Zuckoff, who wrote the 2005 biography “Ponzi’s Scheme: The True Story of a Financial Legend.” In late 1919, as Ponzi’s latest fanciful plan was imploding, a letter from Spain arrived with a curious document that resembled currency but wasn’t. Ponzi’s monumental insight was to realize it could be as good as money. It was an international reply coupon. In those days, many nations had agreed on a system for prepaying international postage. Sending a reply coupon was like sending a self-addressed stamped envelope. You could buy a coupon in Rome, and it could be redeemed for stamps in Boston. But the coupons’ fixed price did not reflect the dramatic post-World War I devaluation of some currencies. Thus, $1 worth of lira in Rome could buy enough coupons to redeem $3.30 worth of stamps in Boston, according to Zuckoff’s reconstruction of Ponzi’s calculations. Ponzi figured he could make a profit of $2.30 for every $1 invested. He was still puzzled about how to convert the coupons back into cash. He decided to worry about that later. With zero advertising, the astounding offer spread by word of mouth: Ponzi promised to return a 50 percent profit to investors within 45 days. The pool of investors grew exponentially. “The woman cleaning houses on Beacon Hill would mention it to her employers, and soon you had Brahmin matrons and white-shoe bankers lining up next to newsboys and cleaning women,” Zuckoff says. By spring 1920, Ponzi was pulling in $30,000 a week (about $319,000 today). At this point, Ponzi’s scheme was not a “Ponzi scheme.” But he apparently never did figure out how to convert mass quantities of coupons into cash. Soon he was forced to begin paying off early investors, and for that he used money collected from later investors — a Ponzi scheme, though they didn’t call it that back then. Meanwhile, Ponzi invested in banks and other businesses. “I kept up the bluff, hoping that I might eventually hit upon some workable plan to pay all of my creditors,” Ponzi wrote in his autobiography, cited by Zuckoff. —
By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post
|
|
Delhi Durbar It was not just parliamentary proceedings which had been disrupted by the controversy over AR Antulay’s statement on the killing of ATS chief Hemant Karkare. Even the Congress, which had come under pressure for the removal of Antulay, did not hold its press briefing for two days. Party sources, however, sought to dismiss any speculation, stating that the reason was the absence of two its spokespersons, Manish Tiwari and Jayanti Natarajan. Another spokesman, minister Shakeel Ahmed, had excused himself on the plea that he had been asked to be present in Parliament. That had left only Abhishek Singhvi available for the briefing, but the party did not want to field him because of his strong statement against Antulay in the beginning which was quite contrary to that of senior leader Digvijay Singh, who had virtually defended Antulay. So the party chose the option of not holding the briefings.
Zero hour now personal hour
The other day the BSP’s Iliyas Azmi brought a personal grievance to Parliament. The moment the Lok Sabha Speaker announced zero hour, Azmi started narrating the “untold misery” he suffered at Jeddah airport while returning from the Haj. For over seven minutes, the member kept insisting on an apology from “Indian Airlines” (he obviously meant Air India), which left its passengers without food and water for 36 hours due to flight delay. He also explained how his
baggage reached Bangalore instead of Delhi. Strange it may sound, but throughout the just-concluded session, the Speaker received over 30 notices every day from members itching to address their constituencies in the garb of raising urgent matters during zero hour. Even the Speaker could not help commenting: “I understand the elections are approaching and members are eager to be seen in their areas. But it would be better if they also raise urgent matters instead of concentrating merely on those with regional relevance.” Zero hour can’t after all be reduced to a personal hour.
Sushma Swaraj recovers
Sushma Swaraj of the BJP is back. She had disappeared from the political scene in the midst of campaigning for the recent assembly elections, giving rise to speculation that she was perhaps upset at not being projected as the chief ministerial candidate in Delhi. But no, she says, she had to “retire hurt” due to exhaustion and was admitted to the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). Sushma told reporters that she, however, did not miss much. At AIIMS, she was “treating” herself to lovely home-cooked ‘paranthas’ with lots of butter and curds. Her radiant look appeared to vouch for what she was saying. What a marvellous way to recover from ill health!
|
|
|
|
| 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 | |
